We believe that science can be presented to inform decision-makers while trying not to motivate the decision maker towards any particular course.
We respect those who advocate specific actions, using good science to motivate decision makers, nevertheless #science2inform aims to provide science in as neutral a manner as humanly possible.
We hold that this distinction is important and valuable.
Science2inform presents evidence pro and con, highlights decision-relevant uncertainties, aiming to let the decision-maker make the decision.
Science2motivate may advocate a particular action, policy or general stance; it still answers direct questions honestly, of course.
Both science to inform and science to motivate are honest applications of science; we argue only for the value of making it clear, to yourself and to those you speak with, which path you are pursuing. There is also, of course "science to bushwack," a Machiavellian misrepresentation of science.
This is an open group of scientists who welcome comment and contributions by advocates. Our aim is to clarify the difference between science to inform and science to motivate, including noting examples in social media that might be expressed with less spin.
For more information, write to firstname.lastname@example.org or search twitter for #science2inform.