RE: FACS question

From: Andrew Beernink (ABeernink@novasite.com)
Date: Fri Dec 14 2001 - 17:36:27 EST


No disrespect to the Captain of this Vessel (Paul), but I disagree.  I can't
imagine how many questions he and others have seen which cause the reader to
throw up his or her arms in frustration.  As a relative beginner in the Flow
field, I am anxious to understand all problems, my own as well as those of
others.  I become frustrated when
1) I can't relate some other person's problem to my own flow setup;
2) I'm too busy to inquire;
3) if their problem MIGHT be something I've had some experience with, I'm
denied the opportunity to venture into the discussion forum for lack of
appropriate information.

All three of the above situations lead to the same unfortunate conclusion:
I don't respond in any way (which, depending on your views, might be a good
thing!).  Moreover, the majority of these types of vague or non-specific
questions, coming from people who don't know better, are likely to be the
kind that neophytes like me would want to get wrapped up in.  This leaves
those freakish statistical, compensation, (and other harder) problems to the
experts.

One other thing.  If I'm the one posing "these types" of questions, what am
I to think of the virtual lack of detailed response?  Is my question so
difficult or unknown, that the heavy-hitters can't even venture a guess?
Feedback like Paul's, even if harsh, is a welcome alternative to the bleak
silence that could follow "these types" of questions.

Let's not let our 21st Century Sensitivity prevent us from addressing the
issue.  Therefore, when I ask a questionable question, open fire
(figuratively)!  Hopefully, I'll learn better!

Andrew

Andrew Beernink
Research Scientist - Flow Cytometry
Novasite Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
11095 Flintkote
San Diego, CA  92121
(858) 638-8584
(858) 597-4943 fax



-----Original Message-----
From: J.Paul Robinson [mailto:jpr@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 3:09 PM
To: cyto-inbox
Subject: RE: FACS question



Colleagues
Mea culpa......yes indeed my response was too harsh...even my graduate
students
beat me up.....I am now a lighter shade of blue.....sorry Laura and Rachel I
consider
myself severely reprimanded.

However, when asked by one of my grad students why I was so obnoxous....I
basically
said that the discussion over the past few months, and indeed it has
happened over
years, has made only minor adjustments in attitudes. I don't particularly
support
Mario's suggestion of post -publication critique, but that is in fact what
my response
reflected in this case I suppose.

However, each person must address the issue. The point of my flippant reply
was that
we really can't use nonsensical terms in either our questions or our
answers. Further,
this discussion list is archived for years and is read or at least received
by over 2200
scientists around the world. In such a public forum, we should at try to
maintain the
standard of accuracy, integrity and quality. My answer does not reflect the
standards I
set myself, but it was sheer frustration in trying to stop the use of those
wretched FLs
that drove me over the edge. (Help Mario...!)

Reconciliation drinks will be gladly purchased for those offended at the
next ISAC
congress...

Best regards
Paul Robinson

On 13 Dec 2001, at 9:20, Gerstein, Rachel wrote:

Aren't you being a bit harsh?

I want to suggest that we all try to phrase our responses in a manner that
educates, but does not flog the person asking the question.  Yes, its really
important to ask the right question, with a request for specific
information.  Yes, we all grind our teeth in response to some questions.
Really poorly phrased questions tend not to get answered.  However, there
have been some very harsh responses in the last few weeks.  We all were new
and/or ignorant at some point.  Lets not scare away people who might really
benefit from the list !

just mho...

Rachel

=======================================================
Rachel M. Gerstein, Ph.D.
Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology
Graduate Program in Immunology/Virology
University of Massachusetts Medical School
55 Lake Avenue North
Worcester, MA 01655-0002
(508) 856-1044
(508) 856-5920 (FAX)


> ----------
> From:		J.Paul Robinson
> Reply To:	jpr@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu
> Sent:		Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:20 PM
> To:	Cytometry Mailing List
> Subject:	Re: FACS question
>
>
> Colleagues: I am going to answer this question in a manner that I hope you
> all
> understand (or not)......(think of the bad data issue)
>
> You can solve the problem by adding reagent A to reagent B, plotting FL3
> Vs FL2.
> If you add reagent C, then a single histogram of FL5 should do the trick.
> I think you
> could also try probe A and probe B, both of which should have the right
> spectra...Oh,
> turn the power of laser 1 up a bit, and you should get some valuable
> data.....
>
> sorry, I couldn't resist it...
> please stop using terms which are totally undefined....
>
> Paul Robinson
>
>
> On 10 Dec 2001, at 11:58, Laura H
> odges wrote:
>
>
> I'd like to post a question on your website:
>
>
> Can anyone suggest another P-gp accumulation probe
> other than rhodamine 123 which has too broad of an
> emission spectrum for my use.  I am trying to find a
> P-gp probe that can be used with other fluorescent
> markers in channels FL2, FL3, and FL4 in a multicolor
> assay.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
> http://greetings.yahoo.com
> J.Paul Robinson, PhD		   PH:(765)4940757
> Professor of Immunopharmacology
> Professor of Biomedical Engineering
> Purdue University	     FAX:(765)4940517
> EMAIL:jpr@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu
> WEB: http://www.cyto.purdue.edu
>
>
J.Paul Robinson, PhD		 PH:(765)4940757
Professor of Immunopharmacology
Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Purdue University	   FAX:(765)4940517
EMAIL:jpr@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu
WEB: http://www.cyto.purdue.edu



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 05 2003 - 19:01:43 EST