[open-science] JennyMolloy and PeterMR representing OKF at Open Science Summit

Bryan Bishop kanzure at gmail.com
Fri Oct 28 18:13:43 UTC 2011

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Puneet Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 28, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Maloney, Christopher (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]
> <
> > maloneyc at ncbi.nlm.nih.gov> wrote:
> >
> >> As for the PR point, I also agree with Pawel that it makes the open
> >> movement too easy to ridicule.
> >
> > .. or that the open movement is too radical. In which case, where should
> I
> > go- what groups etc.- where open access is taken to these extremes?
> am unable to parse the above question? Are you saying that the open
> movement is too radical therefore you want to go to where open access is
> taken to extremes? That doesn't make sense. On the other hand, if the open
> movement is *not* radical enough for you, you are free to fork it and create
> your own.

Hm, sorry for the confusion everyone. You're right, I should probably
clarify my question. My question is specifically is that if OKFN membership
or OKFN proper is /not/ "that radical", what groups are? I fully understand
and value that Peter's original statements were opinions and that this has
experienced an unnecessary explosion; I am probably only adding to the
problem with my question.

I suppose another issue is the expressed opinion ("open access is net
better") vs. "has anyone studied whether or not inaccessible research would
actually save lives" which isn't so much an issue of extremism but rather an
issue of practicality, of whether you are presenting an opinion or fact.
However, I think we are all in agreement that there are benefits of open
access here; the issue of opinion vs. fact is not an issue of extremism but
rather an issue of natural and healthy discourse; still, it seems that the
general consensus opinion in this group might not be aligned with Peter's?
There is nothing wrong with this mis-alignment except that it opens the door
to a question like mine- "okay, then out of curiosity are there any groups
where the opinions are exactly aligned with Peter's, or even more extreme?".

So just some further clarification: (1) no, OKFN/open-science (this group)
is not too radical for my personal tastes/interests, (2) OKFN is certainly
something I wish to continue to support (even if it is not the most radical
extremist set of beliefs I can possibly imagine), and (3) yes I would very
much like to know the names of other groups that are more radical and/or
extreme that I may pursue. I am not particularly interested in making forks,
but I would very much enjoy knowing of alternatives.

hope this helps, sorry for the noise on the list everyone

@Peter, I saw you a few times at the Open Science Summit this year but I
didn't have a chance to say hello. Maybe next year.

- Bryan
1 512 203 0507
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20111028/abd2483a/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the open-science mailing list