Not in defense of his lists, which I regard as a bad idea in theory and fatally flawed in practice, for reasons I’ve documented (most recently here but elsewhere over time).
But…I’ve seen some stuff on another blog lately that bothers me.
- I do not for a minute believe that Jeffrey Beall wrote the supposed email I’ve seen that suggests a listed publisher would be re-evaluated for $5,000. That email was written using English-as-a-third-language grammar; it’s just not plausible as coming from Beall.
- I truly dislike the notion that a doctorate is the minimum qualification for scholarship. But then, I would, wouldn’t I (since my pinnacle of academic achievement is a BA and a handful of credits toward an MA).
- I also dislike the notion that state colleges are somehow disreputable. My own degree comes from a state institution, and I’ll match its credentials with anybody.
The same blog had an interesting fisking of one of Beall’s sillier anti-OA papers. I had tagged it toward a future Cites & Insights essay on access and ethics. But after seeing this other stuff…I won’t link to or source from this particular blog. Heck, I’ve been the subject of Beall’s ad hominem attacks; doesn’t mean I have to support that sort of thing.
