[ilds] OER

Bruce Redwine bredwine1968 at earthlink.net
Mon May 16 07:55:05 PDT 2016

Yes.  Another point about the “paywall.”  I understand that publishers have to make money to stay publishing, but I don’t understand their greed to gouge the public.  Many a time I’ve found an article I’d like to buy—but not if the publisher is charging $25+ to download.  I’ve worked in a publishing house and know how some editors think—charge whatever the market will bear, and if that’s 10x the value of the product, then so be it.  I’ll really against this “free-market” mentality.


> On May 15, 2016, at 1:11 PM, Ric Wilson <Ric.Wilson at msn.com> wrote:
> This may be as good as it gets said Mr. Nicholson once ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Nicholson ). The paywall has a long and elaborate history, a double-edged sword, ad infinitem. On one hand, there are those who'd look toward learning as an unlimited resource yielding ROI that clearly outweighs a phenomenon like "regulated capture." But this favors the precariat learner, an intoxicatingly seductive slant once upon a time. Darley's fiction was deemed genuine somewhere in that meandering track going backwards, so his point of view was immediately adopted. Snap.
> On the other hand, estates are formed and designed through the fictions society creates for securing an elite "controlling" class of producers--writers included. It may not be appropriate to re-read one's AQ if in fact in the secrecy of his panic chamber he's supplementing his viewing of an appropriately acquired hard-copy with an unrestricted digitally thieved one--an unauthorized version on his 24+" from .ru--tapping into an uncontrolled server to assist waning eyesight. And hey, friends, there's undeniable residual angst at LD for leading me on through what, upon careful review in this community's chatter, may have been a cop-out's story. Am I the junky, then? Mutinously, one may insist privately that deconstructing LD's text(s)--googling out its fabric upon a virtual loom without the benefit of rulers, deciphering every single deliberately placed loose end (foreign phrases, place references, uncanny or unheard of schools of thought)--may reverse a precariate's cravings (!
> see also http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-04-20/a-controversial-response-to-heroin-epidemic-supervised-injections to feel me), right? With so many digital fixes to choose from,readers may conceivably take back that power of intrigue given up during their prior reads, right? I could Wiki-out his place-referents almost instantly cutting out his stickers as if a chef filleting it up into a rendering than even many much wiser than me could ever hope for or want to be.... (http://www.wordswithoutborders.org/article/the-city-the-spirit-and-the-letter-on-translating-cavafy). Taking back what was once given up, LD retrospects, "in the same streets you'll wander endlessly"
> Noam Chomsky (https://web.sbs.arizona.edu/privacy) made some fairly inflammatory remarks about governance and privileged access to resources as wedges driven deliberately between classes to uphold our social constructs. (I just viewed his Requiem for the American Dream documentary, his vision of what keeps us together or alternatively pulls us apart) What I'm leading to, pardon my scrawl, is that we're lucky to find ourselves engaged as a small group (?) of individuals  who tinker with these significant concepts in literature. Behold, I sense in our threaded dialogue these forces both shaping and identifying us within our larger frameworks. Each thread connects , it seems. So my shout out to the identification of a paywall. This is good company.
> Ric Wilson
> ________________________________________
> ------------------------------
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 11:47:47 -0700
> From: James Gifford <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
> To: ILDS Listserv <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Subject: [ilds] Tunc 1.1
> Message-ID: <bb1f9448-a27d-88d9-d8ec-3d056005ef1c at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> Hi Bruce,
> On 2016-05-13 9:59 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
>> I was unaware that an article was worth ?a couple of
>> thousand dollars.?  I?ll take your word for it,
>> but this seems to me unlikely.
> I'll remove my tongue from my cheek -- they're not worth it.  It just
> makes "Open Access" another revenue stream by getting funds directly
> from authors...  That then opens the trouble of pay-to-print in a peer
> reviewed environment.
> Best,
> James

More information about the ILDS mailing list