list of ET members out of date

Create issue
Issue #2046 new
Roland Haas created an issue

The current list of ET members on is out of date (mostly I guess because there is no way to update one's information).

Eg looking at Charalampos Markakis would be at Southampton (he has been at NCSA since 2016), Philipp Moesta would be at Caltech (he has been in Berkeley for a couple years now). Tanja Bode is no longer at Tuebingen but at UCSC etc etc.

My suggestion would be to contact all persons listed for their current institution and remove those that do not respond within a month. For future registration I suggest that we ask for an email address and ping the addresses once a year, removing stale ones. We should also include a paragraph to contact to update ones affiliation in any email send out along with the registration.


Comments (6)

  1. Frank Löffler
    • removed comment

    (mostly I guess because there is no way to update one's information).

    Every developer has commit rights (contact me if you don't). Yes, that means not everyone on that list can update their information. We have yet to find a system that can do that without making it open for everyone (which would be bad; ask Steve about the spam we get that never makes it to the users).

    In general yes: it is a good idea to try to keep this up to date.

  2. Frank Löffler
    • removed comment

    Concerning email: I might have the email addresses they used for most of them, but since they don't give explicit permission to post them online, and I think it would be bad to ask for that, I didn't do so. I wouldn't care about mine (it's easily available anyway), but I want to respect the potential wish of persons to keep their email address from being 'too public' (usually for spam reasons), and without starting a discussion about the sense of that.

  3. Roland Haas reporter
    • removed comment

    I do not want to suggest to post the email addresses online which would be quite bad. Just have them internally (say visible only to the owner of the list) so that they can be contacted. To allow for updates I agree it is sufficient of one of the developers/maintainers handles the update, my suggestion was to include a sentence along these lines

    If your affiliation changes or you would like to be removed from the list of active Einstein Toolkit users displayed on the website, please contact . You will be contacted approximately once a year to verify that you would still like to be included in the list of Einstein Toolkit users on the website .

    in the confirmation email users receive when registering their membership.

  4. Roland Haas reporter
    • removed comment

    We should make an effort to ensure that list of users on the website is at least somewhat up to date by removing persons no longer active / updating incorrect entries.

    For those persons we know personally, we can just send an email and ask for up-to-date information. For those that we don't know personally, but that had themselves registered to the users mailing list, we have he email in the mailing list. For those that have since removed themselves from the mailing list, I would say that a reasonable assumption is that they are no longer an Einstein Toolkit user but can also contact them. If the email is no longer valid then I would assume the person is no longer interested in the ET.

  5. Ian Hinder

    There is also the question of what this list of “members” is supposed to represent. Is it people who are actively using the toolkit, or all people who have ever used the toolkit? “Members” of a consortium, I think, should be the former. If we wanted to, we could then have “alumni” who are no longer using the toolkit. This would be a fairer representation; e.g. when applying for funding and stating the size of the consortium, it is an exaggeration to say that all the people on that page will benefit from whatever we are applying for, as many of them are likely no longer using the toolkit.

    If we are listing the affiliation, we should make sure it is accurate. Come to think of it: are we in violation of the GDPR by even continuing to have this page here? I suspect so.

    I propose:

    • Collect the email addresses for everyone we can
    • Ensure that when new people are added, we keep (privately) an email address for them
    • Email each person once per year to confirm details, and ask if they are still using the toolkit.
    • People get moved to Alumni if they don’t reply or say they are no longer using the toolkit (we might email them again to give them another chance before moving them)
    • If someone doesn’t reply, a note is added to their name along the lines of “last updated XX/XX/XXXX”, so it’s clear that the affiliation might be out of date
    • The page could have a global “Last updated” so people can see that anyone without a “last updated” is up-to-date as of that date.

    This is probably not something we want to do manually, at least, not every year. Probably we want to do it manually the first time.

  6. Log in to comment