Comments on: The Ritson Comment: An Update http://climateaudit.org/2005/12/04/the-ritson-comment-an-update/ by Steve McIntyre Fri, 24 May 2013 06:59:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: David Stockwell http://climateaudit.org/2005/12/04/the-ritson-comment-an-update/#comment-41155 Mon, 05 Dec 2005 15:11:45 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=446#comment-41155 Surely you would have needed to sign a confidentially agreement with the editors to the effect that all correspondence will remain confidential. Nature has this, though I am not sure they had it before you blew the whistle on the trashy way they treated you there. If you have not agreed to confidentiality then it would be more of a request, I would think.

]]> By: Brooks Hurd http://climateaudit.org/2005/12/04/the-ritson-comment-an-update/#comment-41154 Sun, 04 Dec 2005 19:30:03 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=446#comment-41154 Steve,
It sounds to me that Famiglietti is consulting with attornies on this. This leads to the obvious question; why?

If someone is doing their job and following organization procedures, what is to be feared about making comments about one’s professional activities on the record?

This is getting even stranger.

]]> By: Steve McIntyre http://climateaudit.org/2005/12/04/the-ritson-comment-an-update/#comment-41153 Sun, 04 Dec 2005 16:37:24 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=446#comment-41153 I think that people in official positions should stay on the record. I’m simply recording that he has updated us on the status of this comment, but refused to do so on the record.

]]> By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2005/12/04/the-ritson-comment-an-update/#comment-41152 Sun, 04 Dec 2005 16:16:45 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=446#comment-41152 What’s the update? He sent you a letter marked confidential on this topic? And you’re considering publishing it? That’s the update? When did he send it? Sheesh. What’s the new information?

]]>