In reply to David.

Dear David, Lori, Diane, Mike

Thanks so much. I think the important thing is that we debate implementation details and I'm conscious that it is very easy to criticise from an arm-chair. I take your point about the title. My aim was to attract the attention of a specific group, but in that I'm as guilty of a click-bait approach as many of the groups that we often criticise for simplistic headlines on complex subjects.

As you note, what is important is that we tackle the issue of collectively funding infrastructure, platforms and innovation. Targets matter and numbers speak to people in a way that more complex proposals often don't. As you note benchmarks are useful, and it may be that as these efforts evolve we see the number rise. Perhaps a 2.5% Club of institutions will give way to 5% and 10% over time?

What matters in the long term is that we develop systems that can evolve into the future. For that, I thank you for the work you're doing in raising these issues and getting them on the agenda of librarians and university leadership. The implementation details we will no doubt continue to discuss for some time.