Re: Simulating air with NAMD

From: Mark Abraham (
Date: Mon May 07 2007 - 00:26:59 CDT

Jim Phillips wrote:

> Second, Mark's response contains no more information than RTFM and STFW
> (see for
> definitions). If he felt compelled to respond publicly, it would have
> been better to point out the vagueness of the question and ask for
> clarification.

I prefer to make all responses to a public forum in public, so that all
can potentially learn from the response, multiple people don't expend
the same effort, and the answers are archived publicly for future reference.

Depending on the context of the original question, my answer may or may
not have been useless. Someone with a little experience in molecular
simulation would have learned nothing from my reply. If so, they posed a
question other than the one they wanted answered, and my response may
stimulate them to ask the question they do want answered. However
someone with no experience in molecular simulation asking such a
question (which in my experience is alarmingly frequent, e.g. for an
undergraduate research project) needs the information which my reply did
contain. Silence serves no purpose at all, in my view.

> Fortunately, the rest of NAMD-L has been mature enough to let it pass
> and get back to discussing science. Miraculously, Jeff Potoff has now
> popped up with genuine expertise on gas-phase simulations, which is the
> kind of response people are hoping for when they ask questions. Thanks,
> Jeff!

Yes, nods to Jeff! :-)


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Wed Feb 29 2012 - 15:44:38 CST