One thing to consider is that not only is he considering whether to take you on as a student, but you are considering whether to have him as a supervisor. The relationship is reciprocal- yes, the student gets a great deal of support and knowledge from their supervisor, but the supervisor gets various things too - publications that you will do the majority of the work for, the ability to put your name on their CV as a successful PhD, a colleague that knows the field to bounce ideas off, occasional help with workloads. Unless he is already a professor, you are useful for his own career progression. And you bring money to the department, even if it is the departments own money!

I suppose my point is that you should not be completely deferential and begging him to supervise - it goes both ways!

So, consider whether or not this individual is the best person to help you in the long, arduous journey that is a PhD - are you the type to get worried/angry when you do not get an email reply, or can you adapt to phoning/knocking on the door if you know this is not one of their strong point.

My secondary supervisor is a colleague and friend. Personally, I have found that this has strained the supervisory relationship, and would have preferred to not have had that background relationship. But leaving that aside, in this situation, I agree with the above advice-knock on the door with a packet of biscuits and a smile, and ask if he can spare 10 minutes...

Thank you for the advice Smoobles!

A carefully crafted email later and all three (supervisory boards, never easy to manage!) seem fine with it - none have actually congratulated me, and one -justifiably- suggested that I always get a critical reviewer to read through something prior to submission, but I do not seem to be off the Christmas card list just yet!

Phew!

Hi all, a random message for my first post!

Yesterday I was reading a newly published article (an invited commentary) in one of the better journals in my field of research. I didn't like the tone of the article, which prescribed quite a paternalistic way of providing health care. I composed a 'letter to the editor' in reply, basically saying that our job is to provide evidence in an easily understood way, not prescribe certain behaviours, added a few references and sent it with me as the only author, feeling certain that I'd never hear again.
Well, they have only gone and accepted it! Which is great. However, I'm now freaking out that my supervisors are going to be upset that I did not put their names on it - should I have done? It is not related to my PhD work, or indeed any of the work that they do -do you think they are likely to be irritated, either that I did not discuss it with them, or add them as authors? Or pleased that it was published? Or not care either way?

Sorry to bend your ears, not sure whether I should celebrate or be worried! It was all a bit quick and rash on my part - very different from my usual agonising over each sentence!