What significance do you think this has, if any? I'm thinking not just from the standpoint of publishing, but also the business model, and other aspects as well. Was this idea doomed to fail? What could have, should have been done differently? Does it send a message of impending doom to other open source journals, refine the whole open source model for future success, or something else? I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
I don't think the story can be generalized to all potential online or open-source journals. There were fundamental flaws in the management of the Journal. It was underfunded by the University and not supported adequately by corporate benefactors. Because of these things it became hostage to a few friends (volunteers) with personal agendas.
As you may recall TCFIR co-sponsored a conference in Breckenridge, CO with Innovate and Fischler. Education 2008 I was also formerly an associate editor for the Journal. The multi-media interview of Peter Suber (posted in the video section) was a product of that relationship.
As is the case in all of education, the forces of the status quo rule at Innovate. That is to say most of the content was not about Innovative ideas but rather old pedagogies wrapped up in new technologies. IMHO, this was due in part, to the fact that management at Innovate were digital immigrants, who were enamored by technology without understanding the strengths and shortcomings.
I am very sorry to see the Journal disappear. The concept is/was, as its name connotes, "Innovative". Jim Morrison did a yoeman's job in herding the cats. The Journal existed by the force of his personality. His health and age may be as significant as any other possible cause for this closing.
I hope the Jounal will be committed to open-source archives.
I am very grateful for the opportunity to be associated with the Journal and Jim, but this news comes as no surprise.