RE: [Company] submissions to the list
This message: [ Message body ] [ More options ]
Related messages: [ Next message ] [ Previous message ] [ In reply
to ]
From: Robert C. Leif <rleif@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Date: Tue Mar 25 2008 - 12:45:10 EDT
Vince et al.
I believe that we are in general agreement and should I get elected as
the
technical councilor, we will have at least two votes to try to keep
the
costs down and to keep ISAC vendor friendly. ISAC effectively has
three
constituencies: researchers, clinicians, and industry. Fortunately,
our
society is not a zero sum game. Rather we are in a symbiosis.
As for arrays, there is precedent to include them with digital imaging
of
cells. In the case of a related standard, arrays are within the area
of
interest of the Pathology Working Group (26) of Digital Imaging and
communications in medicine, DICOM. The instrumentation and reagents
employed
to analyze arrays is sufficiently close to that used for digital
microscopy
that including them together in the subject matter of a single
scientific
society is reasonable. One other point of overlap is that arrays can
have
cells in their chambers.
As far as the costs of the meetings is concerned, my favorite meeting
was at
Cambridge University, perhaps it would be possible to be able to run
our
meetings at other institutions of higher learning. Since I have not
seen the
cost breakdown for Budapest, I cannot comment on the source of the
comparatively high cost of the meeting. However, I know from other
meetings
that I have been involved in, that the hotels either directly or
indirectly
through hotel occupancy taxes, kick back to the convention centers. I
have
added meetings that were considerably smaller than ISAC where there
was a
food and drink minimum. A banquet and lunches would often suffice to
cover
this minimum. The SPIE seems to have their costs under control. As a
chair,
one has the meeting attendance fee waved and gets a free copy of the
volume
written by the authors at the meeting. The chairs pay for their
travel and
lodging. As far as the US is concerned, I favor meetings in cities
served
by low cost airlines.
Even though I have also lived in Chicago, please vote, but only once.
Bob Leif
From: vincent.shankey@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Friday, March 21, 2008 3:48 PM
To: cyto-inbox
Subject: [Company] submissions to the list
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.
vincent.shankey@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(305)-380-2430
"FloCyte Associates, INC" <flocyte@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
03/20/2008 02:16 PM
To
Cytometry Mailing List <cytometry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
cc
Subject
RE: Bay bioscience opens US office and introduces its JSAN cell
sorting and
analysis system there
No this is not acceptable! I'm sorry, I just don't get it! I agree
100%
with Roland.
I can't understand your position at all? WHO pays the majority of
the
expenses for meetings? Vendors! Without them your cost to attend ISAC
would
probably triple or quadruple!! Who allows you to have very cheap or
FREE
local users' group meetings? Vendors! Who solves issues with vendor
services?? VENDORS! Why on earth would you exclude vendors from the
discussion???
And actually SOME people welcome messages from vendors... Vendors can
solve
a lot of your problems! The Boston Area high speed sorter list, for
example, welcomes vendors responses and they get results. The vendors
HEAR
their requests and respond! I've learned a LOT from vendors! Without
messages from Vendors, how do you find out about new products and
services?
How often would you go to the ISAC website to look for a new product
you
don't even know exists? Or how do you know there is some training
op****tunity happening in your area? OR how do Vendors know what you
need
and how do you get your service / technical questions heard by all
vendors?
Shutting them out isn't the answer to your mail problems! Roland's
answer
was eloquent! And, although we've discussed this often, nothing has
ever
evolved that is a better suggestion! If you don't like messages from
vendors, just filter them out, and having [Company:] in the subject
time is
a perfect way to do that!
I'm sorry, I just don't get it!! Why would you shoot yourself in the
foot?
Vendors - you can put my email address on your mailing list!! Just
put
[Company:] in the subject line! I'll filter them and decide what I
want to
read or not read later! Just like I filter this list!
Sue
At 01:37 PM 3/18/2008, you wrote:
I would suggest extending this to include use of e-mail addresses from
the
mailing list for commercial solicitation. Can we agree this is
unacceptable
?
-----Original Message-----
From: Joanne Lannigan [ <mailto:jl7fj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
mailto:jl7fj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun 3/16/2008 11:56 AM
To: cyto-inbox
Please refrain from use of this list for commercial purposes. The ISAC
website has a place where you can post news releases about such events
or
information. Thanks-
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:17:03 -0500
"Jeffrey Harvey" <jsharvey01@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Bay bioscience is a Japanese company, based in Kobe. The company
designs,
> develops and manufactures high performance cell sorting and analysis
>systems
> and also develops unique reagent products. The company made the
decision
> earlier this year to establish a direct office in the United States and
> to introduce its instrument systems here. Bay bioscience currently
offers
> the JSAN system, which combines high performance cell sorting and
analysis
> capabilities in a compact and affordable design. The company office is
in
> the San Francisco area and the company has demo sites on both the East
>Coast
> and West Coast. Please visit the company website (
<http://www.baybio.co.jp/>
www.baybio.co.jp ) to
> learn more about the company and its products. I will be overseeing
the US
> operation and also the distribution of the products in Europe The
company
> will be an exhibitor at both the Northwest Regional Cytometry Meeting
>(March
> 13-15, in ****tland, OR) and at the ISAC Congress in Budapest (May
17-21).
> Please visit us at either of those meetings, if you wish to discuss any
> aspect of the company's products. In the interim, please feel free to
> contact me directly, at this email address. I'll look forward to
hearing
> from you.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Jeff Harvey
mailgatemia2 made the following annotations
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This message contains information that may be privileged or
confidential and
is the property of Beckman Coulter, Inc. It is intended only for the
person
to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you
are not
authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute or
use this
message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error,
please
notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wed Mar 26 16:58:00 2008
This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Eric P Miller: "re: FC500 or Canto?"
Previous message: Jeffrey Harvey: "Re: Bay bioscience opens US office
and introduces its JSAN cell sorting and analysis system there"
In reply to: vincent.shankey@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"[Company] submissions to
the list"
Contem****ary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ]
[ By Author ] [ By messages with attachments ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 31 2007 -
03:12:00 EST
|
