Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, pp.118-119 [SLACK_000332] · slack_pm:msg:01212

Date: 2020-07-29 14:24
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Robert F. Garry, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Edward C. Holmes

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

Don't get me wrong, I want serious revenge on this. I spent much of the night plotting schemes. But, we need to absolutely take the moral high ground all the way through this.

In context

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

2020-07-29 13:40 Kristian G. Andersen open

And I don't think we want to give Clare the whole narrative we emailed to Jon - other than to say it's completely wrong. We can give it to her if she asks, but I don't think we necessarily want her to email all those details to the reviewer just yet. I don't think Jon will share back what we did yesterday with Deep Throat.
2020-07-29 13:48 Kristian G. Andersen open

If Jeremy could mention that the meeting was confidential and the information classified (I believe it was a secure line?) that would be helpful. He should mention we will contact the journal and that the narrative is false (I assumehe won't actually be sharing the email to Jon?)
2020-07-29 14:00 Andrew Rambaut open

I seem to remember that Jeremy actually contacted Nature to tell them it would be coming. Have an email to that effect.
2020-07-29 14:22 Edward C. Holmes open

It was definitely to be on a secure line. I'll email Jeremy and see what he says. Kristian - do you want to draft the email to Clare.
2020-07-29 14:24 Edward C. Holmes

Don't get me wrong, I want serious revenge on this. I spent much of the night plotting schemes. But, we need to absolutely take the moral high ground all the way through this.
2020-07-29 14:29 Andrew Rambaut open

It also occurs to me that whoever in the meeting leaked it may not have intended it to get out and was just gossipingto his mate. A careful move keeping the meeting participants onside could be good.
2020-07-29 14:40 Robert F. Garry open

We've got that high ground, but there are probably many more than a few in the Old Coronavirus Guard that don't like us "interlopers" getting so much positive attention [Cohen article a case in point] and have had enough. Looking down from the other side it actually does piss me off that curefinder - class clown and the worse grad student inhistory - was able to lie his way into a position as virus expert on national teevee [karma is a bear though]. Agree with Andrew that the leaker may not be nefarious - just a gossiper - the info just got into the hands of one or a few ofthe righteously pissed off. I agree informing the meeting participants - even if they are not all exactly "happy" with us- would be a decent move.
2020-07-29 14:42 Edward C. Holmes open

Possible I guess. Any email from Jeremy should just be passive and just say remember it was confidential. It is also striking that we have not had one email, phone call of complaint from any on the call (or anyone else for that matter) about the paper. Nothing. The only moans we have had are from the lab escape mob.

Full conversation →