Bringing JRMES back to life

[mcbishop]

I've been wrestling with options for bringing the Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies back to life and the three options in the poll reflect my current thinking.

Traditional
As before, a dead-tree (paperback) JRMES is published once a year for which you pay a subscription (possibly upfront, as opposed to after publication as used to happen, to get over me personally always having to stump up the cash for production and almost inevitably losing out on the deal).

Hybrid
An open-access model that costs nothing to read online but provides a dead-tree version for those who like (or need, if a library) The Book As Artefact and are willing to pay for it. If enough (probably >200) were interested this might be traditional (high-quality) offset litho printed, if only a few, then lower quality Print On Demand (POD).

Digital
An open-access model that costs nothing to read online and has no dead-tree version. There is of course no such thing as a free lunch, so if you want this, you have to suggest a payment model that covers production costs (just because trees are not felled does not make it free to produce; there are server costs, postage (not all contributors may have internet access), and so on and so forth).

For the second two options, a subscription model could be used to provide delayed open access (e.g. you pay $10 a year to see everything, or nothing to see everything from five years ago and older). Alternatively, a donation system like Flattr might work (although I have my doubts, pessimist that I am), or even advertising (but I am as sceptical as for donations and somebody would have to be paid to sell advertising). Incidentally, I would not favour an article-processing charge (APC) for authors as that would limit submissions from those without institutional funding (such as re-enactors) and run against the whole ethos of ROMEC and JRMES.

So, if you want JRMES back, in what form do you want to see it?

Mike Bishop

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Right now I'm voting Digital, you could probably use Ads on the site to help foot the bill, preferably relevant ones.

I'm interested to hear what others think, but I'd definatly like to see this.

[M. Demetrius]

I voted paper and web. You can't always take the web with you, but paper copies are portable when you need that. There is absolutely no substitute for turning the pages of a book, Kindle notwithstanding.

A subscription to read, to help with web maintenance, and a fee to enable printing, or for some form of download. Many sites disable the right click, which prevents some freebie pilfering people from getting free copies. I don't suppose you can stop screen captures, but they're not really very satisfying, and a lot of trouble.

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

Perhaps a pdf accessible online with an option of downloading? I am voting digital.

[markhebb]

Mike,

I've just handed in my thesis on imperial efforts to maintain military loyalty AD 235-395 and I'm looking for places to publish parts of my work. Will you be calling for submissions if JRMES gets back off the ground?

cheers,
Mark Hebblewhite

[mcbishop]

Perhaps a pdf accessible online with an option of downloading? I am voting digital.

But we need to know how you think it should be funded, too. No funding = no JRMES ;-)

I've just handed in my thesis on imperial efforts to maintain military loyalty AD 235-395 and I'm looking for places to publish parts of my work. Will you be calling for submissions if JRMES gets back off the ground?

That's the plan. There are already several papers in the pipeline.

Mike Bishop

[Titvs Statilivs Castvs]

I voted for hybrid, since digital is very practical, and a dead tree version is good for libraries and people who prefer to have something in their hands while reading (including myself, although very dependent on the price). A paper edition in libraries will also get the attention from researchers who would not come in contact with it online.

[caiusbeerquitius]

How about putting them on iTunes books or so? Would cost just a little bit to download each paper.

[Renatus]

I am a traditionalist and like to have a printed copy in my hand. Accordingly, Digital only is out, as far as I am concerned. I can live with Hybrid, which offers a compromise to cater for both the Traditional and Digital schools, but I worry about the quality of the printed version and about the certainty of subscriptions. Therefore, my vote is for Traditional but I would take Hybrid, if I had to.

[Kegluneq]

Delighted to hear the journal is being revived!

I would personally prefer a paper and digital option, but what would the end user cost for that be? As my funds are chronically limited, I couldn't pay vast sums for a paper subscription straight off. Is $10 a year a realistic figure? That sounds extremely reasonably, especially for a consistently interesting journal such as JRMES.

[Tarbicus]

Why not Kindle? I don't have a Kindle so I use the free app for personal computers downloadable from Amazon.

[mcbishop]

Why not Kindle? I don't have a Kindle so I use the free app for personal computers downloadable from Amazon.

All the recent Kindles read PDFs, which would probably be the main way papers would be offered digitally. On a desktop, besides Adobe's own cursed offering, there are various PDF readers available. I doubt markup specifically for Kindle would merit the time involved (first question: which Kindle? They change specs so rapidly); I spend my life weaving around the obstacles generated by the various ebook formats. However, nobody can rule out the possibility that one of the open-access journal software platforms might offer a plugin which generates Kindle-friendly output. Digital platforms are always more flexible than cellulose ones.

Mike Bishop

[mcbishop]

I worry about the quality of the printed version

Libraries would too. POD uses cut-sheet technology and toner-on-paper; offset litho uses folded and stitched signatures and ink on (and in) paper and it is much easier for a library to rebind an OL book than a POD one (which is basically just a large perfect-bound paperback just waiting to spew its glued pages all over you one day when you open it). For the foreseeable future, the Book As Artefact people will always be best served by offset litho.

Mike Bishop

[Robert Vermaat]

I voted for hybrid.

What's with dead-tree publishing? Why not reused-rag publishing? ;-)

[jvrjenivs]

Yes, bring JRMES back to us! I was looking for some back issues recently again and these are hard to find.

I voted hybrid, as I prefer to have papers I've been researching on paper, but like the search functions in a digital format for faster reference.