| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Support
Forum: Suggestions / Feedback
Thread: WCG's ethical guidelines for volunteer DC |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 139
|
|
| Author |
|
|
cjslman
Master Cruncher Mexico Joined: Nov 23, 2004 Post Count: 2082 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
... so in your past in WCG -> 2-3 project must be rotten apples You sure have the knack to say the wrong thing at the wrong moment. Now that you have the WCG answering your questions politely and all you can think to state is the above ? I just hope that it was a mishap in translation from Croatian.CJSL Crunching like there's no tomorrow... |
||
|
|
toss
Senior Cruncher New Zealand Joined: Jan 3, 2007 Post Count: 220 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
2-3 project must be rotten apples...  There is no factual basis for such an inference to be drawn. Unless you can provide some evidence of wrongdoing by any past projects, you must withdraw that statement. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
There is now a second edit to my first comment, where I've quoted jhindo, but also added another comment.
|
||
|
|
deltavee
Ace Cruncher Texas Hill Country Joined: Nov 17, 2004 Post Count: 4848 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
There is now a second edit to my first comment, where I've quoted jhindo, but also added another comment. Thanks for not boring us with it here.  |
||
|
|
theodolite
Advanced Cruncher Joined: Apr 11, 2014 Post Count: 119 Status: Offline |
u have assured us a little Just to clarify. The use of the word "we" is incorrect. The writer means "klik".1. nice of WCG that ALL data collected on these research through our donations is FREE of charge & publicly made...but has a WACG got a mechanism if "by chance" some1 miss-use data for personal gain so Jhindo takes the time to reply and the first thing you say is that some scientists will undoubtedly violate the signed agreement. Nice way to CONTINUE to disrespect ALL the scientists.2. as always we just wanted to assure that drug research for example of AIDS will be cheaper by our donations in FAHV, FAHA & FAHB data...blah, blah, blah 1. In the future use the word "I" instead of the word "we".2. The use of the phrase "as always" is used out of context and is misleading if all scientist do agree on that why the word "if" unless you forgot to read jhindo's replywe have no problem thwre never was a problem, just a conspiracy theory we just feel, as same as u, that those affiliations should be made publicly listed & included in papers... blah, blah, blah in case you missed it the first few times, you have neither the right nor the responsibility to either make or enforce WCG policies or procedures. Actually, you don't even get to suggest them. Quit trying to lecture the professionals as if they are children.Sorry, pressed POST too soon [Edit 1 times, last edit by theodolite at Oct 7, 2015 5:15:34 AM] |
|||
|
||||
|
theodolite
Advanced Cruncher Joined: Apr 11, 2014 Post Count: 119 Status: Offline |
There is now a second edit to my first comment, where I've quoted jhindo, but also added another comment. Thanks for not boring us with it here. So I'm a sucker. I read the edits. I can assure all, dont bother. Summary: Since BOINC prevents a computer from sleeping, the cost of those extra cycles must allow users to claim a donation. Since the donation is not spare cycles but is money, users must be allowed to set the policies of WCG. Since WCG Admin are incapable and disinterested in enforcing policies and agreements, full disclosure of all business practices must be made to members. Since the policies have not been disclosed to members, Members must therefore assume that scientists are profiting from WCG work. NONE of these premises are true so logic dictates that no truthful conclusions can be created. Wow, this stuff is really getting bad. Can't someone nuke this thread? [Edit 1 times, last edit by theodolite at Oct 7, 2015 5:38:22 AM] |
||
|
|
KLiK
Master Cruncher Croatia Joined: Nov 13, 2006 Post Count: 3108 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
... so in your past in WCG -> 2-3 project must be rotten apples You sure have the knack to say the wrong thing at the wrong moment. Now that you have the WCG answering your questions politely and all you can think to state is the above ? I just hope that it was a mishap in translation from Croatian.CJSL Crunching like there's no tomorrow... 2-3 project must be rotten apples... There is no factual basis for such an inference to be drawn. Unless you can provide some evidence of wrongdoing by any past projects, you must withdraw that statement. C d 1st page, edited by TBMS! u have assured us a little Just to clarify. The use of the word "we" is incorrect. The writer means "klik".1. nice of WCG that ALL data collected on these research through our donations is FREE of charge & publicly made...but has a WACG got a mechanism if "by chance" some1 miss-use data for personal gain so Jhindo takes the time to reply and the first thing you say is that some scientists will undoubtedly violate the signed agreement. Nice way to CONTINUE to disrespect ALL the scientists.2. as always we just wanted to assure that drug research for example of AIDS will be cheaper by our donations in FAHV, FAHA & FAHB data...blah, blah, blah 1. In the future use the word "I" instead of the word "we".2. The use of the phrase "as always" is used out of context and is misleading if all scientist do agree on that why the word "if" unless you forgot to read jhindo's replywe have no problem thwre never was a problem, just a conspiracy theory we just feel, as same as u, that those affiliations should be made publicly listed & included in papers... blah, blah, blah in case you missed it the first few times, you have neither the right nor the responsibility to either make or enforce WCG policies or procedures. Actually, you don't even get to suggest them. Quit trying to lecture the professionals as if they are children.Sorry, pressed POST too soon u quotes "us" & then referring to "we"...English must be hard 4 u? but yes, there r some of us who believe that WCG should become better...& implement some "fail safes" in its policy! it's good to be prepared... there is a BIG difference between "some scientists" & "all scientists"! btw, all scientists which wanna protect their "science reputation" would gladly agree 2 extra fail-safes...it protects not only WCG but also d "good & fair scientists"! here is list of "some bad scientists" & their practices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misc...titution_or_a_corporation again, using "we", 'cause there r more than 1 of us! using "as always" reference goes to all "CPU time donation", not only donations to 1 research (which is listed as example!)... about problem, goes as a quake preparations...meaning that if the ground didn't shook in last 30y, doesn't mean it wouldn't d next day or in next y, or in 2y, or in 10y...it's just a matter of time, until we have a problem here! maybe u didn't understand...when is said that "I feel", that doesn't give me (quoted) "the right nor the responsibility to either make or enforce WCG policies or procedures"...not @ all! when is that "I feel" means that it's "a suggestion to improve WCG policies or procedures"... but it keeps me a BIG QUESTION over my head...why do you oppose so much to "improve WCG policies or procedures"?! why do u oppose more transparency?! what is ur leverage?! what is ur gain in a game u play?! & how come u don't have listed ur data...any of it here!  There is now a second edit to my first comment, where I've quoted jhindo, but also added another comment. Thanks for not boring us with it here. So I'm a sucker. I read the edits. I can assure all, dont bother. Summary: Since BOINC prevents a computer from sleeping, the cost of those extra cycles must allow users to claim a donation. Since the donation is not spare cycles but is money, users must be allowed to set the policies of WCG. Since WCG Admin are incapable and disinterested in enforcing policies and agreements, full disclosure of all business practices must be made to members. Since the policies have not been disclosed to members, Members must therefore assume that scientists are profiting from WCG work. NONE of these premises are true so logic dictates that no truthful conclusions can be created. Wow, this stuff is really getting bad. Can't someone nuke this thread? well, what do u care about money & equipment?! u r just another IT geek that doesn't care about costs & have put WCG on some of equipment u can lay ur hands on...here's ur post: https://secure.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/viewpostinthread?post=496976 so u probably didn't pay 4 that server...nor do u pay 4 it's cost of running! hopefully u did ask d owner about running such a setup 4 WCG?! or would be, 'cause of ur negligence have something like this on WCG?! http://www.geek.com/news/setihome-god-fired-f...rict-1-6-million-1004362/  again, asking - why do u oppose so much of making "fail safes on WCG & by WCG"?! why do u oppose a suggestion a WCG should be more protected?! ---------------------------------------- [Edit 6 times, last edit by KLiK at Oct 7, 2015 6:49:15 AM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
So now that we've established that the project scientists are obligated to release their data into the public domain, you're now insisting that WCG somehow dictate how private companies use publicly available information.
I guess all WCG need to do now is overthrow every government and then nationalise all companies. |
||
|
|
KLiK
Master Cruncher Croatia Joined: Nov 13, 2006 Post Count: 3108 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
what we actually would want to prevent in future, is sthg like this:
----------------------------------------http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-07/breast-...rt-rules/6833232#comments & that case got a lot of women killed, 'cause of 2 expensive testing... why? & when will some people see? |
||
|
|
toss
Senior Cruncher New Zealand Joined: Jan 3, 2007 Post Count: 220 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
2-3 project must be rotten apples... There is no factual basis for such an inference to be drawn. Unless you can provide some evidence of wrongdoing by any past projects, you must withdraw that statement. C d 1st page, edited by TBMS! There are no facts in the first post. There are a lot of assertions - but to be considered facts they must be supported by evidence - which is not there. My comment stands. BTW do you not see the hypocrisy in your publicly calling reputable science institutions and WCG unethical when you make these assertions without any evidence? |
||
|
|
|