Well, Science SPAM never seems to go away. Not sure exactly why it seems to come in waves, but recently I have been getting a lot of email messages from the OMICS publishing group OMICS Publishing Group: An Open Access Publisher
The latest is for the Journal of Bioanalysis & Biomedicine. I love how the message says
"This is not a spam message, and has been sent to you because of your eminence in the field. "
Interestingly, this is the EXACT same wording in messages I used to receive from the horrible Bentham OPEN group. (see one of my complaining posts about this here). I wonder, did Bentham somehow morph into OMICS publishing group? OMICS Publishing group is also trying to promote itself as an Open Access publisher in much the same way Bentham does. I hope for everyone's sake they are not connected since the last thing we need is more SPAM out there. Anyway, since I have gotten a bunch of emails from various OMICS journals many of which I have no possible scientific connection to, I am giving OMICS my "Science SPAMMER of the month award".
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
I have a new friend in Google Scholar Updates I have written about the Updates system before and if you want more information please see... -
See Isolation and sequence-based characterization of a koala symbiont: Lonepinella koalarum Paper based on PhD thesis work of Katie Dahlha...
-
Just got this press release by email. I am sick of receiving dozens of unsolicited press releases, especially those in topics not related ...
For me it has been a flood of conference invitations, mostly in China, having nothing to do with my research.
ReplyDeleteNobody's trying to sell you forklifts? (I know that's not science spam, at least I can't think of any reason why it would be, but I neither can I think of any reason why I would be targeted for forklifts.)
ReplyDeleteBut you get to be on their editorial board--a bit like "Who's Who"
ReplyDeleteJust go this: http://www.omicsonline.org/Biotechnology2011/
ReplyDeleteBeing in Philadelphia, I couldn't resist but to give it a look. I love how they say "Venue: Philadelphia". Will they hold it in the courtyard of City Hall?
In the "reknowned speakers" list, they seem to have real people. Or at least the one that is from Philadelphia -- he seems to be a real person from the Wistar Institute. Under what conditions did these people agree to speak at an unknown venue?
I received two e-mails from them today, requesting me to send my full papers for two different journals. The thing is they requested my "full article presented" at a certain Conference, but I did not present it, it was accepted but I couldn't afford the fees, that's when I decided to search if they were legit.
ReplyDeleteOur Brazilian organization for post-graduate programs (called CAPES) has an index of journal qualifications, where the papers are "graded" according to the area you work with, and when I searched for theis ISSN code, the website gave me a different journal as a result! So I decided to google it, and I came across this post.
What's wrong with these people? lol... Last year I received three different invitations from a certain David Publishing, requesting a paper that I published, and I found out they were sort of fake, just like this one... Apparently it happens a lot, right?
Thanks for your post!
Best regards.
Dear Fellow Researchers,
ReplyDeleteFrom the comment "THE ENIGMA THAT IS OMICS PART 3 * Response from Paul Vaucher received on 1st February 2013: " posted in Richard Poynder's Blog, it is clearly evident what is the level of communication at the Publisher's end. If a simple email cannot be written in plain english without gramatical errors!!!! how could one expect the articles within the journals be error proof. Omics claims articles are peer-reviwed by prominent researchers however, there are many open allegations that the process is not followed and screened internally by the employees and are published as soon as possible to generate revenue. The comments were substantiated stating that Omics could not provide the reviewer's details which should be provided when asked for as per the norms of online publishing.
Secondly,
Under MR. Gedela's Comment "THE ENIGMA THAT IS OMICS PART 4
* Response from Dr Srinubabu Gedela: "
Gedela has accepted that their company is losing business due to the error's made by their team. AS a researcher i do not agree to what Mr. Gedela stated about serving the scientific community in monetary terms biased to his/their personal benefits rather to the benefit of the "actual scientific Community".
Based on the research online - An interesting fact about Mr. Gedela is that he is the sole producer of a movie in his regional language. Surely, this speaks where the revenue obtained by "serving" the scientific community is being directed to.
I recommend Mr. Gedela gets a proofreading to his own comments prior to posting them. Probably a peer-review is required here..