jason_paloalto said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
I read this differently from jason_paloalto, on substance rather than tone. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
jason_paloalto said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
jason_paloalto said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
VanRx_Mike said: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…
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. Nothing to add that would improve it.