Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.837 [SLACK_001051] · slack_pm:msg:08718

Date: 2021-05-19 02:25
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Robert F. Garry, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Edward C. Holmes

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

I think we need one paper that details everything. The doc is here but I don't think you'll have permission: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jmvbeZ1_RqQedPmfNKNs7DA_Z9sySsEWgAgZoVKRSWg/edit

Links shared

file https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jmvbeZ1_RqQedPmfNKNs7DA_Z9sySsEWgAgZoVKRSWg/edit

In context

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

2021-05-19 02:25 Edward C. Holmes

I think we need one paper that details everything. The doc is here but I don't think you'll have permission: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jmvbeZ1_RqQedPmfNKNs7DA_Z9sySsEWgAgZoVKRSWg/edit
2021-05-19 02:30 Edward C. Holmes open

On those emails above, I've confirmed with Dr. Shen in China and he confirms he has not sent them to anyone. They also include emails from Nature and Nature Microbiology that should even be there because this breaks all journal confidentiality. The one from Nature doesn't have anything to do with me. So, he's clearly be hacked. BillyBostickson said he was working with Sharri so I my guess is that DRASTIC are behind this.
2021-05-19 02:31 Andrew Rambaut open

In which case I am not sure Nature is the place to send it?
2021-05-19 02:32 Andrew Rambaut open

We will see how it works out but it needs to be comprehensive.
2021-05-19 02:32 Edward C. Holmes open

I agree. Comprehensive is key.

Full conversation →