Hugo Catherine @hugo4@qoto.org

By adopting Green Open Access, the global research community could have forced academic publishers to downsize to the real costs of publication: manag...

This survey has been designed by 3 researchers who have been using the Mastodon social network for some time. Given the recent events and changes on Twitter and the role that Mastodon has acquired, we concern about whether the scientific community is using Mastodon. For this reason, we have developed this survey. We want to achieve knowledge about the current use of Mastodon by the scientific community, about the reasons for its use and non-use, about its possible limitations, and about Mastodon as an alternative to Twitter for the scientific community. The survey is divided into 5 sections. There are some questions that have conditional answers and therefore the total number of questions may vary. The maximum number of questions is less than 30. The sections are as follows: A. Demographic information B. Use of Mastodon and reasons C. Possible potentialities/limitations D. About Twitter and Mastodon (for comparison as an alternative to Twitter) E. Optional free text commentary on both the survey and the subject matter The survey is completely anonymous, and there is no way to relate the answers and the people who give them. If you have received the invitation to participate in this survey, it is because we believe that it may be of interest to you and you will enjoy it. We thank you in advance for your time and the value of the information you provide us on the subject. We, the three researchers leading the survey, intend to write a scientific paper on what we will achieve. If we publish any scientific work on the subject, it will always and only be in Open Access journals and with a Creative Commons license, in such a way that the work is freely accessible to anyone interested in it. In addition, we will add acknowledges to all the people who participated in our survey, which will be reflected in the works. If you would like to obtain information about the results and the possible studies to be developed, after completing the survey we will provide our users on Mastodon. Yo can get in touch with us by that way. Informed consent We inform you that all the data collected in this research will be treated in an absolutely confidential manner and will be used only for scientific purposes, in accordance with Organic Law 3/2018 of December 5, 2018, on the Protection of Personal Data and Guarantee of Digital Rights. By pressing the page forward button below, you declare that you have read and understood that: Participation is voluntary Participation in this survey and study does not and will not have any prejudice to whoever participates Consent to participate in the study has been given Note: credits for the header image: Pixabay License - Free to use. Link: https://pixabay.com/es/illustrations/smartphone-direccion-4942918/)

Speaker: Fernando Racimo Title: Ethical publishing: how do we get there? Abstract: The academic journal publishing model is deeply unethical: today, a few major, for-profit conglomerates control more than 50% of all articles in the natural sciences and social sciences, driving subscription and open-access publishing fees above levels that can be sustainably maintained by publicly funded universities, libraries, and research institutions worldwide. About a third of the costs paid for publishing papers is profit for these dominant publishers' shareholders, and about half of them covers costs to keep the system running, including lobbying, marketing fees, and paywalls. The paywalls in turn restrict access of scientific outputs, preventing them from being freely shared with the public and other researchers. Thus, money that the public is told goes into science is actually being funneled away from it, or used to limit access to it. Alternatives to this model exist and have increased in popularity in recent years, including diamond open-access journals and community-driven recommendation models. Here, we give a brief overview of the current state of the academic publishing system, including its most important systemic problems. We then describe alternative systems. We explain the reasons why the move toward them can be perceived as costly to individual researchers, and we demystify common roadblocks to change. Finally, in view of the above, we provide a set of guidelines and recommendations that academics at all levels can implement, in order to enable a more rapid and effective transition toward ethical publishing.

Rights retention agreement aims to end ‘unhelpful’ model under which universities ‘give IP to publishers and buy access to it in perpetuity’, says Manchester librarian