[Chapter-delegates] Internet data and research

[Evan Leibovitch]

Hello Michael,

I appreciate your efforts and truly value the use of research to support
the work of ISOC and its Chapters in their education and advocacy.

As for your quandry, I believe that, especially as an Internet-focused
community we have available some tools and approaches that may prove useful.

First of all, I would hesitate to use the term "bad research", for in my
experience it has been used interchangeably to refer to badly performed or
biased research, but also sound research that may infer unpopular
conclusions. (For instance, what would be do with well-done research that
comes to the conclusion that IPv6 is unnecessary?). Without analytical
rationale, "bad research" is in the eye of the beholder.

Promoting an open Internet -- the principle mission of ISOC -- means not
making preliminary judgements on what is good or bad Internet for the
purposes of censorship, blocking, spying, data collection, etc. Likewise,
regarding our research inputs we should strive to be *open and tolerant in
what we accept, but critical in that which we use* and cite going forward.

I urge creation of a repository for research that enables submissions to be
peer reviewed by the community, with you (Michael) being one of our most
important reviewers. Using voting, rating and commenting systems that are
common amongst social media, both the "bad" and "good" research could sit
side by side, each featuring evaluation of fairness and utility by those
who have read and analyzed it themselves. IMO it is actually vital *not* to
exclude "bad" research -- to do so merely hides it from us, but then
enables it to emerge elsewhere without criticism (but accompanied by claims
of censorship and persecution). It is as important to expose the frauds as
to elevate the gems, to call attention to good research but also provide a
snopes-like exposure of the bad stuff. Because the bad research will always
be around, we need to be aware of it in order to rebut it when it is
inevitably used by our adversaries,

In any event, it is vital that an organization that promotes openness as
its very reason for being not be seen to be engaging in (what might be seen
as self-serving) censorship. Keeping the moral high ground is hard enough
without openly courting accusations that we are ourselves biased in the
research we use.

HTH,

Evan Leibovitch
Canada Chapter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20131211/c7bde9cb/attachment.htm>