Precisely. Thanks for the breakdown, JD.

NSF is too big for its britches. There may be an economic reason (your job) to obey this statute, but the legality is all fired up with the notion of some Clancy novel. It’s an amazing fantasy that the National Science Foundation owns the record of your life, whether on paper, or online, or through seismic brain transmission.

NSF does a good job overestimating its grey legal power on the ice in that they present weird and formidable threats that no one understands. In fact, the ice is already so weird that these bizarre caveats just fly under the radar and no one even knows to protect themselves from them. So NSF wins by default.

Unless you write, blog, or otherwise enhance The Program with perspectives.

Furthermore be it, that we have tired of the criticism begat by allowing polies to express anger at said lunacies.

Thus was born the new IT policy. marvel at it’s inept construction! Fear it’s overly broad language! Beware it’s ludicrous examples! And fear for the poor bastards that not only do one of the hardest jobs on the planet, but now have to do it with a smile under their muzzles.

The pole just got a bit colder

According to this, the NSF is authorizing an information lockdown about a non-secured, non-military, non-sensitive, research station during its highest point of public interest. Thats like 7-11 banning the cashier from explaining the flavor of slushies and why he’s out of cherry today.

Wow, getting fired for complaining about cooperate politics, favoritism, and spending on a government contract….
But I can see two quick items that are protected by federal law… discussing the effectiveness….spending. If they don’t have the authority to do that in Iraq/Stan anymore, you can damn well be sure it can’t be enforced on the ice. ( of course, vindication usually comes months after termination)