It all started from Molecular Philosophy blog, he wrote a series of post about Socialism in science (here are direct links to his posts: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4). Although I was not able to manage the time to read his post but I don’t agree with his perception that open access may ultimately fail. Unfortunately this topic was picked up by Bora Zivkovic a.k.a. ‘Coturnix’, and he wrote this in his own way. Read out Science publishing also suffers from its curmudgeons, as usual his contribution to whole post is just title and rest of the post is just quoted. Everyone will agree with me that Zivkovic is a strong supporter for open access model and he is also affiliated to PLoS as online discussion expert. Zivkovic also organize the Open Laboratory competition which features the best writing on science blogs every year. Although I never doubted about his intention to promote the scientific blogging in this way, but I have only objection the model he adopted to do so and when he started selling this. The Open Laboratory 2008 a.k.a 2008 Science Blogging Anthology is now available for sell from Lulu for nominal cost $15.50 for paperback book and $7.50 for soft copy. Open Laboratory publishing model is very much same as used by traditional non open access peer reviewed publishers, for example 1. you put your time and resources to write the post without thinking that some day people will make money out of this, 2. you submit this to Open Laboratory and that goes for review through volunteer editors and they select bunch of high standard blog post to publish, 3. organizer select a publisher to publish this content and to have access to this content you need to pay a nominal XYZ$ 4. Of course the original blog articles are freely available to read very much like scientific researcher make their raw manuscript available to their web page or pre-print servers when they publish with non open access journals. Why there is so much difference between ideology and action? Insisting on being politically-correct all the time about open access and when we it comes to implement and execute you opted for traditional paid model, this is nothing but typically a hypocrite behavior. I can agree with the fact there is associated cast with printing anthology as hard copy, well I am also not asking that if you are making any money in this process, but I am just arguing to make soft copies freely available. Zivkovic don’t stop here, he further claims that

You can get for free something that actually costs. Read the posts for free, or pay for the added value of having it nicely edited, typeset, bound and printed.

That is excuse which even traditional publishers are giving for long time, so what exactly you are against for. One moment you are too harsh and other time you just flip the side. Pseudo-intellectual like you don’t actually do the things they talk about and they always have flip-flop. Certainly, there are lots of reasons, lots of excuses but it is action what makes an idea great (and by the way who cares how much great you are).