Archivalia: Open Access and milking cows

[From Google's English] "In the OA list https://lists.fu-berlin.de/pipermail/ipoa-forum/2015-September/thread.html being discussed item fees. My comment: In my view, only the diamond OpenAccess sustainable which incurs no APCs, but publishing costs by promoting agent (if one may call the publisher to be seen) is carried out.. 1 Open Access is of equal opportunities, this insight is lost here too many. When we APCs equal opportunities are far away. This also applies to monographs. Austrian textbook authors have to hope for big fat FWF grants that actually brings many important humanities monographs into the net, while the DFG it leaves more than lip service - the proportion of OA monographs in this country because even negligible. Waiver begging is unworthy. Reiche institutions care for their STM-authors while an APC culture is seen not in the humanities. Since it is believed that the host institution can not wear APCs, let the OA publishing entirely.. 2 The costs of publishing are extremely exaggerated. The statements of Shieber 2012 no one has disproved conclusively: http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/75229491/ Nobody can tell me that Netzplatz or domain is particularly expensive. Many good journals are with OJS https://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/ operated. Rather luxurious the Arxiv features, but also because it is a far cry from the supposedly cost-covering product costs in the cost per item. What precarious workers are exploited, whether to support the publishing activities of their professor or as an editor of an OA journal, has here no role to play. Interested OA does not mean that taking advantage of people. Like any proofreading activity is copy-editing, its significance is extremely overrated, extremely instructive. Volunteering or as part of a job to deal with it, is quite reasonable. No less organizable is the peer review if they do not put on Open Review. Quality is overrated, I formulated provocatively: http://digigw.hypotheses.org/1063 The editors must sift the manuscript input and distribute appropriate contributions to peer reviewers. Content management systems help them. So what? Both groups get involved - usually - a penny for it, as well as science writers unlike Fiction writers run out completely empty (but see § 32 of the Copyright Act.). So: What's so incredibly expensive if you please? ..."