leech@homer.cs.unc.edu (Jonathan Leech) (12/14/90)
In article <4509@wrgate.WR.TEK.COM>, dant@mtdoom.WR.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque) writes: |>Coming to a concensus on the net can be difficult if not impossible, but |>I'll try anyway. Here are some proposed additions. Anyone have severe |>objections? Anyone want to write answers and mail them to Eugene? |>... |> 2. Why do the Principle Investigators get to hog their data for |> a full year instead of releasing it to me (Joe Taxpayer) who |> paid for it? I'd rather phrase FAQs in a less-biased way than get into another big argument on this topic. Want to try that one again?
dant@mtdoom.WR.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque) (12/15/90)
leech@homer.cs.unc.edu (Jonathan Leech) writes: >dant@mtdoom.WR.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque) writes: >|> 2. Why do the Principle Investigators get to hog their data for >|> a full year instead of releasing it to me (Joe Taxpayer) who >|> paid for it? > > I'd rather phrase FAQs in a less-biased way than get >into another big argument on this topic. Want to try that one again? Sorry. I didn't mean for it to appear in the FAQ in that form. How about: Why isn't the scientific data and images from a probe released to the public immediately? If that's unsatisfactory, please feel free to rewrite it yourself. --- Dan Tilque -- dant@mtdoom.WR.TEK.COM