I share Bob's concerns, too. However, I am also skeptical that any action of TDWG will influence or even sway the authorities; in the end, I think, it's the people who are motivated to change things, and who TDWG as an organization needs to empower, such as in sharing information freely. And while I'm all for taking a principled stance, it can easily cross over into taking the moral high-ground, which would be counterproductive.

Moreover, TDWG hasn't itself, I think, shown particular principled leadership in terms of promoting openly sharing information about the world's biodiversity. Openly sharing information isn't just about the standards for doing so being open. It's a socio-technical undertaking. Information is based on data, is produced through science, and is generated through software. TDWG hasn't, as far as I am aware, taken principled stances, as for example would be evidenced by rules for presenting at its annual conference, on open science, open data, or open-source software. So taking a principled stance now in the question of whether convening in China is acceptable or not seems inconsistent to me with the historic behavior of the organization.

So, I'm as unhappy with the choice of venue as Bob is, but I also don't think it's such a drastic departure from past decisions. And perhaps that's what's really concerning about it.

Finally, just to be clear, the same disclaimer applies as Annie's: All of this expresses solely my personal opinion, and should not be construed to reflect the views of my employer.

-hilmar

On May 10, 2012, at 6:23 PM, Annie Simpson wrote:

Dear Fellow TDWG members:

Often the discussions on TDWG lists can overwhelm due to number of responses and depth of content. I am therefore astounded that there have been no replies to Bob Morris' well-thought-out and convincingly-delivered argument of 22-April (copied here below) about our 2012 meetings. I did not answer sooner under the assumption that there was discussion going on behind the scenes by the TDWG Executive. So far, crickets.

I'd like to go on the record with a personal but hesitant response that does not reflect the views of my employer.

I share Bob's concerns. What do the rest of you think?

Annie Simpson

From:

Bob Morris morris.bob@gmail.com

To:

tdwg@lists.tdwg.org

Date:

22/04/2012 15:22

Subject:

[tdwg] tdwg 2012 in inappropriate venue

Sent by:

tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org

Dear fellow TDWG members,

As I said publicly at TDWG 2011, I feel that it is inappropriate for an organization devoted to the open exchange of scientific data and information to hold a meeting in a country where there is routine governmental suppression of internet connectivity on political grounds. I personally would attend any scientific meeting in such a country except one by an organization like TDWG which should be taking a position about openness of access to information, and I hope others will join me in this position and publicly decline to attend TDWG 2012.

Sometimes an argument is made in such cases that participation is a way to support the hosting organization, which in this case is eminent. But often just the opposite can result: the authorities will proudly say to themselves: "See, they come anyway."

Bob Morris

-- Robert A. Morris

Emeritus Professor of Computer Science UMASS-Boston 100 Morrissey Blvd Boston, MA 02125-3390

IT Staff Filtered Push Project Harvard University Herbaria Harvard University

email: morris.bob@gmail.com web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/ web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram === The content of this communication is made entirely on my own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or Harvard University. _______________________________________________ tdwg mailing list tdwg@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg

---

tdwg mailing list tdwg@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg