[Taxacom] saturday morning fun

[David Remsen (GBIF)]

I don't wish to continue this thread forever but I would like to  
clarify something about the funding.   GBIF has a policy on not  
contributing more than a minimal amount (~10%) in overheads to ensure  
that the funds were utilised for the proposed work.

An example of one of the projects that was catalysed and supported by  
GBIF is the Early Land Plants Today consortium.   Please see "http://www.mapress.com/phytotaxa/content/2010/f/pt00009p021.pdf 
"

David

On Nov 29, 2010, at 11:54 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:

>> The assumption that "people are paid in museums and other  
>> organisations to
>> digitise and enter data into collections databases"
> is often incorrect.  Often they aren't paid, or else they are  
> minimally paid.
> Thus, it becomes a job for student assistants, volunteers, etc., who  
> often don't
> have a good grasp of taxonomy, geography, etc., while more competent  
> taxonomists
> can't find paid employment
>
> I think it is more complicated than this ... yes, the actual work is  
> often done
> by summer students, etc., but if GBIF is giving millions to  
> taxonomists to
> compile checklists, as David has indicated, then that money is going  
> somewhere.
> I suspect that it isn't given directly to independent taxonomists,  
> but to
> taxonomists at institutions where the institution will take half as  
> "overheads",
> and then the taxonomist will get paid to "supervise" the summer  
> students. All
> they need is their "chicks for free" and we have a damn good 80s  
> rock song!!! :)
>
> Stephen
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: David Campbell <pleuronaia at gmail.com>
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Sent: Tue, 30 November, 2010 11:35:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] saturday morning fun
>
> There seems to be appreciable problems in GBIF's attempts to deal with
> homonyms.  Papillina, for example, was used first in Gastropoda and
> then in Porifera.  GBIF has apparently harvested the Porifera taxonomy
> from one source and data records for the snail from other sources.  I
> did try emailing GBIF about it.
>
> Probably the greatest problem is that there's generally no support for
> actual taxonomists to check the data for compilations of this sort.
> The assumption that "people are paid in museums and other
> organisations to digitise and enter data into collections databases"
> is often incorrect.  Often they aren't paid, or else they are
> minimally paid.  Thus, it becomes a job for student assistants,
> volunteers, etc., who often don't have a good grasp of taxonomy,
> geography, etc., while more competent taxonomists can't find paid
> employment.
>
> -- 
> Dr. David Campbell
> The Paleontological Research Institution
> 1259 Trumansburg Road
> Ithaca NY 14850
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either  
> of these
> methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/ 
> pipermail/taxacom
> your search terms here
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either  
> of these methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/ 
> pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>