Gratis After Effects | Volledige versie vanPosted by Vanessa on February 5th, 2021 By Jeremy Manier ScienceInsider, the top-notch blog by Science magazine writers, flags this case of a scientist that found his research grant program had been a part of a Freedom of Information Act petition. A physician at another university asked for the application, on the assumption that once something is submitted to a national agency it is fair game to get a public records request. This reminds me about the somewhat unethical practice among journalists of performing a FOIA for all the additional FOIAs which were submitted to a specified agency. It is a means to keep tabs on exactly what your coverage opponents are up to, but it always struck me a little like cheating. In this case, as the first post explains, there's a legitimate legal case that the unpublished information in such an NIH application should be shielded from public view. And since the poster arguesa FOIA is definitely a non-collegial direction of getting information. However, is this unethical? Certainly it's if the intent was to find an unfair progress peek at a different scientist's approaches, goals, etc. But public documents are public. I never filed an e-mail, FOIA or other communication to a public agency which I wouldn't have been comfortable seeing released. Grant requests are distinct, but it is probably safe to presume that unless there is a clear exemption, whatever you provide a government office may become people. microsoft windowsxp mediacenter 2005 bootable from. osx86 microsoft office descarga gratuita de adobe acrobat reader. Like it? Share it!More by this author |