I think the key is that the questions asks "is a waste of money".
In a straightened funding time it may just be that storing the raw images in addition to the processed
data doesn't float to the top of the list of "things that must be done whatever else happens in science".


Something can be desirable but just not come above a funding barrier.




Susan



Prof. Susan M. Lea                                          tel: +44 1865 275181
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Professor of Chemical Pathology  & Co-Director of the James Martin Vaccine Design Institute
Sir William Dunn School of Pathology, Oxford OX1 3RE UK

Tutorial Fellow @ Brasenose College, Oxford OX1 4AJ

________________________________________
From: CCP4 bulletin board [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jacob Keller [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 27 October 2011 17:30
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] raw data deposition

One thing that the poll is useful for is something I find surprising:
~40% when I checked found storing images a waste of time. So, I guess
this might be useful for finding the "silent [significant] minority."
Why not have those folks chime in about why they think this is
useless, even to store images of solved datasets?

JPK

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Gerard Bricogne
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Ed,
>
>     I am really puzzled by this initiative. It assumes that there is a
> pre-formed "collective opinion" out there, independent from and unaffected
> by the exchanges of views that have taken place on this BB, that would be
> worth more than the conclusions we might reach by pursuing these exchanges.
>
>     The thread you are obviously deciding to dissociate yourself from was
> initiated in response to a suggestion that views on this topic would
> usefully be aired publicly on this BB rather than posted off-list to Tom
> Terwilliger, who immediately agreed that this was a good idea and has been
> very supportive of this discussion.
>
>     Shouldn't we continue to try and put our heads together to reach a
> consensus, rather than collect opinions that may be little more than prior
> prejudices?
>
>     What shall we gain by such a vote? I may be misunderstanding what you
> have in mind, of course :-) .
>
>
>     With best wishes,
>
>          Gerard.
>
> --
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 12:08:24PM -0400, Ed Pozharski wrote:
>> I am curious as to what the collective opinion on the raw data
>> deposition actually is across the cross-section of the macromolecular
>> crystallography community subscribed to the bb.  So, if you have a
>> second and a formed opinion on the idea of the depositions of the raw
>> data, please vote here
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/3qlwwsh
>>
>> I'll post the results as soon as they look settled.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Ed.
>>
>> --
>> "Hurry up before we all come back to our senses!"
>>                            Julian, King of Lemurs
>
> --
>
>     ===============================================================
>     *                                                             *
>     * Gerard Bricogne                     [log in to unmask]  *
>     *                                                             *
>     * Global Phasing Ltd.                                         *
>     * Sheraton House, Castle Park         Tel: +44-(0)1223-353033 *
>     * Cambridge CB3 0AX, UK               Fax: +44-(0)1223-366889 *
>     *                                                             *
>     ===============================================================
>



--
*******************************************
Jacob Pearson Keller
Northwestern University
Medical Scientist Training Program
email: [log in to unmask]
*******************************************