Scott --

Since the World Community Grid does not function as an organization out on its own, I am not sure that there is the executive structure in place you are looking for. I have e-mailed the project team to ask if they can provide any further information to you.

There's nothing secret going on that I know of and i'm the person that's in charge of World Community Grid on a day-to-day basis.

IBM spends a lot of money to make World Community Grid available to researchers for free. I'm glad that they do. Our hope is that this will result in the cure for some disease. I mentioned in an earlier post that by clicking on any Powered By IBM logo on our website, you will see the internal organization that sponsors World Community Grid and many other worthwhile initiatives. That's who is behind World Community Grid, a group called Community Relations. Go to that website and click on Grant programs and then on Education and you will see a lot of similar initiatives that are philanthropic in nature. In addition to that, if you go to the Advisory Board page link on worldcommunitygrid.org, you will see that a Sr. IBM executive is on this board.

Hopefully this information helps you in your quest.

Hey, buddy, was there something specific that lit your fuse or did you just decide to spontaneously combust on us, Scott?

As Merlinius pointed out, a number of us have done a good deal of research to make certain that the results of this project are "slamdunk" public domain.

Of course, this is not what you asked. But if you really believe that it matters, then there is no good reason that this information should not be made freely available to you upon request. There is also no good reason that you should be made to feel defensive for persisting in trying to get an answer. Nor is it unreasonable for you to be annoyed that instead of a simple answer to a simple question, all you get is the typical beaurocratic "run-around."

But you may be preaching to the choir, here. I'd be willing to lay money down that these guys would love to just be able to give you the information if they had it. Why the hell wouldn't they? The trouble is that they don't have it and that being employees, they can only push so hard to get it.

Personally, I don't think it's worth the hassle. But if you do, Scott, then I agree that it is your right to ask. Just make certain that you go to the people who can actually give you the answers, or you're just pissing into the wind.

And in the meantime, try playing nice with the rest of us.

Scott --
I take offense to this. If you would go back and read my posts, I have tried to accomodate your requests for information as best as I can. I do not think that I was resistive, accusatory or that I ridiculed you. I have tried to let you know as much as I knew about the organizational structure behind the World Community Grid and have not said anything which I would expect you to take offense to. I do think you do need to apologize. I do wonder, as have others that have posted here, what has motivated your postings in this thread after having participated in the project since its inception. Until now, I have said nothing of this, but now I will say that it seems to me that you did so only to cast a shadow on the World Community Grid. Your choice of the New Members Forum for this thread makes me even more suspicious of your intent. Certainly, after six months of participation, you cannot consider yourself to be a new member. While I am angered by your most recent post, please believe me that I have tried to respond as best as I can and that bbover3, the WCG project manager, has done so as well.

This whole issue is rediculous. Perhaps, I hope, due to a basic misunderstanding between the individuals involved.

Is everybody on the same page here?

Putting aside the tone of his correspondence, all Scott is asking for are the names/titles of the individuals at IBM who oversee this project at the corporate level. To quote Scott:


Scott is asking about the names of the corporate executives. This is no different from asking who is in charge of the Acct Dept, or Marketing of a publically traded company. It is usually accessible through the company's website. Market analysts and investors routinely review this information as part of their analysis of the company. What is not customary and normal is for this information not to be readily available to the public.

If the company has not taken the time to list this information in an easy accessible location, it is not unreasonable for an individual or institution to request that this information be provided. It is a routine administrative event that occurs at least hundreds of times every business day.

While the request may seem irrelevant to me, still it makes absolutely no sense to me for anyone at the project support level to be upset if a member asks who has operational responsibility for a specific project at the corporate level.

Why in hell is everybody so worked up about this? It's not worth even a tenth of the energy everybody is putting into it. The request itself has nothing to do with the member's reasons for making it. If the request is reasonable and customary according to normal business practices, then why would anyone want to question his motives?

That is nobody's business but his.

If an investor requested this information, you can damn well bet that it would be provided instantaneously. If it wasn't, the investor would tell the company to take a hike. And no one would fault him.

For Scott to say that for a charitable project a member's time and computer resources ARE his investment - instead of cash; and that he simply wants to ensure that it is being "spent" wisely is entirely correct and justified. To say that the member should NOT care about how their time and resources are being used would be utterly demeaning of the huge contribution being made by all of the members collectively and individually.

Based upon my own experiences with WCG, I find this notion utterly preposterous. Based upon Scott's limited experiences as they have been posted, though, frankly I would not.

This has nothing to do with my taking sides with anyone. From where I stand it is as if one person is looking at a cow, the other at a horse and then they just keep on arguing with each other about who is right. Forget about potential innuendos, motives, tones and assumptions. Just tell the man who the hell is in charge of this project at IBM and let's move on.

Please do not bother to reply. For me this issue is WAY over. I would rather lurk at TW. At least they don't pretend to be sane.

Good night, grandma.