Alright, if the image deposition is the only way out, then I am for it, but please make sure that synchrotrons will do it for me...
On Apr 5, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Bernhard Rupp (Hofkristallrat a.D.) wrote: > Ojweh.... > >> c) Discarding your primary data is generally considered bad form... > Agreed, but it is a big burden on labs to maintain archives of their raw > data indefinitely. > Even IRS allows to discard them after some time. > > But you DO have to file in the first place, right? How long to keep is an > entirely different question. > >> What is wrong with partially integrated data in terms of structure > validation? > > Who thinks something is wrong with that idea? Section 3.1 under figure 3 of > said incendiary pamphlet > states: '...yadayada....when unmerged data or images for proper > reprocessing are not available > owing to the unfortunate absence of a formal obligation to deposit unmerged > intensity data or diffraction images.' > >> They did not generate the bad data. > This is a genuine American thinking! > > Ok, the US citizens on BB might take this one up on my behalf, gospodin ;-) > видеть вас на Лубянке. > >> But they might create conditions that would prevent their deposition. > > Sure. We are back to the 2007 Reid shoe bomber argument. If you make PDB > deposition > a total pain for everybody, you don't get compliance, you get defiance. Ever > seen > any happy faces in a TSA check line? > > Anyhow, image deposition will come. > > Over and out, BR > >
