Managers 7May08: Difference between revisions

From GO Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:
===Meeting Frequency===
===Meeting Frequency===
From several people in the UK: Is it necessary to have GO Consortium meetings twice a year? Several UK people are much happier with less frequent meetings, as the trips to the US are very disruptive and physically gruelling, and also very expensive to attend. With the use of skype and webex we feel that there are far fewer contentious issues, and many people are happy to resolve things using online meetings. Might we consider using these technologies more for the whole group? For example Tanya's talk on regulates and Jennifer and Harold's talks on mf-bp links could easily have been given to the whole group via webex and a phone line.
From several people in the UK: Is it necessary to have GO Consortium meetings twice a year? Several UK people are much happier with less frequent meetings, as the trips to the US are very disruptive and physically gruelling, and also very expensive to attend. With the use of skype and webex we feel that there are far fewer contentious issues, and many people are happy to resolve things using online meetings. Might we consider using these technologies more for the whole group? For example Tanya's talk on regulates and Jennifer and Harold's talks on mf-bp links could easily have been given to the whole group via webex and a phone line.
==Human Genetics==
Dear Dr Lomax,
Further to our earlier phone conversation, I have pleasure in formally inviting you, in my capacity
as European Editor of the journal 'Human Genetics'
[http://www.springer.com/biomed/human+genetics/journal/439?detailsPage=aimsAndScopes], to invite
you to contribute a review article on the Gene Ontology Project and its utility for human
geneticists (broadly in terms of the functional analysis of human genes and perhaps specifically in
the context of the analysis of genetic disease). I am sure that a review article would be of great
interest to our readership and would be highly cited. In terms of its length, there is no absolute
maximum length although 5000 words is about average for our reviews. Mini-reviews of 2000-3000 words
on a 'hot topic' within your research remit are also very welcome. The exact timing would also be up
to you although the next 6-12 months would be desirable from our point of view.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can provide further assistance. I look forward to hearing
from you.
With all best wishes,
David Cooper

Revision as of 09:21, 29 April 2008

Agenda item requests

Communications question

From Ruth Lovering: When should we notify the PIs of new developments e.g. papers, grants, new general initiatives. Ruth is keen not to bombard GO-Top with emails but also interested to have their views. She could send reports via the relevant managers but this takes away the opportunity for the PIs to respond directly to her emails.

Meeting Frequency

From several people in the UK: Is it necessary to have GO Consortium meetings twice a year? Several UK people are much happier with less frequent meetings, as the trips to the US are very disruptive and physically gruelling, and also very expensive to attend. With the use of skype and webex we feel that there are far fewer contentious issues, and many people are happy to resolve things using online meetings. Might we consider using these technologies more for the whole group? For example Tanya's talk on regulates and Jennifer and Harold's talks on mf-bp links could easily have been given to the whole group via webex and a phone line.


Human Genetics

Dear Dr Lomax,

Further to our earlier phone conversation, I have pleasure in formally inviting you, in my capacity as European Editor of the journal 'Human Genetics' [1], to invite you to contribute a review article on the Gene Ontology Project and its utility for human geneticists (broadly in terms of the functional analysis of human genes and perhaps specifically in the context of the analysis of genetic disease). I am sure that a review article would be of great interest to our readership and would be highly cited. In terms of its length, there is no absolute maximum length although 5000 words is about average for our reviews. Mini-reviews of 2000-3000 words on a 'hot topic' within your research remit are also very welcome. The exact timing would also be up to you although the next 6-12 months would be desirable from our point of view.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can provide further assistance. I look forward to hearing from you.

With all best wishes,

David Cooper