IFIP TC6

• How to ensure high quality of the journal
• How to come up with a sustainable business model
• How to provide a unique selling point

Idea: shift business model from “charging for publications” towards “charging for reviewing”

• Each submitted (= reviewed) paper is charged a decent amount (300+ EUR, say). This income is used as (still symbolic) reward for the reviewer, stimulating high quality reviews. In addition, this provides a clear signal to the outside world about the high quality of the review process, and at the same time deters substandard papers by definition.
• Authors receive extensive feedback to their papers. In the case of accepted papers, this reviewer feedback is condensed into an accompanying “Letter to the Authors” highlighting main achievements, pointing out ways for future research, proposing add-ons etc. Publishing also this Letter to the Authors can be of further benefit to the authors, e.g. as recommendation letters etc.
• Feedback from users can be summarized in an additional “Letter from the Editor” some months after publication, adding further aspects to this feedback.

Further input from the audience

• Redefinition of the review process could also include a move towards more transparency (e.g. non-anonymized reviews). However, this may create unwanted trouble (e.g. in the case of conflict of interests). To be further discussed.
• May extend this scheme towards some fee reduction for accepted papers (e.g. by including a voucher for the subsequent IFIP-sponsored conferences, etc.)

• Including teaching material into the IFIP library: could be nice, but be aware of copyright issues (copyright must remain with the authors)
• Including tutorials into the OA journal: yes, acceptance should follow the standard IFIP OA journal process.