Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.557 [SLACK_000771] · slack_pm:msg:05805

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

It was really insulting to so many people!!!

In context

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

2021-03-01 14:23 Andrew Rambaut open

This is utterly awful: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00525-x How to insult just about everyone, not cite any work done previously.
2021-03-01 14:29 Edward C. Holmes open

Agreed! I pulled my name off.
2021-03-01 14:29 Kristian G. Andersen open

Holy crap. Especially love this paragraph [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-03-01 at 14.25.52.png]
2021-03-01 14:30 Kristian G. Andersen open

"... many of them early in their careers, who cobble together software and analytical tools in their own time to findessential answers" - Andrew, I assume that's you. Sorry, buddy. :face_with_rolling_eyes:
2021-03-01 14:30 Edward C. Holmes

It was really insulting to so many people!!!
2021-03-01 14:31 Kristian G. Andersen open

This part is just unbelievable - "The Twitter thread became a key source of information on the new variant, and E.B.H.'s Christmas break was lost to crunching further sequences and briefing journalists". I'm glad she thinks sohighly of herself. I'm gonna give myself a prize too - I'm going to call it The Kristian Prize.
2021-03-01 14:31 Kristian G. Andersen open

Of course - none of these people have sequenced anything....
2021-03-01 14:31 Kristian G. Andersen open

(or shared data)
2021-03-01 14:31 Edward C. Holmes open

The original version of the paper was fine. It then degenerated into this...I told them multiple times that the focus onEmma was completely inappropriate.