Update MAIN.md

added a new paragraph on "Limitations of OS"
a few suggestions for changes in the text

Author: johave

content_development/MAIN.md

@@ -160,21 +160,30 @@ Open Science gives us a new set of standards, tools, principles, and practices t
 ### Open Scientists share objects to gain network effects for their work <a name="Network_Effects"></a>
 
 “Because we have to coordinate with one another to get anything out of our shared free time and talents, using cognitive surplus isn’t just about accumulating individual preferences. The culture of the various groups of users matters enormously for what they expect of one another and how they work together. The culture in turn will determine how much of the value that we get out of the cognitive surplus will be merely communal (enjoyed by the participants, but not of much use for society at large) and how much of it will be civic.”
-Excerpt From: Clay Shirky. _Cognitive Surplus_.
+Excerpt From: Clay Shirky. _Cognitive Surplus_[Link to original source text?/year/highlight graphically as quote].
 
-Building on a civic culture of sharing, open science creates new value from every object (idea, data, method, software, results) that is openly shared. Some of this new value accrues to the scientist who shares, some goes to the benefit of all scientists working in the same research arena who reuse this object, and some goes to scientists who can open up new research from the collective resource that this object now enhances. This last value is the ultimate promise of open science: a shared surplus of research objects the can be openly mixed, mined, and melded into new, synthetic knowledge. McKiernan (et al, 2016), demonstrates the advantages of open sharing for citations, impacts, careers, etc. What the open scientist does to increase the holdings of the open corpus in their field adds a civic choice to these advantages. Growing the open research ecosystem helps every scientist on the planet.
+Building on a civic culture of sharing, open science creates new value from every object (idea, data, method, software, results) that is openly shared. Some of this new value accrues to the scientist who shares, some goes to the benefit of all scientists working in the same research arena who reuse this object, and some goes to scientists who can open up new research from the collective resource that this object now enhances. This last value is the ultimate promise of open science: a shared surplus of research objects that can be openly mixed, mined, and melded into new, synthetic knowledge. McKiernan (et al, 2016), demonstrates the advantages of open sharing for citations, impacts, careers, etc. What the open scientist does to increase the holdings of the open corpus in their field adds a civic choice to these advantages. Growing the open research ecosystem helps every scientist on the planet.
 
 McKiernan, E.C., Bourne, P.E., Brown, C.T., Buck, S., Kenall, A., Lin, J., McDougall, D., Nosek, B.A., Ram, K., Soderberg, C.K. and Spies, J.R., 2016. How open science helps researchers succeed, ELife 5. See: https://elifesciences.org/articles/16800.
 
-Adding a new bit of research findings or experimental methods to an open repository is as easy (or easier) than submitting this to a closed collection (such as a for-profit publisher). However, open sharing scales better, particularly when it uses open standards-based platforms, and it is less fragile, as it can be migrated to new platforms and spread across multiple locations. Openness adds to discoverability and access, and contributes to reproducibility.
+Adding new research findings or experimental methods to an open repository is as easy (or easier) than submitting this to a closed collection (such as a for-profit publisher). Open sharing scales better, particularly when it uses open standards-based platforms [such as?], and is less fragile, since it can be migrated to new platforms and spread across multiple locations. Openness adds to discoverability and access, and contributes to reproducibility.
 
-Even as the value of, say, a telephone exchange, increases with each new telephone connection, the addition of a new data set, or a null result paper, or a specific finding, etc., builds numerous interconnections with the rest of the corpus. These interconnections (and their “network effects”) can lead to new knowledge, and they can serve as a mirror and a measure to reveal how each new bit of content solves (or critiques) a specific issue, and also potential problems with the newly added object. Rapid, open review opportunities arise. So too does rapid recognition and opportunities for new collaborations.
+Even as the value of e.g. a telephone exchange increases with each new telephone connection, the addition of a new data set, or a null result paper, or a specific finding, etc., builds numerous interconnections with the rest of the corpus. These interconnections (and their “network effects”) can lead to new knowledge, and they can serve as a mirror and a measure to reveal how each new bit of content solves (or critiques) a specific issue, and also potential problems with the newly added object. Rapid open review opportunities arise as well as increased recognition and opportunities for new collaborations.
 
-A lot of these network effects will take place on the internet at a planetary scale. The interconnections made possible by open science build capacity for the free movement of objects and ideas directly linked back to their authors. This capacity the almost instant global access to science products on the open web is anathema to markets that need to claim ownership and restrict access in order to capture profits from these. Distributed data protocols such as the [Interplanetary File System](https://ipfs.io/) and other emergent technologies will reduce the cost of hosting science objects to a near zero margin. Open licenses make sharing science knowledge durable and its reuse legal. 
+Many of these network effects will take place on the internet at a planetary scale. The interconnections made possible by Open Science [Shall we agree to always use capital letters sin ce it's a fixed term?] build capacity for the free movement of objects and ideas directly linked back to their authors. This capacity the almost instant global access to science products on the open web is anathema to markets that need to claim ownership and restrict access in order to capture profits from these. Distributed data protocols such as the [Interplanetary File System](https://ipfs.io/) and other emergent technologies will reduce the cost of hosting science objects to a near zero margin. Open licenses make sharing science knowledge durable and its reuse legal. 
 
-As [Cameron Neylon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Neylon) said at the metrics breakout of the _Beyond the PDF_ conference some years ago, _reuse is THE metric_. Reuse reveals and confirms the advantage that open sharing has over current, market-based, practices. Reuse validates the work of the scientist who contributed to the research ecosystem. Reuse captures more of the inherent value of the original discovery and accelerates knowledge growth. Open science is a science knowledge and data reuse accelerator. Its network effects help make reuse available, and, in time, inevitable. However, active, open reuse has not been a part of science culture for most scientists today, and the cultural changes that can help open science realize the goal of widespread reuse is a major challenge we face.    
+As [Cameron Neylon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Neylon) said at the metrics breakout of the _Beyond the PDF_ conference some years ago [when exactly?], _reuse is THE metric_. Reuse reveals and confirms the advantage that open sharing has over current, market-based, practices. Reuse validates the work of the scientist who contributed to the research ecosystem. Reuse captures more of the inherent value of the original discovery and accelerates knowledge growth. Open science is a science knowledge and data reuse accelerator. Its network effects help make reuse available, and, in time, inevitable. However, active, open reuse has not been a part of science culture for most scientists today, and the cultural changes that can help open science realize the goal of widespread reuse is a major challenge we face. [where does the quote end? Reference?]   
 
 
+### Limitations of Open Science <a name="Limitations"></a>
+
+Despite the more or less obvious benefits of Open Science practice, there are a range of reasonable concerns and therefore necessary limitations and exceptions to be identified, discussed and implemented in a higvhly discilpine-specific manner. These include and are not limited to:
+- personal data of and information about individuals 
+- any sensitive information (re bioengineering, medical information, ...)
+- geomapping data of endangered species (flora & fauna)
+
+Another important aspect to note (as has always been) is that each OA dataset requires a clear description of the context in which the data was raised, so that scientists who make use of the freely accessible data apply it in a meaningful analysis and reasonably transferred context.
+
 
 ### History of Open Science and Open Cultures <a name="Cultures"></a>