@Wrzlprmft: That sounds interesting. How do they claim open-access journals threaten science? Coud you give us a gist of the content of the book?

@ÉbeIsaac No, I do not want to pay money for this. Also, after reading the abstract, I did not feel that the article was worth my time.

I rather wanted to point out the irony that an article criticising open access that appeals to scientists in general will not be accessible to most of them due to being behind the paywall of some niche journal.

@Wrzlprmft It appears that I have institutional access to it. For the moment I've downloaded it, but I haven't yet dared reading it. Should you be interested in reading it, let me know.

It's an interesting article; there definitely needs to be some control over (scientific) publishing. And I believe (scientific) information shouldn't be, in general, so easily accessible for everyone.

My search foo is failing me. Do we have a question about who to list as people who should not reviewer your paper?

@Wrzlprmft thanks. That links to: academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27160/… which I think is better for me

@101010111100 Why do you think that scientific information should not be easily accessible?

@MassimoOrtolano I just think that it needlessly spreads ignorance and misinformation, as well as breeding crackpots and pseudo-scientists. Advanced literature should only be available to people who meet certain criteria (e.g. working in academia), but that would be possible only if there is tighter control on what gets published.

@101010111100 In my experience (years of newsgroups and forums), crackpots and pseudo-science are much more bread by popular science books (notwithstanding their good intentions), bad websites and youtube videos. They almost never read real scientific literature, even when they have access to it.