Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.315 [SLACK_000529] · slack_pm:msg:03305

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

Yes, no way the lawyers will allow those to go up. I not quite sure how I'm going to explain it all them though.?

In context

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

2020-12-14 16:24 Edward C. Holmes open

That's just between Andrew and I and because it does not discuss the paper per se I think I don't have to include it.
2020-12-14 16:26 Kristian G. Andersen open

Hahaha, can't WAIT to see those emails on the internet - and it's fair - it shows that we too think he's an arse.
2020-12-14 16:26 Andrew Rambaut open

Also discuss personal medical history of a person.
2020-12-14 16:26 Kristian G. Andersen open

Ohhhh - HIPAA
2020-12-14 16:29 Edward C. Holmes

Yes, no way the lawyers will allow those to go up. I not quite sure how I'm going to explain it all them though.?
2020-12-14 16:29 Andrew Rambaut open

Out of interest what is the situation with Slack? Presumably that is private communication?
2020-12-14 16:30 Edward C. Holmes open

Great quote for Bob which we should definitely put out "I think the approach for the paper should be totally agnostic."Slack is private.
2020-12-14 16:44 Kristian G. Andersen open

Oh boy. :clown_face:
2020-12-14 16:51 Edward C. Holmes open

Aside from the crudity, what the emails show I think is that we took lab escape very seriously and that we genuinely worried about it. They do show that Jeremy was involved though and I can see that causing a stir....but there's zero smoking guns. Absolutely nothing.