Comment Re:Here then.... (Score 1) 94
Now, we're talking. Thank you for the increased clarity.
Okay, what if it were true that McRobbie really didn't accept any compensation whatsoever from ChaCha? Would that change the color of the situation? And I really do mean NO COMPENSATION. If it were absolutely TRUE, would it factor into your thinking? BTW, public representations from both IU and ChaCha are that there has been no compensation to McRobbie ever.
And IF this really were a research-oriented "strategic alliance" in the truest sense, where university and company-with-a-fresh-idea were genuinely trying to sort out the future of human-mediated search, would it be relevant that there was a mutual interest in forming a relationship that might expand the opportunities of both the university and said company? (It appears that such a model has worked quite well for MIT, Stanford, CMU, Rice, Caltech, etc etc) Might university, company, and constituents of Indiana ALL benefit from such an alliance? Think about jobs, learning opportunities for students, interesting collaborations for faculty, etc....
Also, does it factor into your opinion that IU is not restricting any student or faculty member from using whatever general search engine is desired. Therefore, there is complete freedom for all IU constituents to use the search engine of their choice. And, yes, there is a default of an Indiana-based product as opposed to default of a California-based product. Who picked Google in that role before they were the clear market leader? Why? It certainly wouldn't be the first time that a local university collaborated with a local business for mutual best interests. This also maps into the Governor's "Buy Indiana" emphasis. Seems like a pretty worthy concept intended to provide a better future for Indiana constituents.
For local site search (i.e. local IU content), IU is clearly adding librarian-mediated functionality that cannot be provided by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, or any other current search engine on the market today. This functionality involves IU-paid employees who are offered ONLY to IU-affiliated users. Perhaps there has been confusion about that point. Assuming it were completely true, would it make the situation palatable?
If (and understandably it is a big "if" for you) these things were true, would you find the relationship more acceptable?
Okay, what if it were true that McRobbie really didn't accept any compensation whatsoever from ChaCha? Would that change the color of the situation? And I really do mean NO COMPENSATION. If it were absolutely TRUE, would it factor into your thinking? BTW, public representations from both IU and ChaCha are that there has been no compensation to McRobbie ever.
And IF this really were a research-oriented "strategic alliance" in the truest sense, where university and company-with-a-fresh-idea were genuinely trying to sort out the future of human-mediated search, would it be relevant that there was a mutual interest in forming a relationship that might expand the opportunities of both the university and said company? (It appears that such a model has worked quite well for MIT, Stanford, CMU, Rice, Caltech, etc etc) Might university, company, and constituents of Indiana ALL benefit from such an alliance? Think about jobs, learning opportunities for students, interesting collaborations for faculty, etc....
Also, does it factor into your opinion that IU is not restricting any student or faculty member from using whatever general search engine is desired. Therefore, there is complete freedom for all IU constituents to use the search engine of their choice. And, yes, there is a default of an Indiana-based product as opposed to default of a California-based product. Who picked Google in that role before they were the clear market leader? Why? It certainly wouldn't be the first time that a local university collaborated with a local business for mutual best interests. This also maps into the Governor's "Buy Indiana" emphasis. Seems like a pretty worthy concept intended to provide a better future for Indiana constituents.
For local site search (i.e. local IU content), IU is clearly adding librarian-mediated functionality that cannot be provided by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, or any other current search engine on the market today. This functionality involves IU-paid employees who are offered ONLY to IU-affiliated users. Perhaps there has been confusion about that point. Assuming it were completely true, would it make the situation palatable?
If (and understandably it is a big "if" for you) these things were true, would you find the relationship more acceptable?
