Re: [DIYbio] Help end harassment in hacking!

I am one of the people repeatedly contacted (and at this stage harassed) by Jen Kotila before this public attack.

I collaborate on some of the Biogarageen/Labitat/Kopenlab projects, in which we often disagree, which was also how Jen found me, but I never felt any gender bias nor other forms of harassment.

She sounded very distressed and I didn't want to question her intents at the time, but decided to give her the benefit of the doubt while saying very clearly that the privacy is as important as gender equality and other values. 

I also respected her privacy and decided not alert any of the people she talked about while offering her mediation and also trying to explain, why this needs to be addressed in a constructive and less personal manner.

Her rather aggressive insistence to support her petition, but even more the blatant disrespect for the privacy of other people

involved in this dispute

 (which no one outside Copenhagen can really claim to understand),

made me question her intentions and her plea for gender equality etc. I simply don't find her interest in the gender issues around hackerspaces genuine

and I'm really disappointed that she misused it for something that looks and feels more like a vicious attack on the reputation of the whole Copenhagen group of biohackers.

I stopped communicating with her, because she started accusing even me of various biases and I don't know how I can help her.

I invited her to a session in Finland to meet other DIYbio groups and people and maybe realize how diverse the whole group is and make new friends, but she didn't show any interest

and continues´to send vicious and aggressive e-mails slandering everyone who doesn't share her mission to destroy the Copenhagen group while making the whole gender issue ridiculous now. 

What I'm even more worried about is that this whole threat opened a dangerous precedent, where the DIYbio list will become a cesspool of gossips and anyone, who had a dispute, can publicly shame and humiliate people by posting here private conversations and other documents,

which we can't even verify.

The moderators of this list should make a better judgement in the future or even delete this whole threat. They could refer people with similar complaints to the advisory boards of their organizations or other institutions, which deal professionally with similar problems.

Saying this, I'm impressed by the restrain most people showed in this discussion

and this gives me hope that we all do care for creating inclusive and supportive environments in our various DIYbio organizations

and maybe it is time to share tips & tricks, ideas how to improve the gender balance and support people with interest in science to join

. If we are serious about social and gender issues, we need an appropriate form to address them without destroying other values and goals, such as privacy, trust, freedom to disagree.

There are important structural problems - most citizen science initiatives and places don't have an advisory board, where similar disputes should be addressed and dealt with, before they become such public issues - and we need to remind every group to have such board... 

Copenahgen is after all one of the most active and interesting scene in the world and I hope soon they will have the peace to work on their projects.

On Monday, June 16, 2014 6:16:38 PM UTC+3, Emil CytoP Polny wrote:

Dear All

As you can read in this thread, Jen Kotila has attacked and accused us and several others publicly for alleged bullying and/or sexual harassment. So far we have tried to keep a low profile, because we wanted to avoid contributing to an aggravation of the conflict, and because we were trying to establish a mediation process.

However, since Jen Kotila has repeatedly trumpeted her story on international mailing lists and is continuing to contact a large number of our collaborators and friends, we wish to tell everybody the background and facts, as we see them.

You can find the document here:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5in7g08ewq4rg7n/AABamCKMD14I1Rcwb3K7vwvca/JenKotilasAllegations.pdf

Kind regards,

Emil, Malthe, Søren

On Jun 3, 2014, at 22:39 , Jen Kotila <jen.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:

I just got off the phone with the neutral party from Labitat who is coordinating the meditation process. Apparently the mediators he's spoken to want me to desist from posting here as a condition for mediation to take place. Since I DO want to give that a shot (and the suggestion was originally mine, and the mediator I had ready to go on Apr. 28th was declined), I agreed pause this discussion from my end as long as mediation takes place in a reasonable time frame. He was joking about not getting mad at him for silencing me and I am not mad at him. I am not quite sure if I am entirely comfortable with ceasing public discourse here. In fact, I am definitely uncomfortable with it. But I have agreed to do so for now in the interest of trying to reach a solution ASAP as I really just want this to be over and it is possible that the mediator can help them see that they really are not in the right and really do need to step down and away from power. I have been asking for constructive dialog since January and have not been able to get it. It's way overdue and maybe this will actually work. 

Achieving resolution IS why I came here-- to try to see if this could speed up the conclusion. Hopefully it has helped. 

Well, I am grateful for the pause for the more personal reasons I cited earlier anyway. I think that's part of why I assented. So I'm making a concession to that request and pausing discussing this in this public forum for now. 

On 3 June 2014 20:02, David Murphy <murphy...@gmail.com> wrote:

funny you should say that. For reference he also goes by the name Yvain and is known for logical and well reasoned articles in a community dedicated to avoiding falling victim to or using cognitive biases and fallacies. He genuinely takes more issue with the use of  bad arguments than with a movement itself. 

http://lesswrong.com/lw/6ga/index_of_yvains_excellent_articles/

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Jen Kotila <jen.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:

Well, I don't see how it would be possible to produce good logic out of that mess. That was one of the craziest things I have ever glanced at. Whoa. 

On 3 June 2014 19:40, David Murphy <murphy...@gmail.com> wrote:

no, it's simply written by someone who takes more issue with tricks of human nature, psychological tricks, fallacies and other "dark side" tactics used by movements which he likes (such as atheists) than in movements he dislikes. 

As he says, lots of other movements use the same tactics.

Why do you think he also points to the pro-israel movement and the athiests? note that he's jewish and he also doesn't believe in god. What do you think that say about his choice of movements who's methods he critiques?

When you watch people who's goals you oppose use fallacies or mind tricks it's a chance for a cheap shot back at them.

When you watch people on your own side do the same it can just make you want to shout "For gods sake! argue honestly!"

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Jen Kotila <jen.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:

Wow, that article is a trip. It's a joke, right? 

When I Googled for good examples of those bingo games to post above, it was pretty hard to find the Zionism ones and so on. Almost every ideological bingo game out there was feminist. This is not a coincidence.

For those who have absorbed the associated memes, feminism is a fully general conceptual superweapon. It has attempted and probably completed the task of making every possible counterargument so unthinkable that any feminist can refute it just by reciting the appropriate bingo square, then pointing and laughing.

...Right?

On 3 June 2014 18:24, David Murphy <murphy...@gmail.com> wrote:

>where anyone not instantly agreeing with
>a viewpoint can be assigned to a classification of enemy (in this case,
>"concern troll") and discredited, discarded, or attacked for nonconformance.

I've heard such things refereed to as a "conceptual superweapon" 

http://squid314.livejournal.com/329561.html

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Josiah Zayner <josiah...@gmail.com> wrote:

I agree will Cathal.

I have read many of the documents and things you posted and though it seems you were marginalized I am having a hard time finding sexual harassment.

At most it seems like jilted would be lover than sexual harassment. In fact you even mentioned in one of the original documents on google drive that you had a romantic interest in one of them!

I highly believe in innocent until proven guilty. 

A good example of why is the Duke University Lacrosse Case, were players were accused of rape with no evidence just the word of someone and they were kicked out of the university and names tarnished. They were later found to be innocent and the person was fabricating.

There is a fine line is situations like these. I am not saying you are fabricating this but I believe that people should not be defamed as you are doing to these people.

You keep saying people were around and in the minutes there were people around but no one has come on here saying that they think you were harassed. Why not? Why are you fighting this alone if there were witnesses? That would be the only burden that you need.

As for the files:

In the Soren file you are very aggressive in some of your emails. Even in one saying that they better be prepared for a fight. 

You also claim you don't speak Danish well or at all? English is not their first language. How much does the language that they use create a perceived threat rather than a real threat?

As Cathal said, people telling you to shut-up sucks but appeared a little warranted in the situation however you say it is harassment but it doesn't appear so. 

Again, take it to the proper authorities the more stuff you post here the more it seems like a vendetta and not that you were harassed. 

You are also constantly contradicting yourself in these "statements"

One example is:

"Critically, everyone in the opposition tried to shut down the discussion of safe space and defining harassment and tried force me into talking about harassment when I didn't want to because I felt mobbed and was saying I felt unsafe."

Everyone shut out the discussion of harassment but tried to _make_ you talk about it? In the notes you were skirting the issue. Even after you defined a safe space you seemed like you wanted an argument not a discussion about harassment. No one was trying to shut you down when you brought up harassment you were trying to shut them down. They asked to talk about it and you kept going on about a safe space and were avoiding bringing up any allegations. You seem to make the discussions all about what you feel and not about what should be done.

You say you were "mobbed" but in all the minutes you appear dismissive and aggressive towards others. Rarely, do other seem this way to you and usually only in response to you.

"Passive aggressively" pushing people off topics is not sexual harassment. I am sorry.

You want a festival shut-down and people expelled. That is not a solution. That is a hatchet job. It will not fix any problems. These requests are very vindictive. 

Why don't you leave the space?

I think if there are moderator on this forum that his thread needs to be closed. I feel you are harassing these people. And your "evidence" is not that at all. It is evidence of a lack of sexual harassment. It is evidence of you threatening others. Instigating fights with others. Nothing you present is sexual in nature or gender biased in any way.

Please stop this Jen. Find help in a proper way if you truly feel threatened but harassing others is not the answer.

Having a calm open discussion about sexual harassment on this, what seems like male dominated forum would be good. But this is not the way to do it!

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Cathal Garvey <cathal...@cathalgarvey.me> wrote:

Hi Jen,
Actually, I have been reading all of the documents you've posted
(although I'm afraid I have to speed read some), and I'm keeping on top
of the discussion as best I can.

As I've previously stated, I have worked with Malthe in the past, and
I'm wary of my own bias. Given that, however, I don't even accept the
existance of concern-trolling, and I'm highly sceptical of much of the
content of that tenor on the geekfeminism wikia. Much of the content
there (which I have encountered before) is designed to foster a
black-and-white war mentality, where anyone not instantly agreeing with
a viewpoint can be assigned to a classification of enemy (in this case,
"concern troll") and discredited, discarded, or attacked for nonconformance.

The DIYbio community means a lot to me, as it clearly does to you. And,
like most here, I'm sorry to see that your work in Denmark (regardless
of whether I or others would feel similarly about the events) have left
you feeling this way. Whether or not what you say about your experiences
actually reflects sexism, it does seem that the culture in
Biologigaragen is suffering from a structural problem. The minutes
mention another issue of aggression and a difficulty in dealing with it,
for example.

While I don't think the others in the minutes were wrong to avoid
imposing written strictures in that case or others, if an informal
resolution process is what the membership overall prefer, it does seem
that the discussion/resolution process isn't up to task in cases like
that, and cases like yours.

However, having read the documents you posted, and many of your
annotations of said documents, I can't say that I understand your
position, either. You posted a document where Malthe asked you to bring
a neutral third party of your choosing, and you presented this as an
attack or an undermining position.. I genuinely don't understand that
argument at all. To me, perhaps as an outsider, Malthe's proposition
seemed entirely reasonable.

Reading over the minutes, I can see the event you describe, with others
saying "shut up", and I would condemn that on its hostility. It's an
emotionally charged event, but civility is critical, and (assuming the
minutes are not your own version) there is no record of you showing that
form of hostility to others. However, I don't think it's appropriate to
blame the moderator for asking you to keep your silence while others
speak (as I hope he did to others if they interrupted you), nor for
asking you to keep things brief, because that's what a moderator is
supposed to do. A good moderator annoys everyone in equal measure.

I have no role in this except that I am vocal about DIYbio, and because
this arrives in my inbox and includes entreaties to my opinion. But if
you want my opinion, and if it means it'll be discarded as "concern
trolling" or some other frame/construct, then so be it. I think that
there is a serious personality conflict in BG, and I think that
mediation with a neutral third party is the proper avenue to approach. I
don't think, based only on what you have presented, that what you are
describing is anything near the Scientific American blogging case, nor
the Github fiasco, and I think those comparisons are overly colourful.
Boraz was constantly asking coworkers about their sex lives (not just
teasing them on new relationships, which would be mildly inappropriate,
but actual bedroom activity), picking up physically and spinning a
coworker (after being asked not to) and inviting an affair repeatedly
with a coworker. The github story is murkier, but still pretty messed up
by all accounts, and the fact that they regarded a HR employee as a
suitable mediator in a case involving a company founder was just farcical.

When you elaborate on the "sexual" harassment you allege, it sounds like
you felt marginalised for being addressed differently because you are a
woman ("we should lock the doors", etc). You're entitled to be offended
at this behaviour if it bothers you, and it should cease if you ask for
it to. I would object if a fellow hacker behaved in this way, because
being made to feel different at all is somewhat exclusionary, even if in
jest. But this isn't earth-shaking misogyny, either. You are offended
that a coworker teased you about a relationship with another coworker,
but while that's inappropriate I don't think it even fits the
categorical description of "sexism", because your gender didn't have
anything to do with it, and it was applied equally to your then-partner.

Your description of Malthe's behaviour towards you is hard to understand
from the outside; humans are complex. But you object that, after a
failed start, he became "cold". From without, it's hard to know how much
of this assessment is down to the subjective; clearly he was "warm"
before, because you and he were mutually interested. Malthe's baseline
can appear pretty reserved to begin with (sorry Malthe!), and that's
before factoring in the awkwardness of a failed start and a growing dispute.

I'm not going to go on. My aim is not to make you feel marginalised, not
to tell you what to feel or believe. I think that your position is
complex, and that a great deal of the story is lost in interpersonal
relationships that are impossible to translate to email. I do think that
the severity of the things you allege are amplified by these
interpersonal conflicts, and that perhaps is why it is hard for me to
relate.

So, in closing; I hope that the arrangement to undergo external
mediation is still on the table, and that you all take it seriously. A
neutral third party is not a judge to mete punishment, and I think if
you are seeking punishment then nobody's going to find closure or
resolution.

yours in concern,
Cathal

On 03/06/14 15:45, Jen Kotila wrote:

> On 3 June 2014 15:45, Cathal Garvey <cathal...@cathalgarvey.me> wrote:
>
>> I can't commit to a response to everything being discussed, because the
>> volume is waay too large for me to digest and properly consider
>
>
> Fair enough, it is massive. The amount of documentation is overwhelming, as
> is the amount of information regarding context and background that needs to
> be assimilated to render first hand judgement from some
> positions/frameworks of which yours is certainly one.
>
>> but
>> this jumps out at me:
>>
>> On 03/06/14 14:27, Jen Kotila wrote:
>>> By doing what the Danes do and putting the burden
>>> of proof more heavily on the accused than the accuser.
>>
>> ..this is the sort of idea that crops up all the time as a seemingly
>> common-sense approach, but usually ends up being absolutely poisonous to
>> a free society. It's always been popular to accuse ones' neighbour of
>> the crime-de-jour, hence inquisitions, witchhunts, wars on terrorism.
>> For a time in my own country, it was sufficient to accuse a person of
>> IRA membership to have them locked up.
>>
>> A person must be considered innocent in the absence of evidence, so the
>> burden of proof must remain upon the person accusing, not the accused.
>> There are ways to help encourage those who feel abused to come forward,
>> but assuming the guilt of the accused is not one of them; it will cause
>> too much collateral damage, and create more victims.
>>
>> They have made an exception for sexual harassment here because it is so
> poorly handled so often. I quote myself:
>

> *so, keep in mind that if this does go to court here in Denmark, they have

> recently rewritten their laws so that in cases of sexual harassment the
> onus of proof is partially on the accused, which is different from almost
> all other crimes because the reaction in these cases is so terribly often

> to blame and mistrust the victim.  *

>
> They have the highest rate of this kind of stuff in the EU for a reason
> and, good on them, and I think with this law they are trying to figure out
> how to shed that dubious distinction.

> <http://www.b.dk/nationalt/vold-chikane-og-stalking-mod-kvinder-i-danmark-overstiger-eu-gennemsnit>

> While
> I agree with you in large part, I do think that often exceptions need to be
> made to almost every set of rules, laws, ideas. When I first came forward,
> I did so internally to the Kopenlab group over email on April 25. You can
> see that thread here

> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/19J-RtJDDtHegcIYNYDWlCKy-_3TPP5kCMgwP9a5Isiw/edit>.

>
>
> (Note: this case is incredibly complex. I was also seeing misconduct in
> terms of them 1. not taking minutes and then saying that taking minutes
> would be "overly bureaucratic" 2. not being transparent about the proposed
> new space to Labitat and 3. trying to block Labitat members from attending
> the Kopenlab steering group meetings. )
>
> Instead of meeting any of my concerns with compassion and a genuine intent

> to solve the problems, they fought against discussing *all* of them until

> their backs were to the wall, but they eventually fixed the minutes and the
> day after the Apr. 28th meeting, my Dropbox was pining incessantly with
> documents being uploaded that should have been there all along.
>
> They blamed me and accused me of being destructive and completely refused
> to see the wrong they had done, acknowledging the behavior but not the
> harm. Emil Polny keeps saying that it was "just his humor" and I keep
> saying "I have friends who have the crasses, least PC humor you can imagine
> but they do not use it to attack me as you do and I asked you to stop many,
> many times" They never owned anything beyond "I am sorry you are feeling
> that way". They said that my tone made it impossible to listen to me, which

> is classic silencing <http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument>.They

> were SUPER careful to not put too much if anything in writing.
>
> They keep silencing me about the harassment and they only want it to be
> discussed in forums favorable to them if at all, such as that May 22
> meeting where I had a very serious breakdown

> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UBXIbR9BY9BTmaSe7dDenBkKCIyAuHySsgtwKFMVQck/edit?usp=sharing>

> or
> quietly in mediation that will take weeks to resolve. They want to do this,
> I think, as it allows them to get away with it and be paid for and get the
> credit for hosing an open knowledge festival that is not open knowledge!
> This is not ok and I 1. wanted to test how this nascent community would
> react and police itself. Would it do a better or worse job than science
> blogging

> <http://www.indyweek.com/triangulator/archives/2013/10/18/the-fall-of-triangle-scientist-and-scientific-american-blog-editor-bora-zivkovic>?

> 2. It also just kinda sucks that in biohacking we have no HR or union rep
> to go to with this stuff. Thankfully, Labitat and Biologigaragen have
>

> *This is why I am here on DIYbio trying to get help. *
>
> *This also is why my beloved Denmark (and I still love it despite all of

> this crap) has taken it upon itself to make it easier for victims of

> harassment to speak out in court.*
>
> *This is why many countries have whistleblower laws. *

>
> It is SO common for a victim of harassment to be doubted, silenced, treated
> with hostility and blame, doubted and mobbed it might as well just be
> assumed  that that is what will happen when one steps forward and in fact
> it IS assumed, as I linked to above in a response to David. People are
> scared to come forward and rightly so. Which is why most women just keep
> quiet and don't rock the boat. But are people scared to come forward if
> someone punches them in the face? No! Are they scared to come forward if
> they have been raped? Sometimes still, yes. But that is better than it used
> to be because of a change in consciousness. We no longer blame rape victims
> or say they were asking for it and yet Søren Borch did precisely that to me
> when I told him about the harassment. I had to write him to correct him
> after a phone call in which he accused me of inciting men to do this to me
> via my looks and dress.

> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_8eMJXPG5y7D-2ffqSn5xqgWIfbZa-zU9oZEzpvJu9A/edit?usp=sharing>

>
> This whole thing, up to and including me speaking out, happened because I
> am damned naive and trusting and think that people will just do the right
> thing mostly. I think that because I want to live in that world, where is
> it? I want to make it happen. I want this world to be a place where things
> like this do not happen.
>
> I really, honestly thought that when I took the matter to Labitat, I would
> get help. I thought that I would be listened to. Haha. AHAHAHA.  Instead I
> was victim blamed and mobbed.
>

> *THIS is why the Danes have that law putting the onus of proof on the

> accused in these kinds of cases (and I think only in these kinds of cases

> (as far as I am aware))*. It is a taboo subject and the accuser almost

> always gets reabused in coming forward. My character has been called into
> so much question over this. My motives questioned. I have been interrogated
> time and time again. One of my friends who was supporting me in this is now
> averse to my tactic of taking this big and he said to me the other day "if

> you keep talking about this, no one will want to work with you" *even

> though he 100% thinks that what has happened to me is harassment and fully

> acknowledges that it has messed up my life in an incredibly severe manner*.

> Yet he still warns me this and the horrifying thing is that he is possibly
> right. I hope DIYbio is better than that, though. The movement, I mean. I

> hope that we are. I have faith in it as so many *have* taken the time and

> energy to hear me out and are incredibly supportive.
>
> That said, it is usually the case that harassment truly is a winning
> strategy as the victim is so often damned if they do and damned if they
> don't.
>
> This needs to end. In hacking and in the broader world.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jen
>
> P.S. Wait! Cathal! So you are saying you don't want to talk? ;) It's fine,
> but if not  please try to restrain yourself from getting in the middle and
> casting doubt on me and not on them as that is what I feel you are
> currently doing. I fel the need to be open and honest and state that this
> interaction is reminding me a BIT of a Labitat guy who in the end was a

> textbook concern troll. <http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Concern_troll> I

> am not saying you are that, per se with so little information to go on and
> all-- it's just an intuition of mine and maybe it is just my bullying

> induced hypervigelence <http://www.bullyonline.org/stress/ptsd.htm>getting

> the better of me, but yeah... There was at least one Labitat guy who
> refused to engage constructively overall, especially not to good points I
> raised, but still felt like slipping in little contrary things to derail
> debate who was definitely a concern troll.
>
> Do you see yourself at all here? I kinda have to say I do (again it might
> be hypervigelence):
>

> *A concern troll is a person who participates in a debate posing as an

> actual or potential ally who simply has some concerns they need answered

> before they will ally themselves with a cause.* In reality they are a

> critic. Concern trolling in geek feminism communities can result in
> continual reversion to Feminism 101 discussions in attempts to appease the
> troll's concerns, frustrating attempts at more serious discussion. Concern
> trolls are not always self-aware, they may also view themselves as
> potential allies who have just, oddly, never met a feminist opinion they
> liked.
>

> *Concern trolls can be identified primarily because they will retreat from,

> rather than engage with or be convinced by, answers to the questions they

> pose.* They may repeatedly ask a certain question in feminist discussions

> without ever absorbing or replying to answers from previous discussions.
> They will often back into typical anti-feminist arguments, such as
> expressing concern that an argument is too "extreme" or a feminist too
> "strident" or even "hysterical". Another common tactic is insisting that
> some subjects are more important than others, for example, that media
> depictions of women shouldn't be criticised while violence against women
> continues.
>
> Concern trolling is frequently banned in feminist communities.
>
> -
> -
> -
>
> I think it is very true that often this type of person is not self aware of
> their actions. I am sure the guy in Labitat isn't and that he doesn't mean
> harm, but that he has a hard time processing and accepting that his friend
> would do this kind of thing. That is what I think is happening there. I'm
> not sure what's going on here. :)
>
> --
>> T: @onetruecathal, @IndieBBDNA
>> P: +353876363185
>> W: http://indiebiotech.com
>>
>

--
T: @onetruecathal, @IndieBBDNA
P: +353876363185
W: http://indiebiotech.com

--

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en

Learn more at www.diybio.org
---

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/diybio/oLgYmZ26Wco/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diybio/538DE987.60003%40cathalgarvey.me.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

...

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en
Learn more at www.diybio.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diybio/45e733e0-e161-450f-bfe2-60c449ed172a%40googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.