It's sometimes hard to avoid the impression that universities worldwide are run by extraordinary incompetents, people who would, in any sane world, be sweeping streets for a living. That the people who run the University of Queensland are among the least competent university administrators around has now been widely advertised by their decision to threaten Brandon Schollenberger with a lawsuit if he so much breathes a word of the details of the data behind John Cook's infamous 97% consensus paper, or of the fact of the threat itself.
After due consideration Brandon has decided to test the waters, publishing the threatening letter and issuing a challenge of his own:
Nobody has told me what I need to keep confidential. Nobody has explained why I need to keep things like datestamps secret. Nobody has explained how knowing people performed 65 ratings two years ago (to the day) could affect anyone’s contractual obligations. Nobody has explained how disclosing material like that could possibly harm anyone.
So here’s the challenge I want to propose to the Skeptical Science team, to the University of Queensland, and to anyone else who thinks I shouldn’t release the data I possess:
Tell me what material I possess could cause harm if disseminated. Tell me what agreements or contractual obligations would be impinged upon if that material were released to the public.
If you are unable or unwilling to meet such a simple challenge, I’ll release the data and you can bite me. I mean, sue me.
Popcorn required, I would say.