Lpsc Policies Options

[TheChemist]

Emily, what I do in a similar situation at DPS meetings is to leave my tape recorder running in one lecture room while I dash into another one to attend a second lecture in person.  This leads to occasional peculiar looks, but it also allows you to take in a good deal more information than you would otherwise (and, so far, it hasn't led to my tape recorder being stolen, scientists being ascetic types).

You better hide that recorder well Bruce

"NOTE: Photography, videography, and audio recordings are NOT allowed in either the oral or poster sessions. This policy will be strictly enforced."

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2006/lpsc2006.3rd.html

[djellison]

hmm - PC with voice recognition software

JUST about skirts around those descriptions

Doug

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

You better hide that recorder well Bruce   

"NOTE:  Photography, videography, and audio recordings are NOT allowed in either the oral or poster sessions. This policy will be strictly enforced."

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2006/lpsc2006.3rd.html

One reason for this is that some journals are getting fed up that figures, maps, imagery, illustrations, etc. from poster sessions are ending up in the public domain before being published.

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

One reason for this is that some journals are getting fed up that figures, maps, imagery, illustrations, etc. from poster sessions are ending up in the public domain before being published.

That's your opinion, Alex. Personally, I think they're just sadists. (And I don't recall any rule like that at the DPS meetings, although it would be entirely in character for me to have overlooked it.)

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

That's your opinion, Alex.

True enough. However, I do know a few people on the editorial staffs of a few journals, and one of them told me once that journal editors, especially those still adhering to the embargo policy, are driven crazy by the amount of detail released at some conferences.

[elakdawalla]

That's your opinion, Alex.  Personally, I think they're just sadists.  (And I don't recall any rule like that at the DPS meetings, although it would be entirely in character for me to have overlooked it.)

Astonishingly (to me), I'm going to be as crochety as Bruce on this topic. They're either sadist or elitist. Why should you have to be able to afford the time and the travel to go to these meetings in order to be able to see the latest stuff and also, by the way, witness science in action? If more people were exposed to preliminary stuff and how scientists hash it out in meetings like this one, they might understand science better.

By the way, volcanopele, I may want to sneak a look at your notes later

--Emily

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

Astonishingly (to me), I'm going to be as crochety as Bruce on this topic.  They're either sadist or elitist.  Why should you have to be able to afford the time and the travel to go to these meetings in order to be able to see the latest stuff and also, by the way, witness science in action?  If more people were exposed to preliminary stuff and how scientists hash it out in meetings like this one, they might understand science better.

I agree, and I was just speculating on LPI's policy in this regard. However, as I mentioned in the other message, some journals, which end up publishing many of the results presented in preliminary format at conferences, have a different point of view -- and that is not mere speculation.

[elakdawalla]

I agree, and I was just speculating on LPI's policy in this regard.  However, as I mentioned in the other message, some journals, which end up publishing many of the results presented in preliminary format at conferences, have a different point of view -- and that is not mere speculation.

Yep. Stupid journals. Though I understand their desire actually to have only peer-reviewed results out there. I'm just generally peeved about this topic because we've had people refuse to let us print non-press-released space images in The Planetary Report because, their claim goes, that would prevent them from ever being able to publish the same images in Science or Nature. It's just a smokescreen of course but we have to abide by the argument.

--Emily

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

Yep.  Stupid journals.  Though I understand their desire actually to have only peer-reviewed results out there.

Of course, that's their altruistic reason. Another explanation is that they simply want to be, for various self-serving reasons, including sound business ones, the first one to release the results. Although it's a little dated, there was a good series of articles on the whole embargo business in the October 30, 1998, issue of Science.

[Phil Stooke]

I've never seen this taping statement before at LPSC.

Personally, I think the journals are afraid that their very reason for existence is threatened.

Phil

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

I've never seen this taping statement before at LPSC. 

Personally, I think the journals are afraid that their very reason for existence is threatened.

Not to beat the issue to death (nor to hijack Jason's thread) but another possible (perhaps likely) explanation for the LPI policy, which might fall under Bruce's "sadist" theory, is that some conference participants may have complained. I know many scientists who don't want their pre-publication musings and speculations recorded for the "uneducated masses" only to blow up in their faces later.

Indeed, even "closed" science meetings are eschewing taping. For example, the Cassini TOST/SOST telecons (or, as a few wags have said, "telethons") that occur before each targeted encounter were intially recorded. I have a few of these multi-hour extravaganzas on my iPod (e.g., TOST T6/T7/T8 and SOST E1), and they are unusually open and candid. However, the recording of these telecons has tapered off due to, from what I understand, objections from some of the teams in having their presentations taped, notwithstanding the fact that these telecons are restricted to Project personnel, who, presumably, aren't laypersons who don't understand the "sausage making" aspect of science.

Having said that, I find it puzzling that LPI would allow non-participants to attend LPSC, including the press, and not allow them to tape. I would have thought that, at the very least, for the sake of accurate reporting that recording would be desired.

[djellison]

'We wont let them record it because they report our stuff badly'

Yup - and leaving them without a record of what you've said is going to make it worse

Very narrow minded imho. Bill Haartman's comments in his Travellers Guide to Mars are so very true re: papers and conferences etc.

[vexgizmo]

Not to beat the issue to death (nor to hijack Jason's thread) but another possible (perhaps likely) explanation for the LPI policy ... is that some conference participants may have complained. 

Correct, IMHO. Some are uncomfortable with the digital camera revolution resulting in their figures being captured before they wish them to be out there in the world. Without description, preliminary plots lose their caveats.

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

Correct, IMHO.  Some are uncomfortable with the digital camera revolution resulting in their figures being captured before they wish them to be out there in the world. Without description, preliminary plots lose their caveats.

Well, I don't use no stinkin' digital camera. I just use a tape recorder, which does nothing but record their caveats. So why are they after us for that?

[elakdawalla]

Well, I don't use no stinkin' digital camera.  I just use a tape recorder, which does nothing but record their caveats.  So why are they after us for that?

Bruce et al.: I've just exchanged several emails with Steve Mackwell of LPI, who is one of the conveners of LPSC. He told me that the prohibition on recording was not intended to limit the activities of the press, only others who have more nefarious designs on other people's research (though he did not go into detail about that). So as long as your intent is to share the info with the public, you're copacetic. He invited any member of the press who had concerns about the policy to contact him directly.

(Should this discussion be moved to its own thread somewhere?)

--Emily