Use it yourself and keep improving it.

I think this is an interesting point here.

I use what I make."

If you don't use it yourself, "integrity dictates that you make an effort to have the research results put in."

Another expression

Make the deliverables available to others than yourself

Publish detailed production instructions.

Use it yourself and keep improving it.

I can't help but wonder what this is all about now.

You're not using what you've made, and you're thinking defensively at the same time when you're making up the concept.

Peer review looks for novelty and holes in the experiments and methods of argumentation.

Anything can be made useful by specifying extreme situations (HCI makes this easy thanks to the Human element).

The best tactic to create novelty easily is to make strange things that even you don't use because of these factors.

I would think that in other engineering fields, the value of the extreme situation setting itself would be sifted to some extent by market needs (such as the fact that such a network configuration is useless).

The extreme situation setting by the Human element is strong because it can be used as an invincible shield that can never be beaten if it is well-spoken, poly-colored, etc.

[* If you set up an extreme situation, I think the integrity is whether or not you are making an effort to get your research results in there.

It looks like you're toying with the Human element to make it useful.

It's just that it's not fair to act like it's convenient when you don't think it's convenient or necessary yourself.

That's all there is to it.

relevance

---