In reply to
@natesjacobs @csarven @lesliekwchan @ewout @sciteai @CrossrefOrg (15/N) And we also have orgs that are made up of just one person (hint).
In reply to
@natesjacobs @csarven @lesliekwchan @ewout @sciteai @CrossrefOrg (15/N) And we also have orgs that are made up of just one person (hint).
In reply to
@natesjacobs @csarven @lesliekwchan @ewout @sciteai @CrossrefOrg (14/N) And we also have orgs that are just crap at meeting their responsibilities.
In reply to
@natesjacobs @csarven @lesliekwchan @ewout @sciteai @CrossrefOrg (13/N) Clearly, identifier-dweebs are outliers in this case and would probably be more responsible than most orgs in meeting CR obligations.
In reply to
@natesjacobs @csarven @lesliekwchan @ewout @sciteai @CrossrefOrg (12/N) So we have focused on orgs because they are generally better equipped to take on the responsibilities associated with updating their pointers (DOIs) and metadata.
In reply to
@natesjacobs @csarven @lesliekwchan @ewout @sciteai @CrossrefOrg (11/N) They also, legally, tend to have well-documented provisions for maintaining & transferring assets (e.g. domains, content, etc). People, alas, don't.