Thanks, Jerry, for the summary.
I think having a place for AMMRL members to discuss and evaluate the
performance of vendors privately and anonymously is a great idea. With the
rating of vendors out there, the life for AMMRL members and other NMR lab
personnel will be much easier when it comes down to which vendors to go for
services and parts.
Cheers,
Jerry
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Jerry Hu, Ph.D. *
Technical Director Email:
jghu_at_mrl.ucsb.edu
Project Scientist Tel:
(805)893-7914 (office)
Materials Research Lab, UCSB (805)893-7940 (lab)
Santa Barbara, CA 93106 Fax: (805)893-7914
http://www.mrl.ucsb.edu/spectroscopy-facility
*From:* Hirschinger, Jerry D [mailto:jerryh56_at_purdue.edu]
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 05, 2016 12:23 PM
*To:* AMMRL (ammrl_at_ammrl.org)
*Subject:* RE: AMMRL: Petition for the JUNTA to remove vendors - SUMMARY
Hello again,
I will not be there this year, so I should get this summary out there
before ENC begins. I received five responses from other members in support
of my petition, one informative response from AMMRL Junta, plus 2 other
kind responses from vendors. None of the membership expressed opposition
to the petition, and the other responses were cooperative and informative,
which I greatly appreciate. Thank you Clemens, Rich, Charlie, Sameer,
George, Dean, John and Arnold for your comments.
As it turns out there have been vendors on the list all along! Those which
are not directly members are kept informed by their collaborators who are
members. This is not necessarily a bad thing. By including vendors, they
have an opportunity to get first-hand feedback regarding their products and
problems with products. They are also able to correct misinformation when
it is passed to the list, as well as gage the need for new products. The
general membership benefits by having vendors’ expert advice and experience
on the list, even if they don’t always volunteer it.
Since the vendors have tacitly been here all along, it does not seem so
necessary to remove them from the list. They hear of the conversations
here through collaborators anyway. The on-list private opinions,
recommendations, and reviews of vendor performance which come from the
membership have always borne the risk of aggravating vendor relations. We
just didn’t necessarily know that.
Since Agilent is leaving the market, vendors have been encouraged to step
forward on the list to assist Agilent users. This has resulted in an
increase in outright advertising, IMO. Perhaps my issue with the vendors
would be satisfied if they just stop advertising services whenever they see
a problem come over the list which they could make some money on. When we
members post a problem, we are all pretty well aware that there are
commercial services available to fix the problem. So, vendors please
resist the urge to tell us that you have service available to fix our
problems. WE KNOW THAT ALREADY!! If we were ready to hire you, we would
not be asking the list for help.
The main drawback I see to having vendors on the list is that frank and
honest evaluation of their products and services is not possible without
possibly spoiling a vendor relationship. We all appreciate our friends and
colleagues working for the vendors, and don’t want to jeopardise those
relationships. In my mind, it seems a matter of whether the primary
purpose of the list is to provide connections and assistance, or to
evaluate vendors. I’m guessing the Steering Committee would rightly agree
with the former. We can always discuss vendor performance privately and
post anonymous summary to the list, anyway. Collecting replies privately
and summarizing to the list anonymously is a great way to handle any post
here, IMO.
In conclusion, I believe we can keep the list as it is with vendors
present. It has operated so well for so many years that way. I would,
however like the Steering Committee to formally ask the vendors to stop
replying to our posts with messages like “We can handle that work.” Or “We
have that part in stock.” and other advertisements thinly disguised as
assistance. Those responses are unwelcome, IMO.
I hope you all have a great ENC, if you’re going.
Cheers, -Hirsch
Spinlanders,
I understand the reasoning behind admitting vendors into AMMRL. There was
hope that the Agilent crisis could be alleviated with their knowledge.
Well, I for one do not see that happening. What I do see is that every
time an opportunity comes up, they simply hawk their services. Agilent
themselves has a VERY helpful Spinsights forum which supplants any need for
vendors in AMMRL to solve Agilent-related problems.
In the meantime, with vendors in the list it is no longer possible to have
‘private’ and frank discussions among lab managers without possibly
poisoning our valued relationships with our vendors. I am hereby
petitioning the AMMRL ruling Junta to remove all vendors from AMMRL and to
restore the historic policy prohibiting their membership.
Sincerely, -Hirsch
Jerry Hirschinger, NMR Instrumentation Specialist
Purdue Interdepartmental NMR Facility
560 Oval Dr. West Lafayette, IN 47907-2084
Office: Wetherill 365A
Phone / Fax: (765) 494-5288 / 494-0239
Cellular: (765) 427-3034
Received on Wed Apr 06 2016 - 10:43:34 MST