The h Bar - 2016-12-24 (page 2 of 3)

« first day (2242 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2680 days later) »

10:00 AM

RESTART

Input:

$22=0$
$02=20=2$
$1+1\neq 2$
$12=21=2$

--->

$0(1+1)=0+0=0$

Input

$\forall x, 0+x=x$

--->

$0+1=1$
$02+12=12$
$2+2=2$

$0+2=2$
$02+22=22$
$2+0=0$

user223506

10:15 AM

interesting site!

user223506

wish I could participate (hence join), but are not a theoretical physicist by any strong measure

user223506

I am heavily involved with the experimental and observational side of the greatness that is physics, with the associated instrumentation design and evaluation, and data analysis and modelling.

@Doc Hi Doc. You'd be welcome as we don't get too many experimental physicists hereabouts. We tend to be mainly theorists and students. That isn't by design, it's just that experimentalists seem to be rare beings! :-)

it will be nice to have some experimental physicists to flesh the discussions with some experimental insights. What experimental physics field you are working in?

Maybe it's because experimentalists get jobs

While us theory guys just spend a lot of time at home

10:26 AM

Oh, the cynicism :-)

Well that's what I'm doing

user223506

@Secret image sensor semiconductor physics, atmospheric radiation

user223506

@JohnRennie i figured that was the case, just a bit daunting to see (similar to some real-life experiences)

user223506

@Slereah I wish!

I guess that's why you're here then :p

user223506

10:29 AM

that and paid vacation

user223506

part time

I see. Hmm, it's a very broad field with many divisions. Will wait a bit when discussions comes as otherwise I have nothing to say about it from the top of my head.

As for atmospheric radiation, your involvement in the modelling of the radiation budget of earth or something similar?

user223506

yes

user223506

and the effect of aerosols

user223506

the beer-lambert law is my favourite beverage ;)

10:34 AM

I see

Back in my honours year, the group I joined involved some atmospheric chemistry. While my project is not directly related to aerosols, from meeting with my group I know a little bit about things like typical degrdation reactions of hydrocarbons and other chemicals into components that form secondary aerosols, and how they can affect the formation of clouds hence one of the things that contribute to the albedo of the atmosphere.

As for atmospheric physics, my undegrad course back then introduced very basic modelling by varying the concentrations of water vapor, CH4 and CO2 and how that tied…

user223506

i did my PhD in UV-A detection and monitoring

what is UVA?

user223506

ultraviolet A - nowadays drifting into ultraviolet B

what is the definition of UVA

400-320nm I guess

user223506

i may be able to answer some practical radiation based questions, semiconductor signal processing.. but from a relative limited viewpoint

user223506

10:49 AM

@Kenshin yes, that is correct

did you study the interaction between radiation and human tissue?

user223506

@Kenshin yes, and with the eye

should they wear sunscreen to block UVA?

or would the distance, and the glass be enough to not require it

well

user223506

@Kenshin just in case, but it would depend on several factors of the window itself

I don't knwo anything about the window

user223506

10:54 AM

is it tinted?

do you wear sunscreen everyday yourself?

user223506

yes

do you think wearing sunscreen can halt the ageing process?

of the skin?

user223506

had skin cancer before - not keen on going through that again

is ageing of the skin predominantly due to UVA damage?

I see sorry to hear that

user223506

10:55 AM

@Kenshin all UV can cause photo-aging

user223506

what is your research in this field?

@Doc if i start wearing sunscreen every day (mid 20's) will my skin look the same in 10 years as it does now?

@Doc just some basic googling

user223506

@Kenshin hard to say

I wonder if the sunscreen itself can damage the skin

so many variables

user223506

@Kenshin yes, there could be an intolerance to some of the ingredients - have seen that happen - not frequently

10:59 AM

yeah my skin is very sensitive to moisturiser, not sure about sunscreen

so I don't use any product atm

but maybe I will start using sunscreen

dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2467385/…

^this article says 80% of skin ageing is from the sun

user223506

My main lab is in the oncology (cancer) ward of a hospital

@Doc which type of radiaiton is more carcinogenic

the UVA type or the UVB type?

user223506

both, but in very different ways

user223506

UVB is needed for vitamin-D production

you can take supplments though hey?

user223506

11:05 AM

true, but that is just a 'bandaid'

user223506

man, there are some interesting questions and answers on this site!

yes so many

sometimes I think i have a new qwuestion and it is already on this iste

user223506

i would not be confident enough to ask one (mostly due to me being a perfectionist mainly)

@Doc you have a PhD you'll be fine

this site isn't as critical as some of the other SE sites

user223506

@Kenshin PhD is not all that great I find sometimes

11:09 AM

maybe not for knowledge, but you have to be reasonably smart and educated to get through it

@Doc have you studied sun spots?

I mean on the sun, not on the skin

user223506

@Kenshin nope - it is an interesting field though

user223506

what do you do?

^ deleted for privacy

did you see tho

user223506

nope

user223506

got it

11:15 AM

yeah but i have a varied interest

and my degree was in physics

user223506

very cool indeed!

user223506

I find it important to have many interests

user223506

I enjoy astronomy, music, movies and writing as well

yeah, when I was young i was only interested in physics and maths

but now I'm interested in so many other things as I learn about them

Physics is a great start to then learn any field in my opinion

user223506

I agree

11:22 AM

Hii @Kenshin

sup @koolman

Could you help me in this physics.qandaexchange.com/?qa=649/…

@Kenshin

soryr

Ok np

11:39 AM

Hi. What's your opinion about french Grandes Ecoles ? I would like to have opinions from other countries. Ty

user223506

any, have a Merry Christmas! I'll have another look at the site after I recover from the Christmas feast ;)

11:59 AM

Merry Christmas to everyone!

3

@Sanya ok

12:26 PM

@Sanya Merry Christmas to you too!

@Sanya Merry Christmas :-)

Where is doraemon ???

@koolman The account has been deleted for reasons I am not privy to (and probably wouldn't be allowed to talk about anyway).

12:48 PM

@koolman his account belonged to the banned user S007, this account was therefore deleted as a duplicate attempt to evade this

Merry Christmas All

@Kenshin how do you know?

@DavidZ I deduced from his chat conversations and account create date that he was S007

@Kenshin So you don't know

No I just think I know

But given you asked how do I know, and you probably do know, maybe that confirms I'm right?

This falls under the category of unfounded speculation that is, at the very least, highly frowned upon in this room

12:50 PM

I'm not sure it is unfounded

Pretty much the day after he was discovered in the chat room as being S007 hsi account was deleted

@Kenshin I actually have no idea. It's just that those sorts of things you shouldn't be saying without demonstrable public proof.

@DavidZ There is very strong evidence he is S007, whether his account was deleted for that is not clear

@Kenshin We generally ask people how they know such "classified" information because unless you have actual public information that proves what you're saying you could be lying through your teeth and the moderators who know the actual reason would have to let you because they're bound by the moderator agreement to not disclose such reasons.

Therefore, we generally ask that people refrain from such speculation.

user228700

@Kenshin: Dude, please stop, I don't want you to be banned as well.

^^yea, that

12:52 PM

@Kaumudi.H I won't be banned for being rational, I don't want to encourage "speculation" either

But there is clear public information that Doraemon was S007

that is all I will say

@ACuriousMind does site has deleted or she herself want to be deleted

Well now that the Doraemon account is deleted, some of the public information has vanished

@Kenshin And I'm saying, if you're going to make that claim, link the evidence and let it speak for itself. Otherwise, stop mentioning it.

@DavidZ ok, the evidence is in this chat room from his conversation, and also the account creation dates of Doraemon and a related account that had "S007" in the name. I can't link to this information though because the create date isnn't visilbe on deleted accounts

Then as I said, stop mentioning it.

user228700

12:54 PM

There is clear evidence in the JEE Launch Pad but @Doraemon was my friend (of sorts) so I shall not link to it. And that's all that I shall say about that.

I agree speculation is wrong, but I also think it is helpful for Doraemon's friends for me to share what I know about why their friend has vanished

@koolman nice beard

@Kenshin Yeah, I'm just saying, stick to what you actually know and can prove.

@Kenshin you too

@DavidZ ok if those r the rules i will abide

Yes, let's say those are the rules.

1:00 PM

r they the rules or r we just saying they r?

Well, if you really want to know... I don't know just how much of this is codified in rules. We don't exactly have formal rules for this chatroom. So I'm hesitant to say that "those are the rules" without having a source to back it up.

kk

perhaps at some point we should codify some rules so that everyone is on the same page

That probably would be a good idea. We can bring it up in our chat sessions.

I've been thinking the same for a while

cool

But in the absence of explicit rules, instructions from a moderator are probably the next best thing.

1:05 PM

Yes but I don't think a moderator should punish a user over a difference of opinion unless there are codified rules

@Kenshin The vast majority of the rules we need are already codified in the Be Nice policy. The only additional thing is the "we don't speculate suspensions" thing, and that's less of a "don't do that or we'll suspend you" and more of a "please don't do that because it hasn't done any good in the past" thing. I don't see that there is a lack of codified rules.

2

@ACuriousMind that's fine then, but I when Kaumudi asked me to stop to avoid a aban, DavidZ echoed the statement

@Kenshin Uh... @DavidZ, I was pretty sure you wanted to agree with my rationale and not the "please stop before you get banned" Kaumudi posted shortly before you?

@ACuriousMind oh, actually I was alluding to Kaumudi's "please stop"

Oh

1:10 PM

I guess I should have been more clear that I wasn't threatening immediate suspension...

ok no worries

in any case I'm not going to speculate further, there's no need

but nevertheless I think a codified set of rules could ease confusion about this in future

...but I would also point out that when a moderator warns you not to do something (say, because it's disruptive), if you don't stop doing it, or probably even if you try to "skirt the line" to see just how much you can get away with, that is something that can lead to a suspension. We do try to show a lot of restraint when issuing suspensions for such reasons but it can happen. (This is general advice, by the way.)

@DavidZ but what if a moderator deems a reasonble thing to be "disruptive". Should they have the power to ban a user over a difference in personal opinion like that?

would multiple moderators need to review the decision?

or could a rogue moderator exploit that power?

user228700

Thanks for spelling my name correctly, you guys :-P

np :)

1:15 PM

@Kenshin Well, we do have that power. If you'd like to argue that we shouldn't, I suggest taking it up on Meta Stack Exchange.

okay, looking at this, there is one question i have here - what constitutes "be nice"?

@heather individual moderator discretion

Individual moderators can issue suspensions but you can be fairly sure that others will review it after the fact, if not before.

i say this because (to illustrate) most people around here agree that a conversation 0celo had before his ban was perfectly within chatroom policy but yet he was banned later

(of course, this may not be the reason of banning, but a mod did delete it all and tell everyone to calm down)

^ @heather there is no chat room policy

I personally think a codified policy should be place by which modeators police

1:16 PM

@heather You might take that as an example of something that does not constitute being nice

let me rephrase then: instead of chatroom policy, how about that sort of thing has gone on in the chatroom before

@Kenshin Moderator decisions are rarely made by one individual alone and if you think their power has been abused you can either post on meta.SE or use the "contact us" form to get a community manager to investigate. I would advise against posting on meta.SE unless you have evidence of grave wrongdoing though, the crowd there is rather fierce.

@ACuriousMind good to know

@DavidZ yet that has gone on before in the chatroom and no one has gotten banned.

@Kenshin when ACM says fierce, he means it ::shivers::

Oh, right. When I suggested posting on Meta Stack Exchange, that was if you want to affect changes in the whole system network-wide, not to complain about a specific incident.

1:17 PM

@heather this is why I think individual moderators shouldn't have such power

because a moderatror on a bad day might not be consistent

Take a legal system

the police enforce the rules, and politicians make the rules

police don't make and enforce the rules simultanously

@heather See, now we're treading on weird territory again because we moderators cannot, by the moderator agreement, discuss the reasons for individual suspensions publicly. We are simply not allowed to.

I believe the community should help make the rules in meta, and the moderators enforce the rules created by the community

@Kenshin, no, I don't mind moderators having such power, I just think the rules need to be more explicit, because then there is no argument over stuff like this. The problem is that "be nice" is something that it is hard to define - it is more a "know it when you see it" type of thing.

So "be nice" is kind of a poor policy in the chatroom, because that is open to interpretation.

@heather experience suggests that if a normal person has to ask whether something counts as being nice, it is either not nice, or it is close to not nice. That's not 100% accurate of course, but it tends to be a useful guideline.

@heather my point is, moderators shouldn't have the power to make the rules up as they go along, which they do have now

1:19 PM

@heather What about the Be Nice policy is lacking in clarity?

@ACuriousMind well for one, how bad do you have to be to be banned?

e.g. I've reported Bernard for some very rude comments earlier

the comments were trashed

but he wasn't banned

@ACuriousMind see the 0celo comments earlier

So how many rude remarks can a user make before being suspended?

forget about suspension in that case

the comments were all deleted even though it was a joke conversation

and later the other participant stated again and again that it was all a joke.

@heather i think ur being too specific

1:21 PM

and if i remember right, a temporary ban was placed for all users on the chatroom. (might be wrong there).

they can't discuss this so there's no point

@Kenshin It's impossible to codify that. Offensiveness is not a binary property, some remarks would be so offensive they would be grounds for immediate suspension, but most rudeness and profanity, as isolated incidents, do not warrant that.

@Kenshin, I'm not talking about the suspension, I'm talking about the specific conversation and what happened to it!

@heather no, there's no such thing

@DavidZ, there was something, like the chatroom was frozen

1:22 PM

@heather Yeah, but that's not a suspension. It only applies to that one room.

sometimes jokes can go too far heather

@DavidZ yeah, i couldn't remember the phrase for it.

I haven't read the conversation, but if a new user came into the conversation and didnt' know it was a joke, they could be offended

SE purposely did not lay down exact rules for what punishments are appropriate in what specific cases in order to avoid "rules-lawyering" - but the general rule is that the length of suspensions increased with repeated offense, i.e. no one gets banned for a year for a first offense, and the standard suspension period for a first offense is seven days at most.

@ACuriousMind ok that's good info to know

but it would be good if it was documented somewhere

cos I was worried I'd be banned for a year for "speculating" before

1:24 PM

@Kenshin, I know! I'm asking for the mod version of it, especially because one of the users repeatedly stated later that it was all a joke and the other was 0celo

That's on-site. For chat it's generally less. Automatic suspensions are half an hour.

@Kenshin It is documented

ok ty

@ACuriousMind, @DavidZ, does my example make any sense (the non-suspension example)?

Discussing page policy ... can anyone explain to me why this question remained open? :D

-1

Q: I think my lecturer has lost a factor of two

I have had this general feeling since I've been at uni, that if you have a good enough degree you can drop factors willy nilly, and my physics lecturer just did this in the middle of a lagrangian mechanics lecture, while changing the equation for kinetic energy $$K= \frac12 m \left(\left(\frac{dx...

homework-and-exercises lagrangian-formalism

1:25 PM

@heather where you mentioned Bernard, you mean?

@Sanya It got 3:0 leave open votes oO

@Sanya, -1 and vtc as homework is what i just did

I flagged it and was pretty surprised when my flag was rejected :o

@heather You voted to leave it open in the review before, see the link

@DavidZ no, the 0celo conversation, Kenshin mentioned Bernard.

1:26 PM

@DavidZ it was I who mentioned Bernard, his comments were offensive and I flagged them, they were trashed.

(this was long ago)

@Kenshin Flagging comments in chat is a bit wonky

why?

what about the be nice policy?

@heather oh, hard to tell when everyone's avatar is covered in hats. Sorry.

flags attract moderators from all over the site

1:27 PM

@ACuriousMind he was flat out insulting me unnecessarily using vulgar terms

@DavidZ, not a problem =)

@Kenshin The flags are shown, without context, to all 10k users across the chat network, and if enough of them mark the flag as valid, the comment gets deleted and the user autobanned for 30 minutes.

@ACuriousMind the link is not to the review...

@ACuriousMind so what, his messages were very inappropriate

@Kenshin, why are you trying to get a user banned

1:28 PM

2 mins ago, by ACuriousMind

@Sanya It got 3:0 leave open votes oO

no

that seems fairly out-of-bounds as well

@heather I didn't know he would get banned

only now did I find out

@heather I'm still a bit lost. Could you recap, what is the example you're asking about?

you are saying you are surprised he didn't get banned!

1:28 PM

but I"m just saying, if he was banned for 30 min, it's not like he didn't desrve it

@heather because I was told that Ocelo was banned for offensiv behaviour, so why not bernard?

@Kenshin I have to say I'm also a bit lost as to what your point is

it's inconsistent @heather

@Kenshin Again, we cannot discuss the reasons for individual suspensions. Stop trying to get us to do so.

@ACuriousMind sorry I'm not talking about Ocelo

I mean in principle, if one can be banned for offensive behaviour

it's hard to know where to draw the line isn't it

Because a moderator could have banned Bernard the other night

it all depends on how offensive the moderator viewed Bernard's comments

which is highly subjective

@DavidZ sure. 0celo and another user had a joking conversation that could be perceived as offensive but to most in the chatroom it was fairly clear it was a joke. later the other user repeatedly stated it was all a joke (at this point 0celo had been banned, but he said through Bernardo that it was all a joke). at the time, the comments were all deleted, as I recall the chatroom was frozen, etc.

but it was all a joke, and fairly clear within context.

(I'm not talking about the suspension, just what happened to the room/comments.

and i don't know if the other user got a shorter ban that nobody noticed (as opposed to 0celo's longer ban).

1:32 PM

@heather and you're asking, why were comments deleted even though the participants considered it to be all joking?

that and why was the chatroom frozen.

what's wrong with moving stuff to the trash?

@Kenshin Which is precisely why you should refrain from acting in an offensive manner at all. Yes, the level of offensiveness is not objective and different moderators might make different judgements about that. That is the nature of things being offensive. Again, suspensions are rarely given out by the decision of one individual alone.

@ACuriousMind to take my point further, I think whether one is offensive or not can even be subjective

@ACuriousMind I think one should always get warnings (e.g. a flag system, where 3 flags and you get ban for a year or something)

rather than potential to be banned for a long period just because a moderator deemed ur comment to be "highly" offenisve

that's ridiculous though @Kenshin because flags are sometimes flags that shouldn't exist.

1:34 PM

@Kenshin People are also rarely banned without some sort of warning (except for the 30 minutes autoban).

@heather Well, I don't remember specific details (and I'm not even sure if I was there when it happened), but in general, mods consider how things will appear to a broad spectrum of people who might view the chat room. If the people making the comments, and even the people in the chat room passively reading at the time, don't mind, that still doesn't necessarily mean the comments are appropriate for everyone else.

@heather I"m not using "flag" as in the comment flag, but rather "flag" as in like a card system, where you can get 3 red cards etc. do you understand?

@ACuriousMind whether they are "rarely" banned or not doesn't matter. The moderator has the power to do it, so whether it happens "rarely" or not is irrelevant. A rogue mod could make it happen

@DavidZ yes, but then that might be a "stop this conversation" - instead all comments were deleted, etc, etc, which seems a bit extreme

@Kenshin, same problem still exists.

~~Deletion~~ Freezing the room would indicate that the participants were told to stop and didn't.

@heather what's the problem? A moderator will deicde if you should be carded or not

1:36 PM

i recall nothing of that happening

@Kenshin Yes, and a rogue mod will get complaints about their behaviour and have their diamond taken away rather quickly. It has happened before.

@heather surely this is better than the current system wher e amod can just ban you for 1 year without any cards

grr

@DavidZ, again, I recall no "stop" happening.

It may have been in a prior conversation.

1:37 PM

@ACuriousMind Suppose a reputable mod has one bad day and bans someone he has a grudge on. Noone will care if every other day he is a good mod

@DavidZ, before that, if i remember right, it was a completely non-inflammatory discussion (physics related, if I remember right)

@Kenshin I assure you the community managers do care about that sort of thing. It's their job to care.

@Kenshin, I think you're bringing up all the wrong points here. The problem you're stating isn't quite the problem and the solution isn't either.

@heather maybe you have your problems and I have mine

you're concerned about 0celo, I'm not

@heather yes, it is usually the case that before an inflammatory discussion starts, a non-inflammatory discussion was taking place ;-)

1:38 PM

the real problem is that there's no review system for moderator bans.

@heather oh, there is. That's what ACM is saying.

@DavidZ, I'm going to guess by the wink you're joking? =)

@heather my problem is that earlier today it appeared I was threatend with a ban for discussing Doreaemon's account deletion

@DavidZ, not a user-based one, no.

@heather I'm not joking, I'm just making my point in an amusing way

@heather That's very different though.

1:40 PM

@heather and I was questioning why we have no codified rules that state we can't discuss deletions

@Kenshin where exactly were you threatened with a suspension?

@DavidZ I wasn't I said "it appeared I was threatened"

where Kaumudi stated "stop or you'l be banned"

and DavidZ replied with somethign like "^ what she said"

@Kenshin oh OK, sorry, I misread

yea I udnerstannd it wasn't a threat, but it made me think about how we should have clearer rules of behaviour and clearer consequences for such behaviours

What you saw happening there was the progression of warning -> short suspension -> etc. getting started. That was the warning.

1:42 PM

@heather There is! When you are suspended you get a private message to which you can reply to the moderators. You can also use the "contact us" form to get an SE community manager (employee, not elected) to investigate the situation if you think you have been wronged. The private nature of the information accessible to moderators (and the philosophy laid out in "A Day in the Penalty Box") makes it undesirable to impossible to have public reviews of suspensions.

@DavidZ warning for what though? Why should a moderator be able to make up the rules on the spot that discussing a deltion means I should be warned?

maybe that is how the system works, but it needs to change

Link to "A Day in the Penalty Box, didn't fit into that message anymore.

@DavidZ if you warn one person for discussing a deletion, it must be that all users who do so are warned for consistency

but this isn't happening in this chat room from what i've observed

@Kenshin Because moderators are trusted to understand what sorts of behavior is appropriate and inappropriate, and what is deserving of suspensions, and furthermore to continue revising that understanding as needed over time.

@ACuriousMind, 0celo's made comments that make me think things are much more vague than they should be.

1:45 PM

@DavidZ politicians continue to revise the law overtime, and as such the law is updated and codified

updaing rules doesn't mean that it can't be documented

@Kenshin uh... no. It's like parenting. What works for one member (child) doesn't always work for another.

there needs to be consistency

Sure, it can be documented. But just because it isn't documented doesn't mean there won't be consequences for inappropriate behavior.

@DavidZ so you're saying it's ok for heather to talk about Ocelo without being warned, but I can't discuss doreamon?

I'ts unfair

what applies to one user should apply to all users

and this can only be guaranteed if there are rules

btw I'm not saying heather should be warned, but rather I shouldn't have been warned

In general, we do apply the same principles of moderation to all users. But there will naturally be little differences from case to case.

What I warned you for is unfounded speculation.

1:47 PM

wait, what!? i'm not even discussing 0celo's suspension @Kenshin

@Kenshin You pretended to know why one account was deleted, heather is not acting as if she had knowledge she doesn't have. Mentioning the public fact that an account was suspended/deleted is alright, pretending to have information you cannot have (the reasons for suspension/deletion) is not.

@ACuriousMind you might have an argument if the rules were codified

but you really have no grounds to say one type of behaviour is ok and the other is not

because it is subjective

::face-palms::

tomorrow maybe mentioning the public fact will be considered a warnable offence

who knows, the mods can make it up as they go

@Kenshin I'm getting the sense that nothing we say is going to convince you that moderators are justified in their actions without specific codified rules backing them up. So I won't bother to try. I'll just say that that is how things work here.

If you don't like it, you have the options which have been mentioned to you (post on Meta Stack Exchange, contact the SE team, or just don't participate in the chat)

1:51 PM

@DavidZ another point, is that you stated that I was warned for my behaviour

I believe the "warning" should be more explicit

because I didn't know that I could soon have a 30min suspension for my behaviour

I knew I was close to the line, but you were never clear that I had crossed it

You didn't cross it. That's why you got a warning, and not a suspension.

ok so if you cross the line the moderator has in their head, you get insta 30 min suspension?

without warning?

@Kenshin What are you talking about, the 30min autobans are if a rude/offensive flag is cast on one of your posts and is validated.

Or... I mean, you didn't cross the line into the sort of consistent pattern of behavior that gets you a suspension.

We don't really think in terms of lines, necessarily.

@ACuriousMind no, DavidZ said I could be banned for 30 min for further speculation

k brb gt get some icecream

1:53 PM

@Kenshin sorry if I was misleading, but I meant the automatic bans are 30 minutes, and I said separately that chat suspensions tend to start out shorter than main site suspensions

(Something to remember: mods make mistakes too! But we cross-check each other to try to minimize the impact.)

I should be off to bed anyway. See y'all later.

laterz good chat

@DavidZ, well, thanks for the clarification (somewhat, I'm still a bit unclear, I don't see why it was all deleted and frozen). have a good night =)

@heather yeah, it's hard for me to say with much precision without being able to review the exact conversation (and then there may be confidential details that prevent me from being specific, unfortunately)

We can pick this up some other time

@DavidZ okay. Thanks again!

« first day (2242 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2680 days later) »

Transcript for

Dec '1624

The h Bar

General chat for Physics SE (physics.stackexchange.com). For M...

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile