In article <355AD938.70FB at bbsrc.ac.uk>, Jackie Potts
<jacqueline.potts at bbsrc.ac.uk> writes
>> If you are smart you post obsolete stuff on your www site as an advert
>> and sell the good stuff. Basically anything over 10 years old is
>> obsolete and should be FOC providing acknowledgment is given if used.
>>It is true that specific results of experiments have already been
>published in scientific journals together with summary data
So why not publish it openly on your web site to provide publicity and
to help those who might wish to consider your work. For example farmers,
who are ostensibly the target for much of the work you do, have
effectively no access to your published results. We thus have the absurd
situation that academics can access the data with only trivial
requirements, but the intended beneficiaries of the research (ie
farmers) are utterly banned. As you may imagine, farmers do not
typically have access to the publications your researchers would publish
>but there is
>a significant quantity of unpublished data.
OK, keep that secret then.
>While much of the data is
>'old', it still has enormous value in that it provides high quality
>consistent data over long time periods and as such has significant
>potential for use in studies of long-term effects.
If it has been published any *researcher* can access it in their
library. So there is no point keeping it secret. I would imagine that
most of the 'old' data has been published, at least in part, and can
thus be public. After all I would imagine that 'the public' funded a
great deal of it, if not all of it.
>> Anyone wishing to do detailed work for publication is going to WANT to
>> have full access and collaborate in some way with a member of staff
But there is another group, probably long forgotten by the agricultural
researcher, called 'the farmer'. He would probably quite like to see it
too. This is why you are called an 'Agricultural Research
I am afraid your protestations are simply invalid. I think the main
reason is that you can't be bothered, unlike the US academic