When you express your personal opinion in an online forum, you must be as courteous as if you were speaking with someone face-to-face. Insults and personal attacks will not be tolerated. To disagree with an opinion, an idea or an event is one thing, but to show disrespect for other people is quite another. Great minds don't always think alike - and that's precisely what makes online dialogue so interesting and valuable.

Netiquette is the set of rules of conduct governing how you should behave when communicating via the Internet. Before you post a message to a blog or forum, it's important to read and understand these rules. Otherwise, you may be banned from posting.

  1. RCInet.ca's online forums are not anonymous. Users must register, and give their full name and place of residence, which are displayed alongside each of their comments. RCInet.ca reserves the right not to publish comments if there is any doubt as to the identity of their author.
  2. Assuming the identity of another person with intent to mislead or cause harm is a serious infraction that may result in the offender being banned.
  3. RCInet.ca's online forums are open to everyone, without regard to age, ethnic origin, religion, gender or sexual orientation.
  4. Comments that are defamatory, hateful, racist, xenophobic, sexist, or that disparage an ethnic origin, religious affiliation or age group will not be published.
  5. In online speak, writing in ALL CAPS is considered yelling, and may be interpreted as aggressive behaviour, which is unpleasant for the people reading. Any message containing one or more words in all caps (except for initialisms and acronyms) will be rejected, as will any message containing one or more words in bold, italic or underlined characters.
  6. Use of vulgar, obscene or objectionable language is prohibited. Forums are public places and your comments could offend some users. People who use inappropriate language will be banned.
  7. Mutual respect is essential among users. Insulting, threatening or harassing another user is prohibited. You can express your disagreement with an idea without attacking anyone.
  8. Exchanging arguments and opposing views is a key component of healthy debate, but it should not turn into a dialogue or private discussion between two users who address each other without regard for the other participants. Messages of this type will not be posted.
  9. Radio Canada International publishes contents in seven languages. The language used in the forums has to be the same as the contents we publish. The usage of other languages, with the exception of some words, is forbidden.
  10. Messages that are off-topic will not be published.
  11. Making repetitive posts disrupts the flow of discussions and will not be tolerated.
  12. Adding images or any other type of file to comments is forbidden. Including hyperlinks to other websites is allowed, as long as they comply with netiquette. Radio Canada International is in no way responsible for the content of such sites, however.
  13. Copying and pasting text written by someone else, even if you credit the author, is unacceptable if that text makes up the majority of your comment.
  14. Posting any type of advertising or call to action, in any form, to Radio Canada International forums is prohibited.
  15. All comments and other types of content are moderated before publication. Radio Canada International reserves the right to refuse any comment for publication.
  16. Radio Canada International reserves the right to close a forum at any time, without notice.
  17. Radio Canada International reserves the right to amend this code of conduct (netiquette) at any time, without notice.
  18. By participating in its online forums, you allow Radio Canada International to publish your comments on the web for an indefinite time. This also implies that these messages will be indexed by Internet search engines.
  19. Radio Canada International has no obligation to remove your messages from the web if one day you request it. We invite you to carefully consider your comments and the consequences of their posting.


Heather Exner-Pirot
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

After a forty year wait, the National Science Foundation, America’s foremost scientific research and funding organization, is beginning construction of a state-of-the-art, 254-foot oceanographic research vessel for the Arctic.  The project, which is estimated to cost $199.5 million, was approved last December; construction is slated to begin in October, with the vessel ready for scientific duty by 2014.  When complete, the R/V Sikuliaq will be able to break ice as thick as three feet, and navigate in seasonal sea ice and open ocean waters near Alaska, including the Chukchi, Beaufort and Bering Seas, as well as the eastern Arctic.

There are many great reasons to be excited about this project.  The most obvious is the scientific one.  As everyone knows, the Arctic is acting as the proverbial canary in the coal mine for the effects of global warming. Climate change and the anticipated increase in human use of the region will influence ocean circulation and ecosystem dynamics, impacting biological productivity, marine mammals and fish stocks.  The Sikuliaq will help scientists better understand those effects.

But perhaps more interesting is what it says about American priorities.  In recent years, the icebreaking capability of the U.S. Coast Guard has been allowed to atrophy.  Of only three icebreakers, two – the Polar Star and the Polar Sea - have reached the end of their original commissions (built in 1976 and 1977 respectively, their intended service life was thirty years).  Currently in dry dock in Seattle, the Polar Star is being given a $62 million refit in order to extend its service by seven to ten years, and is not expected to re-enter service until 2013. The Polar Sea received a $6.3 million refit in 2008 and $5.5 million in 2009, meant to extend its sea life by one season each. However unexpected engine troubles sidelined the vessel this June, and she will be out of service until at least next Winter. No new icebreakers have been commissioned by the USCG to replace its aging fleet. (The third icebreaker, the Healy, is a smaller vessel that was constructed mainly to conduct polar research.  It is currently being used to map the geological seabed of the continental shelf off the coast of Alaska.  It received its commission in August 2000.)

As shipping, industrial and tourist traffic increases in the Arctic, it will be necessary for the US to enhance its monitoring and enforcement capabilities in the Arctic, not to mention search and rescue.  Anyone in favour of law, order and holding polluters accountable should be in favour of having well-functioning icebreakers operated by the circumpolar nations’ Coast Guards.  But the fact that the big bucks - $200 million – are being allocated to brains rather than brawn in the US reinforces the point that climate change is seen as a bigger issue, and a bigger threat in the Arctic, than international conflict, terrorism or illegal fishing.

I think this assessment is spot on.  And I applaud the funding of Arctic science. Good policy comes from good information; with its many environmental, cultural, political and economic issues, the Arctic is going to need a lot of good policy in the coming years.