But in a first email, I also haven’t seen anything like what you got 😅

An applicant asked me a similar question in an interview yesterday, there it felt appropriate. I asked “what’s your goal with applying for this position?” Got a great answer, then “what would be your goal in hiring me? Why are you interested in my application?” I hope my answer was also good 😊

Is it primarily dry lab, and primarily focused on child health?

My condolences to all of Jochen’s family, students, and colleagues, indeed a great loss

This might explain a lot of emails I am getting. Using Mac Mail…

Thought the same recently, glad we have an open and international discussion platform again! Still, engagement seems lower than on Twitter during the good days, despite the higher follower count here

I was about to ask :-)

Thanks, no need to defend, your points are clear & justified! We have data where gene and enhancer don’t come closer than ~200-300 nm, but do come into that distance systematically. I’m trying to understand whether that distance is sufficient to mainly rule out it’s driven by your/a cohesion effect.

Right, that makes sense, also and especially considering the question of your study. I was wondering how close a gene would have to cone to an enhancer to be “caught” by a cohesion. It would help distinguish what type of event we see in our own data. Any idea?

One question, after reading your short overview:

How close, in terms of nm distance, would one locus have to come to a second locus for them to be caught into this type of cohesin-based long-lived engagement? Something below 100 nm? I hope my question makes sense…

Very much on the case, also motivated as the project came back today during the defense in Erlangen 👌

☺️

It’s moving for you! ☺️