If you're advocating that 'something be done' to eliminate ethical conflicts, you need to give some cogent reason for whatever that something is and you've failed to do that.

You seem to oscillate between two different arguments. On the one hand you want measures instituted that prevent some commercial interests from getting early access to data saying that such access gives them an unfair advantage. When that argument gets you nowhere you say that the least that should be done is that commercial interests should be disclosed, even though that will not make any practical difference in how data is shared.

You need to pick one position an try to stick with it. Unfortunately both positions are untenable so you vacillate between the two - I suppose hoping that no one will notice the shell game.

Your argument about early release of data fails because anyone using public domain data is not going to be allowed to profit from it. That is a legal issue not an ethical one.

Your argument that commercial interests should be exposed also fails because it neglects the reality of how research is conducted.

I'm sure you're capable of extending this thread indefinitely by trying other positions but your real issue is that having commercial interests profit in any way from the research we help do is unacceptable to you. Except commercial interests are the source of most research funding so unless or until researchers have alternative means of funding, it's a moot point.

Many here seem to be heavily invested into these projects, so much so that they no longer can stand anybody questioning how the projects are conducted. Dare I say it has almost taken on a religious meaning for some.

Why all the hostility? I too want these projects to succeed or I wouldn't be burning 780W, but I also want transparency. I've been criticized for this, even though it's obvious people are being misled by WCG -- even longtime crunchers have not been aware of the intricate web commercial interest groups have spun around these projects.

Am I alone in thinking this could have been done in a better way? I think we deserve to know who these researchers are working for, because many of the crunchers are living from paycheck to paycheck and still they choose to divert some of their meager earnings into this. Don't they deserve honest and forthcoming information?

I'm afraid so cowtipperbs.

This serious issue was first brought to my attention through the work of Professor Denzil Dexter, a gifted experimentalist from the University of Southern California.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIUdyBG_DT0

You three couldn't answer my question why you oppose transparency, so you decided instead to hijack the thread, by obfuscating my message and ridiculing me as a person with these non-relevant comments and links.

Is spamming your preferred answer to a serious problem?

I give up. I feel I've done my bit to raise awareness regarding this issue, but only WCG can do anything about it, so I doubt anything will change.

Until they change the rules and make all researchers sign a "code of ethics and best conduct"-letter, where the researchers have to list all their employers during the past 24 months, current and former, the abuse will continue. Silently and out of sight. New people will start crunching, only to discovers years later that WCG's nonprofit promise was a hollow one. By then they'll be so heavily invested into this, with many thousands of dollars paid in computer related energy bills, that they'll most likely -- like many here already have -- turn to denial, criticizing anyone daring to question anything regarding the projects. Instead they'll most likely complain about nonessential matters, such as, "why do we still use this old forum software?".

Here I am, trying to express an honest opinion while dodging the stones being thrown at me by the dogmatic WCG-wahhabists. Many of them have the same personality as the people who followed Jim Jones into the jungle. Others, the more moderate ones -- the ones who are still only reading this thread and not yet trying to sabotage it -- are the ones who cherished, in awe and silence, every word uttered by the late high priest of gadgets, Steve Jobs. So I'll better stop before this groups also begins to throw stones at me.

Happy crunching!