HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: andersmh@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (ANDERSON  MIKE HOWARD)
Subject: Re: Bleak news from the academic job market
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:59:05 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.235356.462@cs.sfu.ca> mcdonald@cs.sfu.ca (Ken Mcdonald) writes:
[stuff deleted]

>To my mind, this situation is largely a result of faculty accountability
>and incentives, and in this, I disagree with a previous poster, who
>maintained that government was taking students on a ride, by getting
>them for cheap research for several years.  This might be true if
>the research had some net value to the government, but quite frankly,
>I think publish or perish has pushed research to a point where 90% of
>it is identifiable garbage.  Maybe things are better at the well-

This point is well taken.  But from the students perspective, it makes
little difference who is is doing the exploitation.

>
>So, to (attempt to) sum up my rambling contribution to this thread; there
>is nothing wrong with paying grad students student type wages, so long
>as the terms of the resulting contract, both written and unwritten,
>are clearly spelled out, and are as accurate as the participating parties
>can reasonably make them.  Part of these unwritten terms include the
>likely benefit of the degree to the student after completion, and
>if (as is the case in my field, at least in my department), the
>department provides false or misleading information which on topics
>which it can be reasonably expected to be aware of, the contract
>is morally abhorrent, and deserves all the anger the affected students
>will likely feel.
>
>'Nuff said.  (No kidding, eh!)
>
>Ken McDonald
>mcdonald@cs.sfu.ca

I agree with part of this.  What the prospective student is getting for
their sweat should certainly be spelled out clearly, and it isn't.  But,
my central point is that too much of our resources are going into the
hiring of graduate students and not permanent postions.  This leads to
an oversupply.  Just because you can get prospective students to agree
to it doesn't mean you should do it.  That's where the exploitation
comes in.  Shifting limited resources to the hireing of graduate students
is great for graduate students but screws them over when they graduate.
This doesn't mean that I don't think graduate students should be paid or
do any teaching.  It just means I don't think the universities/gov't should
produce more than can be absorbed.  But they have a self serving motivation
to do just that.

Mike
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: maniattb@cs.rpi.edu (Bill Maniatty)
Subject: Re: Bleak news from the academic job market
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 03:10:16 GMT

In article <1992Nov22.195007.791@athena.mit.edu>, solman@athena.mit.edu (Jason W Solinsky) writes:
|> In article <dn115al@rpi.edu>, maniattb@cs.rpi.edu (Bill Maniatty) writes:
|> |> In article <1992Nov21.044832.5114@tc.cornell.edu>, bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:
|> |> |> In article <1992Nov21.002534.5154@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> andersmh@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (ANDERSON  MIKE HOWARD) writes:
|> |> |> >In article <1992Nov20.222750.25504@tc.cornell.edu> bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:
	[Stuff Deleted]
|> A) 240 million people would be wasting money so that they Universities could
|> carry out these social engineering practices for the benefit of a hand ful of
|> people. Meanwhile the product of the quantity and quality of the research
|> would decrease significantly.

The University system has many duties, among them is research.  Teaching students
and grooming them for future research spots is important.

|> 
|> B) Lots of incomming graduate students who REALLY WANT to become graduate
|> students would be denied the opportunity and left out in the cold.

There are very few people that I know of who want to be graduate students,
rather most people have expectations about what they will do with their PhD.
Students should have full disclosure of placement information, so that they
can make an informed decision.

|> 
|> Jason W. Solinsky

Bill
-- 
|
|	maniattb@cs.rpi.edu - in real life Bill Maniatty
|
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: atems@igor.physics.wayne.edu (Dale Atems)
Subject: Re: wanting something TOO MUCH!
Organization: Wayne State University, Detroit, MI
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 21:48:47 GMT

In article <BxvG7J.KEC@cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies) writes:
>
>The courts have acquitted, in some instances, women who kill their
>abusive husbands.  For some people, academia / job is their strongest
>love in life, stronger than their love for their mate.  When you love
>something this strongly, you lay yourself open for abuse.  How do you
>reconcile the many jury acquittals of wives who kill their husbands,
>with the statement, posted here recently:
>
>	"Nobody is justified in doing harm to their colleagues in the
>	course of their professional careers, PERIOD!"
>

For one thing, women who kill abusive husbands and are acquitted
usually have good reason to believe they are in mortal danger. From
what I've read and heard, it's unusual to be acquitted unless the
danger is immediate, though I believe there have been exceptions.

I don't think homicide is ever *justified* on the grounds you give.
Just my $.02 worth, I'm not a lawyer.


------
Dale Atems
Wayne State University, Detroit, MI
Department of Physics and Astronomy
atems@igor.physics.wayne.edu
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
From: ray@philmtl.philips.ca (Ray Dunn)
Subject: Re: In your school?
Organization: Not Philips.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:50:35 GMT

In refd article, godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY) writes:
>I said simply that I SUGGEST that they deserved it.  Dunn is just angry
> - I guess - because his attempt to have me thrown off the network has
>failed.

On the contrary, my attempts so far have been to dissuade a correspondant
from taking that action.

>I would prefer it if my opinions were publicised by me, not interpreted
>by the likes of Dunn and communicated for "public attention".

Considering I just requoted the words which he publicly posted, this is
just posturing on Godfrey's part.
-- 
Ray Dunn at home        |  Beaconsfield, Quebec  |  Phone: (514) 630 3749
ray@philmtl.philips.ca  |  dunn@cam.org          |  uunet!sobeco!philmtl!ray
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: solman@athena.mit.edu (Jason W Solinsky)
Subject: Re: Bleak news from the academic job market
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 19:37:35 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.002534.5154@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, andersmh@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (ANDERSON  MIKE HOWARD) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov20.222750.25504@tc.cornell.edu> bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:
|> >
|> >I think that you are wrong on two accounts:
|> >
|> >(1) I would hate to see univeristies being engaged in "social engineering".
|> >    They do exist to educate and do research. If they can get the work
|> >    done cheaply, why should they pay more ? Resources are limited,
|> >    and the burden will be on the tax-payer. Why should the tax-payer
|> >    spend his/her hard earned money to pay more for the same work ?
|> >
|> What do mean by social engineering?  It sounds like what you are
|> saying is that since the university CAN exploit graduate students
|> then they SHOULD.

The universities are NOT EXPLOITING GRADUATE STUDENTS. There is no shortage of
applicants to CS graduate programs. Thousands of students are simply BEGGING
to spend years working at slave wages BECAUSE THEY WANT A PHD. The people who
are whining that they can't get a job now, and complaining that they were
misinformed when they entered graduate school TOOK AWAY A SPOT FROM SOMEBODY
ELSE. The University has done those people a favor. It selected them for a job
that far more people want than can be provided for. They are saying that it is
everybody's fault that they were misinformed EXCEPT THEIR OWN.

I wish people would stop whining and accept responsibility for themselves.

Jason W. Solinsky
From: elm@cs.berkeley.edu (ethan miller)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Academic jobs
Date: 18 Nov 92 01:57:20
Organization: Berkeley--Shaken, not Stirred
	<1992Nov10.155058.16190@galois.mit.edu> <jeff.722073474@mama>
Reply-To: elm@cs.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: terrorism.cs.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: jeff@mama.minmet.uq.oz's message of Wed, 18 Nov 1992 07:57:54 GMT

In article <jeff.722073474@mama> jeff@mama.minmet.uq.oz (Jeff Gates) writes:
=>lenivch@levinson.mit.edu (Witold Biedrzycki) writes:
=>>[...]for most foreigners  finding a job in their
=>>home country is a contingency plan, which they implement after
=>>having failed in US job search.
=>
=>Will someone please tell me that Americans don't really think this way?

Actually, in this particular case, the author is somewhat correct.  It
has nothing to do with how Americans think.  Rather, many foreign students
choose to stay in the US after getting a PhD (at least in CS).  This is
especially true of Asians; many Europeans and Australians return to their
countries.  It's not a baseless statement.  I know of several foreigners
who have gotten US jobs.

I'm not passing judgment on this one way or the other.  It's the way
things are.

=>My sister is a botanist.  A visiting botanist from California once commented
=>to her
=>	"My, haven't the eucalypts done well here!"

Well they have, haven't they :-).  Actually, you can have them back.
Eucalyptus oil was partially responsible for last year's firestorm in
the Oakland-Berkeley hills (those trees are *very* flammable), and the
eucalyptus are crowding out native species.  The trees were originally
planted here by someone who thought they'd make good wood trees.  He
apparently got the wrong eucalyptus species, and we ended up with a
tree that only a koala could love :-).

ethan
--
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
ethan miller--cs grad student   | "Anybody not wearing 2000000 sunblock's
elm@cs.berkeley.edu             |  gonna have a REALLY bad day.  GET IT?"
#include <std/disclaimer.h>     |  -- Sarah Connor, _Terminator 2_
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: thomae@eos.ncsu.edu (DOUGLAS ALAN THOMAE)
Subject: Re: Academic jobs
Originator: thomae@boomer.csl.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: thomae@eos.ncsu.edu
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:37:01 GMT


In article <jeff.722073474@mama>, jeff@mama.minmet.uq.oz (Jeff Gates) writes:
|>>                                                  for most foreigners  finding
|>>a job in their home country is a contingency plan, which they implement after
|>>having failed in US job search.
|>>Witold
|>
|>Will someone please tell me that Americans don't really think this way?

Americans think that way because they come into frequent contact with foreign
students that think that way (at least those in academia do). Whatever flaws
the US of A may have, it  has more and higher paying jobs for people with
graduate degrees than can typically be had in many other parts of the world
(e.g. India, some parts of the mideast, China).  I assume that you interpreted
the comment as a statement that the USA was a better place for a job than
Australia.  I don't think that Australians really fit into the model of
there's-nothing-at-home-for-me that many foreign students are working from.

P.S. Next time you have the urge to bash Americans, at least pick something
that is actually wrong with our people or country. It's not that hard to do.


|>|  jeff@minmet.uq.oz.au	      |  Jeff Gates,   Dept Mining	   |   _--_|\
|>|  Ph. direct: +61 7 365 3726 |        & Metallurgical Engineering |  /      B
|>|  Ph. Dept: +61 7 365 3738   |  University of Queensland 	   |  \_.--\_/
|>|  Fax: +61 7 365 3888	      |  Brisbane   Qld   4072   Australia |	    v
|>

Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: chohan@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Harpal Chohan)
Subject: Re: Fabrikant archives?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 19:55:07 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.015533.20579@henson.cc.wwu.edu> n8946410@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Cameron Parish) writes:
>
>	
>	Have the Fabrikant (and associated) postings been archived
>anywhere?  I would very much like to have them, for my own interest and
>for a professor who's studying anger in academia.   

Yes. I've collected the initial fabrikant posts, and related followups
from this group. You may pick them up via anonymous ftp from

davros.acs.ohio-state.edu

in


pub/fabrikant.txt
pub/fabrikant_2.txt

-h
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
From: craigen@ace.acadiau.ca (DOUGLAS CRAIGEN)
Subject: Re: Free Speach (Was: In your school?)
Organization: Acadia University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 19:27:22 GMT

Dear Laurence:

  I happened across soc.culture.canada about a month ago and have been 
browsing through it every few days ever since.  I have read the recent 
discussions between you and your a few others with great amusement.  
The following exchange however has prompted me to ask directly something 
that has been puzzling me ever since I picked up on this debate:

>>at rest.  I don't intend to waste my time trying to do so, nor in 
>>responding to his insincere declarations of concern.  If I ever feel the 

>
>I have to agree with Laurence .... He doesn't intend to waste his time trying
>
>He barely has any left after writting all his STUPIDITIES in this newsgroup!!
>

  The question is why do you bother?  Surely all this reading and writing 
takes up an awful lot of time.  It is hard to imagine that there aren't 
other things that you wouldn't or shouldn't rather be doing.  I would expect 
there is a good chance that you have a valid beef with NRC over authorship, 
but what exactly do you hope to gain by spending so much time arguing with a 
bunch of undergraduates (you are probably right in this assessment) who have 
not yet matured enough to be able to ignore you?

   One other point while I'm at it.  I believe that this line (Free Speech) 
got started with your complaint about those who tried to have your network 
access removed.  I do not believe that "free speech" are the proper terms 
to be used here.  Most of us do not personally pay for our network access, 
but our institutions do pay in various ways for the degree of access they 
obtain for us.  Given that someone else is paying the bills, it appropriate 
that they should have some say in what exactly is done.  I have seen people 
lose their rights for abuses, the most recent being someone who sent a 
pyramid scheme to another group I belong to.  If you were to use someone 
else's equipment and mailroom to make up pamplets and have them sent out, 
would you call it a "freedom of speech" issue if someone tried to stop 
you?  My personal opinion is that as annoying as your comments may be to 
some, they are still within the standard realm of what occupies these 
groups.  To be consistent, silencing you would have to be done within a much 
larger crack-down on garbage mailing, and I can't see any feasible way of 
doing it.

   Incidently, since you often correct the spelling or grammar of others, 
"speech" is misspelled in the title of this discussion.
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: gillies@cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies)
Subject: Re: Bleak news from the academic job market
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:54:07 GMT


From MAILER-DAEMON@CS.UTK.EDU Fri Nov 20 10:45:23 1992
Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by sal.cs.uiuc.edu with SMTP id AA02646
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for <gillies@sal.cs.uiuc.edu>); Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:45:22 -0600
Received:  by CS.UTK.EDU (5.61++/2.8s-UTK)
	id AA19281; Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:45:08 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:45:08 -0500
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@CS.UTK.EDU>
Message-Id: <9211201645.AA19281@CS.UTK.EDU>
Subject: Returned mail: Local configuration error
To: gillies@sal.cs.uiuc.edu
Status: R

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
554 <primeaux@carlsberg.cs.utk.edu>... Local configuration error

   ----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: from sal.cs.uiuc.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61++/2.8s-UTK)
	id AA19279; Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:45:08 -0500
Received: by sal.cs.uiuc.edu id AA02637
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for primeaux@carlsberg.cs.utk.edu); Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:45:15 -0600
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:45:15 -0600
From: Don Gillies <gillies@sal.cs.uiuc.edu>
Message-Id: <199211201645.AA02637@sal.cs.uiuc.edu>
To: primeaux@carlsberg.cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Bleak news from the academic job market
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers

In sci.research.careers you write:

>You mentioned 200 applications for two faculty positions in CS.  From what
>I have been hearing, that is relatively low.  I have heard reports of 300-400
>for a single position, but this is only hearsay.

Here is some non-heresay from last year (I can fax you the rejection
letters).

700+ for university of washington last year.
400+ for texas / UT-arlington (not in the top-20).
400+ for another department (can't remember where).

These were all individual positions.

Now here is some heresay:

~1500 for UCLA last year.

Hopefully, things will not be as bad this year.
-- 



Newsgroups: sci.research.careers,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
From: ambidge@ecf.toronto.edu (Chris Ambidge)
Subject: Re: In your school?
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 20:13:02 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.150001.29664@pixel.kodak.com> dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
>LAURENCE GODFREY (godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov) wrote:
>> (re the shooting spree at Concordia University)
>> On the contrary, I would
>> suggest that the Concordia people probably got what they deserved.
>> 
>I seem to remember that some of the victims were students.  If you think
>that their deaths were justified then you have a very warped viewpoint
>indeed, far more than is indicated by thinking that a dispute with faculty
>authorities can be resolved by blazing away with a hunting rifle.

While I agree with Dave that NO shooting deaths at Canadian universities
are "deserved", he's confusing two incidents.

Unfortunately, there have been two shooting sprees at Engineering departments
in Montreal in the last few years.  The Valerly Fabrikant incident was at
Concordia, earlier in 1992.  He was shooting at people who, he felt, had
done him a personal dis-service (I'm trying to keep my language neutral
here).

The incident Dave is thinking about was on December 6 1989, when Marc
Lepine went  on a shooting spree at the Ecole Polytechnique.  He shot 14
people (13 students, one staff), all of them women.  He died in the incident
himself [Fabrikant is still alive and awaiting trial].  Lepine screamed
at his victims "you're all a bunch of feminists" (or the French equivalent).
They were killed  *because* they were women.

This thread has drifted a way from the original thrust, but the title
"In YOUR school" seems chillingly appropriate.  I teach engineering 
students.  Montreal is not very far away.  Marc Lepine might have been 
shooting my students (or Valery Fabrikant my collegues).  Both are
frightening thoughts.
-- 
Chris Ambidge / ambidge@ecf.toronto.edu / ambidge@ecf.utoronto.ca  
   chemical engineering / university of toronto
   200 college st / toronto ON / M5S 1A4 // 416 978 3106
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: jeff@mama.minmet.uq.oz (Jeff Gates)
Subject: Re: Academic jobs
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 07:57:54 GMT

lenivch@levinson.mit.edu (Witold Biedrzycki) writes:

>                                                  for most foreigners  finding
>a job in their home country is a contingency plan, which they implement after
>having failed in US job search.
>Witold

Will someone please tell me that Americans don't really think this way?

My sister is a botanist.  A visiting botanist from California once commented
to her
	"My, haven't the eucalypts done well here!"
(For those who don't know, eucalypts are the "Gum" trees that Australian poets
rave about.)

Will someone please tell someone
that not _every_ good thing originates in the U.S.of A.

|  jeff@minmet.uq.oz.au	      |  Jeff Gates,   Dept Mining	   |   _--_|\
|  Ph. direct: +61 7 365 3726 |        & Metallurgical Engineering |  /      B
|  Ph. Dept: +61 7 365 3738   |  University of Queensland 	   |  \_.--\_/
|  Fax: +61 7 365 3888	      |  Brisbane   Qld   4072   Australia |	    v
Xref: sparky sci.research.careers:1523 soc.culture.british:16242 soc.culture.canada:8728
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 00:35:43 EST
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: In your school?
 <1992Nov17.150001.29664@pixel.kodak.com> <17NOV199216535151@sscvx1.ssc.gov>

In article <17NOV199216535151@sscvx1.ssc.gov>, godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE
GODFREY) says:
>
>In article <1992Nov17.150001.29664@pixel.kodak.com>, dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com
>(Dave Jones)     writes...
>>LAURENCE GODFREY (godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov) wrote:
>>> (re the shooting spree at Concordia University)
>>> On the contrary, I would
>>> suggest that the Concordia people probably got what they deserved.
>>>
>>I seem to remember that some of the victims were students.  If you think
>>that their deaths were justified then you have a very warped viewpoint
>>indeed, far more than is indicated by thinking that a dispute with faculty
>>authorities can be resolved by blazing away with a hunting rifle.
>>
>>This is a new low in the Godfrey saga.  Take a pill.  Take a holiday.
>>
>>--
>>||I dreamed I met a Yadallean          |(parody in progress, apologies to
>>||A most confusing man....             | Tim Rice & Andrew Lloyd Webber)
>>||------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com)|Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY  |
>
>You are wrong, I'm afraid.  Fabrikant shot only those members of staff
>involved in his dispute.
>
>Laurence

Oh, well that makes it alright then. Are your colleagues aware of this rather
cold, almost endorsational approach to murdering colleagues who you perceive
have done you an injustice?
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor)
Subject: Re: Bleak news from the academic job market
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:27:50 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.175905.15811@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> andersmh@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (ANDERSON  MIKE HOWARD) writes:
>I agree with part of this.  What the prospective student is getting for
>their sweat should certainly be spelled out clearly, and it isn't.  But,
>my central point is that too much of our resources are going into the
>hiring of graduate students and not permanent postions.  This leads to

I think that you are wrong on two accounts:

(1) I would hate to see univeristies being engaged in "social engineering".
    They do exist to educate and do research. If they can get the work
    done cheaply, why should they pay more ? Resources are limited,
    and the burden will be on the tax-payer. Why should the tax-payer
    spend his/her hard earned money to pay more for the same work ?

(2) It is unlikely that if universities stop hiring graduate students,
    then there will be more permanent positions. On the contrary:
    My understanding is that one of the reasons for new faculty positions
    to get approved is when a new PhD program is established. If there
    will be less graduate students, then there will be less need for
    lecturers and thesis advisers. That may result in less positions.

I agree, however, that universities should not deceive graduate students
about prospective employment, and if they do, it is ethically _very_ wrong,
as Ken Mcdonald pointed out.


Dov