I am confused by the 'citation analyses."  What are they telling us?   ARe the linked articles citing each other so we can see connections between articles/research? 

   I enjoyed the article on the history of openness. I'd heard comparisons of the INternet to Gutenberg as far as getting knowledge "out there" with many copies, to many people... but didn't know about the "coffee house" culture which I could imagine happening At A Starbucks Near You ...  

    I felt like the key paragraph was 

After a period of open movements many times there have been slight but important shifts from
“pure” openness towards “pretended” openness, i.e. some aspects have been modified to offer more
control for producers and other stakeholders. For instance, the historic culture of the coffeehouses
had been transformed to private clubs and closed, exclusive societies. The original MOOC concept
has been utilised for the development of platforms like Udacity or Coursera both of which are providing free courses containing material that cannot be adapted according to the 4Rs (see above).
Similarly, Open Study is a for profit platform. History emphasizes the risk in failing to preserve the openness that made initiatives successful in the first place. The development of free but not entirely open courses needs to be examined more closely. While not immediately altering public perception, the shift from humanistic values to more “efficient” and “productive” educational opportunities can
undermine the significance of openness.

I'd kinda like to go back to that idea they mentioned  that knowledge is from God and therefore should be free to everybody..