Comment by jnxx
4 years ago
> Understandable from gkh, but I feel sorry for any unrelated research happening at University of Minnesota.
That's the university's problem to fix.
4 years ago
> Understandable from gkh, but I feel sorry for any unrelated research happening at University of Minnesota.
That's the university's problem to fix.
If this experience doesn't change not only the behavior of U of M's IRB but inform the behavior of every other IRB, then nothing at all is learned from this experience.
Unless both the professors and leadership from the IRB aren't having an uncomfortable lecture in the chancellor's office then nothing at all changes.
What's the recourse for them though? Just beg to have the decision reversed?
The main thing you want here is a demonstration that they realize they fucked up, realize the magnitude of the fuckup, and have done something reasonable to lower the risk of it happening again, hopefully very low.
Given that the professor appears to be a frequent flyer with this, the kernel folks banning him and the university prohibiting him from using Uni resources for anything kernel related seems reasonable and gets the point across.
Expel the students and fire the professor. That will demonstrate their commitment to high ethical standards.
Or fire the IRB people who approved it, and the professor(s) who should've known better. Expelling students seems a bit unfair IMO.
8 replies →
Expelling the students seem overkill - they have advisors that should be fired for allowing it to happen
The comment about IRB —- institutional research board —- is clear, I think.
The suggestion about the IRB was made by a third party. Look at the follow up comment from kernel developer Leon Romanovsky.
> ... we don't need to do all the above and waste our time to fill some bureaucratic forms with unclear timelines and results. Our solution to ignore all @umn.edu contributions is much more reliable to us who are suffering from these researchers.
1 reply →
Probably that, combined with "we informed the professor of {serious consequences} should this happen again".
Well, yes? Seems like recourse in their case would be to make a convincing plea or plan to rectify the problem that satisfies decision makers in the linux project.