Austin Hurst

> Could we not just return a dict in both cases, with the keys `pre_interpolation` and `post_interpolation` ... and the values for these keys being `None` or empty dicts if...

> yes! That sounds good to me, I like the new `get_raw` 👍 But I think the default should be `"current"`, not `"None"`, to be more explicit. Great! I'll get...

> I understood that @a-hurst meant without the "final" interpolation. Yep, that's what I was referring to! As you said, during referencing NoisyChannels only ever does interpolation to make predictions...

@sappelhoff @yjmantilla So I started taking a crack at this thinking it might simplify #95 a bit, but I've run into a couple snags I'd like to get your thoughts...

@sappelhoff @yjmantilla Okay, I've got a rough draft for reorganized/renamed attributes for the `PrepPipeline` object, am hoping to get your thoughts before I go and write docstrings or anything: ```python...

> Regarding the proposed getter methods: I think as a user I'd like to have access to all data, and not "being served a part of the data based on...

Okay, submitted an issue in the original repository. Will let you know when (if) they respond! EDIT: Just out of curiosity, I went and looked at the git blame around...

@sappelhoff With @yjmantilla's functional RANSAC and the NoisyChannels tests being broken into simpler chunks in #84, what do you think is left for this issue? Factoring out adaptive line noise...

They'd only be flagged as bad-by-flat if their standard deviations were *extremely* low (i.e., practically no signal). This check seems to be for channels where they still have a signal,...

> I think the PREP devs didn't think of what they did as a statistical test that matches certain assumptions Probably, but I think it still makes sense to treat...