Professor Jones: Just sent loads of station data to Scott. Make sure he documents everything better this time ! And don’t leave stuff lying around on ftp sites - you never know who is trawling them. The two MMs [Patrick notes: he is referring to McIntyre and McKitrick] have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.
The rest of that email reads:
Does your similar act in the US force you to respond to enquiries within 20 days? - our does ! The UK works on precedents, so the first request will test it. We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind.
Why then, would they bother to mail it around, as they did in the quoted email?
I suspect there are some other reasons.
This makes me glad again that there is some kind of legal system in most civilized countries. So many people seem to be ready to form a lynch mob at short notice.
I don't know any of the people involved, but I really despise lynch mobs. Still, I know I shouldn't bother with this.
Of course, if it turns out that it was illegal for them to accept the data under that license in the first place, then it might be more understandable.
Not wanting to deal with the MMs does not imply guilty, just as not wanting to discuss moot points with creationists does not imply evolution theory is wrong. At some point maybe you decide your energy is better spent elsewhere.
Just playing devils advocate... I still feel there is too much context missing.
...and if the FOI won you wouldn't be able to get data anymore.
I don't understand what you're getting at with your second paragraph.
Under that license, right.
I don't understand what you're getting at with your second paragraph.
What I mean is that if government documents are subject to FOI requests, then it seems possible that there's a law about accepting data under a license which would conflict with that. I don't know that there is, but it seems possible. That would be an understandable reason having no bearing on the climate debate to delete rather than provide the data.