Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.6 [SLACK_000220] · slack_pm:msg:00047

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

Baric's paper IS really strange - I think he's just miffed because a bunch of amateurs came walking all over his turf.

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2020-05-01 16:25 Edward C. Holmes open

Mine is very similar, although I probably have 30% bollocks bollocks and 10% bollocks scientists.
2020-05-01 16:27 Kristian G. Andersen open

I have another 50% bollocks bollocks coming in, but I ignore all of those, so don't need to spend too much time on it.Plus bollocks bollocks my assistant responds to while journalistic bollocks our comms department takes care of.Leaving only 80% of bollocks to deal with.
2020-05-01 16:28 Edward C. Holmes open

Oh, I'm impressed/jealous - seems you have decent bollocks wall in place. I have to deal with all bollocks myself.
2020-05-01 16:30 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yeah, firewalls and bollockswalls were needed pretty quickly. Still need the wall though. Or not.
2020-05-01 16:30 Kristian G. Andersen

Baric's paper IS really strange - I think he's just miffed because a bunch of amateurs came walking all over his turf.
2020-05-01 16:31 Edward C. Holmes open

Exactly how I read it.
2020-05-01 16:32 Kristian G. Andersen open

I also had a pretty heated discussion with him on one of the WH committee calls where I mentioned that the RBD would probably lead to high affinity binding and the furin site being active. He essentially said that was all bullshit and I couldn't possibly know... Well.
2020-05-01 16:32 Kristian G. Andersen open

[this was early January]
2020-05-01 16:33 Edward C. Holmes open

We actually did him a MASSIVE favour in writing that article. He would be really in the cross-hairs without it.