From: <...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fri Mar 21 2008 - 19:47:53 EDT
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
Without belaboring the point, while I find this an interesting
suggestion,
it would imply that I should place [Company] in the subject line
because I
work for a company. All rules have their excess, and I would submit
that J
Paul (actually Steve) and company have done a great job maintaining
the
integrity of this list. If an occasional message is allowed thru that
has
potential commercial implications, I would rather have that than
complete
(or no) censor****p. If individuals wish to express their displeasure
at a
specific posting (irrespective of the source) this allows discussion,
and
if necessary, re-calibration of the gating algorithm. And regarding
vendors monitoring the list versus actively soliciting messages, I
suspect
that most monitor this list to gather useful information, much of
potential use to their customers. But this is quite different from
"open
access" for solicitation.
While I'm here, some additional comments:
1.) Cost of the ISAC meeting. I find the registration of $650 (US) a
bit
steep for a meeting. While I was on ISAC Council, a resolution was
passed
by Council that the Congress be shortened (in an attempt to reduce
the
registration fee and overall cost) and be held annually. The
combination
of a $650 registration fee plus hotel costs (esp in Europe- for US
scientists) makes it difficult for many labs to bring key technicians
and
post-docs; it even makes it difficult for many senior scientists to
justify. To put this in a bit of perspective, the American Asc for
Cancer
Research charges a $425 (US) registration fee to their members for
their 4
day. An im****tant difference is that the AACR has SIGNIFICANT
industrial
sup****t. We need to do as much as possible to make our meeting's
overall
cost "reasonable". ISAC must do everything it can to keep the overall
meeting costs (registration, airfare, hotels and meals) to a minimum
(this
ain't ASCO).
2.) Vendor sup****t. This is essential for ISAC or any other
professional
society. At one point, I was chair of the committee that raised
donations
for the ISAC Congress, and approached every company that I could think
of
that sold products to our member****p quite shamelessly. Every society
does
this because it helps lower the cost of the meeting (or should) for
the
individual attendees. And by the way, the money the vendors use comes
from
the customers. Donations are thus a means to widen the available
attendees
who will buy their products. The approach must be balanced.
3) Meeting location. While I appreciate this is a problematic issue,
refer
back to item "1. At one point, ISAC restricted the Congress to
"smaller"
venues to keep us together. Much science gets discussed (in places
that
tend to serve alcohol) at ISAC, and that's one reason I attend
(discussion, not libations). Where will we gather in Budapest (after
poster sessions)? Unlikely to be the InterContinental Hotel - I
probably
could not afford one beer there.
4) What is the focus of ISAC? I'm running for Clinical Councilor
(sorry, I
too had to get in my pitch), so my potential constituency for the
most
part has a limited focus. But the society needs to have a balanced
focus
on flow and image cytometry. And I don't think that DNA, RNA or
protein
arrays should be our soup!. Our unit of measurement is the cell, and
once
you bust it up, someone with better technical expertise should be
telling
scientists and clinicians what best to do. That said, we should
communicate and work with "non-cellular
scientists where our
interests
and technologies intersect.
I need to go home for the weekend. A Happy Easter to all.
Sincerely,
Vince
p.s. I'm running for Clinical Councilor. If you live in Chicago vote
early
and often
T. Vincent Shankey, Ph.D.
Advanced Technology Center
Beckman Coulter, Inc.
vinc...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(305)-380-2430
http://ph.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080510103004AA7dRIo
Click the link above to to read more.
|
