[G12] Fwd: Momentum corrections

[Gagik Gavalian]

Dear Matt,

I think we will all use the term "problem in your analysis" unless we 
know for sure what your analysis really were !
Paul, respectfully, mentioned that you have shown a simulation that 
shows a peak around that mass. When, I have never seen a code or the 
simulation file. If I were to take your word for it, why can't committee 
take our word for it as well.

I think in order to avoid future unpleasant referrals to anyone's 
"analysis problem", I suggest to go one of two ways:

1) send full analysis details to public (or people who do this analysis)
2) stop defending the analysis and ask people to not consider them.

Does this really seem  unreasonable to you ?

Once either of these conditions are met, I do not think there will be a 
necessity for "choosing" words !

Gagik.


Matt wrote:
> Hi Gagik,
>
>  
>
>     I want to mention that there are no personal attacks here against
>     anyone, just a call for not considering their results valid unless
>     full
>     details of analysis are provided. DOES not seem unreasonable to me.
>
>
>    The problem is that this is the third time (that I am aware of) 
> that Moskov has commented on this plotting issue and using it to claim 
> problems in my analysis, when he has always been part of the 
> discussions which explained what actually happened. I have discussed 
> with him in the past and he has claimed that he will choose his words 
> more carefully going forward, however, perhaps this is not the case. 
>
>  
>
>     -- 
>
> -- 
> ----------------------------
> Matt Bellis
> Stanford University
> (SLAC office)  650-926-4392
> (cell)    412-310-4586
> ----------------------------