Apparently #Clarivate's Web of Science, one of the major proprietary indexes that employers use to determine whether papers in a journal can be considered in tenure & promotion decisions, denied @joss 's request to be indexed without even telling us. This is not the first time JOSS has been rejected
I checked their "objective review criteria" and JOSS easily passes all the qualifications.
Speaking strictly as my own opinion, not in my role as a JOSS editor or reviewer, but as a matter of fact these indexers are a fucking racket.
It's for "corporations and research organizations". Does that include #universities? Not clear. The focus is not on sharing research to make it more useful, but on creating "brand IP assets".
It's now cultivating the false & invidious impression that journals w/o JIFs are somehow untrustworthy or fraudulent.
"We have evolved the JIF from an indicator of scholarly impact (the numerical value of the JIF)…to an indicator of both…impact & trustworthiness (having a JIF – regardless of the number)."
Sorbonne's "choices are in line with those of @cwts, which has announced it is making openness of research information a priority, and is currently working on fully transparent and reproducible version of its rankings, based on open data from @crossref and @OpenAlex."