For the open access question, I usually ask the person, who is benefit from the perception of higher quality in closed-access journals? I try to get them to see how corporations are exploiting academics in close-access journals – or at least to appreciate the inherent bias is closed access. Peer review is peer review, the distribution channel should not be relevant. I find that I need to get people to think about the influence of the large publishers in order for the to start to see the benefits to open access. It isn’t just about ability for anyone to read it, it is also about changing who holds the power .. taking it away from profit seeking organizations that are not adding any value and exploiting authors, and allowing the authors to take back the power of publishing.