Following on from julia.endo — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
Following on from julia.endo — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
KetoKyle said:The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.
Pushing back on KetoKyle here. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
KetoKyle said:The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.
Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsKetoKyle said:The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.