Azhir Mahmood  🚀 🤖 🧬 🧠 🪐

That's true, but you can still have an influence on people in those position, I would think. Some form of collective lobbying will be critical to help those in more political positions to see which way the wind is blowing -- but also powerful opinion pieces, open letters, etc.

Perhaps, but it would need to be a massive effort. Their jobs are so different from ours (i.e. worrying about keeping congress and executive branch happy) that our academic opinions are many degrees removed from usefully actionable on their end. We're privates to their generals

this is a common refrain we often hear.. "I will do it if everyone else does it" adds to so much collective friction things will remain exactly where there, or that weights pulls everyone deeper into the dump.. say it with me: every bit of action from each PI makes a difference!

Don't confuse inaction on this with an unwillingness to help improve science. I spent my free time on NMC and NMA this year, which is a different way of improving the community.

my bad, I didn't mean it personally to you Brad at all (i generally never make personal comments as a matter of policy, except in egregious situations). I do hear this refrains so routinely in the reform debates it frustrates me.

as general Qn/criterion (nothing personal directed at anyone here), where and how should we draw the line between [temporary] inaction and unwillingness to help create change? how many years of inaction should be considered unwillingness (or lack of belief in the cause/methods)?

It depends on many life factors that are unknowable. Someone may face a myriad of personal challenges not visible in the public sphere that drains their ability to do much more than get by.

I get that there may be few with genuine barriers preventing them from acting on their beliefs, but wouldn't you agree that's rather an exception than the norm?