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