Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.16 · slack_pm:msg:00164

Page text: p.16 · original PDF

Date: 2020-05-06 20:23 (hour precision)
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen

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

.. the kind of shit we have to deal with though... Geez. :face_with_rolling_eyes:

In context

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

2020-05-06 20:23 Edward C. Holmes open

Exactly! SLACK_000230
2020-05-06 20:23 Kristian G. Andersen open

And I'm pretty glad we did - because at least we then have some _actual_ ammo to fight these plonkers. I really don't understand what the journalist is trying to do - it's so dumb I wouldn't even respond.
2020-05-06 20:23 Edward C. Holmes open

I'm not responding. The University are going to issue a statement.
2020-05-06 20:23 Kristian G. Andersen open

Even better. They have nothing.
2020-05-06 20:23 Kristian G. Andersen

.. the kind of shit we have to deal with though... Geez. :face_with_rolling_eyes:
2020-05-06 20:23 Edward C. Holmes open

I know...for trying to do the right thing. Fuck me.
2020-05-06 20:23 Andrew Rambaut open

And you have a married blond woman in your house during lockdown.
2020-05-06 20:23 Robert F. Garry open

"There is a lot of shit about." We've all seen it, but this is unwelcome and taking it to another level. Sorry Eddie -don't need this. If you are committed to good science and do it you'll piss off a vocal minority. COVID-19 has stirredup a lot of turds (Hooper, Mikovits, Fair) that are floating to the topof the cesspool. "it's so dumb I wouldn't even respond" yes getting your University to respond is a good start. -- an ex-"student" of mine who if very good at media manipulation, once had the WashPost ready to write adefamatory "expose" on our Ebola sequencing paper in Science (if it had existed at the time - think high Altmetric). Harvard's approach was a well-consider point bypoint rebuttal - I admittedly was more "colourful." WasPost never ran the story. Lesson learned - need to do both.
2020-05-06 20:23 Andrew Rambaut open

Bob is right though. You can basically get your University to just write those facts back at them they are all true and they are all irrelevant. The point is that there is already transparency on grants.

Full conversation →