Payments for assistant

[Andrew Lockley]

Hi list citizens! 

As you've probably noticed, I've hired an assistant (infog...@gmail.com) to help with posting to the lists and twitter. This is due to spiralling amounts of literature and correspondence to sift, which meant I was badly neglecting my Actual Proper Work. I'm currently paying out of my pocket for this help, but contributions would ultimately be welcome. 

This email only concerns those who might be interested in chipping in - so feel free to tune out, if that's not you (unless you're a payments expert!). 

Getting donations sounds simple, but unfortunately it isn't. I have to select a way to collect payments that

* works without a registered charity

* handles international payments

* allows widely-varying donations.

There are lots of options (patreon, PayPal, gocardless, wise, etc.), and I need to know more about expected donations to choose between them.

If people are confident that they will be contributing, please can they contact me off list, with

A) location (and currency, if different) 

B) preferred donation frequency (monthly, annually, one off) 

C) expected donation amount (all welcome)

This will enable me to set up the most appropriate way to collect the payments.

Thanks, 

Andrew 

[Renaud de RICHTER]

Hi Andrew,

A complementary thought on this subject.

Carbon Dioxide Removal, GHG  Removal (GGR) and NETs are completely different from GEOENGINEERING, and many of us don't want to see GEO or SRM or SAI be associated with CDR in the public mind. This is the principal reason why the CDR list has been created.

I personally feel very uncomfortable with the N°1 poster on the CDR list being named  Geoeng Info <infog...@gmail.com>.

Would it be possible for you to change that name and that email address?

Many thanks in advance for taking into consideration the public perception.

Best,

Renaud

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Carbon Dioxide Removal" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to CarbonDioxideRem...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CAJ3C-05TTWRDZjDUOcg3O4AfUL5HwASL6-2SkfJ3fY-_Uu7eFw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Douglas Grandt]

Renaud, agree. I’ve been wondering who the anonymous person is for a while, to put a name and face to the “handle” ... especially one with a perceived ‘a priori’ bias.

Merci,
Doug Grandt



Sent from my iPhone (audio texting)

> On May 14, 2021, at 6:16 PM, Renaud de RICHTER <renaud.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Car

[Andrew Lockley]

The reason is that my twitter is also @geoengineering1 (geoengineering info).

There's no bias, the same posting formula is followed as I've done myself for years. Nobody accused me of bias in what I share, and I don't really say anything. 

If people have thoughts on branding fair enough (AndrewsPA?), but I'd really like to hear about the funding. 

A

[Greg Rau]

Another issue to broach is with the increase in CDR information/topics, do we want all of it on the CDR list? My preference would be to list/discuss only the most important/relevant stuff rather than clogging 612 mail boxes with everything written about CDR. I've been tempted to moderate the infogeoeng feed for this reason, and may ultimately do so, but then I would rather not have to play editor. So in the interest of mailboxes and band width, lets try to go for quality rather than quantity, though happy to listen to other opinions. 

Your moderator,

Greg Rau 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CAHodn9-%2B2_wsuRVaZECBSYkPzb%2Bq_skfRyXtBiJxsmQsuesmzg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Andrew Lockley]

There's not been a change in posting policy. There was a short period of time where they were catching slightly more general news than I used to post. The nature of the field is that a tiny change to quality causes a big change in quantity, as there is exponentially more off-topic material than on-topic. But that should be back to normal, now. I monitor the posting, and point out any issues that arise. 

It's not very helpful for members to request "less stuff" without being specific as to what they do(n't) want. Best to respond to specific posts people don't like. 

I've had no feedback on funding yet. Just lots of criticism... 

Andrew 

[Tom Goreau]

ditto

 

Thomas J. F. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance

Chief Scientist, Blue Regeneration SL
President, Biorock Technology Inc.

Technical Advisor, Blue Guardians Programme, SIDS DOCK

37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

gor...@globalcoral.org
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226 (leave message)

 

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392

 

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734

 

No one can change the past, everybody can change the future

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CAHodn9-%2B2_wsuRVaZECBSYkPzb%2Bq_skfRyXtBiJxsmQsuesmzg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Anton Alferness]

I use multiple news / scientific paper aggregation services and do not use this CDR list as such. I find the real value here to be the thoughts, perspectives, views, debates, opinions, etc of the people on this list. I'm curious how many people (who do not post regularly or at all) find more value in the stream of publications (as an aggregation service) or find more value in the human responses to topics and/or papers? 

If I just want to read papers I don't need to be on a listserv. 

What I can't get from reading scientific papers is YOUR OPINIONS on the topic(s). 

I apologize, I'm about to slip off my soapbox but I hope everyone realizes that the real value of this Google Group (just like any listserv community) is in fact the people on it, in this case the 612 people. I only wish more people here would participate. 

-Anton 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/73F6BAFB-44CD-4DCD-A4D1-F28D95F82558%40globalcoral.org.

--

-Anton Alferness

Director of Strategic Initiatives - Aquavetic Labs

206.669.7770

www.aquaveticlabs.com

[Andrew Lockley]

I see it thus: The papers often prompt discussion. Moreover, the papers ARE the discussion. PS If you have an effective aggregation service, let me know. It would save me time and money! 

[Anton Alferness]

Google has one, science direct has one and the one I like the best is Flipboard (it grabs scientific papers as we as articles). There are others too, just do some searching. 

There is a balance to information vs discussion in a community. I prefer communities that discuss, debate, etc but perhaps I'm an outlier. 

I have another possible way to achieve information input... get 10 volunteers to post 1-3 papers, publications, articles, etc per week. Don't pay em, just stand up volunteers. I'll be one. 

[Clive Elsworth]

I get about 100 emails per day which I 'skim read' to get an overall picture, before deleting nearly all of them. Occasionally something catches my eye or is recommended by a colleague.

So the current mechanism works quite well for me, for the moment at least.

Clive Elsworth

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/796918968.1013796.1621033071706%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Peter Flynn]

Clive captures my experience exactly. What we have been doing works for me.

 

Peter

 

Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.

Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers

Department of Mechanical Engineering

University of Alberta

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

1 928 451 4455

peter...@ualberta.ca

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/2114619372.121625.1621082767906%40email.ionos.co.uk.

[Andrew Lockley]

We already use Google alerts. Sifting out low quality and irrelevant material, removing duplicates, etc. takes a longtime.

People can post whatever they want to the list - announcements or discussion. It's not finding the first paper that takes the time, it's finding the last one. It's hard enough to get authors to post their own work, let alone coordinate a dozen volunteers! 

[Dan Galpern]

My two cents: 

I was also confused about who or what was "infog...@gmail.com."

I find a lot of the material Andrew posts as to CDR to be useful. Same as to material that Greg and a few others post. Sometimes there is duplication in such posting, but I have no suggestion as to that.

I also find some of the commentary on this listserve, concerning the quality or implications of research, to be useful, particularly learned commentary from several of the scholars who contribute here. 

But sometimes such brief learned commentary is too condensed to be understood -- at least, by me -- and my suggestion there is that our most learned commentators strive to ensure their brief contributions here are comprehensible even to the reader who has not the time or capacity to read or re-read all their papers and books. At least, to the extent feasible. 

Einstein urged, for example, to make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.

There also seem to be a number of posts carrying the flavor of industry advertisements, while other posts convey no more information than whether a fan of one specific technology -- such as, for instance, biochar -- should be satisfied or not with an article under consideration.  In my view, such adverts and insubstantial fan-based reviews do not seem especially useful here.

Dan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CAJ3C-07J%2BVwuj-Xoo2_MJm9juo94QQ4zcmqPX7Vs%3DGfrPE1G4w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Andrew Lockley]

Can folks please highlight examples of posts that aren't useful?

Andrew 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CANNDMDr%3DvVi%2Be7CL-4%3DoYFB-bB0m-HyAqUwoWzH6HgDU8g5Arw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Anton Alferness]

Andrew - 

I've been a member of several listserv / google group communities, including 10 years on a 5,000 person community in the music and copyright industry and I've never seen one that has a single dedicated person doing the information sourcing. It is usually done by members of the community and organized organically (no coordinating needed). I guess what I'm wondering here though is this: do you think finding (and posting) every single publication that comes out is the goal? And secondly, does the volume of postings on paper publications induce conversation or debate or does the volume hinder it? 

Here's an idea: what if we followed Greg Rau's model? For many of his paper-related posts, he (others have done this too) adds a little blurb which almost always has a question or two in it. I find that to be better than just posting a paper and nobody has anything to say about it, rinse and repeat 10-20 times per week. Another aspect to consider about any community like this one, is that you have different levels of education and different perspectives from different sectors of society / industry... which is the point, to get all these people to communicate and (hopefully) collaborate. The problem is that some people have different motivations for participation, and as such, I doubt there is a perfect solution to what kind of posts, volume of posts or frequency or depth of debates there-in that would satisfy everyone. 

To your last question about what examples are not useful...

Most people in this group are committed to CDR and need no further "analysis of the need for CDR" type papers. Analysis of types of CDR is relevant, same with governance issues. Then of course any paper that gets into a single specific methodology is very useful. 

Also - thanks Andrew for being a major contributor to this community, although, as I've said to you before, I personally wish you would share your opinion more, and be less of a news distributor. <insert podcast plug here> :)

-Anton 

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CAJ3C-05080vANzPxNeijamtCi%2BGiJ5vJPp8LzffmRh%3Dbo70w1Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Andrew Lockley]

I certainly don't intend to share everything. There's loads of stuff I just tweet, and don't post to the list. But I think that academic papers should always be shared. 

I've been told off for commenting on stuff I've shared on the lists several times. "Moderators should be moderate" was the wording, I think. While that was specifically directed at the geoengineering group (which I moderate), I try to behave consistently across both. So I now only point out things that are egregious falsehoods, bad faith arguments, etc. that otherwise people might think I endorsed in some way. 

I've also received such a significant amount of personal abuse from several prominent academics that I no longer comment publicly, outside of peer reviewed literature, conferences, etc. All I do is host the podcast, which people are free not to listen to. Some of these personal attacks have gone far beyond simple disagreement, and have been a very open and explicit attempt to destroy my career. I've had to privately send more than one warning about harassment and/or libel. All in all, this is a pretty sorry state of affairs. I don't discuss this situation much, but it's specifically relevant here, so apologies if this is TMI 

I hope that explains my approach. 

Andrew 

[Bruce Melton -- Austin, Texas]

Hola from rain bomb land CDR list.

From the perspective of a heavy user of findings of all sorts, yes please post just a little more with links to new papers. The abstract, or just the money shot from the abstract helps me understand if I want to spend more time on the work.

One of the great things about this list for my uses is its diversity.

And one of the pieces of my mission being interpretation, please do send along an opinion when you have one. Findings by definition are almost always siloed. What we are doing with lists like these is putting the pieces of the puzzle together. Findings are the beginning. The discussions on these lists helps with the big picture.

Adios,

B

Bruce Melton PE
Director, Climate Change Now Initiative, 501c3
President, Melton Engineering Services Austin
8103 Kirkham Drive
Austin, Texas 78736
(512)799-7998
ClimateDiscovery.org
MeltonEngineering.com
Face...@Bruce.Melton.395
Inst...@Bruce.C.Melton
The Band Climate Change
Twitter - BruceCMelton1

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CADDS%2B7e%2BrP8x1jHVzMTv4OGjSg%3DTttyXrSN3fB85cJyq1cEYzQ%40mail.gmail.com.