Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.707 [SLACK_000921] · slack_pm:msg:07415

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

Reading that article again pissed me off more than I expected. So I wasted some time. [shared file(s): Clarificationon recent CNET article]

In context

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

2021-04-15 12:07 Kristian G. Andersen

Reading that article again pissed me off more than I expected. So I wasted some time. [shared file(s): Clarificationon recent CNET article]
2021-04-15 12:15 Robert F. Garry open

Not a waste of time - well done!
2021-04-15 12:18 Kristian G. Andersen open

I mean - the idiot included Eddie being "a Chinese puppet" among many other things. That's a really, really low point for journalism.
2021-04-15 12:24 Robert F. Garry open

It's a hit piece. Claims to be a science writer - hates people that can actually do science. You did a good job ofpointing out the sophistry, which describes the entire article.
2021-04-15 12:35 Robert F. Garry open

Again well done. What a real journalist would do is ask the straightforward questions; "Can you please clarify (a) ifyou are accusing Drs. Holmes and Zhengli of lying," "Just to clarify - are you saying Dr. Rasmussen is lying?" andDo you agree with these statements by "Bostickson...?" No journalist has done the same of Alina, Jamie, Relman etc.