| 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 |
|
|
KLiK
Master Cruncher Croatia Joined: Nov 13, 2006 Post Count: 3108 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? if u call that those links that have been posted r not true or do they not have facts? how about a change of some scientists CVs, with links written by TBMS? how about an exclusion of some scientists after this topic has been run? also, I'm not calling anyone guilty...just asking some questions - there is a BIG DIFFERENCE! & in post this morning I've posted also a company which wanted 2 patent a human natural occurring genes 4 their own benefit & test of breast cancer...research was originally made on 1 of the respectable universities & afterward some1 wanted to make profit on genes which have 5-10% of every woman (link with facts about cancer: http://www.breastcancer.org/research-news/asc...enetic-testing-guidelines )... if we all don't learn from these examples, than we r all just "plain stupid herd sheep"! (which is going to sleep in bed with wolves, hopping nothing will happen...)  |
||
|
|
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? if u call that those links that have been posted r not true or do they not have facts? how about a change of some scientists CVs, with links written by TBMS? how about an exclusion of some scientists after this topic has been run? also, I'm not calling anyone guilty...just asking some questions - there is a BIG DIFFERENCE! Indeed there is a difference. I took issue with your statement 2-3 project must be rotten apples... That is not a question. It is a derogatory piece of speculation entirely without substance. None of the links provide any support to that statement. It must not stand. Now the ethical thing to do would be to withdraw your unfounded assertion and apologise for it to all those involved in past projects as you have no evidence that any of them have behaved in any inappropriate manner. & in post this morning I've posted also a company which wanted 2 patent a human natural occurring genes 4 their own benefit & test of breast cancer...research was originally made on 1 of the respectable universities & afterward some1 wanted to make profit on genes which have 5-10% of every woman (link with facts about cancer: http://www.breastcancer.org/research-news/asc...enetic-testing-guidelines )... if we all don't learn from these examples, than we r all just "plain stupid herd sheep"! (which is going to sleep in bed with wolves, hopping nothing will happen...) That link is entirely irrelevant to the issue I am discussing. |
||
|
|
KLiK
Master Cruncher Croatia Joined: Nov 13, 2006 Post Count: 3108 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
there's always in all societies 10% of rotten apples...that is known from d beginning of civilization! & statistic never lies...
----------------------------------------so there must be the same thing here...& we have shown that 2-3 projects & 2 grand institutions have some questionable associations...might be those?! might be others... 2 this day scientists haven't said that they have within their campus listed all associations 2 other companies, or started to make some statements within campus 4 their own & WCG protection...but they do depend on all of our donation of CPU power, which costs me about 100€ per month in electricity! I don't concur with u...that's the exact example what we r NOT TRYING 2 do here...that's d exact example of misuse of research...that is d exact example of what shouldn't have been done from our donations! so yes, I do care 2 which people I donate my computer grid power...& I do care that research is used 4 good! ---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by KLiK at Oct 7, 2015 10:37:29 AM] |
||
|
|
toss
Senior Cruncher New Zealand Joined: Jan 3, 2007 Post Count: 220 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
there's always in all societies 10% of rotten apples...that is known from d beginning of civilization! & statistic never lies... so there must be the same thing here... Another piece of info you draw from thin air. That is not a fact. I'm quite sure there is not even a cogent definition of rotten apple. So what - even if it were true that provides absolutely no reference to the validity of past WCG projects. Even if 50% of society were bad apples that still tells us nothing at all about the projects. & we have shown that 2-3 projects & 2 grand institutions have some questionable associations...might be those?! might be others... No. You have made assertions and insinuations. Shown nothing. So someone serves on two boards - that is evidence of .... well serving on two boards. There is no evidence of wrong doing. None. Zip. Nada. I foolishly still await your withdrawal of your statement |
||
|
|
cjslman
Master Cruncher Mexico Joined: Nov 23, 2004 Post Count: 2082 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
toss, this is never going to end so I would suggest to all of us (me included), lets not feed the troll.
---------------------------------------- CJSL Crunching for a brighter future... |
||
|
|
toss
Senior Cruncher New Zealand Joined: Jan 3, 2007 Post Count: 220 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
toss, this is never going to end so I would suggest to all of us (me included), lets not feed the troll. CJSL Crunching for a brighter future... Yes that has become clear to me. In the interim I went and had a chat with my blow up doll. I found she had an equal understanding of the difference between a fact and an assertion, and her responses were just as enlightened as those received here. Got to go now. If anyone wants me I'll be out the back bashing my head against a wall. |
|||
|
||||
|
KLiK
Master Cruncher Croatia Joined: Nov 13, 2006 Post Count: 3108 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
& we have shown that 2-3 projects & 2 grand institutions have some questionable associations...might be those?! might be others... No. You have made assertions and insinuations. Shown nothing. So someone serves on two boards - that is evidence of .... well serving on two boards. There is no evidence of wrong doing. None. Zip. Nada. I foolishly still await your withdrawal of your statement there's also a term in law, that if u stay "silent" upon some accusations (of questionable associations) you are not denying it...but affirming them! so far we asked about those questionable associations here & got a "silencio stampa" from all of scientists & most of people on WCG...so that is only affirming those questionable associations... there's also a question why WCG has not protected it self more with additional statements? why would WCG just play blindly on agreements & why doesn't it have more fail safe mechanisms?! serving on non-profit & for-profit boards is OK...I've got no problem with that! someone can serve as many boards it wants to... but I do have problem if someone uses non-profit organisations & IBM infrastructure (as WCG) for some for-profit gain...so that is why we would want some form of statements from the scientists or that WCG asks those scientists about it?! all those facts were plainly in open sight on internet...so anyone can check them & get that info... & in democracy we are used to ask questions about donations...regardless if it's a donation of vote, time, energy, work or some form of money donation! |
||
|
|
theodolite
Advanced Cruncher Joined: Apr 11, 2014 Post Count: 119 Status: Offline |
In the interim I went and had a chat with my blow up doll. I found she had an equal understanding of the difference between a fact and an assertion, and her responses were just as enlightened as those received here Nice!! |
||
|
|
vlado101
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jul 23, 2013 Post Count: 226 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I would like to say that from reading all of these posts that I fully support the staff and the scientists that are involved in making WCG possible. Yes there are many areas that they can improve, however I will support the scientists and the staff that are working on making WCG possible. I am singed up for all the projects and am crunching as many as I possibly can :) I hope to make a difference in the wold in some small way and if contributing my spare cycles to projects like FightAIDS or MCM ect will do so then I say full speed ahead.
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
Still Alive
Advanced Cruncher Germany Joined: May 27, 2013 Post Count: 69 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
+1 vlado101
---------------------------------------- AMD 3900X - 21 Threads @ 4,00 GHz - 24/7 Samsung Xcover4 - 4 Threads @ 1.43 Ghz - 24/7 |
||
|
|
|