How Many list are show on the Purdue cytometry mail list for software sales...

[Unregistered]

FCS compression

ERIC MARTZ ([email protected])
Fri, 23 Oct 92 14:38:01 EDT

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Steve Kelley: "FCS compression"
Previous message: ERIC MARTZ: "Profile FCS?"

I'd like a utility which removes unwanted information from FCS1.0 or FCS2.0 standard list mode files.

For FACScan files created by FACScan Research Software (ca. 1988), this could reduce the file size by about two-thirds!

What I have in mind is removing FL2 and FL3 for single
color work


(the FACScan software lacks this option although it is present in the FACStar software),

and

reducing the resolution from 1024 channels to 256 channels (which reduces the space consumed from 2 bytes per parameter-event to 1).

Such a utility might also offer an option of inserting additional sample description
or other information.


Does anyone know of such a utility?


I'm considering writing it


but

I'd rather not re-invent the wheel



(for the hundredth time or so).



--
/* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
Eric Martz [email protected] Professor of
Immunology
Voice 413-545-2325, FAX 413-545-1578
Morrill IVN Rm 203, Dept Microbiol, Univ Mass, Amherst MA 01003
USA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - */


Next message: Steve Kelley: "FCS compression"
Previous message: ERIC MARTZ: "Profile FCS?"

[Unregistered]

Purdue Cytometry Mail List BAN OF COMMERCIAL MARKETING Mario Roederer
Advertising

From: Mario Roederer ([email protected])

Date: Fri Nov 01 2002 - 16:46:47 EST


* Next message: William Telford: "Re: Fluorochromes choice"
* Previous message: Derek Davies: "RE: Fluorochromes choice"
* Next in thread: Penney Robbins: "RE: Advertising"
* Maybe reply: Penney Robbins: "RE: Advertising"
* Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]
[ author ]
[ attachment ]
________________________________________

I agree that there have been far too many commercial-oriented emails
on the list.


I appreciate the efforts of most manufacturers to
withhold from advertising on this list

(plus, of course, the efforts of Steve & Paul to filter those out).

The list, which is an outstanding forum for exchange of information,
has been occasionally used to identify substantially new products

which can significantly impact on how we do experiments.

I feel that the Molecular Probes email of 10/30

clearly does not fall into this category;

the new product advertised was no more than a slight
modification of the existing one.

Such an email should be directed solely to the person requesting information;

if that person then collates responses and puts it back on the list then so be it.

But

for manufacturers to directly respond in this way is

counter-productive to the goals of this list.


I would like to propose a 6-month moratorium on all emails that are
no more than advertisements.

Note that I write "would like to"--because I'm not sure that this is possible.

I don't want to put any additional on us on Steve or Paul to filter out the borderline emails.


While these may be easy to identify when they come from
manufacturers,
it could just as well be considered blatant advertising when they come from a user.


Therefore, perhaps we can see if the commercial participants on this
list could exercise self-restraint rather than requesting a formal
censorship of advertising emails.


Thus, if you are a manufacturer, and you are responding to somebody's
request for information, do so privately to that person ONLY.

It is up to the person requesting information to decide whether or not the
information received in response to the query warrants a summary on
the list.


If you are not a manufacturer, and are responding to somebody's
request for specific information, please consider whether your
response
(that identifies a specific product or manufacturer)

is of general enough interest to warrant the list.

If it does not, then simply send it privately to the person who requested information, and let them decide whether to post the summary of responses.


In general,

I urge people to err on the side of caution and send
their information only to the person who requested it.

Realize that
if several people want the same information, they can always request
it from the original poster!

I have posted queries to the list;

people have sent me emails asking me to forward to them the
responses, whichI did.


This process can significantly cut down on emails that might be
viewed as too commercial.


mr
________________________________________
* Next message: William Telford: "Re: Fluorochromes choice"
* Previous message: Derek Davies: "RE: Fluorochromes choice"
* Next in thread: Penney Robbins: "RE: Advertising"
* Maybe reply: Penney Robbins: "RE: Advertising"
* Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]
[ author ]
[ attachment ]
________________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 01 2004 -
17:42:08 EST

[Unregistered]

Isac President J Paul & Purdue Cytometry Mail List End of Year Message
From: J. Paul Robinson <j..._at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>

Date: Fri Dec 28 2007 - 13:43:46 EST


> Beware, the end is nigh!

No, not an apocalyptic prediction - but 2007 is definitely coming to an end.

Not before time I would say - it s been a busy year.

But

I have some strong words to end the year

and

I am going to say them!!

Of course you don t have to read them!


Cytometry is now 40 years old and it s been sort of decaying a bit.


What do I mean?

I am amazed at how conservative

and

frankly boring the field has become.

Why?

It s time to move to the 21st century folks.

I'm getting older and frankly,

its time to kick some butt

as my younger colleagues often say.

We talk so much like it is the same old cytometry
it has always been.


Wake up people - times are changing

- look at all these new small companies


trying to stick their noses in "our" field!


True we need to do the core work and do it well,

but lets not forget that fundamental tools of cell analysis are changing

and

if we don't keep ourselves up-to-date and educated on what's happening....

before we know it,

a new field will emerge and we will be like the old electron microscopists who are still wondering what happened ......


I know most of us work in the field

and

like what we do,

but

I think its time to open up a little

and

try to do some serious integration of our field.

It s not happening very effectively on the most part

I would say.


Cytometry is about integration of the tools of the field into the vast reaches of biological problems that we can contribute to solving.

Cytometry is about advancement of the field,
that means always looking ahead.

ISAC will soon be the International Society for Advancement

of Cytometry a 21st century Society not a 20th century Society.

Cytometry is not flow cytometry!!

Let s not kid ourselves about this folks.

Cytometry is about measuring cells -

however you do it -

and

flow cytometry is just one component of many.

I understand that it may be the only tool some of you use -

I don t want to take away from that

or

de- emphasize its value or importance.

But,

we so often hear people talk about our field

only in context of just flow cytometry.

Recently, when we polled the ISAC community on

changing

our name from "analytical Cytology"

to Advancement of Cytometry"

we received comments like

"hey I don t do flow cytometry,

so

why are you reducing the breadth of the field?"

Ouch - they think "cytometry" means "flow cytometry".

We have a long way to go before


we convince the community that we cover all

aspects of cytometry.


And

let s also remember the growing membership

in

India and China

(that s half the worlds population right there)

it s high time we paid much more attention to these countries

as a field Awtar Krishan can t be the only person to drive cytometry training

and

education for 1.2 billion Indians can he?

Well he has been up to now.

Who is taking on the mantle of training and education of cytometry in
China?

So here's the scoop.


That's one of the reasons

why the Purdue Web portal is going to change.

We tried to make the change this past year,

but

there were too many other things happening here to achieve it.

But

come middle of 2008,

I am resolved that you will see a huge difference in the Purdue site.

It s been the default cytometry communication portal nowfor many, many years.

We have focused on good clean fun with cytometry

quality, timely, simple - no spam.

Many people like that actually.
> The
> portal is almost overwhelming for us 22,000 daily page requests with
> over 2 Gigs daily download. In 2007 alone, downloads of 208,000
> powerpoint files, 233,000 PDF files, 8800 movies, 38,000 word
> document
> files. The education pages and the Cytometry Discussion Archive are
> the
> most hit for sure. Over 125,000 distinct files from our portal were
> accessed in 2007.

> But all good things must come to an end.

Come July 2008,

the usual Purdue web portal may well be no more.

It will be replaced with something entirely new.


Hopefully most will find it more useful

and


relevant - some will not like it.

Maybe we will be able to make everyone happy

....ha!..C'est la vie.


Some of you will be beta testers and advisers I hope.


So my best wishes to all in the cytometry field for 2008.

Regarding the past year on the discussion list, its been lively, with an average of 7 messages per day with 754 different individuals submitting at least one message. 139 messages had at least 6 responses. There were 1205 unique subject lines. Subscribers came from 64 top level domains. The usual bunch of suspects answered lots of messages and Marty Bigos seems to have too much time as he answered the most (thanks Marty!!).

Tragically, the second most prolific responder was Randy Fisher who passed away on December 5. Randy's responses were always short, to the point and accurate. It hurts to lose one of our own, particularly when it's one
of our most active members.

But that s the point isn't it. For many
years to come, we have the value of Randy's hundreds of suggestions over the years archived for the many new people who enter our field. Many of you probably never actually met Randy - but I bet most of you feel you knew him. One of the mysteries of the web I suppose. Our condolences to Randy's family - perhaps they didn't know how many people knew Randy "electronically" - but we all did.
You know we are a small field when
it comes to the big world of science so when we lose one person, the entire field morns.

To end 2007, let me make a big plug for a program we began at the 2006 ISAC congress.

Gary Durack from iCyt and myself started a small not- for-profit charity called

"Cytometry for Life" in response to Stephen
Lewis' compelling plea for some low cost CD4 devices. Our field
has done a lot of talking about this,

but

only a few people have really tried to do anything practical.

Well, folks we have all been doing cytometry for a very long time - it's time to do something.
"Cytometry for life"

(http://www.cytometryforlife.org)

is working hard. We have made tremendous progress in just one year. It would be great if you all decided to jump on board and play a small part.
You can give money, advice, moral support, talk to your politicians, community healthcare, charities,

whatever.

but get involved as be recognized as the cytometry community to solve this problem of bringing low cost, portable devices to the 65% or more of African's who don t live in the cities and towns where current CD4 technologies are available. Our goal is to work in areas not being served by current technologies.

We have heard these calls before, but folks we have to deal with this problem - it's your problem

if you call yourself a "cytometry" person.

Email me if you can help -

consider donating to the program, let's make it work. By the end of 2008,

I want to be telling you that the program is getting to
people who need this desperately. Help us achieve that for 2008.

I hope many of you got hold of a copy of our new double DVD set Cytometry 60 years of Innovation
if not ask your local rep from virtually any company in our field.

It might give you a good sense of
how strong the foundation in our field really is.
I will see many of you at the 2008 congress in Budapest. I know some of you think its going to be expensive so I took several hours myself and created a webpage for
the cheap ones out there so you have no excuses not to go...

(Cheap european Flights).

It's been a privilege to serve for the past 19 months as President of ISAC.

I will gladly pass that hat to Bob Murphy in May. ISAC is alive and well - membership is growing daily.

I would not be surprised to see us top 2000 by the end of the Congress in May.

I know that about 60% of the members of this list are NOT ISAC members.

Perhaps you should consider joining

the

Society that keeps many of you in business?

Welcome to the ISAC! - Mambo

> My best wishes for you all in 2008 from Purdue Paul
> --
> J. Paul Robinson
> SVM Professor of Cytomics
> Professor of Immunopharmacology & Biomedical Engineering
> Director, Purdue University Cytometry Laboratories
> President, International Society for Analytical Cytology

[Unregistered]

Fixing Papers on the PURDUE CYTOMETRY MAIL LIST your ISAC LEADERS!

From: Ray Hicks
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 8:42 PM
To: Cytometry Mailing List

Subject: Re: Bad Flow Data & reviewing -- What can we do?


Many good points Mario,
but

I'm going to take you back a few years to our
discussion on dot plot versus contour, and how misleading contours are.
I'd
reverse your logic in " remember that contour plots are also
histograms (2D histograms),

and

they have no numbers on the "Z" axis
corresponding to event frequency. Why should univariate histograms have
them?", and suggest that contour plots need even more annotation.

I'm sorely tempted to attach a few figures to this e-mail,

but

I've restrained myself, and made them available at:http://www.fcspress.com/seeWhatIMean.gif (Who's computer is this?)

and

http://www.fcspress.com/512AlongTheAxis.gif (Who's computer is this?)

The first <http://www.fcspress.com/seeWhatIMean.gif (Who's computer is this?) > shows how strikingly different contour plots of the same data can be

(the data is from the FlowJo tutorial set, the figures are made in FlowJo 3.2 and FCSPress 1.3).

The top left dotplot is from FlowJo,

and

shows the crowding you object to, the upper central plot is FlowJo's default contour plot of SSCvFSC with ten thousand
cells, the upper right plot is a plot of 1600 cells gated from the same
file
- doesn't look like fewer cells does it?
The lower left plot is a log 50% contour plot of the data in the top left
and top centre plots, what is one to make of those contours based on four
cells that jump out in the lower left?

The lower central plot is a dot plot from FCSPress, plotting data at 512 points along the axis

(the data has a range of 512 "channels"),

FCSPress has dithered the plot to represent how it would

(and does) print on a printer which isn't limited to screen resolution

(using the "clarify option),

you'll notice that using higher resolution avoids much of the coalescing to a black blob that you object to in dot plots

(the second figure, <http://www.fcspress.com/512AlongTheAxis.gif (Who's computer is this?) >,
.
shows this graph at full size with no dithering)
The lower right plot shows a density plot from FlowJo,
the smoothing belies the sparsity of the data.

What's an expert to do when presented with this kind of thing?

Would labelling the upper left and lower left plots as having the same number of cells be enough to make you see them as representing the exact same data
set?

The dot plot of 1600 cells (not shown for brevity) clearly has fewer
cells than that of 10000, and does a better job of warning the viewer,
expert or not, of how confident they should be in making conclusions based
on the plot than numbering the events on the two contour plots (upper left
and upper right).
Oh, alright then, I've put a further figure up with two dot plots and two
contour plots with paired numbers of events at:

http://www.fcspress.com/nowDoYouSee.gif (Who's computer is this?)

The other issue I take is;

how is the collective going to select the
experts?Surely the people who are publishing this stuff ARE people

"with a modicum of experience in flow".

Putting the responsibility on editorial
boards is probably going to end up in a status quo.

How about pressuring your lab-fellows

to sling the FACS aspect of papers, that

they're reviewing anyway,

in your direction?


Ray

ps

as an aside,

there's something freaky happening on the axes of these graphs -

they're 512 channel data,

but

the linear FSC axis runs out
just past 200,

and one of the events exceeds the maximum for side scatter
(ie the one that juumps above the red line in the left hand plots -

has this beenfixed in later versions of

FlowJo?

Would this be

something an expert could

criticise/reject

a paper for?

[Unregistered]

Control Of Isac Congress GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOGLE
PURDUE CYTOMETRY MAIL LIST


READ HOW THEY GREW AND TOOK CONTROL OF ISAC CONGRESS!

FILTERING OUT THE LIST!

DEVELOPERS OF SOFTWARE

MACHINES

CODE

THERE MUST BE CHANGE

[Unregistered]

Purdue Cytometry Mail List Im Developing an ANALYSIS program Called FCSPress From: Ray Hicks (rh...@cus.cam.ac.uk)

> Date: Fri Jul 04 1997 - 04:15:27 EST

> Next message: Woo, Gary: "BrdU staining"
> Previous message: W. Roy Overton, Ph.D.: "RE: registration form"
> In reply to: Vincent Falco: "Software"
> Next in thread: Kevin G Waddick: "Fixation/Ab-binding"
> Reply: Kevin G Waddick: "Fixation/Ab-binding"
> Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> [ attachment ]
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------**-----
> Hi Vincent,

> I'm developing an analysis program, based on FCS Assistant, called > FCSPress.

So far it's quite rudimentary and only allows you to plot
histograms.

It doesn't do gating or analysis yet.

And

there is little support for the edit menu functions (cut, copy, paste, undo).

Unlike most cytometry programs available on the mac,

it allows you to open a data file and optionally manipulate its contents,

graphs are plotted from the active data window into graph windows,
which are wysiwyg for printing and saving as PICT )(sort of like cricket graph).

You can put as many graphs from as many files as you like into a graph window, and you can constrain their plotting to an optional grid of variable size.

You can annotate the graphs manually in variable fonts and styles, as well as semi-automatically from text held in the source file.

I've got quite a way to go before the program is finished, but it seems to be quite stable so far.

If you'd like a copy let me know and I'll e- mail it to you (or anyone else who'd like a copy).

Ray

At 10:29 am +0000 3/7/97,

Vincent Falco wrote:

I have BD Vantage generated list files copied to a PC via FACSNET.

I have an investigator who wishes to

generate multiple histograms in gallery format.

Which software product can do this the easiest(least steep learning curve)?

Thanks.

Ray Hicks


__________________________________________________ ______________________
> |University of Cambridge |Tel 01223
> 330149 |
> |Department of Medicine |Fax 01223
> 336846 |
> |Level 5, Addenbrookes Hospital |e-mail
> <rh...@cus.cam.ac.uk> |
> |Hills Road Cambridge |Web http://facsmac.med.cam.ac.uk
> |
> |CB2 |ftp server ftp://131.111.80.78
> |
> |UK
> | |
> |_________________________________|
> _____________________________________|
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------**-----
> Next message: Woo, Gary: "BrdU staining"
> Previous message: W. Roy Overton, Ph.D.: "RE: registration form"
> In reply to: Vincent Falco: "Software"
> Next in thread: Kevin G Waddick: "Fixation/Ab-binding"
> Reply: Kevin G Waddick: "Fixation/Ab-binding"
> Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> [ attachment ]

[Unregistered]

Purdue Cytometry Mail List Software Marketing & Seminars!
FCSPress Training Sessions?

From: Ray Hicks ([email protected])

Date: Thu Oct 11 2001 - 19:42:36 EST
Next message: Laird Bloom: "RE: Multiple plate loader?"
Previous message: flow: "RE: HELP! How to clean the sample injection
tube?"
In reply to: Jennifer Wilshire: "FlowJo Training Sessions (Midwest)"

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of you will findFCSPress so easy to use that you won't need
training sessions.

You can download a copy to try it out for yourselves at

http://www.fcspress.com/html/FCSPArea.html

(Who's computer is this?)

where you'll also find documentation and details of a special offer.
If you find you DO need some assistance using FCSPress,
I'm planning on staying in Cambridge for quite some time, and I'd be happy to answerany ofyour queries via e-mail at

[email protected]
Cheers,
Ray
--
e-mail mailto:[email protected]
Web http://www.FCSPress.com
(Who's computer is this?)
Tel +44 797 453 8647
+44 1223 871081
Fax +44 870 7408595
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next message: Laird Bloom: "RE: Multiple plate loader?"
Previous message: flow: "RE: HELP! How to clean the sample injection
tube?"
In reply to: Jennifer Wilshire: "FlowJo Training Sessions (Midwest)"

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 01 2004 -
17:40:27 EST

FlowJo Training Sessions (Midwest)

From: Jennifer Wilshire ([email protected])

Date: Thu Oct 11 2001 - 06:20:11 EST
Next message: Richard Grenfell: "Multiple plate loader?"
Previous message: William King: "Searching for pig anti-CD34"


Next in thread: Ray Hicks: "FCSPress Training Sessions?"

Rand locations are listed below. Thanks, Jennifer Wilshire FLOWJO
SEMINARS ______________________________________ Monday, October 15th
University Hospitals Clinical Sciences Center 600 Highland Ave,

Madison WI Room K4/418 10:00 AM reply: Ray Hicks: "FCSPress Training Sessions?"

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
I will be in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa offering FlowJo seminars
and training sessions next week. All of the hosting sites have

graciously opened the sessions to members of the Cytometry list.


Times

______________________________________
Tuesday, October 16th University of Minnesota Cancer Center 425 E.
River Road Room 450 9:00 AM ¬ Introduction to FlowJo 10:30 AM ¬
Advanced Topics _______________________________________ Tuesday,
October 16th University of Minnesota, St. Paul Building AS/VM Room
295M 2:00 PM _______________________________________ Friday, October
19th University of Iowa South East 310 General Hospital Bean
Conference Room 10:00 AM _______________________________________ If
you are interested in hosting a FlowJo seminar, please let me know.
Upcoming trips are in the planning stages for: -NJ, PA, DC -Florida.
-
Boston (home) Jennifer Wilshire, Ph.D. Application Scientist
[email protected] Tree Star, Inc. FlowJo Home
Next message: Richard Grenfell: "Multiple plate loader?"
Previous message: William King: "Searching for pig anti-CD34"
Next in thread: Ray Hicks: "FCSPress Training Sessions?"
Reply: Ray Hicks: "FCSPress Training Sessions?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]

[Unregistered]

Purdue Cytometry Mail List FC500 data Files a COMPLICATED BEAST!
From: Novo, David [email protected]

Date: Fri Aug 17 2007 - 18:52:53 EDT


Hello Kate,


The FC 500 data files are indeed a complicated beast that give you a
lot of information.


There are indeed two separate data sets inside the one
FC500 file.

This is allowed by the FCS standard.


The first data set is a FCS 2.0 file.

quite a typical FCS 2.0 file, stored in 10 bit with the data already saved compensated and This is converted to log (if necessary).

This is quite clever to put it there because any analysis software that can read FCS 2.0 files should be able to read this file, and not even know that there was a second data set hiding afterwards.

I am not sure why the BD CBA software

would not be able to handle this,

maybe there is a hidden setting or something that allows this.


The second data set is a high resolution data set that is in FCS 3.0
format. This contains all the high resolution linear data, that is stored uncompensated, and is ideal for performing software compensation.


I guess our web site is either too high, or too low,

and

fell out of the range of your previous search :-)

FCS Express can read both the FCS

2.0 and FCS 3.0 portion of the FCS 500 data files. You can even export
them as individual files if you like.

When loading the files you can either default to load the FCS 2.0 or FCS 3.0 portion, or be prompted which to choose.



I also know that WinList can read both portions of the FC500 file.

I am not familiar withFlowJo's capabilities in this regard.

If you contact them,

I am sure they will be glad to answer this point.


-Dave


-----------------------------------


David Novo


President


De Novo Software


[email protected]

[Unregistered]

Purdue Cytometry mail list EXPOSED
Which Government agency would Investigate the Purdue Cytometry Mail
List and Isac Congress/ Who do I notify to Enforce the laws and make a
Complaint about the Purdue Cytometry Mail List and the PRESIDENT of
Isac Congress?

The Entity I make the Complaint to should be able to Investigate BD,
and the rest of the software Companies since our software was sent
back DYSTROYED and we are concerned about our CODE. Since Mr.
Gunderman explained we were ahead of the times. 40 PARAMETERS BY 10
MILLION EVENTS. FCS 3.0 NO CONFUSING MENU BAR. 24-48,000 FILES PER
HOUR.

J Paul Robinson President of Isac CONGRESS and Head of Purdue
Cytometry Mail List called our Corporation Kanecki Associates Inc.
Scammers Internationally through the Purdue cytometry Mail List and
Communicated to Pass the Word through ISU Professor Larry Farell after
we sent a message informing Robert Murphy President elect about our
Corporations break through in NEW TECHNOLOGY.

The LETTER was not sent to J Paul Robinson but some how he intercepted
it. Regardless the Details of the Flow Cytometry Software for only
$150.00 for student..NO License Fees


All flow Cytometry Software Companies Charge Large License fees . We
thought this would be a great Idea for STUDENTS and the rest of the
world. Obviously, Mr. Robinson DID NOT Like this message responding
to Steve with Concern that the LETTER may have gotten to HIS MAIL LIST
stating that the Information sent for Consideration was JUNK MAIL.

After I sent Messages back to Mr. Robinson he still insisted that it
was Junk mail.

I have Evidence that Could make a great case for Discrimination,
Filtering,Collusion, and Much More ESPECIALL SINCE there is only 5
software Companies ALL ON THE MAIL LIST and all Developed thier own
FlowCytometry software while on the LIST.


This is a LETTER FROM THE MAIL LIST TO SUPPORT THE RULES!



Recent FlowJo announcementFrom: Steve Kelley
(SKELLEY@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu)
Date: Wed Dec 30 1998 - 06:13:04 EST

Next message: Steve Kelley: "Possible minor disruption"
Previous message: Mark A. Corio: "Chemdex no help..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
I know that many people on the mailing list are adamantly opposed to
anything that even looks a little commercial, and to try to forestall
any possible

complaints about the FlowJo announcement
, I'll explain what

I'd like to see. In my opinion, announcements about new products, and
product updates are completely appropriate as long as they aren't
abused.
I've never wanted to specifically encourage that, because I really
don't want to be put into a position of having to decide whether a
message is an

"announcement"
or an

"advertisement

. The companies involved in our cytometry community have always been
extremely good 'citizens' as far as I can tell.



We have representatives of many companies on the list, and they have
always had the power to make my life miserable, and the list no more
than junk mail. Instead, they have helped build this mailing list
into one of the most useful around, through their contributions

and
responses. I'm not going to try to set specific rules about what
people can say about their own products, and when they can say it.


I'll just ask that everyone continue to show restraint; that the
commercial representatives ask themselves before they submit an
announcement whether they'd mind seeing every other company in the
business sending the same message they are about to, and that the


non-
commercial (and anti-commercial) people accept discreet announcements
as simple information, and continue the sometimes brisk discussions
about problems and benefits of particular products, alongside the
purely scientific (and occasionally purely entertaining) conversation.
Steve Steve Kelley

kelley@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu
Purdue University Cytometry Laboratories (765) 494-0757 --
voiceB050 Hansen LSRB, Purdue University (765) 494-0517 --
faxWest Lafayette, Indiana, 47907 -- End --

Next message: Steve Kelley: "Possible minor disruption"
Previous message: Mark A. Corio: "Chemdex no help..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 01 2004 -
17:35:29 EST

After these Conversations with Mr. Robinson, Bill Gunderman from BD
refused to return our phone calls. After 3months he finally took my
Call at night. At this time he explained we were there COMPETITION.

Nothing seemed to make sense..all the FORUMS I joined banned me.
Anytime I mentioned our software it got DELETED!


Then when I started asking Questions on Yahoo ie Why do companies
charge license some one sent me a link to my personal email that
exposed the mail list. When I CLICKED on the link it took me through a
BACK ROUTE so I was able to download all the Purdue Cytometry Mail
List ARCHIVES SINCE 1992.

Soooo much to read but It was easy to see how everyone in the User
groups, software companies, forums. science advisory board,ect were on
the PURDUE CYTOMETRY MAIL LIST and were a part of ISAC.

J. Paul Robinson
<jpr_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>

ViewMonday, November 19, 2007 2:14:38 PM

To:Larry Farrell <farrlarr_at_isu.edu>; mitchell haynes
<buybroker_at_yahoo.com>;
skelley_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu; Bartek Rajwa
rajwa_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu

Larry

Sorry you are experiencing a problem

>From the header - This is apparently coming from a Mitchel Haynes
mitchell haynes <buybroker_at_yahoo.com> - is this correct?

I initially thought messages coming from this person were a scam and

challenged them when they started posting to our list as well. I had

someone do a check on them. it is apparent that they have written
some

software and they think its ants-pants. They have tried to post
things on the Purdue list , they have used every possible website and email

discussion group to get cross listed to boost their ratings on
Google.

Basically I view their behavior as very tenuous and from the message
you

sent me, it appears that it is not appropriate to do what they are
doing...

I have taken the following action:

Steve Kelley has been instructed to remove their email and any
postings on the Purdue list. They are now banned

2. I am going to Copying Bartek Rajwa the editor of the ISAC site to

beware of them

3. I am contacting Google and other sites to let them know that these

people are self-propagating links.

4. If I see any message that in any way impunes Purdue or our

reputation, I will go after them with every possible legal recourse
at

my disposal.

We will not allow our reputation to suffer because of

commercial abuse.

5. You should ban this address, and basically indicate to your
members

that this is a scam. While they claim to be legitimate, they are
acting

exactly as any scam artist...



I already told them that they were
acting

as scammers and they got upset with me..

.well, if they don't desist,

they will find out how much influence we actually have...


I will check the message

> Subject: flow cytometry software will you trust Purdue..Lets play
MONOPOLY

> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:38:56 -0800 (PST)
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
and see if this is actually libelous - it appears to be - and if it
is,

I will close this person down really, really fast!!! (Steve please
check

out this message and make a copy)



Larry, we have about 3000 people on the Purdue discussion list which
is

primarily about cytometry - and a lot of flow cytometry -

to join,people actually have to go through me,

and we review every person

who

comes on.

I am sorry you are experiencing this problem, and we are happy to
help

in any way we can.

regards

paul Robinson

Professor, Purdue

GLarry Farrell wrote:
> Someone has apparently decided to post the following, and a huge number
> of related messages, to misc.health.aids. I have asked that person,
on

> several occasions, not to post this material into that newsgroup and
> have been ignored. My reasons for that request are two-fold: (1)
> Misc.health.aids is an HIV/AIDS group so the material is decidedly off
> topic, and (2) Some of these messages contain reference to a site from
> which cytometry software can be purchased and commercial solicitations
> of any sort are expressly forbidden by the group's charter. Is there
> any way you can intervene in this issue and stop the *many* posting
of

> this and related cytometry messages in misc.health.aids?
NO READ WHAT WAS SENT TO ROBERT MURPHY NOT J PAUL ROBINSON



Dear Robert Murphy

NEW
FLOWCYTOMETRY SOFTWARE FOR ALL BD and Beckman/Coulter Flow Cytometers
CAN
PROCESS 24,000-42,000 SAMPLES PER HOUR. FLOW CYTOMETRY FCS CYTO PRO
QUICK FACS Kanecki Associates - The Future of Software Technology and World Leader in Intelligent Thinking Systems Management Government Military Intellectual Property

Increased quality and productivity. With 10,000,000 event files, you
can process 24,000 samples/hour, and maintain quality up to Sigma 5
or
better. Compare this to having your research technologist performing
only 100 samples/hour analysis.
Increased laboratory utilization by 3X because you can perform the
analysis off-lab and free laboratory time for reading samples. This
was achieved when I developed the program, and we had a program
project grant from 1992 to 1998 of $8M.
Works with FCS 3.0 in all data modes as floating point, integer*4,
and
ASCII.
Works with BD and Beckman/Coulter Flow Cytometers and Cell Sorters
Backwards compatible with FCS 2.0 files and Flow Cytometers and Cell
Sorters.
Can read FCS 3.0 files up to 10M events with 20 parameters. Easy to
Use, three step process. Load initial file, set gate, specify file
list to process. That's it.
Collaboration tools to allow you to cut and paste image results to
results.
Statistical analysis results imprinted on histogram plots directly as
mean, mode, and median with the ability to present results in log
mode
or linear mode, depending on the detector used. Plain vanilla coding
for easy update and maintenance to allow for the greatest user and
software quality.
One time purchase fee, no yearly renewal fees as with others. Proven
tract record in FACS, Fluorescent Activated Cell Sorter Laboratory.
The laboratory was rated the best laboratory in the Midwest USA in
1990.

This application is designed for large-scale fluorescent activated
cell sorter
analysis. The program can read up to FCS 3.0 files and has been
tested
to run on Becton Dickinson and CoulterOrtho based flow cytometers and
cell sorters. The main advantage of this program is that you can have
the computer perform the analysis for you after you have selected the
region to analyze. The result is that up to 24,000 samples per hour
can be analyzed on a 1.4 GHz speed computer. This program is designed
for researcher and technologist use. It uses rectangular gating, and
is intuitive to use. To use this program, the FCS must have the
extension, *.bin as "54203023.bin" as an example. The *.bin extension
is what the computer uses to locate the files on the computer.

THANK YOU FOR YOU TIME MITCHELL HAYNES VP
SALES KANECKI
ASSOCIATES 832-347-1669



THIS WAS J PAUL ROBINSON RESPONSE TO THE INFORMATION SENT Re: Fw: NEW
FLOWCYTOMETRY SOFTWARE FOR ALL BD and Beckman/Coulter Flow Cytometers
CAN PROCESS 24,000 SAMPLES PER HOUR...Standard Header|Full Message
View J. Paul Robinson J. Paul Robinson ... ViewFriday, September 28,
2007 9:37:32 AM To:mitchell haynes Cc:david_at_kanecki2.com;
skelley_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu


Steve
what is this email - it came to me with Bob Murphy's name associated
with it. It seems to be anadvertisement, this junk mail, and it
seems
to have been modified by you ...

So I guess I am confused. was this sent to the list,

or
do you have anydetails about it -

i am concerned about these junk messages going out
to
our members,

- if they are using our lists, I will deal with them
appropriately,

but I am not happy about this

- any info you can give
me
appreciated

thanks

paul
WHILE BEING SHOCKED BY THIS MAIL...MITCHELL HAYNES VP.KANECKI
ASSOCIATES INC....WROTE BACK : mitchell haynes
<buybroker_at_yahoo.com>

> To: skelley_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu
> Cc: skelley_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 11:39:02 AM
> Subject: NOT A JUNCK MAIL STEVE WAS JUST FOWARDING INFORMATION TO PROPER
> CHANNELS
>


Dear Paul,
> I recieved your responce to the email I sent. Please understand it is not
> junkmail but a update on new technology that will inhance all
> flowcytometers..It is currently being evaluated by BD who request for this
> software to be developed directly by our corporation.
> It was simply sent as an announcement for you concideration.
> The software is demonstrates precision and a higer processing rate than
> every existing software today.
> If you have any questions please call I provided my phone number with the
> email. I understand institutions of your caliber is always looking for new
> technology. Futhermoore this is the only software in the world that works
> for every platform on one peice of software
> Thank your for you time and have a great day.
> Please do not blame Steve for send the information to the proper channels
> I would think you would be upset if he did not foward important infomation
> that pertains to furthering cytometry breakthroughs.
> If you would like us to send information to another address that won't
> interfer please foward it to me and I will make sure that there are no
> more misunderstandings.
Mitchell Haynes

From: "jpr_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu"
<jpr_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>

To: mitchell haynes <buybroker_at_yahoo.com>

Cc: jpr_at_flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu

Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 2:26:51 PM


Subject: Re: Fw: NOT A JUNCK MAIL STEVE WAS JUST FOWARDING
INFORMATION
TO
PROPER CHANNELS Sorry, I think it is junk mail

regards

paul robinson

On Nov 30, 7:23 pm, Larry Farrell isu.edu> wrote:

- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

> Mitch Haynes wrote:
> Mitch Haynes wrote:
>> On Nov 30, 2:01 pm, Larry Farrell isu.edu> wrote:
>>> Mitch Haynes wrote:
>>>> Why do you continue to post cytometry materials in misc.health.aids?
>>>> That is an HIV/AIDS newsgroup and your material is completely off
>>>> topic. No one in the group is interested.
>>>> --
>>> [Multiple copies snipped]
>>> Very interesting. I got a "Mail Undeliverable" notice when I sent
>>> this directly to Mr. Haynes but he turns around and posts multiple
>>> copies of a personal e-mail message into a newsgroup. Extremely poor
>>> Netiquette (although it is just a further example of the poor
>>> Netiquette displayed by the issue about which I tried to contact him).
>>> Exactly what is it that you are trying to accomplish, Mr. Haynes?
>>> --


>>> Larry D. Farrell, Ph.D.
>>> Professor of Microbiology
>>> Idaho State University
>>> --
>>> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
>> PLEASE PROVIDE PROOF OF UNDELIVERALBE MAIL NOTICE...I GOT YOUR MAIL SO DID PAUL ROBINSON....WHY DON'T YOU CARE....?
>> THAT IS THE PROBLEM....ONLY GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOGLE WILL
>> PROVIDE THE INFORMATION TO THE WORLD...
>> ISSUE....WHY DID YOU NOTIFY J PAUL ROBINSON ABOUT POST?
>> IT IS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLES WEBSITE........

>> I BELIEVE THE WORLD NEEDS TO KNOW....YOUR IMPORTANT POST ARE NOT
>> BLOCKED....SO POST WHAT YOU LIKE....
>> GLAD IM NOT YOUR STUDENT TOO

>> I GOT YOUR MAIL.....

> --
> Larry D. Farrell, Ph.D.
> Professor of Microbiology
> Idaho State University> On Nov 30, 2:01 pm, Larry Farrell
> isu.edu> wrote:
>>> Mitch Haynes wrote:
>>>> Why do you continue to post cytometry materials in misc.health.aids?
>>>> That is an HIV/AIDS newsgroup and your material is completely off
>>>> topic. No one in the group is interested.
>>>> --
>>> [Multiple copies snipped]
>>> Very interesting. I got a "Mail Undeliverable" notice when I sent
>>> this directly to Mr. Haynes but he turns around and posts multiple
>>> copies of a personal e-mail message into a newsgroup. Extremely poor
>>> Netiquette (although it is just a further example of the poor
>>> Netiquette displayed by the issue about which I tried to contact him).
>>> Exactly what is it that you are trying to accomplish, Mr. Haynes?
>>> --
>>> Larry D. Farrell, Ph.D.
>>> Professor of Microbiology
>>> Idaho State University


Paul Robinson was *not* informed of my message to you. What makes
you

> think he was?


> I deleted the Undeliverable Mail notice as soon as it was received,
> assuming that it was a dead issue since you would not have received the
> message. And then, lo and behold, you actually did. Something is fishy!
> Why do I care? Because you are flooding a normally useful newsgroup
> with off-topic material, wasting bandwidth and turning off people who
> might read the group. Your behavior in this group certainly does not
> reflect well on you or on Kanecki Associates, the company for which you
> apparently work as Marketing Director.
> You have no idea how glad I am that you aren't one of my students!!
> --
> Larry D. Farrell, Ph.D.
> Professor of Microbiology
> Idaho State University

After sending a letter to his Corporate

It was sent a Link to the Purdue Cytometry Mail List which EXPOSED how
software was developed over the years and the VENDORS on the LIST were
in the Software Business.

Rules of the Purdue Cytometry Mail list allows for NEW TECHNOLOGY
especially if it EXPANDS the FIELD in which ISAC is concerned.

We developed software for BD due to a request by BILL GUNDERMAN. We
made the Software to PROCESS FCS 3.0 with all 128 Permeations calling
our announcement that was Sent to Robert Murphy President Elect of
Isac also at Purdue. He transfered from Purdue AFTER this. He will be
the next ISAC president.

[Unregistered]

Purdue Cytometry Mail List BD's Fix pseudo-unique ID's in their infinite wisdom
From: David.C.McFarl...@gsk.com

Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:06 AM
To: Cytometry Mailing List

Subject: Re: FloJo and DiVa file IDs

Ray,

I had this discussion with BD a while ago. This is something that
blindsided me.

We actually have an SOP that we follow for tube IDs
such that they are all unique. Basically, we use accession numbers
of
the format FCM00001 for experiment names
and then the tube IDs would be FCM00001_001, etc.

In the older versions of Diva, this was the "FCS" file name that showed up in the folder when experiments were exported.


However, those weren't "real" FCS files.

Evidently,

people were trying to import these bogus FCS files

back into Diva,

or

elsewhere,

and it was creating errors.

In their infinite wisdom,

BD's fix

was

to change the names of these files to something unrecognizable to the users so that they wouldn't be tempted to do that.

They have a system of generating their own pseudo-unique IDs in this manner.

I say pseudo-unique, because it isn't clear to me where/how the
numbering starts if, for instance, you have several instruments
running Diva in the same lab, or if upgrade to a new version by doing
a clean install.

Or perhaps the machine crashes.

Can the numbering be set to pick up where if left off?

I think what they really mean is unique to that particular incarnation of the database on that local machine which isn't unique enough in my mind.

This really screwed up my system.

So asked the same question you just did, "Is there a way
to retain my Tube IDs

and/or

can I configure Diva to use the same unique filenaming convention that I do".

Of course, the answer was no.

Even worse,

even if you export as FCS files, although recognizable, the files aren't exactly the same as the entered ID.

The specimen name

and

an underscore are added before the tube ID

and

".fcs" is added to the end.

This is more aggravation for me to deal with in regard to data management in a GLP setting.

It's too bad. We like exporting entire experiments for archiving purposes,

but

it is easier to reconcile file name/tube ID discrepancies when exported as
FCS, so we will probably have to make a change.

At present we've just been adding a file note to the archive documents and explaining that the original naming scheme will reappear when imported back into
Diva.

This isn't entirely true when FCS files are imported into Diva
since you have to import them into an open experiment, which could be
named differently than the exported FCS files.



Again this is an issue for me in a GLP validated instrument setting and would warrant more workarounds or further explanation as to why reimported raw data
doesn't look "exactly" as it did when collected.

Let me know if you here anything different from what I've told you as
the situation seems to change frequently and this may no be the most
current info.

Regards,

Dave

David McFarland
Principal Scientist
GlaxoSmithKline