In a "dry lab" the appearance of the notebook will surely be different - the key point of ONS is transparency and "no insider information". It will certainly be interesting to see how all this evolves. Concerning the experimental data, in this case I think Peter is using self-reported lists of C NMR peaks. He will be able to check for plausability of peak assignments but in the cases where there are problems it will be hard to know why. Hopefully chemists will start publishing their entire spectra in an expandable format like JCAMP. That way anomalous spectra can be investigated by anyone - to check for the reference peak and how much noise there is. Quaternary carbons can be tricky to distinguish from noise.