[Foundation-l] Is a research banner "advertising" of the evil sort?

[Thomas Morton]

>
> We're an educational resource concerned with the diffusion of
> knowledge.  They are primary researchers that will publish their data
> and conclusion with an open license, thus adding to the "sum of all
> knowledge".  I think those objectives are eminently compatible.
>

Which is a reasonable response; and I'd probably agree with you.

Although it does lead to another question; a lot of studies are conducted
around the world, many of them would benefit dramatically from publicity on
a "top-5" website. How far does supporting those that ask go?

What sort of precedent does it set?

Were Berkman given preference here for some as-yet-unknown reason (as is
being suggested).

The latter point could be fairly damaging to our credibility.

Again; issues that should really be worked out in advance?

Tom