Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.259 [SLACK_000473] · slack_pm:msg:02709

Date: 2020-11-16 16:31
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.

I think so too - or at least that must have prompted it. But this basically adds nothing - and isn't really an 'addendum'- it's just a bit of extra background information.

In context

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

2020-11-16 16:05 Andrew Rambaut open

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2951-z
2020-11-16 16:21 Kristian G. Andersen open

Eh? Isn't that a bit of a weird addendum? I mean - what does it add we didn't already know?
2020-11-16 16:29 Andrew Rambaut open

It is very odd. I think it is trying to address the tinfoilers who are going on and on about that bloody mine.
2020-11-16 16:31 Kristian G. Andersen

I think so too - or at least that must have prompted it. But this basically adds nothing - and isn't really an 'addendum'- it's just a bit of extra background information.
2020-11-16 17:24 Edward C. Holmes open

100% due to the tinfoilers. Both Shi and Nature have likely been inundated with comments about this. And that BBCbloke keeps emailing me. To me, this is just clarifies what they did. I think the Methods bit in the first paper had some suspect English. No doubt Inspector Clouseau is already typing vigorously.

Full conversation →