8 thoughts on “

  1. Stevan Harnad says:

    If Jeffrey Beall gives just criteria and the researchers can use those criteria for identifying the predatory publishers. Many are suspecting Jeffrey Beall’s activity and his list because Hindawi and Versita can be classified as predatory as per many of the criteria that Jeffrey Beall lists. But many researchers say that Jeffrey Beall has stopped commented on these publishers because …… (The people know the reason).

    Can Jeffrey Beall openly discuss why he removed Hindawi and VersitaOpen?

      1. Stevan Harnad says:

        Many people say that he got money from Hindawi and VersitaOpen. One day his predatory behavior will come out with open access.

      1. gregdawes says:

        The English of the email apparently from Jeffrey Beall that is cited as evidence, it looks suspiciously like that of a non-English speaker. I would therefore question its authenticity. Does anyone know where it came from?

    1. stevanharnad says:


      (see Nature: )

      If the inarticulate English didn’t give it away, then the incoherent content falsely attributed to me should be apparent to everyone with any familiarity with open access and with our views.

      But the Fool’s-Gold scam journals are going beyond just spamming to solicit authors, editors and referees: They are now doing fraudulent postings to counter criticism. This is the dark side of openness and begins to sound like the Nigerian fee scams.

      Congratulations to Jeffrey Beall whose work becomes ever more important, as this sad development illustrates.,-Not-Anonymous-Innuendo.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s