Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.112 [SLACK_000326] · slack_pm:msg:01150

Date: 2020-07-27 16:37
Type: chat message · slack
mentioned: Edward C. Holmes
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.

One thing though - and @Eddie Holmes this is important - we _*need*_ to talk to Jeremy or Tony first before saying _*anything*_ about a meeting. If we confirm that the meeting did happen, then we automatically confirm that Tony and Jeremy were present - we can't do that, without getting their consent. I'll reach out to Tony (and Francis) to seeif I can get a moment with them - Eddie, will you please do the same with Jeremy? Or should we do all three at the same time?

In context

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

2020-07-27 16:23 Andrew Rambaut open

In the document history is a named version from the 4th Feb called 'First Distributed Version'. Looking at my emails Eddie passed this version on the 4th to Jeremy who then distributed it to Fauci and others.
2020-07-27 16:27 Andrew Rambaut open

We then reworked it and Jeremy sent it round the full group on the 8th. Ron replied about a point so definitely saw it.
2020-07-27 16:28 Andrew Rambaut open

Jeremy's email - ```Kristen, Andrew, Bob, Eddie have reworked the summary and it is attached here. We are pushing to get the sequence data from the reports on the pangolins, but do not have currently, clearly that isvery important to incorporate. Interested in your viewsIs this reasonably balanced given the data?Is there anything anyone disagrees with?Is there anything more in relation to what would seem to be the two possibilities Nature, Intermediate host, evolution and passage Future data you may have Advice on whether KA, AR, RG and EH should publish this. These and other thoughts welcome in confidence.```
2020-07-27 16:36 Kristian G. Andersen open

Very good - and I remember the followup to that where I'm actually saying that we need to get more conclusive data before we can say one thing or the other. I think our paper trail is good
2020-07-27 16:37 Kristian G. Andersen

One thing though - and @Eddie Holmes this is important - we _*need*_ to talk to Jeremy or Tony first before saying _*anything*_ about a meeting. If we confirm that the meeting did happen, then we automatically confirm that Tony and Jeremy were present - we can't do that, without getting their consent. I'll reach out to Tony (and Francis) to seeif I can get a moment with them - Eddie, will you please do the same with Jeremy? Or should we do all three at the same time?
2020-07-27 17:29 Edward C. Holmes open

Agreed. I've now emailed Jeremy.
2020-07-27 18:12 Edward C. Holmes open

On the plus side, this may be the Altmetric boost we need...
2020-07-27 18:12 Kristian G. Andersen open

Exactly!
2020-07-27 19:02 Kristian G. Andersen open

Obviously the person writing the email... [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2020-07-27 at 7.02.03 PM.png]

Full conversation →