Re: The Plan for our Meeting with the Other Team

From: Saul Perlmutter (saul@lbl.gov)
Date: Mon May 24 2004 - 08:39:37 PDT

  • Next message: Saul Perlmutter: "Re: we have a 5 == LENS QUESTION (fwd)"

    I think that's a reasonable set of information to show them. (We're not
    revealing anything new about our techniques, since we already showed
    them our table of "scores" last time.)

    You typed "I think we should not show them our 0's and 1's; no point."
    I think you meant to say "I think we should not show them our 0's"
    (based on the rest of your message) -- is that right?

    I guess there is one reason to also throw in the 0's, which are also
    clearly labeled "probably junk": if by any chance we resuscitate one
    of them later today, and the other team had it on their list, they will
    say that they found things we didn't.

    Robert A. Knop Jr. wrote:

    >Dudes --
    >
    >In 1.5 hours (10AM PDT), we will have a phone meeting with Lou Strolger.
    >
    >I propose that we take our table of candidates, including everything
    >priority 5 on down to priority 1, and put it on the web at a page where
    >they can see it.
    >
    >We can copy the table over as is. (See AllMayCandidates) We should,
    >however, remove the links to the individual candidate pages (since they
    >won't be able to use them). I can do this very quickly and easily.
    >
    >I will put off doing this for about an hour just in case anything comes
    >in. However, I think that our list of candidates in the priorities they
    >are is a good list right now.
    >
    >I think we should *not* show them our 0's and 1's; no point. Even a
    >bunch of the 1's are probably junk, but by classifying them down there
    >we make it clear that we think they are junk.
    >
    >-Rob
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 24 2004 - 08:40:29 PDT