Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.559 [SLACK_000773] · slack_pm:msg:05836

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

Yes indeed

In context

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

2021-03-01 14:59 Kristian G. Andersen open

(not posted yet)
2021-03-01 15:00 Edward C. Holmes open

Nope
2021-03-01 15:00 Andrew Rambaut open

I am not sure 'misrepresents' more than completely ignores.
2021-03-01 15:00 Kristian G. Andersen open

"Ignores" - better.
2021-03-01 15:01 Edward C. Holmes

Yes indeed
2021-03-01 15:04 Andrew Rambaut open

I can just imagine the cringy reply about how everyone worked super hard.
2021-03-01 15:05 Kristian G. Andersen open

Hah - there's no going back from this other than a full retraction. This is embarrassing beyond belief.
2021-03-01 15:09 Edward C. Holmes open

It is indeed a total disaster. The original version was a technical piece about issues in phylogenetic analysis. It was fine. The Editor then completely rewrote it into this shit. But all that stuff about Emma saving the world came from the paper authors. That was embarrassing and misleading. It also totally over-hyped the issues. Rob Lanfear saidhe agreed with my concerns but still decided to be an author!
2021-03-01 15:11 Kristian G. Andersen open

One very important question the authors need to ask themselves - would they have been authors if this had been for, say, Nature Microbiology and not Nature?