In response to that post, a quick comment about open access journals. I do not think they are the solution to everything but I think it is good to have some competition on the publication market. And not just always the same big players, like Elsevier, Springer, ACS.
Elsevier has apparently recently been criticized.
Aside from that I do not like the fact that I seem to publish everything for the American Chemical Society. Not only that my English girlfriend frowns everytime I write "neighbor" or "analyze". But I am appalled by their disgracefully unprofessional "exclusive invitation letter" everyone of us gets about once every month (I don't understand why they think it makes sense to do that).
I do think that the big publication companies play an important role in science. And they surely have the know-how and infrastructure to produce quality publications. But just as I sometimes like to buy fruit at the local market, rather than the big super market, I think it makes sense to consider alternative journals as part of a healthy science world. And in fact if I see PLoS publications or arXiv links in someone's publication list, I already think of that person as dynamic and open-minded.
Macrocycles, flexibility and biological activity: A tortuous pairing - Here's an interesting paper from the Jacobson, Wells and Walsh labs at UCSF and Stanford that seeks to demonstrate how restricting the flexibility of macr...
5 days ago