My #Scipolicy News Archive: September 2010 Part A

TABLE OF CONTENTS
2010/08/31 GUARDIAN Blog: Guardian science blogs: We aim to entertain, enrage and
inform .................................................................................................................................... 2
2010/08/31 GUARDIAN Blog: Is science teaching undermined by religious instruction in
faith schools? ......................................................................................................................... 5
2010/08/31 GUARDIAN Blog: MMR – the vaccine damage myth that will not die ................. 7
2010/08/31 GUARDIAN Blog: MMR: The zombie controversy that still lurches on ................ 9
2010/09/01 Girl, Interrupting: On women in science .......................................................... 16
2010/09/01 In Verba: Public science, in French ................................................................... 19
2010/09/01 GUARDIAN Blog: Sex education, STIs and politicians make a toxic combination
............................................................................................................................................. 20
2010/09/01 GUARDIAN Blog: The blue revolution at BBC Science ....................................... 23
2010/09/01 Nature: World view: Politicize me .................................................................... 26
2010/09/01 GUARDIAN Blog: Supersymmetry - the end of the line? .................................. 28
2010/09/01 GUARDIAN Blog FESTIVAL: Psychedelic drugs return as potential treatments for
mental illness ....................................................................................................................... 30
2010/09/02 GUARDIAN News: Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God ........... 33
2010/09/02 GUARDIAN Blog FESTIVAL: The Mosasaur's kinky tail ....................................... 34
2010/09/02 TELEGRAPH: Science funding cuts risk hi-tech company exodus ...................... 37
2010/09/02-05 SOLO10 Tweet Transcript ............................................................................ 38
#soloconf Transcript from September 2 to September 4, 2010 ................................................................ 124
2010/09/03 Alice Bell Blog: Taking science journalism “upstream” ................................... 129
BMG Blog: Science online London 2010 ............................................................................ 141
2010/09/03 Science online London 2010 – day 1 ..................................................................................... 141
2010/09/04 Science online London – day 2 .............................................................................................. 142
2010/09/05 Science online London 2010 – a (my?) summary .................................................................. 143
2010/09/04 ONE MAN AND HIS BLOG: Science Online: Bloggers, Commenters and the
Reputation Game ............................................................................................................... 145
2010/09/04 Not Exactly Rocket Science: Rebooting Science Journalism 2: Rebooting Harder
........................................................................................................................................... 146
2010/09/04 Not Exactly Rocket Science: Engaging people online – Science Online 2010 .. 146
2010/09/04 A Man and his Blog: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics ........... 147
2010/09/04 AoB Blog Pat Heslop-Harrison: Dissemination and Science On-line #solo10 .. 149
2010/09/04 Alice Bell Blog: Scientists and the vote ........................................................... 151
2010/09/05 Confessions of a (former) Lab Rat: On Web 2.0 .............................................. 156
2010/09/05 UoL Library Blog: Katie Fraser: Science Online ............................................... 159
2010/09/05 Only in it for the gold: The Role of Scientists and of Scientific Authority ........ 161
2010/09/05 STAGES OF SUCCESSION: Wild Haired Scientists Online ................................. 163
2010/09/06 Guardian Blog Martin: How not to pass a homeopathy exam ........................ 164
2010/09/06 Guardian science blog: Peer review is no picnic ............................................. 167
2010/09/07 New Statesman: Will this picture come back to haunt Nick Clegg? ................ 175
2010/09/07 Washington Post: In Europe, science collides with the bottom line ............... 176
2010/09/07 Guardian Blog Evan: Labour leadership candidates leave scientists in the dark
........................................................................................................................................... 178
2010/09/07 Guardian Science Blog: Science sidelined in the government-PR-media frenzy
........................................................................................................................................... 180
2010/09/07 Guardian Science Blog Butterworth: Peter Higgs, UCL and the Right Honorable
William Waldegrave ........................................................................................................... 183
0|Page
VOLUME 9
2010/09/07 I am scientist get me out of here: Read about our session at Science Online
conference ......................................................................................................................... 184
2010/09/07 Guardian Science Blogs: You too can be a medical* practitioner ................... 190
1|Page
VOLUME 9
2010/08/31 GUARDIAN BLOG: GUARDIAN
SCIENCE BLOGS: WE AIM TO ENTERTAIN, ENRAGE
AND INFORM
Alok Jha introduces the new Guardian science blogs network, and our science
blogging festival
Our new blogs will cover particle physics, skepticism, evolution, politics – and much more.
Photograph: Getty
It's nearly the end of summer holidays, and there are plans afoot in the blogosphere.
You would not know it from general media coverage but, on the web, science is alive with
remarkable debate. According to the Pew Research Centre, science accounts for 10% of all
stories on blogs but only 1% of the stories in mainstream media coveage. (The Pew Research
Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism looked at a year's news coverage starting from
January 2009.)
On the web, thousands of scientists, journalists, hobbyists and numerous other interested folk
write about and create lively discussions aroundpalaeontology, astronomy, viruses and other
bugs, chemistry,pharmaceuticals, evolutionary biology, extraterrestrial life or bad science. For
regular swimmers in this fast-flowing river of words, it can be a rewarding (and sometimes
maddening) experience. For the uninitiated, it can be overwhelming.
The Guardian's science blogs network is an attempt to bring some of the expertise and these
discussions to our readers. Our four bloggers will bring you their untrammeled thoughts on the
the latest in evolution and ecology, politics and campaigns, skepticism (with a dollop of
righteous anger) and particle physics (I'll let them make their own introductions).
Our fifth blog will hopefully become a window onto just some of the discussions going on
elsewhere. It will also host the Guardian's first ever science blog festival - a celebration of the
best writing on the web. Every day, a new blogger will take the reins and we hope it will give
you a glimpse of the gems out there. If you're a newbie, we hope the blog festival will give you
dozens of new places to start reading about science. And if you're a seasoned blog follower,
we hope you'll find something entertaining or enraging.
2|Page
VOLUME 9
We start tomorrow with the supremely thoughtful Mo Costandi ofNeurophilosophy. You can
also look forward to posts from Ed Yong,Brian Switek, Jenny Rohn, Deborah Blum, Dorothy
Bishop and Vaughan Bell among many others.
In his Hugh Cudlipp lecture in January, Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger discussed the
changing relationship between writers (amateur and professional) and readers.
We are edging away from the binary sterility of the debate between mainstream media and
new forms which were supposed to replace us. We feel as if we are edging towards a new
world in which we bring important things to the table – editing; reporting; areas of expertise;
access; a title, or brand, that people trust; ethical professional standards and an extremely
large community of readers. The members of that community could not hope to aspire to
anything like that audience or reach on their own; they bring us a rich diversity, specialist
expertise and on the ground reporting that we couldn't possibly hope to achieve without
including them in what we do.
There is a mutualised interest here. We are reaching towards the idea of a mutualised news
organisation.
We're starting our own path towards mutualisation with some baby steps. We will probably
make lots of mistakes (and we know you'll point them out). Where we end up will depend as
much on you as it does on us.
Comments in chronological order (Total 17 comments)
AdamRutherford
31 August 2010 1:12PM
Nice image to show the bleeding edge of technology dude. What is that, a Dragon 32?
AlokJha
31 August 2010 1:24PM
@AdamRutherford Yes but just look at how thoughtful ther person in front of the computer looks! Mmmm, lots of thinking,
see?
drshibleyrahman
31 August 2010 1:30PM
I do a blog called 'Law and Medicine' with a team of writers.
The aim of this blog is to explain the advances in medical research that might have an impact on the formation of laws in
society. It's all done in a non-threatening, friendly way, and the good thing about this it feels as if you're permanently being
peer-reviewed, content-wise.
I believe that there is no such blog in the UK, although the lawandmedicine does have a Twitter feed and we are on
Facebook.
My own first degree was in Cambridge in neuroscience, and my PhD was too. However, my postdoc was in academic neurology;
I latterly became really interested in the law which I'm a postgraduate in as well. However, I find that other people's blog
contributions are needed by people who can actually communicate science effectively. This is the challenge we all face -
there's no point doing all this research, if we don't explain it to the general public.
Best wishes,
Dr Shibley Rahman (@RecoveryShibley on Twitter)
phaine
31 August 2010 2:56PM
@AdamRutherford Yes but just look at how thoughtful ther person in front of the computer looks! Mmmm, lots of thinking,
see?
Yes, they're thinking "I wish I could afford a better computer"
PommieBarsteward
31 August 2010 3:22PM
We aim to entertain, enrage and inform
3|Page
VOLUME 9
Enrage? Are you expecting the sky fairy brigade to come and visit? I'd have thought that entertain, engage and inform may
have been a bit more conciliatory but probably less fun.
PalMD
31 August 2010 3:45PM
I'm most interested to see how you will navigate the treacherous waters of English libel law.
LondonLouis
31 August 2010 3:46PM
Good on you, the Guardian team.
SuntoryBoss
31 August 2010 4:11PM
Good stuff etc, but I think I'd rather be "engaged" than "enraged". If I wanted to be the latter I'd read the Huffington
Post's pathetic dribblings.
AlokJha
31 August 2010 4:51PM
@SuntoryBoss Hopefully all of the stuff our bloggers do will engage (even the stuff that enrages)
jamesg1103
31 August 2010 5:05PM
I hope the name "Punctuated Equilibrium" for your evolution blog isn't permanent.
Some of us are less than impressed by that particular "idea" and by much of the work produced by Gould.
GrahamRounce
31 August 2010 5:16PM
Why would you want to enrage? Create arguments just for the sake of it? That's supposed to be a good thing?
While I'm at it, I don't know what the Science page does on your computer, but on mine it doesn't explode.
PalMD
31 August 2010 6:31PM
@jamesg: that falls into the category of "get your own damned blog"
@Graham: sometimes substantive engagement involves "enragement". See @jamesg.
oharar
31 August 2010 9:52PM
Alok -
@SuntoryBoss Hopefully all of the stuff our bloggers do will engage
Grrl never got engaged - we went straight to getting married.

jamesg1103 -
I hope the name "Punctuated Equilibrium" for your evolution blog isn't permanent.
Some of us are less than impressed by that particular "idea" and by much of the work produced by Gould.
The name of the blog is a hint. Grrl will publish 7 posts on one day, and then not post anything for another 6 months.
Spironis
31 August 2010 10:46PM
One presumes The Guardian wishes to project credibility. It would do well to display a possible, possibly elegant molecule
rather than overlapping blots from a child's spilled paint set. To criticise is to volunteer. Here are five molecular pictures,
including stereograms, as *.png graphics,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/nicemol.zip
five files enclosed
D<I>3</I>-trishomocubane (pictured without its 14 hydrogens) is notable for its threefold rotational symmetry and its chiral
asymmetry, C11H14 (carbon blue and hydrogen white). The molecule, like opposite shoes, has distinct mirror images. We put
some colour into it with three carbonyls (oxygen red) and six nitrogens (blue), C5H2N6O3. Each nitrogen is a non-inverting
chiral center.
Adjust gamma, brightness, contrast to have it display well. Or post another molecule in your banner - that is not an
embarrassment to those skilled in the art. Mediocrity is a vice of the doomed.
PalMD
1 September 2010 3:10AM
OMG what a tool.
GrahamRounce
1 September 2010 9:34PM
Ok, I think he means "enrage".
brembs
Good luck with the blogging network! looking forward to following it.
4|Page
VOLUME 9
2010/08/31 GUARDIAN BLOG: IS SCIENCE
TEACHING UNDERMINED BY RELIGIOUS
INSTRUCTION IN FAITH SCHOOLS?
The evolution-creationism debate in schools must be about religious education

lessons not just science lessons. This is my blueprint for better RE
Pupils should be encouraged to question and debate the teachings of different religions in RE
lessons. Photograph: Markku Ulander/Rex Features
From time to time there are concerns raised that some state-funded religious schools teach
creationism, or intelligent design, in their science lessons.
The last Labour government and the Conservatives in opposition have always denied this is a
problem and have always said that they will not stand for the teaching of creationism in
science lessons. Ministers always say that creationism can't be taught in science lessons
Whenever this issue cropped up in parliament I was always concerned that the debate was
missing the point. It is no good teaching about evolution (which is a scientific fact) in a science
lesson at 9am then at 10am, in a religious education lesson, instructing pupils not to believe it.
The whole problem with RE lessons is not that they exist but that they amount to religious
instruction in some schools. There is no basis for allowing state-funded schools to indoctrinate
their pupils, even if that is what their parents want. They can provide this in optional after-
school (or lunchtime) classes or clubs. They could even have something on a Sunday where
children are taught to be believers. They could call it Sunday School!
5|Page
VOLUME 9
The recognition that RE lessons can be proselytising is reflected in the right that parents have
to withdraw their children from these lessons. In contrast, they can't withdraw their children
from biology lessons even if they have profound religious objections to their being taught about
sexual reproduction or evolution – these subjects are recognised as non-proselytising.
Secularists like me believe that RE is a valid subject for study in the curriculum but should be
about what different religions (and other world views like humanism) believe; it should not be
about what ought to be believed. So Catholic schools should be allowed to use RE lessons to
teach that the Catholic church opposes contraception and believes that homosexuality is a sin,
but not that the children ought to believe those things. The lessons should set out contrasting
views on that subject.
It is reasonable that a school with a large proportion of children of parents with a particular
religion might spend more time learning about the beliefs and practices of that religion, but not
to the exclusion of other beliefs.
At the moment, however, all RE falls outside the national curriculum – for no good reason. In
schools other than voluntary-aided faith schools the curriculum is set by a local Standing
Advisory Committee on RE (SACRE)made up of religious representatives.
Many faith schools can decide their own RE curriculum and it is not subject to Ofsted
inspection but by an inspector of their own religion. This is hardly a bulwark against instruction
and indoctrination. There is no requirement to have a humanist or atheist on such committees.
And many refuse to have them even as non-voting members let alone as full members as the
religious members are.
10 commandments – sorry, suggestions – for RE teaching

1) Religious education should be about what different people believe, not what pupils should
believe.
2) It should be in the national curriculum and inspected by Ofsted.
3) Non-religious people should not be excluded from helping to draw up the curriculum. Under
current arrangements of local determination non-religious people should be included equally
and allowed to be full members.
4) It should teach about a range of world views, both religious and non-religious.
5) It should not pussyfoot around controversial religious views (on sex and gender, for
example) but tackle them head-on. Pupils should learn what the doctrine is but be encouraged
to question and debate it.
6) In those communities with a high proportion of children whose parents are of a particular
religion, the curriculum can be skewed towards more coverage of that – but not to the
exclusion of other religions and world views.
7) End the right of withdrawal from RE classes, which would no longer be needed because the
subject would be academic not proselytising.
8) Offer optional religious instruction classes after school if parents want that from a particular
school.
9) End collective worship in state schools.
10) Worship opportunities made available on an optional basis for children if they or their
parents want it.
6|Page
VOLUME 9
All ten of these proposals were in the Liberal Democrat manifesto at the last election. It
remains to be seen if any of them emerge intact from the coalition, and if so whether the plans
survive attacks from the Labour opposition and from the bishops in the House of Lords.
This article was amended on Tuesday 31 August 2010. The original implied that the problem
of RE being effectively religious instruction affected all faith schools. This has been corrected.
It has also been made clear that some SACREs exclude non-religious people altogether, and
that many faith schools set their own RE curricula because some follow the SACRE
ones. Please see Evan's comment below.
2010/08/31 GUARDIAN BLOG: MMR – THE

VACCINE DAMAGE MYTH THAT WILL NOT DIE
Despite the disproving of a link between MMR vaccination and autism, MMR is
under attack again
Many parents are still suspicious of the MMR vaccine. Photograph: Rex
It is now well-established that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of the view that MMR
does not cause autism.
The front page of the Mail on Sunday at the weekend has the headline"FAMILY WIN 18YR
FIGHT OVER MMR DAMAGE TO SON" and a strap-line reading "£90,000 pay out is first
since concerns over vaccine surfaced".
This is the case of a boy called Robert, who is now 18 and has severe brain damage such that
he is unable to talk, stand unaided or feed himself, following a severe convulsion and onset of
epilepsy at the age of 13 months. It is impossible not to feel sympathy and admiration for
7|Page
VOLUME 9
Robert and his family for his condition, their circumstances and their long battle for
compensation. In fact I share the view of Robert's mother that £90,000 is not very much given
the financial costs involved with a case like this.
The text of the story makes clear in three places that Robert does not have autism, but it
implies through repeated reference to the MMR/autism "controversy" that compensation pay-
outs may now be forthcoming for those families who claim that MMR caused autism in their
child.
The article refers to the judgment of a three-person appeal panel under the Vaccine Damage
Payment Scheme who, by a majority decision, decided that Robert suffered convulsions,
epilepsy and severe brain damage as a result of a serious reaction to the vaccination 10 days
after receiving it.
The ruling makes clear that it does not apply to autism, and even Robert's mother – who runs
a campaign group which is, to put it charitably, sceptical about vaccines – points out that
claims of autism are not considered under the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme. Robert's
mother asserts there are 120 MMR cases waiting to be heard, which presumably refers to
claims in respect of non-autism-related ill-health.
The story states that the "judgement will give hope to hundreds of other parents whose
children have been severely affected by routine vaccinations." And Robert's mother is also
reported as saying that the ruling would give hope to hundreds of other parents fighting to
prove that their children's disabilities were caused by MMR injection.
There is an accompanying analysis article written by Sally Beck, who I had rather expected to
be a doctor but is instead a journalist with a history of writing MMR-causes-autism stories. The
analysis piece is headlined "New hope for parents who claim MMR jab blighted their children".
It says:
"Up to 2,000 parents remain convinced their children have suffered significant harm from MMR
but have been unable to prove it. This new decision will give them hope even though
compensation panels do not officially recognise autism claims."
Surely therefore any hope would be false hope?
The panel say in their ruling:
"We would stress that this decision is fact-specific and it should not be seen as a precedent for
any other case. In particular, it has no relevance to the issue ... as to whether there is a link
between the MMR vaccine and autism."
The story has been picked up in the Daily Telegraph who said "A man who suffered severe
brain damage after being given the MMR vaccine as a baby has been awarded £90,000
in a landmark ruling expected to pave the way for thousands of similar compensation
claims."
Even the Daily Mail story only talked of hundreds. Where did "thousands" come from?
Step forward Tory MP Nadine Dorries – described as "a member of the powerful Commons
Health Committee". She is quoted in the article as saying that:
"If an independent panel has reached the conclusion that there has been a link between the
MMR vaccine and the brain damage suffered by this boy in this case, then it is fair to assume
that there could be as many as thousands of children and parents in the same position. "
Asserting that there are thousands of cases of brain damage being ascribed to MMR might
well have the effect of deterring parents from having the vaccination. It is of course well
8|Page
VOLUME 9
established that a measles outbreak could well cause severe brain damage as that is a
recognisedcomplication of measles infection.
It does not seem responsible for any MP to be creating an MMR scare all over again without
good evidence to back it up.
2010/08/31 GUARDIAN BLOG: MMR: THE

ZOMBIE CONTROVERSY THAT STILL LURCHES ON
The MMR vaccine makes an unwelcome return to the headlines
Measles is far more dangerous to children than the MMR vaccine. Photo: Alexander
Caminada/Rex Features
I thought it was over. I thought it was finished. But then I flicked on the TV and saw
that Ultimate Big Brother was on, some monstrous new zombie version of the interminable
celebration of mediocrity, and now I'm too traumatised even to glance at a TV Guide until
probably around December time, when I have my annual "oh dear God is this really what
they're putting on the telly for Christmas" moment.
But even that doesn't compare to the nausea-inducing sight of the letters "MMR" plastered
across the front of the Mail on Sunday like an immigrant who made house prices go up. Once
again the MMR vaccine has hit the headlines, and once again the journalism involved has
been less than stellar.
Having apologised to the shopkeeper for all the swearing, I hurried back home to pour a stiff
brandy and take a look at the article.
9|Page
VOLUME 9
The facts of the case are fairly straightforward. Some 18 years ago Robert, the then 13-month
old son of Jackie Fletcher, was given an MMR vaccination. Ten days later he began suffering
seizures that left him"epileptic and severely retarded".
Fletcher believes that the MMR vaccine was responsible and has fought a long campaign for
compensation, which she was eventually awarded last week by the government's Vaccine
Damage Payment Scheme. Previous applications failed on the grounds that it was impossible
to prove that the vaccine was responsible, but on appeal a new expert panel (consisting of a
barrister and two doctors) agreed - though not unanimously - that the "temporal association"
was enough to pay out on.
That means Jackie Fletcher now has £90,000, which she's apparently going to spend on home
improvements that will benefit her severely disabled son. On balance, I think that's a good
thing, and I hope the money goes some way towards reducing the burden Fletcher faces as a
full-time carer.
The problems start when people try to make this story into something it isn't, for example by
splashing it across the front page of the Sunday edition of their newspaper with a headline
like "Family win 18 year fight over MMR damage to son: £90,000 payout is first since
concerns over vaccine surfaced". There is a real danger that a decision like this will end up
being used by anti-vaccination activists in the way thatthe case of Hannah Poling was in the
United States.
The first and most important point to make is that this case tells us nothing new about the
safety of MMR, for two broad reasons.
Firstly, it's a legal verdict, not a scientific one, which was reached by a panel of one barrister
and two doctors, and where one of the doctors disagreed with a verdict that was at best
tenuous. Correlation in time isn't proof of causation, any more than hearing a car drive past the
window as my WiFi dies is evidence that nearby traffic affects my internet connection
(although it still feels good to shout at them). A great weakness of the human mind is that we
tend to be good at finding patterns and relationships where none actually exist.
Secondly, the fact is that vaccines do have risks and side-effects. Although research has failed
to find any general link between MMR and brain damage, it's plausible that some rare reaction
to the vaccine resulted in Fletcher's predicament; but that shouldn't be seen as evidence of a
wider problem, as the panel's judgement makes clear:
"We would stress that this decision is fact-specific and it should not be seen as a precedent for
any other case. In particular, it has no relevance to the issue... as to whether there is a link
between the MMR vaccine and autism."
Even if this was a reaction to the vaccine, we know from decades of using it that the chances
of it happening are so rare as to be insignificant compared to the risk of contracting the
diseases the vaccine protects from. Millions of doses of MMR have been dished out with only
a handful of cases like Fletcher's; but measles is far more dangerous, with 1 in 1000 cases in
the UK causing inflammation of the brain - 40% of those leading to permanent brain damage.
In short then, this is a one-off legal decision, and yet the Mail on Sunday's headline tries to
conflate this with the wider, long-since discredited concerns about MMR and autism. While the
Mail accepts that the link between MMR and autism has been discredited, it seems to do so
grudgingly, and the article is a great example of "false balance", with sensible contributions
placed against the likes of MP Nadine Dorries and Dr Marcel Kinsbourne.
Kinsbourne was brought in as an "expert witness" for the appeal, where apparently "he
explained the biological changes which had occurred in Robert's brain following the
vaccination." His presence in this story is quite disturbing, given that Brian Deer's
10 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
investigations revealed through a Freedom of Information request to the Legal Services
Commission that he pocketed over £400,000 working as an expert witness for a solicitor trying
to build a case against MMR. Needless to say this isn't mentioned in the Mail piece, but one
wonders why such a controversial figure was called to give evidence at all.
Nadine Dorries has somehow managed to grab a place on the Health Select Committee for
this parliament, and blunders into the debate with a gem of a quote which neatly ignores the
panel's warning that the verdict isn't applicable more widely:
"If an independent panel has reached the conclusion that there has been a link between the
MMR vaccine and the brain damage suffered by this boy in this case, then it is fair to assume
that there could be as many as thousands of children and parents in the same position."
Dorries is needlessly fanning the flames, but of course her comment feeds nicely into the
Mail's narrative, which seems to be based on the story of hundreds of plucky parents, fighting
to get justice for damage caused by a jab that the (Labour) government insisted was safe. It's
a view that's reinforced by the inclusion of a highly sympathetic comment piece by journalist
Sally Beck (underneath the main article on the same page), which portrays the struggle of
parents seeking compensation without any real attempt at scrutiny of their claims.
It's a bloody good narrative too. There are many parents out there with children they sincerely
believe to have been damaged by vaccines. A few of them might actually be right, but in any
case I wouldn't begrudge all of them receiving compensation like Jackie Fletcher has - there
are far worse ways to spend public money. But MMR is a safe vaccine, it's been in use for 22
years now, and it's time that journalists at the Daily Mail and elsewhere started putting science
ahead of a good story.
But for many of these hacks, the MMR controversy isn't over. Like the tales of Japanese
soldiers found deep in jungles unaware that the war has ended, they seem to exist in a sort of
jungle of misunderstanding, still debating an issue which has long since been resolved, and
thus producing journalism which is almost as bad as this jungle metaphor.
The problem is that this creates a kind of feedback loop. Readers commenting in the Daily
Mail claim there's been "too much controversy" surrounding it, the irony being that the
controversy has been generated by papers like the Mail itself. With vaccination rates struggling
to reach pre-Wakefield levels, their reporting could yet have serious consequences for public
health.

PalMD
31 August 2010 5:11PM
We're seriously going nuts over here in the U.S. An influential NY Times health blog declared that vaccination
avoidance is not the cause of the resurgence of pertussis here, missing the essential fact that the disease is
thriving in reservoirs of the unvaccinated: one reservoir is the antivax parents who claim "moral exemptions"
and the other is in recent immigrants who are often too afraid to try to access the health system, fearing they
might be denounced and deported.
PalMD
31 August 2010 5:12PM
I should clarify that the immigrants are not so much a reservoir as the children are susceptible to catching the
disease and suffering because of relatively wealthy vax refusers. All the infants who have dies in CA so far
have been Latino.
Gareth100
31 August 2010 5:16PM
I suspect that the dismally dim Nadine Dorries will be slapped down pretty quick by the powers that be as any
suggestion that there will be a payout bonanza for those who erroneously blame MMR for their childs autism
will be viewed pretty unfavourably by the Treasury. How the hell she got on the health committee is quite
beyond me.
11 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
JaneBasingstoke
31 August 2010 5:37PM
"plastered across the front of the Mail on Sunday like an immigrant who made house prices go up"
LOL. That is so Mail.
Bottom of Form
JaneBasingstoke
31 August 2010 5:43PM
OK, let's allow for the possibility that MMR can in very rare instances cause these sorts of problems.
1. Most likely mechanism involves measles doing its thing. The measles virus, let us not forget, likes to fuck with
the human brain. So even if MMR does sometimes cause problems, skipping vaccination risks worse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measles#Complications
2. Statistics still strongly suggests something else is causing the vast majority of extra cases. So perhaps an
awareness campaign to look at the other suspects in the frame. You never know, perhaps the Mail might then
devote its headlines to something that is actually contributing to the problem.
3. If parents won't submit their children to MMR then they need to be reminded that most of the MMR scare
mongers have strongly recommended some sort of vaccination.
WhiteCoatEirini
31 August 2010 6:04PM
I am working in translational biology. All I have to say is one thing: neither doctors nor biologists know what's
going on with the human body. All we are doing in the labs is testing, we cannot put our hands on fire and say:
the vaccine is safe or THIS is how autism and mental retardation occur.
We are trying to fish things out, if we don't have the right bait, we don't catch the right thing.
So, in this case, I am left speechless!!!!! How did these people assume it was the vaccine? There are millions of
examples of mental retardation patients whose disease onset took place on a random day, in a random
environment, from perfectly healthy parents.
From all the human organs... The brain is one of the most mysterious ones because we don't have easy access to
it. Hopefully one day we will know what makes the brain develop MS, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, mental
retardation... but for now, needles in haystack people!!!!
PalMD
31 August 2010 6:34PM
All I have to say is one thing: neither doctors nor biologists know what's going on with the human body.
O RLY?
Funny, i have a whole career based on a somewhat different proposition.
ArecBalrin
31 August 2010 6:48PM
Think of it like how Space Ork technology worked in Warhammer 40K: they don't know how it works, it just
does because they really believe it should.
backandtotheleft
31 August 2010 6:52PM
Lest we forget: http://www.thepoke.co.uk/index.php/2010/07/15/daily-mails-secret-editorial-formula-
revealed/
roxane
31 August 2010 7:01PM
All I have to say is one thing: neither doctors nor biologists know what's going on with the human body.
O RLY?
Funny, i have a whole career based on a somewhat different proposition.
Don't you think that a more humble approach would suit science good, Martin? Science diggs deep down,
measuring in naoscales, unfolding proteins and what not, but don't tell me, that this provides us with the full
picture.
PalMD
31 August 2010 7:18PM
That is a straw man. There is a difference between "knowing everything" and "not knowing what's going on with
the human body".
We know enough medicine to, for instance, prevent nearly a third of a million deaths from heart disease yearly
in the U.S.
Deebles
31 August 2010 7:29PM
12 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
I think, to add some context, that it's worth mentioning that we've had our first two deaths from acute
measles in recent years (one in 2006, the other in 2008) since 1992. And that, more recently, Bulgaria
has had a measles outbreak that resulted in 24 deaths. We should be considerably safer if we can just crank
up measles-containing vaccine coverage from its current 85% level to 90%. Unfortunately, the cranks won't let
us.
ikesolem
31 August 2010 8:48PM
Rational scientific debate on vaccination and public health has gone out the window as quasi-religious anti-
vaccination forces running on ignorance and paranoia clash with pharmaceutical corporations out to avoid
liability while making a tidy profit. The facts? Good luck... but trying to sort out the two sides should lead to at
least one robust conclusion: you can't effectively combat infectious disease without good public health
infrastructure, vaccines or not.
From a scientific and medical perspective, atypical reactions and allergies are a constant threat in any drug-
based treatment plan, and vaccines are just specialized drugs. Hence, MMR really might have played a role in
some deaths, that's to be expected.
Recall that the first vaccines known to Europe were the imports of Arabic and African native medicine - the
smallpox scabs or fluids were gathered, prepared in some way, and anyone brave enough to take the inoculation
might be protected against smallpox - or, depending on the witch doctor's methodology, they might get
infected. Many vaccines are little different than this, if more carefully prepared and standardized - either a
weakened strain of the virus or a heat-killed preparation of viral proteins, etc.
Thus, even with such attenuated strains, a small percentage of the public will have atypical or allergic reactions
- but with good public health infrastructure, such cases can be rapidly identified and treated, before any
autoimmune-linked fever has a chance to cause brain damage - which is a better option than letting the lawyers
argue over whether it was the doctor, the hospital, or the pharmaceutical corporation that killed the child by
negligence.
The lawyers for the pharmaceutical lobby will instead tell you that vaccines are absolutely safe, which is
nonsense - but with decent medical care, the risks are insignificant - assuming the vaccine was prepared
correctly, and that the vaccine is really needed as part of a well-designed public health strategy. I don't
understand the religious argument against vaccination, and wouldn't try to restate it - who understands the
Spanish Inquisition?
Now, pharma companies like to do production runs and then stock the product - but for vaccines, this is a
problem. Shelf life is short - they tried to extend it with organic mercury anti-microbials, and that lead to all
the autism claims (unsupported scientifically, tho high-sensitivity individuals might have been affected). They
also like to market their goods - and with vaccines, they've often resorted to a little vaccine hysteria of their
own. The birds are coming! Or the pigs! The rats?
For this reason, it might be best if public sector vaccine production was undertaken - there's really very little
profit in it for the private sector if they have to keep vaccine production running around the clock. This is how
U.S. anthrax vaccine production was done for decades until privatized in 1997 (sold off to an ex-Admiral of the
U.S. Navy in partnership with Saudi-Lebanese businessmen, aka Bioport-Emergent-Vaxgen), and it worked
pretty well.
Recall that when smallpox was eliminated, it wasn't just the discovery and production of the vaccine that
mattered, it was the effective strategic administration of the vaccination program that did the job.
There's another reason for this, in that the real goal of a vaccination program is to eliminate the disease
entirely - after which vaccination ceases. How many for-profit private enterprises do you know that are looking
to put themselves out of business? If you sell a disease treatment, and the disease vanishes, well, bye-bye
profits. In contrast, people will always want aspirin, alcohol, opiates, cannabinoids, stimulants, wide-spectrum
antibiotics and so on - perfect for the private sector.
However, I doubt the shareholders like this de-privatization idea, given the $1 billion in useless but
Desperately Needed swine flu vaccine contracts from the U.S. government in 2009 alone - the biggest case of
manufactured hysteria since the Asian Bird Flu Crisis of 2005, wasn't it?
AMother
31 August 2010 9:56PM
'Rational scientific debate on vaccination and public health has gone out the window as quasi-religious anti-
vaccination forces running on ignorance and paranoia clash with pharmaceutical corporations out to avoid
liability while making a tidy profit'.
Look no further than the Steiner Waldorf School movement and the hidden religion behind it called
Anthroposophy:
13 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
http://projects.latimes.com/schools/custom-ranking/county/los-angeles/statistic/immunization-exemption-
rate/order/highest/
Bottom of Form
LogicLover
MMR should stand for "Mail Makes Retards".
I`d contend there is a greater correlation between reading the Daily Mail and intellectual deterioration than
with any vaccine.
ElGwero
Not sure I'd classify Anthroposophy as the "hidden religion" behind the Steiner or Waldorf school concept,
necessarily. It's pretty much up front, at least where I am. And a quick google search will bring you all you need
to know about it too. And yes, we did consider a Waldorf school for our kids, and yes, I did do the research,
and no, I wouldn't touch such schools with barge pole. Fair enough if others like it though.
AbelW
This latest death rattle of of the antivaccine movement involves a boy who seemed quite normal until ten days
after he received his MMR vaccination. Alert readers will recognize ten days as the peak of post-MMR seizure
activity in children who are apparently genetically predisposed to febrile seizures; such readers will also
understand that similar seizures peak within a day or two of vaccination against pertussis. It happens that when
14 children who had been considered to have been injured by the pertussis vaccine (and had all suffered a
seizure within a day or two of vaccination against pertussis) were examined, ALL of them turned out to have
recognized forms of epilepsy and ALMOST ALL (11 of the 14) had mutations affecting a single particular gene
that is associated with febrile seizure, the development of epilepsy early in childhood, and—wait for it—autism.
It also happens that this affected individual‘s symptoms are, according to press accounts, consistent with
epilepsy syndromes associated with mutations in that particular gene that cause, among other things, mental
retardation and problems with motor coordination as well as autism-like symptoms. It also happens that such
children follow the same clinical course whether or not the first symptoms happen to emerge in proximity to
vaccination.
Eleven of 14 children in the only study to genetically evaluate this type of ―vaccine injury‖ were not in fact
injured by vaccines but instead happened to have mutations that entirely accounted for their developmental
problems, and the other 3 of 11 had similar problems unrelated to vaccination. This was noted by one member of
the the panel that heard this case, but he was overruled by the two others who (as shown by the pertussis-
related research) unfortunately quite erroneously believed that temporal association indicated causation—as if
entering middle school causes puberty.
SuzanneWinchester
I was in Edinburgh on Sunday and after reading Martin's Tweet about this article took a look at the Scottish
Sunday Mail. No article about MMR, but their front page was taken over by a scare-mongering HPV Vaccine
piece instead! I wonder why the difference?
drsocialpolicy
MMR is absolutely the zombie health scare story of all time for the Mail. They will carry on running it forever...
Jackie Fletcher is a determined woman and I'm pleased that she has received some money that will help make
the task of caring for her disabled son somewhat easier.
muscleguy
@WhiteCoatEirini
Spoken by someone who is focussed on the twigs on the trees and never learned to appreciate the tree, let
alone the wood. I trained in physiology, then got into developmental biology then learned MolBiol including
transgenics and esoteric stuff like bandshifts but I never lost sight of the organism, you have let our confusion
in the plethora of gene interactions discovered only recently blind you to the vast amount we do know about how
the body works and how it grows and develops and sickens. It is not actually necessary to understand the
molecular details in order to develop successful treatments, the history of vaccination proves that one.
It may help to know the molecular detail but that is yet to be proven as a general principle, it is one thing to
know the 3D structure of the active site of a target protein but that information is no use to you if your
chemistry is insufficient to build a non toxic, sufficiently specific molecule to target it, not to mention that
even if you have that we lack in many cases sufficient delivery vehicles. Many are the drugs found through high
14 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
throughput screening using tethered targets that turn out to be useless for the above reasons, despite that
they work at the molecular level.
Wake up and smell the roses.
butteredballs
Didn't help at the time that Blair went private and gave his baby the vaccines separately.
TomG1
Part of me wants to hold anti-vaccination parents financially and criminally liable for damage caused to children
(theirs, and others) by measles, mumps or rubella infections, but I know that would be unfair (and probably
counter-productive).
ikesolem
The two protagonists in this debate - pharmaceutical corporations and religious groups - have very little
credibility when it comes to scientific claims about the value of vaccination. Their concern is not the health of
the patient, but rather the health of their institutions and ideologies - take the anti-vaccination crowd's
arguments:
The English theologian Rev. Edmund Massey argued that diseases are sent by God to punish sin and that any
attempt to prevent smallpox via inoculation is a "diabolical operation."
The scientific version of this claim was stated by Darwin some time later:
"There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would
formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No
one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the
race of man."
The scientist and the theologian are both catering to the sensitivities of the aristocratic Victorian class
structure of the time. If concentrated wealth and power were not divinely granted, then British class structure
must simply be the natural outcome of biological evolution - and thus, the white robes of the priest were
replaced by the white robes of the scientist. Out went the church collection plate, in came the philanthropic
grant and the private scientific foundation.
Hence, there is still a tendency to celebrate Darwin while ignoring that he also spawned the dubious "science"
of eugenics that became so popular in the 1930s and 1940s, in Germany. In reality, Darwin's claims have been
widely discredited, and his notions are about as relevant to modern biology as Isaac Newton's are to modern
physics - of historical interest only. However, isn't it interesting that you could base a hysterical anti-
vaccination screed on Darwinian concepts as well as Spanish Inquisition concepts? Funny though - Darwin never
suggested that the children of wealth should be sent to live in the slums for a year as a "natural selection test"
- and those who contracted diseases must be allowed to die, since they are genetic inferiors? Off to Auschwitz!
None of that changes the fact that many modern vaccines - HPV, swine flu, etc. - are likely useless and only
exist because of massive marketing campaigns by the pharma sector, along with media and government collusion.
Corruption at the WHO linked to conflicts-of-interest (shareholder involvement) in vaccine recommendations
has already been demonstrated, for example:
Documents acquired through the Danish Freedom of Information Act by the Danish daily newspaper
Information show that Juhani Eskola, a Finnish vaccines adviser on the WHO board, has received £5.6m
(€6.2m; $9m) for his research centre, the Finnish National Institute for Health and Welfare. The money, from
GlaxoSmithKline for research on vaccines during 2009, is the institute‘s main source of income.
There are three really bad sources of medical advice that any wise person will ignore: media corporations,
pharmaceutical corporations (aka "advertisers"), their various lackeys, and religious/ideological nuts. This
leaves... trained and experienced doctors, maybe?
SurplusGamer
@ikesolem
Oh dear, oh dear. You have been reading some rubbish. Someone else can probably cover this one in better
detail than I could but briefly.
1) Darwin did not 'spawn' eugenics. Eugenics may have come about as a result of an ill-advised attempt to use
Darwin's theories in a certain way, but all Darwin himself did was observe natural selection, and report his
observation. Those observations are still relevant today, and provide the foundation for a science that has been
built on since. There has been lots of advance since Darwin in explaining the mechanisms -behind- what Darwin
observed, but his observations of natural selection are still supremely relevant.
15 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Blaming Darwin for Eugenics? That's like calling me a murderer for accidentally dropping a pen on the pavement
only to have someone later that day slip up and crack their head open. Yes, it was a regrettable consequence,
but hardly something that I should have to account for.
2) Similarly, Einstein did not destroy Newton's work. He built on it. Newtonian mechanics is correct for all
intents and purposes, which is why we don't need to apply the relativistic modifications to the equations when
dealing with everyday things. What Einstein did was to add a modifier to those equations, one which only
changes the result in a significant way at very high speeds approaching the speed of light. That has important,
earth-shattering ramifications but it doesn't destroy what Newton built, it just adds a very important caveat.
ramekins
ikesolem
excellent post, ta
Yellowriver
£90,000 is a pathetic sum.
It really is a joke when the governments have bailed out the banks with taxpayers money.
Pharmaceutical companies should hide their heads in shame. They are literally getting away with murder. First
they destroy our children with un-safe vaccines and then destroy our children even more with un-safe drugs. A
total disgrace. When is the world going to wake up to these evil non compassionate people.
Yellowriver
@
LogicLover who says
MMR should stand for "Mail Makes Retards".
Actually it should stand for.
Mass Market Retailers
Masked Money Raiders
Mothers Must Resist
Maximum Medical Regression
Measels and Mumps Ruse
and the rest:
hillbillyzombie
What a noxious group of posters. The personal attacks on Ben Goldacre, as far as I can tell, are just innuendo-
ridden, ad-hominum slurs with little or no substance. It would be very disturbing if this is the face of the anti-
vaccine movement.
Attacks on evidence-based public health policy were common in my youth as I grew up in Appalachia. Folks want
explanations and they need someone to blame when things go wrong. And there always seem to be those who are
able and willing to take advantage of people's pain and fear and whip it into hysteria.
Measles was no joke back in the day, and the MMR vaccine has saved a hell of a lot of hillbilly kids. It was the
60's - 70's and the new doctors at the local clinic (Palistinian doctors who had immigrated after the 67 war)
began a vaccination program for the outlying valleys and hollows up in the hills. Those 4 lost and lonely Arab
doctors in SW Virgina did a lot of damn good and it's a shame to see it undone by a bunch of wing nuts.
I honestly want to cry.
2010/09/01 GIRL, INTERRUPTING: ON WOMEN

IN SCIENCE
I am always in 2 minds about Women in Science. There is something about that title that reminds me of
the Muppet Show and I can hear the announcement line sounding like ‘Pigs in Space’ – and it just sounds
silly..
I am, after all, a woman in science though I haven’t really ever thought of myself as that. I don’t mean I
think I am not a scientist (I am) and I am pretty clear that I am a woman, but those things don’t seem like
16 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
they should be mutually exclusive to me. The term Woman in Science actually points out that that subject
(women)in Science is something somehow different.
I have always thought, in my job why does (should) it matter that I am a woman? Other than I obviously
use different washroom facilities. My position on this as a graduate student was a follows: I am training to
be a scientist, and I am just as good (or bad) as the next guy or gal, I should be judged on my merits not on
my reproductive equipment. So I was adamantly against participating in any society which highlights the
fact I am different – I didn’t want to be a part of women in science groups, full stop, which to me seemed
divisive and separates women even further from a male dominated profession.
It is true that women are under-represented in many sciences, especially the physical sciences, and they
did not participate in professional science (except on the sly) until fairly recently. There are some pretty
amazing stories about women who worked in science against all of the odds. There are amazing individual
stories about Rosalind Franklin, Caroline Hershel and so many others that worked in science before they
were really ‘allowed’ and yes it really was ‘allowed’.
And we love these stories! I do, they are great, and impressive. In the UK they love an underdog, and in the
US they love the pioneer American dream spirit – against all odds! These amazing forerunners fought the
system and won. Individually this is powerful stuff. But should you really have to fight against the odds just
to have a job in science? And what about all of the women who probably fought the good fight and still
failed, or had to give it up, or quit to have children (as a lot of people did, as it was “normal”) who knows
about them? My mother (who is a social worker) always told me that if she had it to do all over again she
would be a wildlife biologist, or a park ranger. But my mother was born in the 30′s in Southern US and as
she said – that’s just the way it was, women were either nurse’s, teachers or social workers – so she didn’t
even KNOW she had a choice, really.
And some of the women, I am sad to say, who have succeeded against all odds are the worst about
repressing other women, just like some of the most conservative people about social equality are the very
ones that could have used a leg up, simply because they themselves fought ‘against the odds’ and
therefore think ‘why can’t everyone else?’
I really don’t want to be and hope I am not like that, not that I have a startling Nobel prize winning career,
but I don’t want to be intolerant of people with different backgrounds (be they women or whatever under-
represented portion of the population) who didn’t do what I did. No one’s life is the same. I also think by
excluding people you cut your base, you necessarily limit what can be done, just like only funding the elite.
And while —– (insert whatever under-represented group you like) aren’t ‘excluded’ in any formal sense
these days, they may well be excluded in an unconscious manner, unconscious bias – and this can sting,
and in some instances be so discouraging, people just think – forget it, I can’t (or don’t want to) deal with
this.
I think about some of the things that have been said to me in my scientific career, for instance:
When I got my first independent fellowship from NSF, I was ultra-excited, and a senior (male) professor
told me -
“You only got it because you are a woman” ?!?!
When I was on an interview panel with a male colleague who said (in response to a question I asked the
candidate)
” She just thinks that because she is a woman”
Thankfully, these instances, at least in my career, have been rare. Most people don’t think or at least don’t
say things like this.
17 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
So here is the two minds bit – bias still exists, and I truely believe that all people, regardless of race,
gender, etc. should be encouraged not discouraged, so maybe a women in science group is the way to do
this? But I still don’t want to be a member, because I don’t want to classify myself as different, but I think,
as I didn’t used to think, there is a place for this, whether or not I want to participate myself.
So if you want to join a women in science (or whatever group) I have one thing to say –
you go girl!
Comments (4)
4 Comments »
As a senior woman scientist I entirely understand your ambivalence. When younger I felt as you did, that I was
a scientist who happened to be a woman, not a woman scientist. But as I have progressed I have seen just how
many women have been deterred for the ‗wrong‘ reasons, and so I have slowly but surely turned into a woman
who works – indeed leads – such groups. It is regrettable they are still necessary, but they are. And
institutional culture change is a necessary part of that. I have the opportunity to try to push some of these
activities in my new role as the University of Cambridge‘s gender equality champion (so much broader than just
science). And I have just started a blog http://athenedonald.wordpress.com to cover some of these issues,
because they do need airing. I would hope to encourage the next generation, or those who feel in need of it, but
it will take time to turn things around. And personal anecdote is not enough, however much incidents may hurt.
Organisations change, as the 1999 MIT study showed, by hard facts being put on the table. Boring but true.
Comment by Athene Donald — September 1, 2010 @ 4:30 pm | Reply
Thank you for your comment – I am in favor of hard facts, institutional change and evidence for that change. I
don‘t find the MIT study in 1999 dull by any stretch of the imagination, for the same reasons that I believe in
Affirmative Action programmes in the US, real changes some times need to be enforced and we all need an
advocate at times. However this being said, what I am in two minds about is the balance between that real
focused change and alienation of yourself as a group. For instance if I set up a women‘s discussion group for a
journal club, would it be justified for the men in my university to have a similar men‘s group? I realize this is a
somewhat naive example, however how do you fight this? How do you balance assimilation with segregation? How
do you have people feel included if they mark themselves as exclusive? Conversely, I see the need for forcing
change and the existance of such groups (which is what I hope I said in my post), supplied of course by facts
and hard truths.
Again, thank you for your input and your blog link, which is fantastic and very interesting. I also started my blog
to air things – of a somewhat similar nature, and this post is something I have been thinking about for a long
time. Will my mind change? Not sure, but I seem to be in the process at the moment, and I can say I
wholeheartedly support what you do.
Comment by sylviamclain — September 1, 2010 @ 10:23 pm | Reply
I love your rationale for not participating in ―women‘s groups‖…sounds familiar. I also have avoided involving
myself in gender-based groups because I want it not to be an issue. But it is.
I remember when I was the only female guide among a pack of muscled men at the put-in for a dangerous
stretch of river, how crew after crew of rafters would pass by me and choose a man for their guide. I would
only get a crew after all the men were taken. Later my crew would discover that I was highly skilled and that
some of those sculpted bronze boys were mere beginners at the river thing. I had to steel myself on a daily
basis not to be offended by the ubiquitous sexism.
Lately I have been noticing how differently patients treat male vs female doctors. I spend a lot of time in clinic
just observing. Male docs can speak softly and be heard, whereas female docs may have to push their way into a
conversation, even though it is their advice that is sought. Patients are far more likely to barrage a female doc
with an assortment of minor complaints and also to interrupt her. The differences in how we are treated by
gender run deep, perhaps deeper than culture. Perhaps it is in our biology as well.
So what I have determined to do, for my own medical practice, is to dress and behave in a fairly masculine
manner. This is not hard for me as I am tall and muscular of build. I put my hair away, wear collared shirts,
unisex shoes* and a white coat, smile less, and I get more respect. People pay more attention when I speak, and
defer to me more as a physician than just as some girl. Perhaps we ―shouldn‘t‖ have to play these games, but
18 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
when you really want to do your job, whatever you can do to ease people‘s kneejerk reactions to you could be
beneficial.
*Sexy shoes are a real handicap for a woman who is attempting to play a professional role. This is my
observation, I have seen no studies about it. Want to be treated according to female gender instead of by
profession?–>Wear seductive heels.
Comment by Teresa Gryder — September 1, 2010 @ 4:53 pm | Reply
I remember that from our raft guiding days as well, and comments like ‗You‘re too little to guide this thing
aren‘t you?‘ and are you sure you can lift that. I however always just assumed they were ignorant and that I
could do anything. I think one of the points I wanted to make in this post is its not about me! Women (or people
for that matter) react in different ways to different things and and and…
and yes it IS an issue. But I don‘t think it has ANYTHING to do with biology, in many animals which exhibit
sexual dimorphism, the female is very dominant, I think we have to be careful about linking what humans socially
with biology because we don‘t have enough info and we have a different social structure -
Thanks for your input!
Comment by sylviamclain — September 1, 2010 @ 10:33 pm | Reply
2010/09/01 IN VERBA: PUBLIC SCIENCE, IN

FRENCH
By Jessica Bland on 1 September 2010
Last week, I spent a couple of days at The Royal Saltworks at Arc-et-Senans in France, a
symbolic venue for a discussion of the place for science and technology in public
debate. Described by UNESCO World Heritage as “the first instance of a factory being built
with the same care and concern for architectural quality as a palace or an important religious
building”, the saltworks were one of the first spaces designed with a particular technology in
mind – the production of salt. It was a stunning setting for debating the future public space for
scientific and technological developments.
The meeting was a summer school for about 45 French „future leaders‟ from the public and the
private sectors. Organised by the Institut des Hautes Études pour la Science et la Technologie
(IHEST), as part of a yearlong training on science-society relationships, the delegates were
asked to examine the place of science in the debates that unfold in the public sphere. I spoke
at a session on international experiences of public debates around nanotechnology,
19 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
alongside Jamey Wetmore from the US and Rinie van Est from the Netherlands. Jamey, along
with a couple of colleagues, wrote a series of blogposts on the discussion.
The Royal Society is intrinsically bound up in the history of these debates in the UK. The
Society‟s 2004 report recommended a model for the governance of nanotechnology in which
the government would engage directly with the public. In response, the government set up a
Nanotechnology Engagement Group in 2005, which organised a series of public dialogue
exercises. (The group‟s final report from 2007 is a detailed account of how this played out.)
But some critics felt that one-off engagement exercises do not provide the public with enough
space to make a substantive contribution to policy-making in this area. As the Royal
Commission on Environmental Pollution‟s report on nanotechnology put it, we need a model
that includes “continual social intelligence gathering and the provision on ongoing opportunities
for public and expert reflection and debate”.
But what would continuous interaction look like? This was a question that Rinie van Est tried to
answer in his discussion of the Rathenau Institute‟s work. In addition to organising exercises or
debates, the Institute attempted to „seduce‟ people into networks of continual public debate.
These networks include the various parts of the media, politicians & wider publics and
interested groups – from policymakers to NGOs and lobbying organisations.
The French National Commission for Public Debate (CNDP) had a recent series of
nanotechnology debates disrupted by protestors, and so many of the questions from the
audience concentrated on how to create a safe space for dialogue exercises in this difficult
national context. (An assessment of the exercise is available here.)
But what stuck with me was the term ‟seduction‟ in Rinie‟s speech. Sitting at the interface of
policymakers, scientists and the public, the Royal Society is engaged with these groups. The
challenge he sets us is to become architects of this interaction, creating communities interested
enough to engage regularly with a particular issue – a kind of everyday engagement.
Posted in Science and Society
2010/09/01 GUARDIAN BLOG: SEX

EDUCATION, STIS AND POLITICIANS MAKE A
TOXIC COMBINATION
20 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Should our response to the rising number of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) be a call for more
ignorance, as one MP appears to believe?
Year 6 sex education at a school in Lambeth. Photograph: David Levene/Guardian
Woody Allen, in the movie Annie Hall, tells a joke about how two elderly (probably Jewish)
women are at a Catskill Mountain resort, and one of 'em says, "Boy, the food at this place is
really terrible." The other one says, "Yeah, I know; and such small portions."
That's how I feel about sex education in Britain's schools.
Over the bank holiday weekend, an MP, Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough) in
response to media reports of a rise in the number of STIs (sexually transmitted infections) in
teenagers, said on Twitter that the problem was too much sex education. He tweeted on 26
August:
V disappointing news on STD rates in Pboro. No doubt our liberal friends will tell us we need
MORE sex education – as it's worked so well
Predictably (although perhaps not to Mr Jackson), when it was further circulated on Twitter it
led to a flurry of comments from people agreeing and – mainly – disagreeing with him. As far
as I can tell, at first he chose not to respond but after some time he lashed out on Twitter,
saying:
Touched a raw nerve with shrill intolerant pro sex education Lefties who don't like debating the
issues. Wonder why not?
On 27 August he said,
Re. Sex education Memo to sad tedious sex obsessed Leftie weirdos – do please tweeting me
[sic] You're confusing me with someone who's interested
and then
Left are simply unable to debate issues without personal abuse and vicious shrill denunciation.
Important we keep them locked out of power
The irony of tweeting an insult (even truly sad, tedious, sex-obsessed Leftie weirdos don't
identify themselves as such) then complaining about insults led to a flurry of comment on
Twitter, on blogs and even on the BBC.
On Twitter everyone's tweets are public and accessible and it seems thatall the tweets that
had been directed at Mr Jackson – all that the bloggers could find – are entirely civil (certainly
by parliamentary standards) and seek to debate the issues. It is therefore hard to see what he
21 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
was objecting to when he made his complaint on which he enlarged in the Peterborough
Evening Telegraph, where he also said that:
"I wanted to engage in intelligent debate but was met with a barrage of crude, personal abuse.
I am always keen to hear from my constituents but these people were generally not even from
Peterborough and were only interested in making personal attacks."
This repeated assertion had all the ingredients needed to infuriate people who use Twitter –
rather like poking a wasps nest – who felt not only that they were right (cue cartoon), that he
was failing to engage with them, that he falsely or unfairly accused them, but also that they
had caught him in that alleged falsehood. None of these blogs, except perhaps one, was
particularly rude, as opposed to critical, and there is no evidence that they were emailed or
tweeted to him.
There are some important issues behind all this.

First, it is not clear whether the rise in reported STIs reflects a genuine rise in incidence or is
an artefact of more widespread testing (leading to more true positives being picked up). This
has been covered by Mark Easton at the BBC and by Dr Petra Boynton, and no doubt
elsewhere, so I will not pursue that further here.
Second, there is the question of whether we have too much sex education or too little. I would
say we have too little and of poor quality. This is also the view of young people
themselves, who report that sex education does not tell them what they need to know or does
not reach them in time. There is surely merit in providing sex education before children are
sexually active, and before the pubertal "giggle factor" and the "schoolyard fable factory"
prevent information being readily accepted.
There is international evidence that "school-based sex education improves awareness of risk
and ways to reduce it. It increases the intention to practise safer sex and delays rather than
hastens the onset of sexual activity". There is also evidence of this from the UK.
Hell, sex education has even been reported to work in Peterborough!
Other countries seem to do it better (sex education that is). For example in the Scandinavian
countries and Holland, which can hardly be described as puritanical, and where sex education
is delivered early and clearly (and where the media is more supportive of it), the rate of
teenage conception (and teenage abortion) is much lower than in the UK. The age of first
intercourse is also delayed relative to the UK. It seems that providing information equips boys
to resist peer pressure and girls better to resist boy pressure. It also makes the use of effective
contraception more likely when sexual activity does begin.
I agree with Anne Widdecombe. I will repeat that. I agree with Anne Widdecombe – and Stuart
Jackson – that there is a problem with theover-sexualisation of young people by our media
more widely. I agree with them that this is unhealthy. No doubt it contributes to the earlier
onset of sexual activity and also causes misery to girls (mainly) as they feel expected to
conform to the sexualised body images portrayed in the media.
Given that this is the society we have (and it is impossible to uninvent the internet, movies,
teen magazines, TV, etc) we have two approaches to tackling this problem that could be used
in combination.
First, we can try to roll back the normalisation of portrayals of women as mainly or primarily
sexual objects. We can for example regulate – or self-regulate – so that so-called family
newspapers do not portray women in topless or sexual poses, and that such objectification
and soft porn is marketed as such. So, for example, magazines like Zoo and Nuts should be
available to adults and displayed and sold as such. I have supportedcross-party campaigns on
this led by the Fawcett Society and Object, but I am not certain whether Mr Jackson has done
so.
22 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Second, we can equip young people for the world as it exists rather than as we would wish it
to be. The curious thing about those who believe in Victorian values is that the Victorian age
was a golden era for the sexual exploitation of women and the abuse of children.
2010/09/01 GUARDIAN BLOG: THE BLUE

REVOLUTION AT BBC SCIENCE
With the BBC now providing links to the scientific research it reports, will 2010 be
the year when science journalists discover the web link?
Journalists who provide links to sources show themselves to be open and trustworthy, and
allow the reader to judge their interpretation of the source material
It's funny how things can be connected. I was looking up the recipe for Worcestershire
sauce last night and ended up idly clicking through Wikipedia. It turns out that the sauce is
made from anchovies, which can cause amnesic shellfish poisoning, a brain-damaging illness
that may have caused thousands of frantic seabirds to invade towns in Californian in 1961;
events that may have provided some inspiration for Hitchcock's film The Birds. I found all this
because of links.
Links are the foundation of the world wide web. They take us beyond whatever we happened
to be looking for, on journeys to places we never even imagined existed. Every minute of
every day, millions of curious apes click billions of links, each travelling on their own miniature
voyages of discovery.
Of all the differences between science blogging and mainstream media reporting of science,
one of the most profound is the use of links. Science bloggers often come from a scientific
background, and as scientists we were drilled on the need for citations. Any factual statement
or assertion you make in a research paper should be backed up with a reference to primary
evidence supporting the claim.
It's a habit that translates well into journalism, a profession which, like science, should be
concerned with studying the world and reporting its findings on behalf of the public in an open
and accountable way.
23 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
By providing links to sources (or indeed posting full interview transcripts), journalists can show
that they're honest, open and trustworthy and allow the reader to judge whether the
interpretation they've presented of someone else's work or words is the correct one.
And links can do much more than that. By embedding links in text, journalists can turn their
articles from static descriptions of the world into platforms that open up avenues for
exploration and discovery to their audience, tapping into rich veins of knowledge and intrigue
to provide the reader with far more value than one journalist could provide on their own.
Links are beautiful, so why are newspaper websites so utterly reluctant to use them? In
particular, why do science journalists who write about scientific papers so often fail to provide
a link to a copy of the paper in question?
It's an issue that Ben Goldacre raised with the BBC earlier this year, but with apparently little
success. As Ben pointed out at the time:
"It's very important that the public are able to get access to information, especially since media
reports – for many structural reasons – can be light on information, or even contain errors."
But now the Beeb seems to have relented. It has come to my attention,courtesy of the
commenter soveda, that the BBC are – occasionally at least – now adding links to the original
research in their articles, for example in the 5th paragraph here.
This is to be congratulated. It's easy to moan when journalists get things wrong, but fair play to
the BBC here – they've listened, and they appear to have changed their practice. For that they
should be congratulated, and if you give a crap about news outlets linking to research (and if
not, why on Earth are you still reading this?) then you should go immediately to their feedback
page, and leave a friendly comment.
So will other organs follow the BBC's lead? Unfortunately, the scientific journals themselves
are putting barriers in the way of journalists who want to link to the original research, as the
science editor of the Times Mark Henderson told me earlier:
"I think it's good practice to provide direct hyperlinks to journal articles where practical, but this
isn't always easy to achieve. The main problem is that while some journals (eg Nature) provide
such links on their embargoed press releases (or tell you how to work them out using DOI
numbers), others do not. It can thus take time you don't have to establish the correct link.
Worse still is that some journals (PNAS is a particular offender) don't have papers available
online when an embargo lifts. It is thus impossible to link even to an abstract."
Embargoes themselves are a difficult and controversial subject best left to the likes of Ivan
Oransky, but clearly there's a problem with the way that PR officers at some major journals are
operating – by failing to support busy journalists, they're failing the public. One simple solution
would fix this problem, as Mark suggests:
"I would encourage all press officers dealing with journal articles to include a hyperlink to the
paper, that will go live when an embargo lifts, on their press releases as a matter of course."
Let's hope that the BBC's decision will start putting pressure on journals to do just this. But
let's not forget the wider problem here. As blogs and mainstream media draw ever closer
together – a long-term shift epitomised by my own move to the Guardian – there are
opportunities for each to learn from the other. One of the most obvious things that bloggers
can teach mainstream media journalists is the proper use of the link. It's not enough for
journalists to simply report on the world, they need to let people see it for themselves.
Posted byMartin RobbinsWednesday 1 September 2010 17.33 BSTguardian.co.uk
24 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
ScotinParis
So we can we expect to see references to the original papers in the Guardian ?
Recommend? (4)
PalMD
It is a constant source of frustration to read stuff cribbed from press releases or stories about a study with no citation,
hyperlinked or otherwise. It's a holdover, I think, from traditional journalism of not sharing sources, not mentioning
possible competitors, etc. It's also crappy journalism.
Recommend? (1)
SeymourDaily
Links are only half the battle, though. So many of the original papers are in journals that can only be accessed via paid
subscription, or by academics whose institution subscribe. Tackling the scientific publishing racket is the next challenge...
Recommend? (8)
cmsdengl
Quite a lot of journal papers are behind pay walls, only accessible to subscribers (or members of university libraries). In an
ideal world scientists could make publicly available summaries of their work, but that takes time.
Add to that funding supporting public understanding of science is likely to be cut in the spending review - see here
Recommend? (1)
MartinRobbins
@ScottinParis - I don't speak for The Guardian, but in my articles, yes, and I think my colleagues at Guardian Science Blogs
feel the same.
@PalMD - Yes, I think promiscuity is another big culture difference. Bloggers are accustomed to working together to create
value jointly across multiple blogs and networks, whereas newspapers have more of a "we have to do everything and we don't
want to share" approach to life. I think though that might start to change a bit, but we'll see.
@SeymourDaily - I agree it's a major issue, but I'm not sure I'd call it a racket. The fact is that someone somewhere has
to pay for this stuff to be reviewed, edited and published (which is a costly process), and at the moment journals do. PLoS
get around it by charging researchers instead of the public, but a fully open and free system would need considerable public
subsidy.
cmsdengl
Having said that, one of my Belgian colleagues has posted sixty of his papers on academia.edu - will have to check the
copyright issues of that...
SeymourDaily
@ MartinRobbins, that "someone somewhere reviewing and editing is frequently an academic giving their services for
nothing..... well, not strictly speaking for nothing, because in academic circles it's described as being an 'indicator of
esteem' to be a member of an editorial board, so I guess vanity comes into it, but the fact remains that the publishers who
charge an arm and a leg for their journals receive thusands of hours of free labour from their editorial boards, who referee
papers and spend many hours of legwork recruiting and chasing up referees. Add to that the fact that many 'high impact'
journals that are not PLoS levy page charges on the scientists who publish their work in them and 'racket' isn't really so
very far off the mark.
Recommend? (2)
MartinRobbins
@SeymourDaily: Yes, the reviews themselves are often done for free, but the wider costs of the process are still
substantial, running into hundreds of pounds per paper, which translates to thousands of pounds per published paper once
you account for the rejections. You give the example of PLoS, but they're a not-for-profit company - the prices they charge
are more-or-less the prices they need to charge (which incidentally they frequently waive). You can live in denial of the
costs, or you can figure out a better business model for people to support, but meanwhile someone somewhere has to pay
for it.
SeymourDaily
25 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
@MartinRobbins, all true, but 'someone somewhere' is, all too often, the taxpayer - funding university academics who do
the research and also work for journals for nothing, then funding universities to buy back the results of publically-funded
research in the journals purchased by university libraries....... which seems like a very good business model if you are a
journal publisher. Add to this the fact that academics are compelled, by the demands of the RAE, to publish in the highest-
impact journals possible, so they automatically buy into the system by competing to get their papers published in these
journals, and the journals have society over a barrel.
Recommend? (2)
painstructure
my son keeps asking why, his 'whys' i am sure will dry up as they do when faced with the current contingencies of life. 'why
do you work', 'why do we need money'.
seymour daily
from here, you have hit the nail on the head. 'esteem' factors is part of the new economy. the new economy is virtual. the
virtual, in order to survive, needs the real. the esteem factors feed on the real at the same time esteem is the one thing
the real lacks. the virtual, the distant, are akin to vampires, parasites.
DavidWaldock
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/02/babies-sugar-pain-relief-warning
And yet, no linky linky...
*le sigh*
2010/09/01 NATURE: WORLD VIEW:

POLITICIZE ME
Barack Obama is finding that sometimes politics needs to put science in its place, says Daniel Sarewitz.
Daniel Sarewitz
In his inaugural address, US President Barack Obama promised to restore science to its "rightful place".
How is his administration doing so far? It has failed to strengthen protections for endangered species,
appointed officials with long records of suppressing politically inconvenient science, ignored new evidence-
based recommendations for breast-cancer screening, failed to remove all restrictions from embryonic
stem-cell science and ignored decades of research in a politically motivated effort to prevent nuclear waste
from being stored at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
Of course, during the regime of Republican president George W. Bush, opposition Democrats got
surprisingly good political mileage from accusations that science and scientists were routinely suppressed,
flouted or abused on issues ranging from stem cells to air pollution. But the political resonance of this
subject has mostly died down during the Obama administration. Could this be because less than 10% of US
scientists are Republicans? In any case, the fact is that Obama, like Bush before him, is not sacrificing his
political agenda on the altar of science.
“Science is the wrong tool for solving political disputes.”
26 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
And why should he? When a problem is complex and the stakes are high, the relevant science can never be
settled to the satisfaction of all parties — it is always going to be politicized. This is not because all
politicians are shameless toadies to special interests, but because science is the wrong tool for solving
political disputes.
Fuelling controversy
The saga of high-level nuclear-waste disposal in the United States illustrates this fact with uncomfortable
clarity. Starting in the early 1980s, the US Department of Energy (DOE) began evaluating sites for use as a
waste repository. In 1987, Congress narrowed the assessment to a single location: Yucca Mountain.
Although the scientific case for this site was fairly strong, the political case was stronger. Of the states
being considered for repositories, Nevada, with the smallest population and weakest congressional
delegation, provided the political path of least resistance. Science would show the way along that path.
And so, over nearly 20 years, the DOE spent more than US$10 billion assessing the long-term safety of
using the site. The state of Nevada led the opposition, mobilizing its own scientific experts to argue that
the hydrological and tectonic setting of Yucca Mountain is too uncertain to guarantee safety over the
coming millennia. Nonetheless, the Bush administration decided that almost two decades of government-
sponsored research sufficiently demonstrated the site's adequacy. In June 2008, it submitted an 8,600-
page application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a licence to construct the repository.
In March this year, the Obama administration submitted a motion to the NRC to withdraw the still-pending
licence application, thus reversing the Bush policy and contravening the scientific assessments of the DOE.
What had changed? Not the science, but the politics. Since 2007, the Senate majority leader has been
Democrat Harry Reid of Nevada, who is staunchly opposed to the Yucca Mountain repository. Obama
pledged during his election campaign to close down the Yucca Mountain programme — a pledge he must
keep if he is to have Reid's continued backing for the administration's ambitious political agenda.
The saga is not over. On 29 June, the NRC's licensing board denied the motion to withdraw the application.
Five groups, including several states and localities that store nuclear waste that they'd like to get rid of, are
formally opposing the administration's effort to shut the programme down. Now the NRC must decide
whether to uphold the board's denial — thus keeping Yucca Mountain alive as a potential repository — or
allow the government to abandon the site permanently.
The Swedish message
Can science and politics ever work together to resolve complex problems such as nuclear-waste disposal?
Consider the approach pursued in Sweden for the past 30 or so years. As in the United States, multiple
sites were selected for technical evaluation. But rather than quickly converging on a single site, the
possibilities were narrowed gradually, while candidate municipalities were closely involved in the selection
process — and given veto power. Three towns were chosen as finalists in 2000; one exercised its veto, and
the winner was announced in 2009, with the two final towns sharing a $240 million reward (three-quarters
of which is going to the loser).
This imaginative process kept the politics ahead of the science. Candidate municipalities, which valued the
economic benefits of hosting the site above the risks that it might present, were self-selecting and had an
interest in making the best scientific case for a safe repository. The process was iterative and incremental,
with public support sought along the way through inclusive politics rather than by trying to overcome
opposition with a mounting body of science.
In Sweden, science that was good enough to support the site selection process emerged relatively
smoothly from this political arrangement. In the United States, a failed political approach led, instead, to
science that fuelled controversy and gridlock. Successful science — science that can support public goals —
27 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
is not just a matter of how sophisticated the models are or how well the probabilities are communicated to
the public, but of the political context in which knowledge is generated and used. In social-science jargon,
the Swedish science was 'socially robust'; the US science was not. The challenge is not to avoid politicizing
science (which is impossible) but to politicize it wisely.
The decade-long brouhaha over the politicization of science in the United States reflects an incorrigible
cultural delusion: that if science were left alone to speak truth to power, it would exercise a purifying
magic on the miasma of politics. The delusion serves politicians, who are free to hand over difficult choices
to scientists, as they did with Yucca Mountain — and later with climate change. It also serves scientists,
who get to maintain their position of high cultural authority and do a lot of research in the process.
Who will be courageous enough to step away from this pathological codependence? Perhaps Obama's
unapologetic decision to turn his back on $10 billion of nuclear-waste disposal research is the best thing for
both politics and science. Perhaps he is discovering science's 'rightful place' after all.
This is Daniel Sarewitz's last regular column. Seego.nature.com/ILx8PC for past columns.
Daniel Sarewitz, co-director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State
University, is based in Washington DC. e-mail: dsarewitz@gmail.com
2010/09/01 GUARDIAN BLOG:

SUPERSYMMETRY - THE END OF THE LINE?
Just before this blog moved to the Guardian, I wrote about a supersymmetry meeting I attended. Now my
theory pal who organised it chips in
In case you missed it, I wrote about a conference on supersymmetry I went to last week, just
before this blog moved home. I also gave some reasons why supersymmetry might, or might
not, be seen as an attractive extension of the Standard Model of particle physics, given that
there is no experimental evidence for it yet.
28 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Waiting for data can be frustrating. Particle physicist
Herbi Dreiner
Now my theory friend Herbi Dreiner, who I used to work with when I was a student and who
organised the Bonn meeting, has given his view. Since I know there are heaps of
supersymmetry fans out there, I thought I should bring it to your attention:
The conference on "Supersymmetry and the Unification of Fundamental Interactions", which

my colleagues and I organised in Bonn, finished yesterday. The entire week I was thinking I
would drop into bed and sleep for a full day. But oddly, I feel quite refreshed. It was great fun
listening to the talks and discussing with so many friends and colleagues, despite all the
organisational headaches. The conference dinner was on an elegant boat which in an earlier
life was used for the signing ceremony of theSchengen agreement. (For us mainland
Europeans this is a big deal.)
Supersymmetry seems alive and well and ready to face the challenge from the LHC. But what
is supersymmetry? And what is so super about it? Why are we so taken with it, even though
there is as yet no experimental evidence it actually exists? There are two main arguments.
First, it is a solution to the "hierarchy problem". I will save this for a potential second post, if
Jon invites me back. The other is indeed an aesthetic argument related to the "Coleman-
Mandula theorem".
Now, I tell myself every morning in front of the bathroom mirror that aesthetics is for wimps,
but it is all the same an interesting argument.
Symmetries have become a central pillar of our understanding of nature. A sphere is

symmetric in the sense that if you leave me in a room with the sphere and come back in, you
cannot tell if and by possibly how much and about which axis I have rotated the sphere. The
sphere is highly symmetric. This, however, also makes a sphere kind of boring, since because
it has to be the same in every direction it has no structure. If the sphere has a pattern on it, like
for example an old black and white football, only very specific rotations are still undetectable.
This is the remaining, reduced symmetry.
It turns out that in the world of elementary particles there are two types of symmetry. One kind
is internal symmetries. These govern the forces of nature like the electromagnetic force. Here
a hidden, internal property of particles is changed. The other kind we call external symmetries
and they affect the way particles fly through space and time. The appropriate external
symmetry is described by special relativity, invented by Einstein in 1905. The undetectable
transformations are called Lorentz transformations. In this case the laws of nature are
unchanged if we look at the particles for example on a stationary train or one moving with
constant velocity (and on smooth tracks!).
29 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Now how about Coleman and Mandula? They showed that in fact the Lorentz symmetries are
the maximal external symmetry allowed in nature. If you were to introduce a larger more
extensive symmetry the world would become so boring that particles could no longer interact.
They would just fly around freely in space not knowing about each other.
However, in their argument Coleman and Mandula neglected one external property of
particles, their spin. This is a peculiar quantum property: they behave as if they had a small
internal magnet. In specific units all the matter particles we know, e.g. the electron and the
quarks, have spin 1/2. The force carriers like the photon have spin 1. Spin is an external
property, which is affected by rotations in space.
Now if we extend Coleman and Mandula and allow for discrete changes of spin by half a unit,
we find a new maximal external symmetry of nature. This is supersymmetry. It is super
because it goes beyond the previous external symmetries. If nature is supersymmetric the
electron must have a partner with spin 0 and the photon a partner with spin 1/2 and all with
many interactions.
However, if this symmetry were at all extended (now also taking spin into account, of course)
the resulting world would be boring and trivial with no interactions. Since we have now used up
all external particle properties we believe this is the end of the line. This is what makes
supersymmetry so special ... and to some beautiful.
Of course, the data from the LHC over the next months and years, but also from precision
measurements of certain particle properties, will decide whether any of this is real.
2010/09/01 GUARDIAN BLOG FESTIVAL:

PSYCHEDELIC DRUGS RETURN AS POTENTIAL
TREATMENTS FOR MENTAL ILLNESS
New research confirms that psychedelic drugs are promising treatments for depression, obsessive-
compulsive disorder (OCD) and schizophrenia
Moheb Costandi writes the Neurophilosophy blog
30 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Psychedelic drugs such as ketamine
and MDMA (ecstasy) have been used to treat mental illness. Photograph: Fredrik Skold/Alamy/Alamy
Long before hippie poster boy Timothy Leary invited the world to "Turn on, tune in and drop out", a group
of pioneering psychiatrists working in Canada began to treat alcoholics with lysergic acid diethylamide
(LSD), and reported unprecedented recovery rates.
Far from being at the fringes of medical research, their work was fully supported and funded by the
Canadian government, and became a promising new area of research that played a role in modernising the
field of psychiatry. But despite the encouraging results, studies of LSD therapy ended abruptly in the late
1960s, and did not resume again until some 40 years later.
At the cutting edge of early psychedelic research was one Humphry Osmond (1917-2004), a British
psychiatrist at the Weyburn Mental Hospital in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. It was Osmond
who gave the novelist Aldous Huxley his first dose of mescaline in 1953, and coined the term "psychedelic"
in 1957.
Between the years of 1954 and 1960, Osmond and his colleague Abram Hoffer treated some 2,000 chronic
alcoholics with LSD. None of these patients had responded to other treatments, and yet, Osmond and
Hoffer reported that up to 45% of those treated with a single large dose of the drug abstained from
drinking for at least a year afterwards.
Other researchers in Canada, Britain, the United States and elsewhere began experimenting with LSD
therapy, and by the time the drug hit the streets in the early 1960s, there were more than a thousand
published research papers that described promising results in over 40,000 patients.
These studies took place alongside trials of newly developed compounds such as the antipsychotic
chlorpromazine and the tricyclic antidepressant imipramine. This body of work effectively established the
new field of psychopharmacology, which led psychiatrists to abandon the psychoanalytical approach they
had been using since the turn of the century, and begin to consider alcoholism and mental illnesses in
terms of disrupted brain chemistry.
Although the results of many of the early studies into LSD therapy were promising, investigations of the
potential therapeutic benefits of the psychedelic drugs stopped towards the end of the decade, for two
main reasons.
First, some began to question the methods used in the studies, arguing that they lacked scientific rigour,
and few, if any, other researchers managed to replicate the high recovery rates reported by Osmond and
31 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Hoffer. Many therefore viewed the early studies as providing nothing more than anecdotal evidence for
the therapeutic benefits of LSD.
Second, and more importantly, the cultural and political climate became less conducive to psychedelic
research. LSD became a popular recreational drug towards the end of the 1960s, and came to be
associated with the hippie counterculture, anti-authoritarianism and social disobedience. As a result,
research funding quickly dried up, and the drug was eventually criminalised by the US and other
governments in 1970.
The past decade has seen renewed interest in the potential therapeutic benefits of LSD and other
psychedelic drugs, and the availability of sophisticated techniques such as functional neuroimaging is
beginning to provide fresh insights into how they affect the brain.
The new research confirms that the psychedelic drugs do indeed have therapeutic value for a number of
psychiatric conditions, including depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and schizophrenia. It
also points to various brain mechanisms which may underly their beneficial effects.
We now know that the so-called classical hallucinogens (LSD, psilocybin and mescaline) activate 5-HT2A
receptors – which normally bind the neurotransmitter serotonin – in the deep layers of the prefrontal
cortex. This in turn alters nerve cell signalling mediated by the transmitters glutamate and dopamine, and
may also lead to changes in the strength of connections between neurons in the cortex and other parts of
the brain.
Serotonin and dopamine convey messages in the brain circuits involved in mood, and psychedelic drugs
apparently alleviate the clinical symptoms of mood disorders by modulating the activity of the cells in
these circuits and by modifying their connections.
The very latest research shows that ketamine, an anaesthetic with hallucinogenic properties, can reduce
the symptoms of depression quickly and effectively, and that MDMA (popularly known as ecstasy) can be
beneficial to sufferers of post-traumatic stress disorder when used in combination with behavioural
therapy.
By contrast, new research into the effects of the classical hallucinogens has progressed at a much slower
pace, probably because these drugs are categorised as Class A in the UK (Schedule I in the US), and
researchers who wish to obtain them therefore face numerous regulatory barriers.
Nevertheless, it now seems quite clear that psychedelic drugs have enormous potential for treating a wide
variety of psychiatric conditions. Much still remains to be discovered about exactly how they affect the
brain, however.
For example, optimising their clinical benefits will require a better understanding of how their molecular
structures are related to their activity, and of how each drug can be combined with psychotherapeutic
approaches to achieve the best results.
Furthermore, because most psychedelics can mimic the symptoms of naturally occurring psychoses – they
can, for example, induce hallucinations and disorganised thought processes – future researchmay reveal
some of the brain mechanisms underlying schizophrenia and related conditions.
The debate that occurred in the 1960s about the therapeutic use of LSD mirrors the one taking place today
over the use of MDMA, so the history of LSD experimentation could provide valuable lessons about how to
incorporate these controversial drugs into modern medicine.
32 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Moheb Costandi is a molecular and developmental neurobiologist who writes the Neurophilosophy blog
Further reading
The secret history of psychedelic research (Neurophilosophy)
Serotonin, psychedelics and depression (The Neuroskeptic)
Ketamine for depression: yay or neigh? (The Neurocritic)
Visions of a psychedelic future (Mind Hacks)
Vollenweider, F. X. & Kometer, M. (2010). The neurobiology of psychedelic drugs: implications for the
treatment of mood disorders.Nature Reviews Neuroscience; 11: 642-651.
2010/09/02 GUARDIAN NEWS: STEPHEN

HAWKING SAYS UNIVERSE NOT CREATED BY GOD
Physics, not creator, made Big Bang, new book claims
Professor had previously referred to 'mind of God'
Adam Gabbatt
Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why we exist, says
Stephen Hawking. Photograph: Bruno Vincent/Getty Images
God did not create the universe, the man who is arguably Britain's most famous living scientist
says in a forthcoming book.
In the new work, The Grand Design, Professor Stephen Hawking argues that the Big Bang,
rather than occurring following the intervention of a divine being, was inevitable due to the law
of gravity.
In his 1988 book, A Brief History of Time, Hawking had seemed to accept the role of God in
the creation of the universe. But in the new text, co-written with American physicist Leonard
Mlodinow, he said new theories showed a creator is "not necessary".
The Grand Design, an extract of which appears in the Times today, sets out to contest Sir
Isaac Newton's belief that the universe must have been designed by God as it could not have
been created out of chaos.
"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing,"
he writes. "Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the
universe exists, why we exist.
"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."
In the forthcoming book, published on 9 September, Hawking says that M-theory, a form of
string theory, will achieve this goal: "M-theory is the unified theory Einstein was hoping to find,"
he theorises.
33 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
"The fact that we human beings – who are ourselves mere collections of fundamental particles
of nature – have been able to come this close to an understanding of the laws governing us
and our universe is a great triumph."
Hawking says the first blow to Newton's belief that the universe could not have arisen from
chaos was the observation in 1992 of a planet orbiting a star other than our Sun. "That makes
the coincidences of our planetary conditions – the single sun, the lucky combination of Earth-
sun distance and solar mass – far less remarkable, and far less compelling as evidence that
the Earth was carefully designed just to please us human beings," he writes.
Hawking had previously appeared to accept the role of God in the creation of the universe.
Writing in his bestseller A Brief History Of Time in 1988, he said: "If we discover a complete
theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind
of God."
Hawking resigned as Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University last year

after 30 years in the position.
2010/09/02 GUARDIAN BLOG FESTIVAL:

THE MOSASAUR'S KINKY TAIL
For centuries scientists routinely straightened the tails of Mosasaur fossils in their reconstructions. But a
recent re-examination changed overnight the way they see the sea-going lizards
Brian Switek blogs at brianswitek.com
34 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
The marine predator Platecarpus, a mosasaur with a downward-kinked tail that was perfect for cruising in
the open ocean. Illustration: Johan Lindgren/PLoS One
On 6 April 1821 – a little more than two decades before their countryman Richard Owen would coin the
term "Dinosauria" – the English naturalists Henry de la Beche and William Conybeare presented a report
on a peculiar group of fossil animals to their fellows in the Geological Society of London. One of the
subjects of their paper, the long-necked marine reptile Plesiosaurus, made its academic debut that night,
but the others were already familiar to the scholars in attendance. CalledIchthyosaurus, these fossil
creatures seemed to have been cobbled together out of equal parts fish and crocodile, and even during
this era of pre-evolutionary palaeontology, de la Beche and Conybeare could not help but place
Ichthyosaurus in what they believed to be a graded series of forms between fish, the newly
discovered Plesiosaurus, and crocodiles.
At the time of their report, de la Beche and Conybeare did not have much to work with. Popular accounts
of the marine reptile had made Ichthyosaurus famous, yet a significant portion of its skeleton remained
unknown. The tireless efforts of one of the first expert fossil collectors –Mary Anning, of "She sells
seashells on the seashore" fame – provided naturalists with more complete specimens, showing the
various species of Ichthyosaurus to be crocodile-like reptiles with straight, tapering tails. Restorations
remained true to the animal's "fish lizard" moniker, and when Richard Owen examined an Ichthyosaurus
with a kink in the distal part of its tail, he came up with a series of scenarios by which the tail of the dead
individual may have become bent. (My personal favorite: that part of the tail had become bloated with gas
during decomposition and pulled the spinal column out of place.)
But Owen, as well as the various scientists and artists who had reconstructed Ichthyosaurus with a straight
tail, was wrong. Exceptionally well-preserved ichthyosaur specimens discovered in the 1890s from
Holzmaden, Germany, exhibited dark-coloured "halos" – created by bacteria that ate away at the carcasses
as they laid on the bottom of the Jurassic seas – which represented the body shapes of these animals. Not
only did Ichthyosaurus have a fleshy dorsal fin, but the downward tailbend was not a pathology – it was a
normal feature which supported a large tail in the shape of a crescent moon.
Re-examined in this light, it became clear that even specimens preserved without soft-tissue impressions
had vertebrae near the end of their tails that were wider at the top than at the bottom; a sure sign of a
downward-kinked tail that supported a large caudal fin.
The image of Ichthyosaurus changed overnight. The piscivorous predator was not a big amphibious lizard
with paddles where its hands and feet should be; it was a streamlined, fusiform creature which more
35 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
closely resembled a shark than any lizard. By the close of the 19th century, the issue was settled, but
spectacular specimens continue to change what we thought we knew about prehistoric life.
One such skeleton, found in the middle of Kansas in the 1960s, sat in storage for years, but a re-
examination has caused scientists to reconsider what they thought they knew about another marine
reptile – amosasaur called Platecarpus.
Many books and documentaries cast mosasaurs among the many "also-rans" that lived alongside
the dinosaurs between 98 and 65 million years ago.
A genus or two – usually Mosasaurus and Tylosaurus – get mentioned now and again, but the larger swath
of mosasaur diversity is rarely elucidated. These marine reptiles, which were much more closely related to
today's Komodo dragons than any dinosaur, were the fiercest predators of the Cretaceous seas, with many
species occupying a range of habitats from near-shore to the open ocean. Most were not streamlined
speed hunters like the ichthyosaurs, but instead looked like seagoing lizards; they were ambush predators
that propelled themselves out of their hiding places with their long tails.
Among the most common of these marine predators was the species Platecarpus tympaniticus (named by
the notorious "bone sharp" Edward Drinker Cope in 1869), and one century after it was first described an
unusually complete specimen was collected from the well-known Niobrara Chalk in Kansas – a formation
representing a time when a shallow sea covered much of western North America.
Shortly after it was excavated in the 1960s, the Platecarpus skeleton (known as LACM 128319) was stored
in the collections at California's Natural History Museum in Los Angeles County. For one reason or another,
it sat there, undescribed for decades, but in August of this year a team of palaeontologists led by Johan
Lindgren of Sweden's Lund University at long last published a report on the specimen in the journal PLoS
One.
Not only did it retain traces of soft tissues – including skin impressions and a reddish residue on its ribs that
may be the remnants of its heart or liver – but its tail contained a distinctive set of vertebrae that were
wider at the top than at the bottom. Platecarpus, just like Ichthyosaurus, had a downward-kinked tail that
probably supported at least a modest tail fin.
Specimen LACM 128319 was not the first mosasaur skeleton to show signs of a tail fluke. In 2007, Lindgren
led a different set of colleagues in describing the skeleton of a specialised form of mosasaur found in
California called Plotosaurus (a specimen of which has also been found sporting soft-tissue impressions).
The end of its tail sported a modified portion of vertebrae that looked extremely similar to the tail
arrangement of sharks (just flipped down inside of up).
Along with a streamlined body that was deep from top-to-bottom, Plotosaurus was a mosasaur adapted to
cruising in the open ocean – it was a mosasaur built like an ichthyosaur.
The skeleton of Platecarpus was not as specialised for pelagic life as that of Plotosaurus, but the
examination of the new specimen shows that it was an intermediate form between the early, lizard-like
mosasaurs and the last, highly streamlined types.
What is curious, however, is that the new specimen of Platecarpus represents yet another case of a marine
reptile that independently evolved a downward tailbend. Ichthyosaurs did, some seagoing crocodiles (such
as Geosaurus) did, and now we know that some mosasaurs did. Putting this in an even wider context,
sharks have the same kind of tail, but their spinal column kinks upward and the fleshy part of their tail is
below. In marine reptiles it is the other way around – with the spinal column bent downward – and
perhaps there is some kind of shared evolutionary constraint, inherited from their last common ancestor,
36 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
that caused the tails of marine reptiles to consistently bend downward when evolving this kind of
propulsion.
As yet, such an evolutionary constraint has not been identified, but if it could be discerned, such a quirk of
natural history might help us better appreciate how contingency and constraint shape evolution's grand
pattern.
Brian Switek blogs at brianswitek.com
2010/09/02 TELEGRAPH: SCIENCE FUNDING

CUTS RISK HI-TECH COMPANY EXODUS
Government warned that physics-based businesses will suffer if public funding of science research is cut in
the autumn spending review
Richard Tyler
A researcher at Southampton University's Optoelectronics Centre checks readings. On the left the machinery can be seen
melting glass to procude fibre optic cable
Hi-Tech companies have called on the Government to minimise cuts to science funding, warning that any
significant reduction in the October spending review could reduce investment in research and
development.
Whitehall has signalled that research funding faces cuts of between 15pc and 30pc, a scenario the Institute
of Physics told the Chancellor George Osborne was "disastrously short-sighted".
In a letter seen by The Daily Telegraph, the institute's president, Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell, wrote:
"Science and innovation have the potential to be one of the major drivers of growth in a rebalanced
economy. But R&D is mobile; the best researchers will follow the funding, and high technology businesses
will follow the researchers."
Jonathan Flint, chief executive of Oxford Instruments, echoed the warning. "We run the business in the UK
because we have access to world-class physicists. We are in a very dangerous position."
37 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Mr Flint added: "Have we got spare physicists lying around in the UK? There are none. I recruit as many as I
can. When I run out I go to Europe and then to China.
"And in a competitive world you either win or you don't. We have to be the best. As soon as [leading
physics research teams] sense we are not funding things well they will be off to another country that
does."
Stephen Bold, managing director of Sharp Labs Europe, said his Japanese parent company, which invests
£14m a year in the UK, was "very concerned about the availability of very good physics graduates in the
UK."
He added: "The majority of that money is spent on salaries and with local organisations like universities. I
just don't think the Government has thought this through. The money you spend on universities attracts
inward investment to do R&D here and that is big business."
Mr Bold said Sharp was committed to its 20-year-old laboratory at Oxford Science Park, where it employs
120 physicists, but wanted more public investment rather than less.
"It's the entire environment that's important. It's impossible to reduce the physics research and not have
an impact on that."
2010/09/02-05 SOLO10 TWEET

TRANSCRIPT
September 2, 2010
8:11 am simon_frRT @BoraZ: What science bloggers blog about ? the results are in! http://bit.ly/cavu6E #solo10
antz:
8:12 am simon_frRT @BoraZ How can science teachers use blogs? http://bit.ly/cU0kTN #solo10
antz:
9:49 am petermur#solo10: Green Chain Reaction starts to deliver Open Notebook Science and Open
rayrust:
Patentshttp://bit.ly/bAWnC7
10:42 am iainh_z:BMC Research Notes ? adding value to your data (we want your
standards!) http://bit.ly/dkCVw6#opendata #solo10
12:14 pm physicus:Off into town. Looking fwd to joining the Diamond Light Source synchrotron visit to Oxford tonight with
#solo10
1:52 pm scijourntrWould anyone be interested in a #solo10 unconference session on online science resources/help/forums for
ain:
non-specialist journalists?
2:13 pm VivRaper:Does anyone want to talk about my blog topics data at #solo10? Am happy to send you data or chat. Tweet
me
2:47 pm scisu:@rubp you can follow a twitter list compiled by @LouWoodley of #solo10 attendeeshttp://bit.ly/9iTGQY
2:49 pm researchrLiked "#solo10: Green Chain Reaction starts to deliver Open Notebook Science and Open
emix:
Patents"http://ff.im/-q6ccf
4:19 pm simonhoPMR Blog: ABCD of Open Scholarship http://bit.ly/dcTpPf #jiscmrd #jiscexpo #solo10
dson99:
4:21 pm Ed_Rial:Hope you #solo10 guys coming to @DiamondLightSou like Insertion Devices - we've got a couple of
interesting designs in our ring...
4:22 pm jackofkenWill be speaking on "Science Writing and the Law after #SinghBCA" - 13.15 tomorrow at
t:
@soloconf #solo10: http://bit.ly/9MqfN
4:36 pm KatAkingFor science lovers everywhere ... http://bit.ly/12hByi #solo10
bade1:
5:14 pm alicebell:Topeople in adjacent offices / students in corridor: I'm not talking to myself, I'm rehearsing my #solo10 talk
for tomorrow.
5:18 pm parragueThinking about proposing my work "technology and knowledge transfer under the open innovation
zr:
paradigm" for #solo10 unconf.Feedback welcome!
38 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
5:33 pm lauradesiThinking of proposing my Msc Thesis "Reciprocity and investment: the role of social media in fostering
gn:
serendipity" #solo10
5:37 pm psigrist:@lauradesign love it - do it :) #solo10
6:02 pm alicebell:@kieronflanagan I have written both my #solo10 talks up as blogposts, with links and extra background, etc.
Will publish over weekend.
6:02 pm NewShooBlimey! Diamond is BIG! Glad to see they spent my budget wisely! #solo10
t:
6:56 pm scibuff:And we've arrived #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2klitp
7:13 pm sarahkendebating whether to join the #solo10 pub crawl.... it's a bit of a walk, been on my feet all day and my foot is
drew:
suffering...
7:24 pm scibuff:@sarahkendrew what pub crawl?! #solo10
7:24 pm sarahken@scibuff this one! http://www.scienceonlinelondon.org/programme.php?tab=fringe-programme#solo10
drew:
7:27 pm scibuff:.@sarahkendrew dammit I really
should have checked the programme #solo10
7:32 pm akshatratAt
the diamond light source, learning about the many things tht have been achieved by the use of the
hi:
synchrotron. #solo10
7:41 pm NewShooDiamond. Shiny! #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2kluqi
t:
8:00 pm scibuff:Diamond's storage ring #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2klzj4
8:05 pm NewShooUndulator insertion device. Diamond. #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2km0ul
t:
8:46 pm sjcockell:Much pre-#solo10 drinking and talking. May eventually eat/sleep tonight, but having fun regardless...
9:51 pm akshatrat@scibuff I really like your website. Must meet you at #solo10 for some tips. Hope you don't
mind me bugging
hi:
you.
10:09 pm hywelowI designed that bit! RT @DiamondLightSou: RT @scibuff: Diamond's storage ring
en:
#solo10http://twitpic.com/2klzj4
10:32 pm Ed_Rial:Hope the #solo10 tweeple enjoyed their tour of @DiamondLightSou tonight. Have fun tomorrow and Sat!
11:54 pm akshatratAt @diamondlightsou. Inside the building. Standing on top of the storage
hi:
ring.http://twitpic.com/2knqv2 #solo10
11:58 pm akshatratThe Allotrope: Science Online London http://bit.ly/cDOm4V #solo10
hi:
September 3, 2010
12:03 am physicus:V.enjoyablevisit to the Diamond Light Source cyclotron this evening. Thanks to @diamondlightsouand
@mattfromlondon #solo10
12:17 am physicus:O.K., synchrotron, not cyclotron. You know what I mean. It's late..:) @diamondlightsou #solo10
2:40 am BoraZ:The Allotrope: Science Online London http://bit.ly/d1KIMx #solo10
4:43 am andrewspong:I'll be participating in #solo10 today, so will be missing #hcsmeu at 1pm CET. Here are today's
Qs:http://bit.ly/c8Ss46 @whydotpharma
5:19 am oxleyresidencBlaaarg, up at stupid o'clock, mad dash in car, run across town and *just* made train to #solo10
es:
5:25 am mentalindigesUp at stupid o'clock in the morning, mad dash in the car then run across town and *just* made the train to
t:
#solo10 #hothungrytired
5:28 am tacoe:Boarding a quick London flight to find out if Science Online is any fun #solo10
6:32 am orbitingfrog:On my way to #solo10 and hoping the the new popularity if Macs means someone else will have the
DisplayPort adapter I've forgotten.
6:33 am TheBigPotatoePotato @MartynPerks will be at Science Online conference on science, the digital and
s:
networkshttp://upcoming.org/event/6043133/ #solo10
6:52 am mattfromlondUp extra early to go talk science with a Lord, an ex-MP, a TV presenter and a ton of great people at #solo10
on:
7:12 am andrewspong:Listening to the Cephalic Carnage back catalogue to get me in the mood for #solo10. Seems eminently
appropriate :)
7:45 am parraguezr:Btw If anyone is interested in open innov, tech & knowledge transfer I have something prepared 4 the
unconf at #solo10 www.advient.net/pedro
7:54 am JoBrodie:1/2 archive of the #solo10 tweets started by @wollepb at http://twapperkeeper.com/hashtag/solo10- useful
for catching missed tweets, links.
8:00 am JoBrodie:2/2 iPhone Twtdck tip: type #solo10 in new tweet, cancel (press the circled x above Q or 1) & save. New
tweets now have the hashtag loaded.
8:04 am Argent23:Tweeting the #solo10 twitter wall http://twitpic.com/2kra0x
8:15 am JoBrodie:Hi #solo10 captive audience :) Where do you post, or look for, science communication jobs? Always keen to
expand list at http://is.gd/1KPor
8:15 am aallan:Emptied the #solo10 conference bag. Kept the bag, left the rest in a pile. When will conference organisers
stop filling bags with junk?
39 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
8:18 am TwistedBacteriLiked "Science Online London 2010 #solo10" http://ff.im/-q9ROD
a:
8:20 am joergheber:At Science Online London! #solo10 (@ British Library w/ @londonist) http://4sq.com/2f3S1b
8:24 am LouWoodley:Game of the morning so far: how many people look like their avatars? #solo10
8:37 am grgirlinlondon:for anyone interested, I've created a #solo10 tweet archive at http://wthashtag.com/Solo10 :)
8:39 am sjcockell:#solo10 filling up http://twitpic.com/2krh9c
8:54 am rpg7twit:Just now at #solo10: @mjrobbins : "@edyong209 is always so fucking perky"
9:01 am JoBrodie:@north5 Can you follow
#solo10 at http://wthashtag.com/Solo10 orhttp://twapperkeeper.com/hashtag/solo10?
9:05 am imascientist:Hey, how come @ShaneMcC has 'Speaker' on his badge and I don't? Hmph! #solo10
9:12 am aallan:I thought it was #solo10 not #soloconf? Wireless not working... http://twitpic.com/2kropp
9:12 am brunellalongo:At #solo10 Martin Rees to give us a fresh vision of the future of science - after the Reith
Lecturehttp://bit.ly/cAQHjv
9:13 am orbitingfrog:Is it #solo10 or #soloconf? Either way, here's a blatant plug for @chromoscopehttp://www.chromoscope.net
9:13 am LouWoodley:@mjrobbins your glasses are on the registration desk by the entrance #solo10
9:13 am TheXchangeTeCalling all science tweeps at #solo10 ! Please fill out the sci-tweet survey! http://bit.ly/cv09bM Have a great
am:
couple of days.
9:15 am mfenner:Martin Rees starts keynote by giving historical perspective of how Royal Society was started in 1660 #solo10
9:16 am twhyntie:@edyong209 How about "Cough if you believe in M-Theory"? #solo10
9:17 am mfenner:Royal Society started science journal, peer review, and other things we now take for granted #solo10
9:17 am razZ0r:Martin Rees http://bit.ly/18v2K6 keynote speech on the start of the Royal Society #solo10
9:18 am aallan:"...the universal language of science is bad English," Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal at #solo10#soloconf
9:18 am sjcockell:"in the 2010s printed journals are anachronistic" Martin Rees #solo10
9:19 am mfenner:Martin Rees: 1st science journal Philosophical Transactions started in 17th cent. Authors were advised
against "swellings of style" #solo10
9:19 am IanMulvany:#solo10 http://www.jstor.org/pss/531255 < interestingly oldenburg was imprisoned on suspicion of spying,
early pressure on science freedom!
9:19 am rpg7twit:Martin Rees @soloconf #solo10 http://tweetphoto.com/42976139
9:19 am AJCann:Martin Rees dealing well with audience heavily engaged with sit forward media at #solo10
9:20 am andrewspong:'Printed journals are anachronistic' Sir Martin Rees Me: maybe also: licensed journals per se, peer review as
it exists etc. #reform #solo10
9:20 am liquidizer:"Online journals" - refers to distribution. Interactivity is hugely important as well of course. #solo10
9:20 am alexwade:Royal Society is encouraging members to drop print subscriptions in favor of electronic (Sir Martin Rees @
#soloconf #solo10)
9:21 am mfenner:Martin Rees: scientific journals and books should become online, print is outdated #solo10
9:21 am pssalgado:Sir Martin Rees: Journals online versions offer more; printed versions are anachronistic #solo10
9:21 am morphosaurus"The universal language of science is bad English" - Martin Rees. My students do punctuate their reports with
:
"innit"... #solo10 #soloconf
9:21 am gbilder:DOI for first Phil Trans: http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1665.0001 #solo10
9:22 am tweeterpeter:Martin Rees at #solo10: academic monograph is obsolete & inefficient - need new format urgently
9:22 am sjcockell:'scientific information and ideas should be absolutely and freely available to everyone' #solo10
9:22 am razZ0r:Martin Rees: Printed versions of journals are anachronistic. #solo10
9:22 am quantum_tunAt #solo10, listening to Martin Rees. http://post.ly/vNc3
nel:
9:22 am AJCann:RT @llordllama: Most academics have a weak understanding of copyright let alone creative commons
#oer #otter found #solo10
9:22 am jasonhoyt:Sir Martin Rees - Scientific ideas...should be freely available to everyone, academic or not #solo10
9:23 am bmcmatt:Martin Rees' opening keynote notes that printed journals now pretty pointless, printed monographs in
humanities even more so #solo10
9:23 am mfenner:Martin Rees: scientific information and ideas should absolutely be freely available to everybody, not just
institutions #solo10
9:23 am j_timmer:Rees gives the arXiv a big plug at #solo10
9:23 am jamesdadd:Journal access should be freely available to everyone not just those in research institutes Martin Rees,
Astronomer Royal #solo10 #soloconf
9:23 am AJCann:Martin Rees being refreshingly candid about journal referees - the physicists have us life scientists beat on
peer review #solo10
9:24 am tweeterpeter:Rees at #solo10: finds that papers in arXiv get quicker (better?) feedback than those submitted to peer
review
9:24 am edyong209:Sir Martin Rees: "Someone once told me that the mean no. of readers of a scientific paper was 0.6... Does
that include referee?" #solo10
9:24 am rpg7twit:@mfenner is the twitter wall picking up #solo10 alone?
40 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:24 am alexwade:Martin Rees: Paul Ginsparg transformed the literature for physics and established a new model for
scholarship #soloconf #solo10
9:24 am bmcmatt:Martin Rees, president of the Royal Society, is a big fan of #openaccess and notes huge benefits of Ginsparg's
ArXiV for his field #solo10
9:24 am mfenner:Martin Rees: Paul Ginsberg and ArxiV transformed publishing in physics, he personally looks at ArXiV every
day #solo10
9:24 am fischblog:Rees: "I personally look into arxiv almost every day." #solo10
9:25 am mendeley_coMartin Rees: Putting his papers on arXiv makes him fret less about slow reviewers, often gets better
m:
feedback than from peer review. #solo10
9:25 am mfenner:Martin Rees: journals remain important #solo10
9:25 am fedorajen:#solo10 use repositories in addition to traditional journals to provide access and review Marin Rees
9:25 am aallan:"The mean number of readers of a paper in a scientific journal is 0.6... wondered whether this included the
referee?" Martin Rees #solo10
9:26 am mfenner:Martin Rees: most publishers have agreed on the inevitability of some form of open access #solo10
9:26 am andrewspong:'Accreditation of journals may be trumped by approval of peers' Sir Martin Rees #solo10 <-- He's making me
like him even more :) #R4
9:26 am bmcmatt:Interesting that Royal Soc does not yet publish any fully open access journals though. (@PointofPresence ?
Anything in the works?) #solo10
9:28 am j_timmer:Rees: Royal Society journals will move a close to open access as they can while still balancing the books.
#solo10
9:28 am fischblog:It's always about money. Am I the only one who finds this depressing? #rees #solo10
9:28 am mfenner:Martin Rees: All Royal Society journals make articles freely available to journalists and bloggers #solo10
9:29 am andrewspong:There's a wonderfully subversive echo of the inevitability of the demise of trad STM publishing running
through this :) #solo10
9:30 am alexwade:http://www.research4life.org/ providing the developing world with access to scientific lit. cited by Martin
Rees #soloconf #solo10
9:30 am tweeterpeter:Rees at #solo10: blogs & wikis now an important part of the scientific literature
9:30 am BobOHara:Royal Soc waits longer to make physical science freely available, even though they're already on arXiv hmm
#solo10
9:31 am phillord:@rogeroge #solo10 the cost needs lowering to publisher and author. I can publish on my blog for nearly
nothing. Why OA cost 1000 dollars?
9:31 am IanMulvany:#solo10 my favourite paper by M. Rees: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1974MNRAS.169..395BNozzle jets
FTW!
9:31 am petermurrayru#solo10 Martin Rees some discoveries will be made by brute force data mining. Great to hear this
st:
9:31 am tweeterpeter:Rees at #solo10: data-mining & mashing will provide a new kind of scientific discovery
9:32 am mfenner:Martin Rees now moved from publishing science to doing science, talks about open data, including citizen
science #solo10
9:32 am mrgunn:@rogeroge ceasing to lose money chasing outdated business models would be a good start. #solo10
9:32 am pssalgado:Sir Martin Rees: some discoveries are achieved by brute force rather than special insight. It can now be done
by anyone, anywhere #solo10
9:33 am ayasawada:Martin Rees owns a playstation? #solo10
9:33 am tweeterpeter:Rees at #solo10: open science enables amateurs (e.g. astronomy, biology) to make a real contribution
9:34 am mfenner:Martin Rees: wiki-style collaborations are catching on in mathematics #solo10
9:34 am egonwillighag#solo10 @petermurrayrust why is that surprising? data mining is just theoretical science... that has proven
en:
itself already... not?
9:34 am christineotteryRees: Progress of science will be driven by tech and large-no crowdsourcing 'wiki' science eg Galaxy Zoo
:
project #solo10
9:34 am the_zooniversSir Martin Rees talks about @galaxyzoo in #solo10 keynote. Join in at http://galaxyzoo.org
e:
9:34 am egonwillighag#solo10 @petermurrayrust just think of the periodic table... wasn't that data mining? (sure, different scale...)
en:
9:35 am mfenner:Martin Rees: researchers cluster in institutions, but online collaboration very efficient #solo10
9:35 am TwistedBacteriRT @pssalgado: Sir Martin Rees: some discoveries are achieved by brute force rather than special insight. It
a:
can now be done by anyone, anywhere #solo10
9:35 am jjaron:Yep: http://bit.ly/97hOGdRT @mfenner: Martin Rees: wiki-style collaborations are catching on in
mathematics #solo10
9:36 am tweeterpeter:Rees at #solo10: internet & open science make sci research more widely distributed, but still need clusters of
scientists
9:36 am mfenner:Martin Rees: now talks about education, using MIT OpenCourseWare and Open University as examples
#solo10
41 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:36 am AJCann:Martin Rees - Universities need to add value to the educational experience in the digital era #solo10
9:36 am kjhaxton:#soloconf #solo10 Shameless Plug: British Science Festival Session on online
Chemistryhttp://bit.ly/b0yRsa 16/09, 13:00 Aston Uni
9:36 am ChemSpider:"Some discoveries will be made by brute force rather than scientific insight" Martin Rees #solo10#soloconf
9:36 am alokjha:At #solo10 in British Library - Martin Rees on web's impact on science. Better collab on huge datasets, also
inc access to best lecturers
9:36 am kaythaney:Lord Rees, Astronomer Royal, citing new initiatives involving amateurs : GalaxyZoo, FoldIt and the Polymath
project #solo10
9:37 am moomoobull:If papers go free to journalists and bloggers, scientists will need to present their work more clearly. Most are
incomprehensible. #solo10
9:37 am JennyRohn:When Arts Council gives £ to film producer, taxpayers don't expect to see result for free - what makes
science different? #solo10 #soloconf
9:37 am mjrobbins:Happy to report that rogue elements attempting to start a #solo10 hash tag have been mercilessly crushed
by we of the #soloconf
9:38 am mfenner:Martin Rees: access to literature in the humanities still difficult for lay people, ironic that access is easier in
high-energy phys #solo10
9:38 am jamesdadd:Science heading toward 'brute force' research where the limitation is computational power - distributed
computing a solution? #solo10
9:39 am d_swan:Sir Martin Rees opens with a wide-ranging and on-message keynote for #solo10 - OA, citizen science,
OpenCourseware, arXiv all get a nod
9:39 am tweeterpeter:Rees at #solo10: mustn't forget arts & humanities, esp. as we're in the Brit Lib ( libraries = arts &
humanities??? - discuss)
9:39 am aallan:Why you shouldn't have #twitterfall running in the background during the
talks, http://j.mp/92wkGc.#solo10 #soloconf (via @zephoria)
9:40 am alicebell:Rees' raises a very important point about (the lack of) humanities online #solo10 #soloconf Need more open
access hums and hums bloggers
9:40 am tweeterpeter:Rees at #solo10: don't forget those researchers outside uni's etc - they must pay for access to resources that
uni staff take for granted
9:41 am edyong209:Rees: Comments on blogs and emails can give authors far more useful input than they get from referees.
#soloconf #solo10
9:41 am ayasawada:RT @imascientist: OK peeps, the PROGRAMME says #solo10 is the hashtag. So can we fix the twitterfall pls?
#soloconf
9:42 am andrewspong:'Many of us have a strong prejudice against the rip-offs that commercial publishers [propagate]' #solo10
9:43 am andrewspong:'We don't want new journals' Sir Martin Rees #solo10
9:43 am mbonett:Nice gender balance in audience at #solo10 wonder how many are techies vs comms?
9:45 am jschneider:@rdmpage Hope you meet my colleague @julieletrice at #solo10. Julie researches how science messages
spread on the web, esp. to the public.
9:45 am PaoloViscardi:No comments on today's mystery object yet: http://bit.ly/aP2MfE I guess my regulars are all at
#solo10 which is here: http://bit.ly/cciZsM
9:46 am christineotteryBloomsbury humanities imprint open access: ebook with extra metadata to sell to libraries to fund it. Call for
:
consortium buying #solo10
9:46 am TwistedBacteriRT @aallan: "...I think new journals are damaging and should be resisted," Martin Rees #solo10#soloconf
a:
9:47 am steinsky:Or the librarians could pool their resources and their own expertese, and that of their academics, and do it
themselves :o #solo10 #soloconf
9:48 am aallan:"...there is no such thing as free content, but the scientists generate the content. What do the publishers
add?" #solo10 #soloconf
9:48 am TwistedBacteriRT @simon_frantz: Martin Rees on journals: When people ask me if I want to be on a new journal, I say no
a:
b/c we don't need any more journals #solo10 #soloconf
9:48 am tweeterpeter:Rees at #solo10: discussion: Frances Pinter (Bloomsbury) - publishes #oa books in arts/hum - business model
depends on *library* budgets
9:48 am andrewspong:RT @danielintheory: "we do not want more [academic] jnls...commercial pressures are detrimental [to
community]" Lord Martin Rees #solo10
9:49 am ayasawada:Does @mjrobbins always wear the same shirt? #solo10
9:49 am LouWoodley:Rebooting Science Journalism panel at #solo10 (minus twitterfall)
9:49 am andrewspong:Interesting discussion as to whether commercial publishers are reforming, managing their staged decline, or
circling the drain at #solo10
9:49 am AJCann:Surprised & disappointed that this grouping wants to distance themselves from the audience #solo10
9:49 am ayasawada:Liking @edyong209's T-shirt though. He wins best dressed award for this session. #solo10
9:50 am CameronNeylo@andrewspong Agree and disagree. Need less journals but more effective markets to ensure we get good
n:
42 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
value for money #soloconf #solo10
9:50 am mfenner:Now Rebooting Science Journalism with Dobbs, Bell, Yong and Robbins #solo10
9:50 am steinsky:Publishers always seem to suggest solutions that require a layer of publisher middlemen... #solo10(*i* didn't
say this ;))
9:51 am christineotteryI'm taking twitter questions from those that aren't here at #solo10 to put to the panellists of Re-booting Sci
:
Journ. Hit me with it
9:52 am habib:@IanMulvany I will be discussing how Elsevier adds value during your session #solo10
9:52 am christineottery@ianhuston I'm reading and will ask for you #solo10 - if you make it good ;)
:
9:53 am phillord:@pssalgado #solo10 #soloconf then quite a few publishers owe me cash
9:53 am llordllama:@AJCann Rebooting Sci Journ? Are they turning it off and on again...? #solo10
9:53 am ishzz:What about free access to the journals to researchers of Third World #solo10
9:54 am DrEvanHarris:At #solo10 science online conf - great opener frm Martin Rees. Now panel: Sci journalism w/ @david_dobbs;
@mjrobbins, @alicebell, @edyong209
9:54 am LouWoodley:Key questions: How do science journalists as individuals move forward? + how does science journalism as a
whole move forward? -Dobbs #solo10
9:55 am simon_frantz:DD: 2 big Qs for him -- How do science journalists move forward and how does science journalism move
forward #solo10 #soloconf
9:55 am mfenner:Dobbs: how can I personally continue being a science writer in changing environment #solo10
9:55 am imascientist:Dobbs: Blogs, etc mean there is more good science writing online than ever before - journos have prob of
competing with that #solo10
9:56 am CameronNeylo.@andrewspong I suspect the answer to your question is "Yes" to all. And its not just the commercial
n:
publishers #solo10 #soloconf
9:56 am beck_smith:@David_Dobbs There is more good science writing online than ever before - esp from those who do it in
addition to 'day jobs' #solo10
9:57 am mfenner:Dobbs: Science writing skills that will stay in changing environment: accuracy, perspective, transparency,
good writing #solo10
9:57 am joergheber:#solo10 #soloconf @David_Dobbs: how can paid MSM journalists compete with free bloggers <- long format
writing, features etc. I think!
9:57 am ChemSpider:Martin Rees also said that the progress of science will depend on large numbers of people where proximity is
not an issue. #solo10 #soloconf
9:57 am VivRaper:Watching David Dobbs. Interesting - my husband thinks no room for professional science writers in future
because of amateur content #solo10
9:57 am christineotteryDobbs: How do we make science blogging sustainable, money & time? How do journos compete w/ bloggers
:
who do same for less money? #solo10
9:57 am mfenner:Robbins: science journalism has never been better #solo10
9:58 am VivRaper:David thinks there's a physical (staying up until 2am after the day job) limit to amateur content #solo10
9:58 am jamesdadd:There is a real need for me to have iPad so I can follow the meta discussion as well as the panel discussions
at #solo10
9:58 am AJCann:Top science bloggers? OMG, the cult of celebrity #solo10
9:59 am aallan:If there is no such a thing as free content then the academic publishers owe me money. Writing for
@oreillymedia pays the bills. #solo10
9:59 am simon_frantz:DD: skills journalists can use in new env.--accuracy, depth, perspective/access, transparency, write
accurately/engagingly #solo10 #soloconf
9:59 am fischblog:If there is more good science writing around than ever, good science wiriting stops being a viable business
model #blogs #lournalism #solo10
9:59 am LouWoodley:Scienceblogs resulted in mass commercialisation of science blogging - @mjrobbins #solo10
9:59 am christineottery@joergheber Limited amount of outlets for longform sci writing is a challenge #solo10
:
9:59 am DrEvanHarris:#solo10 @mjrobbins says sci journalism never been better. >> Maybe, but that is not the same as media
coverage of sci getting better
10:00 am AJCann:Top science bloggers writing on commercial platforms? Has this guy never heard of RSS? Who cares about
platforms? #solo10
10:00 am mfenner:Robbins: no crisis in journalism, but crisis in business models and format #solo10
10:01 am VivRaper:#solo10 Science journalists tend to stick offline content online and most coverage is c**p (Martin Robbins - I
think. Recognise the shirt)
10:01 am mfenner:Robbins: PDF format is an insult to science #solo10
10:01 am christineotteryRobbins: PDF journal papers an insult to the internet - why aren't journals doing more? #solo10
:
10:01 am LouWoodley:Quality
of science writing from media outlets can be poor: unimaginative, no links, sometimes inaccurate -
@mjrobbins #solo10
43 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:01 am CameronNeylo"The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit Morse Code"
n:
#solocon #solo10
10:01 am VivRaper:@PaoloViscardi I hope he's right! A big issue for young science writers like me though is we don't have a
career model to follow #solo10
10:02 am AJCann:Do you think BBC News would have started linking to original articles without being made to look bad by
science bloggers? #solo10
10:02 am petermurrayru#solo10 PDF's for science are like inventing the telephone to transmit morse code
st:
10:02 am egonwillighagRT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
en:
Morse Code" #solocon #solo10
10:03 am ianhuston:Agree that PDFs are probably not the way to deliver science in future. Problems with reflow & non-A4
screens (tablets) already here. #solo10
10:03 am mfenner:Robbins: There is no reason to believe that what we do now will be relevant to science communication in 10
years #solo10
10:03 am gimpyblog:RT @mfenner: Robbins: PDF format is an insult to science #solo10 <==very very stupid point. pdf ensures
accurate reproduction of figs
10:03 am ishzz:@PointOfPresence we dont get free access to many journals of #asm #wiley. #solo10
10:04 am LouWoodley:"Performance, feedback, revision" is the solution for science journalism - @mjrobbins #solo10
10:04 am akshatrathi:PDF format is an insult to science says @mjrobbins #solo10
10:04 am christineotteryYES! @mjrobbins I agree there's no set way of blogging I hate that 800 word limit! #solo10
:
10:04 am imascientist:Robbins: The key prob in sci comm and sci journalism is no one is experimenting<<spk for yourself!;-) #solo10
10:04 am VivRaper:Some older journalists who served their time find this scary #solo10 They are well established and have loud
voices :)
10:04 am north5:QFT! #solo10 @mjrobbins : "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to
transmit Morse Code"
10:04 am whittybus:Not enough innovation in science writing people just trying to figure out the rules. Martin Robbins #solo10
10:05 am beck_smith:@mjrobbins Slate have had a good response to their experimental attitude e.g. long form
blogging:http://bit.ly/cA7PPH #solo10
10:05 am phillord:@nicoadams #solo10 Sad you aren't here! Was good to meet last year.
10:05 am PointOfPresenIf the PDF is such an insult to science, why do journal readers overwhelmingly download them in preference
ce:
to the HTML?!! #solocon #solo10
10:11 am AJCann:So basically, what you're all saying is that publishers no longer add sufficient value? #solo10
10:12 am simon_frantz:Ed Yong quotes Jeff Jarvis: Do what you do best, link to the rest http://bit.ly/bNT7bP #soloconf#solo10
10:12 am imascientist:RT @pssalgado Can we hv twitterfall back on pls? just realised it enhances experience, even if it's distracting
at times #solo10 #soloconf
10:12 am VivRaper:Ed Yong says part of the problem is repeating PR copy, by retweeting or not realising what PhysOrg does
#solo10
10:12 am Pathh1:Science is underpinned by quality and novelty of research. How does sci journalism ensure these? Does is
need peer review? #soloconf #solo10
10:12 am lauradesign:Liked this quote RT @whittybus: Do what you do best, link to the rest, says Ed Yong at #solo10
10:12 am d_swan:"churnalism" a new term for me, but like it a lot - unverified repetition of science stories #solo10
10:12 am imascientist:Ed railing against churnalism. Hear hear. #solo10
10:13 am PointOfPresen@AJCann Then can you explain that to the right hand panellist? It was his remark I was responding to.
ce:
#solo10
10:13 am PhilDRoberts:RT @andrewspong: Sage advice from @edyong209 on chosing subjects to blog about: 'do what you do best;
link to the rest' #solo10
10:13 am mfenner:Ed Yong: we are sleepwalking in the same old traps, example of simply retweeting something without
background checking #solo10
10:13 am sjcockell:accuracy is neccesary but not sufficient for being good - @edyong209 #solo10
10:13 am julie_bee:Anytime anyone retweets something without verifying the source, that's part of the problem.
#unverified tweet #solocon #solo10 #soloconf
10:13 am mentalindigesI always read the links I retweet. By retweeting them it's my credibility (partly as a scientist) on the line.
t:
#solo10
10:14 am imascientist:Ed: Being accurate is necessary, but not sufficient, for being good at science writing < v true #solo10
10:14 am VivRaper:@edyong209 How can I fact-check everything I retweet? It would take hours! #solo10
10:14 am kejames:Good advice... RT @whittybus: Do what you do best, link to the rest, says Ed Yong at #solo10
10:14 am VivRaper:RT @imascientist: Ed: Being accurate is necessary, but not sufficient, for being good at science writing < v
true #solo10
10:14 am jamesdadd:I wonder if anything real will come out of #solo10 or will it just be talk?
10:14 am beck_smith:@mjrobbins The brilliance of Baba Brinkman - website: http://bit.ly/dmp7cl Performance, feedback, revision
44 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
vid: http://bit.ly/aj32nL #solo10
10:15 am akshatrathi:On science writing: Being accurate is necessary but not enough to be good says @edyong#solo10
10:15 am pssalgado:@edyong209 blind RT, blogging w/out checking is part of problem of scicom. Accuracy, critical analysis are
important #solo10 #soloconf
10:15 am msmiji:Ed Yong: don't forget, ppl still have make a living doing sciwriting #soloconf #solo10
10:15 am TrendsLondon#solo10 is now a #TT in #London http://trendsmap.com/gb/london
:
10:15 am egonwillighag@julie_bee I would argue a tweet is undefined... may not be a true statement, just a pointer to something
en:
potentially interesting #solo10
10:15 am GozdeZorlu:R liked @edyong209's comments on making use of web for providing context to news (ie @StoryTracker) to
reveal the nature of science #solo10
10:15 am bmcmatt:Bloggers criticizing researchers/publishers for using PDF reminds me a little of librarians complaining about
academics using Google #solo10
10:15 am imascientist:Now @alicebell on. Says we should take sci journalism upstream. Then apologises for jargon and metaphor. <
don't apologise Alice! #solo10
10:15 am pssalgado:RT @christineottery: Ed: "Do what you do best, link to the rest" #solo10
10:15 am VivRaper:@kjhaxton I use 'writer', actually. I've found I get better interviews from scientists. Scientists don't like
journalists #solo10
10:15 am ChemSpider:"Do what you do best and link to the rest" Ed Yong on science blogging and journalism #solo10#soloconf
10:15 am mfenner:Bell: science writing should go upstream, talk about science in the making #solo10
10:16 am VivRaper:@mentalindigest Yes. I always read the links I retweet. But I can't check an interesting story is
wrong/inaccurate #solo10
10:16 am imascientist:Alice referring to Demos report on taking sci comm upstream. Thinks Willets a fan < I always thought that
report said nothing new #solo10
10:16 am razZ0r:"churnalism" journalism of not checking, just posting and RTing blindly. new medium, old problem.
#soloconf #solo10
10:17 am VivRaper:What did @alicebell say about writing boring stuff about scientists going rafting? Missed it (someone drilling
outside) #solo10
10:17 am bmcmatt:i.e. it's important not simply to moan about it, but to understand the reasons why PDF is what researchers
find useful right now #solo10
10:17 am akshatrathi:Writing about science in the making will solve the trust issues that public has with science says @alicebell.
#solo10 really? I don't buy it
10:17 am mfenner:Bell: you can't report something that is not peer reviewed is a lame stick #solo10
10:17 am JonMendel:RT @imascientist: Ed: Being accurate is necessary, but not sufficient, for being good at science writing < v
true #solo10
10:17 am pssalgado:@alicebell "look science in the eye" #solo10 #soloconf
10:18 am imascientist:Alice: Science reporting shouldn't be at the end of the process. Can show the whole story, scis as real ppl, scis
as a process #solo10
10:18 am TwistedBacteriRT @VivRaper: Ed Yong reiterates "do what you do best and link to the rest", which news orgs don't do
a:
#solo10
10:18 am rpg7twit:RT @bmcmatt: important not simply to moan about it, but to understand the reasons why PDF is what
researchers find useful right now #solo10
10:18 am imascientist:Alice: We also need sci journalism to go VERY VERY downstream - look into the future, poss outcomes
#solo10
10:18 am AJCann:Sigh. So much for my conference targets. #solo10 descending into a discussion of buisness models.
10:18 am LouWoodley:Sci journalism doesn't need to follow the linear flow of publishing - should be able to convey works in
progress #solo10
10:18 am mendeley_co@jamesdadd Several unconference suggestions are about ongoing app/tech/data linking development
m:
projects. #solo10
10:19 am kjhaxton:Showing scientists as people vital to engaging public and encouraging minorities to participate #solo10
10:19 am PaoloViscardi:Damn right. RT @mentalindigest: RT @christineottery: @edyong209 "Do what you do best, link to the rest"
#solo10
10:19 am bmcmatt:NB PDF doesn't mean 'lacking in social links and metadata', any more than MP3 means music is lacking in
social links and metadata #solo10
10:19 am DrEvanHarris:#solo10 Problem w/ @alicebell's calls for upstreaming of sci journalism isn't just pre-peer review but can't
check if true if pre-publicatn
10:19 am christineotteryBell: write about scientists and their lives not just their results. < a move away from churn and towards
:
*gasp* journalism #solo10
10:19 am egonwillighag#solo10 #soloconf churning in tweets is a non-issue... tweets are not the correct platform to worry about
en:
that... 140 chars are just no.....
45 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:19 am imascientist:@akshatrathi I don't think she said *solve*, but help #solo10
10:19 am AJCann:You want downstream, but you want Twitterfall turned off. Hmm. #solo10
10:19 am aallan:Not sure that @alicebell is right when she says that scientists trust science journalists. I've been misquoted
far too many times... #solo10
10:19 am beck_smith:@alicebell talking about Demos 'See through Science' paper http://bit.ly/bqjAJS and idea of taking sci
journalism upstream #solo10
10:20 am mentalindiges@VivRaper True, it comes down to trust in the source, access to original data and your own professional
t:
judgment #solo10
10:20 am MyScienceCarMartin Rees: progress of science will be driven by technology that makes physical proximity irrelevant
eer:
#solo10
10:21 am fischblog:Writing less about results and more about the process of science sounds nice, but it's not what editors want,
in my experinence. #solo10
10:21 am imascientist:Alice gives David Rose as good eg of using twitter for immediate coverage #solo10
10:22 am axiomsofchoichttp://yfrog.com/2m3fqpj Newton at the British Library #solo10
e:
10:22 am DrEvanHarris:#solo10 @alicebell's calls for seeking to have sci discuss working b4 publicatn. But science must preserve
process of prepare then publish
10:22 am SRP:PDF isn't that much different to HTML; they are both just formats for rendering things on paper and screen.
Why be so hard on PDF? #solo10
10:22 am JonMendel:@DrEvanHarris also worth emphasising that peer review isn't good at detecting many types of false results,
though #solo10
10:23 am wikinews030:#solo10 and science without sex is also boring if endless, isn't it? -> #kondomwerbung swedsex forbidden
#kiez (#joke)
10:23 am PhilDRoberts:Twapper Keeper of all #solo10 tweets created by @wollepb see http://bit.ly/bTWxSI [me: great resource to
pull all the URLs links from]
10:23 am d_swan:Wasn't expecting much from the science journalism panel discussion but it's extremely entertaining and
informative #solo10
10:23 am kieronflanaga@alicebell talking sense about science journalism at #solo10. Let's finally ditch the post-WWII pipeline model
n:
- science is an activity...
10:38 am akshatrathi:Anti-science community problem: easy answer make yourself trustworthy but very hard to do. #solo10
10:38 am AJCann:RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
#solo10@petermurrayrust http://bit.ly/mooooooooooooooooooooo
10:38 am CameronNeylo@bmcmatt To expand. Now that "printing off" is becoming less imp there is a big opp for publishers to lead
n:
in collab with rsrchers #solo10
10:38 am bmcmatt:Should point out: esp. with our #opendata work @BioMedCentral *is* doing a lot to create richer non-PDF
web versions of articles #solo10
10:38 am VivRaper:@edyong209 Websites need more savvy names to compete with anti-science websites that do #solo10
10:39 am GozdeZorlu:@ayasawada can speak to scientists, publishers - can have more diverse conversations than just talking to
other sic journos #solo10
10:39 am LouWoodley:Reputation is important, Don't be afraid to cry "bullshit" and be aware of tricks used to make pseudo-science
more prominent online #solo10
10:39 am AJCann:Uh oh, ClimateGate! #solo10
10:39 am kieronflanaga@DrEvanHarris Point is that it doesn't only become science after review. Much regulatory science & science
n:
advice not peer rev'd... #solo10
10:39 am imascientist:Err, hard to be trustworthy? RT @akshatrathi Anti-science community prob: easy answer make yourself
trustworthy but very hard to do. #solo10
10:39 am razZ0r:Dobbs: no reason that the finished paper has to be the basic unit of science. what about (raw) data,
methods, etc? #solo10 #soloconf
10:40 am chem_showcaClearly need touch screen practise! As sum1 who works in commercial publishing I'm enjoying #solo10 does
se:
any1 want my #fringefriv ticket?
10:40 am kjhaxton:RT @CameronNeylon: Funders 1st interest is maximising ROI. Career structures is a 2nd issue. Public funding
is not a sheltered housing scheme for PhDs #solo10
10:40 am bmcmatt:@daycoder #solo10 "Can we see half written unfinished articles by journalists, too?" In fact
@bengoldacre often posts half-finished articles
10:40 am kieronflanaga@DrEvanHarris ...got to see p review for what it is, just one element in the process. Fetishising p review
n:
ultimately damages sci. #solo10
10:41 am DrEvanHarris:#solo10 @edjong209 points out that Anti-science types are often higher on google searches. True. So we
need to stick to scientific strengths
10:41 am ananelson:@bmcmatt What does the #solo10 hashtag relate to?
10:41 am blJOg:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
46 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:41 am VivRaper:@daycoder Sure. Would love you to proofread and criticise my awful first drafts! #solo10
10:41 am razZ0r:'the paper' and 'the journal' are historical artifacts. #solo10 #soloconf
10:41 am jamesdadd:"The published paper should not be the end" - suggesting datasets should be made available for publication
also #solo10
10:42 am mfenner:Yong: look at feedback (traffic stats, comments) to decide which of your blog posts are particularly
newsworthy #solo10
10:42 am ishzz:Can anyone plz rotate the camera so that we can see the audiences too. #solo10
10:42 am bengoldacre:@bmcmatt ooh hello, had no idea #solo10 was on. but yes. eg here http://bit.ly/b2uNRw
10:42 am beckcea:Q&A started @ #solo10 [...] great debate: how to top the ' google' charts and traffic flow.
10:42 am DrEvanHarris:@kieronflanagan I agree with that but should not abandon it, or other parts of the scientific method just coz
slow or not perfect #solo10
10:42 am nantel:Today it's #solo10, tomorrow it will be something else.
10:42 am AJCann:Can "The Public" eat datasets? Let them eat journalism cake. #solo10
10:43 am icecolbeveridg@DrEvanHarris EIther that or work on our SEO #solo10
e:
10:43 am VivRaper:Yay! Dobbs has always worked long and slow (long-form journalism)! #solo10
10:43 am LAScienceBL:Most big STM publishers use XML. PDF is for reading. Wonderful things could be done with the XML. #solo10
10:43 am imascientist:Q fr @alokjha - how to get eds to let sci journos put sci in? Ed: look at actual stats - ppl want real 'this is cool'
sci covge #solo10
10:43 am AJCann:Dude, you need your network to filter for you #solo10
10:43 am ishzz:Rt @AJCann Can "The Public" eat datasets? Let them eat journalism cake. #solo10
10:44 am andrewspong:RT @nantel: Today it's #solo10, tomorrow it will be something else. <-- it's on tomorrow, too ;)
10:44 am mrgunn:RT @CameronNeylon And all of this assumes that the only thing we can publish is "a paper". We could easily
publish smaller things #solo10
10:44 am almileke:RT @LouWoodley: Reputation is important, Don't be afraid to cry "bullshit" and be aware of tricks used to
make pseudo-science more prominent online #solo10
10:44 am j_timmer:Good thing about embargoes: easy to organize freelancers in advance. Distribute papers, get timing sorted
out, etc. #solo10 #soloconf
10:45 am alexdenhaan:RT @rubp: Most scientists I work with are not playing the online game so the first challenge getting them
online. #solo10
10:45 am Lambo:Wish I were there... Keep up the twittering/blogging, #solo10 partipicants!
10:45 am AJCann:Bloggers ARE the filter! #solo10
10:45 am akshatrathi:#solo10 I propose an unconference session on: how to make the public think critically using science writing?
10:45 am beckcea:where the most relevant info lies?! #solo10 ± is there a trend with english speaking speakers are shadowing
other language spkrs wh same tpk
10:46 am rubp:#solo10 there's Idea collaborative filtering: where the most relevant information is for me. #toomuchjunk
10:46 am LouWoodley:Blogs are really badly searchable - no one has yet solved this problem - Robbins #solo10
10:46 am imascientist:Q abt lack of filtering on blogs. Alice: curate your crowd/network and they do it for you. Dobbs: big love for
twitter #solo10
10:46 am jamesdadd:Who would be the published dataset be for? @AJCann #solo10
10:46 am CameronNeylo@alicebell: "Filtering is job for the audience, something to be done collaboratively. Not a responsibility for
n:
blogs" -my paraphrase #solo10
10:46 am VivRaper:Questions about searching blogs. Dobbs: Twitter is a single powerful conduit for evaluation and information
online. #solo10
10:47 am mfenner:Dobbs: Twitter is the single most useful filter of useful information #solo10
10:47 am VivRaper:Robbins: People using social networks as editors #solo10
10:47 am rubp:RT @LouWoodley: Blogs are really badly searchable - no one has yet solved this problem - Robbins #solo10
10:47 am LouWoodley:@akshatrathi You need to write unconference suggestions on the board in the upstairs foyer (if it's still up)
#solo10
10:47 am DrEvanHarris:#solo10 what's the cleese joke that @david_dobbs tantalised us with? My guess is "I'll have a screwdriver"
"Anything I can fix?"
10:47 am imascientist:Dobbs: 'It's hard to overstate the power of twitter' #solo10 <grin
10:47 am AJCann:@jamesdadd Peers? Raw data indigestible for most? #solo10
10:47 am rubp:RT @CameronNeylon: @alicebell: "Filtering is job for the audience, something to be done collaboratively.
Not a responsibility for blogs" -my paraphrase #solo10
10:48 am akshatrathi:#solo10 we are becoming each others' editors... bleep bleep bleep bleep bleep bleep bleep
10:48 am ishzz:and the science bloggers are the filtrate. RT @AJCann Bloggers ARE the filter! #solo10
10:48 am akshatrathi:#solo10 I agree with the guy in the audience. Journalists should do the filtering but should provide more info
so that readers can find it.
47 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:48 am lauradesign:#solo10 twitter praised by David Dobbs as bullshit filter
10:48 am VivRaper:Question: Reporting on Hawking has been a dreadful mess over last 48 hours. Mentions Guardian's yes/no
poll #solo10
10:48 am pssalgado:Q: "Non-english bloggers: do they have a relevant presence?" Few eg in Portugal, several in Brasil, growing
community and audience #solo10
10:48 am kyleplacy:RT @lauradesign: #solo10 twitter praised by David Dobbs as bullshit filter
10:49 am drnickmorris:Using twitter as your editor..... Is 'crowd sourcing' the answer? #solo10
10:49 am MyScienceCar@alicebell: curate a (online) crowd that's useful to you to filter info from news, blogs, journals, twitter, etc.
eer:
#solo10
10:49 am Kate_Travis:@alicebell: curate a (online) crowd that's useful to you to filter info from news, blogs, journals, twitter, etc.
#solo10
10:49 am VivRaper:Robbins: Not all the fault of journalists, re: Hawking. He's got a new book out #solo10
10:49 am DrEvanHarris:@DT_1975 Think #solo10 tweets are asking the wrong questions. Sci-reporting isn't a prob. Bad sci-reporting
by non-sci journalists is>>agree
10:49 am PhilDRoberts:@CameronNeylor agree that the PDF is bad and more journals are stopping publishing supplementary
data http://bit.ly/aGwiv6 #solo10
10:49 am CameronNeylo@kjhaxton Yes. I would argue that failures should be released quickly. Success maybe argument for holding
n:
back a little for checking #solo10
10:49 am fedorajen:#solo10 PDF and HTML aren't ideal but wondering how we'll handle them when they're dead? Conversion?
We're pretty entrenched.
10:50 am VivRaper:@alicebell It's easy to point fingers, but it's not productive. Don't always blame journalists #solo10
10:50 am PhilDRoberts:@CameronNeylor but publishing data straight to the web without proper data architecture and/or API is also
just as bad #solo10
10:50 am jamesdadd:An open access dataset cloud platform would seem to be a sensible move for storage and sharing
@AJCann #solo10
10:50 am andrewspong:RT @Kate_Travis: @alicebell: curate an online crowd to filter info from news, blogs, journals, twitter, etc.
#solo10 <-- #myniche #hcsmeu
10:50 am zemogle:Is Cheggers sitting at the front of #solo10 ?
10:50 am GozdeZorlu:@david_dobbs hard to overstate the power of twitter as a quality filter #solo10
10:51 am rubp:#solo10 can any scientist here, been to a more formal scientific conf. Know if Twitter is being used like here?
10:51 am DrEvanHarris:@mjrobbins says "being the first to a story, why not strive to provide the best version of it?" #solo10>>
because you also need readers!
10:51 am VivRaper:@ishzz Ha! Ha! Re: Why Hawking is a trending Twitter topic... IS because the reporting is a mess #solo10
10:51 am rhysmorgan:RT @DrEvanHarris: @DT_1975 Think #solo10 tweets are asking the wrong questions. Sci-reporting isn't a
prob. Bad sci-reporting by non-sci journalists is>>agree
10:51 am fischblog:Twitter als Filter, Hawking-Berichterstattung in der Presse. Gute Gedanken bei #solo10 grade
10:52 am VivRaper:Question: Do press officers need to be trained to be journalists in university press offices? To take a critical
view #solo10
10:52 am imascientist:Q fr floor: Talk about rebooting news, but can we reboot the press office? *murmur of agreement in room*
<oh dear, fight upcoming? #solo10
10:52 am Pathh1:"Raw data indigestible?" Amazed to hear of 100s of downloads of 26GB wheat sequence this week - what do
people do with it? #solo10 #SOLOCONF
10:52 am CameronNeylo@PhilDRoberts Agree with sentiment but don't think it hurts to publish disorg stuff. We need material
n:
around which to build APIs #solo10
10:52 am ishzz:RT @VivRaper: @ishzz Ha! Ha! Re: Why Hawking is a trending Twitter topic... IS because the reporting is a
mess #solo10
10:52 am wikinews030:#solo10 -> #kondomwerbung!
10:52 am andrewspong:Please consider turning off my #solo10 firehose today using http://muuter.com if I'm bugging you. Thanks! :)
10:52 am drnickmorris:Scientist - press officer- journalist: press officer is often the problem and just interested in selling the
institution #solo10
10:52 am harrietvickers:#solo10 Do we need to train press officers as journalists?
10:52 am akshatrathi:I would rather read an economist style science magazine which gives quality content and opinion in few
words and then contemplate. #solo10
10:53 am GozdeZorlu:Questions re God/Guardian poll. Not helpful. Agree: @alicebell - don't blame journos for rel between
scientists/public. Dawkins? #solo10
10:53 am CameronNeylo@PhilDRoberts Google couldn't have been built if there wasn't a morass of web pages there to use as data
n:
and create obvious need #solo10
10:53 am bmcmatt:@jamesdadd re "openaccess cloud platform for data storage/sharing" YES - lots going on in that space - join
panel discuss this pm #solo10
10:53 am christineotteryIf there was more time I would ask: @alicebell to answer @drevanharris Qs, and @edyong209 to answer
48 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
:@VivRaper on factcheck - depth? #solo10
10:53 am ayasawada:Our Wellcome press officers DO contribute to our news - I know it's not 'journalism' per se but what we do is
more than PR #solo10
10:54 am AJCann:That's lunch at #solo10. Twitter stream will slow down for a while - back at 13.15!
10:54 am ishzz:i wonder The gurdian has any good science reporter or not #solo10
10:54 am jamesdadd:@bmcmatt which one speaks to cloud computing? #solo10
10:55 am GozdeZorlu:Would like to know how many ppl at #solo10 use twitter?
10:59 am VivRaper:@ishzz Well. It's not trending because the reporting is a mess! It's trending because it's science v religion -
that old chestnut #solo10
11:00 am VivRaper:@edyong209 That's what I thought, re: fact-checking #solo10
11:01 am NewShoot:#solo10 any chance of a delegates list to help networking?
11:01 am Kate_Travis:Hmm, weird to walk into meeting room at #solo10 and see my pic on screen on twitterfall
11:01 am electronsholesRT @edyong209: Sir Martin Rees: "Someone once told me that the mean no. of readers of a scientific paper
:
was 0.6... Does that include referee?" #solo10
11:01 am ishzz:he was only talking metaphorically.RT @VivRaper: @ishzz Well. ess! It's trending because it's science v
religion - that old chestnut #solo10
11:02 am whydotpharm#hcsmeu Hello everyone! Welcome to today's session. I will replace @andrewspong who is at #solo10
a:
11:03 am ishzz:and who created gravity Mr. Hawking...RT @VivRaper: @ishzz Well. It's not trending because the reporting is
a mess! It's trending be #solo10
11:04 am miquelduran:It's nice to have competition at Science Online London #solo10 #udgamp10
11:05 am jamesdadd:'Beyond the publication - dataset sharing' I have put as an un-conference session suggestion.
#solo10 #soloconf
11:08 am tomlowe:@DrEvanHarris #solo10 or maybe SEO?
11:10 am OncologyTimeVery much enjoying reading tweets from #solo10 Science Online London conference
s:
11:10 am VivRaper:@taz3cat There isn't really a Stephen Hawking 'story', from what I can gather. It really is "physicist talks
religion" #solo10
11:13 am GozdeZorlu:Excellent session on future of sci journo at #solo10. Admittedly, I thought here we go "same old, same old".
Well done to the panelists
11:15 am andrewspong:@mcdawg @erikdigiredo @jkerrstevens if you're here: I am right at top of stairs, with half an eye on
#hcmeu (live) #solo10
11:22 am NewShoot:There's a bit of a @doctorow / stross men's fashion thing going on at #solo10 !!
11:30 am egonwillighagjust a few more years, and it has been said so much, that people consider it true @CameronNeylon"The PDF
en:
is an insult to science" #solo10
11:31 am jamesdadd:Going to go to the publishing primary research data breakout session. It seems it may touch upon data
sharing and cloud computing. #solo10
11:40 am mjrobbins:I thought my comment about PDFs would stir things up, and I wasn't wrong! Will write a blog at
guardian.co.uk/layscience on it tmw. #solo10
11:42 am TechCzech:@mjrobbins Not only don't PDFs make sense other than for replicating print, they're also an accessibility
nightmare. #solo10
11:42 am mjrobbins:@stevestein1982 @bmcmatt Not really, I'm a researcher in my day job, and that's where my annoyance at
pdfs comes from. #solo10
11:45 am DrEvanHarris:@piernes @Tenengyre "maybe SEO or web designer would help". SEO is an arms race 4 on-line attention.
Better to target policy-makers #solo10
11:45 am SfAMtweets:Mmm chocolate brownie at #solo10 was amazing!
11:46 am teachernz:@mjrobbins "PDF.. where documents go to die" (sorry...don't know the source of that quote) #solo10
11:48 am DrEvanHarris:@paulfreeman he metioned eg "age of autism" - I guess because they specialise in topics that are
newsworthy while sci pubs do not. E #solo10
11:54 am alicebell:@DrEvanHarris Mmm, I hate to say it, but strawmanning? ;) See more detail
herehttp://bit.ly/by3pRX #solo10
11:57 am AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: RoySoc encouraging members to drop print subs in favor of online subs ~ astronomer
martin rees, chair, @royalsociety #solo10 #solocon
11:59 am bmcmatt:Gulliver, the #OA turtle, looking forward to the open data session at #solo10http://twitpic.com/2kssf7
11:59 am AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: RoySoc: all papers OA for life sci 12mo after publication, 24mo for phys sci ~ astronomer
martin rees, chair, @royalsociety #solo10 #solocon
12:01 pm d_swan:Going to breakout 4 'from galaxy zoo to zooniverse'. Nothing to do with work, I just love astronomy. Should
really be in breakout 1! #solo10
12:04 pm Kate_Travis:Strategy to sit near power outlet failed; backup plan: sit near iPad users so i can see one in action. #solo10
12:04 pm razZ0r:going to breakout 1: Publishing primary research data #solo10 #soloconf
12:07 pm NewShoot:@GrrlScientist are you referring to the AHRC (open access) or BFI (lost in cuts!) #solo10
49 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:08 pm andrewspong:Suggest we use #b1 #b2 etc *plus* #solo10 for breakout sessions :)
12:09 pm moomoobull:@mrjobbins PDFs prevail because HTML (invented by scientists) is so bad at doing the stuff of science -
equations, data etc #soloconf #solo10
12:10 pm james_randersRT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream http://bit.ly/by3pRX << interesting
on:
piece
12:10 pm NewShoot:Looking forward to @jackofkent s talk. Will he wear his helm? #solo10 #soloconf
12:10 pm jamesdadd:@AnaDinescu @GrrlScientist is the audience 'the public' if so yes they will place a monetary value, if it is
academia well... #solo10
12:10 pm melissawm:RT @mrgunn: Sir Martin Rees: "Printed journals are anachronistic." #solo10
12:11 pm drnickmorris:Off to "Students in the sandbox" session - #solo10
12:11 pm JacAbsolute:RT @NewShoot: Looking forward to @jackofkent s talk. Will he wear his helm? #solo10 #soloconf
12:11 pm moomoobull:so my suggestion to upskill press officers with journalism skills didn't go down well with the science
journalists! #solo10 #soloconf
12:11 pm james_randers@alicebell #solo10 I agree that process is interesting. This works well in features but difficulty for news is no
on:
"event" to report on.
12:12 pm pssalgado:Tough decision between breakout 1 and 4. went with more "businessy" one. Now waiting to hear all about
publishing research data #solo10
12:13 pm harrietvickers:RT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream: blogged (with extra linkage
goodness) http://bit.ly/by3pRX
12:13 pm easternblot:Why are there so many free pens at a Science ONLINE meeting? #solo10
12:13 pm jobadge:ready for the #solo10 people to come along to @ajcann session 'students in the
sandbox'http://bit.ly/bbj7dm
12:13 pm sjcockell:In the room for breakout 2 - @jackofkent on post #SinghBCA science writing & the law #solo10
12:13 pm easternblot:RT @LouWoodley: Watercress sandwiches for lunch!! #solo10 #NatNet
12:13 pm tacoe:RT @GrrlScientist: the peer-review concept is under pressure, may have to be modified ~ astronomer martin
rees, chair, @royalsociety #solo10 #solocon
12:13 pm rpg7twit:Soothing music at #solo10
12:14 pm DiamondLightIn #solo10 session on publishing primary research data - interesting potential for synchrotron data
Sou:
12:14 pm gfpom:@easternblot free ipad haven't been delivered yet... #solo10
12:15 pm morphosaurusI'm in the Students in the Sandbox session. Anyone else primarily an educator? #solo10
:
12:15 pm andrewspong:'Publishing primary research data' #b1 in the auditorium at #solo10 is pretty busy.
12:15 pm aallan:In @orbitingfrog's Citizen Science breakout session here at #solo10.
12:15 pm jeanniedee:RT @GrrlScientist: "The universal language of science is bad English" ~ astronomer Martin Rees, chair,
@royalsociety #solo10 #solocon
12:16 pm d_swan:#solo10 wifi not great in room 3. Will pay attention to Robert Simpson instead.
12:17 pm franknorman:RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
12:17 pm pfanderson:@andrewspong I've asked & asked if #solo10 is doing the usual Second Life audience bit this year, with no
replies. I'd be there if there was
12:17 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: "science journalism has never been better" ~ @mjrobbins #solo10 #solocon
12:17 pm jamesdadd:There is a great dislike for PDF within science. As a web developer I have to agree #solo10#soloconf
12:18 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: there is no crisis in sicence journalism (except journos aren't paid very well, which is fair) ~
@mjrobbins #solo10 #solocon
12:18 pm brunellalongo:RT @daveyp: Has @briankelly been blurred to protect the innocent? #udgamp10 <<< I think we would have
appreciated him here at #solo10 too
12:19 pm mjrobbins:Not quite what I said! RT @GrrlScientist (except journos aren't paid very well, which is fair) ~
@mjrobbins #solo10 #solocon
12:19 pm allinthegutter:E. Is there any way to see the slides on the Ustream for #solo10 #soloconf?
12:19 pm Argent23:Now 'publishing primary research data' at #solo10
12:19 pm PhilDRoberts:zooniverse.org - citizen science being successful around a topic with good non-professional following #solo10
12:20 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @alicebell My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream: blogged (with extra linkage
12:20 pm mfenner:Matt Cockerill: prisoner's dilemma in data sharing. Nobody wants to be the only one #solo10
12:20 pm james_randers@alicebell #solo10 Not quite sure if this is what you mean by
on:
upstreaming http://bit.ly/azVsnNhttp://bit.ly/a39pJy
12:20 pm PhilDRoberts:zooinverse has 315,000+ users within their network #solo10
12:20 pm franknorman:RT @easternblot: Why are there so many free pens at a Science ONLINE meeting? #solo10
12:20 pm petermurrayru#solo10 PDF cow and PDF morse code are not my aphorisms - I just repeat them
st:
50 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:21 pm razZ0r:prisoners dilemma in data sharing. no one wants to be the only one. #solo10
12:21 pm mfenner:Matt Cockerill: open data is more difficult technically than open access publishing. Larger challenges than
publishing PDF files #solo10
12:21 pm egonwillighagRT @easternblot: Why are there so many free pens at a Science ONLINE meeting? #solo10
en:
12:22 pm kejames:Zooniverse: citizen science done right. http://bit.ly/9l1lBR #solo10
12:22 pm edyong209:Fast fingers! RT @alicebell My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream blogged (with extra
linkage goodness) http://bit.ly/by3pRX
12:22 pm pssalgado:Matt Cockerill: "cloud computing is having a huge impact in research" #solo10
12:22 pm razZ0r:RT @easternblot Why are there so many free pens at a Science ONLINE meeting? #solo10
12:22 pm CameronNeylo@ajcann framing the discussion around education via Martin Wellers "pedagogy of abundance" Interactions
n:
matter rather than content #solo10
12:23 pm mrgunn:RT @LAScienceBL Most big STM publishers use XML. PDF is for reading. Wonderful things could be done with
the XML. #solo10
12:23 pm sciencegoddesIn the "Scientists in the Sandbox" breakout session previewing pedagogies of online education at #solo10
s:
12:23 pm joergheber:David Allan Green ( @jackofkent and Preiskel) now speaking on libel law. Quite a minefield. #solo10
12:23 pm MyScienceCarRT @mfenner: Matt Cockerill: open data is more difficult technically than open access publishing. Larger
eer:
challenges than PDF files #solo10
12:23 pm Kate_Travis:RT @mfenner: Matt Cockerill: open data is more difficult technically than open access publishing. Larger
challenges than PDF files #solo10
12:23 pm rpg7twit:Cos data packets fall out of the swagbags. #Freepens @easternblot #solo10
12:23 pm MMaayeh:RT @kejames: Zooniverse: citizen science done right. http://bit.ly/9l1lBR #solo10
12:24 pm mfenner:Cockerill: we need to set standards for open data publication, needs to be collaboration between
stakeholders #solo10
12:24 pm sciencegoddesLimiting step of online education is not the abundance of information but how to filter it and make it
s:
significant to the learner. #solo10
12:25 pm ChemSpider:"No one wants to be the only one to share data" Matt Cockerill on open data #solo10 #soloconf
12:25 pm IMAGuitarist:@sciencegoddess - How were the sandwiches? :) #solo10
12:25 pm AnaDinescu:RT @MyScienceCareer: RT @mfenner: Matt Cockerill: open data is more difficult technically than open
access publishing. Larger challenges than PDF files #solo10
12:25 pm CameronNeyloFrom Terry Anderson: "Ability to see connections is a core skill", "learning is a process of connecting
n:
specialised information" #solo10
12:25 pm kejames:Galaxy Zoo 2 & Galaxy Zoo Hubble present citizen scientists w/ a decision tree to score galaxies. Sound
familiar, taxonomists? #solo10
12:25 pm sjcockell:'You can incur legal liability in 140 characters' #solo10
12:25 pm yokofakun:watching #solo10 #video #streaming http://www.ustream.tv/channel/science-online-london-2010
12:26 pm drnickmorris:"Students in the sandbox" session - where is the sandbox? #solo10
12:26 pm andrewspong:RT @pfanderson: @andrewspong I've asked & asked if #solo10 is doing the usual Second Life audience bit
this year, with no replies. I'd be there if there was
12:26 pm GeekCalendar:At #solo10 conference listening to @jackofkent speaking on how @SLSingh libel case has changed science
writing "everyone's a pamphleteer"
12:27 pm razZ0r:Cockerill: publish all data needed to exactly reproduce all the numbers/results appearing in the study (or stg
like this) #solo10
12:27 pm CameronNeyloBUT: In tertiary ed reality. Lectures pushed tout to too many students, loss of quality. Connection and
n:
interactive learning rare #solo10
12:27 pm MyScienceCarHrynaszkiewicz et al at BMC developed guidelines for prepping raw clinical data for
eer:
publicationhttp://bit.ly/bZGm46 #solo10
12:27 pm Kate_Travis:Hrynaszkiewicz et al at BMC developed guidelines for prepping raw clinical data for
12:27 pm CTSciNet:Hrynaszkiewicz et al at BMC developed guidelines for prepping raw clinical data for
12:27 pm pssalgado:Iain Hz: "opendata later is better than no open data at all" #solo10
12:27 pm sciencegoddesOur speaker's blog and the presentation! Science of the Invisible: http://bit.ly/aNvdrR #solo10
s:
12:27 pm petewilton:RT @kejames: Zooniverse: citizen science done right. http://bit.ly/9l1lBR #solo10
12:28 pm aallan:The @galaxyzoo first data release, http://data.galaxyzoo.org/ #solo10
12:28 pm tacoe:RT
@CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
12:28 pm Argent23:RT @pssalgado: Iain Hz: "opendata later is better than no open data at all" #solo10
12:29 pm CameronNeylo@drnickmorris bit.ly/solo10doc is where the sandbox for the session is if that helps... #solo10#soloconf
n:
51 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:29 pm alicebell:Could be... RT @james_randerson: #solo10 Not quite sure if this is what you mean by
upstreaminghttp://bit.ly/azVsnN http://bit.ly/a39pJy
12:29 pm d_swan:Just had the entire audience gasp at a scatterplot at #solo10 GalaxyZoo talk. It was very cool though - a new
class of galaxy found by users
12:29 pm tektrekker:RT @kejames: Zooniverse: citizen science done right. http://bit.ly/9l1lBR #solo10
12:29 pm edyong209:Twitter during conferences is no more distracting than heavy bullet-pointed slides... #solo10#soloconf (not a
slight on current session)
12:29 pm CameronNeylo@ajcann "Does moving online to increase efficiency or reduce costs actually achieve this and does it reduce
n:
quality?" #soloconf #solo10
12:30 pm sciencegoddesIs online teaching cheaper? quicker? No, says Alan Cann at #solo10
s:
12:30 pm joethestampeRT @sciencegoddess: Limiting step of online education is not the abundance of information but how to filter
de:
it and make it significant to the learner. #solo10
12:31 pm pfanderson:RT @aallan The @galaxyzoo 1st data release, http://data.galaxyzoo.org/ #solo10
12:31 pm sciencegoddesHuge question for me...what about laboratory skills? We can't teach how to do a titration via second life--
s:
yet! :) #solo10
12:31 pm kejames:Two stunning citizen science success stories: Hanny's Voorwerp http://bit.ly/cGHqAh and Green Pea
Galaxies: http://bit.ly/cak5OG #solo10
12:31 pm pahlibrary:RT @Kate_Travis: Hrynaszkiewicz et al at BMC developed guidelines for prepping raw clinical data for
publication http://bit.ly/bZGm46 #solo10
12:31 pm pssalgado:Releasing data before paper submission not detrimental to paper acceptance/publication in BMC journals.
what abt other publishers? #solo10
12:31 pm drnickmorris:?@CameronNeylon: @drnickmorris bit.ly/solo10doc is where the sandbox for the session is if that helps.." I
was looking for real sand #solo10
12:32 pm YSJournal:RT @sciencegoddess: Our speaker's blog and the presentation! Science of the
Invisible:http://bit.ly/aNvdrR #solo10
12:32 pm TechCzech:RT @sciencegoddess: Limiting step of online education is not the abundance of information but how to filter
it and make it significant to the learner. #solo10
12:32 pm DrEvanHarris:@alicebell Not strawmanning by *me* ;-) See my comments on your http://bit.ly/by3pRX #solo10
12:33 pm campusprclareRT @kejames: Two stunning citizen science success stories: Hanny's Voorwerphttp://bit.ly/cGHqAh and
:
Green Pea Galaxies: http://bit.ly/cak5OG #solo10
12:33 pm mrgunn:Adam Farquhar from datacite speaking about digital deposit and preservation. #solo10
12:33 pm petermurrayru#solo10 BMC ask authors to dedicate their data to the public domain and follow Panton Principles.
st:
FANTASTIC!!
12:33 pm andrewspong:'BioMed Central supports the goals of the Panton Principles for Open Data in Science'http://ow.ly/2z224 |
BMC Blog #solo10 #STM #b1
12:33 pm CameronNeylo@ajcann Asked students to draw the tools that they used online as their Personal Learning Environment
n:
#solo10 #soloconf
12:33 pm mfenner:British Library measures shelving space in kilometers (they have about 650 km) #solo10
12:34 pm razZ0r:RT @kejames Two citizen science success stories: Hanny's Voorwerp http://bit.ly/cGHqAh and Green Pea
Galaxies: http://bit.ly/cak5OG #solo10
12:34 pm jamesdadd:The argument for open access has been won now it is a matter of time for alignment and access to be
granted freely #solo10 #soloconf
12:34 pm MyScienceCarHrynaszkiewicz notes that BMC policy (http://bit.ly/9Af8R4) doesn't exclude work that's been discussed on
eer:
blogs #solo10 #openscience
12:34 pm Kate_Travis:Hrynaszkiewicz notes that BMC policy (http://bit.ly/9Af8R4) doesn't exclude work that's been discussed on
12:34 pm pssalgado:>600Km shelving space at British Library! #solo10
12:34 pm CTSciNet:Hrynaszkiewicz notes that BMC policy (http://bit.ly/9Af8R4) doesn't exclude work that's been discussed on
12:34 pm aallan:RT @kejames: Two stunning citizen science success stories: Hanny's Voorwerphttp://bit.ly/cGHqAh and
Green Pea Galaxies: http://bit.ly/cak5OG #solo10
12:34 pm mrgunn:RT @aallan The @galaxyzoo first data release, http://data.galaxyzoo.org/ #solo10
12:34 pm CameronNeylo@ajcann: Not many surprises in what services used but none of these services talk to each other. Not used in
n:
a social way #soloconf #solo10
12:34 pm defjaf:I always forget that most scientists are biologists/medics, which are radically different professions than
physics. #solo10
12:34 pm petermurrayru#solo10 I love the hamburger/cow and telephonemorse code PDF analogies; but they're not mine
st:
12:35 pm razZ0r:Adam Farquhar Head of Digital Technology at The British Library on data sharing, citation, and (re)use.
#solo10
52 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:35 pm jobadge:@CameronNeylon true, and yet there was no distinction in their PLE maps between social services and
academic ones for 'learning' #solo10
12:35 pm CameronNeylo@ajcann: Therefore can a "Personal Learning Network" to leverage social interactions to build a learning
n:
environment? #solo10 #soloconf
12:36 pm allinthegutter:E. Wow, according to @orbitingfrog a few people have managed to classify **ALL** the galaxies in
@GalaxyZoo. #solo10 #soloconf
12:36 pm mrgunn:RT @mfenner British Library measures shelving space in kilometers (they have about 650 km) #solo10
12:36 pm jkerrstevens:Finally made it to #solo10. Chatting in the margins, spying on @shanemcc
12:36 pm jobadge:for everything that @ajcann has written about using FF with students (and others) see his
bloghttp://bit.ly/9nLMWh #solo10
12:36 pm rubp:What is good data? Or what makes data good ? #solo10
12:37 pm rpg7twit:Breakout 1 at #solo10 #meta http://tweetphoto.com/42996024
12:37 pm PointOfPresenDidn't we vote to take the twitterfall off the screen during the actual talks? #solo10 #soloconf
ce:
12:37 pm kejames:Ground rules for citizen science: 1) be open about your research goals (don't try and trick people into
helping
you)...(1/2) #solo10
12:37 pm conorcbarnes:On point as I start @RutgersBSchool classes this week RT @sciencegoddess Is online teaching cheaper?
quicker? No, says Alan Cann at #solo10
12:37 pm jamesdadd:The british library is becoming the steward for dataset preservation. #solo10
12:37 pm science3pointRT @yokofakun: watching #solo10 #video #streaming http://www.ustream.tv/channel/science-online-
0:
london-2010
12:37 pm MyScienceCarsee also our recent Science Careers article on open science: http://bit.ly/c9E0ZW #solo10
eer:
12:37 pm SciCareerEdito@Kate_Travis of #ScienceCareers is live-tweeting from #solo10, Science Online London.
r:
12:38 pm Sheril_:Science Online London 2010 sounds terrific: Program http://bit.ly/aRZut3,
streamhttp://bit.ly/cciZsM hashtag #solo10 Would like 2 B there!
12:38 pm rubp:RT @CameronNeylon: @ajcann Asked students to draw the tools that they used online as their Personal
Learning Environment #solo10 #soloconf
12:38 pm ChemSpider:Biomed central looking to put the Panton Principles into practice also discussing the right formats for data
#solo10 #soloconf
12:38 pm mfenner:Datasets are crucial component of the scholarly record. #solo10
12:38 pm mrgunn:Farquhar: Datasets are part of the scholarly record. #solo10
12:38 pm pssalgado:"Most scientists"?! What does that mean? How unscientific of you... RT @defjaf forget that most scientists
are biologists/medics #solo10
12:38 pm razZ0r:how to link, identify and cite datasets? gap between datasets and articles. #solo10
12:38 pm kejames:(2/2)... 2) Treat participants as collaborators, not as subjects, 3) Don't waste people's time. #solo10
12:38 pm defjaf:I always forget that most scientists are biologists/medics, which are radically different professions than
physics. #solo10 #soloconf
12:38 pm JacAbsolute:RT @CameronNeylon: @ajcann Asked students to draw the tools that they used online as their Personal
Learning Environment #solo10 #soloconf
12:39 pm zemogle:Alan Cann: now the scare resource is adding value to information through education #solo10
12:39 pm fedorajen:#solo10 no widely used method to cite/ identify /link datasets.
12:39 pm imascientist:Am so sorry, @AJCann, really wanted to come to your session, but had to sacrifice that in favour of
rehearsing ours... #solo10
12:39 pm science3pointRT @Sheril_: Science Online London 2010 sounds terrific: Program http://bit.ly/aRZut3,
0:
12:39 pm fischblog:Mind the Gap ... between articles and datasets! #opendata #solo10
12:39 pm metaphorhackRT @TechCzech: RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
er:
#solo10 @petermurrayrust http://bit.ly/mooooooooooooooooooooo
12:39 pm jennifermjoneRT @jobadge: for everything that @ajcann has written about using FF with students (and others) see his
s:
blog http://bit.ly/9nLMWh #solo10
12:40 pm jamesdadd:Wow wonder what capacity british library have for digital dataset storage? Would or could there be online
access to this? #solo10 #soloconf
12:40 pm egonwillighagRT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 BMC ask authors to dedicate their data to the public domain and follow
en:
Panton Principles. FANTASTIC!!
12:40 pm JoBrodie:RT @edyong209: Fast fingers! RT @alicebell My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream blogged
(with extra linkage goodness) http://bit.ly/by3pRX
12:40 pm AgileRoxy:Big issue for me is student motivation, time mgmt RT @sciencegoddess Is online teaching cheaper? quicker?
No, says Alan Cann at #solo10
12:41 pm CameronNeylo@ajcann: Students using Facebook but this innappropriate for "professional" interactions => Friendfeed
n:
53 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
#soloconf #solo10
12:41 pm GeekCalendar:#solo10 @jackofkent now talking about the three degrees of libel chill: after publication, pre-publication and
self-censorship.
12:41 pm mjrobbins:Ties in with my PDF comments. RT @fischblog Mind the Gap ... between articles and datasets!
#opendata #solo10
12:41 pm franknorman:Really? RT @jamesdadd The british library is becoming the steward for dataset preservation. #solo10
12:41 pm razZ0r:DataCite promotes data sharing, increased access, and better protection of research
investment.http://bit.ly/9eSQfm #solo10
12:41 pm TechCzech:Some additional thoughts on interactions between practitioners, participants and researchers
onhttp://researchity.net #solo10
12:42 pm north5:@jamesdadd With increasing dataset size vs storage capacity - desired level of access to data will always be 5
years away. #solo10
12:42 pm rubp:Learning about DataCite Like CrossRef but for datasets DOI for data #solo10
12:42 pm mrgunn:RT @fischblog Mind the Gap ... between articles and datasets! #opendata #solo10
12:43 pm _ColinS_:This. Read it. RT @alicebell My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream blogged (with extra
linkage) http://bit.ly/by3pRX
12:43 pm phillord:#solo10 #soloconf DOIs don't always persist either and URI's can be made persistance. Society makes
persistance, not technology.
12:44 pm mfenner:Familiarity with DOIs for journal papers makes it easier for researchers to start using DOIs with datasets
#solo10
12:44 pm egonwillighagwell said! RT @phillord #solo10 #soloconf DOIs don't always persist; URIs can be made persistant; Society
en:
makes persistance, not technology
12:44 pm aallan:RT @phillord: #solo10 #soloconf DOIs don't always persist either and URI's can be made persistance. Society
makes persistance, not technology.
12:44 pm fischblog:I wonder what comes first: Complete integration of all kinds of Data or a system that can deal with the mess
we have now #opendata #solo10
12:44 pm BoraZ:RT @_ColinS_: This. Read it. RT @alicebell My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream blogged
(with extra linkage) http://bit.ly/by3pRX
12:44 pm SmarterSciencRT @sciencegoddess: Huge question for me...what about laboratory skills? We can't teach how to do a
e:
titration via 2nd life--yet! :) #solo10
12:44 pm rpg7twit:Citability and credit breaks into the prison #solo10
12:44 pm JennyRohn:Anyone at #solo10 have antihistamines? Would appreciate a Loratadine...
12:45 pm ChemSpider:DataCite - like CrossRef for datasets. Sounds v. exciting #solo10 #soloconf
12:45 pm jamesdadd:RT @north5: With increasing dataset size vs storage capacity - desired lvl of access to data will always be 5
years away. #solo10 #soloconf
12:45 pm rubp:RT @mfenner: Familiarity with DOIs for journal papers makes it easier for researchers to start using DOIs
with datasets #solo10
12:45 pm GozdeZorlu:Sad to be missing @jackofkent's session on libel law. Instead I'm at session on the open data movement
#solo10
12:45 pm BoraZ:RT @Sheril_: Science Online London 2010 sounds terrific: Program http://bit.ly/aRZut3,
12:45 pm rpg7twit:RT @JennyRohn: Anyone at #solo10 have antihistamines? Would appreciate a Loratadine...
12:45 pm brunellalongo:"Modern science relies on good data" A Farquhar BL #solo10 presenting Dataset discovery project. It requires
good information governance too
12:45 pm alokjha:RT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream http://bit.ly/by3pRX <- also interesting
comments here by @DrEvanHarris
12:46 pm mfenner:DRYAD project: integrate journal publication with deposition of datasets #solo10
12:46 pm BoraZ:Watching #solo10 hashtag today.
12:46 pm razZ0r:Dryad is a repository of data underlying sci pubs, with an initial focus on evol, ecology, and
related.http://datadryad.org/ #solo10
12:46 pm maricarjagger:RT @alokjha: RT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstreamhttp://bit.ly/by3pRX <-
also interesting comments here by @DrEvanHarris
12:46 pm David_Dobbs:RT @alokjha: RT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstreamhttp://bit.ly/by3pRX <-
12:46 pm rubp:RT @mfenner: DRYAD project: integrate journal publication with deposition of datasets #solo10
12:46 pm mja:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
12:47 pm fedorajen:RT @mfenner: DRYAD project: integrate journal publication with deposition of datasets #solo10
12:47 pm franknorman:RT @fischblog: I wonder what comes first: Complete integration of all kinds of Data or a system that can deal
with the mess we have now #opendata #solo10
54 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:47 pm fischblog:RT @mfenner: DRYAD project: integrate journal publication with deposition of datasets #solo10
12:47 pm rpg7twit:@BobOHara don't use Excel then #solo10
12:47 pm quantum_tun'Modern science relies in good data' Farquhar. #soloconf #solo10
nel:
12:47 pm chem_showcaAny1 else @ #solo10 using free pen to take old fashioned notes? Enjoying talk on publishing data but still
se:
need to rehome #fringefriv ticket
12:47 pm franknorman:RT @brunellalongo: "Modern science relies on good data" A Farquhar BL #solo10 presenting Dataset
discovery project. It requires good information governance too
12:47 pm jamesdadd:British library: Datacite.org datasets@bl.uk #solo10 #soloconf
12:48 pm DebbyAll:RT @_ColinS_: This. Read it. RT @alicebell My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream blogged
12:48 pm razZ0r:Promoting an infrastructure and incentives to encourage datas sharing by Simon Hodson #solo10
12:48 pm mrgunn:Simon Godson from JISC on their Managing Research Data program. #solo10
12:49 pm kejames:How on this blue-green Earth did you crank this out so fast, Alice? RT @alicebell My #solo10 talk
blogged http://bit.ly/by3pRX
12:49 pm sarahkendrew#solo10 nice plug for Project IX in @orbitibgfrog' citizen science session
:
12:49 pm GozdeZorlu:At the open data movement session. Going to the world's first data sharing conference (oxford uni) at end of
month #solo10
12:49 pm TwistedBacteriRT @razZ0r: DataCite promotes data sharing, increased access, and better protection of research
a:
investment. http://bit.ly/9eSQfm #solo10
12:49 pm David_Dobbs:Hi Bora! Wish you were here! RT @BoraZ: Watching #solo10 hashtag today.
12:50 pm fischblog:Everyone should. RT @BoraZ: Watching #solo10 hashtag today.
12:50 pm mfenner:Digital Curation Centre: because good research needs good data #solo10
12:50 pm svaroschi:RT @Sheril_: Science Online London 2010 sounds terrific: Program http://bit.ly/aRZut3,
12:50 pm pssalgado:"Good reseatch needs good data!" Simon Hodson #solo10
12:51 pm simon_frantz:RT @alokjha: RT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking sci. journalism upstreamhttp://bit.ly/by3pRX <- also
int. comments by @DrEvanHarris
12:51 pm gbilder:RT @phillord yes-persistence is social issue, not technical. Avantage of DOIs is level of indirection. Similar to
purls, noids, etc. #solo10
12:51 pm mfenner:@BoraZ we miss you here at #solo10. Rebooting Science Journalism session was again wonderful, so much
good stuff in there
12:53 pm franknorman:RT @gbilder: RT @phillord yes-persistence is social issue, not technical. Avantage of DOIs is level of
indirection. Similar to purls, noids, etc. #solo10
12:53 pm science3pointGalaxyZoo have a lot of projects!! #galaxyzoo #solo10 http://bt.io/Fvq3 (via @backtype)
0:
12:54 pm MishaAngrist:RT @David_Dobbs: Hi Bora! Wish you were here! RT @BoraZ: Watching #solo10 hashtag today. MA: Me too.
Looks like beaucoup fun!
12:54 pm pssalgado:"Value of data is important output of research" JISC via S. Hodson #solo10
12:54 pm mrgunn:Hodson: data is as important a research output as findings and interpretation. #solo10
12:54 pm johnbendevettRT @andrewspong: RT @AJCann: Good point. "The Paper" is not the indivisible particle of Science. It's a
e:
historical artifact. #solo10 <-- ditto 'the journal'
12:55 pm BobOHara:Lots of talk about storing data, but I suspect nobody on the panel involved in re-using it. Odd #solo10
12:55 pm mfenner:Digital preservation costs are consistently a small proportion of the overall costs #solo10
12:55 pm andrewspong:Live at 14.15 UK 'Health convo on soc web: lab or echo chamber?' http://slidesha.re/a2Mapu Add
#solo10 #b6 to comment #hcsmeu #hcsm [EDIT]
12:56 pm mrgunn:Hodson: storage & preservation is the smallest cost for an institution. #solo10
12:56 pm razZ0r:RT @mrgunn: Hodson: data is as important a research output as findings and interpretation. #solo10
12:57 pm sjcockell:Despite the scariness of it all, #SinghBCA really was a triumph (in the end). But shouldn't have been
necessary #solo10
12:57 pm ChemSpider:Simon Hodson tlked about th need to link articles wth th underlying datasets and the need to be able to cite
the datasets. We agree! #solo10
12:57 pm steinsky:@gimpyblog even if pdf did = accurate reprod'n, so what? The sci paper is not a sacred text; relax, it doesn't
need to look perfect #solo10
12:57 pm gingerbreadlaLegally, saying there is "no evidence" for something is an opinion, not a statement of fact. (Helpful to science
dy:
writers) #solo10
12:57 pm cardcc:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 BMC ask authors to dedicate their data to the public domain and follow
12:58 pm Argent23:Who will teach scientists to use all those stored open datasets? #solo10
12:59 pm quantum_tunRT @BobOHara Lots of talk about storing data, but I suspect nobody on the panel involved in re-using it. Odd
nel:
55 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
#solo10
12:59 pm whydotpharmRT @andrewspong: Live at 14.15 UK Health convo on soc web: lab or echo
a:
chamber?http://slidesha.re/a2Mapu Add #solo10 comment #hcsmeu #hcsm
12:59 pm akshatrathi:@imascientist isn't that the point of being trustworthy that people view you as trustworthy? #solo10
12:59 pm aallan:RT @sarahkendrew: #solo10 nice plug for Project IX in @orbitibgfrog' citizen science session
1:00 pm mfenner:@VivRaper David Dobbs only asked for scientists and science journalists in the #solo10 audience. There are
many other good reasons to attend
1:00 pm franknorman:The data session at #solo10 is very well attended. This is one of the key issues in science publishing right
now.
1:00 pm gimpyblog:@steinsky ha I spent, 2.5 hrs this morning sorting out figures from a student who did them in ppt. i bring
prejudice today #solo10
1:00 pm aallan:RT @quantum_tunnel: RT @BobOHara Lots of talk about storing data, but I suspect nobody on the panel
involved in re-using it. Odd #solo10
1:00 pm mjrobbins:RT @andrewspong: RT @AJCann: Good point. "The Paper" is not the indivisible particle of Science. It's a
historical artifact. #solo10 <-- ditto 'the journal'
1:00 pm egonwillighagen:@Argent23 the journal editors should preach how to use Open repositories #solo10
1:01 pm razZ0r:Research data management infrastructure projects (RDMI) http://bit.ly/b5As3W #solo10
1:01 pm kejames:Competition and accolades in citizen science projects can be counter-productive to research aims and
accuracy. #solo10
1:01 pm scilib:RT @cardcc: RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 BMC ask authors to dedicate their data to the public domain
and follow Panton Principles. FANTASTIC!!
1:01 pm dellybean:RT @yokofakun: watching #solo10 #video #streaming http://www.ustream.tv/channel/science-online-
london-2010
1:02 pm McDawg:RT @andrewspong: Live at 14.15 UK 'Health convo on soc web: lab or echo
chamber?'http://slidesha.re/a2Mapu Add #solo10 #b6 to comment #hcsmeu #hcsm [EDIT]
1:02 pm moomoobull:brilliant explanation of libel law for writers in wake of Simon Singh libel case given by David Allen Green
from @Preiskel #soloconf #solo10
1:02 pm imascientist:@jenfold Arent you or any Wellcome types here? #solo10
1:02 pm easternblot:Tweet by @BobOHara reminded me that I blogged about a cool example of data re-use this
week:http://bit.ly/dpq2af #solo10 #shamelessplug
1:02 pm alicebell:@alokjha #solo10 talk on taking sci. journalism upstream http://bit.ly/by3pRX <- also int. comments by
@DrEvanHarris <-- & my reply to these
1:03 pm fischblog:No one. publication without lab Time is incentive enough RT @Argent23: Who will teach scientists to use
those stored open datasets? #solo10
1:03 pm GozdeZorlu:@Ananyo I'm at #solo10. iPads in every direction I look. I'm not tempted...
1:03 pm sjcockell:Excellent (&scary) talk from @preiskel/@jackofkent. Need for #libelreform is clear #solo10#soloconf
1:03 pm chibbie:RT @BobOHara: Lots of talk about storing data, but I suspect nobody on the panel involved in re-using it.
Odd #solo10
1:04 pm rubp:RT @easternblot: Tweet by @BobOHara reminded me that I blogged about a cool example of data re-use
this week: http://bit.ly/dpq2af #solo10 #shamelessplug
1:04 pm lauradesign:#solo10 where can we access to the slideshow of the presentations?
1:04 pm razZ0r:@Argent23 stimes i wonder who will teach scientists to use even the net & the available tools (publishig
data, etc comes after that) #solo10
1:04 pm jamesdadd:Great tools are been built for sharing and collaboration but are individuals willing to share? #solo10
1:04 pm mfenner:Data session at #solo10 very interesting, but we a running out of time for the discussion. That would be the
most interesting part
1:04 pm researchremix:Liked "RT @mfenner: DRYAD project: integrate journal publication with deposition of datasets
#solo10" http://ff.im/-qaJ5g
1:04 pm researchremix:Liked "#solo10 no widely used method to cite/ identify /link datasets." http://ff.im/-qaJ7N
1:05 pm chibbie:RT @andrewspong: Live at 14.15 UK 'Health convo on soc web: lab/echo
chamber?'http://slidesha.re/a2Mapu #solo10 #b6 comment #hcsmeu #hcsm
1:05 pm zenofbass:RT @andrewspong: Live at 14.15 UK 'Health convo on soc web: lab or echo
chamber?'http://slidesha.re/a2Mapu Add #solo10 #b6 to comment #hcsmeu #hcsm [EDIT]
1:05 pm researchremix:Liked "RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 BMC ask authors to dedicate their data to the public domain and
follow Panton..." http://ff.im/-qaI3V
1:05 pm egonwillighagen:@jamesdadd yes, if the journals would only demand it... think #pdb (open) #solo10
1:05 pm zenofbass:RT @andrewspong: 'BioMed Central supports the goals of the Panton Principles for Open Data in
Science' http://ow.ly/2z224 | BMC Blog #solo10 #STM #b1
1:06 pm ChemSpider:Data storage has been discussed. But also important to consider discoverability. #solo10
1:06 pm easternblot:RT @mfenner: Data session at #solo10 very interesting, but we a running out of time for the discussion.
56 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
That would be the most interesting part
1:06 pm steinsky:#solo10 @gimpyblog sorry to hear that. But "at least pdf is better than ms office files" is a bit of a
backhanded compliment ;)
1:06 pm yvonnenobis:RT @moomoobull: brilliant explanation of libel law for writers in wake of Simon Singh libel case given by
David Allen Green from @Preiskel #soloconf #solo10
1:07 pm Argent23:@razZ0r Exactly, huge gap between available tools and data and their adoption by scientists. #solo10
1:07 pm defjaf:Have never seen as many iPads in one place as #soloconf #solo10
1:08 pm zenofbass:RT @AJCann: Science Online, London 2010 hashtag: #solo10.
Programme: http://bit.ly/aRZut3Livestream: http://bit.ly/cciZsM
1:08 pm maltessagomez:RT @sciencegoddess: Limiting step of online education is not the abundance of information but how to
filter it and make it significant to the learner. #solo10
1:08 pm BoraZ:RT @easternblot: Tweet by @BobOHara reminded me that I blogged about a cool example of data re-use
this week: http://bit.ly/dpq2af #solo10 #shamelessplug
1:08 pm CameronNeylon:@ajcann: "If you want to run a chemistry course on 4chan you need to use the language of 4chan" OMG
WE MUST DO THIS! #solo10 #soloconf
1:08 pm mfenner:@researchremix thanks for following #solo10 discussion. You were just mentioned in discussion.
1:08 pm aallan:RT @defjaf: Have never seen as many iPads in one place as #soloconf #solo10
1:08 pm victoria_plumb:overwhelmed & think I need to sit in a dark room for a while, but great and informative talk by
@jackofkent/ @preiskel on libel law #solo10
1:08 pm jamesdadd:What is the incentive to share? #solo10
1:09 pm astropixie:RT @allinthegutter: E. according to @orbitingfrog a few people have managed to classify ALL the galaxies in
@GalaxyZoo! #solo10 #soloconf
1:09 pm razZ0r:laptop 28%, phone 20% grrrr #solo10
1:09 pm aslam:RT @cardcc: RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 BMC ask authors to dedicate their data to the public domain &
follow Panton Principles.FANTASTIC!!
1:09 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @egonwillighagen: @Argent23 the journal editors should preach how to use Open repositories #solo10
1:09 pm imascientist:Eeek, less than 10mins to our session on IAS. Deep breaths and hope it all works. Pls smile supportively
audience! #solo10
1:09 pm rubp:I think the discussion should also be on how we ensure the quality data shared #solo10
1:09 pm moomoobull:libel could not just be in text. it could be a waxwork too! not that that affects many of us here!
#soloconf #solo10
1:09 pm sciencegoddess:Interesting. Presenter Alan Cann thinks video demands too much attention, not as effective as can be in
online education. #soloconf #solo10
1:10 pm rvidal:RT @defjaf: Have never seen as many iPads in one place as #soloconf #solo10
1:10 pm pssalgado:From floor: "Data sharing will only work when there are rewards for doing it" #solo10
1:10 pm phillord:#solo10 Did that person from EBI just call me and all bioinformaticisn a parasite? Can I sue him for libel?
1:10 pm razZ0r:@CameronNeylon do this on 4chan /b/ and you are DOOMED #solo10
1:10 pm aallan:RT @payashim_en: Sorry from Japan! RT @aallan: "...the universal language of science is bad English,"
Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal at #solo10 #soloconf
1:10 pm d_swan:Fascinating, astronomers worse at classifying galaxies than the public - professional bias affects how they
perceive and classify #solo10
1:10 pm Ananyo:@GozdeZorlu lucky thing. @louwoodley didn't come through w/ free tix for #solo10 the news team....
1:10 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @razZ0r: @Argent23 stimes i wonder who will teach scientists to use even the net & the available tools
(publishig data, etc comes after that) #solo10
1:10 pm mariusthart:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
1:11 pm razZ0r:RT @CameronNeylon @ajcann: "If you want to run a chem course on 4chan you need to use the language
of 4chan" OMG WE MUST DO THIS! #solo10
1:11 pm eleanorahowe:RT @d_swan: "churnalism" a new term for me, but like it a lot - unverified repetition of science stories
#solo10
1:11 pm rpg7twit:I hereby defame @phillord So does Chris Taylor #solo10
1:11 pm alicebell:Of course, @jonWturney sums up my point in 7 words: "science is a process, not an
event"http://bit.ly/9JsD1P #solo10
1:11 pm edyong209:This session should have been called "Those who Cann, teach" #solo10
1:11 pm morphosaurus:RT @CameronNeylon: @ajcann: "If you want to run a chemistry course on 4chan you need to use the
language of 4chan" OMG WE MUST DO THIS! #solo10 #soloconf
1:12 pm jobadge:. @ajcann lovely! I agree RT @edyong209: This session should have been called "Those who Cann, teach"
#solo10
1:12 pm new299:RT @CameronNeylon: @ajcann: "If you want to run a chemistry course on 4chan you need to use the
57 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
1:12 pm TechCzech:RT @mfenner: DRYAD project: integrate journal publication with deposition of datasets #solo10
1:12 pm egonwillighagen:RT @defjaf: Have never seen as many iPads in one place as #soloconf #solo10
1:12 pm jamesdadd:Isn't some of the sharing moot until the critical mass of scientists start using the web and learn how to use
it? #solo10
1:13 pm quantum_tunnel'As an individual you are probably going to lose when sharing your data, but science will gain'
:
@IanMulvany, #solo10
1:13 pm egonwillighagen:@defjaf do those people at #solo10 actually realize the #ipad is basically the electronic equivalent of the
#pdf hamburger? #soloconf
1:13 pm morgantaschuk:I would say it's more like commensalism. ;) RT @phillord: #solo10 Did that person from EBI just call me and
all bioinformaticisn a parasite?
1:14 pm MyScienceCareeRT @quantum_tunnel: 'As an individual you are probably going to lose when sharing your data, but science
r:
will gain' @IanMulvany, #solo10
1:14 pm jtmahony:cos you never know :) RT @JennyRohn: Anyone at #solo10 have antihistamines? Would appreciate a
Loratadine...
1:14 pm kieronflanagan:My 2p worth on the debate between @alicebell & @DrEvanHarris on Alice's post/talk on upstream sci
journalism: http://bit.ly/aHT4KF #solo10
1:14 pm Kate_Travis:RT @quantum_tunnel: 'As an individual you are probably going to lose when sharing your data, but science
will gain' @IanMulvany, #solo10
1:14 pm JenLucPiquant:RT @_ColinS_: This. Read it. RT @alicebell My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream blogged
1:14 pm Argent23:@egonwillighagen @TwistedBacteria Will scientists listen to journal editors, or does it have to be pressure
in article publication? #solo10
1:14 pm fedorajen:#solo10 recognition in the form of citation tracking will be increasingly important for datasets
1:15 pm fischblog:We will most likely have great sessions about rebooting science journalism every year till at least 2030...
(@edyong209 @boraZ) #solo10
1:15 pm egonwillighagen:@Argent23 submitting to #opendata repos will be part of the author guidelines #solo10 #soloconf
1:16 pm north5:@jamesdadd "Isn't sharing moot til scientists learn how to use web?": Generational problem. 10 years,
GenXers will be pensioned off. #solo10
1:16 pm pookhahare:RT @sciencegoddess: Our speaker's blog and the presentation! Science of the
Invisible:http://bit.ly/aNvdrR #solo10
1:16 pm mfenner:No time to ask my question in #solo10 open data session: how can we make it as easy as possible to
publish research data, would increase use
1:16 pm jamesdadd:Twitter is an excellent transcript for #solo10
1:16 pm MyScienceCaree... so, there needs to be more sharing incentives to the individual - like the ability to cite datasets so
r:
submitter gets credit #solo10
1:16 pm rubp:"People have careers to worry about and that's how science gets done" #someone #solo10#soloconf
1:17 pm Kate_Travis:... so, there needs to be more sharing incentives to the individual - like the ability to cite datasets so
submitter gets credit #solo10
1:17 pm chem_showcase:Don't feel bad @phillord - publishers got a bashing earlier! Surely we all need to be nice for shared data &
open access to work? #solo10
1:17 pm pssalgado:"Science is done ppl w careers, their science is driven by their career advancement" Surely, that means we
are all doing it wrong! #solo10
1:17 pm drnickmorris:"Students in the sandbox" session - not convinced, suggest let the students decide, and use write once
publish many #solo10
1:17 pm BobOHara:Whole session on making data public, no discussion about using it. Grrrrrr, why can't they talk about what I
want? #solo10
1:18 pm rubp:RT @BobOHara: Whole session on making data public, no discussion about using it. Grrrrrr, why can't they
talk about what I want? #solo10
1:18 pm Harlequinclrty:RT @GrrlScientist: conundrum: when govt arts agency funds filmmakers, public doesn't expect results to be
free, why shld science be different? #solo10 #solocon
1:18 pm EmmaJKing:RT @GrrlScientist: conundrum: when govt arts agency funds filmmakers, public doesn't expect results to be
free, why shld science be different? #solo10 #solocon
1:18 pm d_swan:In breakout 8 'connecting scientific resources' hope its as enjoyable as the last one.. A bit more work
appropriate for knowledgblog #solo10
1:18 pm rpg7twit:@BobOHara unconference? Tonight? #solo10
1:18 pm franknorman:RT @mfenner No time to ask my question in #solo10 open data session: how to make it as easy as poss to
publish research data
1:19 pm BoraZ:Science of the Invisible: Science Online London 2010 #solo10 http://bit.ly/ajyyot
1:19 pm rubp:RT @franknorman: RT @mfenner No time to ask my question in #solo10 open data session: how to make it
as easy as poss to publish research data
58 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
1:20 pm lauradesign:Is
it really how science is done? He said: "People have career to worry about and that is how science is
done" #solo10
1:20 pm jamesdadd:Data sharing session needed another hour #solo10
1:20 pm quantum_tunnel@BobOHara bring the subject up? Maybe unconference session? #solo10
:
1:20 pm kaythaney:btw, wearing my previous cc hat ;) the legal issues and new metrics / incentives for sharing are v different.
#solo10
1:20 pm PointOfPresenceRT @GrrlScientist: When govt arts agency funds filmmakers, public doesn't expect results to be free, why
:
shld science be different? #solo10
1:20 pm GozdeZorlu:Sad you can't be here @BoraZ #solo10
1:20 pm DrEvanHarris:RT @alokjha: RT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstreamhttp://bit.ly/by3pRX <-
1:21 pm zemogle:Alan Cann: "giving students a stroke" means motivating them online and nothing else #solo10#soloconf
1:21 pm drnickmorris:Time for "Help! I'm a scientist, get me out of here" #solo10 #hisgmooh
1:21 pm sjcockell:'Recommendation tools for scientists' now. Remaining the wifi dead zone of room 2. #solo10
1:22 pm TwistedBacteria:@Argent23 Journal editors decide if an article is accepted or not. They can be quite persuasive ;) #solo10
1:22 pm rdmpage:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 BMC ask authors to dedicate their data to the public domain and follow
1:25 pm quantum_tunnelPopular session: 'Connecting scientific resources'. #solo10 #soloconf
:
1:25 pm tacoe:Lots of policy talk... Any hackers or designers up for beers after last session today? #solo10
1:25 pm scicom_bot:RT @DrEvanHarris RT @alokjha: RT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism
upstream http://bit.ly/by3pRX <- also intere...
1:25 pm scicom_bot:RT @fischblog #solo10
1:26 pm BoraZ:Finding people to aggregate with http://bit.ly/cq1VyW Scienceblogging.org #scio11 #solo10
1:27 pm drnickmorris:Hello #solo10 #iassolo
1:27 pm defjaf:Wonderful pics of @neilhimself Neil Gaiman's bookshelves shown at #solo10 #soloconf
1:28 pm cpf118:Is enjoying Science Online Conference #solo10 - recommendation tools for scientist session now on.
1:28 pm sunshinyday:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
1:29 pm akshatrathi:@GrrlScientist #solo10, there's an empty seat beside me and I don't stink. ;)
1:29 pm scibuff:@tacoe hell ya, any suggestions about the place? #solo10
1:29 pm sjcockell:Pictures of Neil Gaiman's book library followed by pictures of @dullhunk's CiteULike library #solo10
1:30 pm GozdeZorlu:Health conversation on social web: laboratory or echo chamber? #solo10
1:30 pm ayasawada:#solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want to support Libel Reform? Buy a
#geekcalendar http://bit.ly/crFydb
1:30 pm j_timmer:Very impressed by zooniverse projects discussed at #solo10
1:31 pm rpg7twit:@BobOHara you should be in breakout 4 #solo10 we're talking about what you do with the data?
1:31 pm rdmpage:Enroute to London to meet up with @vsmithuk then #solo10 tomorrow
1:31 pm fischblog:Pity @rhysmorgan isn't here: Session about Health conversation in social media. #solo10
1:31 pm razZ0r:Breakout 8: Connecting Scientific Resources #solo10
1:32 pm carolune:RT @j_timmer: Very impressed by zooniverse projects discussed at #solo10
1:32 pm razZ0r:crappy wireless, no tweeting for a while. #solo10
1:33 pm alokjha:Hmmm, have become victim of some random drive-by abuse by @edyong209 mafia lord of online
sciencing... @GozdeZorlu @rpg7twit @ananyo #solo10
1:33 pm GeekCalendar:RT @ayasawada: #solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want to support Libel Reform? Buy a
#geekcalendar http://bit.ly/crFydb
1:33 pm kjhaxton:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
1:33 pm mrgunn:RT @BoraZ Finding people to aggregate with http://bit.ly/cq1VyW Scienceblogging.org #scio11#solo10
1:34 pm rsslondontimes:Science of the Invisible: Science Online London 2010 #solo10: Ever since it was first held three years ago,
the Sc... http://bit.ly/b5wS0j
1:34 pm kieronflanagan:@alicebell Indeed. I tried to make similar point in my
tweets: http://bit.ly/bJdHN5http://bit.ly/b4uuhH http://bit.ly/aQDBue #solo10
1:34 pm kjhaxton:RT @CameronNeylon: @ajcann: "If you want to run a chemistry course on 4chan you need to use the
1:34 pm jamesdadd:Social media is 'social' there is no value add to scientific research @thatkeith #solo10
1:34 pm sciencegoddess:Watching well done film about the I'm a Scientist project at #soloconf #solo10 #iassolo
1:34 pm BoraZ:RT @CameronNeylon: @ajcann: "If you want to run a chemistry course on 4chan you need to use the
1:35 pm science3point0:RT @j_timmer: Very impressed by zooniverse projects discussed at #solo10
59 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
1:35 pm brunellalongo:#solo10 At session Connecting sci resources I've already connected through my shared bookmarks
at http://www.connotea.org/user/search
1:37 pm scibuff:RT: @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to
transmit Morse Code" #solocon #solo10
1:38 pm GozdeZorlu:@alokjha i think they all secretly love you. what do they call it? freudian slip :)
@edyong209@rpg7twit @ananyo #solo10
1:38 pm mendeley_com:@rpg7twit Good thing I saw your tweet and can thus move my iPad 30cm to the left, out of your reach.
#solo10
1:39 pm CameronNeylon:.@jamesdadd Do you mean SM is done wrong for sci or that "social" isn't something that adds value to sci?
Disagree with the latter #solo10
1:39 pm drnickmorris:Film: but what are the knowledge outcomes and how are they measured? How do you know they are
learning? #solo10 #iassolo
1:39 pm irenedelse:RT @ajcann: "If you want to run a chemistry course on 4chan you need 2 use the language of 4chan" OMG
WE MUST DO THIS! #solo10 // via @BoraZ
1:40 pm science3point0:RT @CameronNeylon: @ajcann: "If you want to run a chemistry course on 4chan you need to use the
1:42 pm sciencegoddess:How do they recruit scientists for I'm a Scientist! ? #soloconf #solo10 #iassolo
1:42 pm kaythaney:Michael Habib from Elsevier talking about SciVerse, PMR challenging "open" definition. THX :)
#solo10 #soloconf
1:42 pm AJCann:Had to resort to MiFi in BL breakout rooms at #solo10
1:43 pm sjcockell:'no discovery engines are agnostic' - Jason Hoyt. #solo10
1:43 pm d_swan:Ah Peter Murray-Rust laying into the SciVerse chap. But point taken, api regardless you're playing in their
walled garden #solo10
1:44 pm davecl42:RT @defjaf: Wonderful pics of @neilhimself Neil Gaiman's bookshelves shown at #solo10 #soloconf
1:44 pm j_timmer:The scientists that appeared have been someof the best recruiting tools for #iassolo. #solo10
1:44 pm egonwillighagen:@sciverse open standard != open api #solo10 #soloconf
1:45 pm alokjha:This twitterfall wall is a horribly violent colour #solo10
1:45 pm sciencegoddess:200 scientists applied for 100 spaces in June event! #iassolo #soloconf #solo10
1:45 pm zerojinx:Go PM-R! We don't need more walled gardens. They're not open data. - pPublishing is dead now we're all
publishers. #solo10 #soloconf
1:46 pm robinlloyd99:RT @LouWoodley: The list of #solo10 attendees on Twitter is
here:http://twitter.com/#/list/LouWoodley/solo10-attendees Tweet if you'd like to be added
1:47 pm TechCzech:RT @zerojinx: Go PM-R! We don't need more walled gardens. They're not open data. Publishing is dead
now we're all publishers. #solo10
1:47 pm razZ0r:"wouldn't it be nice to negatively link to somebody?" #solo10
1:47 pm aallan:RT @razZ0r: "wouldn't it be nice to negatively link to somebody?" #solo10
1:47 pm AJCann:RT @LouWoodley: The list of #solo10 attendees on Twitter is
here:http://twitter.com/#/list/LouWoodley/solo10-attendees Tweet to be added
1:47 pm BoraZ:RT @LouWoodley: The list of #solo10 attendees on Twitter is
1:47 pm d_swan:'There's no such thing as a negative link on the web' - Richard Wallis arguing passionately for semantic not
unqualified linking #solo10
1:47 pm mrgunn:RT @zerojinx Go PM-R! We don't need more walled gardens. They're not open data. #solo10#soloconf
1:48 pm robinlloyd99:RT @VivRaper For anyone who doesn't know and can't go, #solo10 is being live streamed
at:http://tinyurl.com/3x5e9z5 or #soloconf
1:48 pm sciencegoddess:Diversity of gender, race & field considered, but most important consideration is ability to explain/engage
w/children. #iassolo #solo10
1:48 pm rpg7twit:@petermurrayrust has skewered Elsevier. #solo10
1:48 pm ayasawada:RT @sciencegoddess: Diversity of gender, race & field considered, but most important consideration is
ability to explain/engage w/children. #iassolo #solo10
1:49 pm aallan:@fraserspeirs Had to switch from my iPad to my Macbook today here at #solo10 so I could plug my iPhone
into the laptop to charge it...
1:49 pm rpg7twit:Negative link concept awesome, would like negative citations too? #solo10
1:49 pm sciencegoddess:@scientistcoach if you follow @imascientist, you can find the project in the bio link. :) #iassolo#solo10
1:50 pm JennyRohn:From the back row, Shane McCracken sort of looks like Alan Titchmarsh #solo10 #iassolo
1:50 pm sciencegoddess:ooo, debate kits to use in the classroom on science and society issues! #iassolo #solo10
1:50 pm franknorman:RT @TechCzech: RT @zerojinx: Go PM-R! We don't need more walled gardens. They're not open data.
Publishing is dead now we're all publishers. #solo10
1:50 pm cpf118:Jason Hoyt on Mendeley reader rank #solo10 http://yfrog.com/49trowj
1:50 pm kjhaxton:RT @LouWoodley: The list of #solo10 attendees on Twitter is
60 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
1:51 pm GozdeZorlu:Some issues at health convo on web reminds me of @sciencepunk's skeptics talk - lack of new voices, clubs
rather than open forum #solo10
1:51 pm drnickmorris:Very difficult to read the green Twitter feed on the screen. #solo10 #iassolo
1:51 pm egonwillighagen:@LouWoodley does virtually attending count too? #solo10
1:51 pm mentalindigest:Science and society debate kits on various subjects a highly successful and sought after resource #solo10
1:52 pm AJCann:Mendeley now makes value judgments on users publication channels. Should tools be opinionated?
#solo10
1:52 pm phillord:@chem_showcase #solo10 Science is competitive, insular and cut-throat as well. Nice is good, but bad to
depend on.
1:52 pm kjhaxton:RT @mentalindigest: Science and society debate kits on various subjects a highly successful and sought
after resource #solo10
1:52 pm GozdeZorlu:@oh_henry says most online forums tend to follow that way - new exciting buzz, attracts new ppl, group
forms clique, excludes ppl #solo10
1:53 pm kjhaxton:RT @GozdeZorlu: @oh_henry says most online forums tend to follow that way - new exciting buzz, attracts
new ppl, group forms clique, excludes ppl #solo10
1:53 pm alicebell:@imascientist on BME scientists, do you know Liz Rasekoala? Don't know if this is still active
thohttp://bit.ly/c4IR3x #solo10 #iassolo
1:53 pm quantum_tunnelTalking about ontologies for the Web of Data. Brilliant! #solo10
:
1:53 pm StineCamilla:Hva kjennetegner helsesamtaler i sosiale medier? Temaet diskuteres på Science Online. Hva mener du?
Følg #solo10
1:54 pm rpg7twit:Publish metadata--they're not your crown jewels, low risk for those wary of open data? #solo10
1:54 pm easternblot:Love the honesty: Jason Hoyt showing *negative* feedback they got on a Mendeley blog post #solo10
1:54 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: permanent link to your resources-critical #solo10 #soloconf
1:54 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: how can anyone use semantic web? step1: get your data out there for others to interact
with #solo10 #soloconf
1:55 pm alicebell:Listening to @imascientist talk at #solo10 really impressed by the time, effort & imagination they put into
recruiting range of scientists.
1:55 pm egonwillighagen:RT @quantum_tunnel: Talking about ontologies for the Web of Data. Brilliant! #solo10
1:55 pm AJCann:Pat HH asking about longevity of research tools such as Mendeley/CiuteULike? #solo10
1:55 pm JennyRohn:Have any scientists got in trouble with their university/institute for spending 2 weeks distracted by #ias ?
Or good acceptance? #solo10
1:55 pm drnickmorris:Thanks, that is a better colour for the Twitter feed! #solo10 #iassolo
1:55 pm mrgunn:Negative, procedural, duplicate, major advance, etc. RT @rpg7twit Negative link concept awesome, would
like negative citations too? #solo10
1:56 pm oh_henry:As discussed... Roche social media principles http://www.roche.com/social_media_guidelines.pdf#solo10
1:56 pm mendeley_com:RT @cpf118: Jason Hoyt on Mendeley reader rank #solo10 http://yfrog.com/49trowj
1:56 pm edyong209:RT @alicebell: Listening to @imascientist talk at #solo10 really impressed by the time, effort & imagination
they put into recruiting range of scientists.
1:57 pm egonwillighagen:RT @GrrlScientist: how can anyone use semantic web? step1: get your data out there for others to interact
1:57 pm science3point0:RT @d_swan: 'There's no such thing as a negative link on the web' - Richard Wallis arguing passionately for
semantic not unqualified linking #solo10
1:57 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @oh_henry As discussed... Roche social media principles http://bit.ly/cca7RH #solo10
1:57 pm brembs:Liked "Science Online London 2010 #solo10" http://ff.im/q9ROD
1:58 pm CameronNeylon:A text version of what @rjw is talking about is at http://bit.ly/dgU71e #solo10 #soloconf
1:58 pm science3point0:RT @rpg7twit: Publish metadata--they're not your crown jewels, low risk for those wary of open data?
#solo10
1:58 pm pssalgado:As far as I know, good acceptance RT @JennyRohn Any scientists got in trouble for spending 2 weeks
distracted by #ias? #Iassolo #solo10
1:58 pm oh_henry:Interesting that my new phone's predictive text already had "Roche" in it. SINISTER. #solo10
1:58 pm AJCann:"How do you stop Mendeley being gamed like Digg?" #solo10
1:58 pm egonwillighagen:@GrrlScientist semantic web 4 chemistry -> http://egonw.github.com/acsrdf2010/ #solo10
1:58 pm quantum_tunnelReally interesting talk by Richard Wallis @rjw on the semantic web. #solo10
:
1:58 pm LouWoodley:Each scientist in #IAS2010 received between 200 and 700 questions (depending on which zone they were
in) #IASsolo #solo10
1:58 pm lennarthuizing:RT @GrrlScientist: how can anyone use semantic web? step1: get your data out there for others to interact
1:59 pm mendeley_com:RT @sjcockell: 'no discovery engines are agnostic' - Jason Hoyt. #solo10
61 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
1:59 pm franknorman:RT @rpg7twit: @petermurrayrust has skewered Elsevier. #solo10
1:59 pm bmcmatt:@rpg7twit negative citations: nice idea, but problem is they could be career suicide for those who make
them. @F1000 has this issue #solo10
2:00 pm j_timmer:Asking scientists whether they benefitted from participating in #iassolo. Great idea. #solo10
2:00 pm sjcockell:The question is not can your algo be gamed, it's can it be gamed harder than IF? #solo10
2:00 pm aallan:RT @bmcmatt: @rpg7twit negative citations: nice idea, but problem is they could be career suicide for
those who make them. @F1000 has this issue #solo10
2:00 pm rpg7twit:Score in breakout 8: Richard Wallis 3, Michael Habib nil #solo10
2:01 pm Frankly:RT @sciencegoddess: Is online teaching cheaper? quicker? No, says Alan Cann at #solo10
2:01 pm Frankly:RT @sciencegoddess: Huge question for me...what about laboratory skills? We can't teach how to do a
titration via second life--yet! :) #solo10
2:01 pm d_swan:Definitely following @rjw after a great linked data talk at #solo10
2:02 pm PointOfPresenceRT @franknorman: RT @rpg7twit: @petermurrayrust has skewered Elsevier. #solo10 :: Yet Elsevier went
:
fully "green" open access in 2004!
2:02 pm rpg7twit:@aleksk hope you get better! Selfish: looking forward to seeingyou tomorrow at #solo10
2:02 pm Frankly:RT @sciencegoddess: Interesting. Presenter Alan Cann thinks video demands too much attention, not as
effective as can be in online education. #soloconf #solo10
2:03 pm CameronNeylon:@bmcmatt @rpg7twit Pure neg cit a bad idea based on exp of voting schemes with downvoting but "X
disagrees with Y" is ok? #soloconf #solo10
2:04 pm flipphillips:RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
2:04 pm petermurrayrust#solo10 Semantic web? Elsevier: all OUR data (molecules, proteins, links) is behind their paywall and
:
cannot be re-distributed
2:05 pm aallan:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 Semantic web? Elsevier: all OUR data (molecules, proteins, links) is behind
their paywall and cannot be re-distributed
2:06 pm williamjnixon:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 Semantic web? Elsevier: all OUR data (molecules, proteins, links) is behind
2:06 pm philipmcdermottHello to everyone at #solo10 - really wanted to be there this year.
:
2:06 pm egonwillighagen:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 Semantic web? Elsevier: all OUR data (molecules, proteins, links) is behind
2:06 pm rpg7twit:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 Semantic web? Elsevier: all OUR data (molecules, proteins) is behind their
paywall and cannot be re-distributed
2:06 pm JennyRohn:"Scientists are real people" might be best main message to deliver during #imascientist chats #solo10
2:07 pm Sagebio:RT @mfenner: Digital Curation Centre: because good research needs good data #solo10
2:07 pm jcachat:RT @MyScienceCareer: ... so, there needs to be more sharing incentives to the individual - like the ability to
cite datasets so submitter gets credit #solo10
2:08 pm rpg7twit:@PointOfPresence @franknorman: As @petermurrayrust says, you can't reuse your data once Elsevier has
it unless you pay #solo10
2:08 pm d_swan:On familiar data standards territory with Chris Taylor from the EBI now who *may* be
@crntaylor#solo10 MI standards abound :)
2:08 pm arikia:Wishing I was at #solo10 today. Good luck to everyone presenting! Have fun :)
2:09 pm aallan:RT @MyScienceCareer: ... so, there needs to be more sharing incentives to the individual - like the ability to
cite datasets so submitter gets credit #solo10
2:09 pm Trevesy:At #solo10 v impressed with Im a scientist get me out of here #iassolo they've done lots of evaluation and
think evaluation is key.
2:10 pm EchoLilyMai:RT @allinthegutter: E. Wow, according to @orbitingfrog a few people have managed to classify **ALL**
the galaxies in @GalaxyZoo. #solo10 #soloconf
2:10 pm CameronNeylon:@sjcockell Absolutely - and it avoids the "I hate this person.." effect enough to maintain a better social
environment #solo10 #soloconf
2:11 pm SciEntEx:RT @GrrlScientist: incidentally, #solo10 #soloconf is being streamed live for those who can't
attend: http://tinyurl.com/3x5e9z5
2:11 pm egonwillighagen:RT @allinthegutter: E. Wow, according to @orbitingfrog a few people have managed to classify **ALL**
the galaxies in @GalaxyZoo. #solo10 #soloconf
2:11 pm aallan:RT @sciencegoddess: Interesting. Presenter Alan Cann thinks video demands too much attention, not as
effective as can be in online education. #soloconf #solo10
2:11 pm JennyRohn:Some questions couldn't be answered by scientists and this was also a valuable lesson #iassolo#solo10
2:12 pm gingerbreadlady:Just as important to teach kids about the process and nature of science, as the nitty gritty details.
#solo10 #iassolo
2:13 pm aallan:RT @gingerbreadlady: Just as important to teach kids about the process and nature of science, as the nitty
62 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
gritty details. #solo10 #iassolo
2:14 pm CameronNeylon:@AJCann But equally you get more richness from OA. Should mendeley restrict that display richness to
maintain neutrality? #solo10 #soloconf
2:14 pm cpf118:Interesting discussion around quality of recommendations from CiteULike and Mendeley. #solo10
2:16 pm aallan:When you run out of time in a talk, talking more quickly in acronyms is not necessarily the best approach to
finishing. *sigh* #solo10
2:16 pm rjw:My #linkeddata slides from #soloconf here http://www.slideshare.net/rjw #solo10
2:16 pm TechCzech:If not more: RT @gingerbreadlady: Just as important to teach kids about process and nature of science, as
nitty gritty details. #solo10
2:17 pm drnickmorris:Interesting demo of the chat system, bit difficult to follow chat as not threaded #solo10 #iassolo
2:17 pm ajslaghu:RT @RinkeHoekstra: RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
2:17 pm pssalgado:@mjrobbins train taxi drivers to communicate science! #Iassolo #solo10
2:17 pm BoraZ:using a #solo10 break to watch the Rebooting journalism session from before I woke up...
2:18 pm mrgunn:RT @rjw My #linkeddata slides from #soloconf here http://www.slideshare.net/rjw #solo10
2:18 pm bmcmatt:Attending #solo10 is like playing online poker on several simultaneous tables :-) Why choose one parallel
session- take part in them all
2:18 pm LouWoodley:RT @alicebell Have to say, @mjrobbins' idea of getting cabbies to work as conduits in science comm is
genius. Also hairdressers. #solo10
2:18 pm drnickmorris:Very difficult to follow chat in the room, chat on Twitter, and chat online all at the same time!!
#solo10 #iassolo
2:19 pm mendeley_com:RT @bmcmatt: Attending #solo10 is like playing online poker on several simultaneous tables :-) Why
choose one parallel session- take part in them all
2:19 pm easternblot:Hope my talk about @the_Node gets voted in. Focussing on bringing an *existing* community online: they
asked, we built it #soloconf #solo10
2:19 pm BoraZ:I hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are invited to #scio11 on January 13-15, 2011 in North Carolina
2:20 pm new299:RT @zerojinx: Go PM-R! We don't need more walled gardens. They're not open data. - pPublishing is dead
now we're all publishers. #solo10 #soloconf
2:21 pm christineottery:RT @LouWoodley: RT @alicebell Have to say, @mjrobbins' idea of getting cabbies to work as conduits in
science comm is genius. Also hairdressers. #solo10
2:22 pm egonwillighagen:RT @mrgunn: RT @rjw My #linkeddata slides from #soloconf here http://www.slideshare.net/rjw#solo10
2:24 pm DrMarkJFogg:It felt like many, many more! RT @LouWoodley: Each scientist in #IAS2010 received between 200 and 700
questions #IASsolo #solo10
2:25 pm jamesdadd:The state of science blogging up next. I'm hoping it touches upon the value scientists have in reading and
creating blogs. #solo10
2:25 pm quantum_tunnelFor #solo10 people that asked: Keep ur desktop tidy Mendeley-style Quantum Tunnel
:
Podcasthttp://www.bit.ly/qt_iTunes http://wp.me/p13hI7-3J
2:25 pm Lambo:Metadata or Meatdata? The PDF "hamburger"... great byproduct of #solo10 by
@dullhunkhttp://bit.ly/9MqquM
2:27 pm BoraZ:RT @jamesdadd: The state of science blogging up next. I'm hoping it touches upon the value scientists have
in reading and creating blogs. #solo10
2:27 pm easternblot:YAY, democracy replaced with dictatorship!!! (all unconference talks are in!)
#solo10 #soloconfhttp://yfrog.com/4j4ypnj
2:27 pm BoraZ:RT @LouWoodley: RT @alicebell Have to say, @mjrobbins' idea of getting cabbies to work as conduits in
science comm is genius. Also hairdressers. #solo10
2:29 pm ayasawada:#iassolo @imascientist says not all kids bc scientists but all bc people. Read more of her opinion
here http://bit.ly/ckPqqc #solo10
2:30 pm jackpot73:RT @ayasawada: #iassolo @imascientist says not all kids bc scientists but all bc people. Read more of her
opinion here http://bit.ly/ckPqqc #solo10
2:37 pm quantum_tunnelGreat sunshine by the Brirish Library. #solo10 http://post.ly/vQVX
:
2:38 pm nickridley:Oops ment #solo10
2:38 pm mcguthrie:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 Semantic web? Elsevier: all OUR data (molecules, proteins, links) is behind
2:44 pm franknorman:Eek. I have foolishly agreed to lead a session on ebooks at #solo10 tmrw. Anyone want to help?
2:48 pm kejames:RT @BoraZ: I hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are invited to #scio11 on January 13-15, 2011 in North
Carolina
2:49 pm rdmpage:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 Semantic web? Elsevier: all OUR data (molecules, proteins, links) is behind
2:49 pm morphosaurus:Who put forward "annoying readership" conference? We've been put together and you didn't put your
63 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
name on the postit. #soloconf #solo10
2:50 pm Stellar190:RT @aallan: Why you shouldn't have #twitterfall running in the background during the
talks,http://j.mp/92wkGc. #solo10 #soloconf (via @zephoria)
2:51 pm razZ0r:RT @petermurrayrust BMC ask authors to dedicate their data to the public domain and follow Panton
Principles. FANTASTIC!! #solo10
2:52 pm Marjakingma:http://bit.ly/a6Wdcs Something for discussion on #solo10? It has got BL people thinking.
2:52 pm kejames:+eleventy! @edyong209 Through I'm a Scientist, kids learn that scientists don't always know the answer.
This is important. #iassolo #solo10
2:53 pm pssalgado:Didn't get a chance to mention that a new collaboration research project is one of my personal outcomes
of #IAS2010 #Iassolo #solo10
2:55 pm GeekCalendar:RT @ayasawada: #solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want to support Libel Reform? Buy a
@geekcalendar http://bit.ly/crFydb
2:55 pm alicebell:RT @ayasawada: #solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want to support Libel Reform? Buy a
2:56 pm christineottery:RT @alicebell: RT @ayasawada: #solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want to support Libel
Reform? Buy a @geekcalendar http://bit.ly/crFydb
2:56 pm jamesdadd:Based on today thus far #solo10 has been worth it.
2:57 pm pfanderson:RT @andrewspong: 'BioMed Central supports the goals of the Panton Principles for Open Data in
Science' http://ow.ly/2z224 | BMC Blog #solo10 #STM #b1
2:57 pm mePadraigReidy:RT @alicebell: RT @ayasawada: #solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want to support Libel
2:57 pm pfanderson:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
2:58 pm pfanderson:RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
2:58 pm tacoe:@scibuff let's meet up at the bar outside the auditorium at 5p then walk somewhere #solo10
2:58 pm jamesdadd:Working for an instrument & software manufacturer I am still unsure what role we could play in facilitating
dataset sharing. #solo10
2:59 pm cpikas:tuned into #solo10 for the state of science blogging
3:00 pm mfenner:If you go too fast with health care social media you loose people #solo10
3:00 pm franknorman:MRC Data Suppt Srvce takes this approach. RT @rpg7twit: Publish metadata-they're not yr crown jewels,
low risk if wary of open data? #solo10
3:00 pm rpg7twit:Final session on day 1 of
#solo10 @JennyRohn @GrrlScientist @LouWoodleyhttp://tweetphoto.com/43016003
3:02 pm drnickmorris:A sign that is being clearly ignored at Science online London #solo10 http://yfrog.com/5re7uj
3:02 pm franknorman:RT @JennyRohn: "Scientists are real people" might be best main message to deliver during
#imascientist chats #solo10
3:03 pm razZ0r:Final session today on scientific blogging w/ @JennyRohn @GrrlScientist @LouWoodley @defjaf#solo10
3:03 pm rubp:RT @JennyRohn: "Scientists are real people" might be best main message to deliver during
#imascientist chats #solo10
3:04 pm rubp:Lesson learned. next time print cards with my Twitter username on it. #solo10
3:04 pm franknorman:RT @alicebell Have to say, @mjrobbins' idea of getting cabbies to work as conduits in science comm is
genius. Also hairdressers. #solo10
3:05 pm aallan:Back in the main auditorium for the panel discussion on the state of science blogging. Comfy chairs are a
good thing! #solo10
3:05 pm razZ0r:RT @rubp Lesson learned. next time print cards with my Twitter username on it. (print it for everybody and
w/ blog addresses too) #solo10
3:05 pm drnickmorris:Time for 'The state of science blogging' panel session #solo10
3:06 pm franknorman:Haha! RT @Lambo Metadata or Meatdata? The PDF "hamburger"... great byproduct of #solo10 by
@dullhunk http://bit.ly/9MqquM
3:06 pm easternblot:I just want to say that my T-shirt (no one cares about your blog) does not apply to the three ladies currently
on stage. #solo10 #soloconf
3:06 pm sarabeirne:RT @alicebell: RT @ayasawada: #solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want to support Libel
3:06 pm BobOHara:Damn, no twitterfall. How can I tweet-heckle @grrlscientist now? #solo10
3:06 pm jkerrstevens:RT @rpg7twit: Score in breakout 8: Richard Wallis 3, Michael Habib nil #solo10
3:06 pm JoBrodie:It's the afternoon repeats ;) "Where do you post, or look for, science communication jobs? Help
expand http://is.gd/1KPor" #solo10
3:06 pm mrgunn:RT @quantum_tunnel For #solo10 people that asked: Keep ur desktop tidy Mendeley-
stylehttp://www.bit.ly/qt_iTunes http://wp.me/p13hI7-3J
64 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:06 pm jkerrstevens:RT @oh_henry: As discussed... Roche social media
principleshttp://www.roche.com/social_media_guidelines.pdf #solo10
3:07 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @ayasawada: #solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want to support Libel Reform? Buy a
3:07 pm jkerrstevens:RT @GozdeZorlu: Some issues at health convo on web reminds me of @sciencepunk's skeptics talk - lack of
new voices, clubs rather than open forum #solo10
3:07 pm science3point0:The state of science blogging - Now live at: http://bt.io/FvQh #solo10 #soloconf
3:07 pm TwistedBacteria:The State of Science Blogging - live video now! http://is.gd/eTjZP #solo10
3:08 pm AJCann:RT @TwistedBacteria: The State of Science Blogging - live video now! http://is.gd/eTjZP #solo10
3:08 pm mfenner:Now #solo10 session on the state of science blogging
3:08 pm north5:@jamesdadd At the least we must future-proof our software against the demands of data sharing. Must be
easy, traceable & trustworthy #solo10
3:08 pm aallan:RT @science3point0: The state of science blogging - Now live at: http://bt.io/FvQh #solo10#soloconf
3:08 pm aallan:RT @easternblot: I just want to say that my T-shirt (no one cares about your blog) does not apply to the
three ladies currently on stage. #solo10 #soloconf
3:08 pm franknorman:Definitely. RT @jamesdadd Based on today thus far #solo10 has been worth it.
3:09 pm mrgunn:RT @rubp Lesson learned. next time print cards with my Twitter username on it. #solo10
3:09 pm rubp:RT @easternblot: I just want to say that my T-shirt (no one cares about your blog) does not apply to the
3:09 pm simon_frantz:At the state of science blogging session at #solo10 #soloconf. Hopefully my crap laptop battery can last for
this session
3:09 pm VivRaper:Andrew Jaffe, Grrrrl Scientist, Jenny Rohn and Lou Woodley speaking #solo10
3:09 pm razZ0r:another pub crawl today with people not attending the fringe event? #solo10 #soloconf
3:09 pm nichtich:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
3:09 pm harpistkat:@jackofkent Enjoyed your talk at #solo10 #soloconf earlier - let's hope the quacks think twice about suing
writers in the future
3:09 pm VivRaper:About the state of science blogging #solo10
3:09 pm rubp:RT @franknorman: Definitely. RT @jamesdadd Based on today thus far #solo10 has been worth it.
3:09 pm pencehe:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
3:09 pm MyResearchNewRT @science3point0: The state of science blogging - Now live at: http://bt.io/FvQh #solo10#soloconf
s:
3:10 pm VivRaper:Most of speakers who blog have been blogging since at least 2004/5 #solo10
3:10 pm Argent23:Time for some sugary drinks producing company bashing in the state of science blogging session at
#solo10?
3:10 pm fischblog:RT @mfenner: Now #solo10 session on the state of science blogging
3:10 pm phillord:#solo10 ah, no, twitfall on screen. Ah, well, killing batteries is what wireless is for
3:11 pm patrickgmj:RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
3:11 pm VivRaper:1/4 of audience think they're science bloggers. Just over 1/2 are scientists who blog. A smaller fraction are
blogging journalists #solo10
3:11 pm BobOHara:RT @easternblot: I just want to say that my T-shirt (no one cares about your blog) does not apply to the
3:11 pm mendeley_com:RT @easternblot: I just want to say that my T-shirt (no one cares about your blog) does not apply to the
3:12 pm Argent23:Yes! RT @rubp: RT @franknorman: Definitely. RT @jamesdadd Based on today thus far #solo10has been
worth it.
3:12 pm mfenner:A quarter of the #solo10 audience considers themselves science bloggers.
3:12 pm VivRaper:Andrew Jaffe: Should we rehash Pepsigate? NOOOOOOOOO :) #solo10
3:12 pm imascientist:Btw, if you want to know more abt #IAS2010 #iassolo our site is http://imascientist.org.uk/ Can find eval
reports, film and sign up #solo10
3:12 pm msmiji:RT @mfenner: A quarter of the #solo10 audience considers themselves science bloggers.
3:12 pm Argent23:Told you! #pepsigate #solo10
3:12 pm GozdeZorlu:quarter of audience at #solo10 are science bloggers ,more than half are scientists who blog. journos make
up smaller fraction of audience
3:13 pm andrewspong:RT @Argent23: Time for some sugary drinks producing company bashing in the state of science blogging
session at #solo10? <-- #secondsight ;)
3:13 pm mrgunn:Panel on the future of science blogs convening now, with more Indie bloggers and 50% of audience self-
identifies as science bloggers #solo10
65 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:13 pm imascientist:And thanks for all the supportive comments, we enjoyed our session:-) #iassolo #solo10
3:13 pm mendeley_com:RT @quantum_tunnel: For #solo10 people that asked: Keep ur desktop tidy Mendeley-style Quantum
Tunnel Podcast http://www.bit.ly/qt_iTunes http://wp.me/p13hI7-3J
3:13 pm BoraZ:RT @GozdeZorlu: quarter of audience at #solo10 are science bloggers ,more than half are scientists who
blog. journos make up smaller fraction of audience
3:13 pm orbitingfrog:RT @GozdeZorlu: quarter of audience at #solo10 are science bloggers ,more than half are scientists who
blog. journos make up smaller fraction of audience
3:13 pm VivRaper:Andrew Jaffe says networks are unusual to science blogging #solo10
3:14 pm razZ0r:quarter of audience at #solo10 are science bloggers ,more than half are scientists who blog.
3:14 pm mfenner:Science is probably one of the few areas where bloggers blog in networks #solo10
3:14 pm akshatrathi:Scientist biased panel on science blogging agrees with the scientist biased science bloggers in the audience.
#solo10
3:14 pm VivRaper:RT @mfenner: Science is probably one of the few areas where bloggers blog in networks #solo10
3:14 pm astronomyblog:I wish I could hear what the panel were saying at #solo10. The audio on Ustream is very quiet and I've got it
turned up full.
3:15 pm akshatrathi:RT @mfenner: Science is probably one of the few areas where bloggers blog in networks #solo10
3:15 pm mrgunn:Science blogging session starts off with discussion of #pepsigate yikes! #solo10
3:15 pm simon_frantz:RT @GozdeZorlu: 1/4 of audience at #solo10 are science bloggers , >1/2 are scientists who blog. journos
make up smaller fraction of audience
3:15 pm VivRaper:Nature Networks about scientists talking to other scientists #solo10
3:15 pm simon_frantz:RT @imascientist: If u want 2 know more abt #iassolo our site is http://imascientist.org.uk/ Can find eval
reports, film&sign up #solo10
3:15 pm sjcockell:Collective blogging is good for promotion, but can't be part of collective unless you can self-promote in the
first place #solo10
3:15 pm VivRaper:Also so Nature editors have a public, outward face - people can post about peer review, etc. #solo10
3:15 pm rpg7twit:Just met @andrewspong @soloconf Lovely bloke! #solo10
3:16 pm VivRaper:I should say that's Louise W talking #solo10
3:16 pm rubp:RT @VivRaper: Nature Networks about scientists talking to other scientists #solo10
3:16 pm kejames:'If U don't know the difference between astrophysics & astrobiology then U haven't been reading my blog.'
~@defjaf 2 @mattfromlondon #solo10
3:16 pm AJCann:Networks about commenting on other network blogs? Hmm #solo10
3:16 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @astronomyblog: I wish I could hear what the panel were saying at #solo10. Audio on Ustream is very
quiet and I've got it turned up full
3:16 pm cpikas:darn, i can't hear the women speakers on the blogging panel #solo10
3:16 pm franknorman:RT @mfenner: Science is probably one of the few areas where bloggers blog in networks #solo10
3:17 pm jamesdadd:Nature publishing is a commercial entity right? So what is in it for them to host a blogging platform?
#solo10
3:17 pm akshatrathi:I hope that this discussion on science blogging does not get restricted to talking only about networks.
#solo10
3:17 pm AJCann:For me, blogging is about 1) Personal reflection 2) Outreach. No significant role for a network there.
#solo10
3:17 pm andrewspong:RT @rpg7twit: Just met @andrewspong @soloconf Lovely bloke! #solo10 <-- my new mood stabilizers are
highly effective ;) Great 2 met you IRL
3:17 pm razZ0r:RT @mfenner Science is probably one of the few areas where bloggers blog in networks #solo10
3:17 pm AJCann:RT @akshatrathi: I hope that this discussion on science blogging does not get restricted to talking only
about networks. #solo10
3:18 pm rubp:Should science blog target "real" people? #solo10
3:18 pm VivRaper:GrrlScientist is trying to show the public how science happens #solo10
3:18 pm jkerrstevens:Finally had the opportunity to meet @andrewspong IRL. Man knows his stuff. Useful because we were on a
panel together. #solo10
3:18 pm drnickmorris:"I released that real people would be reading it and not just scientists" but scientists are real people!
#solo10
3:18 pm rubp:RT @AJCann: For me, blogging is about 1) Personal reflection 2) Outreach. No significant role for a network
there. #solo10
3:18 pm McDawg:yah more than 100 peeps watching the livestream #solo10
3:19 pm VivRaper:Grrlscientist has scientist talking about their data. Aim is to have scientist to talk about why they did what
they did #solo10
3:19 pm phillord:#solo10 for me, science blogging is a platform for my primary research and ideas. Why blog about other
peoples stuff?
3:19 pm rubp:RT @VivRaper: GrrlScientist is trying to show the public how science happens #solo10
66 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:19 pm VivRaper:"Well done science is beautiful", Grrlscientist #solo10
3:19 pm GozdeZorlu:@JennyRohn says writing for guardian sci blogs was a good exercise to make her think about different
audiences, ie, non-scientific #solo10
3:19 pm akshatrathi:Rohn: I realized I am going to write for 'real' people not just for scientists when I was asked to write a guest
for the Guardian. #solo10
3:19 pm sjcockell:what's the penetration of science blogs to non-science people? #solo10
3:19 pm d_swan:RT @phillord: #solo10 for me, science blogging is a platform for my primary research and ideas. Why blog
about other peoples stuff?
3:19 pm mfenner:RT @akshatrathi: I hope that this discussion on science blogging does not get restricted to talking only
about networks. #solo10
3:20 pm mrgunn:Maybe they could sit closer to the mics? RT @cpikas darn, i can't hear the women speakers on the blogging
panel #solo10
3:20 pm zemogle:Science is beautiful via @ #solo10
3:20 pm mfenner:RT @akshatrathi: Rohn: I realized I am going to write for 'real' people not just for scientists when I was
asked to write a guest for the Guardian. #solo10
3:20 pm AJCann:@andypowe11 Not if the justification for bloggin network is inward looking #solo10
3:20 pm mjrobbins:Better questions needed in this session, more grit and debate please, not 'what do you write about' trivia.
#solo10
3:20 pm ShaneMcC:Science bloggers gauging success through comments, no mention of incoming links #solo10#soloconf
3:20 pm VivRaper:GrrlScientist - likes to write about stories she loves with an image of the species #solo10
3:20 pm mfenner:RT @AJCann: For me, blogging is about 1) Personal reflection 2) Outreach. No significant role for a network
there. #solo10
3:21 pm habib:RT @PointOfPresence: RT @franknorman: RT @rpg7twit: @petermurrayrust has skewered Elsevier.
#solo10 :: Yet Elsevier went fully "green" open access in 2004!
3:21 pm trufflenet:RT @oh_henry: As discussed... Roche social media
principleshttp://www.roche.com/social_media_guidelines.pdf #solo10
3:21 pm GozdeZorlu:@JennyRohn re diff audiences . points to consider. how to write/content to include for non-science
audience #solo10
3:21 pm andrewspong:RT @jkerrstevens: Finally met @andrewspong IRL. Man knows his stuff. Useful as we were on panel
2gether #solo10 <--TY for covering my 'urrs'
3:21 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @sjcockell: what's the penetration of science blogs to non-science people? #solo10
3:21 pm davidkroll:Shocking! RT @mrgunn: Science blogging session starts off with discussion of #pepsigate yikes! #solo10
3:21 pm edyong209:This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public" in some field or
another #solo10
3:21 pm GozdeZorlu:@mjrobbins hey, suggest some questions then! #solo10
3:21 pm moomoobull:So if scientists are so good at telling stories about their science, why have journal papers become so
incomprehensible? #soloconf #solo10
3:22 pm physicus:RT @AJCann: For me, blogging is about 1) Personal reflection 2) Outreach. No significant role for a network
there. #solo10
3:22 pm edyong209:Writing for "public" opens things up to broad audiences *including* scientists from other fields #solo10
3:22 pm VivRaper:@jennyrohn - wants to be the fly on the lab wall, writing about day-to-day science #solo10
3:22 pm drnickmorris:?@phillord: science blogging is a platform for my primary research and ideas. Why blog about other
peoples stuff?? Bring insight? #solo10
3:22 pm imascientist:RT @ayasawada: #iassolo @imascientist says not all kids bc scientists but all bc people. Read more of her
opinion here http://bit.ly/ckPqqc #solo10
3:22 pm sciencegoddess:RT @edyong209: Writing for "public" opens things up to broad audiences *including* scientists from other
fields #solo10
3:22 pm andrewspong:Massive thanks to @mcdawg @jkerrstevens @erikdigiredo & all participants in Breakout 6 at #solo10. \m/
You rock \m/ :)
3:23 pm ShaneMcC:Thank you to all who came and participated in #iassolo session at #soloconf #solo10 esp
@2020science @pssalgado & @morphosaurus
3:23 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @edyong209 This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
in some field or another #solo10
3:23 pm VivRaper:@edyong209 It's selection of subject, not writing style - in my opinion #solo10
3:23 pm franknorman:RT @VivRaper: "Well done science is beautiful", Grrlscientist #solo10
3:23 pm sunshinyday:RT @edyong209: Writing for "public" opens things up to broad audiences *including* scientists from other
fields #solo10
3:23 pm aallan:Is science blogging really about crunching on papers? Surely the main thing that should be covered is the
process of science? #solo10
3:23 pm philipmcdermott@McDawg what's the addy for the stream? #solo10
67 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
:
3:23 pm mfenner:RT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
3:23 pm nightingale801:RT @edyong209: Writing for "public" opens things up to broad audiences *including* scientists from other
fields #solo10
3:23 pm CameronNeylon:V much agree RT @edyong209: distinction between writing for scientists/public is false. EVERYONE is
public; in some field or other #solo10
3:23 pm jkerrstevens:RT @andrewspong: Massive thanks to @mcdawg @jkerrstevens @erikdigiredo & all participants in
Breakout 6 at #solo10. \m/ You rock \m/ :)
3:23 pm orbitingfrog:For those at @the_zooniverse #solo10 session: spacecraft debris found by
@moonzoo users:http://bit.ly/9m5OFt
3:23 pm edyong209:@GozdeZorlu @mjrobbins Ive had my had up for a bit but the chair is not looking at the audience #solo10
3:23 pm mrgunn:He's just loosening them up, I think. RT @mjrobbins More grit and debate please, not 'what do you write
about' trivia. #solo10
3:23 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @moomoobull If scientists are so good at telling stories about their science, why have journal papers
become so incomprehensible? #solo10
3:23 pm Allochthonous:Is #solo10 coming to the shocking conclusion that people blog for different reasons, and with different aims
in mind? Gosh.
3:24 pm AJCann:Pleased to hear Lou Woodley stress diversity of "science blogging" #solo10
3:24 pm aallan:RT @orbitingfrog: For those at @the_zooniverse #solo10 session: spacecraft debris found by
@moonzoo users: http://bit.ly/9m5OFt
3:24 pm morphosaurus:RT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
3:24 pm moomoobull:how, if at all, do science bloggers verify the accuracy and relevance of what they write about?
#solo10 #soloconf
3:24 pm physicus:RT @TwistedBacteria:@sjcockell: what's the penetration of science blogs to non-science people? #solo10
3:24 pm VivRaper:Nature Network hasn't given bloggers access to their viewing stats?! #solo10
3:24 pm AJCann:Let's talk about MT$Gate ;-) #solo10
3:24 pm BoraZ:RT @Allochthonous: Is #solo10 coming to the shocking conclusion that people blog for different reasons,
and with different aims in mind? Gosh.
3:24 pm BoraZ:RT @AJCann: Pleased to hear Lou Woodley stress diversity of "science blogging" #solo10
3:25 pm imascientist:+1! RT @ShaneMcC Thanks to all who came and participated in #iassolo session at #soloconf#solo10 esp
@2020science @pssalgado @morphosaurus
3:25 pm simon_frantz:Agreed RT @edyong209: This distinction btwn writing for scientists/public is false. EVERYONE is "public" in
some field or another #solo10
3:25 pm VivRaper:Sorry - if I'm getting stuff wrong, the online livestream is faint. And I can't see who is speaking apart from
their head moving #solo10
3:25 pm CameronNeylon:I am puzzled by the distinction between journalism at one end of day and blogging at the other. Isn't it all
just writing? #solo10
3:25 pm akshatrathi:It's funny how the discussion is becoming a grilling session for @louwoodley abt Nature's plan to take over
all science publishing. #solo10
3:25 pm franknorman:RT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
3:25 pm simon_frantz:RT @Allochthonous: Is #solo10 coming 2 the shocking conclusion that people blog for different reasons,
and with different aims in mind? Gosh
3:25 pm rubp:RT @AJCann: Pleased to hear Lou Woodley stress diversity of "science blogging" #solo10
3:25 pm GozdeZorlu:@edyong209 guess it depends on content of science being explained. ie method of science, results of a
scientific finding etc #solo10
3:26 pm andrewspong:RT @CameronNeylon: I am puzzled by the distinction between journalism at one end of day and blogging
at the other. Isn't it all just writing? #solo10
3:26 pm Wise_Diva:RT @AJCann: Pleased to hear Lou Woodley stress diversity of "science blogging" #solo10
3:26 pm habib:@petermurrayrust #solo10 very much out of context but a good soundbite Nothing in our OA policy has
changed. Protein etc examples not ours
3:26 pm jfleck:RT @Allochthonous: Is #solo10 coming to shocking conclusion that people blog for different reasons, and
with different aims in mind? Gosh.
3:26 pm phillord:RT @drnickmorris: ?@phillord Why blog about other peoples stuff?? Bring insight? #solo10 Can I not bring
insight to my own work?
3:26 pm mfenner:RT @simon_frantz: RT @Allochthonous: Is #solo10 coming 2 the shocking conclusion that people blog for
different reasons, and with different aims in mind? Gosh
3:26 pm VivRaper:Question: Do you think networks convey authority? Answer: Yes #solo10
68 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:26 pm ShaneMcC:Political activists also organise into networks of varying formality #soloconf #solo10 : Liberal Conspiracy,
LabourList, Conservative Home
3:27 pm rpg7twit:All Nature Network bloggers should preface all their posts with 'Nature don't pay me!' #solo10#soloconf
3:27 pm AJCann:Is science in a mess if we have to distinguish public outreach from publication? #solo10
3:27 pm ayasawada:RT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
3:27 pm alokjha:Hope someone raises #SpoofJenks at the #solo10 future of blogging session. That was an awesome demo
of blogger power to tackle folk in MSM
3:27 pm oh_henry:Bang on RT @edyong209 distinction between writing for scientists/public is false. EVERYONE is "public" in
some field or another #solo10
3:27 pm VivRaper:Lots of other people plan to leave ScienceBlogs, according to GrrlScientist, over credibility issues! #solo10
3:27 pm nailest:Wish I could have made it to #solo10. Sounds like lots of interesting stuff.
3:27 pm zemogle:Networks convey authority of bloggers #solo10
3:27 pm franknorman:RT @Allochthonous: Is #solo10 coming to the shocking conclusion that people blog for different reasons,
and with different aims in mind? Gosh.
3:28 pm morphosaurus:Problem w/ networks - being accused of being corporate pawn perhaps? Advantages to flying solo.
#soloconf #solo10
3:28 pm akshatrathi:Being on a science blogging network is about gaining trust, hits and building a community. Is that all? Ok.
Can we move on? #solo10
3:28 pm GeekRobot:RT @christineottery RT @alicebell: RT @ayasawada: #solo10 delegates: Enjoyed @jackofkent's talk? Want
to support Libel Reform? Buy a @...
3:28 pm alicebell:I often think science bloggers like to hang out in networks/ brands because trust is such a central issue in
sci com, esp. on web #solo10
3:28 pm rpg7twit:No. Blogging can be journalism, but can be other things too. RT @CameronNeylon: I am puzzled ?Isn't it all
just writing? #solo10
3:28 pm TwistedBacteria:Cannot get much through the #solo10 online livestream. Are they still talking about blogging networks?
3:28 pm AJCann:RT @TwistedBacteria: Cannot get much through the #solo10 online livestream. Are they still talking about
blogging networks?
3:28 pm alokjha:RT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
3:28 pm mrgunn:@grrlscientist says "Networks confer authority" @soloconf #solo10 I think that's misguided because some
of the best are indie.
3:28 pm motor_neuron:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
3:28 pm mfenner:RT @AJCann: Is science in a mess if we have to distinguish public outreach from publication? #solo10
3:29 pm bpanulla:RT @patrickgmj: RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
3:29 pm CameronNeylon:@AJCann I think science is in a mess every time we invoke "the public" as some sort of monolothic "other".
#solo10
3:29 pm NewShoot:#solo10 there are many valued blogger networks, not just science *lookingunderthelamppost*
3:29 pm VivRaper:@TwistedBacteria No. They're now talking Pepsigate and credibility #solo10
3:29 pm drnickmorris:"?@phillord Why blog about other peoples stuff?? Bring insight? #solo10 Can I not bring insight to my own
work?? Woods and trees?
3:29 pm lloydengland:RT @alokjha: RT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one.
EVERYONE is "public" in some field or another #solo10
3:29 pm aallan:RT @AJCann: Is science in a mess if we have to distinguish public outreach from publication? #solo10
3:30 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @akshatrathi: Being on a science blogging network is about gaining trust, hits and building a
community. Is that all? Ok. Can we move on? #solo10
3:30 pm kejames:Enough with #pepsigate already. #solo10
3:30 pm VivRaper:Now they're talking Nature Network blogs and curation #solo10
3:30 pm rpg7twit:@alokjha ask the question!! #solo10
3:30 pm andrewspong:@CameronNeylon I'm intrigued 2. Who cares where author writes (I only see RSS anyway), who they write
for? Only real Q: are they gd? #solo10
3:30 pm andrewspong:RT @mrgunn: @grrlscientist says "Networks confer authority" @soloconf #solo10 I think that's misguided
because some of the best are indie.
3:31 pm bmcmatt:Seems clear that editorially selective blog networks convey* some* authority (+ve or -ve) That's the
essence of an editorial brand #solo10
3:31 pm VivRaper:Discovery makes bloggers very visible. Your stable of bloggers needs to be very visible, not in a widget in
the corner #solo10
3:31 pm mfenner:RT @bmcmatt: Seems clear that editorially selective blog networks convey* some* authority (+ve or -ve)
69 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
That's the essence of an editorial brand #solo10
3:32 pm VivRaper:It's feeling like a NatureNetwork attackfest #solo10 Nope - we're moving onto "Blogging destroys careers"
3:32 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @andrewspong: @CameronNeylon I'm intrigued 2. Who cares where author writes (I only see RSS
anyway), who they write for? Only real Q: are they gd? #solo10
3:32 pm BoraZ:"Networks confer authority" #solo10 does not mean that indies are not good, just less visible to
mainstream media, harder to be seen.
3:32 pm JunkkMale:RT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
3:32 pm andrewspong:Seriously: no-one cares about your brands. Readers are brand-agnostic, author-centric. They follow the
author, not the network. #solo10
3:32 pm AJCann:Impact of blogging on a science career. Audince laughs nervously. #solo10
3:32 pm VivRaper:Some people haven't got tenure because they blog !!!!!!! #solo10
3:32 pm bmcmatt:One of the best things about the google/wikipedia combo, I think, is the worry about using obscure terms is
mitigated #solo10
3:32 pm kjhaxton:Final session of #solo10 raising blood pressure - interesting that there are no indy bloggers there and 2
biologists. Typical!
3:33 pm jamesdadd:Blogging <yawn> I get the point blogging is diverse move on please. What is the value to blogging for a
scientist? #solo10
3:33 pm TomLevenson:RT @edyong209: This distinction betw. writing for scientists/public is false EVERYONE is "public" in some
field #solo10. Preach it, bro!
3:33 pm BoraZ:The visibility of networks to the MSM is important to push the stories, #solo10. With fall of Sb, many
networks. See scienceblogging.org
3:33 pm GozdeZorlu:@sciencegoddess @edyong209 evry situation,evry audience expect diff things. agree where
poss,simplification & context are key #solo10
3:33 pm franknorman:RT @alicebell I think science bloggers hang out in networks/ brands because trust is such a central issue in
sci com, esp. on web #solo10
3:33 pm ruthseeley:RT @TomLevenson: RT @edyong209: This distinction betw. writing for scientists/public is false EVERYONE
is "public" in some field #solo10. Preach it, bro!
3:33 pm edyong209:+10 RT @CameronNeylon: @AJCann I think science is in a mess every time we invoke "the public" as some
sort of monolothic "other". #solo10
3:33 pm mfenner:RT @kjhaxton: Final session of #solo10 raising blood pressure - interesting that there are no indy bloggers
there and 2 biologists. Typical!
3:34 pm science3point0:@mrgunn Thank you! #solo10 #soloconf
3:34 pm VivRaper:Jennyrohn is careful not to mention names of people on her blog (re: tenure question) #solo10
3:34 pm simon_frantz:RT @BoraZ: "Networks confer authority" #solo10 does not mean that indies are not good, just less visible
to MSM, harder to be seen #soloconf
3:34 pm JoBrodie:@alokjha @edyong209 People who write about varied science probably understand that more than me,
writing about diabetes only #solo10
3:35 pm TwistedBacteria:@BoraZ So "visible to mainstream media" = authority...? So sad... #solo10
3:35 pm VivRaper:2004 Grrlscientist worried she's never found a tenure-track position because of negative reaction to her
blog #solo10
3:35 pm jamesdadd:I get the feeling blogging is about trying to get famous. #solo10
3:35 pm AJCann:RT @VivRaper: 2004 Grrlscientist worried she's never found a tenure-track position because of negative
reaction to her blog #solo10
3:35 pm moomoobull:@andrewspong @cameronneylon i care where an author writes because you can then determine their
agenda and honesty when writing #solo10
3:35 pm ehornaday:RT @drpetra: If you can't be at London's Science Online conf (3-4
Sept)http://www.scienceonlinelondon.org/ can follow at #solo10
3:36 pm brunellalongo:According to @tweeterpeter n. of librarians at #solo10 is circa 10. Technical issues prevented him from
tweeting this pm but he's still here
3:36 pm rpg7twit:@CameronNeylon YES! #solo10
3:36 pm jamesdadd:RT @VivRaper: 2004 Grrlscientist worried she's never found a tenure-track position because of negative
reaction to her blog #solo10
3:36 pm easternblot:Reactions from colleagues abt blogging very different for @JennyRohn & @Louwoodley (indifferent) than
for @Grrlscientist (negative) #solo10
3:37 pm oh_henry:No discussion of neg aspects of networks, i.e. cliqueyness, exclusivity. Shame. #solo10
3:37 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @andrewspong: Seriously: no-one cares about your brands. Readers are brand-agnostic, author-centric.
They follow the author, not the network. #solo10
3:37 pm fare:RT @edyong209: Sir Martin Rees: "Someone once told me that the mean no. of readers of a scientific
paper was 0.6... Does that include referee?" #solo10
70 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:37 pm CameronNeylon:@moomoobull Is that not a dangerous proxie? Writing for e.g. Guardian could cover a lot of agendas.
Transparency is imp tho #solo10
3:37 pm aallan:RT @andrewspong: Seriously: no-one cares about your brands. Readers are brand-agnostic, author-centric.
3:37 pm mrgunn:RT @andrewspong Seriously: no-one cares about your brands. Readers are brand-agnostic, author-centric.
They follow the author. #solo10
3:38 pm andrewspong:@moomoobull But if an author isn't transparent about that by default, you wouldn't read them anyway,
right? #solo10 @cameronneylon
3:38 pm orbitingfrog:Blogging does take up time. Blogging during my PhD was easy, now I'm a postdoc and a father it is getting
harder and harder. #solo10
3:38 pm zemogle:Name check for @e_astronomer at #solo10 as a great blogger during #stfc funding crisis
3:38 pm ayasawada:RT @oh_henry: No discussion of neg aspects of networks, i.e. cliqueyness, exclusivity. Shame. #solo10
3:38 pm aallan:RT @zemogle: Name check for @e_astronomer at #solo10 as a great blogger during #stfc funding crisis
3:38 pm morphosaurus:@edyong209 @CameronNeylon @ARCane Would be awesome to see you all at my unconference session
about public opinion of scientists. #solo10
3:38 pm andrewspong:RT @CameronNeylon: @moomoobull Is that not a dangerous proxie? Writing for e.g. Guardian could cover
a lot of agendas. Transparency is imp tho #solo10
3:38 pm orbitingfrog:RT @zemogle: Name check for @e_astronomer at #solo10 as a great blogger during #stfc funding crisis
3:39 pm StineCamilla:RT @jamesdadd: I get the feeling blogging is about trying to get famous. #solo10
3:39 pm mfenner:RT @morphosaurus: @edyong209 @CameronNeylon @ARCane Would be awesome to see you all at my
unconference session about public opinion of scientists. #solo10
3:40 pm VivRaper:#solo10 has moved onto whether funding cuts will affect public engagement activity
3:40 pm franknorman:Do you have a list?RT @brunellalongo According to @tweeterpeter n. of librarians at #solo10 is circa 10.
3:41 pm jamesdadd:If blogging has neg. impact on a scientist then surely social media has the same stigmas? #solo10
3:41 pm rubp:When choosing a lab ask your future PI if you can blog about your work if the answer is no choose a
different lab. #solo10
3:41 pm clasticdetritus:RT @Allochthonous: Is #solo10 coming to shocking conclusion that people blog for different reasons, and
with different aims in mind? Gosh.
3:41 pm kejames:I agree w/ @JennyRohn: there's a message (public outreach=good) & then there's an underlying message
(public outreach=distraction). #solo10
3:41 pm TwistedBacteria:@BoraZ Agree. For most people visibility (= influence) = authority. But shouldn't be that way IMMO
#solo10
3:41 pm aallan:@VivRaper The funding cuts will only affect public engagement activities if there is seen to be money in
public engagement. #solo10
3:42 pm sjcockell:I blog, a little, always at home. I work, a lot, never (or rarely) in my spare time. Why does one have to
impact on other? #solo10
3:42 pm kejames:Comment from audience: 'If you're a PI w/ a grant & papers coming out, a blog will be seen as a charming
eccentricity....(1/2)' #solo10
3:42 pm mfenner:Cliqueyness is big issue RT @ayasawada: RT @oh_henry: No discussion of neg aspects of networks, i.e.
cliqueyness, exclusivity. Shame #solo10
3:42 pm mrgunn:RT @ayasawada RT @oh_henry: No discussion of neg aspects of networks, i.e. cliqueyness, exclusivity.
Shame. #solo10
3:42 pm BobOHara:RT @kejames: I agree w/ @JennyRohn: there's a message (public outreach=good) & then there's an
underlying message (public outreach=distraction). #solo10
3:43 pm VivRaper:Universities are only just coming to terms with blogging. Should be ok provided you don't... erm, talk about
your colleagues #solo10
3:43 pm kejames:'(2/2)...If you're a junior scientist & the papers are coming slowly, it will be seen a bit differently.' #solo10
3:43 pm sciencegoddess:Yes! RT @kejames agree w/ @JennyRohn: there's a message (public outreach=good) & underlying message
(public outreach=distraction). #solo10
3:43 pm imascientist:Audience q: guy told to take his blog down as it got higher google rank than official project site! Project
shld have learnt fr that #solo10
3:44 pm razZ0r:RT @bmcmatt Seems clear that editorially selective blog networks convey* some* authority. That's the
essence of an editorial brand #solo10
3:44 pm rpg7twit:Ask about it. RT @mrgunn: RT @ayasawada RT @oh_henry: No discussion of neg aspects of networks, i.e.
cliqueyness, exclusivity. Shame #solo10
3:44 pm ayasawada:In my head: "The Media", "The Public", "Science" duking it out, Godzilla style #solo10
3:44 pm andrewspong:RT @mfenner: Cliqueyness is big issue RT @ayasawada: RT @oh_henry: No discussion of neg aspects of
networks, i.e. cliqueyness, exclusivity. Shame #solo10
3:44 pm VivRaper:Question/comment: What your colleagues hate is - not blogging - but the assumption that you're a media
slut, not a real scientist #solo10
71 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:44 pm aallan:@BobOHara @kejames @jennyrohn That's true of any non-core activity, if it brings in money then nobody
minds, if it doesn't..? #solo10
3:44 pm rubp:RT @VivRaper: What your colleagues hate is - not blogging - but the assumption that you're a media slut
#solo10
3:44 pm ShaneMcC:.@imascientist very easy for blogs to perform well on google. They are built for grt SEO #solo10
3:45 pm simon_frantz:Good issue, ask about it RT @oh_henry: No discussion of neg aspects of networks, i.e. cliqueyness,
exclusivity. Shame. #solo10
3:45 pm VivRaper:Someone has said their organisation monitors their blog #solo10
3:46 pm VivRaper:Jennyrohn (I think) blogs once a week. Grrlscientist is afraid to say how much. Andrew does 1 - 2 per week
#solo10
3:46 pm imascientist:.@ShaneMcC I know, my point: why didn't project start their own blog, instead of shutting his? #solo10
3:46 pm AJCann:@VivRaper Organizations monitor blogs, but they never complain as long as the press is positive #solo10
3:47 pm BobOHara:@VivRaper @grrlscientist blogs all day every day #solo10
3:47 pm AJCann:In educational technology, it's now the done thing for all projects to have a blog #solo10
3:47 pm VivRaper:@AJCann Is it possible to guarantee that though? I'd say "yes" #solo10
3:47 pm ShaneMcC:#soloconf #solo10 - a lot of focus on current readership, nothing on the long tail of people finding posts via
google
3:48 pm kejames:Comment: 'If you're the one who's on the radio, who writes for the NY Times, who blogs, then you're not a
real scientist.' #solo10
3:48 pm LouPsyc:RT @GrrlScientist: a 10m talk should not consist of 40 slides that have dozens of lines of 10-point font
#solo10 #soloconf
3:48 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong #solo10 'readers are brand agnostic, author centric' is a pretty broad statement - may be
true in narrow cases but generally???
3:48 pm VivRaper:@aallan Thanks! As I say, I keep missing stuff because of broadband jitters, etc.
#solo10#whywewillneverallliveonline
3:48 pm andrewspong:Only want to reach niche readers? Use a network. Want other people to read it? Use Facebook, YouTube,
Twitter to promote yr blog #solo10
3:49 pm rubp:Thinking of it - the fact that universities do not have their own blog platforms 4 researchers seems
anachronistic #solo10
3:49 pm zemogle:No-one bats an eyelid if you watch football but blogging is seen as frivolous #solo10
3:49 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @ShaneMcC: #soloconf #solo10 - a lot of focus on current readership, nothing on the long tail of people
finding posts via google
3:49 pm VivRaper:Writing in public is seen as frivolous and more of a waste of time than any other hobby (e.g. playing
football) #solo10
3:50 pm ayasawada:#solo10 What about other public activities: acting, dancing, writing fiction?
3:50 pm orbitingfrog:Loving that 'media slut' has become a #solo10 meme.
3:50 pm VivRaper:Comment from floor about media sluts: Some bloggers' success goes to their head (!!!!) #solo10
3:50 pm JoBrodie:RT @AJCann: In educational technology, it's now the done thing for all projects to have a blog #solo10
3:50 pm aallan:Maybe it depends on the type of science blogging you're doing? Biologists have problems because there is
money and patents in it? #solo10
3:51 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong aggregation/ editorial selection brands cared about by readers are everywhere - eg
BoingBoing, The New Yorker #solo10
3:51 pm jjaron:Had to shut TweetDeck down and concentrate on work, so I've missed most of #solo10 chat. Where can I
see a summary?
3:51 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt Adjacent analogy: I cd tell you author/title of hundreds, maybe thousands, of my books. No
idea who published most of them #solo10
3:51 pm rubp:#solo10 the interesting question would be how much time you invest promoting your posts
3:51 pm orbitingfrog:.@sarahkendrew really wants to tweet right now. Ooh this is killing her. I can tell... #solo10
3:51 pm StineCamilla:RT @VivRaper: Writing in public is seen as frivolous and more of a waste of time than any other hobby (e.g.
playing football) #solo10
3:51 pm imascientist:@andrewspong @bmcmatt Personally, I read blog posts I come across on twitter, linked to, etc. Neither
brand or author rly features #solo10
3:52 pm CameronNeylon:@moomoobull Do you? I can't say that I would-I'd apply much more of my trust on a per-author basis than
where a given piece appears #solo10
3:52 pm orbitingfrog:I really don't care about blogging networks. Let's move on. #solo10
3:53 pm GozdeZorlu:I hear about scientists who look down on involvement with media.Not my experience-guess I'm journo &
meet media friendly scientists #solo10
3:53 pm andrewspong:RT @imascientist: @andrewspong @bmcmatt Personally, I read blog posts I come across on twitter, linked
to, etc. Neither brand or author rly features #solo10
3:53 pm jamesdadd:It has been suggested nature networks does not communicate very well with its users and this is causing
72 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
problems for the bloggers #solo10
3:53 pm mrgunn:RT @orbitingfrog Loving that 'media slut' has become a #solo10 meme.
3:53 pm AJCann:If you don't want to hear more about networks, ask a question for the panel #solo10
3:53 pm zemogle:@orbitingfrog you're just a media slut #solo10
3:53 pm orbitingfrog:.@imascientist yeah I'd agree with that: generally its about the posts not the author/network. I have RSS
for my faves. #solo10
3:53 pm davecl42:@VivRaper Of course funding cuts will reduce public engagement -they'll reduce everything! #solo10
3:54 pm VivRaper:Panel says good blogging networks curate material, tell people when gremlins will be fixed... #solo10
3:54 pm drnickmorris:Current session on science blogging is really not doing it for me. Seems to be all about blog networks.
Yawn! #solo10
3:54 pm sjcockell:love that it's assumed everyone is on first name terms with @BoraZ #solo10
3:54 pm imascientist:The room is alive with the sound of tapping on laptops. Like a field of busy crickets:-) #solo10
3:54 pm mentalindigest:Do university employers consider science blogging (as a hobby) as being more disruptive than playing
football? #solo10
3:54 pm orbitingfrog:@zemogle no, you're a media slut. Turn around, touch the ground, bagsy not a media slut. #solo10
3:55 pm VivRaper:@davecl42 Can I belatedly add the word 'disproportionately' to my tweet? #solo10
3:55 pm andrewspong:@imascientist Thinking about it, I think I'm agreeing in as much as I consume most content via RSS. But: I
subcribed to *author* 1st #solo10
3:55 pm ayasawada:RT @ShaneMcC: #soloconf #solo10 - a lot of focus on current readership, nothing on the long tail of people
finding posts via google
3:55 pm jamesdadd:There are two groups in blogging, those wanting infamy and those wanting to be the podium for it. #solo10
3:55 pm habib:Simply a false statement #solo10 @rpg7twit @franknorman: As @petermurrayrust says, you can't reuse
your data once Elsevier has it unless you
3:55 pm BoraZ:RT @sjcockell: love that it's assumed everyone is on first name terms with @BoraZ #solo10
3:56 pm BoraZ:@sjcockell but everyone IS on a first-time basis with me, right? #solo10
3:56 pm sciencegoddess:RT @mentalindigest: Do university employers consider science blogging (as a hobby) as being more
disruptive than playing football? #solo10
3:56 pm ayasawada:@ShaneMcC Sdly it's still that 'news' factor. Ppl want the instant gratification and forget the archive factor
of the web #solo10
3:56 pm mrgunn:@bmcmatt @andrewspong There's no well-known & *respected* brand among science blog networks yet.
#solo10
3:56 pm razZ0r:RT @orbitingfrog: Loving that 'media slut' has become a #solo10 meme.
3:56 pm VivRaper:Question: Are bloggers on networks worried about networks becoming cliques? #solo10
3:56 pm ShaneMcC:A post here and there won't change the world. Need to create a movement that might be articulated
online thru a blog. #solo10
3:56 pm sarahkendrew:#solo10 was always terrified of effect of blog on my career but its actually turning out to be very positive.
3:56 pm GozdeZorlu:@oh_henry asks about the negative aspects of online networks #solo10
3:56 pm phillord:#solo10 I think we should have some discussion on blog networks, as we haven't touched that yet
3:57 pm Wise_Diva:RT @mentalindigest: Do university employers consider science blogging (as a hobby) as being more
disruptive than playing football? #solo10
3:57 pm ayasawada:Sadly, science itself is a clique. natural that sciblogs would turn out that way #solo10
3:57 pm andrewspong:Shouldn't science bloggers consider backing their own talent with a myname.com blog rather than
bolstering prestige of a network? #solo10
3:57 pm ShaneMcC:@ayasawada Are most bloggers aware of how well they perform on google on niche searches? perhaps
they wld care more? #solo10
3:57 pm CameronNeylon:@moomoobull You come to expect disclosures of conflict of interest. You build up trust in an
author/source over time. #solo10
3:57 pm imascientist:Good Q from @oh_henry, don't networks have downsides? Cliqueyness, etc. #solo10
3:57 pm aallan:@GozdeZorlu I think many scientists in the trenches do look down on the media friendly, or any any of us
with "outside interests". #solo10
3:57 pm d_swan:@drnickmorris actually the fact I have little interest in this #solo10 session has been very productive for
catching up on work email :)
3:58 pm VivRaper:RT @GozdeZorlu: @oh_henry asks about the negative aspects of online networks #solo10
3:58 pm NewShoot:#solo10 To J Rohn Trained scientists who move outside the research environment should not be seen as
failing to get a job...
3:58 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @phillord: #solo10 I think we should have some discussion on blog networks, as we haven't touched
that yet
3:58 pm VivRaper:RT @ayasawada: Sadly, science itself is a clique. natural that sciblogs would turn out that way #solo10
3:58 pm AJCann:RT @andrewspong: Shouldn't science bloggers back their own talent with myname.com blog rather than
73 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:58 pm mrgunn:RT @AJCann If you don't want to hear more about networks, ask a question for the panel #solo10
3:58 pm zemogle:Just remembered it was a nun who first introduced me to "blogging" - anyone got a more bizarre
evangelist? #solo10
3:58 pm amoebamike:@edyong209 likewise, some of us aren't professional anything #solo10
3:58 pm rpg7twit:Gah. Nature Network has too many bloggers already. #solo10 Also high barrier to commenting is big
problem.
3:58 pm naomiknoble:RT @kejames: Ground rules for citizen science: 1) be open about your research goals (don't try and trick
people into helping you)...(1/2) #solo10
3:58 pm naomiknoble:RT @kejames: (2/2)... 2) Treat participants as collaborators, not as subjects, 3) Don't waste people's time.
#solo10
3:59 pm alun:Are network bloggers cliquey? 'No', say network bloggers who've been talking about network blogs for an
hour. #solo10
3:59 pm ayasawada:@ShaneMcC You'd hope they all monitor their stats. But do they? Esp. the casual bloggers. #solo10
3:59 pm mentalindigesI don't feel like I'm part of a clique on NN, I have both indie and network blog comment on blogs all over
t:
the place. #solo10
3:59 pm rubp:@labratting @abhishektiwari I think if your PI limits you in writing a blog he will limit you in fully exploring
other interests #solo10
4:00 pm CameronNeylo@andrewspong I agree, and that's why I have my own site. It's about creating a brand that is _me_ not
n:
employr, network, company #solo10
4:00 pm VivRaper:JennyR can't keep up with new Nature Network bloggers because there are too many #solo10
4:00 pm imascientist:Answer fr @grrlscientist, never felt part of clique, don't be part of it. < Seems naive. Cliques rarely feel like
clique fr inside. #solo10
4:00 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @ayasawada Sadly, science itself is a clique. natural that sciblogs would turn out that way #solo10
4:00 pm aallan:It looks like @orbitingfrog has been rate limited here at #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2kuwm4
4:00 pm AJCann:RT @rpg7twit: #solo10 High barrier to commenting is big problem on Nature Network blogs. - I agree!
4:00 pm VivRaper:Audience question: How do people check accuracy of their blogposts? #solo10
4:00 pm alun:To be fair the audience is feeding this. #solo10
4:00 pm orbitingfrog:RT @alun: Are network bloggers cliquey? 'No', say network bloggers who've been talking about network
blogs for an hour. #solo10
4:00 pm carolune:@aallan @doccosmos If you don't own one, you should try (it gets you a lot of attention, also online...)
#solo10 #FeatherBoa :D
4:00 pm VivRaper:JennyR: My blog is autobiographical (question about how bloggers fact check)! #solo10
4:00 pm rpg7twit:Hear hear. RT @mrgunn: RT @AJCann If you don't want to hear more about networks, ask a question for
the panel #solo10
4:01 pm zemogle:?@aallan: It looks like @orbitingfrog has been rate limited here at #solo10http://twitpic.com/2kuwm4? its
because he's a media slut
4:01 pm amoebamike:@alicebell lol, i picture the indy sci bloggers-such as myself-as the pesky younger sibling vying for
attention! #solo10
4:01 pm drnickmorris:RT @VivRaper: JennyR: My blog is autobiographical (question about how bloggers fact check)! #solo10
4:01 pm VivRaper:Wonder what the panel talking about science blogging thinks makes a blog popular/successful? #solo10
4:02 pm mrgunn:RT @andrewspong: Shouldn't science bloggers back their own talent with myname.com blog rather than
4:02 pm aallan:RT @alun: Are network bloggers cliquey? 'No', say network bloggers who've been talking about network
4:02 pm edyong209:On real world impact of sci blogs, you'll never know unless you ASK READERS. See responses
here http://bit.ly/aiD7pj #solo10
4:02 pm neilfws:Caught and enjoyed some of #solo10; clearly the best is behind us for today.
4:03 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong if the *only* brands are personal brands, that's actually an obstacle to new entrants, no?
#solo10
4:03 pm VivRaper:Scientists who appear on TV and demystify it are also looked down upon (question from audience)?
#solo10
4:03 pm sjcockell:@VivRaper being invited onto a panel to talk about blogging must be one indicator of success? ;) #solo10
4:04 pm rpg7twit:Good Q for tonight RT @VivRaper: Wonder what the panel talking about science blogging thinks makes a
blog popular/successful? #solo10
4:04 pm TwistedBacteriRT @VivRaper: Wonder what the panel talking about science blogging thinks makes a blog
a:
popular/successful? #solo10
4:04 pm phillord:#solo10 Science is extremely cliquey -- why should blogging be any different?
4:04 pm d_swan:@neilfws yes, yes it is. Going to wrap up here for the day very shortly, but looking forward to tomorrows
sessions now #solo10
4:04 pm mrgunn:RT @edyong209 On real world impact of sci blogs, you'll never know unless you ASK READERS. See
74 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
responses here http://bit.ly/aiD7pj #solo10
4:05 pm NewShoot:#solo10 this is one session where twitter fall would have helped!
4:05 pm CameronNeylo@bmcmatt It is not more democratic than closed shops with non-public editorial policies? Easy for me to
n:
say I suppose #solo10
4:05 pm mentalindigesI go through extensive fact-checking on my own blog(s), just as I would any academic writing - don't most
t:
scibloggers? #solo10
4:05 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @edyong209 On real world impact of sci blogs, you'll never know unless you ASK READERS. See
responses here http://bit.ly/aiD7pj #solo10
4:05 pm the_Node:I (Eva) am in London at the Science Online meeting. I'll talk about the Node tomorrow. Meanwhile see
twitter tag #solo10 for meeting tweets
4:05 pm VivRaper:@sjcockell Yes! Which is why I'd have loved to be there to ask that! #solo10
4:05 pm AJCann:#solo10 Wrapping up. More from Mendeley fringe tonite! #solo10
4:06 pm TwistedBacteriRT @VivRaper: Scientists who appear on TV and demystify it are also looked down upon (question from
a:
audience)? #solo10
4:06 pm VivRaper:@rpg7twit Thanks. If the success question gets asked tonight, can you let me know what people thought?
#solo10
4:06 pm gtyrelle:RT @orbitingfrog: I really don't care about blogging networks. Let's move on. #solo10 [science blogging
networks at least]
4:06 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong I.e. a newly minted PhD can make a big splash with a Nature paper. But post to own
website="Who the hell are you?" #solo10
4:06 pm rpg7twit:@VivRaper absolutely. #solo10
4:08 pm Tideliar:RT @rpg7twit: Gah. Nature Network has too many bloggers already. #solo10 Also high barrier to
commenting is big problem.
4:08 pm VivRaper:@rpg7twit Thanks #solo10
4:12 pm rpg7twit:#ineedabeer #solo10
4:12 pm aallan:Just a reminder of directions to the Mendely building for those at #solo10. http://twitpic.com/2kv0w4
4:13 pm Kate_Travis:#solo10 done for the day. Next adventure: cycling across London in p.m. Rush hour. Wish me luck!
4:14 pm EMBOMeetingRT @MyScienceCareer: our editors will be tweeting from #solo10 and career day at the #EMBOmtgthis
:
weekend - stay tuned!
4:16 pm brunellalongo:We've had some interferences technical issues omissions and duplicates at #solo10 but everything is fine :)
catch the sun before is gone!
4:18 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong You suggested brands weren't important. I said they can be important. Negative examples
don't disprove that. It varies.#solo10
4:18 pm JTownend:@samshepherd I think this site has its readers plus sorted http://bit.ly/aiD7pj (via @edyong209#solo10)
4:20 pm CandyEfH:@GozdeZorlu #SOLO10 re scientists looking down on media. Interesting point. My experience is they're
driven most be publication ranking?
4:27 pm carolune:I wish I could join the #solo10 crowd... but we've got a group getaway at a hot springs resort this weekend.
Could be worse :)
4:27 pm TwistedBacteri"Science Online London: How is the web changing science?" will continue tomorrow. Thanx for the
a:
livestream & to all who tweeted from #solo10
4:35 pm jamesdadd:Heading to the bar across the road as suggested. Hope the beer is cold. #solo10
4:38 pm Geknitics:RT @TomLevenson: RT @edyong209: This distinction betw. writing for scientists/public is false EVERYONE
is "public" in some field #solo10. Preach it, bro!
4:43 pm zenofbass:RT @andrewspong: Only want to reach niche readers? Use a network. Want other people to read it? Use
Facebook, YouTube, Twitter to promote yr blog #solo10
4:44 pm zenofbass:RT @andrewspong: Seriously: no-one cares about your brands. Readers are brand-agnostic, author-centric.
4:49 pm JoBrodie:@jjaron Catch up with all the #solo10 tweets at wthashtag http://wthashtag.com/Solo10 or
Twapperkeeper http://bit.ly/bSqUsD :)
4:50 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt But blogs are free, right? No barrier to entrance/access #solo10
4:51 pm AJCann:Shameless plug for http://bit.ly/9sjgiI - let's reclaim Facebook for science! #solo10
4:52 pm AJCann:RT @JoBrodie: Catch up with all the #solo10 tweets at wthashtag http://wthashtag.com/Solo10 or
Twapperkeeper http://bit.ly/bSqUsD :)
4:53 pm AJCann:RT @andrewspong: Want to reach niche readers? Use a network. Want other people to read it? Use
Facebook, Twitter to promote yr blog #solo10
4:55 pm BoraZ:RT @AJCann: RT @JoBrodie: Catch up with all the #solo10 tweets at
wthashtaghttp://wthashtag.com/Solo10 or Twapperkeeper http://bit.ly/bSqUsD :)
4:56 pm jgold85:RT @BoraZ: Finding people to aggregate with http://bit.ly/cq1VyW Scienceblogging.org #scio11#solo10
4:56 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt Re aggregation: yes. Readers are filters. We trust our peers as readers as well as writers.
#solo10
75 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
4:57 pm craigbruce:RT @ChemSpider: "The pdf format is an insult to science" - Martin Robbins telling off journals 4 taking
photos of papers + putting them online #solo10
4:59 pm EdinburghFire:Great first day of @soloconf & #solo10 in London. We will introduce some of the ideas in our work soon
5:01 pm andrewspong:@moomoobull Re transparency: I think we may be considering different contextual definitions. I mean: I
want to know who pays you. #solo10
5:02 pm morphosaurusBEER. #solo10 #soloconf
:
5:02 pm morphosaurusRT @AJCann: Shameless plug for http://bit.ly/9sjgiI - let's reclaim Facebook for science! #solo10
:
5:03 pm williamjnixon:@mrgunn many thanks for the recent repository Mendeley related URL RT hope #solo10 is going well
5:04 pm kurt_gielen:RT @GrrlScientist: "The universal language of science is bad English" ~ astronomer Martin Rees, chair,
5:04 pm skruk:RT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
5:05 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt Re Author publishes in Nature vs. myname.com 'who are *you*?' You're right. I forget this
mindset still dominates STM :) #solo10
5:08 pm kieronflanagaRT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
n:
5:09 pm hairat:RT @GrrlScientist: "The universal language of science is bad English" ~ astronomer Martin Rees, chair,
5:17 pm enniscath:Hoping all my friends are having fun at #solo10. Wish I could be there!
5:18 pm flipphillips:RT @edyong209: Sir Martin Rees: "Someone once told me that the mean no. of readers of a scientific
5:20 pm enniscath:RT @phillord: #solo10 Science is extremely cliquey -- why should blogging be any different?
5:20 pm enniscath:RT @alun: Are network bloggers cliquey? 'No', say network bloggers who've been talking about network
5:21 pm enniscath:RT @NewShoot: #solo10 To J Rohn Trained scientists who move outside the research environment should
not be seen as failing to get a job...
5:21 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt Does volume of pubs (in English; wait til Mandarin is #1 language) suggest primacy of trad
'brands' has peaked? #solo10
5:21 pm FrankNu:RT @alicebell: My #solo10 talk on taking science journalism upstream: blogged (with extra linkage
5:22 pm PointOfPresenRT @andrewspong: Seriously: no-one cares abt yr brands. Readers are brand-agnostic, author-centric.. Me:
ce:
But the author IS the brand #solo10
5:23 pm HankCampbellRT @alun: Are network bloggers cliquey? 'No', say network bloggers who've been talking about network
:
blogs for an hour. #solo10 HA!
5:23 pm jamesdadd:Not sure if I bought a ticket for the mendeley bbq. #solo10 #soloconf
5:23 pm scibuff:.@tacoe so where did everyone go for beers? #solo10
5:24 pm themorrigan1RT @LouWoodley: RT @CameronNeylon "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and
972:
using it to transmit Morse Code" #solocon #solo10
5:26 pm enniscath:RT @VivRaper: It's feeling like a NatureNetwork attackfest #solo10 Nope - we're moving onto "Blogging
destroys careers"
5:26 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt Not sure abt 'brand of me' idea. It may be a facile assumption predicated on concepts that
don't transpose easily #solo10
5:27 pm enniscath:RT @rpg7twit: All Nature Network bloggers should preface all their posts with 'Nature don't pay me!'
#solo10 #soloconf
5:28 pm BeatriceJBray:RT @CameronNeylon: I am puzzled by the distinction between journalism at one end of day and blogging
at the other. Isn't it all just writing? #solo10
5:28 pm enniscath:RT @simon_frantz: RT @Allochthonous: Is #solo10 coming 2 the shocking conclusion that people blog for
different reasons, and with different aims in mind? Gosh
5:28 pm andrewspong:@Draxford Coda to last tweet to @bmcmatt re brands. We're not brands. We're people. We write things.
People may read & recirc them. #solo10
5:29 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong free/open does not mean equal levels of visibility. Barrier to entry is obscurity. Brands =
one route into limelight #solo10
5:31 pm kaythaney:OK, closing up work related things and heading to rooftop fringe event for #solo10 #soloconf. it's a tough
life we lead, that's for sure.
5:32 pm friendsofdarwi@alun With apologies to Marx, I wouldn't be in any clique which would have me as a member. [Groucho,
n:
not Karl.] #solo10
5:33 pm andrewspong:@PointOfPresence I don't like to think of myself as a brand. It's alienating. I like this post on the
subject: http://bit.ly/b4tYSA #solo10
5:34 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt I can't help but think 'brand=route to fame' is historically contingent. Used to be the case. Not
76 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
sure it is now. #solo10
5:34 pm scibuff:.@jamesdadd @morphosaurus @tacoe so where did everyone go for beers? #solo10
5:37 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong I think we just mean different things by 'brand' #solo10
5:38 pm andrewspong:RT @scibuff: so where did everyone go for beers? #solo10 I heard mention of 'Euston Flyer'. Come out.
Turn left. Leave BL. Opposite.
5:40 pm jkerrstevens:For the brief moment I was there I found #solo10 quite inspiring. Re-invention continues.
5:41 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt Yes, and no. It's been fascinating for me to immerse myself in #solo10 world-view. I've been
mildly taken aback at conservatism.
5:41 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong my defn = name you recognize that conveys certain expectations, so of course people can
themselves be brands #solo10
5:47 pm robisaacnz:RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
5:47 pm GustavHolmbeRT @alicebell: I often think science bloggers like to hang out in networks/ brands because trust is such a
rg:
central issue in sci com, esp. on web #solo10
5:48 pm HankCampbellRT @rpg7twit: NN bloggers should preface posts with 'Nature don't pay me!' #solo10 - Can I stop paying
:
bloggers too??
5:48 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt I don't self-identify as a brand. I'm me. Furthermore, If I can represent myself as me w/out a
brand's mediation, I will. #solo10
5:52 pm tothur:RT @razZ0r: RT @mfenner Science is probably one of the few areas where bloggers blog in networks
#solo10
5:53 pm rvidal:Fringe Frivolous #solo10 (@ Mendeley HQ) http://4sq.com/ajXZRF
5:54 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong Self-identification doesn't really come into it - your brand is the perception of others
#solo10
5:56 pm jamesdadd:@scibuff @morphosaurus @tacoe not at the euston flyer. We are now not surrounded by sci. Where did
they all go? #solo10 #soloconf
5:56 pm bmcmatt:@andrewspong if you want to go No Logo, contributing to discussions genuinely anonymously is closest
(but has probs all of its own) #solo10
5:59 pm victoria_plumAnyone know how long peeps are hanging out in euston flyer for - had to pop home, but would to pop out
b:
again #solo10 #soloconf
6:00 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt I'm going to draw a veil over this before we put everyone into a coma. One more observation
to follow, though :) #solo10
6:02 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt I try to slough off 'the brand' as a concept. IMO, it's ill suited to conversational, indirect nature
of SM economy #solo10
6:02 pm jamesdadd:@tacoe @scibuff @morphosaurus sounds like a secret military operation. #solo10 #soloconf call me Agent
Red Squirrel
6:03 pm andrewspong:@bmcmatt Marketers feel entitled to transpose concept of 'the brand' on to an enviroment where I don't
believe it has any meaning #solo10
6:05 pm scibuff:.@jamesdadd @tacoe @morphosaurus aight let's just pick a place and stick with it ... People will come ...
#solo10
6:05 pm andrewspong:Thanks to all at #solo10 for a great day. 10th anniv wedding celebs mean I won't be participating
tomorrow. Hope to do both days #solo11 :)
6:06 pm metaphorhackRT @andrewspong: @bmcmatt Marketers feel entitled to transpose concept of 'the brand' on to an
er:
enviroment where I don't believe it has any meaning #solo10
6:18 pm lauradesign:#solo10 Good 1day. Had to leave for meeting Elaine Toms discussing serendipity research methods, but
catching up with tweets. See you tmrw.
6:20 pm beautyscientisMissing #solo10 due to family wedding surrounded by evangelical Christians. You have no idea how painful
t:
that is.
6:22 pm jamesdadd:Me and @scibuff are at euston flyer #solo10 where is everyone else? #soloconf
6:25 pm BeatriceJBray:RT @mrgunn: @grrlscientist says "Networks confer authority" @soloconf #solo10 I think that's misguided
because some of the best are indie.
6:29 pm pucegreen:Amazing RT @orbitingfrog: For those at @the_zooniverse #solo10 session: spacecraft debris found by
@moonzoo users: http://bit.ly/9m5OFt
6:31 pm imascientist:LOVELY post RT @noodlemaz: Finally! My *blogpost* on #IAS2010 - sorry it took so long,
people!http://bit.ly/asFQvO #horsesmouth #solo10
6:33 pm exoskeletonfirRT IF YOU Hate/Don't Like JUSTIN BIEBER and get 2 FREE SHOUTOUTS RT now :) (must be following me)
e:
#teamfollowback #lessonlearned #solo10
6:35 pm bevgibbs:I hope my meringues arent turning beige whilst Im catching up with Twitter. Can't believe #solo10 is
trending though. V. Good.
6:36 pm metaphorhackRT @CameronNeylon: "The PDF is an insult to science...it's like inventing the phone and using it to transmit
er:
77 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
6:38 pm scibuff:@morphosaurus we're at the slots getting our asses kicked #solo10
6:38 pm phidias51:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 Semantic web? Elsevier: all OUR data (molecules, proteins, links) is behind
6:42 pm scicom_bot:RT @JoBrodie "Where do you post, or look for, science communication jobs? Help
expandhttp://is.gd/1KPor" #solo10
6:43 pm sjcockell:#solo10 trending (in the UK at least)... cool :) http://twitpic.com/2kwbu5
6:45 pm d_swan:RT @sjcockell: #solo10 trending (in the UK at least)... cool :) http://twitpic.com/2kwbu5
6:46 pm Richard56:RT @Theo_Bloom: RT @andrewspong: Interesting discussion: are commercial publishers reforming,
managing their staged decline, or circling the drain? #solo10
6:49 pm scibuff:So the official word on drinks tonight is Euston Flyer across the road from BL #solo10 #soloconf
6:53 pm BKZDOUGLIX:Rethink #solo10
6:53 pm sjcockell:The #solo10 'newspaper' is a lot more interesting today: http://paper.li/tag/solo10
6:55 pm BKZDOUGLIX:Rethink #solo10 because you are busted. You have no choice. Wir sind glasklar?
6:55 pm chdphd:Some photos from Science Online London 2010 (Friday) - http://bit.ly/cLSkgT #solo10
7:12 pm jamesdadd:Still at euston flyer #soloconf #solo10
7:17 pm amy_mueller:RT @BoraZ: Watching #solo10 hashtag today.
7:23 pm rivenhomewoRT @mrgunn: RT @rubp Lesson learned. next time print cards with my Twitter username on it. #solo10
od:
7:24 pm cells_nnm:RT @mfenner: Martin Rees: most publishers have agreed on the inevitability of some form of open access
#solo10
7:24 pm cells_nnm:RT @mfenner: Martin Rees: scientific information and ideas should absolutely be freely available to
everybody, not just institutions #solo10
7:26 pm amy_mueller:RT @edyong209: This distinction between writing for scientists/public is a false one. EVERYONE is "public"
7:29 pm scibuff:RT @jamesdadd: Still at euston flyer #soloconf #solo10 that's where the partys at
7:29 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: a 10m talk should not consist of 40 slides that have dozens of lines of 10-point font
#solo10 #soloconf
7:29 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: "if you claim to represent a community, you have to interact w them" ~ chris taylor
#solo10 #soloconf
7:29 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: create serendipitous connections, add value to your/other sites, lead public to your
resources #solo10 #soloconf
7:31 pm edyong209:The video from my #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and @alicebell on Rebooting Sci
Journalism online is here http://bit.ly/bMFSzY
7:32 pm TravisSaunderRT @edyong209: The video from my #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and @alicebellon
s:
Rebooting Sci Journalism online is here http://bit.ly/bMFSzY
7:33 pm _ColinS_:Flash :( RT @edyong209: The video from #solo10 on Rebooting Sci Journalism online is
herehttp://bit.ly/bMFSzY
7:44 pm jgold85:ZOMFG @edyong209 has a british accent. RT @edyong209: video from #solo10 panel w/
@david_dobbs @mjrobbins & @alicebell http://bit.ly/bMFSzY
7:44 pm richardhwest:A pretty SlideShare presentation about semantic web by @rjw: Linked Data Publishing Three-
Stephttp://slidesha.re/cnOhH3 #solo10
7:50 pm JennyRohn:The official hashtag for Fringe Frivolous roof unconference is #frfr10 - we start in ten minutes! #solo10
7:52 pm jamesdadd:blogging it seems to be more about personal public value than advancement of science #soloconf#solo10
7:53 pm easternblot:RT @JennyRohn: The official hashtag for Fringe Frivolous roof unconference is #frfr10 - we start in ten
minutes! #solo10
7:54 pm jamesdadd:Surely you have to be part of the community to represent it as a voice? #soloconf #solo10
7:59 pm jasonhoyt:Started RT @JennyRohn: The official hashtag for Fringe Frivolous roof unconference is #frfr10 - we start in
ten minutes! #solo10
8:01 pm cells_nnm:I hope #solo10 will make a webcast and recorded talks archive online
8:01 pm rpg7twit:#frfr10 is warming up cc #solo10
8:06 pm MaverickNY:@cells_nnm there's some #solo10 here http://tinyurl.com/3x5e9z5 bookmark for live coverage tomorrow
:)
8:10 pm nightingale801RT @edyong209: The video from my #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and @alicebellon
:
8:10 pm mentalindigesUnconference http://yfrog.com/1ammnuj w00t! #frfr10 #solo10
t:
8:11 pm sarahkendrewwifi, at last. thanks Mendeley #solo10
:
8:13 pm rpg7twit:More beer please. #solo10 #frfr10
8:14 pm SandyAdam:@rpg7twit losing bags? I dunno, maybe you had enough beer? lol #solo10 #frfr10
8:16 pm akshatrathi:An idea: interview academics asking them about science blogging. #solo10 #frfr10
78 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
8:20 pm aallan:So we just put @sarahkendrew in charge of the unconference. #solo10
8:22 pm jamesdadd:If data needs to be turned into knowledge what do academics need? #solo10 #soloconf
8:23 pm mentalindigesI don't know that my blogs have impact, but I know my talks are received well #frfr10 #solo10
t:
8:24 pm LouWoodley:#ISS pass overhead over the Mendeley roof terrace #solo10
8:24 pm kaythaney:@jennyrohn what about in the pipeline? #frfr10 #solo10
8:24 pm akshatrathi:#solo10 #frfr10 I blog because I love writing. But more importantly, it is also a permanent thing. It's
outreach fr my non-scientist reader
8:26 pm pssalgado:Just saw #Iss for the first time with @kejames and a few #solo10 ppl. Really cool!
8:28 pm axiomsofchoicOh no! Missed this and I told loads of ppl about it. RT @LouWoodley #ISS pass overhead over the
e:
Mendeley roof terrace #solo10
8:31 pm moomoobull:I don't read blogs because I can't get easily add them to my Twitter feed #frfr10 #solo10
8:32 pm aallan:Really interesting question. Who are our readers? I know more about which OS is used by my readers then
what they are interested in? #solo10
8:34 pm aallan:Success is "writing for ourselves," something I definitely agree with... #solo10 #frfr10
8:34 pm akshatrathi:#solo10 #frfr10 @vivraper I am a chemistry blogger. And a famous one. :)
8:35 pm franknorman:RT @aallan: Success is "writing for ourselves," something I definitely agree with... #solo10 #frfr10
8:36 pm akshatrathi:#solo10 #frfr10 writing is not just a form of expression but also a way of thinking. If you have learned a
better way to think, that's it.
8:36 pm YSJournal:RT @aallan: Success is "writing for ourselves," something I definitely agree with... #solo10 #frfr10
8:37 pm franknorman:RT @akshatrathi: #solo10 #frfr10 writing is not just a form of expression but also a way of thinking. If you
have learned a better way to think, that's it.
8:37 pm rpg7twit:@SandyAdam fringe frivolous, the rebel #solo10
8:38 pm memotypic:@rpg7twit @phillord @morgantaschuk For the record, parasite comment was a precis of what bench
scientists say a lot wrt reuse/credit #solo10
8:38 pm kejames:Speaking of science outreach... the space station is passing overhead again at 22:53! #solo10#frfr10
8:40 pm pssalgado:My pleasure! RT @imascientist @ShaneMcC Thanks to all who came and participated in #iassolosession at
#soloconf #solo10
8:40 pm memotypic:@rpg7twit @phillord @morgantaschuk 'Commensalism' requires robust person and data IDs to allow
robust back-propagation of credit #solo10
8:41 pm pssalgado:RT @kejames: Speaking of science outreach... the space station is passing overhead again at 22:53!
#solo10 #frfr10
8:42 pm memotypic:@rpg7twit @phillord @morgantaschuk With reviewers publishers and funders policing and recording, and
databases doing their part #solo10
8:42 pm SciCareerEditoRT @ayasawada: Sadly, science itself is a clique. natural that sciblogs would turn out that way #solo10
r:
8:43 pm easternblot:RT @kejames: Speaking of science outreach... the space station is passing overhead again at 22:53!
#solo10 #frfr10
8:46 pm SongthrushonRT @kejames: Speaking of science outreach... the space station is passing overhead again at 22:53!
Cam:
#solo10 #frfr10
8:46 pm enniscath:@_modscientist_ @BobOHara me too :'( Wish I was there, more so than for the main #solo10event. #frfr10
8:48 pm nksheridan:@akshatrathi #solo10 ?? .. say hello to @GrrlScientist #solocon
8:53 pm David_Dobbs:RT @jgold85: ZOMFG @edyong209 has a british accent. RT @edyong209: video from #solo10panel w/
@david_dobbs @mjrobbins & @alicebell http://bit.ly/bMFSzY
8:53 pm David_Dobbs:RT @edyong209: The video from my #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and @alicebellon
8:54 pm drnickmorris:Blog post: Science online London 2010 - day 1 #solo10 http://bms.ncl.ac.uk/blog/?p=627
8:58 pm researchdigestI been at science online #solo10 #soloconf Was so cool to meet
:
@mocost @gingerbreadlady@alokjha @imascientist @David_dobbs @bmossop
9:01 pm jamesdadd:Academia very sceptical of commercial organisations but intresically linked. #solo10 #soloconf
9:04 pm MaryKnudson:RT @edyong209: The video from my #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and @alicebellon
9:06 pm alisonmacleodBack from excellent #solo10 conference and now drinking beer and stalking conference attendees. Online
:
obv.
9:14 pm TechCzech:Amazing how many academics burnt by bad journalism in their own discipline still rely on reporting from
other disciplines for info. #solo10
9:16 pm harpistkat:Best quote all day from #soloconf #solo10 - @mjrobbins "When there is a bloodbath, we will make black
pudding"
9:26 pm pfanderson:RT @edyong209: The video from my #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and @alicebellon
9:32 pm edyong209:Hey #solo10 organisers, can you make those session videos embeddable pls? Stick em on Youtube?
79 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:45 pm andymee:@jobadge Perhaps @ajcann should suggest it to replace Twitterfall at #solo10
9:46 pm kejames:Okay, #solo10 #frfr10 tweeps, another #ISS pass in five minutes (22:53) - look west!
9:47 pm scibuff:#solo10 #soloconf is gonna hit shoreditch reply if ur up 4 it
9:57 pm jamesdadd:Commercialised networks are a huge turn off.#solo10 #soloconf
9:58 pm pfanderson:RT @mrgunn: RT @andrewspong: Shouldn't science bloggers back their own talent with myname.com blog
rather than bolstering prestige of a network? #solo10
9:59 pm MightyCasey:RT @mrgunn: RT @andrewspong: Shouldn't science bloggers back their own talent with myname.com blog
rather than bolstering prestige of a network? #solo10
10:10 pm researchremixRT @sjcockell: The #solo10 'newspaper' is a lot more interesting today: http://bit.ly/aFH57Y
:
10:11 pm scibuff:The #solo10 is moving the shoreditch ... enjoy
10:16 pm pssalgado:Good day at #solo10. Time to head home, get some test to be ready for some more science on line
tomorrow.
10:19 pm hoxbot:RT @scibuff The #solo10 is moving the shoreditch ... enjoy
10:33 pm bmcmatt:RT @phillord: #solo10 Science is extremely cliquey -- why should blogging be any different?
10:34 pm scienceblogginSaved search for #solo10 and watched all day today. Will continue tomorrow. Hi, everyone in London!
g:
11:40 pm sarahkendrewgiving up on a night at Fabric with friends for #solo10. better be worth it tomorrow...
:
September 4, 2010
12:02 am ovrdr:RT @edyong209: Sir Martin Rees: "Someone once told me that the mean no. of readers of a scientific
12:04 am razZ0r:RT @sjcockell: The #solo10 'newspaper' is a lot more interesting today: http://paper.li/tag/solo10
12:06 am mjrobbins:Thanks! RT @harpistkat: Best quote all day from #soloconf #solo10 - @mjrobbins "When there is a
bloodbath, we will make black pudding"
12:08 am mjrobbins:RT @edyong209: Video of #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and @alicebell on Sci Journalism
online is here http://bit.ly/bMFSzY
12:16 am zeno001:RT @mjrobbins: RT @edyong209: Video of #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and
@alicebell on Sci Journalism online is here http://bit.ly/bMFSzY
12:30 am alicebell:Condoms from your cabbie by @DrPetra http://bit.ly/bkd3YV from 2005, but RT-ed after
@mjrobbins comment at #solo10
1:00 am sciencepond:Link (7 votes http://bit.ly/9QdRWA) #solo10 - Science 3.0 http://bit.ly/drleb6
5:33 am morphosaurus:@Yorrike I'll still be at the #solo10 conference, so will have to pass again I'm afraid.
5:58 am PhilDRoberts:Tube update: most lines have work especially from paddington direction [me: walking from Regents Park]
#solo10
6:15 am kjhaxton:Just about functional for day 2 of #solo10 and day 3 of conferencing in general.
6:33 am orbitingfrog:My 'hotel' for #solo10 is some sort of tribute to soviet Russia. My room is too small to take a meaningful
picture!
6:42 am David_Dobbs:Video of #solo10 panel with @edyong209 @mjrobbins @alicebell and me on Sci Journalism online is
here http://bit.ly/bMFSzY Martin HATES PDFs
6:49 am lauradesign:@aleksk looking forward for you talk today at #solo10
6:55 am pucegreen:Heading down to London for Day 2 of #solo10, in need of caffeine first.
7:04 am AJCann:RT @razZ0r: RT @sjcockell: The #solo10 'newspaper' is a lot more interesting
today:http://paper.li/tag/solo10
7:07 am drnickmorris:Off for day 2 of 'Science online London 2010' #solo10
7:07 am katie_fraser:On the train on the way to #solo10, using the wireless service. It's the future, I tells ya.
7:15 am axiomsofchoice:On the train back into London for day two of #solo10
7:18 am rpg7twit:Yay. @aleksk is London-bound #solo10
7:21 am Stephen_Curry:For those too distracted by #solo10 #soloconf or #frfr10 to go online yesterday, this was my telescopic
blogpost http://gu.com/p/2jdyy/tw
7:23 am orbitingfrog:.@zemogle you're such a media slut #solo10
7:27 am brook_88:Continuing my tendency to missplace my stuff-if anyone has found my wallet (either at #soloconf or
#frfr10) pls let me know #solo10
7:29 am JennyRohn:Beautifully written star encounter RT @Stephen_Curry For those too distracted by #solo10, my telescopic
blogpost http://gu.com/p/2jdyy/tw
7:30 am brook_88:RT @Stephen_Curry: For those too distracted by #solo10 #soloconf or #frfr10 to go online yesterday, this
was my telescopic blogpost http://gu.com/p/2jdyy/tw
7:30 am dellybean:RT @mjrobbins: RT @edyong209: Video of #solo10 panel with @david_dobbs @mjrobbins and
@alicebell on Sci Journalism online is here http://bit.ly/bMFSzY
7:31 am dellybean:RT @brook_88: Continuing my tendency to missplace my stuff-if anyone has found my wallet (either at
#soloconf or #frfr10) pls let me know #solo10
80 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
7:32 am rpg7twit:Eek. RT @brook_88: if anyone has found my wallet (either at #soloconf or #frfr10) pls let me know #solo10
7:35 am mentalindigest:The draw of a good starfield in Cumbria RT @Stephen_Curry For those too distracted by #solo10, my
telescopic blogpost http://bit.ly/asO41l
7:36 am Stephen_Curry:@brook_88 Not to worry - I shall pimp it shamelessly today. And blank anyone at #solo10 who can't quote
from it! ;-)
7:36 am adders:Packing my blogging kit for #solo10
7:37 am morphosaurus:Up and on train for #solo10 second day. Disturbed that a carriage with no toilet smells so strongly of
faeces.
7:37 am notscientific:Seems like for once, Saturday won't be dead twitter-wise. Must thank #solo10 even though I'm not in
London, let alone the UK.
7:39 am ishzz:RT @mentalindigest draw of a good starfield in Cumbria RT @Stephen_Curry 4 those too distracted by
#solo10 my blogpost http://bit.ly/asO41l
7:48 am edyong209:I have late-night-writing hangover. This is about four hours earlier than I normally rise on Sat. Curse you
#solo10.
7:48 am rdmpage:Heading in to #solo10 with @vsmithuk
7:48 am liquidizer:RT @jamesdadd: If data needs to be turned into knowledge what do academics need? #solo10#soloconf
7:48 am AJCann:Blogging about #solo10. Now there's a surprise.
7:50 am petermurrayrust#solo10 #greenchain our session will be recorded live on Etherpad - visithttp://okfnpad.org/soloSession
:
7:55 am katie_fraser:Working on my presentation for #jisclms event next week on my way to #solo10. Lots to say in 3 minutes!
7:55 am egonwillighagen:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 #greenchain our session will be recorded live on Etherpad -
visithttp://okfnpad.org/soloSession
7:58 am JennyRohn:Nothing to do with beer, then? RT @edyong209 Late-night-writing hangover. This is earlier than I normally
rise on Sat. Curse you #solo10
8:00 am lablit:If you want your dulcet tones to appear on our #podcast of #solo10, find @jennyrohn during today's
breaks!
8:17 am Pathh1:An unedited Editor's view of #solo10 #soloconf frv Annals of Botany Comments, criticism, even demolition
appreciated http://t.co/X94aEYf via
8:23 am mendeley_com:too.. early.. #solo10
8:25 am science3point0:En route to #solo10. Aaargh, don't start without me!
8:28 am Pathh1:@mendeley_com: too.. early.. #solo10 Thanks "to" and "for" your great hospitality last night.. Conferencing
happens at the unconferneces.
8:30 am joergheber:Second day of #solo10 is about to start. Look out for tweets with this hashtag. (@ British
Library)http://4sq.com/2f3S1b
8:32 am NewShoot:This conference has such great catering! #solo10 *noms egg and mushroom bun*
8:36 am edyong209:Arriving at #solo10. There is a straight line between me and the coffee and anyone standing in it will be
torn in two
8:37 am petermurrayrust#solo10 #greenchain - Dan and Cameron are here to help with the session. Please visit
:
Etherpadhttp://bit.ly/dxnVaW
8:51 am jamesdadd:Conf room 2 later today we will host a session to understand your needs online. Come along and express
your thoughts. #soloconf #solo10
8:52 am hlgilmartin:Great day at #solo10 yesterday, can't be there today :( thanks to @mendeley_com for their hospitality!
8:52 am kjhaxton:Quite a few blogposts brewing on the back of #solo10 question is, will I actually get them written?
8:54 am mrgunn:RT @petermurrayrust #solo10 #greenchain our session will be recorded live on Etherpad -
visithttp://okfnpad.org/soloSession
8:55 am Stevancw:Awesome RT @edyong209: Arriving at #solo10. There is a straight line between me and the coffee and
anyone standing in it will be torn in two
8:57 am rvidal:RT @mendeley_com: too.. early.. #solo10
8:58 am mrgunn:@rdmpage Say hi when you get in! #solo10
9:00 am alun:Thoughts by @phh1 RT @annbot Dissemination and Science On-line #solo10 http://dlvr.it/4hg11#soloconf
9:01 am rvidal:Science Online London 2010 Day 2 #solo10 (@ British Library w/ 3 others) http://4sq.com/2f3S1b
9:02 am BobOHara:RT @mendeley_com: too.. early.. #solo10
9:02 am rpg7twit:Mmm bacon butties #solo10
9:03 am fischblog:Despite unprofessional reaction to last night's fire alarm (swearing, hiding under pillow) alive and ready for
the second day of #solo10
9:04 am jamesdadd:So many 'connected' devices at #solo10
9:04 am alicebell:"will. anybody. read. it." key point in comment from @iansample re upstream http://bit.ly/bVPxis(also
interesting he mentions nano) #solo10
9:05 am rdmpage:#solo10 Finally here
9:05 am sjcockell:bacon sarnies a very welcome start to the day... #solo10
81 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:06 am alicebell:Go over to @edyong209's blog to watch a video of that #solo10 talk on rebooting sci
journhttp://bit.ly/d7AZ4U
9:06 am moomoobull:RT @euan: genuinely confused by tools that make the web look like newspapers - bit like having a retro
phone I guess .... #solo10
9:06 am kejames:@McDawg Can haz livestream? Am watching from home this morning. #solo10
9:06 am ayasawada:RT @alicebell: Go over to @edyong209's blog to watch a video of that #solo10 talk on rebooting sci
journ http://bit.ly/d7AZ4U
9:07 am kjhaxton:RT @alicebell: "will. anybody. read. it." key point in comment from @iansample re
upstreamhttp://bit.ly/bVPxis (also interesting he mentions nano) #solo10
9:09 am science3point0:Science online London 2010 - Day 2 NOW - #solo10 - Free live streaming c/o S3.0 here:http://bt.io/FvQh
9:09 am ayasawada:2nd day at #solo10 opens with @aleksk. If you didn't already know, she's in
#geekcalendarhttp://bit.ly/bFzCx4 Buy it http://bit.ly/crFydb
9:09 am mrgunn:RT @alun Thoughts by @pathh1 RT @annbot Dissemination and Science On-line
#solo10http://dlvr.it/4hg11 #soloconf
9:09 am rubp:RT @mrgunn: RT @alun Thoughts by @pathh1 RT @annbot Dissemination and Science On-line
#solo10 http://dlvr.it/4hg11 #soloconf
9:09 am GeekCalendar:RT @ayasawada: 2nd day at #solo10 opens with @aleksk. If you didn't already know, she's in
#geekcalendar http://bit.ly/bFzCx4 Buy it http://bit.ly/crFydb
9:11 am razZ0r:at @soloconf day 2 #solo10 (@ British Library w/ 4 others) http://4sq.com/2f3S1b
9:12 am edyong209:Great comments from @iansample and others on @alicebell's post on upstream science
reportinghttp://bit.ly/bVPxis #solo10
9:13 am AJCann:Kudos to @aleksk turning up for #solo10 keynote while clearly not well. Get better soon Aleks!
9:14 am bmcmatt:RT @JennyRohn: Beautifully written star encounter RT @Stephen_Curry For those too distracted by
#solo10, my telescopic blogpost http://gu.com/p/2jdyy/tw
9:14 am gingerbreadlady:Darkness is making me sleeeepy #solo10
9:14 am simon_frantz:RT @alicebell: Go over to @edyong209's blog to watch a video of that #solo10 talk on rebooting sci
9:14 am simon_frantz:RT @edyong209: Great comments from @iansample and others on @alicebell's post on upstream science
reporting http://bit.ly/bVPxis #solo10
9:15 am dellybean:Is there a link to this video? >> @GrrlScientist video: "growing knowledge: the evolution of research"
#solo10
9:15 am sjcockell:twitter very quiet this morning, did everyone fall asleep in the dark? #solo10
9:16 am rubp:I liked the fact that there is a UX person involved in this exhibition #solo10
9:16 am dellybean:Or have I misunderstood your tweet? >> @GrrlScientist video: "growing knowledge: the evolution of
research" #solo10
9:16 am McDawg:we're livestreaming #solo10 again as of 10 mins ago
9:17 am ayasawada:RT @McDawg: we're livestreaming #solo10 again as of 10 mins ago
9:17 am phillord:#solo10 "on the web, we can be free of sex"!?
9:18 am GeekCalendar:Awesome: @aleksk has bought (and it wearing) the shoes she has in Second Life #solo10
9:19 am AJCann:Dissemination and Science On-line #solo10 http://t.co/oXTW0d2 - More great science trickles out to the
places where "The Public" live online
9:20 am edyong209:I am LOVING how many speakers at #solo10 are shunning Powerpoint and are, y'know, actually giving a
talk. Go @aleksk
9:21 am StineCamilla:RT @GrrlScientist: how can we understand who we are by understanding what we do online? alex #solo10
9:22 am lucasbrouwers:RT @edyong209: I am LOVING how many speakers at #solo10 are shunning Powerpoint and are, y'know,
actually giving a talk. Go @aleksk
9:22 am ayasawada:RT @edyong209: I am LOVING how many speakers at #solo10 are shunning Powerpoint and are, y'know,
actually giving a talk. Go @aleksk
9:22 am rubp:@aleksk I found it easier to communicate online via Twitter then starting a dialog with people I met on
#solo10 (might be language barrier)
9:23 am AJCann:Is @aleksk taking about Facebook? #solo10
9:23 am morphosaurus:Ooh, @rdmpage is at #solo10. He was my viva examiner for my MRes in biosystematics, over seven years
ago!!
9:24 am new299:OMG one of the presenters from Bits in giving a talk at #solo10 (giggles).
9:24 am alicebell:#solo10 @aleksk is talking about A Rape is Cyberspace http://bit.ly/aAhq5a I make my students read it. You
should too.
9:24 am new299:Aleks Krotoski is giving a really great talk at #solo10 !!!
9:25 am rpg7twit:+ 10 RT @edyong209: I am LOVING how many speakers at #solo10 are shunning Powerpoint and are,
y'know, actually giving a talk. Go @aleksk
9:25 am rubp:RT @alicebell: #solo10 @aleksk is talking about A Rape is Cyberspace http://bit.ly/aAhq5a I make my
82 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
students read it. You should too.
9:25 am sciencegoddess:RT @alicebell: #solo10 @aleksk is talking about A Rape is Cyberspace http://bit.ly/aAhq5a I make my
9:25 am MyScienceCareeAleks Krotoski: aren't really human subjects guidelines for research in online environments; int'l guidelines
r:
conflict #solo10
9:25 am rubp:RT @rpg7twit: + 10 RT @edyong209: I am LOVING how many speakers at #solo10 are shunning Powerpoint
and are, y'know, actually giving a talk. Go @aleksk
9:25 am McDawg:at 11am we'll be streaming the green chain reaction w/ peter murray-rust
#solo10 #opendatahttp://bt.io/FvQh
9:25 am ayasawada:RT @alicebell: #solo10 @aleksk is talking about A Rape is Cyberspace http://bit.ly/aAhq5a I make my
9:26 am kjhaxton:RT @alicebell: #solo10 @aleksk is talking about A Rape is Cyberspace http://bit.ly/aAhq5a I make my
9:27 am JennyRohn:Fascinating talk about harms of unrestrained psych research by #solo10
9:27 am joergheber:RT @alicebell: #solo10 @aleksk is talking about A Rape is Cyberspace http://bit.ly/aAhq5a I make my
9:27 am scicom_bot:RT @simon_frantz RT @alicebell: Go over to @edyong209's blog to watch a video of that #solo10talk on
rebooting sci journ http://bit.l...
9:27 am scicom_bot:RT @edyong209 Great comments from @iansample and others on @alicebell's post on upstream science
reporting http://bit.ly/bVPxis #solo10
9:27 am scicom_bot:RT @kjhaxton #solo10
9:27 am scicom_bot:RT @ayasawada RT @alicebell: Go over to @edyong209's blog to watch a video of that #solo10talk on
rebooting sci journ http://bit.ly/d7AZ4U
9:27 am defjaf:. @juliandibbell & his "Rape in Cyberspace" name-checked by @aleksk at #solo10
9:28 am quantum_tunnelRT @alicebell: #solo10 @aleksk is talking about A Rape is Cyberspace http://bit.ly/aAhq5a I make my
:
9:28 am petermurrayrust#solo10 #greenchain results now available in http://bit.ly/dxnVaW is 2009 greener than 2000?
:
9:28 am nigelcameron:YES! RT @rpg7twit @edyong209 LOVING how many speakers at #solo10 shunning #Powerpointand,
y'know, actually giving a talk. Go @aleksk
9:28 am gingerbreadlady:I too am guilty of collecting data about people from public forums (for sci comm research). Is this wrong?
#solo10
9:29 am AJCann:Yes folks, the Word of the Week, awarded weekly on a wee-by-week basis is: Upstream #solo10
9:30 am rpg7twit:Very fascinating. RT @JennyRohn: Fascinating talk about harms of unrestrained psych research by #solo10
9:30 am mentalindigest:Great talk by Aleks Krotoski (http://bit.ly/5LtA4H) (@alexsk) at #solo10 - also mentioned 'A rape in
cyberspace' (http://bit.ly/aAhq5a)
9:30 am AJCann:To 1st questioner - cheer up mate :-) :-) :-) #solo10
9:31 am easternblot:"Any activity online is the result of actual human behaviour" - @aleksk at #solo10
9:31 am edyong209:DOOOM! DOOM AWAITS! BARITONE-VOICED DOOOOOM #solo10
9:31 am sjcockell:Ha! RT @AJCann: To 1st questioner - cheer up mate :-) :-) :-) #solo10
9:31 am petermurrayrust#solo10 #greenchain please bring laptops to help us record the session communally on the Etherpad
:
9:31 am drnickmorris:RT @AJCann: To 1st questioner - cheer up mate :-) :-) :-) #solo10
9:32 am mrgunn:Krotoski: user interfaces may create a online version of the Milgram experiments if we're not careful
#solo10
9:32 am gingerbreadlady:RT @mentalindigest: Great talk by Aleks Krotoski (@alexsk) at #solo10 - mentioned 'A rape in cyberspace'
(http://bit.ly/aAhq5a)
9:32 am mrgunn:RT @phylogenomics Some interesting reading here: The electronic lab notebook blog http://ff.im/-qd2Kd
#solo10
9:33 am Delboy167:RT @alicebell: #solo10 @aleksk is talking about A Rape is Cyberspace http://bit.ly/aAhq5a I make my
9:33 am JacAbsolute:RT @science3point0: Science online London 2010 - Day 2 NOW - #solo10 - Free live streaming c/o S3.0
here: http://bt.io/FvQh
9:33 am YSJournal:RT @JacAbsolute: RT @science3point0: Science online London 2010 - Day 2 NOW - #solo10 - Free live
streaming c/o S3.0 here: http://bt.io/FvQh
9:34 am rpg7twit:Just editing my #solo10 badge. I need a shorter blog name.
9:34 am sarahkendrew:RT @science3point0: Science online London 2010 - Day 2 NOW - #solo10 - Free live streaming c/o S3.0
9:34 am YSJournal:RT @mrgunn: RT @phylogenomics Some interesting reading here: The electronic lab notebook
blog http://ff.im/-qd2Kd #solo10
9:35 am rubp:@aleksk "Does the individual means what public is in the Internet?" #solo10 #interesting
83 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:35 am JennyRohn:Aleks makes think we are all mad scientists involved in a massive scary yet exciting experiment #solo10
9:36 am rubp:RT @JennyRohn: Aleks makes think we are all mad scientists involved in a massive scary yet exciting
experiment #solo10
9:37 am Theo_Bloom:RT @mrgunn: RT @phylogenomics Some interesting reading here: The electronic lab notebook
blog http://ff.im/-qd2Kd #solo10
9:37 am pssalgado:Really interesting talk on social studies/impact of online environments by @aleksk at #solo10 Need to think
about it more.
9:38 am iggyduck:RT @Theo_Bloom: RT @mrgunn: RT @phylogenomics Some interesting reading here: The electronic lab
notebook blog http://ff.im/-qd2Kd #solo10
9:38 am coolife:@aleksk "Does the individual means what public is in the Internet?" #solo10 #interesting: @aleksk"Does
the indivi... http://bit.ly/cVD4ZW
9:39 am rubp:RT @coolife: @aleksk "Does the individual means what public is in the Internet?" #solo10#interesting:
@aleksk "Does the indivi... http://bit.ly/cVD4ZW
9:39 am rvidal:Great talk by @aleksk on online identity #solo10
9:39 am NewShoot:Will try to find podcast of the @aleksk talk I am listening to for u garden tweeps -psychology of virtual
friendships (& worse!) #solo10
9:39 am rpg7twit:@aleksk flying at #solo10 http://plixi.com/p/43182860
9:40 am kejames:Oh har har har. RT @easternblot ..FYI, space station doesn't really exist. @kejames just made it all up.
#solo10
9:40 am egonwillighagen:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 #greenchain results now available in http://bit.ly/dxnVaW is 2009 greener
than 2000?
9:40 am adders:Respectful APIs - those that understand users' expectations of privacy. Interesting concept. #solo10
9:41 am JennyRohn:Cheeky mad scientist, ready to 10-pin bowl RT @GrrlScientist am not a shoe whore, but alex's shoes are
VERY VERY cool! ~ aleks #solo10
9:42 am andrewspong:RT @rpg7twit: @aleksk flying at #solo10 http://bit.ly/a3oKRK <-- what sort of mushrooms *were* they in
the breakfast rolls? :D
9:42 am rubp:RT @adders: Respectful APIs - those that understand users' expectations of privacy. Interesting concept.
#solo10
9:42 am sjcockell:keynote 2 @DrEvanHarris talking about evidence-based policy etc #solo10
9:42 am simonhodson99:RT @adders: Respectful APIs - those that understand users' expectations of privacy. Interesting concept.
#solo10
9:43 am YSJournal:RT @alicebell: Go over to @edyong209's blog to watch a video of that #solo10 talk on rebooting sci
9:43 am mendeley_com:RT @rvidal: Great talk by @aleksk on online identity #solo10
9:43 am mrgunn:@aleksk said more about reuse of publicly posted material. There's still spaces which are explicitly public,
no consent required. #solo10
9:43 am edyong209:I'm surrounded by knitters at #solo10. Maybe @alicebell @harpistkat and @lulucrumble can jointly make
me a blanket?
9:44 am ShaneMcC:listening to @DrEvanHarris talk about scientists using online means to affect policy #solo10
9:44 am sciencegoddess:Listening to Evan Harris, a former MP talk about science (member of Parliament in UK) at #solo10
9:44 am brunellalongo:21st Century Kid :) at #solo10 talked about the Database State threats. More by me on
this:http://bit.ly/cpd-wiki -pages Job seeker review
9:44 am kjhaxton:RT @ShaneMcC: listening to @DrEvanHarris talk about scientists using online means to affect policy
#solo10
9:45 am petermurrayrust#solo10 #greenchain programme running ca 12 mins late - please visit etherpadhttp://bit.ly/dxnVaW we
:
need help with a server
9:45 am defjaf:"... we are just about a democracy..." @drevanharris at #solo10
9:46 am harpistkat:#solo10 @DrEvanHarris' talk - when the other side do it it's lobbying, when we do it it's campaigning...
9:47 am joergheber:Followin fascinating thoughts on ethics of online research by @aleksk, @drevanharris now on the impact
scientists can make online #solo10
9:47 am kjhaxton:Use online to make a difference on science topics - e.g. animal research, GM crops, Stem cells, evidence
based med, ineffective med #solo10
9:47 am ayasawada:Next up at #solo10 @DrEvanHarris. He's in #geekcalendar too http://bit.ly/aiZmHC Did I mention you can
pre-order now? http://bit.ly/crFydb
9:48 am GeekCalendar:RT @ayasawada: Next up at #solo10 @DrEvanHarris. He's in #geekcalendar toohttp://bit.ly/aiZmHC Did I
mention you can pre-order now? http://bit.ly/crFydb
9:48 am Argent23:RT @kjhaxton: Use online to make a difference on science topics - e.g. animal research, GM crops, Stem
cells, evidence based med, ineffective med #solo10
9:48 am tweeterpeter:Evan Harris at #solo10: Public interest in science = animal research, GM crops, stem cell research, non-
EBM, etc.
84 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:48 am sjcockell:#solo10 @DrEvanHarris doesn't understand how you can do homeopathy 'properly' vs 'not-properly' -
where's the difference? #ten23
9:48 am d_swan:It is, given the lack of scientist MP's, even more of a tragedy that Evan Harris was not re-elected. 176 votes
in it #solo10
9:49 am aleksk:#solo10 keynote done. Managed to stat upright. Now watching @drevanharris talk sense about science &
policy.
9:49 am kjhaxton:Also investment in science - why is the science community not more effective in lobbying against science
budget cuts. #solo10
9:49 am cromacrox:Only slightly sad not to be at #solo10. Hope all y'all is having a good time.
9:49 am joergheber:On the ethics of online/offline persona of people, I think much better education needed (in schools!)
#solo10 @aleksk
9:49 am PointOfPresenceHow can we distinguish between homeopathy that's properly done vs not properly done?
:
@drevanharris #solo10
9:49 am pssalgado:@DrEvanHarris "ppl only accept animal research after you explain what's the point" surely it must always
be justified, no? #solo10
9:49 am ayasawada:I should say, those Flickr pics are NOT the final calendar pics. Just behind the scenes shots.
#geekcalendar #solo10
9:50 am petermurrayrust#solo10 evan harris wants state support for Open Data - chides universities for not pushing issues
:
9:50 am ShaneMcC:rather depressing list of ineffective campaigns on important science policies #solo10
9:51 am kejames:So @DrEvanHarris is astonished that scientists haven't been more effective lobbyists. Maybe we're too
busy doing science? #solo10
9:51 am mrgunn:RT @adders Respectful APIs - those that understand users' expectations of privacy. Interesting concept.
#solo10
9:51 am mfenner:Evan Harris: Politicians I talk to don't understand why the science community is so polite #solo10
9:51 am ShaneMcC:RT @kjhaxton: Use online to make a difference on science topics - e.g. animal research, GM crops, Stem
cells, evidence based med, ineffective med #solo10
9:52 am imascientist:2nd day at #solo10, keynote from @aleksk, but I'm afraid I've no idea what she was talking abt. The web is
very interesting, I think.
9:52 am Stephen_Curry:?@cromacrox: Only slightly sad not to be at #solo10. Hope all y'all is having a good time.? -> sorry you're
not here, Henry
9:52 am quantum_tunnelRT @kejames: So @DrEvanHarris is astonished that scientists haven't been more effective lobbyists. Maybe
:
we're too busy doing science? #solo10
9:52 am kjhaxton:policy change targets policy makers not the public. Big diff between policy change and public engagement
#solo10
9:52 am kevglobal:RT @adders: Respectful APIs - those that understand users' expectations of privacy. Interesting concept.
#solo10
9:52 am alun:RT @mfenner: Evan Harris: Politicians I talk to don't understand why the science community is so polite
#solo10
9:52 am nigelcameron:Need to mainstream impact of cyberworld RT @joergheber: ethics of online/offline persona . . .education
needed (in schools!) #solo10 @aleksk
9:52 am ShaneMcC:@kejames but without policy change many will involuntarily have time to lobby #solo10
9:52 am tweeterpeter:Harris at #solo10: worried that some science bloggers fear discrimination by bosses who dislike their
blogging - it's illegal!
9:53 am kejames:Live stream working + lively twitter discussion + hangover = 'attending' #solo10 online today.
9:53 am LouWoodley:#solo10 @DrEvanHarris concerned by discussions in yesterday's blogging session about restrictions on
academic scientists who blog
9:53 am imascientist:Now @DrEvanHarris is up. He says he likes arguing. We know Evan:-) #solo10
9:53 am gingerbreadlady:Evan Harris: Don't need to change public opinion to change policy. #solo10
9:53 am edyong209:"If the Daily Mail is for it, you don't have to try hard to convince people to be against it" -
9:53 am pssalgado:Can we really convince policy-makers w/out ever convincing the public, I wonder... #solo10@DrEvanHarris
9:54 am edyong209:Except, obviously, for their millions of readers #solo10
9:54 am rpg7twit:Might be illegal but that is effectively no comfort. RT @tweeterpeter: Harris at #solo10: bosses who dislike
their blogging - it's illegal!
9:54 am kejames:@ShaneMcC but if we spend time lobbying as junior scientists we'll never become senior scientists.... was
the point made yesterday. #solo10
9:54 am alokjha:At #solo10 listening to @DrEvanHarris talking abt how scientists can use web to campaign politically
9:54 am pssalgado:RT @kejames: So @DrEvanHarris is astonished that scientists haven't been more effective lobbyists. Maybe
85 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:54 am kieronflanagan:I'm confused, who are this 'other side' that @drevanharris wants to mobilize his army of 'activists' to fight?
Has he said? #solo10
9:54 am d_swan:RT @edyong209: "If the Daily Mail is for it, you don't have to try hard to convince people to be against it" -
9:54 am edyong209:No he doesn't. ;-) RT @imascientist: Now @DrEvanHarris is up. He says he likes arguing. We know Evan:-)
#solo10
9:54 am sjcockell:'hashtags are for effectively communicating with activists' - @DrEvanHarris #solo10
9:55 am ShaneMcC:@pssalgado absolutely #solo10
9:55 am jme_c:Sadly, I'm finishing my MSc thesis instead of spending 2 days at #solo10. Still, have to *occasionally* get my
priorities right.
9:55 am kjhaxton:RT @imascientist: 2nd day at #solo10, keynote from @aleksk, but I'm afraid I've no idea what she was
talking abt. The web is very interesting, I think.
9:55 am franknorman:@dellybean I this page has a link to the video http://www.bl.uk/growingknowledge/ #solo10
9:55 am mfenner:Evan Harris: old media love reporting on new media, we should take advantage of that #solo10
9:55 am rubp:RT @LouWoodley: #solo10 @DrEvanHarris concerned by discussions in yesterday's blogging session about
restrictions on academic scientists who blog
9:55 am edyong209:@pssalgado @kejames Isn't that exactly the same argument that many ppl use to play down/avoid public
engagement work? #solo10
9:56 am mrgunn:Evan Harris: using the media means understanding how they will transmit your message & how it will be
received. Ex. The Daily Fail #solo10
9:56 am mrgunn:RT @mfenner Evan Harris: Politicians I talk to don't understand why the science community is so polite
#solo10
9:56 am rpg7twit:Just wondering the same. RT @kieronflanagan: I'm confused, who are this 'other side'
9:56 am nigelcameron:Isn't he evidence of their success?! RT @kejames @DrEvanHarris astonished that scientists not more
effective lobbyists. #solo10
9:56 am Argent23:Should I attend talk by David 'Information is beautiful' McCandless or one on ORCID author identifier next?
Decisions, decisions! #solo10
9:56 am tweeterpeter:Harris at #solo10: online = cost efficiency, virality, activism, policy-making engagement, new links with old
media, individualisation
9:57 am harpistkat:@edyong209 @imascientist Is @DrEvanHarris doing a 5 minute argument or the full half hour? #solo10
9:57 am alokjha:RT @gingerbreadlady: @DrEvanHarris says Don't need to change public opinion to change policy. #solo10
9:57 am mfenner:@cromacrox We are having a great time at #solo10, you are really missed.
9:57 am imascientist:And should we? RT @pssalgado: Can we really convince policy-makers w/out ever convincing the public, I
wonder... #solo10 @DrEvanHarris
9:57 am gingerbreadlady:Don't swear online! Language is very important, especially when dealing with policymakers. It's about
presenting an image. #solo10
9:58 am kejames:@edyong209 @pssalgado Sr scientists may use that argument. Jr scientists don't have the luxury (playing
devil's advocate here). #solo10
9:58 am sjcockell:@kieronflanagan when people like Nadine Dorries are in government, there's always another
sidehttp://bit.ly/bq7CBB #solo10
9:58 am kjhaxton:Evan Harris - to make impact watch language & style - swearing, (and by implication incivility) not useful for
engaging with policy #solo10
9:58 am tweeterpeter:Harris at #solo10: dangers of online include over-estimation of reach/effect
9:58 am franknorman:U R missed! RT @Stephen_Curry ?@cromacrox: Only slightly sad not at #solo10. Hope y'all having good
time.? -> sorry you're not here, Henry
9:58 am AJCann:Evan Harris' Guide to New Media: Capitalize sentences and don't swear. #solo10
9:58 am alokjha:Oh yes he does RT @edyong209: No he doesn't ;-) RT @imascientist: Now @DrEvanHarris is up. He says he
likes arguing. We know Evan:-) #solo10
9:58 am defjaf:RT @mfenner: Evan Harris: Politicians I talk to don't understand why the science community is so polite
#solo10
9:58 am kejames:@joergheber Yes, but @DrEvanHarris (and others) are, I think, talking about practicing scientists. #solo10
9:58 am rpg7twit:Seconded. RT @mfenner: @cromacrox We are having a great time at #solo10, you are really missed.
9:59 am scicom_bot:RT @YSJournal RT @alicebell: Go over to @edyong209's blog to watch a video of that #solo10 talk on
rebooting sci journ http://bit.ly/d7AZ4U
9:59 am ShaneMcC:@imascientist @pssalgado @DrEvanHarris I think the point is that the public often don't have an opinion -
on't need to change that #solo10
9:59 am franknorman:RT @pssalgado: Can we really convince policy-makers w/out ever convincing the public, I wonder...
#solo10 @DrEvanHarris
9:59 am aleksk:"we may persuade the Internet, but that doesn't mean we persuade the policy makers"
86 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:59 am kieronflanagan:Ah, it's the good old 'forces of unreason'... If they didn't exist, you'd have to invent 'em... Wait a minute...?
#solo10
9:59 am fischblog:They are busy not "being a dick"... RT: @mfenner: Evan Harris: Politicians don't understand why the science
community is so polite #solo10
9:59 am YSJournal:to all #solo10 dose "current" science blogging help advancement in science?& how?
9:59 am oh_henry:But surely in today's climate, politicians won't back unpopular campaigns? /cynical #solo10
9:59 am martinjmckennaRT @edyong209: "If the Daily Mail is for it, you don't have to try hard to convince people to be against it" -
:
10:00 am lablit:RT @kejames: So @DrEvanHarris is astonished that scientists haven't been more effective lobbyists. Maybe
10:00 am robajackson:... and it's much more exciting than #solo10 (:
10:00 am edyong209:Yep. RT @oh_henry: But surely in today's climate, politicians won't back unpopular campaigns? /cynical
#solo10
10:00 am Stephen_Curry:Hard-headed pragmatism on science campaigning from @DrEvanHarris #solo10 Scientists too polite (& too
busy) to be effective?
10:00 am d_swan:RT @oh_henry: But surely in today's climate, politicians won't back unpopular campaigns? /cynical #solo10
10:00 am harpistkat:RT @oh_henry: But surely in today's climate, politicians won't back unpopular campaigns? /cynical #solo10
10:01 am kjhaxton:Are scientists too busy doing science to lobby? A question of priorities - if it matters that much, we'll do it.
#solo10
10:01 am LouWoodley:RT @AJCann @DrEvanHarris' Guide to New Media: Capitalize sentences and don't swear. #solo10
10:01 am GeekCalendar:RT @aleksk: "we may persuade the Internet, but that doesn't mean we persuade the policy makers"
10:01 am petermt:RT @aleksk: "we may persuade the Internet, but that doesn't mean we persuade the policy makers"
10:01 am rpg7twit:Can we get Stephen Fry as our tame celebrity? #solo10
10:02 am adders:I agree with @drevanharris. Some bastards' language online is bloody awful. #solo10 #oldjoke
10:02 am storm_warning2RT @aleksk: "we may persuade the Internet, but that doesn't mean we persuade the policy makers"
2:
10:02 am ShaneMcC:RT @sjcockell: @kieronflanagan when people like Nadine Dorries are in government, there's always
another side http://bit.ly/bq7CBB #solo10
10:02 am imascientist:.@DrEvanHarris's test for civility online, would it shock yr Mother if she read it in Telegraph? <My Mum wld
never read Telegraph! #solo10
10:02 am kejames:Oh, touché! RT @fischblog They are busy not "being a dick" RT @mfenner Evan Harris?don't understand
why..sci community..so polite #solo10
10:03 am joergheber:@kejames #solo10 then I agree with you. Lobbying needs to be done by profnl academic institutions.
Scientists can convince through research
10:03 am kjhaxton:RT @LouWoodley: RT @AJCann @DrEvanHarris' Guide to New Media: Capitalize sentences and don't
swear. #solo10
10:03 am tweeterpeter:Harris at #solo10: 'libel reform campaign damaged by Simon Singh winning his case before the legislation
could be passed' !!
10:03 am rvidal:.@attilacsordas McCandless will be speaking here in a short while. I should have brought my book for
an autograph. :) #solo10
10:03 am defjaf:. @drevanharris: Singh's victory in libel suit damaged campaign to change the law -- Yes, exactly!
#solo10
10:03 am tabacaria:A very import distinction RT @aleksk: "we may persuade the Internet, but thatdoesn't mean
wepersuade the policymakers" @drevanharris #solo10
10:03 am petermurrayrust:#solo10 #greenchain lastminute analysis of results takiing place in Etherpad
10:03 am oh_henry:He's behind you RT @alokjha Oh yes he does RT @edyong209: No he doesn't RT @imascientist:
@DrEvanHarris is up, says he likes arguing #solo10
10:03 am pucegreen:RT @edyong209: "If the Daily Mail is for it, you don't have to try hard to convince people to be against
it" - @drevanharris #solo10
10:03 am rpg7twit:Haha! RT @fischblog: They are busy not "being a dick"... RT: @mfenner: Evan Harris: Politicians don't
understand scientist so polite #solo10
10:03 am GeekCalendar:#solo10 @DrEvanHarris mentions the petition for Libel Reform. Sign it if you haven't
alreadyhttp://bit.ly/3UCRt6
10:03 am edyong209:"We need Simon Singh to be in court again, or one of you guys with swanky hair." - @drevanharrison
slowing of libel reform campaign #solo10
10:04 am razZ0r:RT @AJCann @DrEvanHarris' Guide to New Media: Capitalize sentences and don't swear. #solo10
10:04 am AJCann:RT @edyong209: "If the Daily Mail is for it, you don't have to try hard to convince people to be against
87 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
it" - @drevanharris #solo10
10:04 am GeekCalendar:Hi #solo10 people, you all know @drevanharris is in the calendar too? Some backstage
picshttp://bit.ly/aiZmHC buy one: http://bit.ly/crFydb
10:04 am cromacrox:@rpg7twit sorry, I'm unavailable. And untamed. #solo10
10:04 am kieronflanagan:@sjcockell There are lots of odd ppl around, but they're not grouping themselves 2gether as the 'forces
of unreason' - it's being... #solo10
10:04 am fischblog:To get anywhere in political campaigning, the scientific community urgently needs to stop playing fair.
#solo10
10:05 am petermurrayrust:#solo10 #greenchain Any equivalent of Etherpad that does spreadsheets? needed urgently
10:05 am edbeltane:RT @GeekCalendar: #solo10 @DrEvanHarris mentions the petition for Libel Reform. Sign it if you
haven't already http://bit.ly/3UCRt6
10:05 am imascientist:Who is the 'we' @DrEvanHarris? Surely scis all have different views on many matters of policy? #solo10
10:05 am kieronflanagan:@sjcockell ...done for rhetorical reasons, and to mobilize the great army of activists in defence of
progress. Just think life... #solo10
10:05 am kejames:Well, yes, we do. Really depends on supervisor. RT @pssalgado Jr scientist do public engagement
and/or lobbying at own risk, surely? #solo10
10:05 am orbitingfrog:"Vicars are effective but not as effective as ill people." #solo10 @DrEvanHarris on campaigning
10:05 am razZ0r:RT @Fischblog They are busy not "being a dick" RT @mfenner Evan Harris: Politicians don't understand
why the sci comm is so polite #solo10
10:06 am morphosaurus:Argument that scientists too doing science busy to lobby is like me as a lecturer being too busy teaching
to interview students. #solo10
10:06 am JennyRohn:I think busy scientists who genuinely don't have time or penchant for lobbying politicians shouldn't be
villified #solo10
10:06 am franknorman:RT @kjhaxton: Are scientists too busy doing science to lobby? A question of priorities - if it matters that
much, we'll do it. #solo10
10:06 am kieronflanagan:@sjcockell ...is a bit more complicated that the convenient picture painted of this great battle. #solo10
10:06 am robajackson:RT: @imascientist: 2nd day at #solo10, keynote from @aleksk, but I'm afraid I've no idea what she was
talking abt.< gd. sci. comm. then?
10:06 am alicebell:That's my talk... RT @imascientist: Who is the 'we' @DrEvanHarris? Surely scis all have different views
on many matters of policy? #solo10
10:06 am imascientist:He's behind you! RT @alokjha: Oh yes he does RT @edyong209: No he doesn't ;-) RT @imascientist:
@DrEvanHarris says he likes arguing. #solo10
10:06 am bmcmatt:"Being unpopular with Daily Mail has done me no harm whatsoever... other than in career and financial
terms" :-) notes @DrEvanHarris #solo10
10:07 am edbeltane:RT @morphosaurus: Argument that scientists too doing science busy to lobby is like me as a lecturer
being too busy teaching to interview students. #solo10
10:07 am mentalindigest:@DrEvanHarris: you need people such as "Gia Milinovich's husband" to help with policy change ;-)
#solo10 (@giagia)
10:07 am BobOHara:@drevanharris needs to defame Simon Singh. Take one for the cause #solo10
10:07 am rpg7twit:But that's illegal! RT @kejames: Well, yes, we do. Really depends on supervisor. @pssalgado#solo10
10:07 am edyong209:. @DREVANHARRIS CALLS FOR MORE CAPITALS, LESS SWEARING. JUST LOTS OF REALLY CIVIL
SHOUTING. AT LEAST FOREIGNERS WILL UNDERSTAND #SOLO10
10:07 am ChemSpider:V interesting and engaging talk by Evan Harris #solo10
10:07 am kieronflanagan:@DrEvanHarris @Stephen_Curry Scientists have generally been highly effective lobbyists. Just ask a
historian. #solo10
10:08 am sameerpadania:RT @aleksk: "we may persuade the Internet, but that doesn't mean we persuade the policy makers"
@drevanharris #solo10 <-- word
10:08 am ayasawada:RT @edyong209: . @DREVANHARRIS CALLS FOR MORE CAPITALS, LESS SWEARING. JUST LOTS OF
REALLY CIVIL SHOUTING. AT LEAST FOREIGNERS WILL UNDERSTAND #SOLO10
10:08 am edbeltane:RT @JennyRohn: I think busy scientists who genuinely don't have time or penchant for lobbying
politicians shouldn't be villified #solo10
10:08 am morphosaurus:If I don't interview and enrol students I won't have any need to teach as there won't be anyone to
teach. #solo10
10:08 am edbeltane:RT @fischblog: To get anywhere in political campaigning, the scientific community urgently needs to
stop playing fair. #solo10
10:08 am edbeltane:RT @kjhaxton: Are scientists too busy doing science to lobby? A question of priorities - if it matters that
much, we'll do it. #solo10
10:09 am oh_henry:Stunning demonstration of the power of case studies in campaigning from @drEvanHarris #solo10
10:09 am mrgunn:Disagree! RT @fischblog To get anywhere in political campaigning, the scientific community urgently
needs to stop playing fair. #solo10
88 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:09 am Argent23:RT @JennyRohn: I think busy scientists who genuinely don't have time or penchant for lobbying
10:09 am petermurrayrust:#solo10 #greenchain we have now set up a spreadsheet - moving at llight speed
10:10 am quantum_tunnel:?cont) villified #solo10
10:10 am petermurrayrust:#solo10 #greenchain session starts in ca 5 mins
10:11 am kieronflanagan:@imascientist @alicebell But there is only one TRUTH, surely? #solo10
10:11 am edbeltane:RT @bmcmatt: "Being unpopular with Daily Mail has done me no harm whatsoever... other than in
career and financial terms" :-) notes @DrEvanHarris #solo10
10:11 am bmcmatt:"We are losing battle to stop waste of Limited NHS resources on therapies *known* to be ineffective"
@DrEvanHarris at #solo10
10:11 am harpistkat:@Argent23 @jennyrohn #solo10 But can scientists complain about policies that don't support science,
if not prepared to campaign for change?
10:11 am imascientist:.@DrEvanHarris's summary of using the internet to influence policy: Spread info, use social media to
form networks, use celebs #solo10
10:12 am edbeltane:RT @oh_henry: Stunning demonstration of the power of case studies in campaigning from
@drEvanHarris #solo10
10:12 am mrgunn:RT @orbitingfrog "Vicars are effective but not as effective as ill people." #solo10 @DrEvanHarris on
campaigning
10:12 am sjcockell:@kieronflanagan even indivs in positions of power (eg health select committies) can do much dmg.
opposition does need coordination #solo10
10:12 am tweeterpeter:Harris at #solo10: used Twitter to get evidence opposing David Tredinnick MP's attempt to promote
homeopathic medicine in UK Parliament
10:12 am petermurrayrust:#solo10 #greenchain RT @scilib: @petermurrayrust doesn't google apps allow per-cell locking? I think
the new MS Office online does, anyway.
10:12 am humphreyjones:Oh, I wish I was at #solo10!
10:13 am zemogle:Amazing parkinson's treatment during @drevanharris great talk http://vimeo.com/11325025 #solo10
10:13 am Argent23:Effing conscience! RT @fischblog: To get anywh in political campaigning, scientific community urgently
needs to stop playing fair. #solo10
10:13 am orbitingfrog:RT @zemogle: Amazing parkinson's treatment during @drevanharris great
talkhttp://vimeo.com/11325025 #solo10
10:13 am YSJournal:Yes but scientists have no practice in political games @franknorman: @pssalgado Can we really
convince policymakers #solo10 @DrEvanHarris
10:13 am edyong209:This RT @harpistkat: @Argent23 @jennyrohn #solo10 But can scientists complain about policies if not
prepared to campaign for change?
10:13 am ShaneMcC:@imascientist @DrEvanHarris Was effective strategy with Robin Hood Tax campaign #solo10
10:14 am aleksk:On creating arguments for science policy online: "you *mustn't* over claim." @drevanharris #solo10
10:14 am LouWoodley:@egonwillighagen I've added you to the list. Hope you're enjoying the coverage #solo10
10:14 am oh_henry:Oh Evan. Invoking "cure for cancer", even indirectly, from stem cell research is really missing what the
science is about #pedant #solo10
10:14 am mrgunn:RT @petermurrayrust #solo10 #greenchain session starts in ca 5 mins
10:14 am quantum_tunnel:Who or what is this 'other side' @DrEvanHarris? The dark side? #solo10
10:14 am imascientist:Interesting q fr floor, why DON'T politicians make right decision on homeopathy, when it's so clearly
nonsense to scis? #solo10
10:15 am NewShoot:A Venn diagram for @DrEvanHarris #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2l46mq
10:15 am rpg7twit:Anyone he disagrees with? RT @quantum_tunnel: Who or what is this 'other side' @DrEvanHarris? The
dark side? #solo10
10:15 am easternblot:Same. Voldemort? RT @rpg7twit Just wondering the same. RT @kieronflanagan: I'm confused, who are
this 'other side' @drevanharris #solo10
10:15 am akshatrathi:RT @JennyRohn: I think busy scientists who genuinely don't have time or penchant for lobbying
10:15 am harpistkat:#solo10 @Drevanharri"The other side have fewer qualms"... oh damn our pesky desire for accuracy and
evidence...
10:15 am PhilDRoberts:Looking forward to #solo10 Breakout session 10 next David McCandless @infobeautiful his website
is http://bit.ly/Y1wFA
10:15 am AJCann:RT @NewShoot: A Venn diagram for @DrEvanHarris #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2l46mq
10:16 am adders:I have an uncomfortable feeling that @drevanharris just lumped a lot of very different people together
as "the other side" #solo10
10:16 am sciencegoddess:I've been sharing David McCandless' talk far and wide since it came out on TED http://bit.ly/cgfBYsLove
it! Excited to see! #solo10
10:17 am raffdoc:RT @dullhunk: "PDF is a hamburger and we're trying to turn it back into a cow"
89 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:17 am mentalindigest:David McCandless (http://bit.ly/czDrVS) leading next Unconf. session at #solo10 (his recent
TEDhttp://bit.ly/83rEeH - via @sciencegoddess)
10:18 am imascientist:.@DrEvanHarris thinks it's range of vested interests, inc commercial ones, plus the heir to the throne
<boo! #solo10
10:18 am ad144000hoe:RT @aleksk: On creating arguments for science policy online: "you *mustn't* over claim."
10:18 am Argent23:next up is DavidMcCandless, author of this great book http://twitpic.com/2l47n3 #solo10
10:19 am mentalindigest:For the quiet moments between #solo10 sessions, go play with the Google's buckyball
#geekcoolhttp://www.google.co.uk/
10:19 am gingerbreadlady:Hoping data visualisation talk is going to be *really* nerdy :) #solo10
10:19 am razZ0r:staying at the auditorium, we have proper wifi here. "Breakout 10: Data visualisation" coming up. (and
more work) #solo10
10:20 am kaythaney:absolutely incredible video shown by @drevanharris of a parkinson's patient taking control of his
disease http://is.gd/eUxQY #solo10
10:20 am Argent23:@harpistkat Why can't ppl with the time for it make the campaining and the sci produce the data to
back it up? #solo10
10:20 am dellybean:Credit for @SciencePunk #WestSkep RT GrrlScientist online dangers: "hostages to fortune", a #tag is not
a campaign! ~ @DrEvanHarris #solo10
10:20 am SpaceGurlEvie:RT @mentalindigest: For the quiet moments between #solo10 sessions, go play with the Google's
buckyball #geekcool http://www.google.co.uk/
10:20 am sjcockell:RT @kaythaney: absolutely incredible video shown by @drevanharris of a parkinson's patient taking
control of his disease http://is.gd/eUxQY #solo10
10:21 am kaythaney:RT @mentalindigest: David McCandless (http://bit.ly/czDrVS) leading next Unconf. session at
#solo10 (his recent TED http://bit.ly/83rEeH - via @sciencegoddess)
10:21 am imascientist:Btw, many of you may be interested in my friend Stephen's documentary on NHS spending on
homeopathy in Scotland. Airing 14th Sept #solo10
10:21 am JennyRohn:Who says the busy ones do complain? @edyong209 @harpistkat @Argent23 @jennyrohn #solo10Can
scis complain about policies if don't campaign?
10:21 am BobOHara:RT @AJCann: RT @NewShoot: A Venn diagram for @DrEvanHarris #solo10http://twitpic.com/2l46mq
10:21 am mentalindigest:Ditto, needing some serious geek fix right now RT @gingerbreadlady: Hoping data visualisation talk is
going to be *really* nerdy :) #solo10
10:21 am rpg7twit:@petermurrayrust session on green science is held together by gaffer tape. @McDawg #solo10
10:21 am rdmpage:RT @kaythaney: absolutely incredible video shown by @drevanharris of a parkinson's patient taking
10:21 am jamesdadd:The facilities at the British Library are excellent. #solo10 has been great at this location.
10:21 am iggyduck:RT @JennyRohn: I think busy scientists who genuinely don't have time or penchant for lobbying
10:22 am rvidal:RT @mentalindigest: David McCandless (http://bit.ly/czDrVS) leading next Unconf. session at
#solo10 (his recent TED http://bit.ly/83rEeH - via @sciencegoddess)
10:22 am iggyduck:RT @Argent23: Effing conscience! RT @fischblog: To get anywh in political campaigning, scientific
community urgently needs to stop playing fair. #solo10
10:22 am d_swan:Very much agree!! > RT @jamesdadd: The facilities at the British Library are excellent. #solo10 has been
great at this location.
10:23 am oh_henry:Geekily excited about next talk - David McCandless on data visualisation #solo10
10:23 am PhilDRoberts:Been following #dConstruct conf while at #solo10 David McCandless's talk visualised in
moleskinhttp://flic.kr/p/8xWvGc [me: will try this]
10:24 am rpg7twit:Serious LOL. RT @AJCann: RT @NewShoot: A Venn diagram for
@DrEvanHarris #solo10http://twitpic.com/2l46mq
10:24 am jjbw:Enjoying #solo10 debate on scientists lobbying, from my loungeroom! Not sure where I stand -
apparently it ought to be on a soapbox...
10:24 am jamesdadd:RT @kaythaney: ...incredible video shown by @drevanharris of a parkinson's patient taking control of
his disease http://is.gd/eUxQY #solo10
10:25 am GozdeZorlu:@imrantime speaking about the role of @sciencecampaign in #scivote at #solo10
10:25 am kieronflanagan:RT @rpg7twit: Serious LOL. RT @AJCann: RT @NewShoot: A Venn diagram for
@DrEvanHarris#solo10 http://twitpic.com/2l46mq
10:25 am dellybean:@SciencePunk #WestSkep RT @imascientist @DrEvanHarris' test 4 civility online, wud it shock yr
Mother if she read it in Telegraph? #solo10
10:25 am moonslider:RT @JennyRohn: I think busy scientists who genuinely don't have time or penchant for lobbying
90 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:26 am YSJournal:BL is a great institution RT @jamesdadd: The facilities at the British Library are excellent. #solo10has
been great at this location.
10:26 am iggyduck:RT @kejames: Well, yes, we do. Really depends on supervisor. RT @pssalgado Jr scientist do public
engagement and/or lobbying at own risk, surely? #solo10
10:26 am iggyduck:RT @mentalindigest: @DrEvanHarris: you need people such as "Gia Milinovich's husband" to help with
policy change ;-) #solo10 (@giagia)
10:26 am adders:Deja Vu time. David McCandless at #dconstruct yesterday and #solo10 today.
10:26 am razZ0r:David McCandless talking http://informationisbeautiful.net/ @infobeautiful #solo10 i have to listen to
this, no work for a while.
10:27 am LouWoodley:ORCID breakout: ORCID needed collaboration between different organisations to gain author trust
#solo10
10:27 am sjcockell:the bollion dollar-o-gram: http://bit.ly/bsCnPM #solo10
10:27 am katie_fraser:At session on ORCID researcher ID system (tweeting on phone as laptop's wifi normed) #solo10
10:28 am kieronflanagan:OK, live stream has ended, no way to watch #scivote session as far as I can see so I'm off to the beach or
the hills. Have fun... #solo10
10:28 am Argent23:RT @sjcockell: the bollion dollar-o-gram: http://bit.ly/bsCnPM #solo10
10:28 am rdmpage:In @mccandelish session at #solo10 @infobeautiful
10:28 am YSJournal:RT @gingerbreadlady: Just as important to teach kids about the process and nature of science, as the
nitty gritty details. #solo10 #iassolo
10:29 am AJCann:The Billion Dollar Gram http://t.co/R0Cqefx #solo10
10:29 am IanMulvany:#solo10 david mcandles has amazing shoes
10:29 am katie_fraser:For normed read borked. Phone autocorrect driving me mad! #solo10
10:29 am zeno001:@edyong209 I thought @drevanharris said 'spikey' hair! #solo10
10:30 am mentalindigest:Discussing the billion dollar-o-gram (http://bit.ly/4BhkSP) at #solo10 with David McCandless
(http://bit.ly/czDrVS)
10:30 am gingerbreadlady:RT @AJCann: The Billion Dollar Gram http://t.co/R0Cqefx #solo10
10:30 am zerojinx:nice shoes @mccandelish #solo10
10:30 am AJCann:What is it with the shoes? #solo10
10:31 am sciencegoddess:RT @AJCann: The Billion Dollar Gram http://t.co/R0Cqefx #solo10
10:31 am imascientist:Sci vote session w @DrEvanHarris @alicebell and @imrantime. Imran outling campaign b4 last election.
Useful was contacting PPCs #solo10
10:32 am katie_fraser:Hard to measure contributions to research, especially non-authors, hence"author & contributor" ID
#solo10
10:32 am LouWoodley:ORCID goals: clear and unambiguous attributation in records, should transcend discipline, country,
institutional boundaries #solo10
10:32 am mentalindigest:UK taxpayer costs: "Scotland costs us £2.93 a day" - bargain! #solo10
10:32 am GozdeZorlu:CaSE #scivote blogs http://bit.ly/4ViWjV #solo10
10:32 am aleksk:Now: The Sci Vote Movement (if science had a vote, who would you vote for?) w
@drevanharris@alicebell & @imrantime #solo10
10:33 am quantum_tunnel:Very convincing data comparisons like the billion dollar-o-gram by David MacCandless. #solo10
10:33 am sgreene24:RT @mentalindigest: Discussing the billion dollar-o-gram (http://bit.ly/4BhkSP) at #solo10 with David
McCandless (http://bit.ly/czDrVS)
10:33 am LouWoodley:ORCID goals: include formal+informal literature e.g. blogs, should be open but respect privacy, should
be controlled by contributor #solo10
10:33 am pssalgado:Powerfull visualisation tools from David McCandless at #solo10 Bringing meaning to data in a beautiful
way
10:33 am harpistkat:It's all in the units - infographics work best when units are easy to relate to @mccandelish #solo10
10:33 am sciencegoddess:Ack! Ive seen parts of this talk on TED...won't give away answers to David McCandless' questions!
#solo10
10:34 am GozdeZorlu:@mjrobbins on science in the election (@guardian) http://bit.ly/aR6777 #scivote #solo10
10:34 am scottkeir:#solo10 livestream crashed on me - which session is this on the livestream now?
10:34 am akshatrathi:I am loving this session on data visualisation. This man is a legend. Wish I can do this for a living!
#solo10
10:34 am lauradesign:Now data visualisation session from David McCandless on billion-o-pound-gram
#solo10http://plixi.com/p/43188697
10:34 am mentalindigest:Can we use #datavis for David McCandles session? #solo10
10:34 am dnage_bv:RT @kaythaney: incredible video shown by @drevanharris of a parkinson's patient taking control of his
disease http://is.gd/eUxQY #solo10
10:34 am katie_fraser:Martin Fenner talking about use cases for ORCID: manuscript submission #solo10
10:34 am science3point0:Livestreaming @petermurrayrust #solo10 - British library secure internet down - wifi is a joke, but
91 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
anyways, join us: http://bt.io/FvQh
10:34 am zemogle:Data is the new soil #solo10
10:34 am imascientist:Think @imrantime just said Tories promised to pay off student loans for teachers in STEM subjects.
That's good! #solo10
10:35 am gingerbreadlady:Cool use of Facebook statuses for gathering data - most common break up time is just before Christmas
#solo10
10:35 am razZ0r:David McCandless: data is the new oil/soil #solo10
10:35 am pssalgado:David McCandless"Data is new soil" #solo10
10:35 am ayasawada:#solo10 Now listening to @imrantime on #scivote. Ahem, he's also in #geekcalendar. See blog and buy
now http://geekcalendar.co.uk
10:35 am David_Dobbs:McCandless: "Data is the new soil." Work it and you can grow all sorts of things. #solo10 Then graphs
"global media panics". Swine flu wins
10:36 am mjrobbins:RT @alokjha re busy scientists. But, to quote President Bartlett, "decisions are made by those who turn
up". #solo10
10:36 am sjcockell:trying to keep up with the data @mccandelish is showing... 'mountains out of molehills' -
http://bit.ly/c1h2IG #solo10
10:36 am mjrobbins:Morning all you lovely, lovely #solo10 people, sorry I can't be there today. I'm busy dying of beer.
10:36 am razZ0r:RT @gingerbreadlady: Cool use of Fb statuses for gathering data - most common break up time is just
before Christmas (and easter) #solo10
10:36 am GozdeZorlu:@newscientist's s-blog on science policy http://bit.ly/59yllR #scivote #solo10
10:37 am kaythaney:RT @David_Dobbs: McCandless: "Data is the new soil." Work it and you can grow all sorts of things.
#solo10 Then graphs "global media panics". Swine flu wins
10:37 am edyong209:RT @mjrobbins: RT @alokjha re busy scientists. But, to quote President Bartlett, "decisions are made by
those who turn up". #solo10
10:37 am kejames:Wow, our priorities really suck. RT @AJCann The Billion Dollar Gram http://t.co/R0Cqefx #solo10
10:37 am sciencegoddess:Interesting gap in "fear" peaks between end of 2001 and beginning of 2002.... David McCandless
#solo10
10:37 am David_Dobbs:Also shows predictable annual surge -- Nov & Apr -- of worry about violent video games. Nov, cuz Xmas.
Apri: Columbine anniversary. #solo10
10:37 am AJCann:David McC's graphs lack titles, hard for me to be sure what he's talking about. Achingly cool but bad
practice. #solo10
10:37 am ayasawada:Also on this panel @DrEvanHarris & @alicebell. #geekcalendar ftw :) #solo10
10:37 am sjcockell:periodicity of fear of computer games - revolves around Columbine anniversary #solo10
10:38 am Argent23:RT @David_Dobbs: McCandless: "Data is the new soil." Work it and you can grow all sorts of things.
10:38 am LouWoodley:RT @David_Dobbs Beautiful. McCandless pulled Facebook data to show surges in breakups during
Easter and Xmas hols. Also Mondays. #solo10
10:38 am imascientist:.@alicebell Usually sneaks some sci policy into lectures, this yr for first time students were asking for
more of it. #scivote win! #solo10
10:38 am mentalindigest:'Mountains out of molehills' (http://bit.ly/O8eVP) The gap on the left was 9/11 (when we were
seriously distracted) #datavis #solo10
10:38 am David_Dobbs:but press didn't worry about any of that other stuff in 2001-2; fear then was post-9/11. McCandless
#solo10
10:38 am sciencegoddess:Gap was after 9/11...something to really be afraid of! #solo10
10:38 am BobOHara:Hmm the only scare in the aftermath of 911 was asteroids #solo10
10:39 am new299:RT @LouWoodley: RT @David_Dobbs Beautiful. McCandless pulled Facebook data to show surges in
breakups during Easter and Xmas hols. Also Mondays. #solo10
10:39 am katie_fraser:ORCID could be used to generate publication lists & aid search #solo10 (would be useful for institutional
repository if widely accepted)
10:39 am scottkeir:#solo10 breakout session live stream http://bit.ly/bgwBqs is session 11 http://bit.ly/cZP4m6(thanks
@science3point0 )
10:39 am sjcockell:who really spends the most on their military? http://bit.ly/ayLR0w #solo10
10:39 am edyong209:Online, rather than speaking to many people, you can mean a lot to a few people - @alicebell#solo10
10:39 am mrgunn:RT @Pathh1 An unedited Editor's view of #solo10 Annals of Botany Comments, criticism, even
demolition appreciated http://t.co/X94aEYf via
10:39 am new299:RT @mentalindigest: 'Mountains out of molehills' (http://bit.ly/O8eVP) The gap on the left was 9/11
(when we were seriously distracted) #datavis #solo10
10:40 am harpistkat:#solo10 Fascinating - flipping military figures from absolute to relative to population size @mccandelish
10:40 am aleksk:Echo chamber of Web is ok 'cause small groups talking to one another can act as seed for larger
campaign - @alicebell #solo10
92 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:40 am edyong209:Small groups of ppl talking to each other can act as seeds for larger things - @alicebell on "echo-
chamber" argument #solo10
10:40 am rdmpage:RT @mentalindigest: UK taxpayer costs: "Scotland costs us £2.93 a day" - bargain! #solo10
10:41 am imascientist:.@alicebell Shows wider than usual suspects involved in #scivote < I'd argue THERE is value in involving
public, might b on yr side! #solo10
10:41 am GozdeZorlu:@alicebell sci policy not popular subject. the #scivote hashtag connects those interested #solo10
10:41 am David_Dobbs:McCandless often graphs to show #s as relative rather than absolute entities. Rapid way to provide
context. #solo10
10:41 am edyong209:Ridiculously simplistic to classify people as "science-friendly" or "anti-science" - @alicebell#solo10
10:41 am scottkeir:RT @kejames: Wow, our priorities really suck. RT @AJCann The Billion Dollar
Gramhttp://t.co/R0Cqefx #solo10
10:41 am kejames:@mjrobbins @alokjha Decisions are made by those who turn up, yes, but for scientists, the cost of
turning up may be your career. #solo10
10:41 am mentalindigest:"Data are a lens to change you perspective on absolute figures" (China biggest army, but 124th when
prop. to population) #solo10 #datavis
10:41 am sciencegoddess:I want a visual CV just like David McCandless has for himself! #solo10
10:42 am sciencegoddess:RT @edyong209: Ridiculously simplistic to classify people as "science-friendly" or "anti-science" -
@alicebell #solo10
10:42 am tacoe:Fun infoviz examples so far despite the title slide (unfortunate recent posterchild of infoviz)
#shoesguy #solo10
10:42 am fischblog:Good idea: Automated CV created with ORCID data. But you Need to be able to insert other stuff, too.
#solo10
10:42 am garwboy:RT @sjcockell: who really spends the most on their military? http://bit.ly/ayLR0w #solo10
10:42 am katie_fraser:Discussion about whether ORCID should be entered on manuscript submission or embedded in original
paper & extracted by publisher #solo10
10:42 am science3point0:RT @scottkeir: #solo10 breakout session live stream http://bit.ly/bgwBqs is session
11http://bit.ly/cZP4m6 (thanks @science3point0 )
10:43 am sjcockell:are we all design-literate because we consume so much design every day? #solo10
10:43 am easternblot:Loving David McCandless' visual CV. I want one. #inspired #solo10
10:43 am David_Dobbs:Yes it's way cool. RT @sciencegoddess: I want a visual CV just like David McCandless has for himself!
#solo10
10:43 am imascientist:+1! RT @edyong209: Ridiculously simplistic to classify people as "science-friendly" or "anti-science" -
@alicebell #solo10
10:43 am AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: US has largest m,ilitary budget, but compared to GNP, do they REALLY spend more
than other countries? @mccandelish #solo10
10:43 am AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: actually, NO: myanmar spends 26% of their total GNP on military, much more than
US @mccandelish #solo10
10:43 am AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: who has biggest army as 100K population? north korea (4711); US has 45th largest
army @mccandelish #solo10
10:43 am AJCann:RT @sjcockell: are we all design-literate because we consume so much design every day? #solo10- No,
I'm design dyslexic and I look at media
10:44 am pucegreen:RT @kejames: Wow, our priorities really suck. RT @AJCann The Billion Dollar
10:44 am scottkeir:Tragic this needs stating RT @edyong209 Ridiculously simplistic 2 classify people as "science-friendly" or
"anti-science"-@alicebell #solo10
10:44 am jamesdadd:I was not expecting data visualisation to be about computational art #solo10
10:44 am simonhodson99:#greenchain #solo10 Parsing patents for key phrases to identify use of solvents: NB: can't be done on
closed access journals.
10:45 am ChemSpider:In Peter-Murray Rust's session on the green chain reaction with the results of his mining solvents for
reactions from patents... #solo10
10:45 am d_swan:Doesn't matter if you're at #solo10 or not, everyone should
readhttp://www.informationisbeautiful.net/ from @mccandeliish
10:45 am JennyRohn:Peter is liberating chemical data from "evil barons" using text mining of patent applications #solo10
10:46 am anthonyhenderse:RT @imascientist: +1! RT @edyong209: Ridiculously simplistic to classify people as "science-friendly" or
"anti-science" - @alicebell #solo10
10:46 am tacoe:Cool graph: data bandwidth of human senses (compared to technology). Sight: 1250Mb/s. #solo10
10:46 am Argent23:RT @d_swan: Doesn't matter if you're at #solo10 or not, everyone should
10:46 am mentalindigest:RT @d_swan: Doesn't matter if you're at #solo10 or not, everyone should
93 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:46 am nigelcameron:Agreed, tho there r outliers at both ends: RT @edyong209: Ridiculously simplistic to classify people
"pro/anti-science" - @alicebell #solo10
10:47 am jamesdadd:RT @d_swan: Doesn't matter if you're at #solo10 or not, everyone should
10:47 am JacAbsolute:RT @science3point0: Livestreaming @petermurrayrust #solo10 - British library secure internet down -
wifi is a joke, but anyways, join us: http://bt.io/FvQh
10:47 am mrgunn:RT @sciencegoddess I've been sharing David McCandless' talk far and wide since it came out on
TED http://bit.ly/cgfBYs Love it! #solo10
10:47 am sciencegoddess:RT @d_swan: Doesn't matter if you're at #solo10 or not, everyone should
10:48 am ChemSpider:Ethernet discussion about Peter Murray-Rust's green chain reaction is on http:okfnpad.org/solosession
#solo10
10:48 am David_Dobbs:RT @mrgunn: RT @sciencegoddess I've been sharing David McCandless' talk far and wide since it came
out on TED http://bit.ly/cgfBYs Love it! #solo10
10:48 am LouWoodley:Lack of incentives for data sharing: effort required to prepare, time better spent writing papers+grants,
"all stick and no carrot" #solo10
10:49 am jamesdadd:So this is how to turn data into information - data visualisation by David McCandles #solo10
10:49 am sciencegoddess:Where time travelers from different times could possibly meet up. A fun look at data by David
McCandless! #solo10
10:49 am kaythaney:RT @mentalindigest: "Data are a lens to change you perspective on absolute figures" (China biggest
army, but 124th when prop. to population) #solo10 #datavis
10:49 am rvidal:Very similar to his TED talk but always entertaining. @mccandelish and his beautiful data. #solo10
10:50 am aleksk:Is there a country where the science vote is organised/recognised, w a politic that rewards scientific
policy? (asks @drevanharris) #solo10
10:50 am imascientist:.@DrEvanHarris saying there isn't a sci vote, but think he's saying there should be. Wants a visible sci
lobby I guess. #solo10
10:50 am harpistkat:#solo10 Infographics "make the invisible visible", but keep it simple @mccandelish
10:51 am katie_fraser:Associating ORCID with OpenAuth saves additional verification #solo10
10:51 am LouWoodley:.@markgfh @alokjha @oh_henry #solo10 beers tonight likely to start in Betjeman Arms once we're
finished ~5.30pm.
10:52 am sjcockell:love the snake oil visualisation: http://bit.ly/cnyCbq #solo10
10:52 am Argent23:David McCandle's Colours in Culture graph reminded my of xkcd's color name
surveyhttp://is.gd/eUzId #solo10
10:53 am imascientist:I guess this sci lobby analogous to, eg christian lobby. So pols must consider it. Prob is, sci lobby would
be much smaller, surely? #solo10
10:53 am jamesdadd:RT @LouWoodley: Lack incentives for data sharing: effort to prepare, better spent writing
papers+grants, "all stick and no carrot" #solo10
10:53 am gingerbreadlady:Data visualisation is knowledge compression - McCandless #solo10
10:54 am nigelcameron:Reliable data? So 2 Marshall Plans = 1 Mars Mission =< Russian bribes via @kejames @AJCannBillion
Dollar Gram http://t.co/R0Cqefx #solo10
10:54 am sjcockell:the live version is here: http://bit.ly/drMCup #solo10
10:54 am brunellalongo:Beautiful examples of data visualization at #solo10 emotionally and visually driven. Adding sources /
definitions could make them useful too
10:54 am harpistkat:#solo10 Key point of @mccandelish snake oil diagram http://bit.ly/cnyCbq is that it's interactively linked in
to the evidence base
10:55 am franknorman:ORCID ID is like ISBN number, i.e. tautologous. #solo10
10:55 am MatToddChem:RT @ChemSpider: Ethernet discussion about Peter Murray-Rust's green chain reaction is on
http:okfnpad.org/solosession #solo10
10:55 am jimbobthomas:RT @d_swan: Doesn't matter if you're at #solo10 or not, everyone should
10:56 am d_swan:For those of you who (like me) have no idea what "Cochrane" might be for the snake oil
visualisation: http://bit.ly/Pk8NU #solo10
10:56 am mjrobbins:@alokjha @pssalgado Yup, Alok is spot on. I think basically the sci community needs to work out how to
support engagement #scivote #solo10
10:56 am YSJournal:RT @gingerbreadlady: Data visualisation is knowledge compression - McCandless #solo10
10:56 am karls_mlab:RT @edyong209: Ridiculously simplistic to classify people as "science-friendly" or "anti-science" -
@alicebell #solo10
10:56 am morphosaurus:RT @science3point0: Science online London 2010 - Day 2 NOW - #solo10 - Free live streaming c/o S3.0
10:57 am Argent23:Wish I could do graphs David McCandles calles his fails... #solo10
94 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:57 am AJCann:Grr, David McC's fails look like my typical efforts. From this I learn that oversimplification = pretty #solo10
10:58 am sciencegoddess:not a chart, not exactly an article--a charticle! :) David McCandless #solo10
10:58 am gingerbreadlady:McCandless has just coined the phrase "charticle" (chart and an article at the same time) #solo10
10:58 am imascientist:.@DrEvanHarris One benefit to an organised sci lobby would be would offer reassurance to those taking on
'our opponents' #solo10
10:58 am katie_fraser:Discussion of whether ID needs to be supervised or if identification can be automated #solo10 (my pubs
have been misattributed so sceptical)
10:58 am StineCamilla:Science Online #solo10 ? at The British Library http://gowal.la/c/2qX2V?137
10:59 am tacoe:Helpful and fun how @mccandelish shares his infoviz failures #solo10
10:59 am harpistkat:#solo10 Good infographics combine form, function, interestingness and integrity @mccandelishAlso, LOL at
everyone ripping his slides apart
11:00 am 1waytofindout:RT @sjcockell: who really spends the most on their military? http://bit.ly/ayLR0w #solo10
11:01 am sciencegoddess:Can't do a four way Venn diagram--FAIL! David McCandless learns from his mistakes! #solo10
11:01 am Jim_Croft:Not good, world. RT @kejames: Wow, our priorities really suck. RT @AJCann The Billion Dollar
Gram http://t.co/R0Cqefx #solo10
11:02 am imascientist:Q(s) from @ShaneMcC, 1. Was #scivote too late (manifestos done early)? 2. Online has to connect to
offline actions, cf Obama #solo10
11:03 am scilib:RT @mentalindigest: "Data are a lens to change you perspective on absolute figures" (China biggest army,
but 124th when prop. to population) #solo10 #datavis
11:03 am JennyRohn:Old scientific literature is a goldmine of untapped information - how to get to the non-open access stuff?
#solo10
11:03 am imascientist:3. Analogy fr West Wing - yr enemies need to be scary, don't many of public think homeopathy harmless?
#solo10
11:03 am quantum_tunnelNot quite an article, neither a chart... But a charticle! @mccandelish #solo10
:
11:04 am oh_henry:RT @harpistkat #solo10 Good infographics = form, function, interestingness and integrity @mccandelish +
LOL at everyone taking slides apart
11:04 am rvidal:@sciencegoddess you can do it, but not with the data he wanted to display. #solo10 (re: @mccandelish)
11:05 am rdmpage:RT @gingerbreadlady: Data visualisation is knowledge compression - McCandless #solo10
11:05 am LouWoodley:Ontology for diff types of ORCID contributors still TBC - needs public discussion, sensitive subject. When
best to gather feedback? #solo10
11:05 am drnickmorris:RT @Argent23: Wish I could do graphs David McCandles calles his fails... #solo10
11:05 am sjcockell:the carbon-neutral volcano: http://bit.ly/av1Kjp #solo10
11:05 am AJCann:RT @sjcockell: the carbon-neutral volcano: http://bit.ly/av1Kjp #solo10
11:05 am drnickmorris:RT @gingerbreadlady: McCandless has just coined the phrase "charticle" (chart and an article at the same
time) #solo10
11:05 am mentalindigest:McCandles: 'Our first carbon neutral volcano: http://bit.ly/aXzo7u ' #datavis #solo10
11:05 am pssalgado:RT @quantum_tunnel: Not quite an article, neither a chart... But a charticle! @mccandelish#solo10
11:06 am nailest:RT @science3point0: Science online London 2010 - Day 2 NOW - #solo10 - Free live streaming c/o S3.0
11:06 am katie_fraser:Comment on needing buy-in from researchers, not at institutional level, ID systems can't be enforced by
library etc #solo10
11:06 am razZ0r:Data visualisation is knowledge compression - McCandless #solo10 (also learned new word: charticle [chart
+ article])
11:06 am easternblot:McCandless: Icelandic volcano eruption in April was carbon neutral due to CO2 emissions prevented as
result of cancelled flights. #solo10
11:07 am quantum_tunnel'Design is really easy' @mccandelish. I will have to give it a proper go! #solo10
:
11:07 am harpistkat:#solo10 Wow- @mccandelish draws everything by hand in Adobe Illustrator. Would question his assertion
that "design is easy"
11:07 am imascientist:.@alicebell Big drivers for #scivote were #nuttsack and funding worries. Sci lobby may mobilise soon once
there are cuts. #solo10
11:07 am gingerbreadlady:I wish I could use Adobe Illustrator like David McCandless #nerdenvy #solo10
11:07 am kaythaney:RT @easternblot: McCandless: Icelandic volcano eruption in April was carbon neutral due to CO2 emissions
prevented as result of cancelled flights. #solo10
11:08 am d_swan:Always assumed that @mccandelish generated his visualisations programatically, but it's all hand done in
Adobe Illustrator #solo10
11:08 am simonhodson99:#solo10 #greenchain PMR the 'recipe' is simply fact, essential part of the chemical data rather than
contextual information or creative work
11:08 am Jim_Croft:Scotland costs me $90 a bottle! :( @rdmpage: RT @mentalindigest: UK taxpayer costs: "Scotland costs us
£2.93 a day" - bargain! #solo10
95 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
11:08 am aleksk:A theme is emerging: the most effective stuff is done offline. Online is useful for debate. #solo10
11:08 am mocost:Would have liked to hear @mccandelish speak at #solo10, and get my copy of Info Beautiful signed, but
can't make it today
11:08 am jiwhite:RT @imascientist: +1! RT @edyong209: Ridiculously simplistic to classify people as "science-friendly" or
"anti-science" - @alicebell #solo10
11:09 am katie_fraser:Interesting question: can one person have more than one identity? ORCHID not sure about supporting
'personas' yet #solo10
11:10 am brunellalongo:#solo10 information design must go beyond beauty of easy visualization and mashups - keep the context
clear and preserve the meaning
11:11 am mrgunn:RT @JennyRohn Old scientific literature is a goldmine of untapped information - how to get to the non-
open access stuff? #solo10
11:11 am sgreene24:David McCandless: No data without context! Visuals! Take to the streets and tell media and politicians
#solo10
11:11 am steinsky:"47 billion people marched on parliament today, demanding that politicians & journalists report big
numbers in some sort of context" #solo10
11:11 am pucegreen:RT @easternblot: McCandless: Icelandic volcano eruption in April was carbon neutral due to CO2 emissions
prevented as result of cancelled flights. #solo10
11:11 am AJCann:I don't understand how that "graph"` is layed out either #solo10
11:11 am adders:The graph axes wars begin at #solo10
11:12 am aleksk:Offline in this case also means old media. Stuff is policy. I wonder if this is generational. #solo10
11:12 am AJCann:If this is a "science" conference, beautiful isn't enough #solo10
11:12 am mrvaidya:RT @mentalindigest: "Data are a lens to change you perspective on absolute figures" (China biggest army,
11:12 am AJCann:Nor is "cool" #solo10
11:13 am harpistkat:#solo10 when choosing how to represent data, try to align design concept to the data. If not possible, then
make it cool @mccandelish
11:13 am mjrobbins:@GozdeZorlu The body was weak and the mind was even weaker, plus lots of writing to do, but following
along with #solo10 tag!
11:14 am mrgunn:RT @steinsky "47 billion people marched on parliament today, demanding politicians & journalists report
big numbers in some context" #solo10
11:14 am AJCann:Really pleased the #solo10 tag has not been spammed. Twitter has done a great job cleaning up in the last
12 months.
11:14 am adders:#dconstruct "beautiful, inspiring dataviz" #solo10 "explain that axis" ;-)
11:14 am GozdeZorlu:My take on #scivote-use online to connect,form voice,direction.then get offline&get things done-spk to
MPs,campaign,reach more ppl #solo10
11:14 am brunellalongo:#solo10 interesting questions and opinions from the audience confirm usability principles. 1st rule, define
who are you talking to
11:14 am harpistkat:#solo10 "Beautiful" and "cool" may not be enough detail for scientists, but v easy to engage public with
complex data @mccandelish
11:15 am katie_fraser:Question about blogs leading to discusion on what should be 'measured'. Should blogs be recorded? By
blog or by post? #solo10
11:16 am gtkajita:RT @edyong209: Ridiculously simplistic to classify people as "science-friendly" or "anti-science" -
@alicebell #solo10
11:16 am BobOHara:@mccandelish graphics a bit hit & miss, IMO #solo10
11:16 am harpistkat:#solo10 Interesting - @mccandelish uses crowd-source gang to check his data visualisations.
11:16 am GozdeZorlu:Q frm audience - one umbrella organisation to speak for diff branches of science - or a unified voice for all?
#scivote #solo10
11:16 am mjrobbins:Visualization also extemely important in industry - I can impress clients by learning from the likes of
@mccandelish #solo10
11:16 am mentalindigest:David McCandles does submit his visualisations to a degree of peer review before publishing #solo10
11:16 am Argent23:also relevant for #solo10 tweeps! RT @PennStateCSI: RT @MyScienceCareer: Jon Copley: easy reading is
damn hard writing #EMBOmtg
11:17 am imascientist:.@imrantime On the diversity of the sci lobby - cf to the pink vote, or the green vote. Not homogenous,
BUT considered by pols #solo10
11:19 am YSJournal:RT @gingerbreadlady: McCandless has just coined the phrase "charticle" (chart and an article at the same
time) #solo10
11:19 am katie_fraser:@mafrado Presenters said ORCHID still resolving issue of one author publishing in different areas, although
ID strictly academic #solo10
11:21 am GozdeZorlu:Q frm @alokjha - scientists realise too late the need to get involved in #scivote #solo10
11:22 am dnghub:My #solo10 challenging: trying to incorporate "Chewbacca" into my unconference session on building a
96 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
good (online) village.
11:22 am MatToddChem:Having a blast in real-time collaboration on assessing solvent use in patents
athttp://okfnpad.org/soloSession #solo10
11:24 am imascientist:Some discn of whether scis don't help selves - not aware enough of politics. < so prob not pol's sci literacy,
but sci's pol lit? #solo10
11:24 am kejames:This debate about whether scientists should be forgiven for not engaging public/politicians makes me want
to scratch my eyes out. #solo10
11:26 am dlivingstone:RT @aleksk: A theme is emerging: the most effective stuff is done offline. Online is useful for debate.
#solo10
11:31 am mjrobbins:Powerpoint presentations should be banned at #solo11 in my opinion | #solo10
11:32 am egonwillighagen:RT @MatToddChem: Having a blast in real-time collaboration on assessing solvent use in patents
at http://okfnpad.org/soloSession #solo10
11:32 am JoBrodie:Strange reading about engagement stuff, and not being at #solo10 as PE is an integral part of UCL project
I'm working on http://is.gd/eUBUU
11:36 am MatToddChem:and I should add it feels somehow appropriate to be taking an active part in #solo10 while sitting in Sydney
11:39 am iggyduck:RT @kejames: This debate about whether scientists should be forgiven for not engaging public/politicians
makes me want to scratch my eyes out. #solo10
11:41 am Trevesy:RT @steinsky: "47 billion people marched on parliament today, demanding that politicians & journalists
report big numbers in some sort of context" #solo10
11:42 am joergheber:The excellent catering at #solo10 is one of the reasons to come here in person! (the meatspace chats being
the other)
11:42 am jluismarin:RT @mentalindigest: "Data are a lens to change you perspective on absolute figures" (China biggest army,
11:42 am NewShoot:Important scientific discussions work best powered by CAKE! #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2l4uzw
11:44 am drnickmorris:Another great lunch! #solo10
11:44 am zemogle:Spaghetti: data that's been visualised in an obscure, unartistic way via David McCandless #solo10
11:46 am astrobiased:Data is the new soil #solo10 (via @zemogle)
11:46 am easternblot:At 14:15, #solo10 unconference session about online communities with me and @dnghub talking about
two different types/uses of communities.
11:46 am balintd:RT @razZ0r: Data visualisation is knowledge compression - McCandless #solo10 (also learned new word:
charticle [chart + article])
11:48 am morphosaurus:Woman who sprayed all over the toilet seat at #solo10, try firing at close range. Or wipe up your urine.
Either would be fine.
11:51 am Allochthonous:RT @morphosaurus: Argument that scientists too doing science busy to lobby is like me as a lecturer being
too busy teaching to interview students. #solo10
11:53 am adders:Lunching at #solo10 : http://yfrog.com/muryboj
11:56 am Villavelius:RT @AJCann: The Billion Dollar Gram http://t.co/R0Cqefx #solo10
11:58 am kjhaxton:RT @morphosaurus: Argument that scientists too doing science busy to lobby is like me as a lecturer being
too busy teaching to interview students. #solo10
12:00 pm nightingale801:RT @edyong209: Small groups of ppl talking to each other can act as seeds for larger things - @alicebell on
"echo-chamber" argument #solo10
12:02 pm rpg7twit:What @aleksk really wants to do is 'fuck people up'. #solo10
12:03 pm joergheber:@kejames #solo10 yes, I wonder what people think scientists should do: lobby, communicate, educate,
teach, research... all at the same time?
12:03 pm Allochthonous:On the whole 'career cost of outreach' thing: if we don't take the risk, attitudes will never change #solo10
12:04 pm axiomsofchoice:In particular during the panel sessions. RT @mjrobbins Powerpoint presentations should be banned at
#solo11 in my opinion | #solo10
12:04 pm Jim_Croft:@kejames forgiveness eh? There are some who should never be allowed to do it, and others, nothing but.
Different skill sets. #solo10
12:07 pm highlyanne:Hear hear! RT @Allochthonous: On the whole 'career cost of outreach' thing: if we don't take the risk,
attitudes will never change #solo10
12:08 pm pipex:RT @kaythaney: absolutely incredible video shown by @drevanharris of a parkinson's patient taking
12:09 pm jamesdadd:RT @thatkeith: #solo10 come to room 2 to talk about the future of information and research!
12:10 pm kjhaxton:RT @highlyanne: Hear hear! RT @Allochthonous: On the whole 'career cost of outreach' thing: if we don't
take the risk, attitudes will never change #solo10
12:13 pm imascientist:Well the food at #solo10 has been amazing. Top marks British Library! Stuffed now:-)
12:14 pm Argent23:#solo10 paraphernalia m( http://campl.us/iNw
12:14 pm d_swan:With no preference for the first unconference session I have wisely chosen the place with the best wifi
signal #solo10
97 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:15 pm rpg7twit:RT @kejames: @JennyRohn It's odd that we who do engage, who come to [@soloconf] are ones who end
up defending our peers who don't #solo10
12:15 pm SophieLNixon:RT @Allochthonous: On the whole 'career cost of outreach' thing: if we don't take the risk, attitudes will
never change #solo10
12:17 pm ShaneMcC:Heading home after an excellent #solo10 thx to all organisers
12:17 pm kjhaxton:There is no point in doing public engagement or lobbying as a scientist if you don't want to. No one is
forcing scientists to do so. #solo10
12:18 pm pssalgado:In room 2 to hear about future of info and research #solo10
12:18 pm kjhaxton:Unconference session 1 - getting the message across to the audience #solo10
12:18 pm katie_fraser:Session on connecting with 'users' (whatever that means in the context of online science!) #solo10
12:18 pm ShaneMcC:RT @Allochthonous: On the whole 'career cost of outreach' thing: if we don't take the risk, attitudes will
never change #solo10
12:18 pm ChemSpider:Data is the new soil. vs data is the new oil. David McCandless on visualisation #solo10
12:20 pm razZ0r:unconference, part 1, engaging your readership or stg like this #solo10
12:20 pm LouWoodley:Unconference session 1 - how to engage with your readers/online communiity - @j_timmer from Ars
Technica introduces #solo10
12:20 pm aleksk:Have left #solo10 for the welcome embrace of the BL reading room. "reading" is tdy's #1984 word. Doh,
left my camera at home.
12:21 pm ayasawada:#solo10 Listening to session on 'engaging with audiences' with John Timmer,
@alokjha@edyong209 speaking.
12:21 pm phillord:#solo10 think I got the wrong room -- I thought this was "why does everyone hate scientists"?
12:21 pm imrantime:At #solo10, interesting session on #scivote this am - sad I missed yesterday!
12:21 pm axiomsofchoice:In the YQL session given by @IanMulvany #solo10
12:22 pm mfenner:John Timmer starts #solo10 unconference session 1 on why you should engage with your readers
12:22 pm fischblog:In the Internet, _nothing_ is uncontroversial! (cc. @j_timmer) #solo10
12:22 pm AJCann:RT @mfenner: John Timmer starts #solo10 unconference session 1 on why you should engage with your
readers - Mmm, ArsTechnica, great site!
12:23 pm LouWoodley:Engaging directly with readers in comment threads helps to encourage their trust in you -
@j_timmer #solo10
12:23 pm rpg7twit:Hear hear. +@edyong209 #solo10
12:23 pm imascientist:Unconference session on 'engaging with audiences' with John Timmer,
@morphosaurus @alokjha@edyong209 #solo10
12:24 pm imrantime:RT @ayasawada: #solo10 Now listening to @imrantime on #scivote. Ahem, he's also in #geekcalendar. See
blog and buy now http://geekcalendar.co.uk
12:24 pm Stephen_Curry:@kieronflanagan Would like to learn more about track record of sci lobbyists. Lessons for now? #solo10
12:24 pm rpg7twit:We shouldn't reward attention-seeking behaviour -- @edyong209 #solo10
12:25 pm blefurgy:RT @David_Dobbs: McCandless: "Data is the new soil." Work it and you can grow all sorts of things.
12:25 pm axiomsofchoice:Trying to extract data from these datasets as html tables via YQL http://scr.ipmpipe.orsolg/cgi-
bin/sbr/public.cgi #solo10
12:25 pm LouWoodley:Comments most likely to get response from a blogger often negative, trollish ones. Choose to interact wth
+ve ones too - @edyong209 #solo10
12:25 pm drnickmorris:In the 'eBooks' session, now with 9 people. Session not what I was expecting. Seems to have
librarian/publisher bias. #solo10
12:25 pm egonwillighagen:RT @katie_fraser: ORCID could be used to generate publication lists & aid search #solo10 (would be useful
for institutional repository if widely accepted)
12:25 pm rpg7twit:Now Ed is channelling Ben Goldacre! #solo10 #armyofgits
12:25 pm JoBrodie:#solo10 raises some interesting points about file formats! What's wrong with .ppts? Plenty wrong with bad
/ boring ones, but good ones r OK?
12:25 pm kjhaxton:RT @LouWoodley: Comments most likely to get response from a blogger often negative, trollish ones.
Choose to interact wth +ve ones too - @edyong209 #solo10
12:25 pm IllustratorExp:I wish I could use Adobe Illustrator like David McCandless #nerdenvy #solo10
12:26 pm fischblog:The quality of the comments depends on how the Blogger deals with commenters. @edyong209#solo10
12:26 pm NewShoot:@edyong209 s instruction to reward good commenting behaviour reminds me of the recommended
method of dog training! #solo10
12:26 pm imascientist:Timmer: listening to readers improves yr writing. @edyong209 points out some engage most w critics, imp
to engage the +ve commenters #solo10
12:26 pm MyScienceCareeJeffrey Lancaster asks, what do scientists want from technology? #solo10
r:
12:26 pm egonwillighagen:RT @katie_fraser: Discussion about whether ORCID should be entered on manuscript submission or
98 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
embedded in original paper & extracted by publisher #solo10
12:26 pm egonwillighagen:RT @ChemSpider: In Peter-Murray Rust's session on the green chain reaction with the results of his mining
solvents for reactions from patents... #solo10
12:26 pm GozdeZorlu:Engage with readers on your blog - improves trust #solo10
12:26 pm gbilder:1st mention of Google Wave at #solo10. Was major topic last year. Perhaps should make us humble about
our tech prediction abilities?
12:27 pm quantum_tunnel'Paying attention to positive feedback is as important, if not more so than to the negative one' Interacting
:
with readership session #solo10
12:27 pm egonwillighagen:RT @katie_fraser: Associating ORCID with OpenAuth saves additional verification #solo10
12:27 pm katie_fraser:Discussion on what scientists want from technology: bringing out ideas around publication, worldliest and
communication #solo10
12:27 pm AJCann:Ed Yoong says stroke good behavior in blog comments, don't just punish the bad boys. #solo10
12:27 pm razZ0r:now talking @edyong209 after @j_timmer of @arstechnica #solo10 <3 Ars Technica
12:27 pm nigelcameron:Isn't Twitter a fine ex of just that? RT @rpg7twit We shouldn't reward attention-seeking behaviour --
@edyong209 #solo10
12:28 pm egonwillighagen:RT @quantum_tunnel: Not quite an article, neither a chart... But a charticle! @mccandelish#solo10
12:28 pm LouWoodley:People often comment without having read your post e.g. cos of reading only its headline/1st para from
another site - @edyong209 #solo10
12:28 pm AJCann:RT @gbilder: Google Wave was major topic last year. Perhaps should make us humble about our tech
prediction abilities? #solo10
12:28 pm pssalgado:That's why we're here. ;-) @ShaneMcC: RT @Allochthonous: On 'career cost of outreach': if we don't take
risk, attitudes never change #solo10
12:28 pm MyScienceCareeSome answers: open source lab notebook platform; integrated publishing platforms; crowd funded sci
r:
research #solo10
12:29 pm egonwillighagen:@LouWoodley what's that ORCID author ontology about? Not about first author = who wrote the paper,
last author = dept head, I hope? #solo10
12:29 pm AJCann:Ed Yong - create delurking thread for readers - who the f*uck are you? #solo10
12:29 pm mfenner:Yong: Engage with readers: develop commenting policy, let users help with errors, watch places like Digg,
ask users who they are #solo10
12:29 pm GozdeZorlu:@edong209 - ask your readers why they come to your blog, what are they looking for, what do they want?
Ask them! #solo10
12:30 pm egonwillighagen:RT @katie_fraser: Interesting question: can one person have more than one identity? ORCHID not sure
about supporting 'personas' yet #solo10
12:30 pm alicebell:#solo10 @edyong209 asks how many bloggers know why people read them? He says use your comment
threads: get them to identify themselves.
12:30 pm GozdeZorlu:Here's the link to @edong209's annual thread - asking readers to explain who they
arehttp://bit.ly/a1iDbp #solo10
12:30 pm ayasawada:The thing I love conferences like #solo10: nobody is even looking at the stage. All on phones and laptops.
12:30 pm rpg7twit:Would love to do a delurking thread on #natnet BUT COMMENTING SYSTEM WON'T LET ME. #solo10
12:30 pm fischblog:@mrgunn I keep wondering if the moral high ground really is worth the trouble. How does it help my
cause? #solo10
12:30 pm JennyRohn:@edyong209 recommends "de-lurking" posts to ask blog readers who they are and what are their stories
#solo10
12:30 pm mbonett:now at yql session at #solo10 to feed my techie side - rest of meeting was dedicated to discussion around
#sagecite just started in #jiscmrd
12:31 pm phillord:#solo10 ah, good, it is about hating scientists after all
12:31 pm kjhaxton:@morphosaurus 'why does the public hate scientists and can we restore our C19th reputation' #solo10
12:31 pm SaveGWave:RT @gbilder: 1st mention of Google Wave at #solo10. Was major topic last year. Perhaps should make us
humble about our tech? #savegooglewave
12:31 pm LouWoodley:@egonwillighagen Not been defined yet. But ideas discussed were how to differentiate between main
author, contributors, bloggers etc #solo10
12:31 pm sarahkendrew:#solo10 wish @edyong209 had been at the unconf at mendeley last night...
12:31 pm imascientist:Ed says ask yr readers abt themselves RT @GozdeZorlu: Here's the link to @edong209's annual
thread http://bit.ly/a1iDbp #solo10
12:31 pm brunellalongo:My comments explained here: Fragments of my online
conversationshttp://www.brunellalongo.it/comments.html #solo10 - unconference 1
12:32 pm O_WR:@morphosaurus 'why does the public hate scientists and can we restore our C19th reputation' #solo10
12:32 pm egonwillighagen:RT @phillord: #solo10 think I got the wrong room -- I thought this was "why does everyone hate
scientists"?
12:32 pm Doppeldenk:RT Have left #solo10 for the welcome embrace of the BL reading room. "reading" is tdy's #1984word. Doh,
99 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
left my c... http://bit.ly/apio0i
12:32 pm kjhaxton:Fermi lab visit - pre visit kids drew stereotypical old white man scientists, post visit dre diverse images,
more +ve view of sci #solo10
12:32 pm egonwillighagen:@LouWoodley sounds like a very bad idea... :( #solo10
12:32 pm xraymancouk:RT @kejames: This debate about whether scientists should be forgiven for not engaging public/politicians
makes me want to scratch my eyes out. #solo10
12:33 pm cgutteridge:I was trying to be helpful and munge/graph some data from home for the #greenchain at #solo10, but
didn't do very well *sigh*
12:33 pm mfenner:RT @AJCann: RT @gbilder: Google Wave was major topic last year. Perhaps should make us humble about
our tech prediction abilities? #solo10
12:33 pm oh_henry:It's cos of @alokjha and his terrifying hair RT @ayasawada #solo10: nobody is even looking at the stage.
12:33 pm aallan:Just got a shout out in the unconference session in engaging your readers from @edyong209 for my
comment earlier, http://j.mp/c5EY7f #solo10
12:33 pm gingerbreadlady:Students don't read science blogs. They need more ways of interacting directly with scientists. #solo10
12:34 pm imascientist:.@morphosaurus Teacher + blogger, asks why public 'hates' scientists. Talks abt fermilab 'draw a sci' thing.
Students know few scis #solo10
12:34 pm B_O_V:RT @mrgunn: RT @sciencegoddess I've been sharing David McCandless' talk far and wide since it came out
on TED http://bit.ly/cgfBYs Love it! #solo10
12:34 pm alicebell:#solo10 I know about (some of) my knitblog readers b/c I read their blogs and talk to them as a community.
Have no idea for my other blogs.
12:34 pm lucasbrouwers:Science blog(s) feel secluded and lonely -> not accessible to laypeople says @morphosaurus#solo10
12:34 pm AJCann:What I'll take home from #solo10 - sweeping generalizations from panel members.
12:35 pm sjcockell:here's the Fermi Lab experiment, results really are striking: http://bit.ly/bIDzCo #solo10
12:35 pm MatToddChem:@egonwillighagen So you still think the number of active research scientists at #solo10 is around 25%? A
minority?
12:35 pm quantum_tunnelWhere does this idea of the duality public v scientist come from? #solo10
:
12:35 pm orbitingfrog:#solo10 echo?
12:35 pm rpg7twit:*snort* RT @AJCann: What I'll take home from #solo10 - sweeping generalizations from panel members.
12:35 pm gingerbreadlady:"Science is not a wild-haired, evil force" #solo10
12:35 pm JennyRohn:Victorian salon culture: was it really that widespread, or rather for the privileged few? #solo10
12:35 pm imascientist:.@morphosaurus Gives a big shout out for #IAS2010, says it did wonders for her students' ideas abt science
+ scientists. #solo10 < Thanks!
12:35 pm egonwillighagen:RT @AJCann: RT @gbilder: Google Wave was major topic last year. Perhaps should make us humble about
our tech prediction abilities? #solo10
12:35 pm LouWoodley:Need means of putting scientists back in touch with public - blogging is one way of improving science's
image - @morphosaurus #solo10
12:36 pm egonwillighagen:RT @orbitingfrog: #solo10 echo?
12:36 pm kjhaxton:can science blogging restore public faith in science? @morphosaurus #solo10
12:36 pm kejames:@DrEvanHarris Clip of you saying 'it is astonishing that the science community has not been more
effective': http://bit.ly/bhBsn2 #solo10
12:36 pm GozdeZorlu:@alokjha a lot has changed since he started at the guardian re how to know/engage with readers #solo10
12:36 pm egonwillighagen:@MatToddChem dunno... I'm physically sitting behind a kitchen table in Sweden :) #solo10 not sure who
spread that rumor ...
12:37 pm beckyfh:@Stephen_Curry @kieronflanagan #solo10 Hist prob better at remembering sci'tists & fields that won
govt/pop support, not those who failed
12:37 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: "journalists are egotistical, attention-seeking people who need a lot of reassurance"
@alokjha #solo10
12:37 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: "scientists are people doing a job, just like everyone else" @morphosaurus#solo10
12:37 pm rpg7twit:Does recent portrayal of scientists in films mesh with @morphosaurus observation? #solo10
12:37 pm alicebell:#solo10 Just a small part of empirical evidence that suggests "the public" do like and trust
sciencehttp://bit.ly/ayHePx at least in UK
12:37 pm GozdeZorlu:@alokjha 7 years ago - select no. of readers wud write letters to the newspaper. now with website-
interaction online with more ppl #solo10
12:37 pm edyong209:. @morphosaurus wants to combat stereotype of wildhaired scientists. We want more glamorous hair like
@alokjha and @imrantime #solo10
12:37 pm easternblot:One of Ed Yong's comments is EXACTLY what I'll talk about in online communities unconference session
(14:15). Know who readers are! #solo10
12:38 pm AJCann:RT @kejames: @DrEvanHarris saying 'it is astonishing that the science community has not been more
effective': http://bit.ly/bhBsn2 #solo10
100 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:38 pm brunellalongo:#solo10 - unconference 1 - bloggers don't know who their readers are, basically. Students don't read blogs
(not yet amplified perhaps?)
12:38 pm kjhaxton:was popularity of scientists in C19th a class issue rather than being more widespread - science was done by
wealthy, privileged few. #solo10
12:38 pm rdmpage:#solo10 @ianmulvany on Yahoo Query Language (YQL) and hacking the web
12:38 pm kjhaxton:Re last tweet - in some ways, nothing actually changes, science still done by weathy, privileged groups :)
#solo10
12:38 pm razZ0r:after Julia @morphosaurus here comes @alokjha and i'm more or less braindead again. coffee is terrible,
has no effect. need caffeine #solo10
12:39 pm egonwillighagen:RT @rdmpage: #solo10 @ianmulvany on Yahoo Query Language (YQL) and hacking the web
12:39 pm imascientist:.@alokjha 'What we have now is a much more mature commenting world' <errr, you mean CiF??!! #solo10
12:39 pm Argent23:Splice, anyone? RT @rpg7twit: Does recent portrayal of scientists in films mesh with
@morphosaurus observation? #solo10
12:39 pm ayasawada:RT @edyong209: . @morphosaurus wants to combat stereotype of wildhaired scientists. We want more
glamorous hair like @alokjha and @imrantime #solo10
12:39 pm axiomsofchoice:select * from csv WHERE url="http://www.mulvany.net/files/ipmpipe.csv" and
columns="date,place,status" and status='Confirmed' // #solo10 YQL
12:39 pm oh_henry:No, that's *journalism* ;) RT @gingerbreadlady "Science is not a wild-haired, evil force" #solo10
12:39 pm GozdeZorlu:@alokjha interact with readers - improves quality of comments #solo10
12:40 pm LouWoodley:RT @GrrlScientist Initially, ppl who commented were angry, now readership is more mature, usually less
nasty @alokjha (Guardian) #solo10
12:40 pm aallan:RT @sjcockell: here's the Fermi Lab experiment, results really are striking: http://bit.ly/bIDzCo#solo10
12:40 pm quantum_tunnel'Comments can be a great way to source very interesting stories' @alokjha #solo10
:
12:41 pm gingerbreadlady:RT @oh_henry: No, that's *journalism* ;) RT @gingerbreadlady "Science is not a wild-haired, evil force"
#solo10
12:41 pm AJCann:I don't comment on Guardian sites because barriers are too high. Registration? Forget it. #solo10
12:41 pm imascientist:Good point! RT @kjhaxton: was popularity of scientists in C19th a class issue - science was done by
wealthy, privileged few. #solo10
12:41 pm GozdeZorlu:@alokjha guardian encourages writers to engage with readers via comments #solo10
12:41 pm axiomsofchoice:http://github.com/yql/yql-tables/blob/master/mendeley/mendeley.search.xml // #solo10 YQL
12:41 pm pssalgado:@Liquidizer "Word is a fundamental unit of knowledge" #solo10
12:42 pm egonwillighagen:@axiomsofchoice of course, this is all going to be replaced by #sparql soon (a more common standard)
#solo10
12:42 pm kejames:She doesn't have scissors on her does she? *cowers* RT @edyong209 @morphosaurus wants to combat
stereotype of wildhaired scientists. #solo10
12:42 pm orbitingfrog:RT @rpg7twit: Does recent portrayal of scientists in films mesh with @morphosaurus observation? #solo10
12:42 pm katie_fraser:I'm getting the impression that the #solo10 audience is predominantly composed of Mac users.
12:42 pm edyong209:RT @oh_henry: No, that's *journalism* ;) RT @gingerbreadlady "Science is not a wild-haired, evil force"
#solo10
12:43 pm JennyRohn:@alokjha says: Convert your blog critics to readers for life by responding productively to them #solo10
12:43 pm joergheber:Interesting arguments on interacting with commenters. I like @edyong209 's proposal to invite them
directly on the blog, to de-lurk #solo10
12:43 pm imascientist:.@alokjha Complaints from readers on accuracy, often if you listen and correct they will love you forever.
#solo10
12:43 pm MyScienceCareeElectronic text has been great for writers. Notsomuch for readers. #solo10 unconference
r:
12:43 pm oh_henry:Times web manager recently said paywall had discouraged bad/offensive comments + improved debates...
food for thought #solo10
12:44 pm andreamoomooRT @GrrlScientist: "journalists are egotistical, attention-seeking people who need a lot of reassurance"
moo:
@alokjha #solo10
12:44 pm drugmonkeyblogRT @mjrobbins: RT @alokjha re busy scientists. But, to quote President Bartlett, "decisions are made by
:
those who turn up". #solo10
12:44 pm dekaysion:RT @sjcockell: love the snake oil visualisation: http://bit.ly/cnyCbq #solo10
12:44 pm new299:RT @axiomsofchoice: select * from csv WHERE url="http://www.mulvany.net/files/ipmpipe.csv" and
columns="date,place,status" and status='Confirmed' // #solo10 YQL
12:45 pm rpg7twit:She should start with @imrantime and @alokjha RT @kejames: @edyong209 @morphosauruswants to
combat stereotype of wildhaired scis #solo10
12:45 pm rpg7twit:Wait they're not scientists #solo10
12:47 pm mrgunn:RT @axiomsofchoice http://github.com/yql/yql-tables/blob/master/mendeley/mendeley.search.xml //
#solo10 YQL
101 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:47 pm axiomsofchoice:@egonwillighagen Yes. Just asked question about this but of course rdf triple stores are still not as common
as plain old html #solo10 YQL
12:48 pm d_swan:Conference #wifi gremlins in the works at the moment it seems #solo10
12:48 pm rpg7twit:Name three famous Belgians. #solo10
12:48 pm showjumper42:no doubt! RTGrrlScientist "comments are best if you can interact constructively w those commenters"
@alokjha #solo10
12:49 pm egonwillighagen:@axiomsofchoice you might be interested in the HTML linked here then -
>http://github.com/egonw/cheminformatics.classics #solo10
12:49 pm mrgunn:Agree! RT @joergheber The excellent catering at #solo10 is one of the reasons to come here in person!
(the meatspace chats being the other)
12:49 pm BioinfoTools:Suspects works best on blogs w critical mass. Still miss most=lurkers.
@JennyRohn @edyong209recommends "de-lurking" posts #solo10
12:49 pm sjcockell:'science is more interesting than GBH, but less interesting than attempted murder' #solo10
12:49 pm egonwillighagen:@rpg7twit 1. Paul Janssen #solo10 (pharmaceutics)
12:49 pm drnickmorris:eBooks: Role of the publisher will be in PR in connecting the author with the audience #solo10
12:49 pm rpg7twit:Between all three readers? RT @oh_henry: Times web manager recently- paywall discouraged
bad/offensive comments + improved debates #solo10
12:50 pm adders:New post: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/9RRDMU #solo10
12:50 pm mendeley_com:RT @mrgunn: RT @axiomsofchoice http://github.com/yql/yql-
tables/blob/master/mendeley/mendeley.search.xml // #solo10 YQL
12:50 pm quantum_tunnelFrom the floor: 'Is the image if a scientist as an old man with crazy white hair and lab coat an Anglo-
:
American image?' #solo10
12:51 pm alicebell:#solo10 Mention of Prof Branestawm! Keep meaning to write up my research on him as a paper (tho'd
make a good feature article too)
12:51 pm oh_henry:Well there is that RT @rpg7twit Between all 3 readers? RT @oh_henry: Times paywall discourages
offensive comments + improved debates #solo10
12:51 pm akshatrathi:Get in touch with your university press office says @j_timmer. Good advice. I will do. #solo10
12:52 pm mendeley_com:RT @adders: New post: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/9RRDMU#solo10
12:52 pm pssalgado:"Hyperwords" looks really cool, possibly fantastic must have tool for everyone #solo10unconference 2
12:52 pm imascientist:Questioner quotes survey of kids, 'name 3 scis', 25yrs ago, 3rd Heinz Wolf. He says, 'Modern equivalent =
@ProfBrianCox' <errr, no! #solo10
12:53 pm ayasawada:This conference proves that MacBooks are better than windows PCs at maintaining wifi. That or it's a
conspiracy #solo10
12:53 pm petermurrayrust#solo10 thanks to everyone who helped - will blog thanks when server comes back. great success
:
12:53 pm eaton:RT @adders: New post: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/9RRDMU#solo10
12:54 pm egonwillighagen:@ayasawada maybe it's the one place where Apple got the attenna right? #solo10
12:54 pm GozdeZorlu:Q frm scientist - stereotype of scientist not changed much in 25 yrs. What can we do? #solo10
12:54 pm brunellalongo:#solo10 - unconference1 - scientists / university bloggers may wish to engage also with their press /
communication offices
12:54 pm GozdeZorlu:Panelist Timmer surprised at the number of scientists in audience who know where their institution's press
office is #solo10
12:54 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: journalists waaay are more distrusted than scientists, scientists are highly trusted by
society #solo10
12:54 pm GozdeZorlu:Perception in Germany of scientists - reluctance to get involved with press. fear of being misquoted
#solo10
12:55 pm GozdeZorlu:Q frm audience - build trust in journalism first? #solo10
12:55 pm aallan:RT @adders: New post: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/9RRDMU#solo10
12:55 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: is characterization of scientists as old, balding men wearing lab coats an anglo-american
phenomenon? #solo10
12:55 pm GozdeZorlu:@edyong209 - trust far higher in scientists than of journalists #solo10
12:55 pm tacoe:agreed re friction being more interesting than preaching to choir RT @adders Cultures Clash over
Infographics http://bit.ly/9RRDMU #solo10
12:55 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: "science is more interesting [to TV media] than grievous bodily harm, but not as
interesting as murder" Brian Denehy #solo10
12:55 pm axiomsofchoice:@egonwillighagen Certainly, but again it the rest of the net that is the problem. #solo10
12:55 pm rpg7twit:So?scientists have to work on their public image/trust and do policy engagement AND do science. Busy
busy. #solo10
12:55 pm JenLucPiquant:RT @JennyRohn: Old scientific literature is a goldmine of untapped information - how to get to the non-
open access stuff? #solo10
102 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
12:56 pm ishzz:#solo10
12:56 pm Yeshes:RT @oh_henry: No, that's *journalism* ;) RT @gingerbreadlady "Science is not a wild-haired, evil force"
#solo10
12:56 pm Kate_Travis:Wowsers, i wish i had my computer so i could play with Hyperwords immediately. Looks awesome. #solo10
12:56 pm egonwillighagen:@axiomsofchoice change is slow, true... #solo10
12:57 pm CameronNeylon:Demo of hyperwords.net from @liquidizer Really looks rather nice set of tools for interacting with text
#solo10
12:57 pm egonwillighagen:RT @GrrlScientist: journalists waaay are more distrusted than scientists, scientists are highly trusted by
society #solo10
12:57 pm kejames:RT @rpg7twit: So?scientists have to work on their public image/trust and do policy engagement AND do
science. Busy busy. #solo10
12:58 pm pssalgado:Don't forget policy change! RT @rpg7twit scientists have to work on public image/trust, do policy
engagement AND do science. Busy #solo10
12:58 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: "what i like about blogging is that bloggers have a surprising degree of accountability in
what they are writing" @edyong209 #solo10
12:58 pm quantum_tunnelSample may B biased RT @GozdeZorlu Timmer surprised @ the no of scientists in audience who knw whr
:
thr institution's press office is #solo10
12:59 pm katie_fraser:Marketing specialist asking for our feedback on best way to communicate w. scientists. Answer:
unobtrusively? On demand? On Google! #solo10
12:59 pm kejames:Scientist. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. #solo10#princessbride
12:59 pm ishzz:RT @Yeshes RT @oh_henry: No, that's *journalism* ;) RT @gingerbreadlady "Science is not a wild-haired,
evil force" #solo10
1:00 pm treeworkers:RT @kejames: Scientist. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
#solo10 #princessbride
1:00 pm rpg7twit:RT @kejames: Scientist. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
1:01 pm quantum_tunnelHv to let me know later RT @pssalgado "Hyperwords" looks really cool, possibly fantastic must have tool
:
for everyone #solo10 unconference 2
1:01 pm kejames:Speak for yourselves. *tosses wild hair* RT @gingerbreadlady 'Science is not a wild-haired, evil force'
#solo10
1:01 pm itslizahere:RT @ishzz: RT @Yeshes RT @oh_henry: No, that's *journalism* ;) RT @gingerbreadlady "Science is not a
wild-haired, evil force" #solo10
1:01 pm quantum_tunnelRT @kejames: Scientist. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
:
1:02 pm GozdeZorlu:Timmer: Trust in scientists is abstract. Pew conducts good research into trust/scientists. #solo10
1:02 pm AJCann::-) BL wifi has crapped out again #solo10
1:02 pm brunellalongo:#solo10 - unconference 1 - trust, transparence, awareness about bias, knowledge of users, personal
responsibility are said key to engage...
1:03 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: audience question: what do you do with information about readership after you get it?
#solo10
1:03 pm adders:Comment is Free: the poster child for bear pit comment threads. #solo10
1:04 pm imascientist:Win! RT @kejames: Speak for yourselves. *tosses wild hair* RT @gingerbreadlady 'Science is not a wild-
haired, evil force' #solo10
1:04 pm mrvaidya:A day every Twitterer dreads: the first time *everybody* is somewhere exciting and he's missing out. Have
fun at #solo10, y'all.
1:05 pm TechCzech:RT @kejames: Scientist. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
1:05 pm mrvaidya:RT @kejames: Speak for yourselves. *tosses wild hair* RT @gingerbreadlady 'Science is not a wild-haired,
evil force' #solo10
1:05 pm oh_henry:I like this a lot RT @adders New post: Science Online: Cultures Clash over
Infographicshttp://bit.ly/9RRDMU #solo10
1:06 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: audience comment: how to deal w crackpot commenters? they can outlast almost any
sane, rational person in a comment thread #solo10
1:06 pm aallan:RT @kejames: Scientist. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
1:06 pm darryl1974:RT @adders: Comment is Free: the poster child for bear pit comment threads. #solo10
1:06 pm defjaf:RT @kejames: Scientist. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
1:07 pm kejames:To whomever is whispering near the ustream mic in the auditorium: we can hear you. #solo10
1:07 pm AJCann:Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://t.co/7vXOgMV #solo10
103 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
1:07 pm ThomLS:*LOL* :)) RT @kejames: Speak for yourselves. *tosses wild hair* RT @gingerbreadlady 'Science is not a
wild-haired, evil force' #solo10
1:08 pm egonwillighagen:RT @GrrlScientist: audience comment: how to deal w crackpot commenters? they can outlast almost any
sane, rational person in a comment thread #solo10
1:08 pm zemogle:@orbitingfrog it's nice #solo10
1:09 pm brendadada:RT @adders: Comment is Free: the poster child for bear pit comment threads. #solo10
1:09 pm jennifermjones:RT @AJCann: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://t.co/7vXOgMV #solo10
1:09 pm zemogle:RT @CameronNeylon: Demo of hyperwords.net from @liquidizer Really looks rather nice set of tools for
interacting with text #solo10
1:10 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: audience: @david_dobbs some scientists have broad readerships, others not (depends
upon how scientist writes, what topics, etc) #solo10
1:10 pm kejames:RT @DrEvanHarris My comment was directed at..failure of sci organisations 2 lobby on issues like short trm
contracts, gender.., etc #solo10
1:10 pm GozdeZorlu:Pew Research Center's report (last yr) on US public perceptions of science http://bit.ly/yzuk5#solo10
1:10 pm joergheber:#solo10 @david_dobbs: use stuff from cutting room floor to interact with constructive commenters on
blogs... Great idea!
1:10 pm AnaDinescu:interesting to follow the #tweets about #scientific presentations #solo10
1:11 pm mfenner:RT @oh_henry: I like this a lot RT @adders Science Online: Cultures Clash over
Infographicshttp://bit.ly/9RRDMU #solo10
1:11 pm genegeek:RT @rpg7twit: So?scientists have to work on their public image/trust and do policy engagement AND do
science. Busy busy. #solo10
1:11 pm GozdeZorlu:Scientist in audience tells panelists to 'chill out' - things not that bad #solo10
1:11 pm dekaysion:RT @adders: New post: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/9RRDMU#solo10
1:11 pm rpg7twit:RT @elbisivni: do you reach out to schools? Kids are great influencers & might get traction with adults
where direct comms might not #solo10
1:12 pm imascientist:Audience guy, too much negativity! As a sci, doesn't feel distrusted. Public disagree w science for REASONS
often. #solo10 <good point!
1:12 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: audience comment: public trusts scientists, but that doesn't mean they believe
everything science tells them-these are not the same! #solo10
1:12 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: audience comment: people distrust scientists when public has a strong emotional
relationship w their own world view #solo10
1:12 pm alicebell:"Americans like science" RT @GozdeZorlu: Pew Research Center's report on US public perceptions of
science http://bit.ly/yzuk5 #solo10
1:13 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @imascientist Audience guy, too much negativity! As a sci, doesn't feel distrusted. Public disagree w
science often. #solo10 good point
1:14 pm imascientist:Audience points: blogs not only way, what is? How much time do they spend engaging directly, esp w
kids?#solo10 < Do IAS everyone!
1:14 pm jkimbell:RT @alicebell: "Americans like science" RT @GozdeZorlu: Pew Research Center's report on US public
perceptions of science http://bit.ly/yzuk5 #solo10
1:15 pm mfenner:My experience was positive RT @akshatrathi: Get in touch with your university press office says
@j_timmer. Good advice. I will do. #solo10
1:15 pm rpg7twit:@elbisivni people are talking about going into schools now #solo10
1:15 pm brunellalongo:#solo10 - unconference 1 - it seems there r more ways to push science out and engage people, not just
blogs (stuff like teachers libraries)
1:16 pm egonwillighagen:while listening on #solo10 working on further #cdk #jchempaint refactoring... introducing IRenderer<?
extends IChemObject>
1:16 pm YSJournal:RT @GrrlScientist: there is no conduit for science writers to speak to schools, etc (maybe something to
work on?) #solo10
1:16 pm GozdeZorlu:@alicebell been meaning to ask, i've come across European surveys but is there recent UK research into
public percep of sci? #solo10
1:17 pm imascientist:Tell you what, blogs are great and all, but if I hear another thing abt science blogs this w/e I might explode.
#solo10
1:17 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: there is no conduit for science writers to speak to schools, etc (maybe something to
work on?) #solo10
1:17 pm YSJournal:RT @imascientist: Audience points: blogs not only way, what is? How much time do they spend engaging
directly, esp w kids?#solo10
1:18 pm mjrobbins:@GozdeZorlu @alicebell My suspicion is that the Pew surveys, etc., on public attitudes to science are
bollocks #solo10
1:18 pm YSJournal:RT @imascientist: Audience guy, too much negativity! As a sci, doesn't feel distrusted. Public disagree w
science for REASONS often. #solo10 <good point!
104 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
1:18 pm mjrobbins:@GozdeZorlu @alicebell Actually no, I take that back, they're fine, but they don't necessarily measure what
ppl think they do #solo10
1:18 pm writediteach:@GozdeZorlu Survey: UK Public is Unaware of Female Scientists: http://tinyurl.com/2w44my5#solo10
1:19 pm alicebell:@GozdeZorlu try more recent Wellcome http://bit.ly/ayHePx or links to DIUS one I think in Trust
report http://bit.ly/cbRH3v #solo10
1:19 pm lulucrumble:re. public image of scientists: this comes from pictures people see in mass media. pics not chosen by
writers but pic editors... #solo10
1:20 pm sjcockell:Wifi still borked. Someone kick the router? #solo10
1:20 pm amoebamike:@JenLucPiquant sci journals are so expensive, it's hard to search them if not in academia #solo10
1:21 pm mjrobbins:@GozdeZorlu @alicebell I.e. I don't think they have much bearing on e.g. likelihood of public to trust
'science' on specific issues #solo10
1:21 pm amoebamike:@imascientist yeah but having reasons doesn't make them right #solo10
1:21 pm lulucrumble:...so pic editors need to take responsib. for accurate portrayal of the working scientist. lazy pic research =
men in white coats. #solo10
1:21 pm katie_fraser:The only unclaimed power socket is right by the entrance of the men's toilets, so I look like a stalker. Great.
#solo10
1:22 pm physicus:RT @amoebamike: @JenLucPiquant sci journals are so expensive, it's hard to search them if not in
academia #solo10
1:22 pm drnickmorris:Waiting for the second unconferenced session on 'Online Communities' to start. More in this session than
in eBooks #solo10
1:22 pm simonhodson99:RT @alicebell: "Americans like science" RT @GozdeZorlu: Pew report on US public perceptions of
science http://bit.ly/yzuk5 #solo10 #jiscsh99
1:23 pm simonhodson99:RT @alicebell: @GozdeZorlu try more recent Wellcome http://bit.ly/ayHePx links to DIUS
reporthttp://bit.ly/cbRH3v #solo10 #jiscsh99
1:23 pm simonhodson99:RT @writediteach: @GozdeZorlu Survey: UK Public is Unaware of Female
Scientists:http://tinyurl.com/2w44my5 #solo10 #jiscsh99
1:24 pm amoebamike:When was the last time you explained something science-y to a kid? Get out of your sciblog and volunteer
a few hours! #solo10 @imascientist
1:25 pm LAScienceBL:Doing final roundup with Victor at 5. Opinions, thoughts etc welcome. #solo10
1:26 pm writediteach:@lulucrumble Mentioned to GrrlScientist but look to Half Life 2's Dr. Kleiner & Dr. Mossman for xmpls of
male/female sci in media #solo10
1:27 pm katie_fraser:Session on open access. Can the system be fixed or does it need trashing? #solo10
1:27 pm simon_frantz:Me too RT @oh_henry: I like this a lot RT @adders Science Online: Cultures Clash over
Infographics http://bit.ly/9RRDMU #solo10
1:28 pm rdmpage:Dario Taraborelli http://nitens.org/ on http://readermeter.org #solo10
1:28 pm orbitingfrog:Check out http://readermeter.org/ and put in the name of a scientist. #solo10
1:28 pm rdmpage:RT @axiomsofchoice: http://github.com/yql/yql-tables/blob/master/mendeley/mendeley.search.xml //
#solo10 YQL
1:29 pm simon_frantz:Wifi was on the blink in room 2, but an interesting stat from interactive words session: Less than 5% of the
web is interactive #solo10
1:30 pm PhilDRoberts:PLoS is launching HUBS soon which is open access papers around a subject to create your own journal,
sounds interesting #solo10
1:30 pm GozdeZorlu:Theo bloom: cycle of research communication is broken #solo10
1:30 pm mendeley_com:RT @orbitingfrog: Check out http://readermeter.org/ and put in the name of a scientist. #solo10
1:31 pm thatkeith:My thanks to the people who shared the Unconference session slot; a very good discussion and sharing of
thoughts! #solo10 #hyperwords
1:31 pm rdmpage:Oh, and @ianmulvany was using http://www.omnigroup.com/products/omnidazzle/ to highlight things on
the screen #solo10
1:31 pm mfenner:RT @orbitingfrog: Check out http://readermeter.org/ and put in the name of a scientist. #solo10
1:32 pm katie_fraser:PLoS provide metrics on per article basis, not per journal, would avoid pressure to publish in certain
journals if everyone did this #solo10
1:32 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @writediteach Survey: UK Public is Unaware of Female Scientists: http://tinyurl.com/2w44my5#solo10
1:32 pm GozdeZorlu:Thanks! RT @alicebell Wellcome http://bit.ly/ayHePx or links to DIUS one I think in Trust
reporthttp://bit.ly/cbRH3v #solo10
1:32 pm mrgunn:Losing mandatory reg would be a good start. RT @GozdeZorlu @alokjha guardian encourages writers to
engage with readers via comments #solo10
1:33 pm egonwillighagen:RT @orbitingfrog: Check out http://readermeter.org/ and put in the name of a scientist. #solo10
1:33 pm cgutteridge:Chart of solvents referenced in patents 2000 vs 2009. http://bit.ly/cMbAa5 #solo10 #greenchain(red=2009)
1:33 pm egonwillighagen:@orbitingfrog and report duplicates with #mendeley #solo10 (see http://chem-bla-
ics.blogspot.com/2010/09/data-duplication-at-mendeley.html)
105 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
1:34 pm sjcockell:As expected, @phillord stirs the pot. #solo10
1:34 pm skysketcher:RT @orbitingfrog: Check out http://readermeter.org/ and put in the name of a scientist. #solo10
1:34 pm egonwillighagen:RT @rdmpage: Dario Taraborelli http://nitens.org/ on http://readermeter.org #solo10
1:34 pm pssalgado:+1 RT @imascientist Tell you what, blogs are great and all, but if I hear another thing abt science blogs this
w/e I might explode. #solo10
1:34 pm pssalgado:@Phillord "what prevents using blog engines to publish primary research data/research?" #solo10
1:35 pm egonwillighagen:RT @pssalgado: @Phillord "what prevents using blog engines to publish primary research data/research?"
#solo10
1:35 pm AJCann:No, building your own site and requiring registration is a failed model, not a community. Be where the
audience is. #solo10
1:35 pm d_swan:Go @phillord :) referencing our now JISC funded http://knowledgeblog.org at #solo10 keep publishing
short, simple and cheap!
1:35 pm Stephen_Curry:RT @imascientist: Audience points: blogs not only way, what is? How much time do they spend engaging
directly, esp w kids?#solo10 < Do IAS everyone!
1:36 pm mrgunn:RT @rdmpage Dario Taraborelli http://nitens.org/ on http://readermeter.org #solo10
1:36 pm morphosaurus:So, will I be able to see my mug on YouTube later? Quite keen to embed the session in a blog post. Good
questions and comments! #solo10
1:36 pm orbitingfrog:RT @egonwillighagen: @orbitingfrog and report duplicates with #mendeley #solo10 (seehttp://chem-bla-
1:37 pm mrgunn:RT @katie_fraser PLoS provide metrics on per article basis, not per journal, would avoid pressure to publish
in certain journals #solo10
1:37 pm biochembelle:RT @GrrlScientist: negative data is boring and largely unpublishable (but it should be published!)
@phillord #solo10
1:37 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: negative data is boring and largely unpublishable (but it should be published!)
@phillord #solo10
1:37 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: problems w changing blogs after publication-shouldnt be able to do this in science; each
version should be available @phillord #solo10
1:38 pm egonwillighagen:RT @d_swan: Go @phillord :) referencing our now JISC funded http://knowledgeblog.org at #solo10keep
publishing short, simple and cheap!
1:38 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: use blog to host a book because they wanted the book, but didn't want to publish it
@phillord #solo10
1:38 pm AnaDinescu:RT @GrrlScientist: advantages of online pub: rapid publication, online peer review, assessment #solo10
1:38 pm imascientist:V interesting talk on development of online community site for dev biol soc http://bit.ly/bYNUsa#solo10
1:39 pm AJCann:"Building an online community" seems to mean "Please read the content from my journal" #solo10
1:39 pm harpistkat:Escaped #solo10 for the afternoon - whipping up industrial quantities of buttercream icing for
@sundaydriveruk 10th birthday gig tonight
1:39 pm cgutteridge:People at #solo10 may be interested in http://iamresearcher.com/ - Embryonic Southampton project to
create social research.
1:39 pm imascientist:They seem to have v much listened to readers/users and engaged w them. #solo10
1:40 pm katie_fraser:Key issue in changing publishing is the reward system for academics. #solo10 (who breaks this cycle?)
1:41 pm zeno001:@JoBrodie @david_colquhoun PDFs are getting a bad press at #solo10
1:42 pm pssalgado:Brian Derby: Pple require "nature", "science" or "physics letters" label on scientific data bcs believe its
needed for their careers #solo10
1:42 pm aallan:RT @egonwillighagen: @orbitingfrog and report duplicates with #mendeley #solo10 (seehttp://chem-bla-
1:42 pm ChemSpider:Ian mulvaney's session on using the yahoo query language to pull info from webpages delighted a room full
of techies. #solo10
1:43 pm quantum_tunnel"Scientists believe that putting labels such as 'Science' or 'PRL' 2 their research helps thr careers" - it surely
:
does! Doesn't it? #solo10
1:43 pm mrgunn:Session on new forms of publishing at #solo10. Issues are cost, longevity, authority.
1:43 pm ejabri:RT @gbilder: 1st mention of Google Wave at #solo10. Was major topic last year. Perhaps should make us
humble about our tech prediction abilities?
1:43 pm steinsky:.@scottkeir @JoBrodie http://joe.dunckley.me.uk/stuff/tweet.pdf #solo10
1:43 pm mrgunn:RT @d_swan: Go @phillord :) referencing our now JISC funded http://knowledgeblog.org at #solo10keep
1:44 pm simonhodson99:RT @d_swan: Go @phillord :) referencing our #jiscmrd funded http://bit.ly/dxt2RI at #solo10 keep
1:44 pm simon_frantz:Brian Derby: Deciding author order in papers is often troubling, one paper said author precedent was
decided by a squash tournament #solo10
1:45 pm rdmpage:RT @orbitingfrog: RT @egonwillighagen: @orbitingfrog and report duplicates with
106 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
#mendeley#solo10 (see http://bit.ly/cVBxX2)
1:45 pm ejabri:RT @mrgunn: RT @sciencegoddess I've been sharing David McCandless' talk far and wide since it came out
on TED http://bit.ly/cgfBYs Love it! #solo10
1:45 pm imascientist:Research on UK attitudes to sci RT @alicebell recent Wellcome http://bit.ly/ayHePx or links to DIUS
one http://bit.ly/cbRH3v #solo10
1:46 pm sjcockell:I thought your current website was the lurid green nightmare @phillord #solo10
1:46 pm jennifermjones:@AJCann Noticed there were similar themes along those lines yesterday. "Build it and they will come." just
doesn't work #solo10
1:49 pm katie_fraser:Some controversy over whether a journal needs to take responsibility for their own archiving or can
assume others will handle #solo10
1:49 pm gamelmag:RT @imascientist: Research on UK attitudes to sci RT @alicebell recent Wellcomehttp://bit.ly/ayHePx or
links to DIUS one http://bit.ly/cbRH3v #solo10
1:49 pm JennyRohn:To quote Gary Larson: "May I be excused? My brain is full." #solo10
1:51 pm gamelmag:RT @imascientist: V interesting talk on development of online community site for dev biol
sochttp://bit.ly/bYNUsa #solo10
1:51 pm brunellalongo:#solo10 unconference 2 publishing options. I'm getting bored. Citation
serviceshttp://www.connotea.org/user/search/tag/citation%20services
1:51 pm alicebell:Blogpost version of my #scivote talk at #solo10 today - Scientists and the Vote http://bit.ly/bu4u29
1:51 pm Patrick_Clarkin:RT @alicebell: "Americans like science" RT @GozdeZorlu: Pew Research Center's report on US public
perceptions of science http://bit.ly/yzuk5 #solo10
1:51 pm imascientist:Likewise:-) Is it pub time soon? RT @JennyRohn: To quote Gary Larson: "May I be excused? My brain is
full." #solo10
1:51 pm simon_frantz:Good debate on whether journals can reduce costs by not having search & archives, as Google/British Lib.
etc does it anyway #solo10
1:52 pm adders:And @dnghub got his Chewbacca mention in at #solo10... http://bit.ly/a0fYZG A bet?
1:52 pm science3point0:RT @GrrlScientist: "if authors would stop badgering us about impact factors, we'd stop pushing them"
@Theo_Bloom @PLoS #solo10
1:52 pm pssalgado:'Gov and funding bodies are using impact factors, scientists & journals are victims" If so, how do we change
that? #solo10
1:53 pm mrgunn:RT @katie_fraser controversy re whether a journal must take responsibility for their own archiving or can
assume others will handle #solo10
1:54 pm AJCann:Scientists and the Vote - more oversimplification at #solo10 http://t.co/pkIBkDK
1:54 pm conorcbarnes:RT @alicebell: "Americans like science" Pew Research Center's report on US public perceptions of
science http://bit.ly/yzuk5 #solo10
1:55 pm AJCann:The Betjeman is beginning to beckon... #solo10
1:56 pm drpetra:@GrrlScientist surely thats country + discipline specific? In uk tenure rare + books not always valued
#solo10
1:56 pm drnickmorris:8 year olds can recognise 120 pokemon characters and yet hardly any animals or trees #solo10
1:56 pm imascientist:Guy called (I think) David Ng, v engaging presenter. #solo10 Kids could name more pokemon chars than
wildlife. So they made wildlife cards
1:56 pm writediteach:Saw this same story in the International Herald Tribune about peer review changing to Web
review:http://tinyurl.com/27ll8ya #solo10
1:57 pm Livable4All:RT @TechCzech: Amazing how many academics burnt by bad journalism in their own discipline still rely on
reporting from other disciplines for info. #solo10
1:57 pm adders:New post: Science Online: Bloggers, Commenters and the Reputation Game http://bit.ly/doQf23#solo10
1:57 pm DrEvanHarris:@kejames I see yr pnt but yr tweet paraphrased my "science community" as all individual "scientists", so
hard to say what ppl think! #solo10
1:57 pm bob_calder:@BoraZ katie_fraser- PLoS provide metrics on per article basis, not per journal, would avoid pressure to
publish in certain journals #solo10
1:57 pm showjumper42:RT @GrrlScientist: audienceQ: we have to develop a new method of promoting academics w/o requiring
them to first publish book to get tenure #solo10
1:58 pm AJCann:Phylo: The trading card game #solo10 http://t.co/ClNmyGg
1:59 pm simonhodson99:RT @alicebell: Blogpost version of my #scivote talk at #solo10 today - Scientists and the
Votehttp://bit.ly/bu4u29 #jiscsh99
1:59 pm imascientist:Crowdsourced, open source, done on word press. http://phylogame.org/ #solo10
1:59 pm gingerbreadlady:Disagreement over whether tweeting at conferences is useful or not. #solo10
2:00 pm gamelmag:RT @alicebell: Blogpost version of my #scivote talk at #solo10 today - Scientists and the
Votehttp://bit.ly/bu4u29
2:00 pm NewShoot:#solo10 3G beating wifi in conf rm 2
2:00 pm AJCann:Wot? Scientists behind in the social media game? #solo10 http://t.co/DEAJ7Qk
107 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2:01 pm imascientist:!! Who thinks not? Adds soooo much value RT @gingerbreadlady: Disagreement over whether tweeting at
conferences is useful or not. #solo10
2:01 pm simon_frantz:RT @alicebell: Blogpost version of my #scivote talk at #solo10 today - Scientists and the
2:02 pm StineCamilla:RT @pssalgado: 'Gov and funding bodies are using impact factors, scientists & journals are victims" If so,
how do we change that? #solo10
2:02 pm drnickmorris:Produced by crowd sourcing http://phylogame.org/ - Pokemon cards for biodiversity! #solo10 Very cool!
2:02 pm writediteach:@gingerbreadlady I wouldn't have known about the Science Online London conference w/o Twitter, so it
seems somewhat useful to me. #solo10
2:02 pm pssalgado:What about the "Journal(s) of negative results"? Any views on them? #solo10
2:02 pm kristinalford:RT @imascientist: Crowdsourced, open source, done on word press. http://phylogame.org/ #solo10
2:03 pm DavidMascord:RT @adders: New post: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/9RRDMU#solo10
2:03 pm simon_frantz:RT @adders: New post: Science Online: Bloggers, Commenters and the Reputation
Gamehttp://bit.ly/doQf23 #solo10
2:03 pm mrgunn:@phillord being called out by the e-journal head at British Library for assuming "someone else" will handle
archiving for them. #solo10
2:03 pm kristinalford:it is absolutely very useful! RT @imascientist: RT @gingerbreadlady: Disagreement over if tweeting at
conferences is useful. #solo10
2:04 pm akshatrathi:Does anyone find the British Library logo wrong? Or poor art or? Not innovative? #solo10 #soloconf
2:04 pm katie_fraser:Head of science from the British Library points out the the long tail of small independent UK publishers
makes archiving difficult #solo10
2:04 pm oh_henry:Bloggers vs the mainstream media at #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2l63n3
2:05 pm simon_frantz:RT @katie_fraser: Head of science from British Library points out long tail of small indie UK publishers
makes archiving difficult #solo10
2:06 pm AJCann:Pedagogical Alzheimer's: We've built it. Remind me what we did? #solo10
2:06 pm aleksk:further to my #solo10 talk tdy, here's the BL's 2008 report, Web 2.0 as a social science research tool [I
contributed] http://bit.ly/aGvBcD
2:06 pm petermurrayrust#solo10 #greenchain Graham Steel McBlawg has recorded the session - many thankshttp://bit.ly/9DWeo9
:
2:06 pm simonhodson99:Very important! Any examples? RT @pssalgado: What about the "Journal(s) of negative results"? Any views
on them? #solo10 #jiscmrd
2:07 pm quantum_tunnelRT @pssalgado: What about the "Journal(s) of negative results"? Any views on them? #solo10
:
2:07 pm dattadeva:@GrrlScientist You also have WebCite, but how long will that last? http://ur.ly/l2qG #solo10
2:07 pm GozdeZorlu:@DrPetra you should be here at #solo10! ;-)
2:08 pm zeno001:@akshatrathi Think logo is different, but not sure it works. Possibly trying to be clever, but fails. #solo10
2:08 pm gingerbreadlady:@imascientist @writediteach @kristinalford People pick up on different things so collaboratively authored
transcript brilliant. #solo10
2:08 pm quantum_tunnelRT @aleksk: further to my #solo10 talk tdy, here's the BL's 2008 report, Web 2.0 as a social science
:
research tool [I contributed] http://bit.ly/aGvBcD
2:09 pm egonwillighagen:RT @petermurrayrust: #solo10 #greenchain Graham Steel McBlawg has recorded the session - many
thanks http://bit.ly/9DWeo9
2:10 pm NewShoot:Question on "how do I crowd source someone to write my grant application"? Get in touch. #solo10
2:10 pm brunellalongo:#solo10 - unconference 2 - Publishing paradigm shift? Check also new
metricshttp://www.connotea.org/user/search/tag/information%20behaviour
2:10 pm PointOfPresenceRating scientists acc. to the impact factors of their jnls is bad science & should not be done! It wd get a 0 in
:
a u/g stats class. #solo10
2:10 pm orbitingfrog:What is 'Google juice'? This term is new to me... #solo10
2:11 pm pssalgado:RT @GrrlScientist: "using journal impact article for judging value of people is bad science" .. should be
embarrassed to do this~cameron neylon [YAY!] #solo10
2:11 pm mrgunn:I have a public collection of research papers on bibliometrics/IF on my Mendeley profile.
HTTP://mendeley.com/profiles/william-gunn #solo10
2:12 pm gtyrelle:@petermurrayrust and @CameronNeylon telling it like it is. Excellent points. #solo10 [via live feed]
2:12 pm Kate_Travis:Phylogame.org: crowd-sourced and designed game to promote biodiversity understanding. Amazing
project presented by @dnghub #solo10
2:12 pm egonwillighagen:RT @mrgunn: I have a public collection of research papers on bibliometrics/IF on my Mendeley profile.
HTTP://mendeley.com/profiles/william-gunn #solo10
2:13 pm egonwillighagen:RT @GrrlScientist: "using journal impact article for judging value of people is bad science" .. should be
embarrassed to do this~cameron neylon [YAY!] #solo10
2:13 pm AJCann:This is not an unconference... #solo10
2:13 pm akshatrathi:yes and that "@sjcockell: @akshatrathi the british library confuses my eyes" #solo10
108 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2:14 pm cavemanjohn:RT @GrrlScientist: audience comment: public trusts scientists, but that doesn't mean they believe
everything science tells them-these are not the same! #solo10
2:14 pm science3point0:RT @gtyrelle: @petermurrayrust and @CameronNeylon telling it like it is. Excellent points. #solo10[via live
feed]
2:14 pm cavemanjohn:RT @GrrlScientist: there is no conduit for science writers to speak to schools, etc (maybe something to
work on?) #solo10
2:14 pm barneygrubbs:Keeps me from sleeping or doodling RT @imascientist: Who thinks not?... RT @gingerbreadlady: [is]
tweeting at conferences useful #solo10
2:15 pm HankCampbell:@kristinalford I'm not there but I side with useless overall. Fun, but useless. #solo10
2:15 pm egonwillighagen:RT @barneygrubbs: Keeps me from sleeping or doodling RT @imascientist: Who thinks not?... RT
@gingerbreadlady: [is] tweeting at conferences useful #solo10
2:15 pm akshatrathi:Agree "@zeno001: @akshatrathi Think logo is different, but not sure it works. Possibly trying to be clever,
but fails. #solo10" #soloconf
2:15 pm cavemanjohn:RT @GrrlScientist: negative data is boring and largely unpublishable (but it should be published!)
@phillord #solo10
2:15 pm Villavelius:Sensitive bunch, scientists. Or should I have said 'science community'? #solo10
2:16 pm imascientist:@gingerbreadlady Exactly! Also convos which spin off, inc w ppl not here, v useful. And ability to add links,
illustrations, etc #solo10
2:16 pm johansson247:Hehe... "The universal language of science is bad English" ~ astronomer Martin Rees, chair,
@royalsociety #solo10 (via @GrrlScientist)
2:17 pm imascientist:This is true. I do like this guy though:-) RT @AJCann: This is not an unconference... #solo10
2:18 pm AJCann:@imascientist Sure some good ideas, but I'm starting to feel #solo10 is losing it's way.
2:18 pm akshatrathi:Journal of Negative Results, it exists?? #solo10 #soloconf
2:19 pm ElBueno:RT @sjcockell: who really spends the most on their military? http://bit.ly/ayLR0w #solo10
2:19 pm writediteach:@GrrlScientist Out of curiosity, in what way is negative scientific data "unpublishable"? As in there is no
money in it? #solo10
2:19 pm mrgunn:@thatkeith Then everyone would write methods papers, right? #solo10
2:20 pm imascientist:@AJCann Well obv it's all gone downhill since me and @ShaneMcC's session yesterday;-) #solo10
2:20 pm quantum_tunnelOpen access repositories in Latin America such as Redalyc @redalyc and Scielo do exist. #solo10
:
2:20 pm kejames:Scientists, when someone criticises or calls to action "the scientific community", do you take that to mean
you? cc @DrEvanHarris #solo10
2:20 pm AJCann:@writediteach Scientific publication is supposed to be a filter for attention, hence negative data is vital, but
attention noise. #solo10
2:21 pm johansson247:Anachronism: listening to The The (Mind Bomb on vinyl 8) ) while following tweets from #solo10. Nice to
be home, but wish I was there.
2:23 pm kristinalford:@HankCampbell oh? I like Twitter at conf's 4 connecting w/ new people, linking to ref's, encouraging ext
particpation & note-taking #solo10
2:24 pm adders:The coffee at #solo10 is pretty rough. #coffeesnob
2:25 pm 99nicu:RT @johansson247: Hehe... "The universal language of science is bad English" ~ astronomer Martin Rees,
chair, @royalsociety #solo10 (via @GrrlScientist)
2:28 pm kejames:The coffee on this island is pretty rough. RT @adders The coffee at #solo10 is pretty rough. #coffeesnob
2:30 pm jamesdadd:Thanks to everyone who went to #solo10 I can see real change happening for science online. #soloconf
2:30 pm mancunium:RT @kieronflanagan: OK, live stream has ended, no way to watch #scivote session as far as I can see so I'm
off to the beach or the hills. Have fun... #solo10
2:32 pm egonwillighagen:RT @jamesdadd: Thanks to everyone who went to #solo10 I can see real change happening for science
online. #soloconf
2:36 pm jenfold:Hear hear! RT @imascientist: blogs are great and all, but if I hear another thing abt science blogs this w/e I
might explode. #solo10
2:36 pm akshatrathi:RT @GrrlScientist: if you want your excellent blog writing to be linked from @guardiansciblog i am hosting
@science4people 13 sept #solo10 send links to me!
2:38 pm morphosaurus:It's been fun, but if I don't head home immediately after the end of #solo10 I'll be in no state to cope with
influx of students next week!
2:39 pm rubp:RT @AJCann: This is not an unconference... #solo10
2:39 pm drnickmorris:Even the biscuits served with afternoon tea at Science online London 2010 are really nice #solo10
2:43 pm drnickmorris:In the 'eBooks' session with 8 people in the audience! #solo10
2:44 pm HankCampbell:@kristinalford Useful is subjective and I think it is fun (meeting people, etc.) but not a tool so if it
disappeared tomorrow ... #solo10
2:48 pm sjcockell:Goodbye #solo10 it's been different, and lots of fun.
2:48 pm LouWoodley:RT @BoraZ I hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are invited to #scio11 on January 13-15, 2011 in North
109 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Carolina
2:49 pm d_swan:Farewell #solo10 Newcastle is a long way, so last session skipped. Enjoyed it though. Will write nice blog
about it that noone will read :)
2:51 pm rubp:RT @LouWoodley: RT @BoraZ I hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are invited to #scio11 on January 13-
15, 2011 in North Carolina
2:52 pm drnickmorris:Waiting for the last session at #solo10 to start - If you build it, will they come?
2:58 pm thatkeith:@mrgunn Yes... I suppose then SEO could come to mean Scholarly Engine Optimisation! Hmm... #solo10
3:01 pm rdmpage:Talking with @edwbaker at #solo10 about a recaptcha for taxonomic names with "n. sp." etc. #bhlib
3:02 pm jjbw:Thanks to all #solo10 tweeps - surely the most tweeted conference ever! V easy to enjoy from confines of a
sunny balcony outside London. :-)
3:02 pm imascientist:They can take part in IAS! http://imascientist.org.uk/ RT @cavemanjohn: there's no conduit for science
writers to speak to schools #solo10
3:04 pm mfenner:RT @LouWoodley: RT @BoraZ I hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are invited to #scio11 on January 13-
15, 2011 in North Carolina
3:04 pm akshatrathi:@GrrlScientist @Stephen_Curry @physicus @mfenner @j_timmer @ajcann what a starcast. Was great
meeting you! #solo10 #soloconf
3:04 pm the_Node:RT @imascientist: V interesting talk on development of online community site for dev biol
sochttp://bit.ly/bYNUsa #solo10
3:04 pm rdmpage:#solo10 Wrap up begins...
3:05 pm oh_henry:Once more unto the breach dear friends #solo10
3:06 pm mrgunn:@thatkeith What we really need is semantic citation metadata, so cites have more kinds of meanings.
#solo10
3:06 pm simon_frantz:And it's well worth going to RT @BoraZ Hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are invited to #scio11Jan 13-
15 2011 in North Carolina
3:07 pm rdmpage:RT @mrgunn: I have a public collection of research papers on bibliometrics/IF on my Mendeley
profile. http://bit.ly/c9YNya #solo10
3:08 pm neilfws:Last #solo10 session should be short; the answer is "no".
3:08 pm LouWoodley:Impressed by the Hyperwords demo. Shame to have missed the breakout session - too much good stuff
here! #solo10
3:09 pm aallan:In the last panel of #solo10, "If you build it, will they come?" Generally the answer to that is almost always
"no". Next question?
3:09 pm drnickmorris:RT @neilfws: Last #solo10 session should be short; the answer is "no".
3:09 pm Stephen_Curry:@beckyfh @kieronflanagan Are you at #solo10 ?
3:10 pm jetforme:RT @kejames: Wow, our priorities really suck. RT @AJCann The Billion Dollar
3:10 pm aallan:The secret sauce for making something people adopt is always building something they wanted in the first
place. #solo10
3:11 pm imascientist:Does sound v cool. And free! RT @pssalgado: "Hyperwords" looks really cool, possibly fantastic must have
tool for everyone #solo10
3:11 pm mrgunn:I was hoping for that. RT @neilfws Last #solo10 session should be short; the answer is "no".
3:11 pm CameronNeylon:@neilfws Well yes, but we can talk about it for hours surely.... #solo10
3:12 pm mfenner:Michael Jubb cites RIN study: ...if things are set up so it's push button easy, then it really is open #solo10
3:12 pm katie_fraser:Michael Hubbard from RIN saying not just about open science, but accessible science, which may take
more work #solo10
3:12 pm stleoscience:@alicebell Do we have anything like #scivote and #solo10 in USA? If so, I'm not seeing it.
3:12 pm imascientist:Michael Jubb talking abt open science. Interesting, but I may be too knackered to incisively tweet it for you,
sorry:-) #solo10
3:13 pm mafunyane:@gingerbreadlady It's useful for people who aren't there. I'm particularly enjoying @grrlscientist's running
commentary! #solo10
3:13 pm mfenner:Jubb: Research community needs training in order to exploit open science tools #solo10
3:13 pm drnickmorris:Looks like the final session is going to disappoint. #solo10
3:15 pm rubp:a scientist told me she won't share her ideas or progress - not be in the spotlight or fighting off critics
#solo10
3:15 pm tweeterpeter:Jubb @ #solo10: In Open Science, researchers confused about whether all taxpayer-funded research must
be open
3:15 pm franknorman:Agreed. RT @adders The coffee at #solo10 is pretty rough. #coffeesnob
3:15 pm morphosaurus:Oh my word. These PowerPoint slides are everything I teach my students not to do. Small serif font on
white background. #solo10
3:16 pm adders:New post: Science Online: Break, Chat & Shoes http://bit.ly/c2aXnX #solo10
3:16 pm aallan:I think perhaps that descending into quoting Rousseau's Social Contract might be missing the target
110 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
demographic here at #solo10
3:16 pm drnickmorris:Another session that seem to be taking publishing to an audience that is fellow scientists. What about
students? Limited mention at #solo10
3:16 pm thatkeith:If you build it, WILL they come? Interesting final talk at the Science Online 2010 conference.
#solo10 #soloconf
3:16 pm pssalgado:Michae Jubb: "Forcing or encouraging researchers to be free/open?" #solo10
3:16 pm mfenner:Let's see whether there is time for any discussion RT @CameronNeylon: @neilfws Well yes, but we can talk
about it for hours surely.. #solo10
3:17 pm science3point0:RT @aallan: The secret sauce for making something people adopt is always building something they
wanted in the first place. #solo10
3:17 pm rubp:RT @pssalgado: Michae Jubb: "Forcing or encouraging researchers to be free/open?" #solo10
3:17 pm AJCann:To avoid upsetting the delicate sensibilities of #solo10, I am currently self-censoring myself up the wazoo.
3:18 pm AJCann:RT @neilfws: Last #solo10 session should be short; the answer is "no".
3:18 pm easternblot:Gaaaaaaaaah. Turn off the phone turn off the phone turn off the phone. #solo10 #chkchk-a-chkchk-a-chk
3:18 pm mrgunn:Michael Hubbell from RIN talking about social contract vs. affordances. #solo10 Now the panel.
3:18 pm edyong209:Ahaha! That's me & the Guardian's crack reporter @alokjha RT @oh_henry: Bloggers v the mainstream
media at #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2l63n3
3:18 pm franknorman:RT @aallan: In the last panel of #solo10, "If you build it, will they come?" Generally the answer to that is
almost always "no". Next question?
3:18 pm tweeterpeter:Jubb @ #solo10: case for researchers to lay open their craft as well as their results
3:19 pm defjaf:Open science at #solo10: is there allowed to be a proprietary period before I open my data to the world?
3:19 pm writediteach:RT @drnickmorris: Another session that seem to be taking publishing to an audience that is fellow
scientists. What about students? Limited mention at #solo10
3:20 pm franknorman:RT @mfenner: Jubb: Research community needs training in order to exploit open science tools #solo10
3:20 pm mjrobbins:Blogger @edyong209 fights/flirts with journalist @alokjha at #solo10 (via
@oh_henry):http://twitpic.com/2l63n3
3:21 pm joergheber:Now I wish the coffee would have been even stronger #solo10
3:21 pm beckyfh:@Stephen_Curry @kieronflanagan #solo10 No: peeping in via Twitter. I think sci advocates today forget
how v successful they've been in past
3:21 pm drnickmorris:Last session is really not doing it for me. Get on with it please. This is not a panel session, it is a series of
short ppts Yawn! #solo10
3:21 pm mendeley_com:RT @aallan: The secret sauce for making something people adopt is always building something they
3:21 pm aallan:I'm really surprised by the final #solo10 session. I think it's a real disappointment considering what could
have been done with the topic.
3:22 pm AJCann:RT @aallan: Rlly surprised by the final #solo10 session. I think it's a real disappointment considering wht
could have bn done w/ the topic.
3:22 pm mfenner:Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g. Martin Rees, Science Journalism
Panel #solo10
3:22 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 who else thinks that theory of affordances is just a watered down hideggerian view on being?
3:22 pm annhvass:Final session of science online its been very interesting! At some point I will learn to listen and tweet at the
same time #solo10
3:22 pm tweeterpeter:Rob Procter @ #solo10: RIN study into use of Web 2.0 in schol comm not just about formal publications
3:23 pm RTjournalism:RT @mfenner suggestion for #solo11: no powerpoint. best sessions were without it, e.g. martin rees,
science journalism panel #solo10
3:23 pm CameronNeylon:@defjaf For me the decision on when to publish (i.e. make public) is orthogonal to the question of whether
that content is "open" #solo10
3:23 pm edyong209:Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps onto a spike.
#solo10 #kittygenocide
3:23 pm rubp:RT @mfenner: Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g. Martin Rees,
Science Journalism Panel #solo10
3:23 pm pssalgado:Patterns of adaptation of web2.0 tools by researchers now, from Rob Procter #solo10
3:23 pm gingerbreadlady:Alright that's it. Brain has died. #solo10
3:23 pm PenguinGalaxy:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
onto a spike. #solo10 #kittygenocide
3:23 pm franknorman:Agree. RT @mfenner Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g. Martin
Rees, Science Journalism Panel #solo10
3:24 pm mjrobbins:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:24 pm CameronNeylon:@defjaf And by "open" I mean in the Budapest Declaration sense that we adopted for the Panton
111 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Principles #solo10
3:24 pm mendeley_com:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:24 pm edyong209:I can hear the mournful meows from here #solo10
3:24 pm aallan:@edyong209 A kitten has died at each and every slide in this session so far... #solo10#kittygenocide
3:24 pm jamiemcquay:RT @aallan: The secret sauce for making something people adopt is always building something they
3:24 pm AJCann:Session suggestion for #solo11 "What is the role of Powerpoint in public appreciation of science?" #solo10
3:24 pm simon_frantz:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:24 pm brunellalongo:#solo10 handovering to RIN / Nesta - great afternoon in - bloggers all over the world, goodbye and
goodluck :)
3:24 pm katie_fraser:When I said Michael Hubbard earlier I meant Michael Jubb #solo10#phoneautocorrecthasamindofitsown
3:25 pm Theo_Bloom:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:25 pm LouWoodley:RT @mfenner Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g. Martin Rees,
3:25 pm rubp:RT @franknorman: Agree. RT @mfenner Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were
without it, e.g. Martin Rees, Science Journalism Panel #solo10
3:25 pm CameronNeylon:.@jamiemcquay @aallan Surely the secret is to build something surprisingly better than what they wanted
in the first place? #solo10
3:25 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 suggestion for solo11, no powerpoint, but more kittens, kittens FTW!
3:26 pm joergheber:+1! RT @mfenner: Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g. Martin Rees,
3:26 pm AJCann:Guy Kawasaki "I can read faster than this bozo can talk" #solo10
3:26 pm rdmpage:RT @morphosaurus: [...] These PowerPoint slides are everything I teach my students not to do. Small serif
font on white background. #solo10
3:26 pm morphosaurus:For FSM's sake, this slide show is worse than my students' overzealous use of the rainbow background and
whizzed animation! #solo10
3:26 pm physicus:Guess their expertise is research not communication...#solo10 #beingkind
3:26 pm aallan:I'd fail any of my students that turned up with a presentation that looked anything like the speakers in this
session have produced. #solo10
3:27 pm mfenner:RIN study: 39% of researchers never use web 2.0 tools in their work, 13% do it frequently. More common in
older age group #solo10
3:27 pm mendeley_com:RT @IanMulvany: #solo10 suggestion for solo11, no powerpoint, but more kittens, kittens FTW!
3:27 pm easternblot:Like an over-eager student, I already read the RIN report, so am waiting for @BobOHara and @rpg7twit to
give their feedback. #solo10
3:27 pm edyong209:On pain of death RT @mfenner For #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g. Martin
Rees, Science Journalism Panel #solo10
3:27 pm AJCann:Oh Twitterfall, where are you when we need you most? #solo10 (kinda fell off the self-censoring wagon)
3:28 pm aallan:@IanMulvany Everyone loves kittens... #solo10
3:28 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 ok, seriously, what's the expected diffusion rate of tools into academics? 5yrs, 10yrs? longer?
thoughts?
3:28 pm franknorman:Maybe Bob will have a slide of The Beast. RT @IanMulvany #solo10 suggestion for solo11, no powerpoint,
but more kittens, kittens FTW!
3:28 pm simon_frantz:& less kittens die RT @mfenner:Suggestion 4 #solo11:no Powerpoint.Best sessions were without it, eg
Martin Rees, SciJournalism Panel #solo10
3:28 pm pitbullsrock:RT @kaythaney: absolutely incredible video shown by @drevanharris of a parkinson's patient taking
3:28 pm pssalgado:This session is mass murder then! RT @edyong209 When someone puts slide w/ bullet points & no visual
info, a kitten jumps onto spike #solo10
3:28 pm tweeterpeter:Procter @ #solo10: Web 2.0 adopters tend to be older, in more senior posts, male, working collaboratively
3:28 pm Allochthonous:[Now, this is far more interesting than scis/bloggers vs journos] RT @AJCann: #solo10 - Cultures Clash over
Infographics http://t.co/7vXOgMV
3:28 pm CameronNeylon:@IanMulvany Closer to ten years I would think. Inherently very conservative community #solo10
3:28 pm adders:Cut to the chase, dammit. #solo10
3:29 pm j_timmer:Alternative to @mfenner's idea: charge for use of PowerPoint, provide beer after last talk. #solo10
3:29 pm CogSciLibrarian:Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps onto a spike
#solo10 #kittygenocide /@edyong209
3:29 pm AJCann:In retrospect, endless discussion of blog networks wasn't as boring as I thought it was #solo10
112 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:29 pm defjaf:Scientists & web2.0: They are really dragging this out. Should have compressed this to 5
minutes. #solo10
3:29 pm writediteach:@physicus It's quite sad that the study of communication doesn't go hand in hand with a scientific degree.
#solo10
3:29 pm kaythaney:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:29 pm defjaf:RT @aallan: I'd fail any of my students that turned up with a presentation that looked anything like the
speakers in this session have produced. #solo10
3:30 pm easternblot:@mfenner but how much would David McCandless' talk have sucked if he had not been allowed
powerpoint? (answer: a lot!) #solo10
3:30 pm Kate_Travis:RT @aallan: The secret sauce for making something people adopt is always building something they
3:30 pm edyong209:Personally, wouldn't call for total Powerpoint ban. Has uses. 1) Images 2) Er... Images. 3) See 1 and 2.
#solo10
3:30 pm _MisterG:RT @mjrobbins: RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info,
a kitten jumps onto a spike. #solo10 #kittygenocide
3:30 pm akshatrathi:Unless there is visualised data in it! "@mfenner: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without itn like Martin
Rees #solo10"
3:30 pm mfenner:RIN report: 4% of researchers are active bloggers, 5% do open science #solo10
3:30 pm aallan:Oh good grief! Using blogs is innovative? Hello, the year 2000 called and wanted its stuff back... #solo10
3:30 pm imascientist:Please! RT @mfenner: Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. #solo10
3:30 pm annhvass:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:30 pm JeongtaeRoh:Hey, I don't know what's #solo10. Can anybody tell me?
3:30 pm defjaf:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:31 pm morphosaurus:@IanMulvany There are plenty of tools in academia, but I don't think that's what you're getting at! ;-)
#solo10
3:31 pm franknorman:Perhaps we should have a kitty-fall screen showing on stage? #solo10
3:31 pm mrgunn:Meow! RT @aallan @edyong209 A kitten has died at each and every slide in this session so far...
#solo10 #kittygenocide
3:31 pm AJCann:Oh, I get it, it's a parody, right? #solo10
3:32 pm rubp:I had high hopes for this session #gone #solo10
3:32 pm science3point0:RT @mfenner: Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g. Martin Rees,
3:32 pm TanyaCNoel:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:32 pm AJCann:RT @franknorman: Perhaps we should have a kitty-fall screen showing on stage? #solo10 Kittyfall - if you
build that, I will come.
3:32 pm kaythaney:I may have missed this, but what was the sample size for this survey? #solo10
3:32 pm mrgunn:I bet they're glad the twitterfall isn't up for this session. #solo10
3:32 pm tweeterpeter:Procter @ #solo10: Open Scientists more likely in Comp Sci + Maths + Arts/Hum, less likely in Med + Phys
Sci
3:33 pm SmallCasserole:Are label-less graphs a handy tool for scientists? Yes RT @AJCann: #solo10 - Cultures Clash over
Infographics http://t.co/7vXOgMV
3:33 pm imascientist:Ha! RT @AJCann: Session suggestion for #solo11 "What is the role of Powerpoint in public appreciation of
science?" #solo10
3:33 pm morphosaurus:RT @mjrobbins: RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info,
a kitten jumps onto a spike. #solo10 #kittygenocide
3:33 pm rubp:RT @kaythaney: I may have missed this, but what was the sample size for this survey? #solo10
3:33 pm quantum_tunnelRT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
:
3:33 pm oh_henry:"Fewer" kittens ;) RT @simon_frantz & less kittens die RT @mfenner:Suggestion 4 #solo11:no Powerpoint
#solo10
3:33 pm JonMendel:RT @alicebell: Blogpost version of my #scivote talk at #solo10 today - Scientists and the
3:33 pm edyong209:This is what happens when ppl think "What do I have to say?" vs "What does my audience need to hear?"
General lesson for scicomm #solo10
3:34 pm physicus:Might read these slides later, quietly on my own, in the pub. Maybe not. #solo10
3:34 pm science3point0:RT @physicus: Guess their expertise is research not communication...#solo10 #beingkind
3:34 pm Stephen_Curry:Web 4.0 will be here before this talk ends... #solo10
113 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:34 pm edyong209:Like a bloody version of Tetris RT @franknorman: Perhaps we should have a kitty-fall screen showing on
stage? #solo10
3:34 pm cells_nnm:RT @mfenner: RIN report: 4% of researchers are active bloggers, 5% do open science #solo10
3:34 pm SmallCasserole:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:34 pm pssalgado:Twiterfall would have been really useful now... #solo10
3:34 pm rdmpage:RT @aallan: I'm really surprised by the final #solo10 session...it's a real disappointment considering what
could have been done with topic.
3:35 pm NewShoot:Now I see why they gave us cake ....more needed #solo10
3:35 pm defjaf:RT @edyong209: This is what happens when ppl think "What do I have to say?" vs "What does my audience
need to hear?" General lesson for scicomm #solo10
3:35 pm mfenner:@edyong209 every rule has exceptions. But not having any Powerpoint frees up significant amount of time
for discussion #solo10
3:35 pm joergheber:Wondering what goes through @rpg7twit's mind right now #solo10
3:35 pm rdmpage:RT @mrgunn: I bet they're glad the twitterfall isn't up for this session. #solo10
3:35 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 the RIN report is important, but more work is needed on pulling out insight from it.
3:35 pm simon_frantz:1,308 responses acc. (to p17) of report RT @kaythaney: I may have missed this, but what was the sample
size for this survey? #solo10
3:35 pm quantum_tunnelDid they consider using some Web 2.0 tools to make this presentation on Web 2.0 adoption? This is painful
:
#fail #solo10
3:36 pm drnickmorris:Just checked the programme - it says this is a panel session.....! #solo10
3:36 pm marynmck:Off to the pub, #solo10, audiences sounding cranky! RT @EdYong209 On pain of death RT @mfenner For
#solo11: no Powerpoint.
3:36 pm mrgunn:Well, this speaker's audience isn't reached by any of us, so it's good he's saying these things, shows
penetration. #solo10
3:36 pm jasonhoyt:Hoping Bob & Richard can still save this session and the remaining kittens #solo10
3:36 pm SmallCasserole:Jon Skeet's unique slide preparation scheme: hand draw, scan, convert to SVG,
edit...http://bit.ly/drOgcV #solo10
3:36 pm tweeterpeter:Procter @ #solo10: "a lot of science is essentially social networking"
3:36 pm franknorman:Haha! RT @joergheber Wondering what goes through @rpg7twit's mind right now #solo10
3:36 pm Comprendia:RT @mfenner: RIN report: 4% of researchers are active bloggers, 5% do open science #solo10
3:37 pm aallan:@IanMulvany This is not the way to present results, have they heard of graphs? #solo10
3:37 pm aleksk:"science is a networking exercise, necessarily" - Rob Proctor (www.merc.ac.uk/?q=Rob) #solo10
3:37 pm science3point0:Was anyone else confused that 4% of scientists blog and 5% put unpublished data on blogs and websites.
What websites? Their blogs? #solo10
3:37 pm easternblot:This is all in the report! We can read! Want opinions/discussion! #solo10
3:37 pm quantum_tunnelThey should have it for this one! RT @mrgunn I bet they're glad the twitterfall isn't up for this session.
:
#solo10
3:37 pm franknorman:Absolutely. Perhaps a blogpost? RT @IanMulvany #solo10 the RIN report is important, but more work is
needed on pulling out insight from it.
3:37 pm MyScienceCareeRT @tweeterpeter: Procter @ #solo10: Open Scientists more likely in Comp Sci + Maths + Arts/Hum, less
r:
likely in Med + Phys Sci #openscience
3:37 pm mfenner:Poor kittens RT @joergheber: Wondering what goes through @rpg7twit's mind right now #solo10
3:38 pm physicus:Or just in general. RT @joergheber: Wondering what goes through @rpg7twit's mind right now #solo10
3:38 pm rubp:@kaythaney I think 1278 researchers based on page 58 of the report #solo10
3:38 pm pssalgado:Powerpoint not problem, it's how you (mis)use it. #solo10 eg McCandless earlier on data visualisation.
These guys should have been there.
3:38 pm eronarn:"Villain." RT @AJCann: Session suggestion for #solo11 "What is the role of Powerpoint in public
appreciation of science?" #solo10
3:38 pm franknorman:RT @jasonhoyt: Hoping Bob & Richard can still save this session and the remaining kittens #solo10
3:38 pm joergheber:@IanMulvany yes, and it needs to be condensed into novel conclusions beyond the obvious #solo10
3:38 pm kaythaney:would not be surprised if sample size was less than 50 ppl and from very narrow bkgrds.<sigh> #solo10
3:39 pm adders:The #solo10 hashtag is now officially channelling the spirit of Statler and Waldorf...
3:39 pm mrgunn:RT @easternblot This is all in the report! We can read! Want opinions/discussion! #solo10
3:39 pm quantum_tunnelAbsolutely! RT @easternblot This is all in the report! We can read! Want opinions/discussion! #solo10
:
3:39 pm franknorman:RT @easternblot: This is all in the report! We can read! Want opinions/discussion! #solo10
3:39 pm rubp:@Comprendia are you at #solo10 ?
3:39 pm MyScienceCareeCompetition is an important factor for how scientists use online tools #solo10
r:
3:39 pm AJCann:#solo11 suggestion - all presentations should be in the form of novels, to be read aloud by authors. #solo10
114 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:39 pm David_Dobbs:RT @simon_frantz: And it's well worth going to RT @BoraZ Hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are
invited to #scio11 Jan 13-15 2011 in North Carolina
3:39 pm edyong209:I think his mind has fled. That's just an empty shell. RT @joergheber: Wondering what goes through
@rpg7twit's mind right now #solo10
3:39 pm morphosaurus:I really REALLY wish I was sitting this session out to join in the #podclast... #solo10
3:40 pm quantum_tunnelRT @pssalgado: Powerpoint not problem, it's how you (mis)use it. #solo10 eg McCandless earlier on data
:
visualisation. These guys should have been there.
3:40 pm rubp:RT @easternblot: This is all in the report! We can read! Want opinions/discussion! #solo10
3:40 pm easternblot:RT @pssalgado: Powerpoint not problem, it's how you (mis)use it. #solo10 eg McCandless earlier on data
visualisation. These guys should have been there.
3:40 pm scottkeir:Is the #solo10 livestream not working for anyone else? Looks like, just as 15 years ago, missing former HCI
lecturer talk again.
3:40 pm writediteach:RT @adders: The #solo10 hashtag is now officially channelling the spirit of Statler and Waldorf...
3:40 pm oh_henry:So true. RT @adders The #solo10 hashtag is now officially channelling the spirit of Statler and Waldorf...
3:40 pm mrgunn:@AJCann @quantum_tunnel: agreed, it would have magnified the angst several-fold. #solo10
3:40 pm kaythaney:@simon_frantz thank you :) a useful piece of info sadly not presented. #solo10
3:40 pm gfry:Institute for the Study of Science Technology & Innovation presentation at #solo10: As good as their
website: http://yfrog.com/jumigp
3:41 pm Laura_B_James:RT @LaurieJ @IanMulvany Early career researchers might play a role - see our research (beats this talk
IMHO) http://bit.ly/92kVXi #solo10
3:41 pm barneygrubbs:Also for showing names of coworkers et al. RT @edyong209: Personally, wouldn't call for total Powerpoint
ban. Has uses. 1) Images... #solo10
3:41 pm attilacsordas:@rvidal nice, any interesting bioinformatics stuff at #solo10 so far?
3:41 pm mrgunn:This is why slides need a progress meter. #solo10
3:41 pm David_Dobbs:But McCandless's was great. RT @mfenner For #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g.
Martin Rees, SciJourn Panel #solo10
3:41 pm joergheber::P at least it's entertaining RT @adders: The #solo10 hashtag is now officially channelling the spirit of
Statler and Waldorf...
3:41 pm easternblot:15 min left. I am hoping for angry @rpg7twit at this point. Needs some shaking up. Or waking up. #solo10
3:41 pm egonwillighagen:RT @Stephen_Curry: Web 4.0 will be here before this talk ends... #solo10
3:42 pm AJCann:RT @gfry: Institute 4 the Study of Science Technology & Innovation presentation at #solo10: As gd as their
website: http://yfrog.com/jumigp
3:42 pm physicus:I love Steven Pinker's stuff #solo10
3:42 pm Stephen_Curry:I have discovered I can read faster than this guy can talk. Go me! #solo10
3:42 pm mattfromlondon#solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think people may need a drink after this.
:
3:42 pm aallan:@joergheber @IanMulvany Possibly the "result" that comp scientists blogged more often wasn't really as
novel as they seem to think? #solo10
3:42 pm AJCann:RT @mattfromlondon: #solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think people may
need a drink after this.
3:42 pm the_idea_agencyGilles Frydman: Institute for the Study of Science Technology & Innovation presentation at #solo10: As
:
good as the... http://bit.ly/bDl2p3
3:42 pm AJCann:No #solo10
3:42 pm steinsky:Might read these tweets later, quietly on my own, in the pub. #solo10
3:43 pm quantum_tunnelHurray! RT @egonwillighagen RT @Stephen_Curry: Web 4.0 will be here before this talk ends... #solo10
:
3:43 pm mendeley_com:RT @mattfromlondon: #solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think people may
3:43 pm akshatrathi:RT @edyong209: This is what happens when ppl think "What do I have to say?" vs "What does my audience
3:43 pm easternblot:Or drunk @BobOHara - that's equally entertaing. C'mon! #solo10
3:43 pm tweeterpeter:Procter @ #solo10: anti-Open Sci view: "anything other than peer-reviewed papers is anarchy leading to
loss of scientific credibility"
3:43 pm aallan:RT @edyong209: This is what happens when ppl think "What do I have to say?" vs "What does my audience
3:43 pm egonwillighagen:Agreed! RT @CameronNeylon @IanMulvany Closer to ten years I would think. Inherently very conservative
community #solo10
3:44 pm simon_frantz:RT @mattfromlondon: #solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think people may
3:44 pm rubp:RT @mattfromlondon: #solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think people may
115 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:44 pm David_Dobbs:I'm thinking: How would this be going if #solo10 twitter fall was still on right now. Don't think I could
watch.
3:44 pm quantum_tunnelSee you there! RT @mattfromlondon #solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think
:
people may need a drink after this.
3:44 pm adders:I do wonder if they're aware of the pre-existing research into the sorts of communities that use web 2.0
tools #solo10
3:44 pm franknorman:@mattfromlondon Can we vote for Bob and Richard to deliver their talks there? #solo10
3:44 pm ayasawada:RT @mattfromlondon: #solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think people may
3:44 pm BillNigh:RT @GrrlScientist: rob procter: web 2.0 can rely on social network as filtering device for info coming in
#solo10
3:44 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 save us Bob
3:44 pm imascientist:So, it's 4.43pm, w two speakers still to go. Who thinks we're going to finish on time? #solo10
3:45 pm edyong209:FLAWLESS VICTORY! RT @mrgunn: This is why slides need a progress meter. #solo10
3:45 pm mrgunn:@rpg7twit should make a motion to finish this in the pub #solo10
3:45 pm gfry:Preso at #solo10 & twitter responses remind me of @zephoria experience : http://bit.ly/4OjgzE"spectacle
at Web2.0 Expo..."
3:45 pm thirstygecko:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:45 pm mendeley_com:RT @edyong209: FLAWLESS VICTORY! RT @mrgunn: This is why slides need a progress meter. #solo10
3:45 pm drnickmorris:What! No PowerPoint? #solo10
3:46 pm David_Dobbs:RT @aallan: @joergheber @IanMulvany Possibly the "result" that comp scientists blogged more often
wasn't really as novel as they seem to think? #solo10
3:46 pm gingerbreadlady:This is like passing rude notes about the teacher in science class. We're all very naughty. #solo10
3:46 pm fischblog:Kittens! RT @edyong209: Personally, wouldn't call for total Powerpoint ban. Has uses. 1) Images 2) Er...
Images. 3) See 1 and 2. #solo10
3:46 pm oh_henry:Bit harsh folks, this is good data, poorly scheduled. Would have made a good 2nd session on day one..?
#solo10
3:46 pm mrgunn:RT @mattfromlondon: #solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think people may
3:46 pm moomoobull:RT @JennyRohn: I think busy scientists who genuinely don't have time or penchant for lobbying politicians
shouldn't be villified #solo10
3:46 pm drnickmorris:RT @gingerbreadlady: This is like passing rude notes about the teacher in science class. We're all very
naughty. #solo10
3:46 pm franknorman:RT @gingerbreadlady: This is like passing rude notes about the teacher in science class. We're all very
naughty. #solo10
3:46 pm pssalgado:Lets go! RT @mattfromlondon: #solo10 The pub after this talk is the Betjemen Arms in St Panc. Think
people may need a drink after this.
3:47 pm imascientist:Rob Procter found comp scis more likely to use web 2.0 tools, tentatively suggests this is cos they have tech
skills. YA THINK? #solo10
3:47 pm David_Dobbs:Rob's #solo10 talk on RIN report noted open sic assoc'd w older age and being male. Possibly reflects
tenure status?
3:48 pm steinsky:.@imascientist a quick two hour q&a session when @rpg7twit has finished talking at 6, then we're pretty
much done, right? #solo10
3:48 pm MishaAngrist:RT @thirstygecko @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a
kitten jumps onto a spike. #solo10
3:48 pm mfenner:@David_Dobbs David McCandless is one of the talks at #solo10 I'm sad I missed (was presenting in parallel
session).
3:48 pm fischblog:What if the whole System has to collapse before substantial Change is possible? #openscience#solo10
3:49 pm aallan:@gfry Despite being one of the hecklers @zephoria's experience at Web2.0 was going through my head
too. *sigh* http://bit.ly/4OjgzE #solo10
3:49 pm physicus:RT @David_Dobbs: Rob's #solo10 talk on RIN report noted open sic assoc'd w older age and being male.
Possibly reflects tenure status?
3:49 pm berniefolan:reading interesting #solo10 tweets. What's the event?
3:49 pm imascientist:Don't stop Gandalph, you were a bit more lively! #solo10
3:50 pm pssalgado:Def a confounding parameter! RT @David_Dobbs Rob #solo10 talk noted open sic assoc'd w being
older+male. Possibly reflects tenure status?
3:51 pm scottkeir:RT @aleksk: "science is a networking exercise, necessarily" - Rob Proctor (www.merc.ac.uk/?q=Rob)
#solo10
3:51 pm easternblot:RT @mrgunn: @rpg7twit should make a motion to finish this in the pub #solo10
116 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
3:51 pm DR3N3AL:RT @aleksk: "science is a networking exercise, necessarily" - Rob Proctor (www.merc.ac.uk/?q=Rob)
#solo10
3:51 pm franknorman:I am listening at last! #solo10
3:51 pm CameronNeylon:Certainly my opinion RT @David_Dobbs: ...open sic assoc'd w older age and being male. Possibly reflects
tenure status? #solo10
3:52 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 @rpg7twit is making some very salient points in this session, wants us to have more carrot and less
stick
3:52 pm rdmpage:RT @gingerbreadlady: This is like passing rude notes about the teacher in science class. We're all very
naughty. #solo10
3:52 pm mfenner:@berniefolan #solo10 is http://bit.ly/dDATq9, conference at British Library September 3-4
3:53 pm scottkeir:Well, #solo10 people, your whinging got the hashtag to the number 2 trend for London! :)
3:53 pm aleksk:HA! RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide w bullet points & no visual info, a kitten jumps
3:54 pm rubp:@rpg7twit saved this session #solo10
3:54 pm mfenner:Then we achieved at least something RT @scottkeir: Well, #solo10 people, your whinging got the hashtag
to the number 2 trend for London! :)
3:54 pm AJCann:RT @rubp: @rpg7twit saved this session #solo10
3:54 pm hashtager:# Well, #solo10 people, your whinging got the hashtag to the number 2 trend for London! :)
3:55 pm tweeterpeter:Richard Grant @ #solo10: 2 reasons for adopting new technol: (1) it makes it easier to do something you
have to do
3:55 pm imascientist:Whinging FTW! RT @scottkeir: Well, #solo10 people, your whinging got the hashtag to the number 2 trend
for London! :)
3:55 pm egonwillighagen:RT @scottkeir: Well, #solo10 people, your whinging got the hashtag to the number 2 trend for London! :)
3:55 pm ReaderMeter:@IanMulvany JJ Gibson (the chap who introduced affordance theory) has nothing to do with heideggerian
views on being! #solo10
3:55 pm drnickmorris:RT @rubp: @rpg7twit saved this session #solo10
3:56 pm edyong209:RT @IanMulvany: #solo10 @rpg7twit is making some very salient points in this session, wants us to have
more carrot and less stick
3:56 pm tweeterpeter:Grant @ #solo10: reason (2) it adds a compelling value
3:56 pm ayasawada:Do people still use the term 'cyberspace' much generally? Just interested #solo10
3:57 pm gingerbreadlady:WHAT? Conference photo? #solo10
3:57 pm steinsky:@scottkeir are we not trending worldwide yet? Did bieber decide to whinge at the same time as us?
#solo10
3:57 pm franknorman:Should we smile or scowl? RT @gingerbreadlady WHAT? Conference photo? #solo10
3:57 pm adders:Are they going to use one of those old panning cameras, so I can appear twice if I run? #somehope#solo10
3:58 pm scottkeir:Come on #solo10 people! Your hashtag is number 2 trend for London just behind #chinesemorrissey! Put
your back into it! Lay into @rpg7twit !
3:58 pm gingerbreadlady:@ayasawada Mostly with my tongue in my cheek #solo10
3:58 pm quantum_tunnelWow! Cool! RT @hashtager # Well, #solo10 people, your whinging got the hashtag to the number 2 trend
:
for London! :)
3:59 pm scottkeir:@steinsky sadly Morrissey said something depressing today, _again_. Maybe get him along for #solo11?
#solo10
3:59 pm BillNigh:RT @mfenner: Suggestion for #solo11: no Powerpoint. Best sessions were without it, e.g. Martin Rees,
3:59 pm BillNigh:RT @aallan: The secret sauce for making something people adopt is always building something they
3:59 pm ReaderMeter:*sigh* #ReaderMeter's tweets do not show up yet in global searches for #solo10 - how do I post a
shameless plug to the conf twitterfall?
3:59 pm tweeterpeter:Grant @ #solo10: show of hands finds 2 of 120 who have neither Twitter nor FB. That's 2 v brave people.
4:00 pm adders:@ayasawada Exactly as much as I do "information superhighway". #solo10
4:00 pm edyong209:Can't they just Photoshop our Twitter avatars together, while we drink? RT @gingerbreadlady: WHAT?
Conference photo? #solo10
4:00 pm leoniedu:RT @edyong209: This is what happens when ppl think "What do I have to say?" vs "What does my audience
4:00 pm IanMulvany:@tweeterpeter yes, but you can say anything you like about them here as they won't see it ;) #solo10
4:00 pm imascientist:Appar the coffee was rubbish too RT @scottkeir: Come on #solo10 people! Your hashtag is number 2 trend
for London. Put your back into it!
4:01 pm AJCann:Structure2.0? Twitter became a lot more useful with hashtags #solo10
4:01 pm ayasawada:RT @edyong209: Can't they just Photoshop our Twitter avatars together, while we drink? RT
@gingerbreadlady: WHAT? Conference photo? #solo10
117 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
4:01 pm franknorman:I think you need a kitten pic. @readermeter #solo10 - how do I post a shameless plug to the conf
twitterfall?
4:01 pm adders:@IanMulvany One of them is my wife. I'm watching... ;-) #solo10
4:02 pm rdmpage:You really don't want the Twitter wall... #solo10
4:02 pm digitalmaverick:Wow! The #solo10 Tweets are being pretty scathing about a speaker - wonder if the Tweeters know how
their comments look to non-attendees
4:02 pm katie_fraser:Haven't come across 'Faculty of a thousand' before. Sounds like a cross between a blog & structured
metadata! #solo10
4:02 pm NewShoot:Loving the very British web two point nought rather than two point zero #solo10
4:02 pm mendeley_com:RT @ReaderMeter: *sigh* #ReaderMeter's tweets do not show up yet in global searches for #solo10 - how
do I post a shameless plug to the conf twitterfall?
4:02 pm quantum_tunnelFor the benefit of those who asked: #solo10 is the hashtag for the Science Online
:
Londonhttp://www.scienceonlinelondon.org/
4:03 pm scottkeir:RT @digitalmaverick: Wow! The #solo10 Tweets are being pretty scathing about a speaker - wonder if the
Tweeters know how their comments look to non-attendees
4:03 pm digitalmaverick:I really think when I see negative #solo10 Tweets that ppl need to have a bit more dignity & respect for the
speakers when tweeting publicly
4:04 pm drnickmorris:?@digitalmaverick: Wow! The #solo10 Tweets are being pretty scathing about a speaker? Not the speaker,
but the session.
4:04 pm gbilder:Seems pretty cowardly to not turn on wall after that. #solo10
4:04 pm imascientist:The rest of us say two point oh. It's just him. RT @NewShoot Loving very British web two point nought
rather than two point zero #solo10
4:05 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 http://www.nature.com/scitable
4:05 pm science3point0:RT @imascientist: The rest of us say two point oh. It's just him. RT @NewShoot Loving very British web two
point nought rather than two point zero #solo10
4:05 pm jasonhoyt:as @rpg7twit states ~no one has cracked the nut of breaching the early adopter chasm in Web 2.0 for
science #solo10
4:05 pm JonMendel:Is #solo10 crowd over-extrapolotating from specific uses of ppt? Can be useful for images, discussion Qs,
textual analysis, accessibility...
4:05 pm digitalmaverick:I'm not at the #solo10 conference but to be frank some of the comments by professionals about a speaker
are rather embarassing to read
4:06 pm scottkeir:RT @drnickmorris: Even the biscuits served with afternoon tea at Science online London 2010 are really
nice #solo10
4:06 pm sgreene24:RT @tweeterpeter: Grant @ #solo10: show of hands finds 2 of 120 who have neither Twitter nor FB. That's
2 v brave people.
4:06 pm franknorman:RT @jasonhoyt: as @rpg7twit states ~no one has cracked the nut of breaching the early adopter chasm in
Web 2.0 for science #solo10
4:07 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 I've just had two very brilliant days here, thank you to everyone, well done!
4:07 pm mfenner:Let's close #solo10 tweeting with some nice comments. WiFi worked very well, especially considering the
heavy use.
4:07 pm digitalmaverick:@drnickmorris I see - but as not an attendee shows you how this is coming across to the rest of the world
via hashtagged tweets #solo10
4:07 pm MyScienceCareeThat's all from Science Online London. Thanks for the follows and RTs! #solo10
r:
4:07 pm AJCann:Thanks to Mendeley, the other sponsors, the BL and some speakers for #solo10. Now off to the Betjeman
Arms at St Pancras.
4:07 pm franknorman:Agreed. RT @mfenner Let's close #solo10 tweeting with some nice comments. WiFi worked very well,
especially considering the heavy use.
4:08 pm edyong209:Great conference. Nice to see so many colleagues again RT @mfenner: Let's close #solo10tweeting with
some nice comments.
4:08 pm drnickmorris:Some excellent sessions, great venue, good food! Thanks to sponsors and British Library #solo10
4:09 pm scottkeir:Frankly, I'd be disappointed if an online conference didn't trend... #solo10 http://twitpic.com/2l7ck9
4:09 pm franknorman:Group hug to everyone at #solo10 - has been a great couple of days with an interesting group of people.
4:09 pm mfenner:I had a great time at #solo10, liked it even more than last year's conference. Now closing remarks by Victor
Henning, and then the pub.
4:10 pm joergheber:Yes!! RT @AJCann: Thanks to Mendeley, the other sponsors, the BL and some speakers for #solo10. Now
off to the Betjeman Arms at St Pancras.
4:10 pm IanMulvany:#solo10 closing remarks now, a big thanks to Capt'n Cindy for the fringe frivilious event last night
4:10 pm adders:Feeling a bit bad about my coffee tweet now. #solo10 #stillacoffeesnob
4:10 pm aallan:Had a great time at #solo10, listened and took part in some good discussions. Thanks to @npgnews,
118 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
@mendeley_com and @britishlibrary.
4:11 pm scottkeir:Thanks for the #solo10 tweets folks - and the livestream!
4:11 pm morphosaurus:Has been superb fun. But I'm going home now. Thanks #solo10!
4:13 pm ethnobot:RT @edyong209: Personally, wouldn't call for total Powerpoint ban. Has uses. 1) Images 2) Er... Images. 3)
See 1 and 2. #solo10
4:14 pm jmcesteves:@pssalgado #solo10 http://is.gd/eUUL5 #PowerPoint
4:15 pm oh_henry:Loved it, thanks to everyone involved in organising #solo10
4:15 pm CalamityK:@adders This #solo10 thing, is it related to online communities? Research ongoing in #secondlifeabout
how ppl use it, how they relate etc.
4:16 pm Ben_Hawkes:Amused at the tweets from #solo10 folks being subjected to the most tedious talk on Web 2.0 since - well,
since the last Web 2.0 talk I saw.
4:17 pm dellybean:RT @GrrlScientist: if you want your excellent blog writing to be linked from @guardiansciblog i am hosting
@science4people 13 sept #solo10 send links to me!
4:18 pm science3point0:For those who want to continue dicussing this kind of thing: www.science3point0.com - plus all talk videos
will be archived here #solo10
4:19 pm scottkeir:@egonwillighagen if it is any consolation, #solo10 is not trending in Boston right now. I checked. :)
4:19 pm edyong209:RT @mfenner: I had a great time at #solo10, liked it even more than last year's conference.<-- This
4:19 pm cpikas:RT @science3point0 confused that 4% of scientists blog & 5% [share] unpublished data.#solo10 < prob
includes mand depo in molec bio & astro
4:19 pm zemogle:Loads of very interesting ideas spaghettiing around my head after #solo10 Thanks to everyone!
4:23 pm telescoper:RT @telescoper: Has a new idea for a conference: bitchygeekgrumblefest! <- Oh, it's been done #solo10
4:23 pm YSJournal:RT @science3point0: For those who want to continue dicussing: www.science3point0.com - plus all talk
videos will be archived here #solo10
4:23 pm BoraZ:RT @simon_frantz: And it's well worth going to RT @BoraZ Hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are
invited to #scio11 Jan 13-15 2011 in North Carolina
4:24 pm BoraZ:Once #solo10 folks finish imbibing, digesting, processing and excreting ethanol, I hope they blog about the
meeting in more detail.
4:28 pm stevepurkiss:RT @aleksk: HA! RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide w bullet points & no visual info, a
kitten jumps onto a spike. #solo10 #kittygenocide
4:28 pm david_colquhouOne reason I'm not there! RT @zeno001: @JoBrodie @david_colquhoun PDFs are getting a bad press at
n:
#solo10
4:29 pm BoraZ:#solo10 - monitor scienceblogging.org (and especially its blog) for updates on #scio11 coming up Jan13-15,
2011 in RTP, NC, USA.
4:29 pm allansudlow:#solo10 thanks for participating everyone - a virtual beer for me please
4:32 pm genegeek:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
4:32 pm Londonist:Unless someone beats me to it, I'll publish full links to all #solo10 blog posts, pics, etc. On Nature Network
tomorrow
4:35 pm mattfromlondonUnless someone beats me to it I'll round up all #solo10 posts, pics etc tomorrow
:
4:36 pm imrantime:Uh, so I kind of missed the last #solo10 session but will be coming to the pub shortly... what happened?
4:36 pm imascientist:Ace conf, thanks all! Great sessions, convos, food. Last sess fine, just a bit slow + ppt heavy for tired
audience, late afternoon. #solo10
4:38 pm TechCzech:Language Log taking on casual use of research in media & "the rhetorical trope 'studies show that
?'" http://j.mp/d0TfP4 #solo10 #sschat
4:39 pm science3point0:@BoraZ you know science3point0.com will be covering all aspects of bloggery and discussion about the
conference : ) #solo10
4:39 pm DRuizUceta:RT @mentalindigest: "Data are a lens to change you perspective on absolute figures" (China biggest army,
4:43 pm gogoodman:RT @aleksk@edyong209 Every time someone puts up a slide w bullet points & no visual info, a kitten
jumps onto a spike.#solo10 #kittygenocide
4:45 pm NewShoot:#solo10 thanks to all speakers, organisers & discussions over coffee. Excellent, inspiring, educational
conference *saves4airfare2solo11*
4:45 pm atul666:RT @GrrlScientist: complaints about british library logo?? i love that logo! (BritLib speaker sez she'll kill a
kitten if you continue to complain) #solo10
4:48 pm AgileRoxy:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
4:49 pm martindave:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
4:49 pm gedankenstueckRT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
e:
119 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
4:50 pm DannyMacRant:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
4:52 pm YSJournal:RT @Londonist: Unless someone beats me to it, I'll publish full links to all #solo10 blog posts, pics, etc. On
Nature Network tomorrow
4:52 pm glacial_till:@Allochthonous what's #solo10?
4:53 pm SamHawkins:FYI: #solo10 is the hashtag for the Science Online London conference. Seems some interesting points were
made. http://is.gd/eUXs9
4:53 pm timflapper:RT @aleksk: HA! RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide w bullet points & no visual info, a
4:54 pm easternblot:Coaster at Betjeman Arms surprisingly relevant to #solo10 we will, pub coaster, we
*will*.http://yfrog.com/n4v8wqj
4:54 pm YSJournal:RT @BoraZ: #solo10 - monitor scienceblogging.org (and especially its blog) for updates on #scio11coming
up Jan13-15, 2011 in RTP, NC, USA.
4:55 pm easternblot:RT @scottkeir: Well, #solo10 people, your whinging got the hashtag to the number 2 trend for London! :)
4:56 pm YSJournal:RT @BoraZ: Once #solo10 folks finish imbibing, digesting, processing and excreting ethanol, I hope they
blog about the meeting more detail.
4:56 pm hashtager:# RT @scottkeir: Well, #solo10 people, your whinging got the hashtag to the number 2 trend for London! :)
4:56 pm hashtager:# FYI: #solo10 is the hashtag for the Science Online London conference. Seems some interesting points
were made. http://is.gd/eUXs9
4:57 pm rpg7twit:Now I understand why you all laughed when I asked for the twitterfall. #solo10
4:58 pm YSJournal:RT @BoraZ: Hope everyone at #solo10 knows they are invited to #scio11 Jan 13-15 2011 in North Carolina
4:59 pm davidkroll:@MishaAngrist #solo10 kitten deaths remind me why I love "teaching" in your classes: no ppt, just
discussions. You have great students.
5:00 pm kaythaney:post #solo10 drinks- stimulating conversation and rad coasters. ;) http://twitpic.com/2l7smm
5:00 pm drnickmorris:RT @easternblot: Coaster at Betjeman Arms surprisingly relevant to #solo10 we will, pub coaster, we
*will*. http://yfrog.com/n4v8wqj
5:01 pm natpryce:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
5:01 pm scottkeir:RT @easternblot: Coaster at Betjeman Arms surprisingly relevant to #solo10 we will, pub coaster, we
5:02 pm drnickmorris:RT @rpg7twit: Now I understand why you all laughed when I asked for the twitterfall. #solo10
5:02 pm MishaAngrist:RT @BoraZ: #solo10 - monitor scienceblogging.org (and especially its blog) for updates on #scio11coming
up Jan13-15, 2011 in RTP, NC, USA.
5:04 pm noodlemaz:Blogpimp! My long overdue post on #IAS2010 - might be of interest to #solo10 attendees (which I'm sad to
have missed!) http://bit.ly/asFQvO
5:07 pm SamHawkins:In a survey conducted by the Royal Society, 90% of 18 to 24-year-olds could not name a single female
scientist. http://is.gd/eUXZU #solo10
5:09 pm amandakobeshiRT @GrrlScientist: it amazes me to see all these suit-wearing professionals hanging around w us t-shirt &
mi:
jeans computer geeks, kinda nice actually #solo10
5:09 pm egonwillighagen:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
5:10 pm egonwillighagen:RT @SamHawkins: In a survey conducted by the Royal Society, 90% of 18 to 24-year-olds could not name a
single female scientist. http://is.gd/eUXZU #solo10
5:11 pm mendeley_com:RT @easternblot: Coaster at Betjeman Arms surprisingly relevant to #solo10 we will, pub coaster, we
5:20 pm BoraZ:Dissemination and Science On-line #solo10 http://bit.ly/c839vm
5:23 pm chrisfreeland:@rdmpage @edwbaker good timing - just completed first pass on service with @eol for finding
nomenclatural/taxonomic acts #solo10 #bhlib
5:25 pm JoBrodie:@JonMendel The #solo10 mob are picking off the file formats one by one ;-)
5:26 pm egonwillighagen:RT @BoraZ: Dissemination and Science On-line #solo10 http://bit.ly/c839vm
5:29 pm drnickmorris:Blog post: Science online London - day 2 http://bms.ncl.ac.uk/blog/?p=650 #solo10
5:33 pm d_swan:@sjcockell and @phillord in intense Mario Kart battle on train home from
#solo10 :)http://plixi.com/p/43250884
5:39 pm briankelly:.@quelet Twitter usage at Science Online conf #solo10 summarised
athttp://summarizr.labs.eduserv.org.uk/?hashtag=solo10
5:41 pm Genetics_Blog:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
onto a spike. #solo10
5:42 pm briankelly:How many people attended #solo10 conference?
5:49 pm zeno001:RT @noodlemaz: Blogpimp! My long overdue post on #IAS2010 - might be of interest to #solo10attendees
120 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
(which I'm sad to have missed!) http://bit.ly/asFQvO
5:50 pm aallan:Oops! I made it into the top ten tweeters at
#solo10, http://summarizr.labs.eduserv.org.uk/?hashtag=solo10
5:51 pm impeus:RT @aleksk: HA! RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide w bullet points & no visual info, a
5:52 pm rpg7twit:@YSJournal @BoraZ might depend on how many neuroma survive #solo10
5:56 pm razZ0r:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
5:56 pm sciliz:RT @edyong209: Every time someone puts up a slide with bullet points and no visual info, a kitten jumps
5:57 pm imascientist:So, I emerge from two days at #solo10 conf. What's been happening in the rest of the world, twitter? Andy
Coulson been arrested yet? No?
6:04 pm mrgunn:RT @easternblot Coaster at Betjeman Arms surprisingly relevant to #solo10 we will, pub coaster, we
6:05 pm gingerbreadlady:Bye bye #solo10 It's been a blast. Sorry everyone else for tweet overload.
6:08 pm mrgunn:RT @JoBrodie @JonMendel The #solo10 mob are picking off the file formats one by one ;-)
6:08 pm mrgunn:RT @briankelly .@quelet Twitter usage at Science Online conf #solo10 summarised
6:10 pm BobOHara:The twitter chat on my session was, um, interesting. #solo10 @rpg7twit
6:12 pm kjhaxton:That's it for #solo10 - thanks to the organisers, some great sessions (some not). Blogposts on Monday -
need to digest :)
6:12 pm dellybean:RT @franknorman: @dellybean I this page has a link to the
video http://bit.ly/akZa8M #solo10@GrrlScientist is this it?
6:12 pm danielgillval:RT @kejames: Wow, our priorities really suck. RT @AJCann The Billion Dollar
6:14 pm orbitingfrog:#solo10 had an odd effect on @zemogle but he says he enjoyed it http://twitpic.com/2l8jep
6:15 pm dnghub:@adders re: chewbacca, not a bet, but a sort of tradition I have going. Hopefully, the one at #solo10made a
point!
6:21 pm MaverickNY:RT @easternblot: Coaster at Betjeman Arms surprisingly relevant to #solo10 we will, pub coaster, we
6:22 pm sjcockell:.@d_swan can't find anyone to play Mariokarts with on the train home #solo10http://twitpic.com/2l8m3e
6:27 pm JennyRohn:Nice meeting in real life @sarahkendrew @David_Dobbs @girlinterruptin @aleksk and many others at
#solo10
6:33 pm phillord:@mrgunn #solo10 ironically, the "someone else" who I assume will archive for me, is the British Library,
who said they will
6:34 pm ChemSpider:#solo10 is over. But no time to be sad. Too excited about all the ideas I've heard.
6:34 pm alisonmacleod:Just back from #solo10 confrence which was very enjoyable. Huge thanks to @jobrodie for making it
possible. My head is full now.
6:35 pm rpg7twit:@BobOHara yeah, I haven't caught up fully yet, but it appears to be a bloodbath. With lots of dead kittens.
#solo10
6:38 pm rpg7twit:Would like to trend #kittygenocide. #solo10
6:42 pm phillord:#solo10 does anyone know the name of the Head of e-journals at the BL -- would be good to talk to her
6:42 pm rpg7twit:\o/ RT @drnickmorris: RT @rubp: @rpg7twit saved this session #solo10
6:43 pm zemogle:Inspired by @infobeautiful cool visualisations? DataGraph is brilliant for beautiful
graphshttp://j.mp/IVt2O #solo10
6:45 pm imascientist:@JoannaBuckley IAS session at #solo10 conf. Went well I think:-) Thanks Jo!
7:21 pm ReaderMeter:checking out from #solo10 after one last pint with @mrgunn @Fischblog @rvidal @IanMulvany the
ChemSpider folks + others - I had a great time
7:22 pm TwistedBacteria:RT @briankelly: @quelet Twitter usage at Science Online conf #solo10 summarised
7:32 pm rvidal:Great end to #solo10 (@ The Betjeman Arms w/ 2 others) http://4sq.com/7iSDBT
7:36 pm rpg7twit:@GrrlScientist I was getting thumbs-down from tech guys. They must have realized... #solo10
7:42 pm edyong209:Apparently #kittygenocide was a more popular hashtag than #scivote at #solo10. Policy people take note.
7:42 pm GozdeZorlu:RT @alicebell Blogpost version of my #scivote talk at #solo10 today - Scientists and the
7:43 pm rpg7twit:@GrrlScientist says @mendeley_com is a tool #solo10
7:45 pm GozdeZorlu:Nothing made me laugh harder than this today RT @edyong209 #kittygenocide more popular hashtag than
#scivote #solo10. Policy ppl take note
7:45 pm bmarsden19:#solo10 was a big eye opener. The challenge now is to put some of the cool tech & ideas into action and
further improve our data sharing.
121 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
7:46 pm GozdeZorlu:Awesome time at #solo10 with some r awesome ppl - too many to list. Also, delighted with the free copy of
nature magazine :D
7:48 pm UKCONNECTZ:Maxitone: WANT A FREE GIFT BOX WORTH £2.99? Just Request Your Own Copy Of The NEW Catalogue To
Claim: http://bit.ly/cY6hFE, #solo10
7:58 pm MaverickNY:@GrrlScientist love Graham, he's a Friendfeed buddy, awesome guy! Say hi from me and thx for your great
#solo10 commentary!
8:01 pm rpg7twit:@imascientist I did! #solo10 was an awesome conference. Please stay in touch :)
8:01 pm imascientist:Ed wins again RT @edyong209: Apparently #kittygenocide was a more popular hashtag than #scivote at
#solo10. Policy people take note.
8:08 pm Jazz_Mane:Ok #solo10 aint had a tweet for 5mins but its TT and #TheRemixOut20th is going hamm but not TT
#TwitterisaFAIL
8:15 pm franknorman:@briankelly I'm told there were 250 delegates at #solo10
8:15 pm CameronNeylon:@phillord do you mean @lasciencebl who asked you the question in session today? #solo10
8:15 pm edyong209:She talks as well as she writes. RT @alicebell Blogpost of my #scivote talk at #solo10 today - Scientists and
the Vote http://bit.ly/bu4u29
8:18 pm edyong209:I love @markgfh's comment on @alicebell's post on upstream reporting. Much news about papers is still
upstream http://bit.ly/avmxLJ #solo10
8:18 pm MaverickNY:@GrrlScientist tis all very amusing from 3k miles away though! Great to follow the #solo10 stream. Hope to
make it next year
8:22 pm PaoloViscardi:Was hoping to make the pub for post #solo10 drinks, but my power ran out and I had to go home to
recharge. My phone battery was dead too.
8:34 pm KateKatV:RT @PaoloViscardi: Was hoping to make the pub for post #solo10 drinks, but my power ran out and I had
to go home to recharge. My phone battery was dead too.
8:54 pm heynips:#solo10 ._. eu li Ben 10, sou muito esperta né?
9:05 pm pssalgado:Great 2 days of science, Scicomm, blogging, twiting & meeting ppl #solo10 Congrats to organizers,speakers
& participants. Fun & interesting
9:15 pm sarahkendrew:#solo10 cheers for a great meeting everyone, great people, excellent conversations.
9:19 pm mjrobbins:@sarahkendrew Were you there yesterday as well? Gutted if I missed you! #solo10
9:25 pm ericneumann:Haha! This generation of websters obsessed with integers more than facts! Web 4.0 will be here before this
talk ends. #solo10 @Stephen_Curry
9:31 pm Tideliar:@rpg7twit not been able to keep up with the tweets. Hoping for a synopsis from y'all... #solo10
9:36 pm sarahkendrew:@mjrobbins yes! wanted to catch up with you today but you were gone.... #solo10
September 5, 2010
12:20 am akshatrathi:@rhysmorgan till we get anything better, we are stuck with it. It's the programmer's problem, I'm afraid.
#solo10
12:20 am psychemedia:Inside the #solo10 hashtag community - which hashtaggers are most heavily followed by other
hashtaggers http://flic.kr/p/8y8zG4
12:27 am psychemedia:#solo10 hashtag community - folk with high internal betweenness centrality acc. to
gephihttp://flic.kr/p/8y8Dzn
12:27 am mjrobbins:@rhysmorgan @akshatrathi @JoBrodie What have I started with my "PDFs are an insult to science"
comments?! #solo10
12:27 am physicus:Deary me; starts with my synchrotron cock-up :)RT @akshatrathi: Find a PDF archive of all the tweets from
#solo10 here: http://bit.ly/blWRtE
12:28 am edyong209:VICTORY! RT @psychemedia Inside #solo10 community - which hashtaggers are most heavily followed by
other hashtaggers http://flic.kr/p/8y8zG4
12:32 am GozdeZorlu:@edyong209 no surprise! :) I tweeted a lot, no? surprised my name isn't bigger *tweet ego
bruised*http://flic.kr/p/8y8zG4 #solo10
12:46 am GozdeZorlu:Open data/access talked about at #solo10. Interesting, relevant @naturenews article - making climate data
free for all http://bit.ly/bS90fR
12:47 am akshatrathi:Really impressed by the idea of PLoS Currents. #solo10 http://bit.ly/aszbws It needs more sections though,
hope they will be introduced.
12:53 am GozdeZorlu:International Data Sharing conference at Oxford Uni Sept 20-22 http://bit.ly/9Vslbc Any #solo10 ppl be
there?
4:51 am BoraZ:Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/aI6vqD #solo10
7:24 am NickDusic:Interesting to read what people thought of election work that led to #scivote, wish I could have been at
#solo10 to take part in the debate.
7:39 am katie_fraser:Just published a blog on #solo10 - specifically discussions of author ID, what scientists want & impact
factors http://bit.ly/9wPVtV
7:44 am Ajmoffat:Are science blogs mostly read by people interested in science. How many extra children study science
122 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
because of blogs? #solo10
7:47 am Ajmoffat:Upstream reporting reduces science to rumours and speculation. Is it only good for bloggers who feed off
the work of scientists? #solo10
7:53 am Ajmoffat:What is the purpose of science blogging? Do blogs really promote critical thinking? #solo10
7:57 am Ajmoffat:Controversial question: why communicate science in anything except specialised journals? #solo10
8:03 am Ajmoffat:Kids who like sci will study sci/eng at college/uni regardless. We have too many scientists so let's just train
the most keen kids #solo10
8:10 am mentalindigest:Fantastic meeting (almost) everyone at #solo10. I'm now wandering around the city until 2 pm; if anyone
fancies a coffee, then tweet/call me
8:32 am kejames:One of my best #solo10 outcomes was meeting @orbitingfrog of http://bit.ly/dootu1 We hatched a plan
for HMS Beagle's logs & maps. (bp)
8:44 am kejames:Inspired by #solo10 backchannel banter I'm thinking of resurrecting my blog w/a post on whether our aim
should really be kids-->sci careers.
9:21 am lucasbrouwers:After a great #solo10 and a thrilling inception today actually gonna see london!
9:28 am bacigalupe:Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/aI6vqD #solo10 -via @BoraZ #hcsm
9:33 am mrgunn:RT @rubp transcript here http://bit.ly/cxJ6jO #solo10 not sure how long it will stay there but it's HTML not
PDF
9:35 am mfenner:@MaverickNY Death by Powerpoint of course old story, not using any visuals not really solution. But some
do visuals really well #solo10
9:41 am mfenner:@katie_fraser Thanks for writing about #ORCID session. And I hope to see more librarians (incl. speakers)
next year #solo10
9:44 am ehealthgr:RT @bacigalupe: Science Online: Cultures Clash over Infographics http://bit.ly/aI6vqD #solo10 -via
@BoraZ #hcsm
9:51 am mfenner:#solo10 tweet archive and analysis: http://bit.ly/bgrjG3 Nice output with > 5000 tweets from > 600 people
9:55 am mfenner:@MaverickNY You would have very much enjoyed #solo10, particularly #hcsm session organized by
@andrewspong
10:05 am McDawg:@MaverickNY we recorded the #hcsm @andrewsprong session at #solo10 - I'm still on the road and will
tag all the recordings when home
10:09 am gingerbreadlady:Fave thing at #solo10 - data visualisation. See http://bit.ly/cqxXCg for awesome egs. I'm going to slave over
Illustrator because of this.
10:13 am GozdeZorlu:So wish I had gone to this RT @gingerbreadlady Fave thing at #solo10 - data visualisation.
Seehttp://bit.ly/cqxXCg for awesome egs
10:15 am McDawg:@rpg7twit @boraz w/ most of the #solo10 ustream vids being 1hrs long, won't i need to dice them into 10
min chunks 4 youtube ?
10:26 am zemogle:RT @gingerbreadlady: Fave thing at #solo10 - data visualisation. See http://bit.ly/cqxXCg for awesome egs.
I'm going to slave over Illustrator because of this.
10:40 am franknorman:The spirit of Marshall Mcluhan was hovering over #solo10 and its meta-theme about information formats.
11:17 am TwistedBacteria:Science Online: Bloggers, Commenters and the Reputation Game /via @AJCann #solo10http://ff.im/-qfNbd
11:23 am pfanderson:RT @GozdeZorlu: Open data/access talked about at #solo10. Interesting, relevant @naturenewsarticle -
making climate data free for all http://bit.ly/bS90fR
11:24 am sciencegoddess:RT @kejames: Inspired by #solo10 backchannel banter I'm thinking of resurrecting my blog w/a post on
whether our aim should really be kids-->sci careers.
11:28 am TwistedBacteria:Dissemination and Science On-line #solo10 - by @Pathh1 /via @AJCann http://ff.im/-qfOsl
11:30 am easternblot:Can't find tweet now, but someone not at #solo10 commented on professionalism of critiquing speakers
over Twitter. I normally don't, but...
11:31 am easternblot:... in this case, was *this* close to raising my hand and asking about time left for panel *discussion*. Was
hoping someone would... #solo10
11:41 am mfenner:@easternblot agree that we should have had longer discussion at last #solo10 session. Twitter comments
didn't feedback to speakers (1/2)
11:44 am mfenner:@easternblot assigned official Twitter monitor could provide feedback. Hashtag confusion at
#solo10 beginning was another example (2/2)
11:45 am rpg7twit:Just peeked at the RIN's report on SM (re Procter talk at #solo10). I think there's a serious methodological
flaw. Will blog later.
11:59 am psychemedia:Doing a bit more hashtag community tinkering: can now generate lists around hashtag community,. eg for
#solo10 http://bit.ly/bhlODt
12:12 pm mfenner:@katie_fraser #solo10 is good opportunity for discussion between scientists and librarians, most
conferences are attended by only group
12:20 pm mfenner:@pfanderson wasn't clear until shortly before #solo10 if video streaming would be possible. Budget didn't
allow this, but @mcdawg helped out
12:47 pm Stephen_Curry:Glimpse of the future of academic metrics? RT @orbitingfrog Check out http://bit.ly/bhb4qC and put in the
123 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
name of a scientist. #solo10
12:55 pm McDawg:@science3point0 & I managed to stream/capture 8.5 hrs of #solo10 A big thx to @mfenner & co for letting
us do this for y'all More laters.
1:08 pm akshatrathi:@Argent23 was nice meeting you. #solo10 was such a great place to meet all those tweeps in real life, you
bet!
1:09 pm BlisterList:BlisterPipe Bloody amazing video of a man controlling his Parkinsons with an implant that was shown at
#solo10 yes... http://bit.ly/afgDlO
1:17 pm obsto:Thanks to @tweeterpeter, @franknorman and @mfenner for tweeting so intensive on #solo10
2:05 pm NatNetNews:Compiling links to #solo10 coverage here http://bit.ly/dqiKUp Please fill in any gaps.
2:07 pm Stephen_Curry:.@noodlemaz Enjoyed #solo10 (Sat only for me). Wonderful people & some v.g. sessions - esp.
@drevanharris & #scivote panel discussion.
2:43 pm mjrobbins:@deevybee @edyong209 That may just be at your end, I've watched it no problem. #solo10
3:01 pm AJCann:David McCandless is spinning in his grave (or would be) #solo10 http://t.co/duq89BV
3:22 pm mentalindigest:Flickr pool for #solo10 photos (http://bit.ly/aDKiKf) - Anyone got anything to offer? Will upload some of
mine once off the train.
3:33 pm MikeHypercube:RT @zeno001: Bloody amazing video of a man controlling his Parkinsons with an implant that was shown at
#solo10: http://youtu.be/KDjWdtDyz5I
3:44 pm cpearson1990:RT @zeno001: Bloody amazing video of a man controlling his Parkinsons with an implant that was shown at
#solo10 yesterday: http://youtu.be/KDjWdtDyz5I
3:54 pm deevybee:Lots of good sense from @edyong209 @mjrobbins @alicebell :video of debate at
#solo10http://tiny.cc/oeyni
3:55 pm egonwillighagen:#BioMedCentral 's author guidelines that web pages must *not* have authors in bibliographies is a total
disrespect to online science #solo10
4:19 pm BoraZ:Science Online: Bloggers, Commenters and the Reputation Game - http://bit.ly/9YltGm #solo10
4:21 pm edyong209:Engaging people online - unconference session with me
@j_timmer @morphosaurus @alokjhahttp://bit.ly/b7OHsg #solo10
4:24 pm BoraZ:Nice to meet your big idea ? the Unconference concept http://bit.ly/bYXHlm #scio11 #solo10#scifoo #TED
4:38 pm drnickmorris:Blog post: Science online London 2010 - a (my?) summary #solo10 http://bms.ncl.ac.uk/blog/?p=657
#soloconf Transcript from September 2 to September 4, 2010

September 2, 2010
9:27 am edyong209:LOL! At #soloconf @drevanharris will be urging the sci/skeptic community to "get
serous"http://bit.ly/brgvfk So pale, yellow, kinda sickly
9:29 am rpg7twit:RT @edyong209: At #soloconf @drevanharris will be urging sci/skeptics to "get
serous"http://bit.ly/brgvfk So pale, yellow, kinda sickly

September 3, 2010
9:08 am mjrobbins:Lost my glasses in the loo at @soloconf ! If anyone found them, tweet or tell me!
#soloconf #solo
9:10 am jamesdadd:Glasses found and handed in ;) #soloconf @mjrobbins
9:11 am petermurrayrust:#soloconf http://bit.ly/a75Y5K first results for GreenChain Reaction - comments please esp.
from chemists
9:11 am thatkeith:#soloconf Good morning all at the conference!
9:14 am sciencegoddess:Good morning all! Sitting between @mocost and @mentalindigest at #soloconf Now listening
to Sir Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal

9:14 am habib:#soloconf #li (@ British Library w/ 8 others) http://4sq.com/2f3S1b
9:17 am thatkeith:#soloconf interesting statement at Science Online conference: 'peer review' concept under
pressure, may have to be modified.

9:20 am rogeroge:#soloconf after listening to the history of publishing can we think about the society of
publishing - how the human 'protocol' works

9:21 am rogeroge:#soloconf and the latest Carr work that the internet is making us stupid ... do we need the
new galapagos for science away from the me-too

9:22 am citeulike:A bit better, man-in-blue-t-shirt. :-) Still low but can just hear now #soloconf
124 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:23 am liquidizer:"Online journals" - refers to distribution. Interactivity is hugely important as well of course.
#soloconf
9:23 am easternblot:He was talking about "scienTISTS", not "science" as a whole. Subtle difference. (re: language
cmmt on twitterfall at #soloconf )

9:23 am danielintheory:Paul Ginsparg (arXiv) praised by Lord Martin Rees at Science Online London #soloconf
9:27 am rpg7twit:Martin Rees @soloconf #soloconf http://tweetphoto.com/42976139
9:28 am rogeroge:#soloconf - now discussing money and open access, if the STM pubs are now losing margin
how will the learned societies survive

9:29 am rogeroge:#soloconf when i was a student i depended on the library and the librarians - this gave me a
real head start

9:30 am danielintheory:"Completely open access would be best....it is a matter of regret that we can't yet achieve it"
Lord Martin Rees, #soloconf

9:32 am rogeroge:#soloconf we are looking at a new science with experiments by brute force rather than
insight. It can now be made by anyone in the world

9:33 am fischblog:Rees: "All RS journals make articles freely available to journalists and bloggers" - Let's just
hole they read them, too... #soloconf
9:33 am rogeroge:#soloconf the role of the amateur a begnign development - they can do science at home
9:37 am thatkeith:"A classroom schoolteacher can become a hit on the web, just like a star MIT lecturer." (But
do they get the time?) #soloconf

9:37 am IanMulvany:#soloconf I'd say that superstring theory provides a pretty good body of fiction for the general
reader
9:38 am David_Dobbs:Who else finds #soloconf twitterfall behind stage distracting & wd like it turned off? Tell me in
6 mins when I start Reboot

9:39 am morphosaurus:@thatkeith Well that would be nice! #soloconf
9:40 am liquidizer:Agree twitter fall is distracting. #soloconf
9:40 am quantum_tunnel:At #soloconf, listening to Martin Rees. http://post.ly/vNc3
9:40 am PointOfPresence:Agree, let's turn off twitterfall. Very distracting! #soloconf
9:41 am phillord:#soloconf Peter Murray Rust stirs up the fun
9:41 am TheXchangeTeam:Calling all science tweeps at #soloconf ! Please fill out the sci-tweet
survey! http://bit.ly/cv09bM Have a great couple of days.
9:43 am aallan:"...I think new journals are damaging and should be resisted," Martin Rees #solo10 #soloconf
9:43 am alicebell:Martin Rees: we don't need any more journals (about to start a fight over commercial
interests of publishing...?) #soloconf #solo10

9:43 am fischblog:That particle physics literature is more accessible for lay people than the humanities is not
only ironic, but rather telling IMO. #soloconf

9:43 am simon_frantz:Martin Rees on journals: When people ask me if I want to be on a new journal, I say no b/c we
don't need any more journals #solo10 #soloconf

9:43 am jamesdadd:RT @edyong209: Rees: Comments on blogs and emails can give authors far more useful input
than they get from referees. #soloconf #solo10

9:43 am pssalgado:Commercial vs learned societies publishing discussion stearing things up at #solo10 #soloconf
9:44 am kjhaxton:RT @aallan: Why you shouldn't have #twitterfall running in the background during the
talks,http://j.mp/92wkGc. #solo10 #soloconf (via @zephoria)

9:44 am simon_frantz:RT @edyong209: Rees: Comments on blogs and emails can give authors far more useful input

9:44 am liquidizer:Plug: Vote for Interactive Words session! Interact with scientific discourse as you do with
scientific data. What are your wishes? #soloconf
9:44 am danielintheory:"we do not want more [academic] journals...commercial pressures are detrimental [to the
community]", Lord Martin Rees #soloconf

9:45 am rogeroge:#soloconf - LOOK BEHIND YOU - I wonder in the speaker has seen any of the tweets running
behind him -- real time feedback

9:45 am TwistedBacteria:RT @edyong209: Rees: Comments on blogs and emails can give authors far more useful input

9:45 am quantum_tunnel:'Would be good to use the Harry Potter profits to support open access'. #soloconf
9:46 am razZ0r:'We don't want more journals' Martin Rees #solo10 #soloconf
9:46 am pssalgado:"There's no such thing as free content" #solo10 #soloconf
125 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
9:46 am rpg7twit:Is it true @RSocPublishing will give articles for free to bloggers & journalists?
#soloconf #solo10
9:46 am jamesdadd:Could free access not be subsidized or sponsored by commercial entities whose products may
be used in the research? #solo10 #soloconf

9:46 am edyong209:"There's a spell for that..." RT @quantum_tunnel: 'Would be good to use the Harry Potter
profits to support open access'. #soloconf

9:47 am IanMulvany:#soloconf, hmm, we stumble into the "value" debate, and I see a big can of worms waving at
me, hello worms.

9:47 am rpg7twit:Who pays for hosting? #soloconf
9:49 am PointOfPresence:so, twitterfall is off. Now it'll get properly nasty! :) #soloconf
9:50 am thatkeith:#soloconf Print On Demand WILL reduce cost of scientific monographs, & other tiny-run
publishing effort. Requires digital library arch.

9:51 am Evo2Me:RT @fischblog: That particle physics literature is more accessible for lay people than the
humanities is not only ironic, but rather telling IMO. #soloconf

9:51 am JonMButterworth:RT @fischblog: That particle physics literature is more accessible for lay people than the
9:56 am msmiji:David Dobbs: ?more good science writing online than ever before? (more bad ones too tho)
#soloconf
9:56 am msmiji:David Dobbs: transparency should top conflict of interests #soloconf
10:02 am razZ0r:'the pdf format is an insult to science' @mjrobbins #solo10 #soloconf
10:02 am alexwade:PDF is like inventing the telephone and using it to transmit Morse code - Martin Robbins
#soloconf
10:03 am axiomsofchoice:PDF's on the net are like "Inventing the telephone to use it for sending Morse code" from
@mjrobbins#solo10 #soloconf
10:03 am pssalgado:@mjrobbins MSM not interested in experimenting with format and form, just put up fairly
static columns #solo10 #soloconf
10:03 am thatkeith:For science papers, where should Print On Demand production be? Bookstores? Libraries?
Universities? #soloconf
10:03 am simon_frantz:RT @CameronNeylon: Robbins: "The PDF is an insult 2 science. It's like inventing phone and
using it 2 transmit Morse Code" #soloconf #solo10

10:04 am thatkeith:"We know next to nothing, and what we do know will be irrelevant in five years" #soloconf
10:05 am pssalgado:@mjrobbbins There are no set rules on effective scicom. Keep innovating and experimenting
#solo10#soloconf
10:06 am thatkeith:"Flash is obsolete." - Speaker at Science Online 2010 conference. #soloconf
10:07 am liquidizer:"Longform text" is hot. "Book" is dead #soloconf
10:08 am thatkeith:RT @liquidizer: "Longform text" is hot. "Book" is dead #soloconf
10:08 am egonwillighagen:@liquidizer Longform text? link? #solo10 #soloconf
10:08 am CameronNeylon:@PointOfPresence I would argue because journals have failed to innovate in HTML to provide
more interesting functionality #soloconf #solo10

10:08 am liquidizer:"Context matters" #soloconf
10:08 am liquidizer:RT @thatkeith: "Flash is obsolete." - Speaker at Science Online 2010 conference. #soloconf
10:09 am simon_frantz:RT @imascientist: Ed: The web is perfect 4 experimentation&innovation - e.g. virtually infinite
space, linking, bkgd info #solo10 #soloconf

10:09 am CameronNeylon:@PointOfPresence But also bcs until recently we hvn't had any decent portable readers so
hardcopy has remained important #soloconf #solo10

10:10 am pssalgado:Can we have twitterfall back on pls? just realised it enhances the experience, even if it is
distracting at times #solo10 #soloconf

10:11 am msmiji:Ed Young: innovative presentation of new discoveries is how online sci writing distinguishes
itself #solo10 #soloconf

10:11 am bmarsden19:"Do what you do best, link to the rest" when it comes down to scientific writing/journalism.
#soloconf#solo10
10:11 am thatkeith:@ricklecoat Yes, location of PoD is less an issue for science papers - unless you're trying to
open access to content. #soloconf

10:12 am liquidizer:"churnalism" journalism of not checking, just posting. #soloconf
10:14 am thatkeith:Churnalism, a publishing problem, esp online. Not limited to lazy journalists; includes
126 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
everyone that retweets without checking. #soloconf
10:19 am julie_bee:Listening online to debate on science communication/journalism from #soloconf at the British
Libraryhttp://www.science3point0.com/solo10-2/
10:20 am morphosaurus:Teaching Perceptions of Science, want stus 2 write blog posts. Anyone @ #soloconf w/ hi
profile blog want 2 judge & offer guest post 2 best?

10:20 am thatkeith:Is Print on Demand like designing a better horse-drawn carriage while Henry Ford is producing
the modern automobile? #soloconf

10:20 am anu:Look at football journalists for great examples of audience engagement #soloconf
10:20 am quantum_tunnel:'Important to bring audience into how science is being done at an early stage',
@alicebell #soloconf
10:23 am Pathh1:Panel is science journalists. But what about increasing impact and accuracy of science on the
front and editorial pages? #soloconf #solo10

10:24 am Jackstilgoe:@alicebell #soloconf #solo10 Rees and others like to point out that the average number of
readers of a scientific paper is 0.6.

10:25 am YSJournal:RT @quantum_tunnel: 'Important to bring audience into how science is being done at an
early stage', @alicebell #soloconf
10:27 am YSJournal:RT @Pathh1: But what about increasing impact and accuracy of science on the front and
editorial pages? #soloconf #solo10

10:27 am silvermaneman:RT @YSJournal: RT @quantum_tunnel: 'Important to bring audience into how science is being
done at an early stage', @alicebell #soloconf

10:28 am CameronNeylon:@kjhaxton But then what happens to all the experiments that you're never quite happy that
you've completed? Just lost? #soloconf #solo10

10:28 am YSJournal:RT @MyScienceCareer: @edyong209: Rees: Comments on blogs emails can give authors more
useful input than they get from referees. #soloconf

10:28 am tom_wells101:@alicebell taking science journalism upstream. Is there anything we should learn from
coverage of celebrity culture? Or avoid? #soloconf
10:28 am phillord:#solo10 #soloconf and what do the scientists who are paying for this get from embargo?
10:28 am msmiji:Martin Robbins: embargo isn?t useful for public, understand and respect publishers? requests
however #soloconf #solo10

10:29 am msmiji:publisher?s pov 1: journos have asked for embargo #soloconf #solo10
10:29 am msmiji:journo?s pov 1: how many of us really spend the time up until embargo to research
#solo10#soloconf
10:29 am pssalgado:@mjrobbins "why do journalist feel they have to be the 1st on a story? Why not be the best?"
#solo10 #soloconf
10:29 am YSJournal:RT @julie_bee: Listening online to debate on science communication/journalism from
#soloconf at the British Library http://www.science3point0.com/solo10-2/
10:30 am MyScienceCareer:Ed Yong: New media maxim: 'do what you do best; link to the rest.' #solo10 #soloconf
10:30 am thatkeith:Question for the organisers: Will the conference sessions be available as podcasts? #soloconf
10:30 am Kate_Travis:Ed Yong: New media maxim: 'do what you do best; link to the rest.' #solo10 #soloconf
10:32 am pssalgado:@mjrobbins "Distributing pdfs is a lazy solution" #solo10 #soloconf
10:34 am tom_wells101:@DrEvanHarris upstream doesn't just mean talking about prelim-findings. It could be "what
do I want to look at next?" for eg #soloconf

10:35 am razZ0r:RT @rubp: Most scientists I work with are not playing the online game so the first challenge
getting them online. #solo10 #soloconf

10:37 am science3point0:RT @razZ0r: RT @rubp: Most scientists I work with are not playing the online game so the
first challenge getting them online. #solo10 #soloconf
10:38 am science3point0:@HoneywellNobel great to see it's working, spread the word! #solo10 #soloconf
10:38 am julie_bee:Bizarrely, on the livefeed for #soloconf, the speakers are drowned out by someone answering
a phone call. Person is not on screen though.

10:41 am thatkeith:Issue of anti-science voices clouding science issues online is inherent in open systems. Hard to
counter if people only see that. #soloconf

10:43 am quantum_tunnel:The 'paper' has become the basic unit of science. What about (raw) data, methods, etc? There
must be room for that too #soloconf

10:46 am thatkeith:There are roughly 2 billion English speakers, including those with it as non-first language.
#soloconf
127 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
10:48 am thatkeith:Thanks to Twitter "we are all becoming each other's editors." #soloconf
10:48 am quantum_tunnel:Science content in languages other than English is somewhat limited (from what I've seen
with my podcast(s)). #soloconf
10:50 am adambanksdotcom:RT @thatkeith: Is Print on Demand like designing a better horse-drawn carriage while Ford is
producing the automobile? #soloconf <-- yes

11:00 am sciencepond:Now trending on Science Pond: #soloconf http://bit.ly/amG9Ui
11:00 am muckrack:Now trending on Muck Rack: #soloconf http://bit.ly/cghb9D
11:00 am scicom_bot:RT @YSJournal RT @julie_bee: Listening online to debate on science
communication/journalism from #soloconf at the British Library http...
11:00 am scicom_bot:RT @julie_bee Listening online to debate on science communication/journalism from
#soloconf at the British Library http://www.science3...

11:06 am pwkprPeter:RT muckrack: Now trending on Muck Rack: #soloconf http://bit.ly/cghb9D: muckrack: Now
trending on Muck Rack: #solo... http://bit.ly/aKJZA4

12:12 pm quantum_tunnel:Waiting for the session on 'Publishing primary research data'. #soloconf
12:28 pm quantum_tunnel:Open data at a later stage is better than not having it at all. #soloconf
12:50 pm PointOfPresence:why is twitterfall still on the screen? #soloconf
12:52 pm phillord:@PointOfPresence #soloconf science online should be online. Just ignore it, if it bugs you.
1:22 pm zemogle:Disappointed not to see @telescoper at #soloconf
1:25 pm NewShoot:@Preiskel 's talk was excellent, fascinating insight into Libel Law, clearly given.
#solo10 #soloconf
1:30 pm thatkeith:One reason why everyone isn't using social media in edu is because it is still all quite new.
How old is Facebook or Twitter? #soloconf

1:33 pm kjhaxton:#iassolo very nice Prezi presentation :) #soloconf
1:34 pm zemogle:Is #iassolo using a Prezi at #soloconf ? Cool.
1:36 pm zemogle:"it's like X-factor but on computers" #iassolo #soloconf
3:44 pm ShaneMcC:#soloconf lots of stories about political downfalls thru blogging. Basic rule don't write
anything you don't printed.

4:43 pm tkrishnamohan91:RT @fischblog: That particle physics literature is more accessible for lay people than the

September 4, 2010
8:54 am Pathh1:Dissemination and Science On-line #soloconf http://t.co/X94aEYf via @annbot
9:04 am kaythaney:at day 2 of #soloconf. bona fortuna, miss @aleksk!
10:48 am YSJournal:RT @Pathh1: Dissemination and Science On-line #soloconf http://t.co/X94aEYf via @annbot
11:41 am liquidizer:#soloconf Interactive Words! Why and what! Room 2!
12:06 pm thatkeith:#soloconf come to room 2 to talk about the future of information and research!
1:28 pm thatkeith:My thanks to the people who shared the Unconference session slot; a very good discussion
and sharing of thoughts! #soloconf #hyperwords

2:03 pm thatkeith:Google's ranking relies largely on time; inbound links, etc. But it also sees known-valuable
sites as being immediately useful. #soloconf

2:06 pm thatkeith:Citations are an equivalent of inbound links. Tally those (somehow), and you have a (basic)
metric for ranking scholarly papers. #soloconf
128 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/03 ALICE BELL BLOG: TAKING
SCIENCE JOURNALISM “UPSTREAM”
Today I spoke at Science Online Londonas part of a plenary panel session curated by David Dobbs and also
featuring Martin Robbins and Ed Yong on ―Rebooting‖ (aka the future of) science journalism. This is the
typed-up version of my talk, along with links and extra bits of context.
As the academic on the panel (not to mention the only one that isn‘t, shhhh, in any way a journalist) I
thought I‘d focus on an idea: an invite to take things ―upstream‖.
That probably sounds dirtier than it should.
The term ―upstream‖ is (a) a metaphor and (b) jargon. Both of which I apologise for. The concept has been
incredibly influential in the engagement end of science communication work. Science communicators use it
all the time, they even tell each other off when they‘re ―not upstream enough‖. But has never really carried
through to journalism.
In essence, it‘s an argument for showing more of science in the making, not just waiting for publication of
―ready-made‖ peer-reviewed papers.
Imagine science as a river. Upstream, we have the early stages of communication about some area of
science: meetings, literature reviews or general lab gossip. Gradually these ideas are worked through, and
the communicative output flows downstream towards the peer-reviewed and published journal article and
perhaps, via a press release and maybe even a press conference, some mass media reporting. Let‘s not get
too carried away with this metaphor though, or we‘ll just end up with boring stories about scientists going
rafting (it also relies on what is, arguably, an over-linear model of science, but that‘s a whole other
argument).
The term ―upstream engagement‖ has various antecedents, but really stems from a (2004) report from
think-tank Demos, See Through Science, by James Wilsdon and Rebbecca Willis. They argued that science
communication initiatives had become over-dominated by questions of risk, which they felt, was too late in
the process. The March 2006 POST note (pdf) provides a good example of the difference between early and
late (upstream and downstream) engagement, drawing on reactions to GMOs. It refers to a 1994 consensus
conference funded by the BBSRC and held at the Science Museum anticipated issues surrounding genetic
modification (GM) of plants and involved publics at an early stage. In comparison, they argue that the 2003
GM Nation project, although government-funded and promised to take up recommendations, it was ―too
little, too late‖ (POST, 2006: 2). GM Nation asked people to respond to what had been delivered to them,
whereas the 1994 event had given people access and, simply, insight into what might be delivered.
Wilsdon and Willis were heavily influenced by Stephen Hilgartner‘s (2000) book about US science
policy, Science on Stage, and echoing this they have a lot of fun with theatrical metaphors:
The task of upstream engagement is to remove some of the structures that divide the back-stage from the
front-stage. It seeks to make visible the invisible, to expose to public scrutiny the values, visions and
assumptions that usually lie hidden. In the theatre of science and technology, the time has come to
dismantle the proscenium arch and begin performing in the round (Wilsdon & Willis, 2004: 24)
I should note, the idea has its critics, e.g. Dick Taverne‘s letter to Nature or, somewhat more
thoughtfully, William Cullerne Bown. Still, these are exceptions. Listening to some of David Willetts‘
statements on public engagement, I suspect he is a fan of working upstream (or is at least has been briefed
by someone who read that POSTnote).
Perhaps it‘s not a surprise that journalists haven‘t really taken it up though. The idea of upstream
engagement is to fix problems in the relationships between science and society. The government like this,
clearly, so write POSTnotes and fund things like ScienceWise, but it‘s not the business of journalism to deal
129 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
with it. They just want to sell papers. They have their own rules to play with (c.f. Andy Williams‘ reference
to news values in the recent Times Higher piece on science writing).
But I think upstream science journalism offers something sell-able. It‘s based on theatre after all. It swaps
that cliché of ―scientists have found‖ for ―scientists are doing‖. It focuses on ―scientists find interesting‖,
―scientists wonder‖ or ―scientists are excited by‖. Actually, I‘d hope it looses the sloppy generalisation of
―scientists‖ and instead introduce researchers with rather less anonymity. That‘s part of the point. It lets the
audience look science right in the eye and see it in all its glory (beauty and wonder; warts and all).
I suspect people are waiting to respond with the criticism that it is irresponsible to report work that isn‘t
peer-reviewed (ooo and here it is – ta Evan). Although I have sympathy this issue, I‘d also say it‘s a lazy
stick with which beat science journalists with, not to mention somewhat supportive of the publishing
industry. But upstream science journalism can be done responsibly, and without tripping over patents or
embargoes. Remember, the focus is more on the people, their ideas, worries and enthusiasms, not the
results. Moreover, I still want a place for ―downstream‖ science reporting. The publication of a major paper
is a news event worth covering. I‘m not dismissing a creative, articulate, probing and context-bringing
write-up of peer-reviewed research in the slightest. Done well, it can be a beautiful and important thing.
There is also, I think, a lot to be said for what we might call ―really, really far downstream‖ reporting: maybe
we need more about what happens to science after publication. Science journalism should follow scientists
all the way through society (yes, that is a Latour reference and yes I have read Amsterdamska‘s review).
I also think science journalism would be served well by taking itself upstream, not only working to show
how science is made, but making its own workings more visible too. Upstream engagement was, after all,
designed to deal with a crisis in trust. Perhaps a bit more upstream communication would help science
journalists to gain trust from their audiences, and from the scientific community. This would include
openness, but also involving their audiences (upstream, and meaningfully, not only letting them comment
at the end of the process).
I don‘t think this call to move upstream offers something drastically new. I use it as a nice phrase to, I hope,
encourage and focus attention in this area. I think it is already being done, and new media is making more
feasible (and showing there is a market for). As Vincent Kiernan argued during last year‘s WCSJ‘s fight over
embargoes, new media mitigates against what John Rennie called ―Big paper of the week syndrome‖, the
reliance on cycles of ―pseudo-news‖ about what happens to have been published in one of the larger
journals (see also the embargowatch blog for fascinating tracking of these tensions).
My favourite example has to be this video of the ICHEP conference hosted on the Guardian. I‘ve also
noticed recently that Times health correspondent David Rose uses twitter not just to post links to finished
pieces, but as news comes in. It‘s also worth mentioning the interactive way Mark Henderson has used his
twitter account in conjunction with the Times‘ Eureka blog (especially during the election), as well as others
who favour the ―DVD extras‖ approach to blogging alongside traditional journalism. Further, the
Guardian‘s science storytracker gives insight into the evolution of a story, and it was interesting to see the
the Guardian‘s health team use their Datastore during the death rates investigation. In terms of ―really far
downstream‖ (in a good way) science journalism, I think Gaia Vince‘s blog is a nice example.
This death rates points us towards a possible pitfall: Ben Goldacre‘s criticism of their stats, and more to the
point, that such open data needs to come with ―open methodology‖ too. As I said at the time, however,
precisely because it is so complex, an approach which is iteratively discursive (rather than momentarily
confrontational) is perhaps the most likely to succeed. There are also, in the business of journalism, matters
of competition to be remembered: the worry of being scooped (perhaps beautifully demonstrated by this
story). As with be careful of embargoes and patents (competition issues in science), I think it‘s a matter of
being careful, being clever and being imaginative. Maybe the tweeting of political journalists during the
election is a nice example?
This sort of upstream work can be pretty niche. A nice example of that being exchange betweenEvan
Harris and Jon Butterworth over ―if‖ you wanted to know about supersymmetry. But that‘s why it can work
online, because you can find those niche markets (e.g. first comment on Jon‘s post). We might similarly
argue that it doesn‘t provide news, but again the web might be of here, as people come to content at
different times and through a range of routes: I think blogging has already started to blur boundaries
between feature and news piece when it comes to science writing.
The niche point does, however, point us towards the best argument against upstream science journalism:
that it‘d would be boring. Maybe that scientists go rafting feature was a bit dull. But people write dull pieces
based on research papers all the time. If a science journalist thinks scientists at work is boring, then I think
they are in the wrong job. Similarly, if they think the ideas and knowledge of their readers is boring, I
suspect they‘re increasingly find they are in the wrong job.
I don‘t think moving science journalism upstream will solve all its problems. Neither do I think the concept
offers something drastically new: it‘s already happening. Still, thinking about upstream as a one of the many
130 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
possible new forms for science journalism might focus attention in a fruitful direction. Or maybe it‘s a
ridiculous mis-application of what is a slightly aging and rather self-indulgent idea in the first place. Tell me
your thoughts.
EDIT: You can see a video of the session.
33 Responses ―Taking science journalism ―upstream‖‖ →

Evan Harris
September 3, 2010
I must say that I agree with Dick Taverne in his letter to Naturehttp://bit.ly/by8k9T where he says…
Sir
Your Editorial ―Going public‖ (Nature 431, 883; 200410.1038/431883a ), like the think-tank Demos,
supports the fashionable demand by a group of sociologists for more democratic science, including more
‗upstream‘ engagement of the public and its involvement in setting research priorities. Demos goes further
and supports a ‗needs test‘ for licensing new products or services by companies. It also argues that we, the
public, should know who owns and controls new technologies, and who benefits, before they are developed.
If the Demos policy had been followed in the past, we would have neither electricity nor the laser, to name
only two examples, because no practical uses were foreseen for either. As your Editorial admits, public-
engagement exercises in the United States have led patient lobby groups to press the National Institutes of
Health for less basic research and more drug development. Because of public demand, large sums are spent
on developing drugs with Viagra-like properties rather than on medicines for people in developing
countries, and a widespread public consultation exercise in Oregon has found strong opposition to spending
limited public funds on AIDS or mental health.
In practice, greater involvement of ‗the public‘ in the ‗upstream‘ development stage of science means
involvement of special-interest groups. When the UK Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology
Commission was set up, the ‗public‘ representatives were the chair of Greenpeace, the chair of the Soil
Association, the executive director of GeneWatch and the programme adviser to the Green Alliance. No
wonder the ‗GM Nation‘ exercise in public consultation was a fiasco.
Of course democratically elected governments must decide how public funds for science are allocated. Of
course sensible consultation helps development of policy: the debate on stem-cell research in the United
Kingdom was a good example. Of course more openness and transparency are to be encouraged where
possible. But let us not display unthinking subservience to the principle of participation. In Britain,
involvement by victims of rail accidents in deciding policy on railway safety has led to the investment of
billions of pounds to save some five lives a year. Meanwhile, twice that number die on British roads every
day. The fact is that science, like art, is not a democratic activity. You do not decide by referendum whether
the Earth goes round the Sun.
Reply
o
alicerosebell
September 3, 2010
Yeah, and I linked to that in the post Evan.
I think Taverne misses the point. As Wilsdon says, Taverne is fighting a straw man. The key element of
upstream engagement is to not to weigh down the scientist with public opinion, but enable scientists to
reflect on the social and ethical dimensions of their work by breaking down false dichotomies of
science/public and ‗bring out the public within the scientist‘ (Wilsdon et al, 2005: 34-35. Emphasis as
original).
If you are interested in developing your own opinion, I suggest you take a bit of time to think about it,
read the 2004 report, that March 2006 POST note and the one linked to above (and my post…?).
Reply
2.
131 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Vivienne Raper
September 3, 2010
When you mentioned boring posts about scientists and rafting during the session, I had a horrible sinking
feeling. I have been blogging about scientists doing fieldwork and worried you were talking about this genre
of science writing.
I now realise you weren‘t! And I wonder if upstreaming more would help get a broader range of research
topics covered in the mainstream media. Someone pointed out, for example, that there aren‘t many
chemistry stories covered in the press. The interesting human aspects of scientific research can help make
otherwise esoteric subjects (a lot of chemistry isn‘t esoteric, but I hope you see my point) accessible to a
wider audience.
Reply
3.
Evan Harris
September 3, 2010
Thanks for this interesting post Alice – very detailed.
You say ―people are waiting to respond with the criticism that it is irresponsible to report work that isn‘t
peer-reviewed (ooo and here it is – ta Evan).
My tweet ["..science must preserve process of prepare then publish"] was saying that it was poor practice of
scientists to go public with work before PUBLICATION (let alone peer-review). This is because if it was a
charlatan or over-claimer or someone merely seeking a short-cut to fame and/or funding, then
a) it is difficult for fellow scientists to rebut
b) for policy makers & politicians (who are already more sensitive to media stories than science
publications) to withstand public pressure for a knee-jerk response.
However good the journalism is, it is still more appropriate to take issue with the science as properly
published than to start arguing with a journalist‘s version of it which may be wrong (albeit perhaps after
being led astray by the press office of the science institution).
We should be urging science journalists (indeed all journalists who report science) to read (or check
against) the paper not just the press release. Hard to do this when there is no paper.
You then say ―Although I have sympathy this issue, I‘d also say it‘s a lazy stick with which beat science
journalists with, not to mention somewhat supportive of the publishing industry.‖
1) But I am not criticising science journalists there am I? They will do what they will and good luck to them.
2) And I would say that supporting the process of prepare, peer review, publish then publicise is being
supportive of the integrity of the scientific method, rather than supportive of the publishing industry, but
may be I have missed something.
Reply
o
alicerosebell
September 3, 2010
Evan,
Ok, fair points, certainly better than the Taverne ref…
Firstly, on your point about not criticising science journalists – I didn‘t think you were, sorry if you
thought I was. Others have though in the past, and I think criticisms like this work as a form of ―chill‖
(sorry, listening to David‘s talk on libel at the moment…).
On the issue of being supportive of the scientific method rather than the publishing industry – I think in
this respect they have been conflated. That fight over embargoes at the WCSJ really is worth listening
to!
Maybe I wasn‘t making myself clear re role of reporting of new science, if so I‘m sorry (and
I‘m really sorry if you think I‘ve misrepresented your views). I‘m not talking about people reporting
132 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
scientific claims – I‘m talking about scientific ideas and work, which I want to happen more andin
addition to the reporting of peer reviewed ideas.
I think the point about reporting to policy is especially important, and I‘m glad you raise it (equally, I
think Ed made a good point about how upstream reporting is more problematic in health). Though I
would also say there are other ways evidence does (and might) report to policy.
James Randerson tweeted some ideas of what we might call upstream in environmental reporting.
Worth thinking about these (including the problems in them, I‘d add, I‘m not sure where I stand on the
whole climategate investigation thing, it‘s a complex business which I haven‘t made my mind up on).
Reply

Ed Yong
September 5, 2010
Yeah just to expand on the health thing (and btw, this is a small addendum on what is a very good
post):
I think there are some fields where upstream reporting should be avoided like the plague, and
epidemiology springs violently to mind. Basically, if readers see that scientists are investigating X for
a possible link to Y disease, then the natural assumption is to think that X causes Y. From a
hypothetical correlation to causality in a single bound. I have seen people do this time and again. I
have even seen people argue that the very fact a study is being funded implies that there‘s probably a
risk there; otherwise, why spend the money?
Reply

alicerosebell
September 5, 2010
Ed,
I share that worry, which is why I make the note about being done responsibly. Again though, I‘d
stress that upstream doesn‘t have to be about the science – the X and it‘s alleged dodgy
relationship with Y – but the people doing this work (and that by arguing for upstream I‘m not
saying downstream shouldn‘t be done too).
As for people arguing that the very fact a study is being funded implies that there‘s probably a
risk there… that‘s terrifying, and surely more reason why the processes of science should be
communicated better, not hidden away?
I‘d also say that I trust you‘ve seen a fair bit of what you worry about, but it is still anecdotal
evidence. I wonder if it‘s worth trusting the audience more than going, as Ruth says, ―danger
danger‖ (maybe I‘m wrong to, I am just wondering).
4.
Evan Harris
September 3, 2010
You say ―If you are interested in developing your own opinion, I suggest you take a bit of time to think about
it‖
I have thought about it but perhaps not as much as you or maybe I am just not as clever as you. Or may be
we can disagree without calling each other (or Dick Taverne) under-thoughtful or under-informed. Btw
Your link to Wilsden et al 2005 does not work.
You say ―The key element of upstream engagement is to not to weigh down the scientist with public
opinion, but enable scientists to reflect on the social and ethical dimensions of their work by breaking down
false dichotomies of science/public and ‗bring out the public
within the scientist‘‖
133 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
I just don‘t think this is desirable, assuming of course it is not the emperor‘s new clothes.
Reply
o
alicerosebell
September 3, 2010
Link fixed.
Sarcasm taken :)
Ok, you don‘t think it‘s desirable. I do. I‘m ok with disagreeing on this! I guess the difference of bringing
the upstream idea from PEST (government funded and directed) and into journalism (more at hands of
the market) is whether it‘s what the audience want (not sure what I think about that by the way!).
Reply
5.
jonturney
September 3, 2010
I think this is a small slice of a general problem: science is a process, not an event. News media are driven to
try and present processes as events (which one can be ―first‖ to report). So the plea to portray more of
scientific process may make an impression on feature-writers, but is hard to respond to in a newsroom, I‘d
suggest.
Interesting that Richard Holmes says at the end of The Age of Wonder that we need to understand science
in the making… Perhaps books are still a useful way to tackle that?
Reply
6.
Kieron Flanagan
September 3, 2010
Evan is missing the point and I always think it is sad that people like Evan and Taverne seem to believe that
science is so fragile that it can‘t survive any close examination or engagement. Evan says science is a
method, central to which is peer review. But, despite Taverne‘s disparaging use of the term ‗sociologists‘ in
his letter to Nature, many decades of empirical evidence has confirmed that there is no single, magical,
scientific method. It‘s a shame that people are unwilling to change their views when confronted with
overwhelming (and peer-review validated) evidence.
The other common view of science is as the stock of knowledge produced by the scientific method. Jon
Turney is right to say science is a process, not a stock of information validated by the magic of peer review.
It is probably the most successful process we have. Without understanding this human and social process,
its strengths AND its weaknesses (and why is works so spectacularly well despite those weaknesses) then we
can‘t claim to ‗know‘ science at all.
Reply
7.
Khalil A.
September 3, 2010
I think, as you‘ve mentioned yourself in the post, that the upstream movement is indeed already happening.
Blogs and micro-blogging like twitter are the obvious tools that propel upstream science journalism.
Having said that, I think it should be pointed out that said tools are used mostly by the scientists
themselves, right? I mean, they know about the science-in-the-making and they can properly blog/tweet
about it. Science writers, I feel, are less connected to this science-in-the-making world and would always
require the intermediary of scientists/researches who are actually hands-on inside the science movement.
One of the things that has always attracted me the most about the science blogging universe is to get an
insight of a scientists‘ worlds. Where they work, what they do, how they do it, etc. Those
134 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
scientists/researches who actually blog about these things are, correct me if I‘m wrong, doing upstream
science writing because they are telling us what‘s actually happening. And that‘s a good thing, because
ultimately it increases transparency (at least in a rather superficial way) but also because it‘s motivating to
other people out there and gives them more confidence in how science does science.
Reply
8.
Ian Sample
September 3, 2010
I think most science journalists/writers cover whatever they find interesting and what they believe their
readers will find interesting. That‘s the most important box to tick, and perhaps the only box to tick. It
doesn‘t matter whether it‘s upstream, downstream or lying at the bottom of the stream.
We wrote piles about the regulation of hybrid embryo research in the UK well ahead of the bill. We‘re
writing piles more about the potential state of the planet and its resources in 20, 50, 100+ years. We cover
nanotechnology, which some groups want to make the next GM. We write about all kinds of highly
speculative scenarios that academics think need debating because they might go pear-shaped in the future.
All of these things are upstream, but are covered simply because they are interesting scientifically and often
ethically, socially etc. There is undoubtedly a benefit in writing about stuff while there‘s still time to debate
it, and while people have a chance to intervene should they wish, but the most important thing is will.
anybody. read. it.
Reply
o
alicerosebell
September 3, 2010
“will. anybody. read. it.”
Yes, I think that is a key point. I also assume that you are a million times better at guessing this than me.
I would also agree that sci journalists work up/ down/ middle/ under/ over any metaphorical stream I
might imagine (I think this is a boring and overly-linear metaphor, I don‘t want to get too stuck in it)
It‘s interesting you mention nano because that‘s an area where a lot of the scientists and their press
officers, etc have been heavily influenced by the idea of upstream engagement, so I suspect a lot of the
sources you will have worked with in this area will be coming to you with a desire to act upstream.
Reply
9.
hapsci
September 3, 2010
Great post with interesting points. I do think that going ‗upstream‘ would improve science journalism. I
think the way in which science research is funded and run will not aid a push for science journalism to be
more upstream. You mention embargoes and patents but new thoughts and ideas are also kept secret for
grant applications. People in scientific research very rarely tell (in fact they only tell if they think there
might be an opportunity for collaboration) anyone in any detail about their research plans, this is in fear of
missing out on grants and papers due to someone beating them to it. So I think here will lie the barrier to
improving scientific journalism by going upstream.
Personally I do not believe that anything is gained in the greater world of science by people being so
secretive – but I do fully understand why at the moment they are.
Reply
10.
Kat Arney
September 4, 2010
135 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
There‘s an important point that tends to get sidestepped in these kind of discussions – Money.
I agree with Ed and Martin‘s assertion in the session that we‘re in a ―golden age‖ for science writing. But
there is a growing trend towards devaluing the craft of writing (in all areas, not just science).
People don‘t expect to have to pay for good writing online any more, but writers still need to eat and pay the
bills. How do we make this happen?
Reply
11.
Sophia Collins
September 4, 2010
I think you‘re making an excellent point Alice. And I think you‘re meaning something slightly different to
what some of the objectors are objecting to.
As I mentioned on twitter, upstream reporting doesn‘t have to mean unchecked and possibly wrong results
being publicised. It means things like the press covering the switch on of the LHC, and before. Telling us
about what was being built and why, what scientists were looking for, what theories had prompted it, what
experiments they planned to do. What they hoped to find out and what it might mean.
This is upstream coverage, and I do think it‘s much more interesting, and makes the work of science much
more part of all our worlds, than if we heard not a word about Cern until the day they find (or don‘t) the
Higgs Boson.
As Keiron then pointed out, further upstream were things like the discussions on funding the building of the
LHC, and why scientists wanted
to do it. And I think those are legitimate subjects for public discussion and media coverage.
Yes, Ian makes a good point, but I can‘t help thinking that showing science as it goes along makes it more
interesting, accessible and absorbing not less. People have the chance to wonder what will happen. A
metaphor: Tell me that an imaginary person dies and I couldn‘t give a stuff. But if a character in a book I‘m
reading, a film I‘m watching dies I may be deeply moved.
Reply
12.
Mark Henderson
September 4, 2010
Interesting post Alice — thanks. A couple of thoughts. First, I‘d reiterate Ian‘s point. The key issue is almost
always whether you‘re producing something that people are likely to find interesting. That, though, can
mean all sorts of things. It can be the big finished paper, the result of lots of research. But I‘d certainly argue
that the processes of research, how it‘s done, the stories along the way and the people doing the work can be
interesting too. Indeed, one of the reasons we set up Eureka at The Times was to give us more of a forum for
doing this sort of feature.
I think quite a lot of science journalism actually fits into this ―upstream‖ bracket. We‘re writing all the time
about preliminary ideas and results that ―promise‖ this or ―could lead to‖ that — full of plenty of caveats of
course. Some critics, indeed, would argue that there‘s too much of this!
To think of a few pieces of my own recently, the story I did a couple of weeks ago on a collaboration between
astronomers and breast cancer researchers
(http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/science/astronomy/article2686455.ece — paywall) would fit this mould.
The whole point of the story is to illustrate that here‘s an interesting interdisciplinary approach that might
end up making a problem (interpreting pathology slides) more tractable. My Eureka feature on genetically
targeted cancer treatments was also intended to tell the story of a work in progress
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/eureka/article7137890.ece— no paywall).
Of course, the danger here is that (particularly in health) one risks providing misleading messages about
what‘s known and what‘s not, and scare people about a threat that ultimately proves illusory, or raise false
136 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
hopes. That said, though, many ―finished paper‖ stories do the same thing — and it‘s at least arguable that
―upstream‖ stories (though using that jargon in an editorial meeting would quickly get you killed) can
actually reflect the necessary caveats more appropriately if done properly. It‘s easier to convey uncertainty
when people aren‘t yet claiming to have ―found something‖.
The bigger weakness of science journalism at the moment is what you call the far-downstream stuff. It is
very difficult to get this stuff in — except in those rare cases where a paper turns out to have been
completely wrong or the product of fraud (think Hwang). Put simply, filling a paper with articles saying
―that thing we reported the other week didn‘t stand up‖ doesn‘t light up editors‘ eyes. The ―idea no-one
really knew about turns out to be false‖ story doesn‘t generally cut it either. The stuff that doesn‘t replicate
tends just to be dropped.
Once again, features of the type we can do in Eureka (and indeed blog posts) are often a better way to deal
with this sort of thing. Ben Goldacre has been saying this for some time, and I think he‘s right — I just wish
there were more suitable platforms for such feature-writing that reach a non-specialist audience.
Reply
13.
Pete Wilton
September 4, 2010
The LHC will destroy the world, hybrid embryos will create manimals, nanotechnology will turn everything
into grey goo…
As Ian Sample points out upstream science journalism is out there but it usually only happens when anti-
science lobby groups stoke up controversy about the dangers of an area of science. I‘d suggest such stories
are mostly covered *not* because they are scientifically interesting (although of course they can be) but only
because they are socially and ethically interesting and involve govt policy – something much more likely to
get the green light from editors with a political background/without much interest in science.
Fair play to journos & writers who piggy-back real science stories on such debates.
Reply
14.
Richard Jones
September 4, 2010
I can understand why the position that democratic oversight of science should come from elected
politicians, rather than more direct public engagement, is attractive to politicians like Evan Harris. But I
don‘t think this is tenable, for a couple of reasons. The first is the question of trust. People often talk about a
crisis of trust in science in the UK, but I simply don‘t think the evidence for this exists. The RCP‘s ―trust in
professions‖ survey is helpful here (see here for a historical summary) – this shows trust in scientists has
been gently rising since the early 90′s, and as of last year stood at around 70%. Where there is a crisis of
trust is with politicians, who were trusted to tell the truth by only 13% of respondents (Evan can at least
take comfort in the 92% who trust doctors). You could make the case that any crisis of trust isn‘t with
science, but by the way science is used by politicians (and big business), as illustrated by any number of
difficulties from Nutt back to GM food and BSE. The second reason is that this position simply doesn‘t
reflect the reality of how science is actually shaped. We actually have a long-standing convention that
politicians are not directly involved in the steering of publicly funded science – the Haldane principle,
which justifies the funding of science by free-standing agencies like the research councils rather than
directly from a government department. This doesn‘t mean that there is no political input into the process
in practice, or that it is only the scientific community that has a voice – and nor should it, in my view.
Advice to research councils comes not just from scientists, but also clinicians and representatives of
industry. In fact, the only people who haven‘t had a voice are members of the lay public, and I don‘t think
this is right.
137 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
As for the question of moving science journalism upstream, it seems to me that the importance of peer-
reviewed papers to science journalism isn‘t because of their fundamental importance in the scientific
process, but because their publication provides a kind of pseudo-happening which allows the slow and
ragged progress of science to be packaged in the event driven format that journalism requires (and it also
owes something, I‘m sure, to the fantastic effectiveness of Nature‘s press office). I accept Evan Harris‘s
point that insisting on results being peer-reviewed offers some protection against weak and tendentious
results, and for the kind of paper telling us that eating fish oil gives you cancer it‘s clear that you would want
to know that the statistics were done right. But, in truth, most papers aren‘t actually that compelling as far
as their actual detailed content goes; it‘s the background assumptions and visions that the scientists are
working with that are most interesting. So you could argue that good science journalism will already
operate in an ―upstream‖ mode if it hangs a story about those visions on a relevant paper.
The reporting of synthetic biology is a good example. When it comes to it, there really haven‘t actually been
a lot of peer reviewed papers about synthetic biology at all (if you look up the papers of some of the most
prominent spokespeople, there isn‘t really a lot there). And even when there is a result – like the Venter
paper earlier this year – it isn‘t the technical details that the coverage concentrated on, but extensive (and
often rather controversial and ill-founded) speculation about what it all implied for the future. But it did at
least illuminate those broad visions and wider assumptions that motivate scientists in that field.
Reply
15.
Gozde Zorlu
September 5, 2010
Hi Alice
I was at your talk yesterday. Thanks for posting this.
The kind of reporting that I come across most often is based on the research findings published in the big
journals (Science, Nature, BMJ, Lance, Cell Biology etc). But that isn‘t to say that upstream can‘t be found –
there‘s quite a bit of it – re Mark Henderson‘s comment.
But a lot of the coverage, it seems to me, reports the latest ‗significant‘ or ‗interesting‘ findings. I‘m led to
believe that this kind of reporting distorts the public understanding of science – not as the river you
describe it as but scientists suddenly making magical discoveries which are then published in the
prestigious peer reviewed journals. The nature of science, the inquiry, exploration and hard graft put into
the science is lost. The weaknesses and strengths of science are often overlooked too. This is partly why the
NHS Choices website exists – to correct articles written by journalists on health stories based on scientific
research. These articles tend to exaggerate miracle cure findings or promote needless scaremongering due
to the lack of understanding of how science works. I think there was a recommendation in the Science and
Media report for a similar service for general science stories, not just health?
Journalists Toby Murcott and Colin Macilwain have authored articles published in Nature highlighting
their frustration with this kind of reporting.
Macilwain highlights the public‘s lack of understanding of how science works. He describes the reporting of
science as being:
―misrepresented as a cacophony of sometimes divergent but nonetheless definitive ‗findings‘, each warmly
accepted by colleagues, on the record, as deeply significant. The public learns nothing about the actual cut
and thrust of the scientific process, and as a result is beginning to adopt a weary cynicism that can only
rebound on science in the long run.‖
Macilwain then explains how the leaking of emails from the University of East Anglia has eroded public
confidence in science as a result and he calls for the: ―public airing of the strengths, weaknesses and
missteps that characterize scientific progress.‖
Dr Jim (@mentalindigest), a scientist and blogger, agrees with Macilwain: He says on his blog:
138 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
―I would like to hear about the context, limitations and realistic direction of the [scientific] work being
discussed. In short, a fuller, more rounded investigative piece, with input (and synthesis) from someone
besides the original PR office.‖
Murcott‘s suggestion is that journalists should have access to the notes/comments made by the referees
reviewing the research as well as the final version of the paper published in the journal. This would enable
journalists to report on science in a richer, far more compelling way – revealing the story behind the
research findings.
I spoke to James Randerson last autumn and he told me that he disagrees with Murcott‘s priesthood
analogy that many journalists report science straight from the journal press releases without placing the
research in context. He told me that good reporters are highly selective of the research they report:
―In some cases journalists do critique scientific work. They may not be able to go head to head with a
researcher on the details of their field (although some specialists can and do so – Fred Pearce on climate
change change comes to mind) but they can get others to pull a paper apart for them but asking for external
comments on it.
Journalists do a lot of intelligent sorting before the news story comes out. They discount tens of potential
studies each day because they are suspicious of the findings, they use sub-standard methodology etc.‖
Alom Shaha, a science communicator and physics teacher, told me that it would be a really good thing if the
public had a better understanding of how science works – he believes schools and journalism can play an
important role in this.
He explained one of the positive changes made to the national curriculum for science in 2006 was the
introduction of ―how science works‖. I wonder how this is coming along and if it has/will lead to any
positive developments?
Just some thoughts. I had written a post on something similar – lifted pieces in this comment from that.
Reply
16.
Ruth Seeley
September 5, 2010
Part of taking science upstream could work so very well – and is already working well, I think – in tandem
with and facilititated by social media, where the idea (at least on Twitter and micro-blogging sites) is to
provide incremental bits of information rather than a media release or press conference once a year. Have
to agree with Ed Yong though – there are subject areas where danger! danger! would be my first reaction,
especially when we‘re talking about incremental process status updates, or when things are still at a very
preliminary investigative stage – could well cause more problems than they solve.
Reply
17.
Stephen Curry
September 5, 2010
An interesting thread and post, Alice. I agree with much of what has been said above. Though focused on
the work of journalists, I am interested in the contributions that scientists themselves can add to all this
upstream activity.
Part of my motivation to get started in science blogging was to try to lift the veil on the scientific life — not
just to report on work in progress (though I am still wary of doing this in any detail for fear of queering the
pitch for my papers and grant applications), but to give an account of the process. I don‘t feel the need to go
this in every post but occasionally I try to log animpression. In this I was much inspired by Jenny
Rohn‘s accounts of lab lifeat Nature Network.
139 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
I‘d like to see more scientists doing this sort of thing. Done well, it gives the public direct access (though
there are perhaps better platforms for this than the scientifically-oriented Nature Network). But I guess also
identifies useful points of contact for journalists looking for background.
Reply
18.
Joerg Heber
September 5, 2010
Fantastic food for thought, Alice. In your post as well as in the comments there are plenty of interesting
arguments made. So just a few additional remarks related to my position as a journal editor.
One of my duties is precisely to go to universities and talks to researchers about what they are up to, what is
happening in their area, and what people are working on. To find the news before the paper gets submitted
(all of this confidential I am afraid). To journalists, researchers are afraid to talk too much about what they
are doing right now for two reasons: journals (like my own) would not publish results that have been
covered in the press as a result of the scientists directly talking to journalists (if a journalist comes across
the story by other means, that‘s fine!). But that aside, a serious issue is of course competition and patent
issues. So even I don‘t get to see all the exciting new results until submitted. Still, I think a lot of great stuff
could be uncovered. An easy source would be conferences, where scientists report at least to some degree
new results (although increasingly less because of the competition issue). Talking to other scientists at the
conference about a certain talk then would provide a pretty good context.
Finally, I like to add that many reporting of scientific results is too one-dimensional, focussing only on a
specific result, and perhaps explaining where this research could lead to downstream. What I miss
sometimes is a bit broader reporting of the context. What are alternative approaches beyond the topic of a
particular paper, what is the bigger picture, not downstream if you like, but what is the landscape around
you…
Reply
19.
Sophia Collins
September 5, 2010
―To journalists, researchers are afraid to talk too much about what they are doing right now for two reasons:
journals (like my own) would not publish results that have been covered in the press as a result of the
scientists directly talking to journalists‖
This bothers me. In one I‘m a scientist event, a scientist had been asked by kids what his results were and
what he‘d found out, and wanted to put up a graph to illustrate the latest ones, but decided he couldn‘t for
fear of prejudicing his paper being published. This is because of journals strict rules on exclusivity and first
publication.
And yet, showing those kids those early results (with caveats and discussion of what they might mean)
would have been exciting, immediate and memorable for those students. They‘d hopefully have felt
welcomed in, and more personally involved in science. They‘d also, very importantly, have got valuable
insight into the process of science, and how scientists think and work.
Now it seems to me that here the interests of science (in terms of connecting with teenagers here, or with
the public in other cases) are coming off second to the business models and inflexibility of the journal
publishing system. Is that the correct set of priorities?
Reply
20.
Joerg Heber
September 5, 2010
Hi Sophia
140 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
yes, you are of course, right, this is unfortunate that the scientists didn‘t want to show results to the kid. As
far as I am concerned, this would have been absolutely no problem. Don‘t forget that many scientists show
new and exciting results at conferences before they get published. In the next sentence of my comment (the
one you did not include when quoting me), I said this would only be a problem if talking to journalists
directly. Let‘s not forget that from my point of view even publication on arxiv is no problem (i.e. if a
journalist finds a cool paper on arxiv and reports on it, thats ok too, we just want to avoid intentional press
contacts)
For example, if you hold a press conference about some exciting results prior to submitting. Why would a
scientific journal that intends to report on new breakthroughs consider a paper in a case when this has been
already reported all over. And this is not limited to Science and Nature et al. Take for example the fuzz and
confidentiality agreements related to the publication of the Ida fossil in PLOS1…
The other issue are of course patent issues. But really, in a case where a scientist wants to show some kids
(and not the world press) some exciting new research results, I don‘t see nothing wrong with that! Tell that
to the next scientist that uses this argument. But don‘t blame them, there are a lot of misconceptions about
this, and every time I give a talk to scientists I try to clarify this issue.
BMG BLOG: SCIENCE ONLINE LONDON 2010

2010/09/03 Science online London 2010 – day 1
Just completed the first day of ‘Science online London conference
2010′http://www.scienceonlinelondon.org/, a mixed day.
Conference was opened with a great talk by Lord Rees (Martin Rees – The Lord Rees of Ludlow who is
Astronomer Royal (1995) and President of the Royal Society (2005) – seewikipedia). The general thrust
of his talk was that science publishing needs to be rethought, online and open (well, that is the message I
got from it). There were some great quotes on Twitter for the session, and they included:
“The universal language of science is bad English”

“Someone once told me that the mean no. of readers of a scientific paper was 0.6…
Does that include referee?”
“we do not want more [academic] journals…commercial pressures are detrimental [to
the community]“
“Completely open access would be best….it is a matter of regret that we can’t yet
achieve it”
This was followed by a panel session on ‘Rebooting Science Journalism’ (David Dobbs, Ed Yong, Martin
Robins and Alice Bell). Again, an interesting session, and it seemed to follow on from the first session in
highlighting that the publishing game has changed and that journalists and the publishers need to be
aware of this, and adapt or die. There was an interesting discussion on ‘embargoes’ (i.e. where a journal
provides early access to a paper so journalists have time to prepare a piece).
The afternoon was divided in to two sessions of parallel talks, followed by a session on the state of
scientific blogging.
In the parallel sessions I attended a talk by AJ Cann titled ‘Students in a sandbox – developing professions’.
Parts of the session were very interesting as it confirmed, with data, my views that students love Facebook,
141 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
and use wikipedia as a primary source of information. Dr Cann produced a compelling argument as to why
academics shouldn’t follow students on to Facebook, and why academics shouldn’t be wikipedia snobs.
Basically, the argument was that Facebook is a social media site and academics should not be on it for
interaction with students as it was unprofessional, and students and academics shouldn’t be ‘friends’ (in
the Facebook sense). Plus, academics should not be wikipedia snobs, they should accept that students use
wikipedia and that wikipedia is correct and a good source.
My responses to this are:
Facebook: Academics need to go where the students are, and not be Facebook snobs. As an academic it is
possible to maintain a Facebook site that is professional, and which students can be’friend’ you on, and
you can use as a way to communicate. Whether or not students become your ‘friend’ is up to them –
see http://www.facebook.com/n.j.morris.uk
Wikipedia: Yes, it is a good place to start reading, but students should go to original primary sources. It is
impossible to reference wikipedia in essays and reports (so therefore it is not good academic practice), and
I have had a number of occasions when I have found things that are completely wrong in wikipedia.
Interestingly I have also found numerous cases of plagiarism in wikipedia where material has been copied
directly from a source, and again this doesn’t set a good example of academic practice.
Dr Cann also advocated the use of Friend Feed (see http://friendfeed.com/drnickmorrisfor

example) in teaching as a way of bringing information from different sources together for teaching, and to
encourage students to build up networks. The problem here is that Friend Feed was bought by Facebook a
year or so ago and appears to be in the process of dying.
My solution to interacting with students online is to ‘write once and publish many’, that is, become an
auto-plagiarist! For example, this blog post will auto-post to Twitter
(http://twitter.com/drnickmorris), which in turn will post to Facebook and Friendfeed. Therefore
the students have a choice where they pick this up. They could follow the blog by rss (or email), on Twitter,
Facebook or Friendfeed.
The next session was on ‘I’m a scientist, get me out of here’ which was an overview and demonstration of
the site http://imascientist.org.uk/. Basically the site hosts events between school children, science
teachers and university scientists, with the aim of ‘demystifying’ science and showing school children that
scientists are human. The school children are able to ask the scientists science questions online in real
time, and allows for interaction and chat. An interesting session.
The last session of the day was a panel on the ‘State of Science Blogging’, and was rather weak. The panel
consisted of Andrew Jaffe (an independent blogger), Grrl Scientist, Jennifer and Lou Woodley, of which two
were bloggers and one was from Nature Networks. The session seemed to be more about blogging
networks and what Nature was doing online, and not about the ‘state’ of blogging. A bit of a bust….
Day 2 tomorrow……
2010/09/04 Science online London – day 2

First two keynotes of day 2 were interesting:
Dr Aleks Krotoski – http://alekskrotoski.com/ – http://twitter.com/aleksk/ – Social Scientist,

BBC 2 series Virtual Revolution, writes for The Guardian and Observer newspapers, BBC Technology, New
Statesman, MIT Technology Review and The Telegraph. The talk, “Who are you? The little details to
remember when gathering information about the people behind the screens”, was interesting in that we
142 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
have moved our offline characteristics (sex, age, location, personality etc.) online, and how online is an
extension of our real selves. Interestingly Aleks thinks we are living in a golden age of research in this area.
Dr Evan Harris – science campaigner and former MP – http://www.evanharris.org.uk/ –

http://twitter.com/drevanharris/ – interesting talk on effective science lobbying and campaigning.
These were followed by breakout sessions.
Breakout session 10: David McCandless – some truly beautiful and interesting ways to visualise data and
extract meaning –
http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/ andhttp://www.davidmccandless.com/- check it
out. Can follow on Twitter –http://twitter.com/mccandelish/. Take home message seemed to be to
that simplifying the data can allow for the extraction of more meaning (plus it looks nice).
Over lunch I asked Aleks Krotoski whether as an Internet user I should be worried that when I was online
that I may be being stalked by a Social Scientist. Her reply was to always assume I was being stalked by a
Social Scientist!
In the afternoon there were a series of ‘unconferenced’ sessions which were derived from suggested talks
by conference delegates. I attended two sessions:
eBooks: This session was not what I was expecting. It was chaired by a librarian and seemed to be more
about the business of publishing, how publishers are going to recover the cost of publishing and how
libraries at Universities are going to buy these books. Not highly informative, and nothing new. There was
an interesting discussion on the role of libraries in the future and how they will provide a ‘service’ and not
just be a repository for books.
Online Communities: First speaker in the session talked about ‘The Node’ – a community for
developmental biologists, set up at the request of developmental biologists to discuss work, publish
articles, reports from conferences etc. What was interesting is the user-base for the site was already there
(they were the readers the journal hosting the site) and they just needed the online space. However, 99%
of users are just readers of the site, and only 1% contribute with articles. The second speaker; engaging the
public so they understand how long science takes, and producing online resources for teaching. The talk
was mainly about using crowd sourcing at http://phylogame.org to produce Pokemon-like cards of
biodiversity (Earlier research had shown that 8 year olds could recognize 120 Pokemon characters, but
hardly any plants or animals.) The community was built up virally. Looked very good and a lot of fun.
Last session of the day was a discussion panel on ‘If you build it, will they come?’ (Micheal Jubb, Bob
O’Hara, Richard Grant and Rob Procter). This last session had a lot of potential, but just ended up as two
short PowerPoint presentations that really didn’t tell me anything. Session kind of rescued by Bob
and Rob Richard. Shame that the session was a bit of a waste. Basically this session was why the general
bench scientist doesn’t blog, use web2.0 etc. Reason seems to be the usual ‘technological barrier’
argument, a lack of time, and ‘carrot and stick’, that is, reward for effort.
2010/09/05 Science online London 2010 – a (my?)

summary
I still can’t make up my mind what is my take home message of ‘Science online London conference
2010′ http://www.scienceonlinelondon.org/. I think I am going to go with science needs to be
open, online and written for a mixed audience (although audience ‘mix’ or type was not really addressed at
the conference).
143 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
First, the conference was and was not what I was expecting. Yes, it was about communicating science
online, but it was very limited, not very forward thinking and at times it seemed ‘stuck in a rut’. There was
nothing radical or new, and no real ‘Wow!’ moment. This was particularly evident in sessions where online
science was discussed and it was clear that only two ‘audience types’, namely fellow academics/scientists
and a ‘lay’ audience were being considered. What about the student reader?
I think all the delegates agreed (with the possible exception of some publishers, and possibly some
librarians present) that science publication and communication HAS to be online. This was best captured in
the first talk of the conference which was given by Lord Rees (Martin Rees – The Lord Rees of Ludlow who
is Astronomer Royal (1995) and President of the Royal Society (2005) – see wikipedia). And can be
summed up in one quote from his 30 minute talk:
“Completely open access would be best….it is a matter of regret that we can’t yet
achieve it”
And that is the problem – achieving it. How? It is clear that the old model of peer review and publishers is
not going to work. But what will replace it? In fact, the session following Lord Ress’s talk, ‘Rebooting
Science Journalism’ (David Dobbs, Ed Yong, Martin Robins and Alice Bell), which although aimed at
‘journalism’ and getting the message out to ‘lay’ readers, did come up with possibly the best quote of the
conference:
“there is going to be a bloodbath and we are going to be making black pudding“

Although this was in reference to science journalism and traditional forms of print media, it could equally
apply to scientific papers and the journals, and scientific text books and the publishers, and it did seem to
confirm a general theme at the conference. That is, what is next for science publishing.
The closest I got to a discussion on ‘science and the student reader’ was a session by AJ Cann titled
‘Students in a sandbox – developing professions’ (see earlier post). But again it didn’t really address the
issue of student interaction and participation in online science and was more about ‘bullying’ the students
in to using online tools that they would not normally use instead of going to where the students are online
and interacting in that place.
On day 2 a keynote was given by Dr Aleks Krotoski – http://alekskrotoski.com/ –

http://twitter.com/aleksk/ – Social Scientist, BBC 2 series Virtual Revolution, writes for The Guardian
and Observer newspapers, BBC Technology, New Statesman, MIT Technology Review and The Telegraph.
One very interesting point that was made was that we have moved our offline characteristics (sex, age,
location, personality etc.) online, and how online is an extension of our real selves. This was neatly
demonstrated at the conference where it was clear in a number of the panels and parallel sessions that the
speakers/participants clearly all knew each other and online groups (i.e. networks) were already rapidly
forming and now moving in to the real world. Science bloggers in particular seemed to be happiest when
operating in groups and under the umbrella of a scientific journal.
One session that did ‘grab’ me, and may in fact impact my teaching, was given by David McCandless. He
presented some truly beautiful and interesting ways to visualise data and extract meaning –
http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/ andhttp://www.davidmccandless.com/. I really
must have a long hard think about how I present some of the data to students in lectures…..
Conference blog posts:
Day one post
Day two post
144 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/04 ONE MAN AND HIS BLOG:
SCIENCE ONLINE: BLOGGERS, COMMENTERS AND
THE REPUTATION GAME
By Adam Tinworth
I dropped into one of the unconference sessions, looking at engaging with your readers (of obvious interest to me).
The panel did a sterling job of giving a beginner's guide to managing comments and commenters, from different
scales (personal blogs to Ars Technica). I thought Ed Yong's comments about building a commenter community
around your personal blog were particularly good - and the delurking thread idea is one I intend to nick.
But the audience, once the questions started, took the conversation in an entirely different direction, about the
reputation of scientists and (to a degree) to the on-going problem of poor scientific reporting. Now, as a journalist, a
profession usually in the top three least trusted professions, I'm not entirely clear why scientists are so concerned, but
there's clearly a strong feeling fo disconnect between the scientific community and the general public. There was
some attempt in the conversation to shape blogs into the answer to that. However, I think there were two key
misconceptions percolating through the discussion. The first was the idea that blogging is inherently publishing to the
mainstream - a question was asked that pre-supposed that a science blog that wasn't reaching a non-specialist
audience was, in some way, failing. And I disagree strongly with that sentiment. Some of the best blogs I know have
small, but highly specialised audiences. A highly specialised science blog is just as valuable as a generalist science
communicator blog - they're just performing different functions.
The second that was a blog is something that "you have to go to" - Ed started to address that point, describing how
people share links to interesting articles on Twitter and Facebook (feel free to use the buttons below, folks ;-)) and that
creates an ecosystem of content that is pushed outside its traditional content.
To me, this suggests that many within the scientific community are somewhere between three and four years behind
the "cutting edge" of social media - much of the focus is still on blogging, and the rise of the social networking systems
has yet to have as much of an impact. But I could be wrong in that. It occurs that scientists are used to describing their
work in written form - it's an inherent part of the current systems. And perhaps the barrier of entry to blogging is slightly
lower here, which means that blogging hasn't been so supplanted by the Twitter/Facebook world. What do you think?
2 Comments
145 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
By Ed Yong on September 5, 2010 6:29 PM | Reply
Glad you enjoyed the session, Adam.
I don't mean to imply that blogging is necessarily aiming for a mainstream audience but I do think it's worth
challenging people about what audience they think they're writing for. If the answer is "a specialist one".
Regarding the use of Facebook/Twitter to push content to a wider audience, I think that journalists are saturated with
comments about how these tools are essential for their jobs. There will of course be curmudgeons but I think people
are getting used to the idea that active use of social media will be an integral part of tomorrow's journalism. I'm not
sure the same level of advocacy has been applied to science, which may explain the gap in uptake.
Ed Yong replied to Ed Yong on September 5, 2010 6:30 PM | Reply

Sorry that second paragraph should have finished with "... then all power to them"
2010/09/04 NOT EXACTLY ROCKET SCIENCE:

REBOOTING SCIENCE JOURNALISM 2: REBOOTING
HARDER
Here‘s a video of the panel I spoke on today. The occasion: ScienceOnline London 2010. The topic:
rebooting science journalism in the age of the web, a sequel to a similar panel that I chaired at
ScienceOnline 2010. The people on either side of me: super-bloggers David Dobbs, Alice Bell andMartin
Robbins, from left to right. The accent: British, which apparently comes as a massive shock to anyone who
hasn‘t previously met me and isn‘t from the UK.
I liked this session. Fewer journalists in the audience that at ScienceOnline 2010 so the Q&A had a different
flavour to it, and there‘s no duck sex. But I think the four of us worked well off each other and everyone
makes excellent points. For my part, I decided to talk about (a) the opportunities that the web (and blogs in
particular) provide for experimenting with science journalism, and (b) the pitfalls that we must recognise if
we‘re not to make the same old mistakes all over again.
And be sure to join me in ScienceOnline 2019 for Science Journalism: Are You Sure She‘s Plugged Into the
Mains?, then in ScienceOnline 2024 for Taking the Cover Off Science Journalism and Rubbing the Batteries
Up and Down; and finally in ScienceOnline 2048 for Science Journalism Ain‘t Movin‘ Ma, Is She Sleepin‘?
2010/09/04 NOT EXACTLY ROCKET SCIENCE:

ENGAGING PEOPLE ONLINE – SCIENCE ONLINE
2010
I had only planned to do one talk at this year‘s Science Online London 2010 conference, but the second day
had some ―unconference‖ slots where people could suggest their own talks. John Timmer from Ars
Technica wanted to run a session about how bloggers with a decent readership deal with comments, and I
agreed. We wrangled in Alok Jha from the Guardian, a paper whose website is no stranger to fiery
commentary, and the organisers melded our session with a suggestion by Julia Heathcote Anderson, who
wanted to talk about how we can fix the reputation of scientists online.
146 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
So here‘s our impromptu panel discussion, which I‘m quite pleased with given that we had got together
around 10 minutes before to plan our talks. As you might imagine, given the slight artificial melding of
topics, the Q&A covers all sorts of ground, but there should be something here for everyone.
Update: Everyone should read Hayley Birch‘s excellent post on the issue of stereotypes raised during this
session, and to what extent they actually matter, and Adam Tinworth‘s reflections.
More parts after the jump…
September 5th, 2010 by Ed Yong in Journalism | 2 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >
2 Responses to ―Engaging people online – Science Online 2010‖
1. Erik Says:
September 5th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
I just gave a talk on this very subject regarding the online commenting community at Eruptions and the
Eyjafjallajokull eruption. I‘ve always held the opinion that I should have a very small controlling hand on
discussions within the comments on the blog – more to correct things that are incorrect, keep things civil and
try to bring up ideas/problems that could help the discussion. This is a topic that is going to get more and more
important as more realtime data shows up on the web – and people want to discuss it as an event is ongoing. This
is a challenge with no simple answer (shocking, eh?)
2. Ed Yong Says:
September 5th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
I‘d agree, Erik. I‘m definitely not advocating that people rule their comment threads with an iron fist. But I
think that the difference between no participation and a gentle controlling hand is a massive one, as Alok
alluded to in his bit about the Guardian‘s experience. You have to make an effort to nudge things in a productive
direction but it doesn‘t usually have to be a forceful one.
2010/09/04 A MAN AND HIS BLOG: SCIENCE

ONLINE: CULTURES CLASH OVER INFOGRAPHICS
By Adam Tinworth
Today's been an interesting contrast with yesterday. dConstruct was very much a temple of the converted,
discussing elements of web design theology. Science Online is much more of a culture clash, with the
social media crowd meeting sceptical scientist, and coming away with a draw at best. (In that, it reminds
me far more of news:rewired.) Nowhere has this clash been more clear than in the presentation by David
McCandless, who spoke at both conferences.
147 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
I've blogged about McCandless before, and his presentation was much the same in all cases. He does
fantastic story-telling through data visualisation, and his presentation was very warmly welcomed by the
dConstruct crowd. The Science Online attendees also took to his infographics pretty quickly, at least while
the topics was slightly outside the scientific mainstream. The closer the got to science, the more twitchy the
audience became. The reason why became apparent pretty quickly. Challenges came to the labelling of
one slide, to the data methodology on another. In the questions. he was challenged on the lack of axis
labelling on his more graph-like visualisations.
And here was the culture clash - people who have been drilled by years of practice to present data in very
clear, systematic and comprehensible ways meeting those who are, essentially, storytelling through data
and graphics. I hope people from both sides learnt something from this: the scientists the value of making
things comprehensible for a lay audience, the visualisers the fact that a greater degree of rigour can give
your work more impact.
And, in a way, I find these sorts of encounters more satisfying than "preaching to the choir" conferences.
Through these sorts of clashes, we can actually see learning happening, rather than beliefs being
reinforced.
1 Comment
By AJ Cann on September 4, 2010 2:10 PM | Reply

Great post, thanks. My issue with David's great talk was about "pretty" making information *less* accessible
at a science conference. Still a good talk though.
148 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/04 AOB BLOG PAT HESLOP-
HARRISON: DISSEMINATION AND SCIENCE ON-
LINE #SOLO10
Science On Line
I am with about 150 people interested in “science communication on-line” at the British Library in
London this week. Journals are all about the communication of science results, and the not-for-profit
charity that owns us, The Annals of Botany Company, is dedicated to the dissemination of botanical
knowledge. So it is critical that we are at the front of seeing how the web is changing the way we conduct,
communicate, share and evaluate science – we need to see how the new mechanisms can be used in the
very best way. Nevertheless, I think I am one of the only Chief Editors here, and the Annals team is strongly
represented by Managing Editor David Frost, and both Alun Salt (@alun) and Alan Cann (@ajcann) who
are leading our implementation of new approaches such as this blog, and Richard O’Brien from our
publishers, Oxford University Press.
Some of the community here are groups I have never met before, and using internet tools in enitrely new
ways. The opening talk was given by Lord Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society. During it, the
internet connected audience (more iPads, Androids and netbooks on display than the largest computer
supermarket!) was linked into Twitter, and our comments on his talk all appeared on the screen.
Remarkably, this ‘crowd sourcing’ picked up, in 140 letter snippets, many of the salient points of his talk –
it needs winnowing to remove half the tweets which are technical, but many forward-thinking nuggets are
there, look at twitter with the hash-tags of #solo10 or #soloconf; my own limited contributions come from
@pathh1.
About 25% of the audience are scientists with blogs and there are a number of science Journalists, most of
whom now also have blogs. Few meetings have the level of audience participatition here, but in the
company of those at the top of science communication, I don’t know whether to raise my hand as a
‘blogger’ or not – half a dozen contributions to the development of AoBBlog.com doesn’t let me take a
place next to Grrl Scientist, Jenny Rohn, Andrew Jaffey, Alice Bell, Martin Robbins or other big names at the
Guardian, Nature Network or independently run blogs. But it is great to be able to discuss what to write,
how personal to make the blogs. Today, as AoBBlog.com is approaching a wide roll out to the plant
community, the final session will be important for us: “If you build it, will the come?”
We at Annals of Botany are also working with two new companies strongly represented here at Science on-
line: Mendeley and CiteULike, who allow you to build up reference libraries and collections. I find
individual collections of papers on a topic just as important as review articles. In Mendeley, one of our
Editors Jeffery Karron (wonderful pictures on that site!) has let us post his his collection of 2698
149 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
references on plant reproduction (see earlier blog), going back 100 years, and this really highlights the
seminal papers in the field better than any review article, especially when the crowd-effect of multiple
entries of the same publication starts to take effect. This mechanism picks up not only the papers in PNAS,
Science or Nature, but the hidden gems – the crowd sourcing mentioned above. In CiteULike, I’ve been
entering references I am working with for a paper I’m co-writing with colleagues from Nottingham on
somatic hybrids in ornamental tobacco Nicotiana species; even with the relatively few papers on plant
science there, their system already included a couple of papers relevant to our work which I might not
have found otherwise.
Of course, there are many things journal editors like me can do to help make these collections more useful
to other scientists, and this needs work at many levels. For example, do the titles of the papers we publish
really summarize what the paper is about? While few journals publish something called ‘Studies on
Ophioglossum XIV: Ecophysiology’ any more, it really is very important that the title does give a
comprehensive view of the work. Keywords are still important – including different spellings, or ways to
say major points for example, making sure the searches will find the paper. We will also be putting papers
published in Annals of Botany, in many cases along with their bibliographies, into Mendeley and CiteULike
over the coming months in the hope of helping people find outstanding papers in modern botany. I often
write to unsuccessful authors to say that I don’t think this submission will be the work which ‘makes a
difference to plant science’ and therefore may not be of interest to our wide readership. On-line
collections papers means that we can really ensure groups of papers of special interest, published in any
journal, can be brought together and found easily.
There are also thoughtful sessions about the future of the ‘paper’ as a unit. Personally, I don’t think
continuous updating of ‘work in progress’ will ever work: a published paper is something that the authors,
the referees, the Editor, the designers and the publishers all put their reputations behind as being
something they are proud to have published. I can truly say that I am proud to have published every paper
that has appeared in Annals of Botany in the last two years in my time as Chief Editor. I don’t think loose-
ends or ongoing updates or conference posters would have anything like that level of value to the archive
of literature.
As at many conferences, open access is also discussed. Publishing any paper costs something like
£GBP1500 or USD$2000, and this must be paid ultimately either by authors or readers. I feel we at Annals
of Botany have it about right – our light subscription control means that all papers free after 12 months,
and are fully available through PubMed Central. It means that people without grant money – whether
from developing countries or those who think and do fieldwork – are able to publish with us. All
our Reviews and Briefings are freely accessible from the time of publication, and all papers are also freely
accessible to Journalists and Bloggers, and any paper of interest to the wider public (particularly when
highlighted in other publications) will be immediately made freely accessible. I would, though, like to have
more open-access papers in the Journal!
Well, that’s about it from me on the first day of Science-On-Line. With AoBBlog.com, the snapshots of
every paper we publish appearing in an accessible format, the introduction just today of the Highwire H2O
platform for our on-line publication and linking, and other initiatives, I am convinced we are doing the right
thing. I hope all of you – from the SOLO10 conference, from our readership, journalists and bloggers, and
from the wider plant community – will be commenting and criticising these words of mine …
———————————————–
Just to save you from looking it up, my ‘day job’ is research on chromosome and genome evolution,
biodiversity and speciation, primarily in crop plants but also models – my personal website
is www.molcyt.com – very Web 1.0 in style, always more out of date than I would like, but hopefully
150 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
content rich and with links to many publications and my talks. I also teach cell and developmental biology
in the University of Leicester and internationally.
Annals of Botany is the oldest broad-spectrum plant science Journal, publishing continuously from 1887.
We publish about 300 papers a year in 16 issues and something over 3000 pages. For those who believe in
it, or current impact factor is 3.5 – but I believe it should be much higher! It is owned by the charity Annals
of Botany Company, and published on our behalf by Oxford University Press.
I’m posting this blog immediately because I want feedback from the Science On-line conference, but I hope
David Frost will look through it and do his magic to remove my dyslexic mistakes, unfinished sentences and
non-sequiturs (not to say exchanging ‘which’ and ‘that’). So an update will exchange this article in a few
hours. Oh, how I admire these writers who can get something written and posted in an hour, and don’t
need a two-day cooling off period for me to find even a small proportion of the errors!
About the author
Pat Heslop-Harrison is Professor of Molecular Cytogenetics and Cell Biology at the University of Leicester.
He is also Chief Editor of Annals of Botany, and President of the Society for Experimental Biology.
2010/09/04 ALICE BELL BLOG: SCIENTISTS

AND THE VOTE
Today at Science Online London I spoke in a session about‖The Science Vote‖ alongside Evan Harris and Imran Khan.
First a bit of background on this Science Vote thing (the content my talk is under the photo). I‘m used having to sneak
references to science policy in the back of my syllabi. This year, I was slightly taken aback to find undergraduates
knocking on my office door asking for more lectures on science policy. They aren‘t the only ones interested in the topic.
Maybe it won‘t last, but at the moment, talking about ―policy‖ seems to be the hot new thing in UK science.
I find this weird. Or at least unfamiliar. It‘s not surprising though; the background is easy to trace. Science-themed
activism surrounding ―bad science bloggers‖ and the developing UK skeptics scene is worth a mention, as well as
concerns over cuts in public funding. Indeed, there‘s an argument to be made that it is the possibility of cuts that truly
makes scientists get political, and perhaps the true action is yet to be seen. Still, we can also add frustrations over libel
law, the school curriculum, climategate, homeopathy, David Nutt, or any mixture of these issues (and more) under the
umbrella of Science Vote issues.
There was also clearly a concerted effort to build a Science Vote network. In November, New Scientist launched its S-
word blog, the ―S‖ being the science they feel is too often unmentionable in UK politics. The following month, the
Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE) set up a Science Vote blog. As the pre-election fervor heated up, there
were a series of pre-election debates held between the three major science spokespeople (video of Royal Society for
Chemistry‘s one). Boththe Guardian and the Times produced extensive science-themed election coverage. The
movement grew, and I got used to seeing #scivote tag flow across twitter as people shared links.
151 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
My Science Online talk used the Science Vote campaign to think about the way a sort ―brand‖ of science works in
scientific campaigning and, more broadly, the advantages and disadvantages of talking to small niche groups. (note: by
―brand‖ I really mean a symbolic impression of cohesion over what science equates to. I won‘t go into theories of
branding here, but this is an interesting book)
It is sometimes said that social media campaigns are merely talking to themselves. Were #scivote twitter-ers simply
ranting in small self-curated bubbles of agreement?
Maybe, but it‘s wrong to think niche (even exclusive) groups are always a bad thing. I would argue against simple
pessimistic talk of echochambers. I think there is a role for small communities of agreement in political campaigning,
they can act as seeds for larger movements Moreover, new media opens up possibilities for developing them. Indeed,
to complain that bloggers, facebook users, tweeters et al are talking to limited audiences is, perhaps, to fall into a trap
of attempting to ape the (outdated?) desires of mainstream media: that of aiming for a mass audience. The odd
ambitious blogger may want to become a household name, but for many it is simply about meaning a lot to a few, and
being able to reach and connect small specialist audiences (we might talk aboutthe long tail if you want to use new
media jargon).
I would argue that precisely because #scivote was a hashtag, it had a power to connect. It works as a link, clicking on it
connected people to others who are using it. Yes, this was a matter of people who largely agreed with each other, but it
helped connect individual grumbles to build a larger (albeit still small) movement. I soon noticed that if I used the
hashtag during the election I‘d get a spate of new followers: people were clearly tracking it. It allowed nascent on and
off-line political mumblings to feel less isolated, it connected people to events, information, ideas, debates and, quite
simply, other people. It let individuals develop knowledge and interest and fostered community. Events such as the
RSC one helped demonstrate the power and number of science-interested voters, and allowed nascent online political
mumblings feel a sense of real-space community. The Science Vote campaign, was, let‘s face it, an extension of quite
Westminster-based lobbying. Groups like CaSE wanted to show that there was a constituency that cared about these
issues.
We should also be careful of assuming too much agreement within the Science Vote campaign. For me, the word
science is a large part of the problem. It‘s a shorthand. A necessary and useful one, but a gloss over the messy reality
nonetheless. Like ―the public‖, ―child‖ or ―the meaning of life‖, the word ―science‖ often comes with scare-quotes,
spoken in a tone of mock-drama because, we know what a fudge it is. (for an academic version of those last two
sentences, try this book). It is worth remembering that the so-called Science Vote was, in many respects, an odd
coalition of people and worries that just happened to collect together in UK science around this particular time.
152 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
My unease over a simplistic application of ―brand science‖ was triggered especially strongly by The Times‘ piece
on candidates‘ backgrounds and labelling ―science friendly‖ (to their credit, the Times did add good bit of context in a
postscript). The Guardian‘s Litmus Test project maybe took a broader view of science, but it was still defined science in
its own way, arguably somewhat skewed to the worries of the skeptics movement. Times Higher highlighted issues
surrounding young and women researchers. Science, writing after the polls had closed, memorably brought the
badgers. Some people found the badgers a bit weird, and their incredulity fueled a fair bit of post-election humour
based upon the passing around of dancing badger cartoons. However, to others, it is a major issue.
Personally, I‘m quite comfortable with such a diversity of ideas of what a science vote might equate to. Everyone has
their own definition of science. That‘s my point: there is no single idea or experience of science. Rather, it is multiple
and differing, and to pretend otherwise is to suggest a coherence which personally I just don‘t see in the UK science
―community‖. Indeed, there are times when I wonder if ―coalition‖ not ―community‖ is the word.
Perhaps the biggest problem with ―brand science‖ is that it is too often an exclusive term, used to articulate the
community‘s boundaries to note who doesn‘t belong, what can‘t be called ―scientific‖. This sense of exclusivity might
be useful to those working in ―anti-quack‖ campaigns. It can also make it an appealing brand to people outside as well
as helping foster a sense of community within in (i.e. a form of bonding). But, at the same time, I worry puts off those
who don‘t happen to feel a strong everyday affinity to science.
Too much of the Science Vote activity of the pre-election period was, for me, characterised by tribalism. Identifying
―science friendly‖ MPs or labelling policy ―anti science‖ felt like a simplistic game of goodies and baddies which belies
the subtitles of science in British society. People are rarely simplistic enough to be ―friends‖ or ―enemies‖ of the whole
of science. Rather, this big thing we call science hangs over all of us in a range of places and ways.
If science is to have a long-lasting and productive role in politics, the science lobby must be careful in their use of the
―S‖ word and instead accommodate a diversity of interests, actors and ideas and demonstrate how specific areas of
expertise are meaningful to British society at large. I think the Science Vote campaign had an impact on the
politicisation of UK science (or at least it helped foster and articular an already murmuring politicisation). However,
looking forward, it should be wary of letting a glossy banner of ―science‖ obscure the diversity of people and detail of
policies involved. It is often the specifics of science policy that matter. Specifics in all their complex diversity. Post
election, it is time to go to show what the many different areas of science can mean to a broad range of people, across
UK society.
At the end of the Q&A in the session, Imran made an interesting analogy between the Science Vote and the so-called
―Pink Vote‖ or ―Grey Vote‖. There is no central orgainsing committee for these, and they are supposed to reflect huge
and diverse communities who may well disagree with each other about the most effective way to deal with,
respectively, gay or mature peoples‘ votes (or with being described as either ―pink‖ or ―grey‖ for that matter). Yet the
use of these terms reflect politicians at least thinking about taking these groups more seriously. Scientists who want a
stronger voice might want to think about these other identity based political movements.
Posted in: campaigning, engagement, policy, science
14 Responses ―Scientists and the vote‖ →

http://twitter.com/WilliamCB
September 6, 2010
The difference between #scivote and #scipolicy is the difference between advocacy and discussion. As a
journalist, I‘m obviously less comfortable with the advocacy bit. But there is a kind of nascent science
movement that you‘ve outlined, which can indeed be compared to pink or bgrey movements. That‘s something
new and important.
One thing that should be considered is that science has special problems in creating such a movement. Even if
there is no central organising committee, there is a lot of organising that goes on in any movement. Structures
of power emerge, albeit informal at this stage. The movement comes under attack, it has to respond, discipline
is required, mechanisms of mobilisation. A monolith emerges. This is natural for a political movement. But this is
of course the antithesis of the reflective self-critical stance, full of doubts, that is (or ought to be) intrinsic
to science. For example, only dogmatism to the point of ideology is ever going to get evidence-based policy
really embedded in Whitehall.
So, to put it at its most provocative, for science to acquire an effective supporting movement it will have to
abandon the things which make it special.
153 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
alicerosebell
September 6, 2010
Thanks William – wish I could have articulated the points so well.
I agree that the scivote/ scipolicy difference is largely one of advocacy and discussion, though I also
think that the lobbyist groups would benefit from a bit more discussion/ reflection/ bigger picture.
I also agree about the ―special problems‖ of science. That‘s my objection to the branding of science as
whole – it seems dogmatic, which science isn‘t. One could turn your ―provocative‖ concluding point around
to say science should abandon any attempt at a coherent supporting movement and instead always work
on specific issues.
That said, on the pink vote point, Imran made the point that a lot of gay people really hate what
Stonewall say. Maybe science isn‘t that special.
http://twitter.com/WilliamCB
September 6, 2010
They might not like what Stonewall says, but on the other hand you don‘t find bucketfuls of
criticism of Stonewall from lesbian and gay people. Similarly, there‘s an amazing amount of
discipline over not outing people in the closet. That is the kind of self-censorship that is inimical
to science, and which I would argue has undermined climate science.
alicerosebell
September 6, 2010
Without taking this analogy too far… I think you can find LGTB critique of Stonewall in
by the bucket if you know where to look. Haven‘t seem that much public criticism of
CaSE though. Or maybe I‘m looking in the wrong place. Whether that‘s an outing issue or
not I‘m not sure. Very much agree re climate.
dunc
September 6, 2010
*nods in agreement*
Thank you for articulating a lot of this Alice. Whilst science in general seems to have grown in voice, the lack of
a voice can be as true within a community as it can be for a whole community within society or politics. As an
aside, whilst I can think of a lot of bloggers who talk about quantitive methods and epidemiology, I can‘t think
of many qualitative researchers who also blog and maybe that is one way of demonstrating the value of the
work. I‘d love to follow some good blogs discussing qualitative work if anyone can recommend some?
A few interesting questions which follow on from this are: What are the shared goals of the science
‗community‘? What would a politician who was after the science vote say or do? What would success look like?
alicerosebell
September 6, 2010
Qualitative about what? Science? Religion?
Ed Yong
September 6, 2010
I note that as of this morning, #scivote overtook #kittygenocide in the #solo10 hashtag league table.
Er… victory!
http://summarizr.labs.eduserv.org.uk/?hashtag=solo10
alicerosebell
September 6, 2010
Take that Yong (though not sure you should be admitting to tracking these things…)
Kieron Flanagan
September 6, 2010
In the Twitter interchange between myself and @xmalik excerpted above I said that my problem with #scivote
stemmed from the mixing up of a whole range of different issues of advocacy versus analysis so I agree very
much with the comments of @WilliamCB. Of course it‘s impossible to separate the rational (or irrational) self-
interest of scientists in continuing and expanding the scientific enterprise from other considerations, but
actively mixing advocacy and analysis at the same time clearly undermines credibility – especially where there
are multiple and poorly-articulated goals to begin with. What is/was #scivote really about? Was/is it a
campaign for more (or protected) basic research funding? For more investment in technology (a very different
thing)? For better use of scientific expertise in policy making? For more ‗scientific literacy‘ amongst policy
makers or the wider population? Or even, as some seem to believe, the prelude to a full-blown war on the forces
of ‗unreason‘?
In my view a key reason #scivote has been easy to dismiss is that it has tended to be a messy mixture of all
these things. Even focusing in on the funding issue, which not surprisingly is on everyone‘s minds right now,
there is little coherence. Evidence about the importance of one thing (applied research and technological
development) is used to justify another, different and only indirectly related thing (funding for basic
research). In fact a common theme is that arguments begin with the importance of technological development
154 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
but end with a call to protect basic research budgets. #scivote seems to have much less to say about applied
research and development, research capacity, knowledge transfer and innovation. All this is likely to reinforce
the perception amongst the target audience for these arguments that this is self-interested lobbying from a
community that doesn‘t really care that much about the economy. Surprisingly, #scivote also seems to have
little to say about the intrinsic cultural value of science (the popularity of which is easily demonstrated) and
about its wider educational value.
Even when thoughtful, strong and coherent arguments are made (e.g. in some of the recent material put out by
CaSE), there seems to be a compulsion to throw red herrings into the mix which ultimately make it easier to
discount the whole argument. My favourite red herring is the synthetic outrage about the non-existent
Treasury scientific advisor – as if that would make a difference to the spending review settlement. The
repeated appearance of this particular red herring actually reinforces the impression of naked self-interest,
appearing to reflect the instrumental thinking that a powerful scientist in the Treasury is the neatest solution
to the challenge of persuading the Treasury to fund science. In reality of course it has been the Treasury
which has pushed big increases in basic research funding over the past decade or so – whilst presiding over
similar sized cuts in the more applied research budgets of individual government departments.
[The other popular red herring is that country X, Y or Z spends more as a proportion of GDP on research than
does the UK. The UK has a particular economic structure which may differ from country X or Y or even Z (our
economy, rightly or wrongly, being dominated by service industries in which innovation is not primarily based on
R&D) and an unusual pattern of spending on R&D (relatively little govt spending on very applied R&D coupled
with a highly competitive and probably very 'efficient' system for funding basic research in universities).
#scivote should be focused about what the UK could gain from more investment in S&T and R&D, not about
bogus comparisons, which just reinforce the impression that the lobbying is done out of naked self-interest.]
alicerosebell
September 6, 2010
―just reinforce the impression that the lobbying is done out of naked self-interest‖
Indeed. I really can‘t see how that impression is good PR. I nearly added links to the Jenkins piece
about the RS 350 that prompted SpoofJenks as an example of how the science lobby can be viewed
from the outside. I didn‘t because (a) I couldn‘t be bothered with any kneejerk reaction to Jenkins
name (b) I agree Jenkins talks a lot of poo about science and, moreover (c) I don‘t think Jenkins is
representative of either ―the public‖ at large or the groups CaSE were trying to influence. But the point
that science looks quite different from the outside remains.
(and I would add, this isn‘t the public‘s fault).
Also your point about ―synthetic outrage‖ on the Treasury. Might use that phrase to describe a fair few
sub-headings in the various iterations of what the ―science vote‖ might mean.
sylviamclain
September 6, 2010
This is a refreshing view- there have recently (in my mind) been alot of complaints about the #scivote lack of
cohesion.
For my part, I am a research scientist and spend most of my time doing physics research, desperately writing
grants for money, and all of the normal stuff. In this current environment this is getting more and more
difficult and you have to be more and more productive. Whether you agree with this policy or not, we are not
left with a big choice day to day.
I blog, follow twitter, etc on top of this because I am interested in science policy and want to follow what
people are thinking, it does provide a venue of some description and maybe it is lacking but I think over all it is
a good thing – its better than nothing. For my part it has introduced me (indirectly) through others who are
concerned about this, in different universities and I think that is important, at least it is to me.
I think this needs to remain, challenging each other and discussion of issues is good, but I think perhaps though
it is always good to be thinking about what to improve – I think #scivote and similar hashtags, blogs, etc are a
good start. Its at least some kind of venue… and useful I think to me….
alicerosebell
September 6, 2010
Thanks. I knew it wasn‘t just me who felt the tag had connected them to others in some way!
Kieron Flanagan
September 6, 2010
I do agree with Alice and @sylviamclain about the connections made through these debates, so #scivote has
been a social networking success – for me, very much so. My criticisms above are of #scivote as a ‗campaign‘.
sylviamclain
September 6, 2010
to both Alice and Kieron- I am actually @girlinterruptin by the way – and tweeting with you has been
part of that…
155 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/05 CONFESSIONS OF A (FORMER) LAB
RAT: ON WEB 2.0
As promised yesterday, I'm going to write down my notes from Saturday's final panel session of Science
Online London 2010. But first, I want to say a couple of things about the Research Information Network
report that Rob Procter discussed, If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web
2.0. (These concerns were raised in the twitter feed at the time, but for reasons I won't bore you with , we
didn't have time to discuss them at the meeting itself.)
In the last half of 2008 I consulted for the Science Advisory Board (SAB) on a study looking at How Online
Media Affects Traditional Publishing Methods. This study was, like the RINone, a survey of scientists and
their use of social media, or 'Web 2.0' (by the way, there was a tweet on the #solo10 hashtag mentioning the
Britishness of saying "two point nought" rather than "web two point oh". Was that really me?). This was an
international study, rather than the British-centric RIN one, and surveyed 1500 scientists (vs 1300 in
the RIN one).
What perturbed me on reading the RIN report was that the SAB study found that it was the younger and
more junior scientists who were making more use of Web 2, whereas the RINreport seemed to imply that it
was being driven by older scientists. In fact, one of my conclusions was that as the older guys died off we'd
see more uptake. (Both studies bemoaned the low overall uptake of Web 2 tools, although the SAB was
more upbeat in its assessment).
But as I sat on the Tube on the way home last night, I realized there were a couple of major flaws with
the RIN study. The RIN sent its survey to 12,000 scientists in the UK, and got a 10% response rate. That's a
pretty lousy statistic. Here, we've selected for people who have both the time and inclination to respond to a
random survey. Most of the SAB respondents were selected from the SAB's membership (currently nearly
50,000) to receive the questionnaire, and were rewarded for their participation (the SAB operates a points
system: if you respond to questionnaires and whatnot you can accumulate points which can be exchanged
for physical goodies). The response rate was a lot higher (I don't have the exact numbers to hand) and we
might assume that the quality of response was correspondingly higher, too.
A more worrying question, however, is how were those 12,000 people (who received theRIN survey)
selected in the first place? Turns out that these are 'scraped' email addresses, which makes me think there
was already some bias towards older, more well-established scientists in the first place. Young researchers
not only have had less time for their contact details to be established on an institutional website (and indeed,
pre-tenure, have probably moved around a lot, relatively speaking. Google me, for example; the second hit is
156 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
me but the email address in it was defunct five years ago) but are possibly also more security conscious and
less willing to have their email address available for scraping.
I think those two concerns might well go some way to explaining the 'surprising' results from the RIN study.
So, what did I say at SOLo 10, after all that? Here's my notes (like Ed Yong, I have to refer to my Moleskine
notebook. No copy & paste here, and it's not a transcript!):
< fx: English accent, ginger hair>
This is a room full of very special people <fx: laughter>. If we didn't believe in online technology, the value
of it and the coolness of it, we wouldn't be here today.
And over the last couple of days we have seen some very neat stuff. This morning, Aleks talked about the
Growing Knowledge project; Peter Murray-Rust showed us a really cool experiment this morning, and
we've had a whole heap of open- and linkeddata stuff--semantic web, if you like. Real nerdgasm stuff.
But, we have to remember, we are special. We are the early adopters, if you like. To borrow a phrase from
technology business development, we haven't yet crossed the chasm to mainstream adoption of these cool
toys, as Rob has just pointed out.
The vast majority of jobbing scientists simply haven't signed up yet, perhaps for the reasons Rob listed. We,
here in this room, are a load of technology evangelists, there are a few companies here who share that vision
and who have demonstrated some of their toys, but people as a whole?
No.
Of course, they're into Web 1--email and websites and whatnot, but Web 2, Web 3? Not so much.
We've given reasons over the last two days why people should adopt these technologies, but there's been a
lot of stick, and not enough carrot, I feel. What should we do? Encourage--or bully--people into using this
stuff, just because it's there, just because it's cool?
I don't think so.
I think, rather, that it comes down to two things, and my thesis is very simple. People, as a whole, will only
adopt these new technologies for one of two reasons.
First, these new tools allow you to do something necessary, something you have to do anyway, something
that exists outwith cyberspace but that you have to do, but that is made so much easier, so much more
efficient with internet tools that people will WANT to do it.
Obvious examples are PubMed--anybody remember Silver Platter?--and online journals themselves. When
did you last use a photocopier to copy a journal article?
Say what you like about PDFs, didn't life get a lot lot easier in the late '90s and early 2000s?
157 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
The second thing that works is something that adds value, and that value can include 'fun', but a value that
just can't be gained from anywhere else. A compelling value. For example, Facebook and Twitter are great
Web 2 tools that allow people to communicate in new and exciting ways.
It's slightly less Web 2, Web 1.5 perhaps, but Faculty of 1000 I think is such a tool. We're addressing the
filtering, the information overload problem, adding value to the published research. We don't care, actually,
whether it's Open Access or where it's coming from: we're just providing editorial, if you like, content on top
of the literature. And you can't do that, effectively, without cyberspace. It won't work.
The challenge, really, is not to have a smart idea. There must be oh, how many people are here? 120 bright
ideas in this room alone. But you have to figure out where that value is, that compelling calue that will make
the vast majority of scientists want to use this stuff we've been talking about.
This includes things like blogging networks, like data visualization, like linked datasets.
and then we were out of time. There was some ad-libbing in there, but that's the gist. Oh, and I had no slides.
(If you would like to comment without signing your soul away to Nature, this post is mirrored at
the BioLOG).
Posted by Richard P. Grant on Sep 5, 2010Permalink | 4 Comments | No TrackBacks

4 COMMENTS
Weren't there demographic questions asked in the survey? This would reveal any odd skew. Agree the findings
are odd.
Posted by: William Gunn Sep 5, 2010
Nature (italic) is the journal. Nature Network is an internet platform (which is also the internet platform which
hosts Nature journal content).
Irrespective of one's views on registering in order to comment, Nature knows nothing whatsoever about anyone
who comments at Nature Network. (They wrote up this report some time back, also).
In purely marketing terms, 10 per cent is a good rate of return. I believe that 0.3 per cent is considered good
in a standard marketing survey. Of course you'd expect to get a higher return from a list that is pre-filtered,
as it seems the RIN list was, from what you write.
Most surveys are flawed for many of the reasons you describe, and others. I personally would not take any
notice of a survey without being able to access the raw data, to be able to look for myself at the demographics,
response rates, actual questions asked, etc. I don't know if this particular survey comes with a supplementary
information file of these data. I recall receiving it as a brochure, but not whether the actual data were
included in addition to the summary.
Posted by: Maxine Clarke Sep 5, 2010
Last page of report has the age breakdown:
under 25: 64
25-34: 398
35-44: 385
45-54: 325
55-64: 233
65+: 60
2% of the under 25 group were bloggers. Here is some math:
1/64 = 1.6%
2/64 = 3.1%
So there's one student blogger in the entire sample. (Maybe an older grad student or two in the 25-34 group as
well) Hm.
Posted by: Eva Amsen Sep 5, 2010
158 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Nature (italic) is the journal. Nature Network is an internet platform (which is also the internet platform which
hosts Nature journal content).
Funny you should say that, because when you're on this page and signed in, clicking the 'Account' button at the
top right takes [me] to [my] Nature details, not the Nature Network ones, as I'd have expected. That's
irrelevant to the point anyway; which is that people are put off commenting because they have to open an
account.
0.3% might be good in marketing, but this wasn't marketing, it was research.
Thanks for doing the nerding, Eva. What percentage of all sci-types in the UK are bloggers, I wonder?
Posted by: Richard P. Grant Sep 5, 2010
2010/09/05 UOL LIBRARY BLOG: KATIE

FRASER: SCIENCE ONLINE
Science Online conference bag
Yesterday I visited Science Online London (the second day). It’s subtitle is ‘How is the web changing
science?’ but it’s a general mishmash of people from various walks who share an enthusiasm for science
and the web, talking about what they’re doing, and how they can share this enthusiasm.
For me, the breakout sessions were the most interesting portions, so I’ll summarise those briefly with
some reflections on what I learnt from them.
Tracking researcher identity: pragmatics and ethics

The first session I attended was looking at an author ID system, ORCID. Such systems try to avoid
confusion between academic authors with similar namesby assigning them a unique ID. I’m already
signed up to Thomson Reuter’s ResearcherID system, to give an example. This is a more top down
alternative to the bottom up approach where databases use algorithms to try to differentiate between
different authors. I understand these algorithms are usually successful, but perhaps because of my limited
academic output, I’ve found myself lumped in with other “K Fraser”s on more than one occasion.
ORCID aims to overcome some of the reluctance researchers have to sign up to proprietary author ID
systems, and offer a central, open and transparent registry instead. The session came alive in the
159 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
discussion of what such a system could do – such as create a far more nuanced record of who had
contributed what to a paper than the traditional author order could capture – and the ethics behind it –
should a researcher’s ID keep track of rebuttals of their work? There are a lot of positives to such a system
from a librarian’s perspective (easier author search, simplified tracking down of academics’ papers for the
institutional repository) so it was great to have a balanced discussion from a range of stakeholders.
What scientists want (and how to give it to them)

The second breakout session I attended was part of the ‘unconference’ (essentially some sessions which
were crowdsourced from attendees the previous day). This session focused on ‘users’ (which turned out
to be scientists). The most interesting bits for me were a discussion of what scientists wanted from
technology (they want better publication and information gathering tools: librarians take note) and one
slightly awkward but fascinating section in which a marketing specialist tried to get the scientists to identify
the best way to market to them.
Obviously I had my ears open for the marketing questions, as sometimes it’s hard for the library to ‘sell’
services to academics. The main message was that scientists will come and look for information as and
when they need it, and so when they do come looking, you’d better be i) easy to find and ii) prepared with
a pitch and some examples of how great your services are. I’m currently mulling over ways to achieve
these two things as a librarian: suggestions welcome!
The “broken publishing system”: whose responsibility is it?

The last session I attended was ostensibly a discussion of open access publishing, but centred mostly
on impact factors, a way of recording how widely read journal are, at the title level. Discussions
with Nancy, our library bibliometrician have already highlighted to me that judging a paper by which
journal it’s in is a flawed idea, but I was surprised to hear that no one in the room – publishers included –
thought they were useful or valid. Somehow impact factors have been seized as a key evaluation metric,
and everyone is only interested in them to the extent that others are using them to evaluate their output!
All were agreed that something should be done to avoid this focus on impact factors, but disagreement
centred on whether small acts of protest at this system (opting out, voting with your feet) or a coordinated
protest (demanding an overhaul of the system at the highest levels) were needed. Again, suggestions for
action welcome!
Conclusions
Overall, this was an interesting conference to attend, and I felt I learnt a lot about how scientists view the
services on offer to them. Oddly, however, I think maybe I’d be more comfortable presenting at it if I
attended again: a lot of the sessions were based on the assumption that the audience was composed of
scientists, and I felt like more like an observer than a participant in the discussion sometimes.
However, participant observation is a time-honoured way of getting to know a culture better, and I’m
sure I’ll use my observations to help inform the library’s development of services over the next year:
maybe with something new to contribute to the discussion of scientists online at the end.
160 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/05 ONLY IN IT FOR THE GOLD: THE
ROLE OF SCIENTISTS AND OF SCIENTIFIC
AUTHORITY
Paulina Essunger sends along this quote for the quotations file:
“We need to adopt a broader view of what it means for researchers to fulfil their obligations to society. It is
not enough for them to make findings and report them in the scholarly literature. As citizens in a democracy,
they must engage, and not just when their funding is at stake.”-Cornelia Dean
Hmm. I don't entirely agree with this as stated. It confuses the singular and the collective. It seems to me
to claim that each researcher must engage in democracy as a researcher. It seems clear to me that the
resulting cacophony would help very little; it's hard to imagine any broad issue on which scientists'
opinions would not span an enormous range. What the democratic process needs to know is the narrow
facts; what's deemed certain, what likely, what plausible, what unlikely, what impossible.
On climate change, IPCC (and especially WG I) has done a creditable job on reporting these things,
notwithstanding the Himalaya glaciers blunder, and yet they are busily being discredited anyway. So one
wonders what the point is; one could do worse that to take the IPCC position and defend it even though it
rather understates the risks. Those of us who are willing and able to engage the public's confusion ought to
do so, and if I may say so, ought to have some way of being rewarded for it.
But it should be noted (and in some circles it isn't noted) that this itself is a radical claim. The primary role
of scientists has always been to impress other scientists in a scientific meritocracy. A very few of the most
elite scientists are then consulted by the policy sector. This is seen as an end-of-career perk for the best of
the best, and is conducted outside the purview of the scientific culture. From the point of view of science,
being appointed to a national or international commission is a hobby, and being appointed to the cabinet
is a form of retirement.
It is only recently that the substance of specific scientific issues have become matters of policy-relevant
general public interest. This has created a role for propagandists, in some disciplines including climate well-
funded ones. And this is responsible for the emergent gap in the set of necessary roles.
Simon Singh made a similar point in the recent Wired interview you shouldn't miss.
A researcher could be doing really important work on global warming, and then somebody writes a column in
a national newspaper that completely undermines what they’re saying. But the scientist doesn’t think the
column is important—it’s just some nincompoop writing a column—so they don’t take that writer to task in the
way they should. It’s a case of saying, “How do we make a difference?” We certainly don’t make a difference
by just moaning over coffee the next day.
These ideas, with which I agree, are totally in opposition to traditional scientific culture, and with good
reason. Once you say something like "I can't believe Tom Fuller's latest, um, topsy-turvy piece. He really
has hid head, um, in the sand, that guy." you are doing two things. One, you are calling additional attention
to something that you don't feel deserves much attention. But more important, you are taking a public
position outside the peer review process on a matter that itself is outside the peer review process. That is,
you are stating an informal opinion, and therefore calling the neutrality of the scientific process into
question. It's nowhere stated in some indoctrination session that you shouldn't do this. But it's important
to realize that until recently this was the expectation.
161 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Indeed, this is the nugget of truth in Roger Pielke Jr.'s meandering and ultimately unsatisfying book "The
Honest Broker"; that an advocate cannot be a scientist and that a scientist cannot be an advocate. On this
key point, Roger is not saying anything new or controversial. On the contrary, it is people like Dean, or
Singh, or myself who are searching for something new.
A scientist is a person who wakes up every morning asking "How could I be wrong?" Such a person cannot
hold their own in a public debate against an advocate who wakes up asking "How could the scientist be
wrong?" Yet, the scientist who surrenders to the conventional techniques of public relations and
influencing public opinion, that is, to politics writ large, really does end up surrendering objectivity.
The public is more and more alienated from the scientific method and the scientific world view. (The ivory
tower is increasingly populated by second and third generation academics.) The desperate need is for
more people to understand not just what we know and what we suspect, but why we know and suspect
these things. This is a non-trivial task, and doesn't get any easier.
Defending science is not about yelling back. It has to be about the nature of objective inquiry. Not
everyone is going to be interested or capable of understanding this very well, but there are smart people
everywhere. We cannot afford to lose them. Winning them back is more than a matter of making
counterclaims.
On the other hand, we have to remain willing to say "no, that's wrong", in other words "science is open-
minded but skilled; our skills do not allow room for your hypothesis". And we have to claim that authority.
A model of biology that does not include evolution is simply wrong. We should not be taking polls to
establish how many people "believe in" evolution. The press and the schools and the political elites should
be treating this as fact.
Authority is not authoritarian. We are not telling people what to do about evolution. We are simply stating
the facts.
We have reached the point where superstition has better marketing than science. Fantasy may have better
appeal than reality at first blush. Reality is a refined, developed, adult taste. We can't live on candy bars
forever, and a society that tries is not long for the world. Why can we sell olives but not charts and graphs?
Does advocating for science undermine scientific objectivity? I think this is a pointless paradox. The missing
role must advocate for objectivity and yet connect objectivity to real-world situations where advocates for
fantasy are prevailing.
Can we call the missing role "science journalism" or "science writing" or "science outreach"? Perhaps, but
its funding model and its conduct are obviously in great need of redesign.
I don't find this role among Pielke's taxonomy. It's crucial. It isn't really policy advocacy. I think it needs to
be distinct from the role of those conducting the scientific enterprise. I think that the failures of the recent
past are to be blamed on people deliberately muddying the waters, but it's foolish to ignore the fact that
no serious resistance to organized misinformation came from either the scientific community or the press.
Posted by Michael Tobis at 10:34 AM
162 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/05 STAGES OF SUCCESSION:
WILD HAIRED SCIENTISTS ONLINE
Today, in an effort to get away from the technological whirl I've been in over the past few days, I
mostly mucked out the fountain in the garden, ate cold pizza and watched repeats of Hotel
Inspector and Supernanny. And now I feel ready to blog. As you know, I went to the Science
Online London 2010 two-day conference on Friday and Saturday.
I was really interested in Alan Cann's breakout session on "Students in the Sandbox". Alan gave
a lot of ideas for those of us involved in education to develop students' professional skills, such as
editing Wikipedia pages for credit. He had settled on FriendFeed as the simplest way for him and
his students to interact professionally, work collaboratively and share items of interest. Infinitely
preferable to Facebook, since it doesn't involve subjecting oneself to seeing photos of one's
students doing keg stands.
The problem from my perspective is that, firstly, we have a whole safeguarding issue - the Powers
That Be may not be too keen on me developing an online community for my students outside of
the protected environment of the college VLE, and that, secondly, it's hard enough to get the little
buggers to use their college e-mail when they'd far rather use their Hotmail or Yahoo IDs (which a)
they change every two weeks, and b) get caught in our spam filters), let alone sign up for another
application. The ideal solution would be if our VLE, Moodle, was sophisticated enough for a
FriendFeed type application to be installed - the news, blog and wiki pages just don't really cut it.
There was a brilliant session on I'm a Scientist by Sophia Collins and Shane McCracken. As you
may know, my students took part in I'm a Scientist in June of this year, and it was probably one
of the most useful, worthwhile and engaging activities they had ever done in the classroom. There
had been some backchannel complaining about how the PIs in many scientists' labs did not
approve of lobbying, blogging, and presumably outreach, so if nothing else, this is a means of
engaging with young people without even leaving your lab. The scientists thoroughly enjoyed
themselves - many of us have quite a shock when we first try to describe our science to someone
outside of our field. The kids will not be polite if they don't understand, so it's a very quick way of
learning how to communicate at a range of levels.
Being a sucker, I thought it might be fun to run an unconference session, and put forward the title
"Why does the public hate scientists, and how can we restore our 19th century reputation?". This
was put in as a joint session on engaging the readership with John Timmer, Ed Yong and Alok
Jha. Why yes, I was punching above my weight.
The video has been streamed, and you can watch the first of three below (I presume clicking
through will bring up the source page, where the rest of the unconference session is also
available archived.
If you only want to hear my dulcet tones, you can start the video from 12 minutes 30 seconds, but
I recommend watching all of this to hear John and Ed's opening throughts beforehand. I was rather
busy engaging in discussion and keeping my eye on the ball to make my own notes during the
session, but there is a rather marvellous writeup from Adam Tinworth on "Bloggers,
163 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Commenters and the Reputation Game". He comments on how, while there were many
attempts to steer the discussion back to engaging with readers in blogs, there was more
enthusiasm for talking about the image and reputation of scientists. My hypothesis for this is that
there had been rather a lot of chatting about blogs and blogging, although the points raised by
John, Ed and Alok were new, and as such something non-blogging-related received more interest.
Some observations, however:
Not a lot of bloggers knew for a fact that they had non-scientist readers - while most of us have
readers in other scientific fields, as an outreach and engagement method, blogging could do with a
bit of refining (there were some heavyweight exceptions, of which Neuron Culture and Not
Exactly Rocket Science are two).
Very few scientists - STILL - engage in outreach, but when I laid down a gauntlet to them that
visiting schools and colleges was probably one of the most effective ways of interacting with non-
scientists, there did seem to be a murmur of agreement, and a couple of volunteers (note, I am
always happy to have scientists come to visit, and would be particularly interested in any London-
based scientists who would like a work experience kid for a week getting in touch).
There are data on public perceptions of science and scientists, but perhaps these don't tell us
exactly what we are looking for. There is also some disagreement about whether it is the public
perception of scientists or the public perception of science itself that requires some improvement.
I am also aware, having seen the photo of me looking very serious, that I need a better hairspray.
When I left the house on Saturday it looked as luxuriant and voluminous as Alok's. Suggestions
welcome in the comments.
2010/09/06 GUARDIAN BLOG MARTIN: HOW

NOT TO PASS A HOMEOPATHY EXAM
Last night I attempted to take an online homeopathy test. Did I pass? Read on to find out ...
One of the criticisms I often get from homeopathy supporters is that I don't really understand it. I'm not an
expert in the mystical art, so how on Earth can I pass judgement on it? So in an effort to prove them
wrong, I took this online homeopathy test that's been doing the rounds on Twitter (tip of the hat
to @zeno001 and @david_colquhoun). Here's how I got on with each of the multiple choice questions...
(and feel free to take a look and let me know how you get on in the comments!)
Q1. The word "Homeopathic" is correctly used interchangeably with the word:
164 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
"Bogus"? Strangely this isn't listed as an option, and neither is "watery","sham" or "made up bollocks", so I
plump for "none of the above".
A similar question was posed by Dr Shaun Holt in the New Zealand Medical Journal to patients using
homeopathy – it turned out that 92% of users didn't actually know what it was, which gives some
indication of how clearly homeopaths communicate their ideas to the public – although to be fair, if they
were my ideas I'd be pretty vague about them too.
My answer: None of the above (Right)
Q2. Although the "Law of Similars" (like cures like) had been known since the time of Hippocrates, this
German physician and chemist is the man responsible for developing the medical modality known as
Homeopathy in the early 1800s
I'm curious about the Hippocrates claim, so I Google it and find the following explanation:
"In one his treatise [sic] he admits that apart from the general rule of treatment contraria contraries the
opposite rule also holds good in certain cases viz similia similibus curentar."
If anyone can figure out what that says, do say so in the comments. I won't read it because I don't actually
care, but people will think you're really clever.
The options given are "Heimlich", "Asperger", "von Basedow","Grafenberg", and "Samuel Hahnemann".
Four of those people have made some sort of contribution to medicine, so it must be the other one.
My Answer: Samuel Hahnemann (Right)
Q3. In Great Britain, Homeopathy is more commonly called:
"Water".
Actually the answer is "homoeopathy". Bonus points for anyone who can pronounce that correctly in the
comments.
My Answer: Homoeopathy (Right)
Q4. The more a particular homeopathic remedy undergoes this process, the more profound its effect on
the living organism:
Racking my brains, the only way I can think of to make a homeopathic remedy have a profound effect on a
living organism is to drop it on one from a very great height. Maybe the process is "selling", and the
profound effect is on the wallet?
But I'm guessing they mean health effects, so it's going to be "dilution". Or at least it is in the fantasy world
of homeopathy – in the real world, pouring water into this Scotch I'm drinking is giving disappointing
results.
My Answer: Dilution (Right)
Q5. A classical homeopathic doctor will conduct a comprehensive interview with a new patient, noting
major and minor symptoms, in order to determine as complete a "symptom picture" of that patient as
possible so that a single remedy which most closely resembles the picture (i.e., which would CAUSE these
symptoms in a healthy person if given in undiluted form) can...
165 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
I get bored before the end of the question and doze off for a bit. When I wake up, I dry the Scotch (well,
mostly water) off my lap and pick a random answer. After a strong start, it's my first failure. My dreams of
becoming a homeopath would be in danger if I had any, but fortunately I'm not a moron, so I don't.
My Answer: Symposium (Wrong)
Q6. A homeopath might use this remedy to successfully treat the symptom picture which includes,
"anguish, hay fever, enlarged liver, rapid pulse, exhaustion, burning in eyes":
Personally, I hope anyone with an enlarged liver and dodgy pulse sees an actual, proper doctor, not a
homeopath, and especially not a homeopath who knows the correct answer to this question, which turns
out to be"arsenic".
Yes, according to homeopaths, arsenic is the best treatment for anguish."Are you feeling suicidal? Here,
take some arsenic."
Arsenic deals with the root cause of hay fever, enlarged livers, rapid pulse, and many other conditions;
which is of course the debilitating condition medical people call "being alive".
My Answer: Coffee (Wrong)
Q7. Homeopaths refer to physicians who practice conventional Western Medicine as:
"Evil"? "Big pharma stooges"? "****s who want to inject poison into your babies"?
In fact the answer is "allopaths", a term which highlights the main difference between homeopaths and
conventional doctors – homeopathsbelieve that like cures like, so that a substance which causes a
symptom can, when diluted, cure it; whereas allopaths are roads for French people.
My Answer: Allopaths (Right)
Q8. By the year 1900, approximately what percentage of US physicians were homeopaths?
The options are "5%", "10%", "20%", "50%" and "43%", so feeling smug I plump for "43%" as it rather
obviously sticks out. But no! It's a cunning trap!
I've been outsmarted by a homeopath. It's time for another Scotch. Two questions to go, and it's falling
apart, much more of this and I may not pass ...
My Answer: 43% (Wrong)
Q9. In 1900, there were 22 homeopathic medical colleges in the US, but the last US medical school
(awarding MD degrees) to teach Homeopathy exclusively closed in:
You really get the impression that homeopaths are pining for the glory days of the late Victorian era, when
men were men, homeopathy was all the rage, and life expectancy was roughly 47. Now of course we have
allopathy, and life just drags on for fucking ages.
I guess "1920". It's "1920".
I'm not sure how knowing this will really help with working as a homeopath. I'd like to know some more
about the basics, like how much do you have to shake the flask to make the magic work? Oh wait, that was
answered by Peter Fisher in the Science and Technology Select Committee Evidence Check, and since I
never tire of reading this quote, here it is again in all its inane glory.
166 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
"Dr Fisher stated that the process of 'shaking is important' but was unable to say how much shaking was
required. He said 'that has not been fully investigated' but did tell us that 'You have to shake it vigorously
[...] if you just stir it gently, it does not work'."
Two hundred years. You have had two hundred years.
My Answer: 1920 (Right)
Q10. The man sometimes referred to as "the Father of Modern Homeopathy," and who, to date, has
trained over 5000 medical doctors worldwide, including hundreds of American MDs, at his International
Academy of Classical Homeopathy on the Greek island of Alonissos ... Mr. George Vithoulkas ... is not a
physician, himself. He was originally:
Several answers spring to mind, but those would be childish and rude, so I look at his Wikipedia page for
inspiration.
The page doesn't mention what he was originally, but apparently he is"widely considered to be the
greatest living homeopathic theorist," an accolade up there with "world's best Pot Noodle chef" in that it's
vaguely impressive, but you can't help wondering why they didn't apply themselves to something that
actually has a point.
Reading further it turns out that one of George's beefs with modern medicine is that old people just aren't
dying like they're supposed to:
"In the past, old people were getting illnesses and getting ready to die; but then they were given
antibiotics, and they would go into a state of Alzheimer's and after that they would live very long ... They
are included in the figures for average life expectancy, but they are not alive."
Concerns about undead OAPs aside, it's worth mentioning that George is about 78.
My Answer: An Optician (Wrong)
So I've weighed in with a mediocre 6/10, which is not pathetic, but not brilliant either. This NHS-funded job
as a doctor of homeopathy is probably beyond someone of my limited intellect, but can you do any better?
2010/09/06 GUARDIAN SCIENCE BLOG: PEER

REVIEW IS NO PICNIC
Anyone who thinks peer review is a process of nudges and winks from your mates has never faced the
harsh reality of having your work pulled apart, says Jenny Rohn (who has)
167 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Peer review is far from the chummy process many people think
While commuting into the lab the other day, I couldn't help overhearing an animated discussion between
two men across the train carriage from me. From context, I pieced together that they were talking about
climate science.
"The thing about these scientists," said the first guy, with a distasteful emphasis on the last word, "is that
they get loads of grant money, so they just make stuff up that makes their research look good. They don't
really care about the truth."
"They can't be objective," the second guy agreed. "It's all driven by money these days."
"It sounds more serious if they pretend that the ice caps are melting," said the first guy. "Then they're
more likely to get more grants to make up more stuff the next time."
Many years of practice on public transport have taught me how to keep a straight face – and a firmly
clenched jaw – when hearing utter poppycock in progress. But I still find it distressing when people bad-
mouth my profession. This little exchange may not represent the views of your average person, but it is not
the first time I've heard such an accusation. Evenmainstream British journalists have been known to
imply that scientists are motivated more by money than the truth.
Such disparaging claims are doubly infuriating considering the immense effort that most scientists employ
to prevent themselves from being falsely swayed. Take peer review as a prime example. Far from being
"largely hokum", or a biased perusal by a crony, liable to nudge-wink away any inaccuracies, a referee
report can be about the harshest criticism you will ever face. Believe me, I've seen some that make a
drubbing onRottenTomatoes.com look like a gushing five-star review. My friends and I like to collect
amusing referee put-downs, and our list includes phrases such as "incredibly lame", "utterly puerile" and
(my favourite) "What are these guys smoking?"
If even the remotest soft white underbelly exists in your research, peer reviewers will home in on it
unerringly and make you fix it. And if you don't fix it to the journal editor's satisfaction, your paper will not
see the light of day.
Although the safety of anonymity probably encourages the nastiness of some peer reviewers, punches
don't get pulled much in the flesh, either. After the very first talk I ever gave at an international
symposium, one of the field's worthies rose to his feet in the hushed auditorium and proclaimed, with a
scathing sneer, that my theory was completely misguided. I was too shocked to make the reasoned
rebuttal that I could easily manage today, and too innocent to realise that the man's chief objection
168 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
stemmed from the threat that my (ultimately true) findings cast on his own work. Since then, I have seen
many colleagues skewered on the podium in their turn, and know that such friction – whether misguided
or spot-on – is all part of the process of polishing truths out of rough ore.
But the innate natural scepticism of scientists goes much deeper – and gets far more personal. Forget
trying to dazzle my scientific critics – I'd be happy most days just managing to dazzle myself. So deeply
steeped are we in thinking critically and sceptically that it can be hard to convince ourselves when our own
research is – against all odds – actually going rather well. I myself have been battling with a recalcitrant
theory for months now, about how cancer cells take up the shapes they do, and ultimately exploit this
knack to migrate inappropriately around the body. The preliminary evidence was quite exciting, but with
practised ease I managed to squelch any optimism when presenting it to my lab-mates in the weekly
meeting. Similarly trained, my colleagues didn't even raise a collective eyebrow at the enticing result,
instead peppering me with a fusillade of counter-arguments and potential fatal flaws that I'd need to rule
out.
So back I trudged to the lab, convinced it would all come to nothing but determined to see it through
nonetheless. I won't bore you with the twists and turns. Suffice it to say that I mashed up my cancer cells,
stained them, poked and prodded them, gazed at them endlessly under the microscope, perturbed their
genomes six ways from Sunday, week in and week out. The enticing result kept coming through in a faint
shimmer, much like the sun on an overcast December afternoon in London: you sense it's there but you
can't quite make out its outline.
Until one day – just last week – I performed the definitive experiment, looked through the microscope and
felt an almost visceral clicking into place: my theory appeared to be true.
And I almost fell off my stool in surprise, so primed had I been to expect failure. You couldn't really call it a
eureka moment: modern molecular biology doesn't tend to move in paradigm shifts. Every finding is
incremental and bitty in the grand scale of biological complexity, and we scientists are but tiny cogs in a
vast, global knowledge machine.
So let's call it a eurekalette. At any rate, I've been walking around with a little spring in my step ever since,
and am looking forward to pulling it all together in the manuscript I'm writing.
So the next time you hear someone asserting that scientists aren't critical, of their own work or that of
their colleagues, remember that if a finding has made its way into a reputable journal, it's most likely
despite every last objection that the researcher and all of his lab-mates could come up with – to say
nothing of those nasty peer reviewers.
Bless 'em.
Jenny Rohn is a research fellow at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Cell Biology at University College
London and writes a regular blog at Mind The Gap
JoeDunckley
a referee report can be about the harshest criticism you will ever face
It can be. The problem is that at the level of individual papers, there is huge variation in whether it actually is;
and there are a huge number of factors affecting how fair and thorough and competent a review is. Reviewing is
a skill like any other, it requires talent, knowledge, and effort. Some people aren't very good at it. Same goes
for editing and running journals. And writing papers, for that matter.
169 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
What matters in the context of the train anecdote is not that a single climate science paper went through a
harsh process of review -- some of them, by chance, will not have been very competently reviewed. What
matters is that climate science, like any academic field, is more than the sum (or indeed the average) of its
research papers. We can have confidence in the prevailing opinion of climate science because thousands of
studies and millions of data points all support the one conclusion and the one overarching theory, and they can't
plausibly all be wrong -- not just because we have the filter of journal peer review, but because we have peer
review at the level of funding, because we have political and media scrutiny of science's value-for-money,
because science is a social process in which the scientist's status depends on the quality of their science,
because there are institutional mechanisms for punishing scientific fraud, and because most people -- even
scientists -- are not bad people.
Within the mass of studies and data points, there might a few individual incompetent, malicious, or fraudulent
articles that slipped through all of the assorted checks, including journal peer review (as a few articles sadly
are in every field of science). But to propose that all studies and data points have done so is to propose a vast
and absurd conspiracy.
Some people think of the paper as "the unit of science", and that peer review is theguardian of scientific truth.
I don't think that either are worthy of such great titles.
JenniferRohn
@JoeDunckley
You've made some excellent points and I largely agree with all of them. My aim was simply to point out, in an era
when some imply that scientists are lenient with one another (whether in peer review or other forms of
criticism), that critical scepticism is more the rule. Of course one can't make blanket generalizations about
every scientific discipline and journal, but there is a healthy debate within most fields and scientists are good
at policing themselves in a lot of cases -- though the inevitable bad apples do exist.
As far as peer review being 'the' guardian of truth, I agree that - as with any human endeavor - it can't be
perfect. If it is to be overthrown, however, we'd need a better replacement. Ideas?
footienut
Peer review is no doubt tough, but I am sure that what all scientists crave above all else is a thumbs up, or, a tip
o' the hat from Lord Monckton (climate change) and Melanie Phillips (MMR, evolution and climate change).
JenniferRohn
For me the main hurdle is to convince experts in the field who are actually qualified to judge my work. There
are only so many battles you can win.
JoeDunckley
Oh - absolutely, and I agree with the article entirely when we're talking about general scientific critical review
and checks. And I don't (necessarily) think that the peer review of journal papers needs to be overthrown, only
that we should be careful not to give the impression that it is the only (or even the best) part of the scientific
review process.
JenniferRohn
The title that was chosen for this blog (not by me) did rather over-emphasize the peer review aspects of
criticism.
Actually, as far as the best forms of criticism: in my own experience, it is the continual feedback I receive
from my lab mates, research supervisor and members of the department. As these folks are able to follow my
work over a long time-frame, they are better placed to put everything into context. I have been stopped from
many a wild goose chase over the years thanks to their tough love.
alicerosebell
Best peer review comment I ever got was in reply from an author I'd reviewed.
It was for a paper on science in fiction, which is a subject a lot of people seem to think they are the only
person to do any reserach on. This researcher wasn't quite so silly, but I did feel they'd missed out relevant
research that had been done on the topic and gave long detailed annotated bibliography along with my
comments. I wasn't so rude to actually say "do some bloody background reading", but that was what I was
thinking.
To paraphrase their response: "thanks for the comments from the anonymous reviewer many of which made me
very angry at first, but having looked over them I appreciate that they have made a better paper and even
where I haven't been able to use them will be useful in the future"
170 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
This is an attitude I can identify. I was impressed by the constructive approach and the way that author went
on to gave a spirited defense of the bits of the review comments they weren't going to take on and why. In the
end I said to the editor that although I personally disagreed with several points too, I was happy for the piece
to be published as it was still a fair analysis.
(I do appreciate differences in film studies from cell bio here...).
I was inspired by this author's approach, and tried the same recently: fighting for my case against peer review
analysis I really disagreed with.
I didn't get very far.
JenniferRohn
Thanks for your comments, Alice. In my field, issuing reasoned rebuttals to peer review is very common; most
editors are willing to listen to sensible counter-arguments. It sounds as if, in the case you described, you were
the best possible referee: you could have just said "the authors needs to do more research" - but you did a lot
of work for them. I always appreciate reviews where the referees have obviously taken a lot of time and energy
on my behalf - even when their comments make me realize I've been stupidly remiss in some department or the
other.
Having been polite in the process was a bonus.
gozdez
As always, I love reading the discussions at the end of an interesting post...
The limitations of peer review are well known. The key is not to rely on one system as @JoeDunckley suggests.
I'd like to quote Richard Horton here. I think this reiterates some of what @joeDunckley says but in a far less
eloquent manner:
"The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was any more than a crude means of discovering
the acceptability -- not the validity -- of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on the pivotal
importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make
science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust,
unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently
wrong.
"A recent editorial in Nature was right to conclude that an over-reliance on peer-reviewed publication 'has
disadvantages that should be countered by adequate provision of time and resources for independent
assessment and, in the midst of controversies, publicly funded agencies providing comprehensive, reliable and
prompt complementary information.'"
http://bit.ly/c2E5EW
JenniferRohn
@gozdez - agreed, and thanks for the Horton quote. I would never deny that peer review has many problems.
Just to reiterate again that the main point of my post was to discuss the fact that scientists are very critical -
of their own work and that of others. Peer review is one way of many to scrutinize a scientist's work - but as I
said above, a lot of the most valuable stuff happens early on, informally, amongst one's peers.
gozdez
@JenniferRohn Agreed - there are many more ways of criticizing/testing a scientist's work. This is why I'm a
big fan of improving the public understanding of how science works! I really like your website, LabLit.com, for
this purpose!
@
alicerosebell
has an interesting post on her blog about moving science journalism 'upstream' - to reveal the scientist's life,
the work they do and how they do it. With greater transparency, I wonder if this could help reduce conspiracy
theories that scientists make up melting ice caps for grant money!
I know you have probably come across Alice's post. I'm listing it here for other readers who may be interested.
http://bit.ly/by3pRX
Keep up the informative and entertaining writing! :)
JenniferRohn
Yeah, LabLit has been trying to drag people 'upstream' kicking and screaming for the past 5 years. Our whole
mission is that in helping to portray scientists as real people (whether in factual descriptions, or in
literature/films/TV), we might help improve trust. Mind you, I'm not sure there is any evidence that this would
work, besides just common sense - but it's good enough for me. I thought Alice's post was great.
171 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
(About conspiracy theorists, I sort of doubt the approach would be effective. This is because I am acquainted
with a few people like this, and though they like me, they don't equate liking and understanding me with trusting
my profession. There is a strange gap between the two that they seem unwilling, or unable, to bridge.)
DrJimbob
Talking of skewering young grad students and postdocs on the podium, a professor of plant genetics once
regaled me with the tale of a time when a colleague who, after listening to a talk given by a young grad student,
stood up and bellowed, 'Well this is all clearly nonsense, you seem to have absolutely no idea what you're doing,
nor any direction. Who on Earth is your supervisor?"
A: "Why, you, professor".
JRanderson
Hi Jenny,
It has been said that (like democracy), peer review is the worse system for evaluating scientific work - except
the alternatives. I'd be interested in your thoughts on whether peer review in its current form really is the
best system we have. Are there other options that might work better?
That scientists are prepared to lay into each other is not in doubt - and in my experience they are often very
happy to do it whether they are anonymous or not. But one problem with anonymity is it makes it easier for
reviewers to pursue personally motivated attacks=. Also, more than once I've heard of reviewers taking an idea
from a paper they were reviewing, reproducing the work and rushing it into print. Anonymity makes that kind of
skull-duggery easier.
Also, is the essentially amateur and chummy nature of the whole process really appropriate for a modern
profession? Should scientists be more open about the (in my view) huge limitations of peer review?
Thanks for the stimulating blog
James
PS I've been peer reviewed myself and can identify with much of what you say...
Petrona
Peer review works in conjunction with a fair (impartial) and knowledgeable editor to manage the process.
Authors usually feel their mss have been improved by constructive criticism of peer-review. One crucial aspect
of a fair process is, when the author has revised in response to technical criticism, for the independent
reviewers to see each others' comments on the ms as well as the author's response. In this way, any subjective
(non-objective) response from a peer-reviewer soon emerges. And the experience of the editor is also a major
factor.
Jenny, I loved reading about how your experiment supported your hypothesis. What a great experience. I look
forward to the result in the peer-reviewed literature soon.
Maxine Clarke, an editor at Nature (who for strange historical reasons owing to the Guardian's registration
nightmare, is here known as Petrona - it was that or nobody).
JenniferRohn
@Jimbob - fantastic anecdote - one I desperately hope is true and not an urban lab myth.
@James, I think we can all agree that peer reviewing could be better. I spent a few years out of the lab as a
journal editor a few years' back so I have first-hand experience with the pitfalls inherent in the referee
process -- especially in more marginal journals that struggle to attract excellent referees. As Maxine (Petrona)
points out above, a decent editor can help out by foreseeing problems with political sabotage or cronyism, and
by wrangling together the various reports to a fairer picture but again, in the lower echelons, journals can't
always employ the most experienced staff. Editorial boards composed of practicing scientists can also be
useful, but these are also not without their problems (if you read the second link in my post, it lays out some of
these issues in more detail).
The alternative? I guess people are talking a lot about crowd-sourcing refereeing - just putting papers online
and letting hundreds of scientists take a look instead of 1-3 as the current system employs: peer review as
Amazon.com ratings. I'm a little bit dubious of this simply because I've been tasked with finding referees for
papers and it's always a struggle just to score 4 or 5 per paper (to ensure that 2-3 actually return a timely
report). Several journals have offered online commenting facilities for their published papers, but again, as I
understand it, there has not been a great uptake for this sort of communal interaction. Finally, even with
crowd-sourcing, you're still dealing with human beings. I have been involved in the review of manuscripts where
literally the entire field was "against" the theory - getting a fairer deal from a crowd is not necessarily
guaranteed where there are fashions and tribes and factions and prevailing views.
172 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
So yes, we should be open about the problems, but in my own experience, the process has seemed to work fairly
well overall. Of course there are horror stories, but considering the sheer number of manuscripts that get
reviewed, I'm not necessarily convinced that the percentage that "fail" is more than with any human system of
judging -- e.g. juries on law courts. (But I'm happy to be shown otherwise with good statistics - and it's likely to
vary with scientific discipline as well, and I can only speak generally for my own.)
DrMaybe
Have been hit with the "lost a sheet of the printout, blame the original author" a couple of times, normally with
vitriolic complaint from the reviewer about the disjointed work with major holes in it. On the plus side, this
hasn't subsequently prevented publication, just delayed it until an alternative reviewer who can read whole
papers has been found.
JenniferRohn
I guess the dog will always eat someone's homework, DrMaybe. Hard these days to pull that one with all papers
being downloadable from reviewer websites...
I realized I forgot to add to my response to James Randerson's comment, about the "chumminess" of the peer
review process, is that there is a code of practice shared by most journals that prevents editors from sending
a paper to anyone in the author's own institution. Also, manuscripts are not sent to anyone who has co-authored
a paper in the past with the authors in question, or has any other sort of tangible connection (e.g. former PhD
supervisor). This also helps. Because editors want someone directly in the field, the paper tends to land on the
desk of one of your direct competitors - and I've already explained that these sorts can be about as far from
chummy as it gets.
DavidColquhoun
The problem, it seems to me, is that the number of papers submitted vastly exceeds the number of competent
referees. And the huge number of papers results from the rise of bone-headed bean counters who think they
can measure the quality of research by counting papers. The system seems designed to encourage spiv science.
It's a bit worse than that, because the bean counters are not all from HR departments who don't understand
science. They are also to be found among senior scientists (or ex-scientists) The spiv scientists have now found
their way on to journal editorial boards and grant-awarding committees, where they encourage more of their
ilk.
The large number of papers also places and impossible load on editors, who cannot be expected to know who is
competent to referee every topic. Even if they did, those people would spend their entire life refereeing
papers.
While I agree that public refereeing after publication hasn't, so far, worked very well, I expect that something
of that sort will eventually have to be the solution. Reviewing papers is a huge amount of (unpaid) work, but the
outcome is mainly to maintain a status hierarchy among journals, There are now so many journals that just about
anything, however poor, will eventually get published in one journal or another. Publishers benefit enormously
from this. You often have to pay the journal to publish your paper, the referees are not paid. Then your
university has to pay the publishers again to buy the journal. That sounds very like a gravy train to me.
Physicists have, for many years, pre-published papers on the web. I suspect that soon we shall all be doing it.
It's true that a lot of low grade stuff will appear, but it appears anyway.
Gareth100
The peer review process is very necessary but by it's very nature flawed. I have personal experience of papers
sometimes being reviewed by scientists who display a complete ignorance of the subject or whilst unable to find
fault with the methodology reject because the results conflict with their own cherished world view.
On a more serious note, I also know of instances where reviewers have delayed the publication of a manuscript
so that their own data in the same area can be rushed to publication before the reviewed manuscript or the
papers often appearing coincidentally in the same journal issue., which in my book is unacceptable behaviour.
Gareth100
Also I've heard that, particularly in the States papers to be refereed are frequently passed on to PhD
students to review as the requested referee is "too busy/can't be arsed" with the obvious consequences. It's
probably time that the anonymity of referees is removed by journals. I'd be happy for my identity to be known
by the authors whose papers I referee.
JenniferRohn
173 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
David, I also think there are too many papers and not enough good referees - and you are right, some journals
down at the bottom of the food chain will probably eventually publish even flawed papers. Because of this, I
would hope that science journalists are aware of the difference between a reputable journal and a bottom-
feeder, because they are all issuing press releases and to your average newspaper reader, a headline is a
headline, no matter its source. Certainly within the scientific sphere, papers in unselective journals do a CV no
favors.
I do also think that the crowd-sourcing peer review solution is inevitable, but the problem is the messy
transition: how do we get from here to there? Who is going to bother to go online and review my paper, unasked
and not coddled along by an editor? Will the funding bodies believe that my research is good enough to warrant
a grant if it's not published in a journal they recognize? Only today I received a mailshot from a place called
"WebMedCentral" that claimed it was "a unique portal for rapid and free dissemination of biomedical knowledge
through Post Publication Peer Review". But when I browsed through it didn't strike me as a place where people
would want to be seen. So I think changes are coming, but can't quite see how it's going to pan out. Will the
early adapters get crucified because they've sacrificed their career prospects on principle?
Gareth, as I mentioned above we all know horror stories about peer review (and every other human endeavor).
The question is, what percentage of papers don't get a fair deal? From my own personal experience over the
past 15 years or so of publication, it has been pretty good.
tomtom2
I don't understand why people want the peer-review process to be a guaranty of truth.
It cannot be and it is not accepted as such by the scientific community. I think the basic mistake people are
making is to consider scientific papers as "finished" science. They should rather be viewed as single
propositions belonging to a vast discussion.
A paper describe the work of a single research group (in general) in which they propose a viewpoint about a
particular subject. The publication in itself doesn't validate as "truth" the proposition. It barely attempt to
ensure that the work match some basic standard.
The validation come with time and it's a global process. It is the nature of science to produce controversies
that last decades. What you wish for when you're a scientist is that your work reach the status of 'textbook
knowledge', which takes a long time.
I understand that people want to control the pace of discoveries and would like to have a "tool" that allow them
to decipher upfront the true from the not true. Me too i wish Santa Claus existed.
It doesn't seem to me that science have failed people, considering how much of our economy and well-being rely
on its previous achievements.
And to answer a previous comment, i don't think the peer-review process qualify as amateurism, considering
what it has contributed to.
Aslo it should be noted that reviewer don't make decision. They advise the editor, who is making the final
decision. Editors are educated and intelligent and are in general able to ensure the process is not flawed. They
do so through the choice of the reviewers, and also assess the quality of the review. It would be very
interesting to have the opinion of one of them on this thread.
regards
Petrona
I agree with both David Colquhoun and Jenny that there are too many submitted papers overall (and one
corollory is not enough good referees, or rather people who can spare the time to properly referee) them all.
Another corollory is that nobody can read all the papers. Fewer journals is the answer, but as David says, with
ranking systems of assessment such as we currently have, it's quite hard to see how scientists can be
persuaded not to perform this particular type of adaptation in order to survive.
Preprint servers do work well in the physical sciences. Nature Publishing Group has provided a similar (free)
service for a few years now, called Nature Precedings, where scientists in other disciplines from those
supported by ArXiv can upload their preprints (and other material) and other scientists can read, rank, and
comment. This has had some success, but in general there are two big problems: (1) fear of "scooping" in
biological and chemistry disciplines (as well as some journals' publication policies which sadly preclude such open
pre-discussion); and (2) lack of participation of the peer group, as Jenny states. It's quite an issue and I am not
convinced either that "post everything/wisdom of the crowds" approach is a proper answer, though it is a
popular idea in some quarters.
174 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/07 NEW STATESMAN: WILL THIS
PICTURE COME BACK TO HAUNT NICK CLEGG?
Posted by Samira Shackle
Clegg was among 57 Lib Dem MPs who signed an NUS pledge to vote against any
rise in tuition fees.
Nick Clegg signs the NUS pledge in Cambridge during the election campaign.
It's been reported today that Lord Browne's forthcoming review of university finances is likely to favour
higher tuition fees over Vince Cable's proposed graduate tax. The review, due to be published on 11
October, is unconvinced by Cable's plans, which break the link between student and university. The
proposals are expected to allow vice-chancellors to raise their fees enough to allow a market between
universities -- £6,000 or £7,000 a year.
For the Liberal Democrats, this is problematic. For many years, one of i's flagship policies has been
opposition to any form of tuition fees at all.
The coalition agreement makes a brief reference to this potential crisis:
If the response of the Government to Lord Browne's report is one that Liberal Democrats cannot accept,
then arrangements will be made to enable Liberal Democrat MPs to abstain in any vote.
But will this be sufficient? As Greg Hurst points out in the Times (£), the NUS rather astutely persuaded all
57 Lib Dem MPs -- including Vince Cable and Nick Clegg -- to sign a pledge saying that they would vote
against any rise in tuition fees.
Clegg can be seen above proudly holding his signed pledge. Here's what he said at the time:
Labour and the Conservatives have been trying to keep tuition fees out of this election campaign. Despite
the huge financial strain fees already place on Britain's young people, it is clear both Labour and the
Conservatives want to lift the cap on fees ...
The Liberal Democrats are different. Not only will we oppose any raising of the cap, we will scrap tuition
fees for good, including for part-time students ... Students can make the difference in countless seats in
this election. Use your vote to block those unfair tuition fees and get them scrapped once and for all.
If he sticks to abstention -- as laid out in the coalition agreement -- rather than actively opposing any fee
hike, Clegg will be hoping that students don't take this advice too literally and punish the Lib Dems at the
next election.
Tags: education Nick Clegg universities Liberal Democrats

175 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
4 comments from readers
bonk
07 September 2010 at 12:35
It wont come back to haunt him,he'll ignore or blame labour business as usual for the cleggster
Tom
Oh, like Labour was haunted by it's failure to honour it's manifesto promises on tuition fees. Or on having an ethical
foreign policy, etc etc
Please try and live in the real world.
Ed
The coalition government has the perfect get-out for all broken promises - they just say 'the situation is far worse than
we could have imagined' = Carte Blanche for cuts
bonk
Oh yeah the lib dem manifesto was full of promises to hump the NHS and all public services yeah i really think its the
likes of you and your chums ought to be living in this real world as you put it,i fear your party may well not be around in
its current form for much longer if things go badly.
2010/09/07 WASHINGTON POST: IN EUROPE,

SCIENCE COLLIDES WITH THE BOTTOM LINE
By Anthony Faiola
IN MEYRIN, SWITZERLAND Using a machine kept colder than space, scientists at the world's most
ambitious international research facility are puzzling out the questions of the universe, working to re-
create the cosmic soup served up by the Big Bang. But the famous institute is also facing a far more earthly
conundrum: how to pay the bills.
An era of fiscal austerity is sweeping over Europe, with governments moving to slash record budget deficits
and avoid a Greek-like debt crisis by cutting everything from aid for single mothers to once-sacred state
jobs.
Under mounting political pressure, some countries are now balking at the mega-price tags of lofty regional
cooperation projects such as the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), home to the "Big
Bang Machine" that sprawls for miles across this complex straddling the picturesque border of Switzerland
and France.
Under orders from European governments to cut costs, CERN officials say, the institute is planning to
mothball all nine particle accelerators at the facility beginning in 2012 - saving $25 million on electricity
alone. The move will mean a critical period of lost opportunities for visiting research fellows and a year
without fresh data for projects, including one on the cusp of trapping an atom of antimatter to better
understand the early formation of the universe.
"It will now take a little longer to answer some of these questions," said Rolf-Dieter Heuer, CERN's director
general.
The pressure on European science, observers here say, is yet another legacy of the financial crisis. Nations
that overextended themselves in the past decade, taking on more and more debt, are now facing liabilities
so large that politicians in a growing number of European countries have decided that dramatic cuts in
public spending are the only answer. That stands in sharp contrast to the United States, where government
spending - including on science and technology - continues to steam ahead despite the record U.S. deficit.
176 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Some here fear that Europe could fall behind in the highly competitive world of scientific research, where it
now goes head-to-head with the United States and Japan.
The new coalition government in Britain, European science officials say, is leading the austerity charge, but
other nations including Italy and Spain are also warning of empty pockets curbing their contributions to
science.
Britain, for instance, has said it may not be ready to commit in December to funding for a second, far more
powerful European telescope on a mountaintop in Chile that could discern atmospheres on incredibly
distant planets. Science officials warn that domestic cuts in Britain set to be laid out in October might also
force the temporary closure of one of two high-tech national facilities near Oxford - the Diamond Light
Source particle accelerator or the Isis neutron source.
To maintain programs at the European Space Agency, Germany - which has vigorously protected science
and technology spending at home - is stepping in to cover shortfalls from other nations, such as Spain. But
even so, the space agency is set to cut internal and administrative costs by 25 percent to cope with fiscal
pressures and is waiting to see whether European governments will agree to new funding to help sustain
the international space station until at least 2020.
Meanwhile, the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility in Grenoble, France - where researchers used X-
ray fluorescence to illuminate the genius of Leonardo da Vinci's brush strokes and to study the skulls of
ancient hominids - has been asked by government donors to assess the impact of potentially sharp cuts to
its annual budget.
"We are all impacted, we are all living on the same planet as our member states," said Jean-Jacques
Dordain, the space agency's director general. "And we cannot ignore that most of our member states now
have budget constraints."
For years, science research in Europe has been somewhat of a sacred cow - an area in which the zeal to
pioneer knowledge for commercial and academic gain spawned jointly funded mega-projects. Indeed,
science officials here say they see the current fiscal pressures as temporary, with European governments
remaining strongly committed to long-term research.
But the pain of austerity is particularly acute at CERN, the European atomic physics complex whose almost-
mystical research - at temperatures approaching absolute zero, or minus-273 degrees Celsius - has been
dramatized in books such as Dan Brown's "Angels and Demons."
A Cold War-era construct from the 1950s, CERN was in part formed to get European nations working
together again in the spirit of science. Today, much of CERN's drama centers on the Large Hadron Collider,
a $10 billion particle accelerator buried 30 stories below green pastures 20 minutes west of Geneva.
Switched on in 2008, the machine made headlines for what it could potentially do - create mini black holes,
even search for new dimensions - and for what it could not - which was, namely, work. Ten days after
starting operations, it broke down, forcing a costly refit of its super magnets and towering circuitry that
funnel along a 17-mile circular track.
Fully functional since only last March, the collider was already scheduled to go down in 2012 for year-long
upgrades, leaving the center's other eight particle accelerators for its 2,000-plus researchers to work with.
But with European governments now demanding budget cuts of $135 million over five years, Heuer made
the decision to put all the accelerators on hiatus.
Delaying the projects for a year, he said, would avoid the need to eliminate them and give scientists time
to review mountains of data collected this year and next.
177 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
The 2012 shutdown will be even more severe than the last time the center powered down many
experiments in 2005, also for budgetary reasons. "Do we want to do this? No," Heuer said. "But it's the
best option I had."
Reactions here have ranged from grudging acceptance to frustration. Inside a warehouse-like lab in the
heart of CERN, for instance, scientists are tantalizingly close to achieving a milestone - the ability to trap an
atom of antimatter long enough to study it, getting closer to an understanding of why so much of it
disappeared at the dawn of time, leaving matter to spread across the universe instead.
If the project has not succeeded by the end of 2011, the 12-month delay, researchers say, will seem like an
eternity, too.
"It's like a 50-meter race where the runners are told to stop running," said Michael Doser, a leading
antimatter research physicist at CERN. "You can imagine what that does to the race."
Staff writer Marc Kaufman in Washington contributed to this report.
2010/09/07 GUARDIAN BLOG EVAN: LABOUR

LEADERSHIP CANDIDATES LEAVE SCIENTISTS IN
THE DARK
Party and union members have begun voting in the Labour leadership election, but Imran Khan is none the
wiser about the candidates' intentions for science and engineering
178 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Of the five Labour leadership candidates, only Ed (left) and David Miliband responded to questions about
science and engineering. Photograph: Nick Ansell/PA
The ballot papers are out and the Labour leadership election is entering its final straight. What will the
result mean for science and engineering?
To find out, the Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE) teamed up with Scientists for Labour (SfL) to
ask the five leadership candidates aseries of questions focusing on science and the economy, the use of
expert advice, and training the researchers of the future. This followed CaSE's own examination of Gordon
Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg just before the general election.
As well as giving us a new leader of the opposition, whose role it will be to hold the coalition to account,
the contest will potentially give us a future prime minister. So it's vital that whoever wins appreciates the
role of science and engineering to the economy and society.
The bad news is that three of the candidates – Diane Abbott, Ed Balls and Andy Burnham – failed to
respond to Scientists for Labour, despite having seven weeks in which to do so. The fact that SfL are a
highly engaged group for scientists within the Labour party makes the unanswered questions all the more
disappointing.
But the responses from David and Ed Miliband were promising – if a little vague. You can read the full
answers here.
David clearly understands the "multiplier effect" of spending on research, development and education,
whereby private-sector spending is leveraged by public spending, and he talked up schools specialising in
science and engineering.
Ed also gets the "false economy" of cuts in research funding, recognising the importance of science and
engineering to economic growth, and said he wants to ensure that "policy is thoroughly evidence-based".
There will be more specific issues that Labour will have to deal with in detail. Does it still want all students
to be able to study GCSE physics, chemistry and biology as three separate subjects? Is it committed
to raising the proportion of GDP that the UK spends on research and development?
Largely thanks to the efforts of two former science ministers, the widely respected and independently
minded Paul Drayson and David Sainsbury, Labour has enjoyed a reputation of being friendly to science.
This was tarnished by the sacking of Professor David Nutt towards the end of Labour's final term, but it's a
reputation that CaSE hopes the new Labour leader will reinvigorate.
Imran Khan is director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering and blogs at The Science Vote
179 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/07 GUARDIAN SCIENCE BLOG:
SCIENCE SIDELINED IN THE GOVERNMENT-PR-
MEDIA FRENZY
The Science: So What? campaign is a classic example of how bad science is ignored when agencies are only
interested in audience impact
David Willetts, in opposition at the time of the campaign, managed to criticise it and add to the
inaccuracies. Photograph: Martin Argles
Under the previous government, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) ran a campaign
called Science: So What? So Everything(SSW). It was designed to encourage young people via websites,
media reports and special events, to be inspired by the contributions of science to their lives.
The SSW campaign was not without problems. The project included a website that was expensive and
inefficient and got little traffic for a campaign of this type. And then there were serious concerns about the
quality of some of the research that BIS was promoting. In particular, a report on future jobs in science by
the Fast Future consultancy was heavily promoted during the campaign despite failing to meet some basic
standards.
Both the department and its SSW campaign have come under fire from researchers in public and in private.
We were interested in how BIS responded internally to these criticisms, which sought to improve their
activities. So we submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to find out.
180 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Good quality research depends upon robust, critical appraisal. As BIS is a major player in the UK's research
work – and as the SSW campaign was intended to promote science, technology, engineering and
mathematics – we hoped the department would reflect the standards that contribute to the UK's
reputation for excellent research. We hoped, for example, that since the department plays a role in
assessing the quality of research in UK universities the studies it commissioned itself would be robust. Our
findings are not encouraging. They suggest BIS did not respond appropriately to concerns about the SSW
campaign and that their way of measuring success was questionable.
The report on future jobs in science was commissioned and promoted as part of the SSW campaign by BIS,
under the former business secretary, Lord Mandelson . The report was garlanded with supportive
statements from the former science minister, Lord Drayson, and even the former prime minister, Gordon
Brown.
As soon as the report was released, major concerns were raised by bloggers and academics about such
things as the methodology, the inappropriate use of Wikipedia and implausible claims about
nanotechnology. These serious issues were largely missed by the mainstream media, beyond a blog on
the Guardian's science website andan article in the Times Higher Education Supplement that criticised the
report.
The Conservative party – then in opposition – failed to challenge the report effectively. It even issued a
press release that added further errors. For example, it argued that a worldwide survey used for the report
"determined that 'Virtual Lawyer' is the fantasy job which people in Africa, Peru and Pakistan think is 'likely
to be the best paid'." But as the Fast Future report makes clear, this was based on responses from only one
person in Peru and one in Pakistan. It would be rather tenuous to assume their compatriots share their
views. It is unfortunate that the Conservative party's criticisms of such a flawed document were
themselves so ill conceived. More worryingly, the press release went out with David Willetts's name in the
headline along with a lengthy quote. Willetts is now minister for universities and science.
When BIS evaluated the success of the future jobs report, it used media coverage as a gauge and all but
dismissed any criticisms. Our FOIA request shows that the PR agency Kindred (which worked for BIS on the
project) noted that the report achieved "178 pieces of coverage across national, regional, consumer and
online media … A combined OTS *opportunities to see+ of 60,985,597 … An AEV *Advertising Equivalent
Value+ of £2,248,866". This is a poor measure of success in science communication. Public understanding
of and engagement with science cannot usefully be measured by column inches in the press, without also
considering the accuracy and efficacy of the project in question.
There were also crude attempts to assess the online impact of coverage of the Future Jobs report. Kindred
said the story "generated a seven-fold increase in volume of traffic to the campaign website". The increase
raised the traffic to "7,733 website hits during the six days after the launch of the activity (compared to
1,167 website hits for the same period before the activity launch)". For a campaign aimed at millions of
young people and backed by a £1m-plus budget, this trumpeted increase is pathetic.
In dealing with criticisms, BIS and Kindred focused on managing negative publicity rather than on
correcting mistakes or meaningful engagement with critics. For example, when the nanotechnology
blogger James Haytoncriticised the Fast Future report, an email exchange supplied in response to our FOIA
request argued that "James' blog isn't particularly well known … Not that this means his criticisms aren't
well-founded, but I doubt appeasement will be a worthwhile strategy". The emails are so heavily redacted
it is impossible to know whether the comment was from a civil servant or a BIS contractor. In deciding
whether to respond to Hayton's blog, these email exchanges gave considerably more attention to whether
Hayton's criticisms would appear on the Guardian's science blog and how to distance BIS from any criticism
than was given to the accuracy and significance of his points: "Given the reach of the Guardian blog, we
believe that it is a worthwhile exercise for Rohit [Talwar, the author of the Future Jobs report] to provide
181 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
some form of response." The email exchange states that "while tacitly looking over Rohit's response, it
needs to come from him (rather than Kindred, and certainly not BIS)".
Responses to mainstream media criticism of BIS's practice were no better. In response to the Times Higher
Education Supplement article, BIS emphasised the "speculative" nature of the research behind the future
jobs report. It was left to Talwar to claim that the approach taken is "accepted best practice in horizon
scanning". The importance of the THES article was downplayed, with one email exchange citing a single
tweet stating that "Jonathan Mendel [quoted in the THES article criticising the future jobs report] is a prat"
as evidence that there was little interest in the story. Substantive criticisms from the THES article and
elsewhere were not addressed in the documents supplied to us.
When preparing a statement on the response to the future jobs report for then science minister, Lord
Drayson, a draft saying that the "vast majority" of coverage of the campaign was positive was revised with
the effect of marginalising criticism further. The final version simply stated that the campaign "has
generated a great deal of positive coverage". Failures by BIS to uphold basic standards raise concerns
about how they engage with the professions within their remit and are frankly embarrassing for those of
us who work within and are keen to promote the UK's excellent research sector.
While BIS failed to redact Hayton's name from the documents released to us and left at least one other
individual easily identifiable, they redacted so much from the email exchanges that it is not always clear
which organisation is saying what. This is hardly in line with the government's claim that "transparency
across all departments [is] a necessary and important part of making government more accountable". We
appreciate it can be important to protect the identities of individuals, but there is a public interest in
knowing whether particular statements were made by government departments or by contracted
organisations.
What stood out in the documents BIS released to us was how government, PR agencies and mainstream
media worked as a closed and vicious circle. The government commissioned and promoted bad research;
PR agencies promoted this to the media and the media overwhelmingly reported the government line. The
project was then deemed a success because of the positive media coverage. Critical engagement with
research and appropriate analysis of the tools, goals and achievements of research communication were
marginalised. Given the damaging nature of such vicious circles, there is a danger that poor policies and
practices will go unchallenged because critics are frozen out.
We hope the new government will engage better with researchers. This means being open to a genuine
dialogue and listening to constructive criticism. Before the election, Conservatives and Liberal
Democratsemphasised the need for evidence-based policy, but we have yet to see convincing signs that
this is happening. Promises of engagement and evidenced-based policy seem to have become less of a
priority than ensuring that mantras of cuts, austerity and reform remain in the headlines.
Alexander Holmes is a biologist
Jonathan Mendel is a lecturer in Human Geography at the University of Dundee
182 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
2010/09/07 GUARDIAN SCIENCE BLOG
BUTTERWORTH: PETER HIGGS, UCL AND THE
RIGHT HONORABLE WILLIAM WALDEGRAVE
We're not just looking for his boson, we also gave Higgs a fellowship and explained his mechanism to
William Waldegrave
I won't make a habit of writing about my meals. But yesterday I had a very nice dinner, most notable to me
for the presence of Professor Peter Higgs*. For several years I have been trying to find out whether his
ideas on the origin of mass and the unification of fundamental forces are correct, so I think a mention is
excusable.
The cocktail party analogy of the Higgs mechanism, featuring Margaret Thatcher as a particle. Cartoon:
Cern
Higgs was a lecturer at University College London a long time ago, before he moved to Edinburgh and
wrote his famous papers. On this occasion we were recognising his huge contribution by awarding him an
honorary degree. He is a charming and modest man. I last met him trying to explain to John Denham and
Ian Pearson (who were government ministers at the time) why science was important.
The lecturing connection and our search for the boson are not the only links between UCL and Higgs. In
1993 when the government was deciding whether or not the UK would participate in the Large Hadron
Collider, the then science minister William Waldegrave challenged particle physicists to explain to him how
the Higgs boson gave things mass. Many particle physicists responded, and the most quoted of the winning
entries came from Professor (now emeritus) David Miller at UCL, who was also there last night.
The same explanation was re-used this year by a friend and colleague (and dodgy banjo player) Bob
Stanek from Argonne National Lab, in Morgan Freeman's "Through the Wormhole" programme, with
President Obama substituted for Margaret Thatcher.
183 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
I can't really explain it better than David. It is an analogy for some beautiful mathematics, and it misses out
some important stuff of course, but it is accurate as far as it goes, and it is certainly the best explanation I
have ever seen of the relationship (and difference) between the Higgs boson and the Higgs (or possibly
BEHHGK) mechanism. In an amazing example of internet durability, David's full explanation is still
available here. Enjoy.
* Ok, actually I was just as excited to meet some of the others there too.

AlokJha
Though brilliant, perhaps time to replace Margaret Thatcher in the explanation of the Higgs? Who is the 2010
equivalent? Forget Barack Obama, surely the Twitter choice is Stephen Fry, of course. Or Justin Bieber (whoever he
is). Any other suggestions?
Synchronium
AlokJha: Stephen Fry wouldn't do us any favours. The religious nuts would all kick off if the "God particle" turned out
to be gay.
Synchronium
(PS, I'm aware that last comment wasn't accurate, just couldn't resist a pop at faith.)
2010/09/07 I AM SCIENTIST GET ME OUT OF

HERE: READ ABOUT OUR SESSION AT SCIENCE
ONLINE CONFERENCE
We‟d never been to the Science Online conference. And we‟d never given a presentation about I‟m
a Scientist, Get me out of Here! But when the organisers asked if we‟d like to do a session on the
event we jumped at the chance.
We then closed the office for the whole of August, so we had to write and organise our highly
interactive, possibly risky session in 2 days when we got back last Wednesday. At the same time
as do all our catching up from the holidays.
Last week was an interesting week…
So here is a summary of our session (last Fri, 3rd Sept) and what we, and others, said.
OUR PRESENTATION
At Gallomanor we like to walk the walk, as well as talk the talk. So we wanted to make the
session as interactive and audience-led as possible. After a short (2 min) intro, we showed the
audience the 12 topics we‟d prepared and asked which 6 they wanted to here about.
Here‟s the prezi presentation, with a slide on each topic. I‟ll summarize below what we were going
to say on each – including the ones we didn‟t cover on the day.
IAS Solo on Prezi
1. Film – we showed our ‘Intro for the classroom’ film.

184 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1T4zi-DIh8
2. Our Philosophy
The audience didn‟t vote to hear about this, which was a shame as I think it‟s really important in
explaining why we do what we do, and how. Fools, fools!;-) Maybe we should have called it
something more exciting sounding…
Anyway, key points would have been:-
 We reverse normal power structures (kids in our event are given some decision-making power
and the chance to ask what THEY want to ask). This engages pupils who are normally turned
off. See more on my thinking here in this piece on the Secrets of Engaging Teens.
 Making it fun and game-like is not a gimmick and doesn‟t make something not educational. It
makes people pay attention and be interested! (e.g. this research)
 It‟s not just about getting kids to study science. Not all teenagers will grow up to be scientists,
but they will all grow up to be people, and need to have a relationship with science. More on
this point in this article for Wellcome Trust blog.
 Scientists have a lot to gain from engagement too – they aren‟t just doing everyone a favour.
They can be energised, challenged and made to think by the huge variety, and inventiveness,
of students‟ questions.
“a 4.00am Eureka! moment solved a problem that‟s been bugging me for the best part of a year.
It came from a seed of an idea planted in my head by a simple question from a 13/14 year old,
absolutely bloody marvellous! Next day I was skipping into work like a refugee Munchkin from the
Wizard of Oz, bleary eyed but elated.”
3. History of event
Shane thought of the idea for our sister event I‟m a Councillor, Get me out of Here! while drinking
Guinness. It‟s been running since 2002, helping councils and local councillors to engage with
young people in their area.
We came up with the idea of doing a science version in 2007 and ran the first, pilot event in 2008.
4. Funding
The pilot was funded with a People Award from the Wellcome Trust. We then successfully applied
for a follow up grant from Wellcome‟s Society Award scheme.
We love Wellcome and they are fab. We approached lots of people – people like BIS and Dept of
Education who you‟d think would be the right people to approach, and we got nowhere. All roads
led back to Wellcome.
If you‟d like to apply for science engagement money from Wellcome, our advice would be:
 Make sure you understand what they value and what they are looking for, and that your project
fits in with that.
 Contact them early and talk to them.
 Make sure you have really thought it through and explained your plans (not just vaguely). They
will fund imaginative, even risky stuff, but they want to know you aren‟t going to piss the
money up the wall.
 Realise the importance of formative (and summative) evaluation.
5. Site detail
Shane was just going to run through what‟s on the site and how it works. You can prob just have
a look for yourself.
185 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
6. Site build
It was in Wordpress, cos we like and support open source, etc. And also cos Wordpress is great.
Apparently the site is doing things with Wordpress that no one has done before. This is of course
very exciting.
Developed by total legend Mike Little. Here‟s Mike‟s presentation about the project at Wordcamp
2010.
7. Scientist Recruitment
We pursued as many routes as possible to recruit scientists, including contacting learned

societies, universities, research institutes and companies. Personally, I also bore people to death
at parties and force my card on them if they are scientists or know any.
Because we‟d done formative evaluation (i.e. talking to possible end users) as part of the
development, we were able to focus communication and explain what the benefits would be to the
scientists.
Once we‟d run the pilot, word of mouth was one of our most powerful tools, as the scientists who
took part really loved it. We also had evaluation evidence to back up our claims of the benefits.
To select the scientists (as we are now oversubscribed) we involved our end users. For the last
event we took each scientist‟s one-sentence description of their work and put it up blind (i.e. just
their words, no information on age, gender, ethnicity, organisational affiliation) on a website
where students and teachers rated each description. We, and a representative of the Wellcome
Trust, also rated each scientist and we combined the scores.
We still want to find new ways of recruiting scientists, and particularly reaching the scientists we
aren‟t reaching at the moment. If you can help, let us know!And if you want to get involved, sign
up here.
8. Teacher recruitment
Timeline for debate kit sign ups, kit 1

Again, used many routes. As you can see from this graph of sign ups for debate kits, some of the
most powerful methods are direct mail, the Planet Science e-newsletter, and posting on the TES
message board.
186 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Also, for the big event in June, we got a significant number of sign ups from the STEMNET
newsletter and a few from many other sources. We think it‟s worth casting the net widely.
Again, word of mouth incredibly powerful. Especially because we recruited a „teacher panel‟ of
teachers to help us develop the project, before the pilot, and they became very invested in the
project and really helped us a lot. This emphasis on consultation with teachers also meant we
really were providing something they wanted, in a way that was useful to them.
Cross-marketing from our debate kits project was also incredibly useful. It enabled teachers to get
a sense of where we are coming from, and the quality of what we provide, before making the
commitment of signing up to a two week event.
We are oversubscribed with teachers too, and here part of our selection procedure is to
deliberately pick as varied schools as possible (geographically, type of school). This has included
Special Schools, Pupil Referral Units and Bristol Hospital Education Service. And also schools in
Shetland, Northern Ireland and Oman.
We also try to get a representative sample results-wise. By which I mean, high-performing

grammar schools are overly represented in the schools who apply, we try to even things out by
picking more of the less academically achieving schools. We think it makes a bigger difference to
those kids.
As with scientist recruitment, this is still a work in progress. If you can help us get the word out to
teachers (taking part is FREE to schools), please do! Or if you are a teacher who would like to get
involved, sign up here!
9. Evaluation strategy
Formative evaluation has been absolutely key. We started talking to scientists and science
teachers before we did anything else. Asking them about what they wanted, what would work for
them, what motivates them.
For teachers, we recruited a teacher panel of people interested in the project, who could give us
instant feedback via email on everything from lesson plan ideas to terminology on the site. This
also meant that they were invested in the project, when the pilot came around, and understood it
and what they could do with it.
We also included young people, for example testing possible designs on them. And we made
several school visits to observe science lessons.
We had a limited budget for the pilot, so much evaluation had to be done in house. But we set
aside money to appoint an external evaluation consultant, Yvonne Harris, to spend a few days on
the project. She advised us throughout, and also conducted some independent interviews with
participants at the end, and audited our report. This was absolutely invaluable as she could check
things like questionnaires and methodology as we went along, and suggest solutions we would
never have thought of, and bring an independent perspective to the whole thing.
It also helped that we had grown the project organically, as we had developed over the years
questionnaires that worked, and found (and corrected) many useability issues as we went along.
You can read our evaluation report on the pilot here.
We now have a much bigger budget for the roll out of the project, and we have devoted far more
of that to external evaluation. Kate Pontin is now our external evaluator, and she has been
invaluable in helping us think with clarity about what we need to find out and how we can do it.
She has also been able to do far more schools observation than we can, as we are busy running
the event while it‟s on! This has been extremely useful.
187 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Kate‟s interim report will be unveiled at a special event at the Wellcome Trust on 20th
October. This will be part of a special „Beyond Blogging‟ event, curated by us. Tickets will be very
limited, but do get in touch if you‟re interested in attending.
10 Evaluation findings
Shane outlined some topline figures so far from the 2010 events.
TopLine Web stats for IAS June 2010
 4,667 students
 100 scientists
 171 teachers
 6,580 questions
 3,085 comments
 4,744 votes
More in-depth evaluation results will be published on 20th October, as above.
In the meantime, you can read our full evaluation report on the pilot here.
A summary of the pilot evaluation report here.
Or our short evaluation report on the 2009 event here.
11. Summary of the strengths and weaknesses of this format
Strengths
 Power reversal truly engages and empowers.

 Online gives access to scientists (for schools) and students (for scientists), without having to go
anywhere.
 Doing it online also creates intimacy (makes it easier to ask real questions and break down
barriers), compared to a scientist in person giving a talk.
 It also „levels the playing field‟ – quieter and less confident students participate more.
 You‟re reaching all the students in the class – not just the very keen, as you find in science
clubs, etc.
 A conversation develops over time – over two weeks, students can read about the scientists, go
away and find out more, ask questions, think about the answers, ask more questions…
 For teachers, the preparation work is done for them and they can concentrate on facilitating
learning.
 For scientists, it saves time – no travelling to a school, they log in from their desk. Every
moment spent participating is spent in engagement.
 Scientists also find the range and energy of the questions rejuvenating, thought-provoking and
inspiring.
188 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
 And scientists get into the competitive aspect and have fun.
Weaknesses
 Some scientists (and some teachers) don‟t like the informality of the project, although we think
it has real value in making connections and breaking down barriers.
 We‟ve disguised the learning and made it fun, so some teachers/scientists/students don‟t see
that it‟s there and think it „won‟t help them pass exams‟. (God help us if that is the only thing
some people think education is about).
 Schools IT (sigh!). Often school firewalls are over-enthusiastic and we do have some problems
with schools blocking the site.
 It can be hard work for the scientists. Some had ~700 questions to answer!
 It‟s expensive to run (although not compared to many other projects).
12. The Question Game
Our question comedy improv game! OK, so not very comedy, and not actually improv, but kind of
a game, inspired by Whose Line is it Anyway? Audience members shout out a word, any word,
and we search the site to see if there are questions (or answers) containing that word. Intended
to give an insight into the enormous range of questions.
Here‟s some results
Search dinosaur
Search space
Search evidence
If you want to play the question game for yourself (be warned, browsing the site can be
addictive!), just go to the main page and type in the search box near the top.
LIVE CHAT
After the presentation, we wanted to give the audience a feel for what live chats are like, and why
they are so popular with scientists, students and teachers. So we had a live online chat, with the
audience taking the place of students. We gave out log in details and everyone in the audience
who had a laptop (quite a few, it being Science Online) could log in and take part. We also showed
the chat on the projector.
Some of the key benefits of live chats:-
 Access to people who couldn‟t be there otherwise: We had a scientist in Michigan, one in
Sydney, a teacher in Shetland, and a student who was in school. All of them had taken part in
the event and answered questions from the audience about what it was like.
 Immediate and friendly
 Fun
Later today we‟ll put up an archive of the chat that took place. Some notes on our live chat format
 Newer comments appear at the top, so you need to read upwards.
 Discussion isn‟t threaded – we‟ve found that breaks up the chat too much and stops it being a
communal experience.
 Chats can be difficult to follow at first, but you get used to it quickly. Students are often quite
familiar with chatrooms and don‟t find it‟s a problem.
 There are two chatrooms side by side, one for students, one for the scientists. (In this chat that
means one for audience and one for our participants). This makes it more difficult to
understand an archived chat, however, we‟ve found from experience that if the scientists and
189 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
students are all in the same box, the scientists‟ replies get lost in an avalanche of comments
from students, so this works better.
Q+A
Despite our best intentions, Q+A actually ended up spilling into all of the session and we started
taking questions during some of the earlier presentations, and during the live chat. Personally, I
think this was in some ways the most engaging part of the session, as we were talking directly to
people and they were asking questions, rather than us lecturing them presentation-style:-).
To get an idea of what was discussed, I think your best bet is checking the tweets from the
session (link below).*
*We made a tactical error really: so that the twitterfall in our session was a useful backchannel,
(rather than a tempting view of other parallel sessions that people were missing!), we suggested
a special hashtag #iassolo. I now realise it would have been better to keep the #solo10 hashtag,
but just add an extra #ias, then all the hashtags from our session would have been archived
along with the others from the conference. Oh well, you live and learn.
Archive of tweets relating just to our session, hashtag #iassolo.
2010/09/07 GUARDIAN SCIENCE BLOGS: YOU

TOO CAN BE A MEDICAL* PRACTITIONER
Simply register with the School of Old Wives' Traditional Medicine and we'll give you a big impressive
certificate
*no medical training required
Your old mum's pearls of wisdom are all you need to qualify from the
School of Old Wives' Traditional Medicine. Photograph: Old Vic Productions/PA
190 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Do you remember the traditional way to treat burns? Or what would happen to your face if the wind
changed? If you think you can answer these questions, why not become a registered practitioner of Old
Wives' Traditional Medicine?
Tomorrow at 11.30am outside the Department of Health in London, a new professional registration
scheme for practitioners in the medical tradition of Old Wives' Tales will be launched. A group of junior
medics and scientists from the Voice of Young Science (VoYS) network will form the new VoYS School of
Old Wives' Traditional Medicine (pdf). They will hand out diplomas for people to practise Old Wives'
Traditional Medicine, registering members of the public who can correctly answer questions about
traditional cures and advice. The assessment is free of charge and absolutely no medical training or
understanding of human physiology is required.
Hang on a moment. Surely it is better to stop people practising medicine that isn't evidence-based rather
than encourage it? Well, according to the Department of Health, to be worthy of a professional registration
scheme all that really matters is for practitioners to be following traditional methods. In a Department of
Health steering committee report, and a later consultation to look into how the government should
regulate traditional medicine practitioners, a professional registration scheme was proposed.
Just like the VoYS scheme, it would register practitioners for everything except whether a practitioner has
medical training or whether the field is based on proper evidence.
The VoYS School of Old Wives' Traditional Medicine is delighted with this proposed scheme, as it flatters
practitioners just for following traditional methods, and does away with the need for any of that difficult
medical training. And while Trading Standards and other schemes already regulate practitioners for
standards of hygiene, English fluency and criminal records, a Department of Health stamp of approval is far
more glamorous.
But hang on a minute. What if you want little Johnny to be treated by someone with professional medical
training? Could that lump that's appeared on the side of his face be indicative of something more serious
than the wind changing while he pulled a face?
Sense About Science and a group of professional societies including the Academy of Royal Medical
Colleges, the Royal College of Pathologists and the Institute of Biomedical Sciences are indeed concerned
about the risks of misdiagnosis (pdf), dangerous drug interactions and the problems of blurring the line
between what is and what is not medicine.
But the new scheme has the Department of Health's approval, so there can't be anything to worry about,
can there? And as the previous health minister Andy Burnham said:
I believe that the introduction of such a register will increase public protection, but without the full
trappings of professional recognition which are applied to practitioners of orthodox healthcare."
Dr Tom Dolphin, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association's juniordoctors committee, objects:
Providing regulation that looks like the kind of regulation that real medicine gets adds an undeserved
veneer of respectability to essentially unproven therapies ... If they are proper treatments then they will be
covered by the existing medical regulations; if they're not, then there is no benefit to dressing them up as
being on a par with actual medical practice."
191 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
What a spoilsport. The Department of Health has reassured us, though, that a professional registration
scheme that doesn't check for evidence or medical training is the right thing to do.
Come and show the Department of Health your enthusiasm for more registration schemes that don't
require medical training. Take the test tomorrow, 8 September, between 11.30 and 12.30 at the
Department of Health on Whitehall to see if you too can get a diploma in the medical tradition of Old
Wives' Tales.
Julia Wilson is the VoYS Coordinator at Sense About Science

ethno
Oh dear, who's bright idea in the DH was this? Hopefully not influenced by the WHO's committee on
traditional medicine... The young medics and scientists seem like they're making a good point, but it isn't
something that is going to matter. Most practitioners are self-regulated anyway and the certificate doesn't
give them anymore legitimacy, despite their concerns. To get into a debate about evidence and medical training
is missing the point - some of the practices in the NHS are acceptable to patients but don't really work, and
some vice versa. And the focus on the terminology of 'old wives' tells you everything you need to know about
sexism amongst juinor doctors!
galdhgflagf
Because I git rid of my corn on my foot by my own therapy, I am qualified for this diploma in any case. (The doc
wanted to numb my leg and burn out that thing with a laser)
Sometimes it's just better to do the opposite of what you have been told.
And moreover, this School of Old Wives' Traditional Medicine diploma will help to reduce the costs of the
British health system. They don't have no money for proper therapies anyway.
Teek
:-) can't make it but good luck...!
galdhgflagf
...moreover, I found help for my frozen shoulder. These stupid massages I got described by the doc didn't help
at all.
inquisitio
Sexist and puerile - what a bunch of shallow twits VOYs are!
Glad to see our health authorities have got their priorities right and are now FINALLY recommending Avandia
is discontinued. Not a word from VOYS on the MIS-USE of science by GSK (as revealed in the Panorama prog
last night BBC 2230 - still available as a pod-cast.) - or on the declaration of the false H1N1 pandemic by WHO
under influence from pharma companies which cost the NHS millions in wasted vaccines and Tamiflu..
sickkid1972
Treat nettle stings with a dock leaf, don't pick at it you'll only make it worse, and don't do that you'll go
blind......... A* material surely....? 8-)
Nickji
Herewith my submission for a certificate as I can't get there in person:
Buying warts for one old penny from those afflicted by them makes them go away.
My favourite self-discovered remedy for stopping bleeding - tobacco in a cutmakes the blood begin to coagulate
quickly.
Having a piercing in the correct part of the earlobe temporarily relieves conjuntivitis symptoms. (don't get
conjunctivitis to often though or your ears'll be a mess!)
jimal
192 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
Any chance of them doing the diplomas on-line, can't go tomorrow; although I am a Dr (PhD in environmental
chemistry I've never had the chance to preform brain surgery and I've always fancied the idea, but never
wanted to spend years at med school
TamlynPeel
inquisito - Are you suggesting you've never in your life used the term 'Old Wives' Tale'? If you did, then you
too were being sexist and ageist. Try to stick to the actual issues rather than getting confused by idioms.
Looking forward to getting my qualification :D I need a nice official certificate for the wall to give me that
veneer of respectability.
baxter22
Some of the biggest examples of quack medicine in history came from 'mainstream' doctors. In the nineteenth
century 'old wives' medicine' got many people through birth and illness at a time when genital mutilation was
considered an acceptable treatment for mental illness in women.
Bit of a misogynist own goal, particularly the jibe against grandmothers in the leaflet itself.
trickle2
bummer I can't get there - I'm pretty sure I could have got myself a job at ATOS - judging wether people are
'fit for work' using 'traditional methods'
DCasey
And the focus on the terminology of 'old wives' tells you everything you need to know about sexism amongst
juinor doctors!
Not to put too fine a point on it, I suspect it was named that way as "bullshit" doesn't tend to play too well on
News 24. I'm not a big fan of the name myself, but if you've got any snappier suggestions, now's as good a time
as any.
Co-incidentally, I'm pretty sure all the VoYS staff are female.
Voodoo
@baxter22
Some of the biggest examples of quack medicine in history came from 'mainstream' doctors. In the nineteenth
century 'old wives' medicine' got many people through birth and illness at a time when genital mutilation was
considered an acceptable treatment for mental illness in women.
The difference is that when it is demonstrated that treatments don't work real medicine stops using them
(belatedly, sometimes). Quacks just carry on while pretending that it is a good thing that their treatments
haven't changed over the centuries.
Criticism of 19th century medicine is not relevant to modern medicine, because medicine has changed over the
last couple of centuries.
Plimsole
Why am I, a skeptic at heart, turned off by this? Perhaps it's because it feels like the young folk at VoYS are
wholeheartedly adopting the arrogant approach of some of the skeptical elders. Get 'em early eh? While I do
understand the message behind it, I think this protest is a silly stunt.
NicolaH
So I have to actually turn up? I can buy certificates and diplomas to practice various forms of useless bullshit
medicine online. This one would look good on the wall next to the 'Doktorate of the Forbidden Sciences' (so
forbidden that I didn't have access to any course material) but they may as well make it a download so those of
us outside the capital can join in the fun.
This is a great way to highlight the absolute stupidity of the Government's proposed scheme.
baxter22
@Voodoo I wasn't using points about the nineteenth century to criticise modern medicine per se but rather to
point out that women's role in medicine has, historically, been as a supplement when doctors could be afforded
and the only possible treatment when they couldn't. 'old wives' is a misnomer, really - a lot of the real quack
myths from history came from male writers and publishers trying to make a quick buck from miracle cures - see
spiders in butter and bloodletting, for instance.
193 | P a g e
VOLUME 9
'old wives' as a tag doesn't actually cover the threat posed by alternative medicine: it's not that it poses as
sensible but that it poses as scientific: perhaps 'quack' is better, with its pseudoscientific overtones.
Sensible grandmothers' advice is not the enemy of modern medicine, and positing it as such potentially
alienates a lot of community/lay carers: the jibe about grandmothers merely confirms, as inquisitio rightly
pointed out, the sexism and ageism inherent in the #oldwivesmed tag.
RCHM
Sense about Science is correct that the Department of Health‘s voluntary registration is not the way forward.
For years herbal practitioners have been asking for full, statutory regulation which gives the public far
stronger protection than voluntary registration. Only qualified and competent practitioners would be allowed to
practise and there would be clear procedures for anyone acting unprofessionally. Regulated herbalists would
take a responsible course of action about the lump on the side of little Johnny‘s face, and may recommend that
Johnny is seen by his GP.
The previous government accepted the case for statutory regulation 10 years ago, and put a timetable in place.
Yet nothing has happened which means the public is still at risk from untrained practitioners.
A new EU directive which comes into force next year means that even highly trained herbal practitioners will
be forced out of business next year without regulation.
Emma Farrant
Secretary
Register of Chinese Herbal Medicine
194 | P a g e
VOLUME 9

My #Scipolicy News Archive: September 2010 Part A

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

My #Scipolicy News Archive: September 2010 Part A

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Grrl never got engaged - we went straight to getting married.

The evolution-creationism debate in schools must be about religious education

10 commandments – sorry, suggestions – for RE teaching

2) It should be in the national curriculum and inspected by Ofsted.

9) End collective worship in state schools.

2010/08/31 GUARDIAN BLOG: MMR – THE

Surely therefore any hope would be false hope?

The panel say in their ruling:

2010/08/31 GUARDIAN BLOG: MMR: THE

The MMR vaccine makes an unwelcome return to the headlines

Comments in chronological order (Total 41 comments)

2010/09/01 GIRL, INTERRUPTING: ON WOMEN

“You only got it because you are a woman” ?!?!

” She just thinks that because she is a woman”

2010/09/01 IN VERBA: PUBLIC SCIENCE, IN

Posted in Science and Society

2010/09/01 GUARDIAN BLOG: SEX

Year 6 sex education at a school in Lambeth. Photograph: David Levene/Guardian

There are some important issues behind all this.

2010/09/01 GUARDIAN BLOG: THE BLUE

2010/09/01 NATURE: WORLD VIEW:

“Science is the wrong tool for solving political disputes.”

The Swedish message

2010/09/01 GUARDIAN BLOG:

The conference on "Supersymmetry and the Unification of Fundamental Interactions", which

Symmetries have become a central pillar of our understanding of nature. A sphere is

2010/09/01 GUARDIAN BLOG FESTIVAL:

Moheb Costandi writes the Neurophilosophy blog

The secret history of psychedelic research (Neurophilosophy)

Serotonin, psychedelics and depression (The Neuroskeptic)

Ketamine for depression: yay or neigh? (The Neurocritic)

Visions of a psychedelic future (Mind Hacks)

2010/09/02 GUARDIAN NEWS: STEPHEN

Professor had previously referred to 'mind of God'

Hawking resigned as Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University last year

2010/09/02 GUARDIAN BLOG FESTIVAL:

Brian Switek blogs at brianswitek.com

Brian Switek blogs at brianswitek.com

2010/09/02 TELEGRAPH: SCIENCE FUNDING

2010/09/02-05 SOLO10 TWEET

#soloconf Transcript from September 2 to September 4, 2010

serous"http://bit.ly/brgvfk So pale, yellow, kinda sickly

to Sir Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal

pressure, may have to be modified.

publishing - how the human 'protocol' works

new galapagos for science away from the me-too

cmmt on twitterfall at #soloconf )

how will the learned societies survive

real head start

Lord Martin Rees, #soloconf

insight. It can now be made by anyone in the world

do they get the time?) #soloconf

6 mins when I start Reboot

interests of publishing...?) #soloconf #solo10

only ironic, but rather telling IMO. #soloconf

don't need any more journals #solo10 #soloconf

than they get from referees. #soloconf #solo10

talks,http://j.mp/92wkGc. #solo10 #soloconf (via @zephoria)

than they get from referees. #soloconf #solo10

community]", Lord Martin Rees #soloconf

behind him -- real time feedback

than they get from referees. #soloconf #solo10