4 ms·

> it was for personal reasons but I could afford it and it only seemed fair. Generally I like supporting people's hard work FYI authors of published papers don

by tempay 5y ago

> it was for personal reasons but I could afford it and it only seemed fair. Generally I like supporting people's hard work FYI authors of published papers don't see any of this money, it all goes to the journal so there isn't really a case to be made for buying papers to support the researchers. Even the peer-review process is unpaid work. If you contact the authors they're allowed to send you copies for free and most are happy to do so.

axegon_ 5y ago
I've never bothered publishing anything, just circumstantially gave a hand several people that have(I don't want my name to pop up in papers for a million and one reasons). I assumed they were since otherwise I saw no logical reason to go for anything other than Arxiv and publish them for free.
- bo1024 5y ago
  People publish in journals (etc) because of the peer review and reputation. People are much more likely to read, trust, cite a paper that’s been through peer review. Also people are more likely to discover the paper by looking in prestigious venues than if it’s just in the arxiv flood. For promotion and tenure, papers aren’t considered unless they’re published and prestigious venues count much more.
- doliveira 5y ago
  Really, you should disclaim your lack of publishing experience in your original comment. You made several claims that are very misleading.
- betterunix2 5y ago
  Universities, especially in Europe, base hiring and tenure decisions in part on where a researcher's papers are published. A paper published on arxiv has less value to advancing one's career than one published in a journal run by a well-known academic publisher. This also makes it hard for researchers to organize their own journals, separate from the publishers. Many universities (again, particularly in Europe) use the publishing company as a proxy for the quality of a journal, rather than letting researchers within a field make that determination on their own. Thus researchers are forced to stick with the exploitative publishing companies because universities demand it, despite spending most of their time reading and sharing preprint copies of papers.

by tempay 5y ago

axegon_ 5y ago

I've never bothered publishing anything, just circumstantially gave a hand several people that have(I don't want my name to pop up in papers for a million and one reasons). I assumed they were since otherwise I saw no logical reason to go for anything other than Arxiv and publish them for free.

bo1024 5y ago
People publish in journals (etc) because of the peer review and reputation. People are much more likely to read, trust, cite a paper that’s been through peer review. Also people are more likely to discover the paper by looking in prestigious venues than if it’s just in the arxiv flood. For promotion and tenure, papers aren’t considered unless they’re published and prestigious venues count much more.
doliveira 5y ago
Really, you should disclaim your lack of publishing experience in your original comment. You made several claims that are very misleading.
betterunix2 5y ago
Universities, especially in Europe, base hiring and tenure decisions in part on where a researcher's papers are published. A paper published on arxiv has less value to advancing one's career than one published in a journal run by a well-known academic publisher. This also makes it hard for researchers to organize their own journals, separate from the publishers. Many universities (again, particularly in Europe) use the publishing company as a proxy for the quality of a journal, rather than letting researchers within a field make that determination on their own. Thus researchers are forced to stick with the exploitative publishing companies because universities demand it, despite spending most of their time reading and sharing preprint copies of papers.