reetie

Thank you for this update — it’s great to see Crossref being transparent about the Resourcing for Future Sustainability (RCFS) initiative and the work underway.

A few thoughts and questions that come to mind:

1. Balancing equity and sustainability
   It’s encouraging that fees and their impact are being examined closely. For many journals and institutions (especially smaller or non-profit ones), cost burdens matter greatly. I hope the final model strikes a good balance: ensuring crossref’s long-term sustainability while not putting undue stress on smaller participants.

2. Phased implementation & feedback loops
   I wonder whether Crossref has considered a phased rollout of any fee changes, with ongoing consultation and adjustment. That kind of iterative approach can help catch unintended consequences early.

3. Supporting non-member or under-resourced journals
   It’d be helpful to hear more about how Crossref plans to support journals that are not full members, or those in regions with tighter funding constraints. Could there be subsidies, tiered models, or special provisions?

4. Impact projections & transparency
   Seeing data or modeling on how proposed fee changes would impact various sizes/types of journals (small, mid, large, society journals, open-access, etc.) would help the community anticipate implications. Will future updates include those breakdowns?

Overall, this process feels like a positive and necessary step. Thanks to Crossref and the RCFS team for engaging the community early. I’m looking forward to seeing how the research evolves, and how it shapes a sustainable, equitable future for scholarly infrastructure.