purplecthulhu

39,747 / 100,000 (39.7%)

I seem to be falling back from my goal of over a thousand words each day I write, but at the same time I think I've found a way to kick some of the plot action up a gear in what were turing out to be a more gentle chapter. There's also the possibility of using the current stopping point as an end of chapter cliff hanger, which has much to recommend it since it, though it might exacerbate some timeline problems I'm having in linking the two threads and sets of characters together, which will be needed in the next set of chapters. Hmm - time for some pondering perhaps.

39,747 / 100,000 (39.7%)

I seem to be falling back from my goal of over a thousand words each day I write, but at the same time I think I've found a way to kick some of the plot action up a gear in what were turing out to be a more gentle chapter. There's also the possibility of using the current stopping point as an end of chapter cliff hanger, which has much to recommend it since it, though it might exacerbate some timeline problems I'm having in linking the two threads and sets of characters together, which will be needed in the next set of chapters. Hmm - time for some pondering perhaps.

Word back from an open meeting today on this subject is that the reason for the cuts is primarily because nobody thought to budget any running costs for Diamond (and possibly some other ex-CCLRC facilities).

This would seem to suggest culpable incompetence at STFC. Quite how that will play out is unclear. The usual reward for civil servants screwing up in this way is promotion to a less damaging post. I suspect the physics community would rather promote the offenders to a permanent position in the CERN beam dump.

Of course they're trying to avoid blame and suggest that the astronomy cuts are due to increases in international subscriptions, but we were assured that we would be protected against such rises due to currency fluctuations, and other increases are linked to GDPn so ought to be reflected in increased science funding anyway.

Not happy.

Word back from an open meeting today on this subject is that the reason for the cuts is primarily because nobody thought to budget any running costs for Diamond (and possibly some other ex-CCLRC facilities).

This would seem to suggest culpable incompetence at STFC. Quite how that will play out is unclear. The usual reward for civil servants screwing up in this way is promotion to a less damaging post. I suspect the physics community would rather promote the offenders to a permanent position in the CERN beam dump.

Of course they're trying to avoid blame and suggest that the astronomy cuts are due to increases in international subscriptions, but we were assured that we would be protected against such rises due to currency fluctuations, and other increases are linked to GDPn so ought to be reflected in increased science funding anyway.

Not happy.