Talk:The BioBricks Foundation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I thought it was important to include in the BBF's mission a statement about evolving ethical and safety standards with respect to engineered biological systems. Although the existence of the open commons itself goes a long way to promoting responsible behavior, I felt it was important to explicitly state (as a separate goal) that the BBF seeks to promote good conduct. If you disagree or want to revise, feel free. I just wrote in some substrate for others to modify as they see fit (ie a starting off point for discussion). --[[User:Rshetty|Reshma]] 20:45, 1 Jun 2005 (EDT) | I thought it was important to include in the BBF's mission a statement about evolving ethical and safety standards with respect to engineered biological systems. Although the existence of the open commons itself goes a long way to promoting responsible behavior, I felt it was important to explicitly state (as a separate goal) that the BBF seeks to promote good conduct. If you disagree or want to revise, feel free. I just wrote in some substrate for others to modify as they see fit (ie a starting off point for discussion). --[[User:Rshetty|Reshma]] 20:45, 1 Jun 2005 (EDT) | ||
In reading this over again and looking at Sri's modifications, I realized that goals (iii) and (iv) were getting a bit convoluted. So I tried to define the line between them a bit more. (iii) is primarily concerned with standards for dealing with the parts themselves which includes bar codes. (iv) is primarily concerned with how the community can promote safe and ethical conduct. I also tried to clarify the language a bit by only using the term "practice standards" to refer to practices on the part of the community and used identification to refer to the labeling of parts and systems. As always, feel free to revert back or modify further. --[[User:Rshetty|Reshma]] 12:52, 3 Jun 2005 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 09:52, 3 June 2005
I thought it was important to include in the BBF's mission a statement about evolving ethical and safety standards with respect to engineered biological systems. Although the existence of the open commons itself goes a long way to promoting responsible behavior, I felt it was important to explicitly state (as a separate goal) that the BBF seeks to promote good conduct. If you disagree or want to revise, feel free. I just wrote in some substrate for others to modify as they see fit (ie a starting off point for discussion). --Reshma 20:45, 1 Jun 2005 (EDT)
In reading this over again and looking at Sri's modifications, I realized that goals (iii) and (iv) were getting a bit convoluted. So I tried to define the line between them a bit more. (iii) is primarily concerned with standards for dealing with the parts themselves which includes bar codes. (iv) is primarily concerned with how the community can promote safe and ethical conduct. I also tried to clarify the language a bit by only using the term "practice standards" to refer to practices on the part of the community and used identification to refer to the labeling of parts and systems. As always, feel free to revert back or modify further. --Reshma 12:52, 3 Jun 2005 (EDT)
