chosen
stringlengths 46
41.2k
| rejected
stringlengths 36
39.3k
|
|---|---|
user: if any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. it is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. it is nonsense. please. if you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. this has happened to me second time now. my professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. if there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. nor is it fair. bot: i did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. i presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. the « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. it sucked because i could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too... | user: if any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. it is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. it is nonsense. please. if you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. this has happened to me second time now. my professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. if there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. nor is it fair. bot: i feel really lucky that i didn't experience this in my program. it was geared towards practitioners so the time limit on presentations was a hard limit. if a policy maker wouldn't sit through it because it was too long the faculty member would cut it off. |
user: if any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. it is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. it is nonsense. please. if you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. this has happened to me second time now. my professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. if there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. nor is it fair. bot: i did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. i presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. the « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. it sucked because i could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too... | user: if any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. it is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. it is nonsense. please. if you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. this has happened to me second time now. my professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. if there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. nor is it fair. bot: absolutely, meeting a time limit is a skill that need to be practiced. i am in math and my supervisor is fond of quoting (well, paraphrasing) pascal saying "i have made this letter longer than usual because i have not had time to make it shorter". |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: using wtf as a keyword surelly sets an impact factor over 9000 | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: those acknowledgements though😂😂😂 |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: using wtf as a keyword surelly sets an impact factor over 9000 | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: lmao i am dead |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: “more research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out. | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: don’t these journals ask for a hefty fee? did the professor actually pay money to get this published? |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: “more research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out. | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: lmao i am dead |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: “more research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out. | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: this is great, love it! thank you for sharing. |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: those acknowledgements though😂😂😂 | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: lmao i am dead |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "get me off your fucking mailing list." | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: lmao i am dead |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "get me off your fucking mailing list." | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: at my university (edit: i do not live in the us), if you publish even in lower tier legitimate journals, that counts against you. so this guy's resume must be bulletproof for him to take a hit like that |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "get me off your fucking mailing list." | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: this is great, love it! thank you for sharing. |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: that fucking graph/figure. hahahaha | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: at my university (edit: i do not live in the us), if you publish even in lower tier legitimate journals, that counts against you. so this guy's resume must be bulletproof for him to take a hit like that |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: that fucking graph/figure. hahahaha | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: this is great, love it! thank you for sharing. |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: probably more views than the typical publication | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: at my university (edit: i do not live in the us), if you publish even in lower tier legitimate journals, that counts against you. so this guy's resume must be bulletproof for him to take a hit like that |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: probably more views than the typical publication | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: this is great, love it! thank you for sharing. |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: added this to my mendeley | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: at my university (edit: i do not live in the us), if you publish even in lower tier legitimate journals, that counts against you. so this guy's resume must be bulletproof for him to take a hit like that |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: added this to my mendeley | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: this is great, love it! thank you for sharing. |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: my new goal is to find a way to reference this paper somehow in one of my own. | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: at my university (edit: i do not live in the us), if you publish even in lower tier legitimate journals, that counts against you. so this guy's resume must be bulletproof for him to take a hit like that |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: my new goal is to find a way to reference this paper somehow in one of my own. | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: this is great, love it! thank you for sharing. |
user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: don’t these journals ask for a hefty fee? did the professor actually pay money to get this published? | user: after receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "what's the deal with birds?", which got published. here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *abstract:* many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? this is a common query. birds are pretty weird. i mean, they have feathers. wtf? most other animals don’t have feathers. to investigate this issue, i looked at some birds. i looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. they were all pretty weird! in conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, wtf, genomics, climate change you can read the pdf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/sjrr.ms.id.000540.pdf alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 bot: this is great, love it! thank you for sharing. |
user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: i'm getting pretty sick of writing papers for free. for my phd and postdoc i've worked on other people's big projects. every time they strategically keep me in the lab for the entire duration of the fellowship with no time to write, knowing full well that i have to write papers to get a job, and that i'll do it for free when the fellowship is over just to try to keep up. | user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: i could probably write more if not reviewing 3+ papers per each published. i had no idea it was that many until i looked up my reviewer stats. |
user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: i'm getting pretty sick of writing papers for free. for my phd and postdoc i've worked on other people's big projects. every time they strategically keep me in the lab for the entire duration of the fellowship with no time to write, knowing full well that i have to write papers to get a job, and that i'll do it for free when the fellowship is over just to try to keep up. | user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: one way i'd think about it is if you're not planning to submit your own papers to journals in the future, then you don't need to review for them. if you do, and aren't expecting to pay others to review your paper for you, then you're kind of being a hypocrite. |
user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: this “publication-review-journals” is one of the most fucked up systems there is. we work like crazy to have publications ready (lab/field/writting) for zero money, plus many times we loose even our rights to our own papers. it is absolutely insane and abusive. people assuming op is being malicious for pointing that out is insane. this kind of thinking will keep feeding this machine. us pals should be more united and have each others backs like in other fields. on top of that, salaries received for universities/industry employment should not be factored in. you are producing new information and using that for handing out tenures and such is borderline blackmail, seeing that not everyone will be able to pay fees for publishing in high-impact journals, have time to review and still pay the bills. we should be paid for our services, especially if it’s in this weird cycle. sadly, it does not look like we will find a solution soon enough. we are kind of trapped in this toxic situation having to overwork for free and having to do it with a smile on our faces. edit: i do not mean to point fingers, just trying to speak my mind. this topic is such a huge cancer in academia it makes me mad. | user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: aren’t you already paid for ‘service’ - employment contracts might mention say 10% of your time to be dedicated to service. you don’t owe more than that. just make a weekly time budget, and anything that requires more than that is a red line. |
user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: this “publication-review-journals” is one of the most fucked up systems there is. we work like crazy to have publications ready (lab/field/writting) for zero money, plus many times we loose even our rights to our own papers. it is absolutely insane and abusive. people assuming op is being malicious for pointing that out is insane. this kind of thinking will keep feeding this machine. us pals should be more united and have each others backs like in other fields. on top of that, salaries received for universities/industry employment should not be factored in. you are producing new information and using that for handing out tenures and such is borderline blackmail, seeing that not everyone will be able to pay fees for publishing in high-impact journals, have time to review and still pay the bills. we should be paid for our services, especially if it’s in this weird cycle. sadly, it does not look like we will find a solution soon enough. we are kind of trapped in this toxic situation having to overwork for free and having to do it with a smile on our faces. edit: i do not mean to point fingers, just trying to speak my mind. this topic is such a huge cancer in academia it makes me mad. | user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: i'm with you op. i'm particularly annoyed at one journal that asked me to review about a week before the pandemic 'hit' and then sent annoying e-mail reminders every 2 weeks until i sent the review (despite me e-mailing them back the first time saying i couldn't review while providing full time childcare and inviting them to find an alternative reviewer if they couldn't wait). i think i'm at the point where i'm going to do my own boycott of journal reviewing. (up to now i've reviewed around 3 times as many papers as i've published and the majority of journals in my subject have 1, or 2, reviewers so i'm "up".) i'll make exceptions for massive breakthroughs or work of students/postdocs who really need it. |
user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: this “publication-review-journals” is one of the most fucked up systems there is. we work like crazy to have publications ready (lab/field/writting) for zero money, plus many times we loose even our rights to our own papers. it is absolutely insane and abusive. people assuming op is being malicious for pointing that out is insane. this kind of thinking will keep feeding this machine. us pals should be more united and have each others backs like in other fields. on top of that, salaries received for universities/industry employment should not be factored in. you are producing new information and using that for handing out tenures and such is borderline blackmail, seeing that not everyone will be able to pay fees for publishing in high-impact journals, have time to review and still pay the bills. we should be paid for our services, especially if it’s in this weird cycle. sadly, it does not look like we will find a solution soon enough. we are kind of trapped in this toxic situation having to overwork for free and having to do it with a smile on our faces. edit: i do not mean to point fingers, just trying to speak my mind. this topic is such a huge cancer in academia it makes me mad. | user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: you should feel free to turn down a request to review if you aren’t interested in the topic. that’s how i decide what to review - whether or not i actually want to read the paper. it won’t hurt your tenure case if you occasionally say no. |
user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: this “publication-review-journals” is one of the most fucked up systems there is. we work like crazy to have publications ready (lab/field/writting) for zero money, plus many times we loose even our rights to our own papers. it is absolutely insane and abusive. people assuming op is being malicious for pointing that out is insane. this kind of thinking will keep feeding this machine. us pals should be more united and have each others backs like in other fields. on top of that, salaries received for universities/industry employment should not be factored in. you are producing new information and using that for handing out tenures and such is borderline blackmail, seeing that not everyone will be able to pay fees for publishing in high-impact journals, have time to review and still pay the bills. we should be paid for our services, especially if it’s in this weird cycle. sadly, it does not look like we will find a solution soon enough. we are kind of trapped in this toxic situation having to overwork for free and having to do it with a smile on our faces. edit: i do not mean to point fingers, just trying to speak my mind. this topic is such a huge cancer in academia it makes me mad. | user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: exactly, i stopped helping those greedy publishers review papers for a while. unless the paper title and abstract really interests me, i don't review. |
user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: tbh, i wish for profit publishing houses would get lost. nature's making a move to own academic publishing at all levels of journal quality and it's just not cool. you get better service from most societies too. now i just need to convince myself not to send the good work to the nature empire, and convince the funders that society journals should be perceived as prestigious as nature's topical collection. | user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: you should feel free to turn down a request to review if you aren’t interested in the topic. that’s how i decide what to review - whether or not i actually want to read the paper. it won’t hurt your tenure case if you occasionally say no. |
user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: tbh, i wish for profit publishing houses would get lost. nature's making a move to own academic publishing at all levels of journal quality and it's just not cool. you get better service from most societies too. now i just need to convince myself not to send the good work to the nature empire, and convince the funders that society journals should be perceived as prestigious as nature's topical collection. | user: how about we stop working for free? just this month i was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. i understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during covid times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? honestly, i feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ field of research: neuroscience/biophysics title: ph.d. country: usa bot: exactly, i stopped helping those greedy publishers review papers for a while. unless the paper title and abstract really interests me, i don't review. |
user: i flunked someone for plagiarism. i just discovered they hired a pi to investigate me. does anyone have experience with this? i’m in a tenure track position in the social sciences at a school in the midwest. last semester, i flunked a student for plagiarizing part of a paper (it was a clear case of copy and paste from an obscure source). the student did not take it well. things are winding their way through the administrative process. it has come to my attention that this disgruntled student has apparently hired a private investigator to follow me and look into my life. i feel extremely violated. however, it has unfortunately also come to my attention that this pi has learned that i am in an open relationship. i suspect this would not be well received by my department and would likely jeopardize my ability to get tenure. it has been strongly implied that details of my personal relationship will be leaked to the department unless i stop pursuing internal discipline against the student. however, it’s not clear to me that i could stop the proceedings even if i wanted to. what exactly am i supposed to do in this situation? bot: this will sound harsh and unpopular, but grow some backbone and stand for your way of life. if this is frowned upon by a place you spend over 8 hours each weekday, you're in the wrong spot and you're supporting a system that undermines something you value a lot. it's difficult to do this, given you might have to provide for a family and run the risk of losing job security, but if the alternative is to live a lie for a third of your life, the choice seems easy to me. | user: i flunked someone for plagiarism. i just discovered they hired a pi to investigate me. does anyone have experience with this? i’m in a tenure track position in the social sciences at a school in the midwest. last semester, i flunked a student for plagiarizing part of a paper (it was a clear case of copy and paste from an obscure source). the student did not take it well. things are winding their way through the administrative process. it has come to my attention that this disgruntled student has apparently hired a private investigator to follow me and look into my life. i feel extremely violated. however, it has unfortunately also come to my attention that this pi has learned that i am in an open relationship. i suspect this would not be well received by my department and would likely jeopardize my ability to get tenure. it has been strongly implied that details of my personal relationship will be leaked to the department unless i stop pursuing internal discipline against the student. however, it’s not clear to me that i could stop the proceedings even if i wanted to. what exactly am i supposed to do in this situation? bot: is being in an open relationship against the terms of your contract? regardless of whether it's right or wrong...if it's in your contract, it's in your contract. all-else considered, the school should protect you from this. you were literally doing your job. however, it sounds like this student comes from a fairly wealthy family...and money talks to universities as we've seen in the media recently. just in case the school does not take your side...i'd lawyer-up immediately. also might be time to throw your resume around to some colleagues at other institutions. |
user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i never thought about it but now that you mentioned it... yess!!! its kind of like when you read a review paper and they cite many other original research papers, and you wanna get through all of them but you dont have the time to do so. when you do attempt to get through them, you find yourself going down a rabbit hole. one paper leads to 10 other papers and each of the 10 papers lead you to another 10 papers... it never ends!! then the timer goes off, you gotta run back to the lab to change whatever solution you've got your tissue incubating in. and those papers that you've found will be left as tabs on your browser, never looked at again (but never closed too). until one day, your computer freezes up and you gotta force shutdown your computer. | user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i have nothing other to say than: yes, i know that feeling. |
user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i had this feeling when i was in grad school. now, it's more that i'll never have time in this life to create all the things i want to: books, games, etc., that will never see the light of day. otoh, that means i'll never be bored. i'll never run out of things to learn, do, and try. i try to keep my focus on that side. | user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i'm more sad that i can't have chips every day without getting spherical. |
user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i had this feeling when i was in grad school. now, it's more that i'll never have time in this life to create all the things i want to: books, games, etc., that will never see the light of day. otoh, that means i'll never be bored. i'll never run out of things to learn, do, and try. i try to keep my focus on that side. | user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i used to feel that way until corona hit and i had to scrub my research project. three months into quarantine and i’m still sitting here trying to work up the will power to get better at coding. |
user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: chaucer had the same feeling: “the lyf so short the craft so longe to lerne.“ one of the quotes i most strongly identify with | user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i'm more sad that i can't have chips every day without getting spherical. |
user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: chaucer had the same feeling: “the lyf so short the craft so longe to lerne.“ one of the quotes i most strongly identify with | user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i used to feel that way until corona hit and i had to scrub my research project. three months into quarantine and i’m still sitting here trying to work up the will power to get better at coding. |
user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: yes, but add on top of that being an artist, writer, and pianist. i feel like i'll just die a mediocre jack of all trades... i'm envious of people dedicated to being amazing with one thing, whether an artisan or just the most knowledgeable in one area. | user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i do! |
user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: no. as soon as you realise the depth of our lack of understanding of the details of everything, it is immediately apparent you will never be an expert in everything. there are people who spend life times mastering individual skills and areas of study. the days of being able to know everything about everything that was known died out - literally - thousands of years ago. so, you can sit and feel sad about it, or you can accept it and get on with doing what you can do. and - if you want a productive career in academia - that means you also need to give yourself peace and time to develop new knowledge and learn. there are tens of thousands of scientists working in related fields to all of us. either we can spend our lives reading every minuscule byte of related information, or we can get ourselves to a working knowledge of a niche and try and contribute. i'm totally accepting and content with the idea that i will never be able to read lots of interesting things. because the trade off is that i get to do lots of interesting and new things. the idea that you might get sad at not being able to read all the things feels a bit too close to the mentality of wanting to passively learn rather than actively do research (i.e. the step change between undergrad and grad education). because you could always be reading someone else's work rather than doing your own. | user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: i do! |
user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: no. as soon as you realise the depth of our lack of understanding of the details of everything, it is immediately apparent you will never be an expert in everything. there are people who spend life times mastering individual skills and areas of study. the days of being able to know everything about everything that was known died out - literally - thousands of years ago. so, you can sit and feel sad about it, or you can accept it and get on with doing what you can do. and - if you want a productive career in academia - that means you also need to give yourself peace and time to develop new knowledge and learn. there are tens of thousands of scientists working in related fields to all of us. either we can spend our lives reading every minuscule byte of related information, or we can get ourselves to a working knowledge of a niche and try and contribute. i'm totally accepting and content with the idea that i will never be able to read lots of interesting things. because the trade off is that i get to do lots of interesting and new things. the idea that you might get sad at not being able to read all the things feels a bit too close to the mentality of wanting to passively learn rather than actively do research (i.e. the step change between undergrad and grad education). because you could always be reading someone else's work rather than doing your own. | user: do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? i was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. or learning one more additional language. and all of that on top of the workload you already have. sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things i am interested in and curious about but the more i study the things the longer the list of things i want to learn more about gets. idk if you can relate but i just wanted to share this and i would be really interested to see what you think about this! bot: yes. i think about this a lot. i just try my best to learn as much as i can in the moment. |
user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: sorry to hear this. as someone who nope-d out of academia pretty much after defending, i have mixed feelings about this, but they're mostly positive. there's a part of me that wishes that academia was what i dreamt it was, and a part of me that wishes i had succeeded, despite it being not what i had hoped. but i don't regret anything. i went to grad school because i loved science - not for the money (lol), or the prestige, but because i loved it as a way of acquiring knowledge and learning about the world. that's still true today, and it will probably be true my whole life. for me, that realization helped me overcome what i think a lot of people fear when they think about leaving academia: "will i ever be able to love something as much as this?" and just like the ending of a bad relationship, despite my feelings to the contrary at the time, the answer is yes. but more importantly, it doesn't matter even if the answer is "no", because from what you describe, it doesn't matter how much you love academia, academia does not love you back. | user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: what is it in? can you go into industry? |
user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: sorry to hear this. as someone who nope-d out of academia pretty much after defending, i have mixed feelings about this, but they're mostly positive. there's a part of me that wishes that academia was what i dreamt it was, and a part of me that wishes i had succeeded, despite it being not what i had hoped. but i don't regret anything. i went to grad school because i loved science - not for the money (lol), or the prestige, but because i loved it as a way of acquiring knowledge and learning about the world. that's still true today, and it will probably be true my whole life. for me, that realization helped me overcome what i think a lot of people fear when they think about leaving academia: "will i ever be able to love something as much as this?" and just like the ending of a bad relationship, despite my feelings to the contrary at the time, the answer is yes. but more importantly, it doesn't matter even if the answer is "no", because from what you describe, it doesn't matter how much you love academia, academia does not love you back. | user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: i do. i did have some good things happen but i am quite disappointed. it's not you, it's the system. you have to be at the right place on the right time. if you feel like staying in academia, take the admin route. working in admin is more secure, gets you on track and later on you can move to the research side. thee is no point in trying to get a goodjob in academia, the generations before us have occupied those positions and won't let go their good salary and pension. |
user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: i can relate. i found a decent position, but i've always kept my eye an the market and applied to the more "dream" schools since i've graduated. i only had one finalist interview at a "fancy" school. as usual, someone better connected than me with more pubs got the position. it's really rough out there. i can really relate to what your saying. my phd experience was traumatic, and my advisor committed suicide when i was writing. i was almost booted from my program because the other major professor didn't like my topic. i was able to graduate super fast, but i think maybe only recently can i honestly say that it was worth getting the degree. once of the things that i've had to do is branch out a bit into other areas of interest, and be flexible with the work that i do. don't box yourself in to the tenure track only dream that gets sold to us. it's just not possible for most of us. focus instead on what you can do creatively, and how you can make a living at the same time. | user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: what is it in? can you go into industry? |
user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: 1. go apply for industry jobs 2. get an entry level job 3. be happy when you see your first pay check that's double the money for less work | user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: what is it in? can you go into industry? |
user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: 1. go apply for industry jobs 2. get an entry level job 3. be happy when you see your first pay check that's double the money for less work | user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: i do. i did have some good things happen but i am quite disappointed. it's not you, it's the system. you have to be at the right place on the right time. if you feel like staying in academia, take the admin route. working in admin is more secure, gets you on track and later on you can move to the research side. thee is no point in trying to get a goodjob in academia, the generations before us have occupied those positions and won't let go their good salary and pension. |
user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: 1. go apply for industry jobs 2. get an entry level job 3. be happy when you see your first pay check that's double the money for less work | user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: surely you must have some teaching or research skills of some sort? or did you go down the path in such a way as to avoid teaching at all costs? i know some who did this - one coworker in particular treated his ta work like a joke and his students rated him with 1's and 2's on ratemyprofessor. regardless, setting aside community college, there's also high school. i know that many people sneer at it, but personally i hate the attitude that "those who can, do. those who can't, teach." we've all had good teachers and terrible ones. being one is the good ones is an accomplishment, whatever the level. but of course, a degree isn't just about teaching, and usually trains many skills. perhaps you learned some coding or technical writing? it may just be that you're looking at the wrong jobs, or that your expectations are too high. technical writing ability is valued in research and business alike. coding and numerical skills, whether in python or excel or something else, can also be valuable. i'm sure you have some skills you can market. you may just have to go about it in a different way. finally, it's also tough out there right now. the economy is sagging, partly due to covid. people are struggling. don't go to hard on yourself. |
user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: op, please in no way take this as me being condescending in anyway. i just want to pass on what i have learned by *just* squeeking by into a tt position. 10 papers (unless they are all first author papers) is not enough to get into a tt position these days. i want to be clear that i think that paper count is an absolutely stupid metric to put the majority of a hiring decision on. if we're all being honest, number of papers is almost entirely correlated with how well funded and connected your group is, which of course you as an individual have very little control over. i fully acknowledge that i was extremely fortunate to be in a high output group and i know this is primarily the reason i have gotten this position. i just feel it's better to shoot you straight now and get an honest take. with all this said, i still fantasize about industry positions with their higher salary and normal work hours, so the grass is always greener. edit: my context is through chemistry. so apply the appropriate amount of salt | user: why did i pursue a phd if it has not led to any opportunities? i’m feeling pretty down at the moment. i’ve been applying to tt jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. i received my phd from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. i’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. yet it’s all been for nothing. i can’t get a job for the life of me. i’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year r1 schools, slacs, and community colleges all have rejected me. i’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. there’s too few jobs and i just don’t cut. i’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. and i’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. no upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. it sucks. i would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. i’ve learned the hard way that the phd pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. why did i do this to myself? any one else feel this way? bot: surely you must have some teaching or research skills of some sort? or did you go down the path in such a way as to avoid teaching at all costs? i know some who did this - one coworker in particular treated his ta work like a joke and his students rated him with 1's and 2's on ratemyprofessor. regardless, setting aside community college, there's also high school. i know that many people sneer at it, but personally i hate the attitude that "those who can, do. those who can't, teach." we've all had good teachers and terrible ones. being one is the good ones is an accomplishment, whatever the level. but of course, a degree isn't just about teaching, and usually trains many skills. perhaps you learned some coding or technical writing? it may just be that you're looking at the wrong jobs, or that your expectations are too high. technical writing ability is valued in research and business alike. coding and numerical skills, whether in python or excel or something else, can also be valuable. i'm sure you have some skills you can market. you may just have to go about it in a different way. finally, it's also tough out there right now. the economy is sagging, partly due to covid. people are struggling. don't go to hard on yourself. |
user: my prediction for the fall semester 2020. might play out like this: https://imgur.com/ivt9eij bot: i currently teach high school... we plan to be open face to face, once a kid gets covid we're out for a week and anyone who was in class with that kid is out an additional week for quarantine... in a school with almost 2k students. yeah, ok... | user: my prediction for the fall semester 2020. might play out like this: https://imgur.com/ivt9eij bot: my uni is gonna be all remote at least |
user: my prediction for the fall semester 2020. might play out like this: https://imgur.com/ivt9eij bot: i currently teach high school... we plan to be open face to face, once a kid gets covid we're out for a week and anyone who was in class with that kid is out an additional week for quarantine... in a school with almost 2k students. yeah, ok... | user: my prediction for the fall semester 2020. might play out like this: https://imgur.com/ivt9eij bot: this is the correct take. |
user: my prediction for the fall semester 2020. might play out like this: https://imgur.com/ivt9eij bot: in all honesty; it's not going to happen. they *intend* to open, and they'd vastly prefer to open from a revenue perspective, but at the same time they're all quietly planning for the possibility (or, rather, probability) of online-only instruction. eventually, they'll start acknowledging it. | user: my prediction for the fall semester 2020. might play out like this: https://imgur.com/ivt9eij bot: my uni is gonna be all remote at least |
user: my prediction for the fall semester 2020. might play out like this: https://imgur.com/ivt9eij bot: in all honesty; it's not going to happen. they *intend* to open, and they'd vastly prefer to open from a revenue perspective, but at the same time they're all quietly planning for the possibility (or, rather, probability) of online-only instruction. eventually, they'll start acknowledging it. | user: my prediction for the fall semester 2020. might play out like this: https://imgur.com/ivt9eij bot: this is the correct take. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: i serve on an admissions committee. i can tell you that whenever we see a negative letter in an application, the first judgement is on the advisor. as others have said, any competent letter writer in the us academic system understands that a letter should be positive, or not written at all. that's why it's called a letter of recommendation. do not use this person as a reference in the future. do let other people know that this person wrote you a bad letter rather than declining. this likely will not harm your application as much as you think. if anything, it will hurt the writer's career when their peers see the kind of letter they write for people they should be supporting. it's of course a shitty thing to happen, and i'm sorry you're dealing with this, but it's not as serious as it probably feels right now. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: you can try to talk to her to see what the problem was. and stop putting her name for recommendations. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: i serve on an admissions committee. i can tell you that whenever we see a negative letter in an application, the first judgement is on the advisor. as others have said, any competent letter writer in the us academic system understands that a letter should be positive, or not written at all. that's why it's called a letter of recommendation. do not use this person as a reference in the future. do let other people know that this person wrote you a bad letter rather than declining. this likely will not harm your application as much as you think. if anything, it will hurt the writer's career when their peers see the kind of letter they write for people they should be supporting. it's of course a shitty thing to happen, and i'm sorry you're dealing with this, but it's not as serious as it probably feels right now. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: what others say and warn future students about her. also, i don't know if it was a "send directly from the advisor" thing, but i always make sure to check their rec letters before submission. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: i expect a lot of people to disagree with this but: really give her a piece of your mind. that is an unbelievably shitty thing to do to someone, and especially lie through your teeth about it. if she thought those things, she should have told you to your face or at the very least declined to write the letter. what she has done here is wildly disrespectful and vindictive. beyond unprofessional, its downright mean. at this point, status aside, you are two adults with no bridges really left to burn. so if you feel like it, you might as well make sure this person knows well how unreasonably shitty this was to do. its not about getting revenge, its making sure other humans understand the consequences of their actions and what it means to be a pos. good luck op, sorry to hear about this. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: you can try to talk to her to see what the problem was. and stop putting her name for recommendations. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: i expect a lot of people to disagree with this but: really give her a piece of your mind. that is an unbelievably shitty thing to do to someone, and especially lie through your teeth about it. if she thought those things, she should have told you to your face or at the very least declined to write the letter. what she has done here is wildly disrespectful and vindictive. beyond unprofessional, its downright mean. at this point, status aside, you are two adults with no bridges really left to burn. so if you feel like it, you might as well make sure this person knows well how unreasonably shitty this was to do. its not about getting revenge, its making sure other humans understand the consequences of their actions and what it means to be a pos. good luck op, sorry to hear about this. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: what others say and warn future students about her. also, i don't know if it was a "send directly from the advisor" thing, but i always make sure to check their rec letters before submission. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: don't use that letter. but honestly i'd burn all sorts of bridges out of spite over something like that. i'd go to her school and tell them this, ideally with a copy of the letter, and ask them why their professor is doing this to students who ask her for recommendations in good faith. it's universally accepted that if you can't give a good reference, you don't. and if you're in a position where it's expected to recommend someone, you at _least_ hit a neutral to positive note. actively attacking you in the letter without warning you that she didn't feel she could write you a good letter is unforgivable. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: you can try to talk to her to see what the problem was. and stop putting her name for recommendations. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: don't use that letter. but honestly i'd burn all sorts of bridges out of spite over something like that. i'd go to her school and tell them this, ideally with a copy of the letter, and ask them why their professor is doing this to students who ask her for recommendations in good faith. it's universally accepted that if you can't give a good reference, you don't. and if you're in a position where it's expected to recommend someone, you at _least_ hit a neutral to positive note. actively attacking you in the letter without warning you that she didn't feel she could write you a good letter is unforgivable. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: what others say and warn future students about her. also, i don't know if it was a "send directly from the advisor" thing, but i always make sure to check their rec letters before submission. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: that is all sorts of craps. it’s not the way the system works. if i am put into a position where i have to write a letter for a poor student, i tell the student that all i will write is factual experiences the student had (i.e., took x class, completed x practicum, etc.) it’s not negative, but it clearly indicates to the committee that i don’t have positive things to say. you can either ignore (and not use her as a reference ever again) or address it with her. i would probably go the route of sending a baffled email—“dear dr. negative, as you know, i am in the process of applying to grad schools. because of my positive experience with you, i asked you to write a letter of recommendation. during one of my interviews, a member of the admissions committee indicated that you had not recommended me for the program because (list reasons here). i’m confused (or other emotion) as these were never conveyed to me during classes/projects or when i asked for a letter. i’m trying to better understand what happened as this negatively impacts my admission to a grad program.” | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: what others say and warn future students about her. also, i don't know if it was a "send directly from the advisor" thing, but i always make sure to check their rec letters before submission. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: this is extremely unfortunate and uncommon. for the most part professors will decline to write a letter if they can’t write a positive one. it’s a “letter of recommendation”, not “letter of review”. this person is out to get you and i would avoid interacting with them further. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: considering that professors (in the us) are specifically told to decline to write a letter if you don’t think the student is deserving due to slander lawsuits shows that this professor is an idiot |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: this is extremely unfortunate and uncommon. for the most part professors will decline to write a letter if they can’t write a positive one. it’s a “letter of recommendation”, not “letter of review”. this person is out to get you and i would avoid interacting with them further. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: faculty shouldn't agree to write letters unless it's going to support the student. i'm a professor. i actually just posted a video on yt about requesting a letter from a prof. (link here, in case it'll help anyone). with regards to this specific case, i'd immediately find a new source for letters of recommendation. if you have any other applications that are out there, you might be able to remove the offending letter writer in question and then setup another person (after asking another person, all that jazz). i'm so sorry that this happened. it's extremely unprofessional and cruel. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: this is extremely unfortunate and uncommon. for the most part professors will decline to write a letter if they can’t write a positive one. it’s a “letter of recommendation”, not “letter of review”. this person is out to get you and i would avoid interacting with them further. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: that’s really quite terrible. sorry you are in that kind of position. the worst letter i wrote never said anything negative about a candidate. the worst letter just didn’t say anything super positive. basically a neutral letter is as bad as it ever gets. |
user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: sounds like a case of sour grapes. either because she didn’t want to lose you as a research assistant or because you weren’t planning to do your grad program with her. it’s not the first time i’ve heard of an academic being spiteful af. | user: what to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? i am in the us, and applying to graduate school. i was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. i did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program i am going into. i asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". she submitted it, i had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that i would not be a suitable candidate for the program. her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". she never gave any inclination that this was the case, so i am stunned that she is saying these things. what can i do about this? she lied to me, and could impact my future. what course of action do i take? i'm at a loss of words here. bot: you can “exclude” a lor in most application systems these days. do that. asap |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? that's pretty nuts congrats! | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: congratulations! that's wonderful! |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? that's pretty nuts congrats! | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: gratz!!! |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? that's pretty nuts congrats! | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: congratulations! |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? that's pretty nuts congrats! | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: that's huge! especially as an undergrad! gg, my friend |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? that's pretty nuts congrats! | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: this is such a great feeling! congratulations to you. |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: congratulations! this will be a huge help for you moving forward in your life no matter what path you choose to take. | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: gratz!!! |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: congratulations! this will be a huge help for you moving forward in your life no matter what path you choose to take. | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: congratulations! |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: now everyone cite it! | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: congrats! |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: now everyone cite it! | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: congratulations |
user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: now everyone cite it! | user: my first paper was accepted!! the good news keep on coming! my sole-author paper was accepted. i will be published as an undergrad! bot: congrats!! |
user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: my spouse and i are both academics teaching fully online. what does "come home" even mean? | user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: the struggle is real. |
user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: ewwwww you kiss your spouse? | user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: the struggle is real. |
user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: i do not understand how the hell i put up with it. you wanna hire a hard working nanotechnologist? i would like to see my family a little, and afford a better house than this tiny apartment... \*sigh\* | user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: architecture school too! once the architecture school term starts, i’m like a widow :/ |
user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: i do not understand how the hell i put up with it. you wanna hire a hard working nanotechnologist? i would like to see my family a little, and afford a better house than this tiny apartment... \*sigh\* | user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: when i *get* home? |
user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: kissing your so is always a good thing. also, the lifestyle that you are implying is not universal and it doesn't have to be like that. maybe some fields, maybe usa, maybe some pis. but there are plenty of places where academia is associated with good pay and work-life balance. | user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: architecture school too! once the architecture school term starts, i’m like a widow :/ |
user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: instructions unclear, do i kiss myself? i come home to myself (or never leave home nowadays), and cook, clean and pay the rent on my own. i know i should be dating but covid killed that option for now🙃 | user: when you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. i see this particularly in stem researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. i'm a spouse working in the private sector. we, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. and i cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call pis, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. so, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! cheers. bot: architecture school too! once the architecture school term starts, i’m like a widow :/ |
user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: yes!! it’s now at the point in my field that if you don’t have a science or nature paper and a prestigious post doc, you’re basically sol for any faculty positions. i have worked on meta analyses and publication bias favouring positive outcomes is completely skewing our ability to synthesis and understand actual patterns in ecological data. which in turn is limiting our ability to apply this information accurately to evidence based policy. the business side of academia is ruining the actual utility of science. | user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: agree 100% on publishing failed experiments! |
user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: it’s one of the things ruining academia. it stems from administrators wanting a way to quantify and rank researchers’ productivity. this may not even be possible, but assuming it is “number of papers” is a terrible metric. it doesn’t measure what administrators think it does and it creates perverse incentives that actually harm research output. citations per paper is a metric i pulled out of my butt just now but it’s still a much better metric than paper count. what i don’t understand is why the publish-or-perish model still exists when everybody should know it’s not working. who’s keeping it going? why? is big paper behind it? is there some law? | user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: agree 100% on publishing failed experiments! |
user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: i've added failed experiments/negative data into papers. you unfortunately generally need some positive/interesting result as the basis for the paper, but if things failed along the way and are relevant to the main topic of the paper, you can briefly mention the negative results and add it as a supplemental figure. i believe there are journals exclusively for negative results now, too, but i'm not sure how widely indexed they are. | user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: agree 100% on publishing failed experiments! |
user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: there's this guy in my field who published like 8 papers based on his phd project alone by slicing and dicing the project into small portions then blowing each of them up into full papers. the intros of some of these papers read almost the same with some modifications to make them just different enough. till this day i wonder how they got published. but he's now a professor at a top university so i guess it worked out well for him. | user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: agree 100% on publishing failed experiments! |
user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: there's this guy in my field who published like 8 papers based on his phd project alone by slicing and dicing the project into small portions then blowing each of them up into full papers. the intros of some of these papers read almost the same with some modifications to make them just different enough. till this day i wonder how they got published. but he's now a professor at a top university so i guess it worked out well for him. | user: does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? i am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. however, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. i think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. i feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. does anybody have thoughts on this? bot: there are very few tt positions, and many of these have research as a moderate to major component of their appointment. why *wouldn’t* you expect those pressures to drive up output? what would selection for a tt job look like research productivity was removed? impact? novelty of research program? that is very much like what midcareer and senior searches look like. how would you do that at the junior stage, without just simply replicating prestige networks? |
user: have you been getting these emails from your ever-supportive senior administrators? dear loyal workers of flailing university, first off, let me start by making a distracting comment about how odd the situation feels and sharing what i think are some uncanny observations about “these times.” next, i want to write something that sounds very empathic here. i want to put a lot of emphasis on saying how much i understand all your stresses now, all of them, every single one. i understand. of course, i need to place some blanket praise here about how much we appreciate all that hard work and perseverance everyone has shown. because this email is going to every single person employed at the school, these statements will feel as personal and uplifting as a sign stating: "thank you for not smoking." now, i will start to discuss the *hard truths*. i will discuss how enormous our budget shortfall is and how all the previous efforts, which i enumerate in detail, have not been enough to come even close to closing the gap. as a result, surely now you will see that we have no other option than to do the following: (1) terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. you can thank us later. (2) as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. however, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the flailing university family. that’s why i know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. a 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. we all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) all senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. i want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. we have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. you see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for fu. i wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! we are all in this together! sincerely, senior administrator bot: >as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their \[paid\] hours will be reduced to a minimum. lol. sincerely, a staff member whose mandatory \[unpaid\] furlough days will result in $3,000 less this year | user: have you been getting these emails from your ever-supportive senior administrators? dear loyal workers of flailing university, first off, let me start by making a distracting comment about how odd the situation feels and sharing what i think are some uncanny observations about “these times.” next, i want to write something that sounds very empathic here. i want to put a lot of emphasis on saying how much i understand all your stresses now, all of them, every single one. i understand. of course, i need to place some blanket praise here about how much we appreciate all that hard work and perseverance everyone has shown. because this email is going to every single person employed at the school, these statements will feel as personal and uplifting as a sign stating: "thank you for not smoking." now, i will start to discuss the *hard truths*. i will discuss how enormous our budget shortfall is and how all the previous efforts, which i enumerate in detail, have not been enough to come even close to closing the gap. as a result, surely now you will see that we have no other option than to do the following: (1) terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. you can thank us later. (2) as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. however, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the flailing university family. that’s why i know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. a 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. we all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) all senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. i want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. we have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. you see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for fu. i wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! we are all in this together! sincerely, senior administrator bot: thankfully we're only getting everything above hard truths at my institution. but we've formed committees to look at all the options |
user: have you been getting these emails from your ever-supportive senior administrators? dear loyal workers of flailing university, first off, let me start by making a distracting comment about how odd the situation feels and sharing what i think are some uncanny observations about “these times.” next, i want to write something that sounds very empathic here. i want to put a lot of emphasis on saying how much i understand all your stresses now, all of them, every single one. i understand. of course, i need to place some blanket praise here about how much we appreciate all that hard work and perseverance everyone has shown. because this email is going to every single person employed at the school, these statements will feel as personal and uplifting as a sign stating: "thank you for not smoking." now, i will start to discuss the *hard truths*. i will discuss how enormous our budget shortfall is and how all the previous efforts, which i enumerate in detail, have not been enough to come even close to closing the gap. as a result, surely now you will see that we have no other option than to do the following: (1) terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. you can thank us later. (2) as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. however, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the flailing university family. that’s why i know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. a 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. we all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) all senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. i want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. we have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. you see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for fu. i wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! we are all in this together! sincerely, senior administrator bot: don’t forget to forget mentioning athletics! no need to cut them! | user: have you been getting these emails from your ever-supportive senior administrators? dear loyal workers of flailing university, first off, let me start by making a distracting comment about how odd the situation feels and sharing what i think are some uncanny observations about “these times.” next, i want to write something that sounds very empathic here. i want to put a lot of emphasis on saying how much i understand all your stresses now, all of them, every single one. i understand. of course, i need to place some blanket praise here about how much we appreciate all that hard work and perseverance everyone has shown. because this email is going to every single person employed at the school, these statements will feel as personal and uplifting as a sign stating: "thank you for not smoking." now, i will start to discuss the *hard truths*. i will discuss how enormous our budget shortfall is and how all the previous efforts, which i enumerate in detail, have not been enough to come even close to closing the gap. as a result, surely now you will see that we have no other option than to do the following: (1) terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. you can thank us later. (2) as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. however, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the flailing university family. that’s why i know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. a 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. we all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) all senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. i want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. we have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. you see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for fu. i wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! we are all in this together! sincerely, senior administrator bot: uncanny |
user: have you been getting these emails from your ever-supportive senior administrators? dear loyal workers of flailing university, first off, let me start by making a distracting comment about how odd the situation feels and sharing what i think are some uncanny observations about “these times.” next, i want to write something that sounds very empathic here. i want to put a lot of emphasis on saying how much i understand all your stresses now, all of them, every single one. i understand. of course, i need to place some blanket praise here about how much we appreciate all that hard work and perseverance everyone has shown. because this email is going to every single person employed at the school, these statements will feel as personal and uplifting as a sign stating: "thank you for not smoking." now, i will start to discuss the *hard truths*. i will discuss how enormous our budget shortfall is and how all the previous efforts, which i enumerate in detail, have not been enough to come even close to closing the gap. as a result, surely now you will see that we have no other option than to do the following: (1) terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. you can thank us later. (2) as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. however, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the flailing university family. that’s why i know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. a 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. we all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) all senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. i want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. we have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. you see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for fu. i wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! we are all in this together! sincerely, senior administrator bot: ours are taking a 10% paycut and one extremely noble individual is going up to 20%. | user: have you been getting these emails from your ever-supportive senior administrators? dear loyal workers of flailing university, first off, let me start by making a distracting comment about how odd the situation feels and sharing what i think are some uncanny observations about “these times.” next, i want to write something that sounds very empathic here. i want to put a lot of emphasis on saying how much i understand all your stresses now, all of them, every single one. i understand. of course, i need to place some blanket praise here about how much we appreciate all that hard work and perseverance everyone has shown. because this email is going to every single person employed at the school, these statements will feel as personal and uplifting as a sign stating: "thank you for not smoking." now, i will start to discuss the *hard truths*. i will discuss how enormous our budget shortfall is and how all the previous efforts, which i enumerate in detail, have not been enough to come even close to closing the gap. as a result, surely now you will see that we have no other option than to do the following: (1) terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. you can thank us later. (2) as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. however, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the flailing university family. that’s why i know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. a 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. we all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) all senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. i want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. we have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. you see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for fu. i wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! we are all in this together! sincerely, senior administrator bot: uncanny |
user: have you been getting these emails from your ever-supportive senior administrators? dear loyal workers of flailing university, first off, let me start by making a distracting comment about how odd the situation feels and sharing what i think are some uncanny observations about “these times.” next, i want to write something that sounds very empathic here. i want to put a lot of emphasis on saying how much i understand all your stresses now, all of them, every single one. i understand. of course, i need to place some blanket praise here about how much we appreciate all that hard work and perseverance everyone has shown. because this email is going to every single person employed at the school, these statements will feel as personal and uplifting as a sign stating: "thank you for not smoking." now, i will start to discuss the *hard truths*. i will discuss how enormous our budget shortfall is and how all the previous efforts, which i enumerate in detail, have not been enough to come even close to closing the gap. as a result, surely now you will see that we have no other option than to do the following: (1) terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. you can thank us later. (2) as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. however, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the flailing university family. that’s why i know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. a 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. we all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) all senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. i want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. we have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. you see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for fu. i wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! we are all in this together! sincerely, senior administrator bot: my university gave a 10% paycut to staff/professors and then a "reduction in pay" (no specified amount) to senior administration. the lack of specificity was glaring to say the least. | user: have you been getting these emails from your ever-supportive senior administrators? dear loyal workers of flailing university, first off, let me start by making a distracting comment about how odd the situation feels and sharing what i think are some uncanny observations about “these times.” next, i want to write something that sounds very empathic here. i want to put a lot of emphasis on saying how much i understand all your stresses now, all of them, every single one. i understand. of course, i need to place some blanket praise here about how much we appreciate all that hard work and perseverance everyone has shown. because this email is going to every single person employed at the school, these statements will feel as personal and uplifting as a sign stating: "thank you for not smoking." now, i will start to discuss the *hard truths*. i will discuss how enormous our budget shortfall is and how all the previous efforts, which i enumerate in detail, have not been enough to come even close to closing the gap. as a result, surely now you will see that we have no other option than to do the following: (1) terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. you can thank us later. (2) as for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (i bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. however, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the flailing university family. that’s why i know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. a 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. we all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) all senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. i want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. we have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. you see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for fu. i wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! we are all in this together! sincerely, senior administrator bot: this was so spot on it was scary |
user: so much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? i am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. however, whenever i visit the r/askacademia subreddit, i find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? if yes, do you know about the details of this effort? if no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? bot: i think you will find that a lot of industry is really resting on a academic foundation. the erosion of that academic foundation is a huge problem. every paper and technique we used in the drug company and in many biotech companies were academic. maybe you took those 100 papers and that federally funded training and those first pilots and paper and ran with it and started your own company, but you weren’t going to get that in the company. all the drug companies, including the ones that made the vaccines , are relying on years of federally funded basic and clinical research. so as more people flee the system and funding to basic science is eroded you will lose that also. | user: so much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? i am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. however, whenever i visit the r/askacademia subreddit, i find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? if yes, do you know about the details of this effort? if no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? bot: >now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? if yes, do you know about the details of this effort? if no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? yeah we complain about this all the time. the funding agencies (primarily nsf, nih, but also doe, dod, etc) are basically the ones that determine it, and that's based on how much money they're given by the federal government... but the academic job market can't grow indefinitely and faculty turnover is greatly outpaced by the rate at which students graduate. if there is one graduate student per professor, they won't find jobs unless professors retire after six years. and they don't. but science wouldn't get done without graduate students, so we're stuck under the current model. thankfully there are plenty of non-academic science jobs as u/drsomewhatevil points out and that's the saving grace for the academic job market. |
user: so much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? i am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. however, whenever i visit the r/askacademia subreddit, i find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? if yes, do you know about the details of this effort? if no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? bot: i don't think that pushing people to become scientists is the same as pushing people to become professors. that said, i do think the way that we promote science to our society is problematic. from a careers perspective, there's this myth that getting a stem degree means that you're guaranteed a good job, when most s and m jobs are really competitive and actually don't pay very well, at least until you get a higher degree. this really fucks over, say, vanilla biology undergrads. | user: so much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? i am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. however, whenever i visit the r/askacademia subreddit, i find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? if yes, do you know about the details of this effort? if no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? bot: >now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? if yes, do you know about the details of this effort? if no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? yeah we complain about this all the time. the funding agencies (primarily nsf, nih, but also doe, dod, etc) are basically the ones that determine it, and that's based on how much money they're given by the federal government... but the academic job market can't grow indefinitely and faculty turnover is greatly outpaced by the rate at which students graduate. if there is one graduate student per professor, they won't find jobs unless professors retire after six years. and they don't. but science wouldn't get done without graduate students, so we're stuck under the current model. thankfully there are plenty of non-academic science jobs as u/drsomewhatevil points out and that's the saving grace for the academic job market. |
user: so much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? i am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. however, whenever i visit the r/askacademia subreddit, i find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? if yes, do you know about the details of this effort? if no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? bot: all i can say is that i studied biology instead of english in college because of the « study stem! you’ll have a job! » push, and when i graduated it was nearly impossible to get a job as a biologist. people that have a ba in stem and don’t want to be a computer scientist can get a job as a teacher pretty easily. but who wants to be a science teacher? in addition to trying to do all of the things most teachers have to do (that could easily be multiple people’s jobs), they have to set up labs, get materials, organize materials, clean up labs... all of this to say i wish i had studied english, so i had at least struggled to get a job in a field i loved most... | user: so much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? i am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. however, whenever i visit the r/askacademia subreddit, i find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? if yes, do you know about the details of this effort? if no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? bot: the us government notice a deficit in supply of stem graduates that will work in industry, not a deficit in supply of stem phds |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: beyond the misogyny and everything else commented here, the op-ed belittles her dissertation, "student retention at the community college level: meeting students' needs", calling it "unpromising" based on its title. (1) fuck you. community college is an incredibly important dimension of us higher education, serving over 40% of all college students, and studying retention at cc is very valuable. (2) being given a platform to judge a dissertation by its title, as opposed to its content, is the epitome of "sound\[ing\] and feel\[ing\] fraudulent, not to say a touch comic". | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: > i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. i mean, why not both? real people are complicated and this guy is a piece of work. the reason it is condemned for misogyny is because people only feel clever asking this kind of question when it's a woman who has the doctorate. that's the misogyny — along with the "kiddo" and other sorts of things that imply that he thinks he is superior to her despite his being a total piece of shit. the fact that it is also deeply ignorant and anti-intellectual is part of that, too. |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: beyond the misogyny and everything else commented here, the op-ed belittles her dissertation, "student retention at the community college level: meeting students' needs", calling it "unpromising" based on its title. (1) fuck you. community college is an incredibly important dimension of us higher education, serving over 40% of all college students, and studying retention at cc is very valuable. (2) being given a platform to judge a dissertation by its title, as opposed to its content, is the epitome of "sound\[ing\] and feel\[ing\] fraudulent, not to say a touch comic". | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: there are several issues and honestly the whole topic is a mess that can't possibly be unraveled in a reddit comment. first, the dr. she is using is valid and is in no way fraudulent. as you rightly point out, the article is a politically motivated and frankly quite vile piece of crap. so i don't think trying to approach this from his ramblings can lead to anything productive. i will say that she has an edd, which is not a phd. it is still a doctorate which confers the right to be called dr. but i believe it's not only misogyny, as if that would not be enough, but also a deep seated disrespect for non-stem or medicine-related fields. so yes the problems in that article are...well, it's a shitshow in many different ways. but maybe let's start over and ask ourselves about degrees, their meaning, their value and the use of 'doctor'. not only is there a complicated history of who is called 'doctor', there is furthermore a complicated history of class and degrees as a whole. first of all, doctor was originally used for learned academics - people who lecture at academies and universities. the use of doctor for medical doctors is significantly more recent, so historically speaking it is the medical doctors who began to use this nomenclature. but does this matter? language is flexible and as long as everybody understands what is being said in what context, ambiguity can be fine. it is not particularly common outside of jokes that medical doctors and doctors in the original sense of what is nowadays called phds are confused, so language wise it's mostly fine. in many western countries there has recently been a mostly men/male-driven push to not focusing on degrees so much. this is often because they feel uncomfortable with being treated differently simply because of their level of education or job, it can feel awkward to be called mr. for many people in their young adulthood, let alone dr. that along with their internalization of themselves as belonging to what is perceived as a privileged group with somewhat easier access or at least less pressures not to do so, makes them want to be chill about it, play it down, and in general you will find most young men in academia like first name basis, casual talk. this may on the surface seem like a good thing, and as a young adult man in mathematics i feel these sentiments too. however, this now puts the people who are first generation academics or people who have so far been minorities in academia into an awkward position: because a large majority of young men are attempting to play down their degrees and status after attaining their doctorate, now all of a sudden it makes people think of women or first gens or ethnical minorities who wish to carry their title as a sign of their achievement as arrogant or stuck up. you will find these sorts of things a lot on twitter. someone adds dr to their handle, then a bunch of people comment why they feel the need to point it out - usually in reference with a lot of their colleagues or acquaintances not doing that. but the circumstance is different for these people, they feel like they belong to a group which has historically been denied this privilege and now after finally also attaining it, they are once again being denied to carry it because most men are, for in my opinion good reasons and with good intention, trying to dismantle the whole degree structure. in a way, and in a vacuum, i think most people agree that we would be better off if degrees had no such role in our lives, if dr. did not modify the way you are generically addressed, just as i think we all agree that mrs. and miss in a historical vacuum is ludicrous. but we don't live in a historical vacuum. we have to deal with the past and the implications that have grown out of our use of language. so while i and many others in my position, based on modern values, feel a need to downplay our education and to remove this "dr." calling stuff, for many people this is a social status that they feel they've been denied despite, of course, rightfully now having earned it. so as i said, this is a complicated mess. it seems recently because of absolute jackasses like epstein who are literally trying to deny people their degrees, younger men have started to, somewhat reluctantly, also wear their doctorates again, e.g. on twitter and other social media, to make it clear that it is perfectly correct that someone who has earned that degree has indeed earned it. it's all a mess, you see. nobody in their right mind would invent such a system nowadays but we have to deal with what is not what we want. and what is, is that any woman, minority and of course every single person, who completes a doctorate at a well regarded university (by which i mean not a degree mill), deserves to be called by the degree which they signed up for and completed if they so desire. as a small side note, in some countries like germany and austria, the doctorate literally confers a name change of adding dr. to your name, and the masters degree until recently used to literally change your name to include mag. (magister, which means teacher). when the mag. title was removed and became the msc and ma during the bologna process in the eu, there were massive shitstorms about people being denied their right to be herr / frau mag. many people rushed their degrees so they could complete it with the old mag instead of the new post-name optional international masters degrees. so it is not impossible to get rid of such structure but it is difficult and people hate it. both for valid and for invalid reasons. we also can't generalize over all countries and cultures, it's unfortunately all a complicated mess. apologies for the long post, hope some of my pointers made sense and lead you down useful thoughts. |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: beyond the misogyny and everything else commented here, the op-ed belittles her dissertation, "student retention at the community college level: meeting students' needs", calling it "unpromising" based on its title. (1) fuck you. community college is an incredibly important dimension of us higher education, serving over 40% of all college students, and studying retention at cc is very valuable. (2) being given a platform to judge a dissertation by its title, as opposed to its content, is the epitome of "sound\[ing\] and feel\[ing\] fraudulent, not to say a touch comic". | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: i think the thesis here is that the wsj is a trash publication that exists for risky clicks. i don't get why it's "fraudulent" for a person who has a phd to call themselves dr, so i feel like his whole argument is moot. |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: beyond the misogyny and everything else commented here, the op-ed belittles her dissertation, "student retention at the community college level: meeting students' needs", calling it "unpromising" based on its title. (1) fuck you. community college is an incredibly important dimension of us higher education, serving over 40% of all college students, and studying retention at cc is very valuable. (2) being given a platform to judge a dissertation by its title, as opposed to its content, is the epitome of "sound\[ing\] and feel\[ing\] fraudulent, not to say a touch comic". | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: i am always hesitant and sometimes feel odd about using “dr” because of the confusion. i don’t work in academia ( but it is a setting with a good deal of md’s) and everyone uses first names except in the most formal of meetings with those outside our organization. |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: i stopped reading the article after “kiddo” | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: doctor meant teacher and well-educated a lot longer than it meant medical professional. you've earned the title, you use it when you want. |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: i stopped reading the article after “kiddo” | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: i am always hesitant and sometimes feel odd about using “dr” because of the confusion. i don’t work in academia ( but it is a setting with a good deal of md’s) and everyone uses first names except in the most formal of meetings with those outside our organization. |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: and where the hell did he hear the phrase about only being able to call yourself a doctor if you’ve delivered a baby? correct me if i’m wrong, but historically (globally) haven’t midwives traditionally delivered most babies while doctors were called in under special circumstances? (or have i watched too much “call the midwife?”) | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: doctor meant teacher and well-educated a lot longer than it meant medical professional. you've earned the title, you use it when you want. |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: and where the hell did he hear the phrase about only being able to call yourself a doctor if you’ve delivered a baby? correct me if i’m wrong, but historically (globally) haven’t midwives traditionally delivered most babies while doctors were called in under special circumstances? (or have i watched too much “call the midwife?”) | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: i am always hesitant and sometimes feel odd about using “dr” because of the confusion. i don’t work in academia ( but it is a setting with a good deal of md’s) and everyone uses first names except in the most formal of meetings with those outside our organization. |
user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: i would add there’s a third layer here that isn’t being addressed: the author’s clear mocking of community colleges and their role in higher education. he insults her dissertation, which focused on community college retention - a critical issue facing higher education. he overlooks her decades of teaching experience in community colleges - a vital part of the picture. and he broadly considers the analytical and service work of ed.d. holders to be meaningless enough to mock. what a prick. | user: is misogyny the only problem with the wsj op-ed on asking jill biden to not use 'dr.'? edit: i do not often post. and looking at the options for flairs, i have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. i apologize if that's the case. so recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by joseph epstein asking jill biden to not use the title of 'dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. the article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. however, i was also offended by the denigration of phds in general. i have listened to people talk about 'real doctors' and it gets annoying. as a phd in computer science, i do not go about touting my title in a hospital. in fact, i rarely use my title, unless required on a form. however, i feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. if a phd goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. i do not know whether the author chose to disparage phds only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. however, i think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. the reason is that both wsj and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a phd should not call themselves a doctor. this is just the thought that occurred to me. i would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. thanks. bot: i am always hesitant and sometimes feel odd about using “dr” because of the confusion. i don’t work in academia ( but it is a setting with a good deal of md’s) and everyone uses first names except in the most formal of meetings with those outside our organization. |
user: my fiancée passed away on the 1st and she was going to come to my phd program with me. is deferment bad? i'm at a loss and i don't know what i should do anymore. i got into my dream phd program in january and my fiancée and i were making our plans to move there soon. however, my fiancée passed away unexpectedly on the 1st of this month and i've been a total wreck. i can't concentrate on my last semester of undergrad and a huge reason i chose this school was because she would love the area/things to do there. i want to still get my phd but now i'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. i contacted the school and they said i can defer up to a year and keep my ra-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but i don't know what i should do. my parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. they want me to finish my undergrad on time (by may 1st) and start grad school on time (june 1st), but i'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. my end goal is to become a professor at a pui. would deferment be looked at negatively? does anyone know how i can transition back into my life/school? is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? i'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. does anyone have any advice? i'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. thank you for any advice. bot: take your time and grieve your loss. you've done the right thing and reached out to your undergrad and grad programs and gotten extensions and deferment. this is why these options are there, when the unexpected happens. don't listen to your parents and take your time to get to a point you are okay. mental health is already tough in grad school and going in when you are already vulnerable is not a wise decision. having a gap year shouldn't be a problem. plus, grant, fellowship and job applications all have a personal statement where you can explain gaps like this. and you have a very good reason if questioned. but also having a gap year at this stage isn't usually an issue. this won't ruin your chance to be a professor. focus on grieving and dealing with your loss. and think about would she want you to put your life on hold. taking the deferment to grieve is okay. but also moving on to grad school (be it this one or applying again this fall for another school) is okay as well. | user: my fiancée passed away on the 1st and she was going to come to my phd program with me. is deferment bad? i'm at a loss and i don't know what i should do anymore. i got into my dream phd program in january and my fiancée and i were making our plans to move there soon. however, my fiancée passed away unexpectedly on the 1st of this month and i've been a total wreck. i can't concentrate on my last semester of undergrad and a huge reason i chose this school was because she would love the area/things to do there. i want to still get my phd but now i'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. i contacted the school and they said i can defer up to a year and keep my ra-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but i don't know what i should do. my parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. they want me to finish my undergrad on time (by may 1st) and start grad school on time (june 1st), but i'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. my end goal is to become a professor at a pui. would deferment be looked at negatively? does anyone know how i can transition back into my life/school? is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? i'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. does anyone have any advice? i'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. thank you for any advice. bot: i'm so sorry to hear about your loss. there's no shame at all in taking time off to process your emotions. trying to push on may only hurt you in the end if you don't take the time to deal with this. |
user: my fiancée passed away on the 1st and she was going to come to my phd program with me. is deferment bad? i'm at a loss and i don't know what i should do anymore. i got into my dream phd program in january and my fiancée and i were making our plans to move there soon. however, my fiancée passed away unexpectedly on the 1st of this month and i've been a total wreck. i can't concentrate on my last semester of undergrad and a huge reason i chose this school was because she would love the area/things to do there. i want to still get my phd but now i'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. i contacted the school and they said i can defer up to a year and keep my ra-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but i don't know what i should do. my parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. they want me to finish my undergrad on time (by may 1st) and start grad school on time (june 1st), but i'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. my end goal is to become a professor at a pui. would deferment be looked at negatively? does anyone know how i can transition back into my life/school? is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? i'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. does anyone have any advice? i'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. thank you for any advice. bot: sorry for your loss op. this is unimaginable. i would absolutely defer if you have any means of supporting yourself over the next year. fall 2020 is going to be a real mess on campuses everywhere, and i can't imagine starting a ph.d. program in the midst of that. you'd be better off almost anywhere else imo, for both personal and professional reasons. give yourself a break and do what you need to in order to reset...grieving during a pandemic is hard as hell (as i and many others now know). being a grad student ain't no picnic either. if you can take some time to focus on yourself and to heal you'd probably be in a better place in fall 2021, and it's all but certain that's true for higher ed in general as well. | user: my fiancée passed away on the 1st and she was going to come to my phd program with me. is deferment bad? i'm at a loss and i don't know what i should do anymore. i got into my dream phd program in january and my fiancée and i were making our plans to move there soon. however, my fiancée passed away unexpectedly on the 1st of this month and i've been a total wreck. i can't concentrate on my last semester of undergrad and a huge reason i chose this school was because she would love the area/things to do there. i want to still get my phd but now i'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. i contacted the school and they said i can defer up to a year and keep my ra-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but i don't know what i should do. my parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. they want me to finish my undergrad on time (by may 1st) and start grad school on time (june 1st), but i'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. my end goal is to become a professor at a pui. would deferment be looked at negatively? does anyone know how i can transition back into my life/school? is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? i'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. does anyone have any advice? i'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. thank you for any advice. bot: i'm so sorry to hear about your loss. there's no shame at all in taking time off to process your emotions. trying to push on may only hurt you in the end if you don't take the time to deal with this. |
user: my fiancée passed away on the 1st and she was going to come to my phd program with me. is deferment bad? i'm at a loss and i don't know what i should do anymore. i got into my dream phd program in january and my fiancée and i were making our plans to move there soon. however, my fiancée passed away unexpectedly on the 1st of this month and i've been a total wreck. i can't concentrate on my last semester of undergrad and a huge reason i chose this school was because she would love the area/things to do there. i want to still get my phd but now i'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. i contacted the school and they said i can defer up to a year and keep my ra-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but i don't know what i should do. my parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. they want me to finish my undergrad on time (by may 1st) and start grad school on time (june 1st), but i'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. my end goal is to become a professor at a pui. would deferment be looked at negatively? does anyone know how i can transition back into my life/school? is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? i'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. does anyone have any advice? i'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. thank you for any advice. bot: sorry for your loss op. this is unimaginable. i would absolutely defer if you have any means of supporting yourself over the next year. fall 2020 is going to be a real mess on campuses everywhere, and i can't imagine starting a ph.d. program in the midst of that. you'd be better off almost anywhere else imo, for both personal and professional reasons. give yourself a break and do what you need to in order to reset...grieving during a pandemic is hard as hell (as i and many others now know). being a grad student ain't no picnic either. if you can take some time to focus on yourself and to heal you'd probably be in a better place in fall 2021, and it's all but certain that's true for higher ed in general as well. | user: my fiancée passed away on the 1st and she was going to come to my phd program with me. is deferment bad? i'm at a loss and i don't know what i should do anymore. i got into my dream phd program in january and my fiancée and i were making our plans to move there soon. however, my fiancée passed away unexpectedly on the 1st of this month and i've been a total wreck. i can't concentrate on my last semester of undergrad and a huge reason i chose this school was because she would love the area/things to do there. i want to still get my phd but now i'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. i contacted the school and they said i can defer up to a year and keep my ra-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but i don't know what i should do. my parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. they want me to finish my undergrad on time (by may 1st) and start grad school on time (june 1st), but i'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. my end goal is to become a professor at a pui. would deferment be looked at negatively? does anyone know how i can transition back into my life/school? is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? i'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. does anyone have any advice? i'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. thank you for any advice. bot: i am so, so sorry. grief is a heavy thing and it can’t be gotten over. you will learn to live with it, but you need support. i think you should defer, take some time, and care for your own health first. i am so, so sorry. i can’t even imagine. i do know that when you’re experiencing grief you should avoid making huge decisions for several months. if funding and admission is the same, don’t jump in just yet. you may feel like you’re in a fog during the first year of grieving, and i’m not sure doctoral work will help. also think about your studies as an investment in yourself. are you ready to invest all that’s required right now, or would you be better suited for the work after taking some time? |
user: my fiancée passed away on the 1st and she was going to come to my phd program with me. is deferment bad? i'm at a loss and i don't know what i should do anymore. i got into my dream phd program in january and my fiancée and i were making our plans to move there soon. however, my fiancée passed away unexpectedly on the 1st of this month and i've been a total wreck. i can't concentrate on my last semester of undergrad and a huge reason i chose this school was because she would love the area/things to do there. i want to still get my phd but now i'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. i contacted the school and they said i can defer up to a year and keep my ra-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but i don't know what i should do. my parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. they want me to finish my undergrad on time (by may 1st) and start grad school on time (june 1st), but i'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. my end goal is to become a professor at a pui. would deferment be looked at negatively? does anyone know how i can transition back into my life/school? is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? i'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. does anyone have any advice? i'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. thank you for any advice. bot: sorry for your loss op. this is unimaginable. i would absolutely defer if you have any means of supporting yourself over the next year. fall 2020 is going to be a real mess on campuses everywhere, and i can't imagine starting a ph.d. program in the midst of that. you'd be better off almost anywhere else imo, for both personal and professional reasons. give yourself a break and do what you need to in order to reset...grieving during a pandemic is hard as hell (as i and many others now know). being a grad student ain't no picnic either. if you can take some time to focus on yourself and to heal you'd probably be in a better place in fall 2021, and it's all but certain that's true for higher ed in general as well. | user: my fiancée passed away on the 1st and she was going to come to my phd program with me. is deferment bad? i'm at a loss and i don't know what i should do anymore. i got into my dream phd program in january and my fiancée and i were making our plans to move there soon. however, my fiancée passed away unexpectedly on the 1st of this month and i've been a total wreck. i can't concentrate on my last semester of undergrad and a huge reason i chose this school was because she would love the area/things to do there. i want to still get my phd but now i'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. i contacted the school and they said i can defer up to a year and keep my ra-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but i don't know what i should do. my parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. they want me to finish my undergrad on time (by may 1st) and start grad school on time (june 1st), but i'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. my end goal is to become a professor at a pui. would deferment be looked at negatively? does anyone know how i can transition back into my life/school? is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? i'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. does anyone have any advice? i'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. thank you for any advice. bot: i’m sorry for your loss. i know it’s not the same, but my roommate took his life while we were living together. my biggest regret wasn’t taking time away from to school to process the event. |