Blog Archives

Response to Inquiry Regarding Data Science Open Notebook & Posted E-mail Correspondence

Good Afternoon Dr. Budden,

I imagine you receive e-mail notifications for new blog posts –

However I wanted to point out I’ve taken a moment to expand in the open notebook on the interesting question you’ve brought to my attention regarding the “appropriateness” of logging e-mail messages in the Data Science open notebook.

In particular, I have become interested in the scenario of a potential visitor to the site who, lacking context, grows confused by what appears to be personal e-mail correspondence.

A solution I considered may be to preface any e-mail correspondence I post to the notebook with a header or “editor’s note” that explains something along the lines that “the following content is posted as part of ongoing research effort concerning open notebook science,” perhaps with a link to the tag “Open Notebook Science” or original entry describing the Data Science Open Notebook concept .

I am of course open to other suggestions or guidelines. As an example – on reflection I have realized I really should avoid entitling lab notebook entries “May 29 Research Effort” – or something witty like “To Infinity and Beyond” – since it adds little value to the post. Even though my analog research notebook might have an title “May 29 Research Effort,” the open notebook format may necessitate more disciplined thinking for assigning titles.

In any case, here is a link to my most recent entry expanding on the problem as posed: “Open Notebook Science – is it a blog or not?”



Comments from Amber Budden Concerning "Policy" for Access

Note: I am summarizing comments from Dr. Budden here. I am not posting verbatim. Pertinent details from message are presered in header only:

From: Amber E Budden
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 1:58 PM
To: Jessel, Tanner Monroe
Subject: Re: docs.dataone access

no official documentation on who has access and who does not
no real ‘policy’ per se but
recognition such a policy might be beneficial

general guidelines:
anyone doing work for us should have access to the site.

  • leadership team
  • employees
  • WG members
  • students
  • postdocs
  • interns
  • etc.

As of this correspondence, except for interns, people who transition out of DataONE do not have access taken away, according to Budden.

DataONE retains ability to control access to specific materials:

  • (sensitive) documents that are for the Leadership Team only.
  • “culture of open science” dissuades expanding to other folders
  • exception: Anyone can become a member of our DataONE Users Group (DUG); therefore, DUG members are not granted access to Working Group materials to prevent viewing “without any context.”
  • ple transition out of DataONE we have not been restricting their access, with the exception of interns.

Original Query Below:

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Jessel, Tanner Monroe <tjessel> wrote:

Good afternoon Amber,

I’m working on a research question related to network analysis of the DataONE community.

Do you happen to know if documentation exists on the site pertaining to criteria for membership in the community?

The reason I’m asking you is I remembered you’d set up permissions for me on the site.

So, I’m assuming you’re the “gatekeeper” and would be the best person to ask about who is granted access.

Thanks for any help on this,