[JoPP-Public] Fw: Your journal application to DOAJ: Journal of Peer Production

[Kat Braybrooke]

Hello all,

I'm weighing in late also, so apologies for that. I'd also like to thank
folk like Mathieu for practicing such patience in aiming to respect all
voices. This doesn't make for an easy or quick process -- but I too am
hoping the journal can submit this in time, as being part of such an index
would be a big boost for JoPP. So Mathieu, if you need any help getting it
in last-minute, please let me know.

My very small 2c on this debate in summary, having read through the
interesting -- and I think, important -- discussion today (and also as the
most heated arguments for/against different 'open' licenses, like maxigas
notes, have already been argued by each of us over the years), is that
the CC-BY-SA license seems to be best -- in this case.

Why? My reading is that almost everyone here (and it seemed, in earlier
threads on the topic) who advocated for CC-0 are also fine with CC-BY-SA.
However, there remain various folk who will be offended by the
potentialities of corporate/commercial use in CC-0. By choosing CC-BY-SA,
the journal can stand by its original principles, align itself with other
'open' projects such as Wikipedia who have used CC-BY-SA successfully for
many years, and ensure it does not alienate current/future authors who
chose to submit to an 'open' journal.

Again, this is just my 2c, and as a newer member of this community I am
happy to go with whatever everyone else thinks is best. And again,
available to help where needed to push this through in time.

- Kat




On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 9:50 AM, natacha <natacha at lesoiseaux.io> wrote:

>
> > Now I'm really confused.
> >
> > CC-BY-SA (which does require citation) is one of the options on the
> > table here and was already so when you started this sub-thread. As it
> > happens, is also the one I personally prefer, on the basis that it
> > promotes the creation of additional Free Culture work.
> Sorry then we really agree only Mathieu O'Neill said JoPP was going to
> go to CC0 which triggered my reaction (as I said yesterday: "
>
> JOPP being CC0 would make one less canal of communication open for me.
>
> " )...
>
>  CC-BY-SA is indeed a lot more appropriate.
>
> Also regarding non-rivalry goods an old memory comes back to my mind: in
> 2004 the director of a French television canal, supported by a known
> publicitarian, triggered a scandal by saying "Je vends du temps de
> cerveau disponible à Coca-Cola" (I sell available mind space to
> Coca-Cola). The expression stayed... it somehow presents mind space as a
> rivalry good which confirms what you are saying about the non-scarcity
> of non-rivalry goods and re-places the issue on the social functionning
> itself: availability of people and energies to process and defend ideas.
>
> **n.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> JoPP-Public mailing list
> JoPP-Public at lists.ourproject.org
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/jopp-public
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/jopp-public/attachments/20170910/ea676321/attachment.html>