Is it too much to dream that Tom has set a trail-blazing precedent and
demonstrated to us all how unnecessary it is be anal about our
oh-so-precious data and structures that in the year 2013 are almost
completely useless without a huge dollop of other experimental data...?
On 27/03/2013 18:32, Anastassis Perrakis wrote:
I think it will be the first time in 15 years I will disagree with Tim.
I personally found the posting of Tom van der Bergh irritatingly disrespectful
in many levels.
1. It does not respect my mailbox capacity
2. It does not respect CCP4 developers posting output from phenix.refine
3. It does not respect his supervisors and colleagues who (right now) look like
fools (to me)
4. It does not respect himself, as I actually suspect he is a proactive
motivated student who came out as a bit of a fool
These said, I am rather easily irritated these days, so I will not comment on
the irritable character of the email.
As for the answers, some were funny, some were informative, some funny and
informative.
Not too much political correctness please, because we will soon start calling
disordered loops
positionally challenged polypeptide segments (*).
Tassos
(*) joke stolen from Thomas Schneider talk @Stanford, 1998. What a great
meeting...!
Dear so-far-posters,
I do not know Tom Van den Bergh, nor do I know his background, nor the
history of the data, nor the reasons why he may have sent it to this
list (although I think he did it to ask for help), but I find these
answers irritatingly disrespectful and nasty.
No regards to the ones addressed,
Tim
