HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: laws@ai.sri.com (Kenneth I. Laws)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Dr. Fabrikant and honesty in science
Date: 7 Sep 92 16:55:23 GMT
	<1992Aug28.030530.7738@tc.cornell.edu>
	<1992Aug28.170505.4700@u.washington.edu>
	<17lpf7INNchs@function.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Organization: Computists International
In-reply-to: edgar@function.mps.ohio-state.edu's message of 28 Aug 92 17:57:59 GMT

In article <17lpf7INNchs@function.mps.ohio-state.edu>
edgar@function.mps.ohio-s\
tate.edu (Gerald Edgar) writes:
>Here is a story told to me by a mathematician.  He discussed a research
>problem with one of his colleagues in chemistry, who politely sat there
>and made no remarks.  Six months later, when the work was being
>prepared for publication, he received a note from the chemist requesting
>co-author listing.  The mathematician thought that odd, so he appealed
>to the Dean, who ruled in favor of the chemist.  (The Dean was also
>a chemist.)

The Dean was also a dean.  He or she may have had several reasons
for the ruling, unrelated to intellectual honesty.  The chemist's
career may have needed a boost, the university may have needed
more chemistry publications, the chemist may have been owed a
favor for accepting other honorary authors, etc.  That may not
be good Science, but it's good business -- and deans are charged
with the business aspects of running a university.  Scientists
must work within business constraints, just as deans must work
within the moral tolerances of their faculty.  The mathematician
was willing to accept a ruling either way on this one, so the
dean was free to consider business factors.

					-- Ken

--

Dr. Kenneth I. Laws, (415) 493-7390, laws@ai.sri.com.
Moderator of the Computists International AI/IS/CS mutual-aid association.
Ask about my weekly online career newsletter, The Computists' Communique.
From: masticol@cadenza.rutgers.edu (Steve Masticola)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions
Date: 10 Sep 92 14:28:44 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Discrimination works the other way, too, at least as far as graduate
admissions go. I'm a white male, U.S. citizen, of Italian descent.
Here's my story:

Several years ago, I was applying for grad school at, among other
places, Princeton. In mid-April, I hadn't heard, one way or another,
whether I was admitted.  I had gotten offers from some other schools,
and Princeton is pretty close, so I decided to go there and check the
situation out.

I spoke with the department secretary, who told me that I would be
getting the thin envelope, i.e., that I had not been accepted. But
before that, we had the following conversation:

Secretary:	"OK, what's your name?"

Me:		"Steve Masticola."

Secretary:	"Oh, _you're_ the one with the _unusual_ name!"

Now, in the U.S., my name was occasionally the object of some
third-grade humor, but she was the first person who ever told me that
it was unusual. It was even wierder that I had been accepted by some
schools that rank above Princeton in the Gourman listings; in fact,
Princeton was the only school that flat-out rejected me. (Brown
admitted me without aid, but I hear they do that to a lot of people.)

I know that Princeton tends to be theoretical, and I'm a systems
person. And I wanted to study some things in which their department is
weak. But that "unusual name" bit has stuck in my mind. And I know it
was just a secretary talking, but I can't help thinking if my name was
too unusual for Princeton to admit me...

Go figure.


- Steve "Not George Herbert Walker Anything" masticol@cs.rutgers.edu.
From: holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes)
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions
Organization: Boise State University Math Dept.
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:55:54 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.210952.22790@netnews.noc.drexel.edu> David.Koert@CoE.Drexel.EDU (Dave Koert) writes:
>This summer, I was one of four finalists to interview for a tenure-track,
>faculty position at a land-grant university in New England.  There was
>enough
>feedback that I felt 99% certain of an offer.  I didn't get an offer. 
>Oh, well.
>
>I asked a colleague to find out what had happened (he had a friend on the
>search committee at the university in New England).  The reason I was not
>given
>the offer (so the story goes) is that the Dean and/or Department Head
>insisted
>that an applicant who was a member of an under represented gender be
>given the
>offer even though this applicant did not fit the slot (area of expertise)
>they
>sought to fill.
[...]
>Even though I *feel* I was somehow cheated, I am forced to reason by the
>compelling argument that past and present discrimination should to be
>compensated for by institutional policies of preference for under
>represented
>groups.  However, I would like to come up with a list of reasonable
>arguments
>against this practice also.
>

No argument is needed.  The practice is self-evidently wrong.  This is
why you feel so uncomfortable about it.  So do its practitioners, I
imagine.


>
>
>
>dave koert, research assist. prof.        | (disgruntler)
>combustion & fuels group, hess labs       |  "Nuke the unborn, gay whale"
>Mechanical Eng. Dept. (MEM), Drexel Univ. |          bumper sticker
>David.Koert@CoE.Drexel.EDU                |          seen in RI, 1983


-- 
The opinions expressed		|     --Sincerely,
above are not the "official"	|     M. Randall Holmes
opinions of any person		|     Math. Dept., Boise State Univ.
or institution.			|     holmes@opal.idbsu.edu
From: merolajs@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (JOSEPH S. MEROLA DEPT OF CHEMISTRY VPI&SU)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Date: 12 Sep 92 19:31:00 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Sep12.165259.26019@tc.cornell.edu>, bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes...
>In article <1992Sep12.155055.22185@news.acns.nwu.edu> len@schur.math.nwu.edu (Len Evens) writes:
>>In article <11SEP199209542037@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu> merolajs@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (JOSEPH S. MEROLA DEPT OF CHEMISTRY VPI&SU) writes:
> 
>>Of course, they are usually
>>very enthusiastic about exceptional candidates, but they may be even more
>>enthusiastic in the case of women.
> 
>This sentence is typical of the attitude that I find so disturbing
>in senior faculty members. They dont say: we would like to be 
>gender-neutral in our hiring practices, but unfortunately 
>affirmative-action directives instruct us otherwise. Rather, they
>sound so excited and enthusiastic, that  you cannt miss their social
>agenda.
> 

Well, all I can say about this is:  When we can be assured that
people will make these decisions race and gender neutral, then
we can stop all of this.  But some of the attitudes on the net
show that this isn't the case.  The automatic assumption for
the number of anectdoatal hirings that have been discussed
has been that the female (or black) that was hired was less
qualified.  What evidence are you using?  Have you seen
the dossiers?  Have you read the recommendation letters?
Have you interviewed the candidates?  Until you do, it seems
that you are assuming that they are less qualified because
they are a woman (or a black).  This says that we have a 
long way to go before we can drop everything and assume
that things will be conducted in a race or gender neutral
manner.  

Now, please don't take this as a personal attack, because
I certainly don't mean it that way.  But, the attitudes
that have become systemic throughout industry and
academia are so entrenched that we cannot simply say that
from now on we are going to be neutral.  Things are so
institutionalized that this will mean that the status quo
will remain entrenched forever.  In chemistry, the numbr
of females faculty members in most universities is
extremely small.  Yet, the number of female Ph.D.'s over
the last number of years has been appreciable (20-30%).

So long as qualified applicants files aren't taken 
seriously because they are female or black, we need
something to force the system to look at them.  

For the millionth time, this does not mean that someone
unqualified should be hired to fill a quota, but that
someone who is qualified should be given a chance that
they never would have received otherwise.


Joseph S. Merola
Department of Chemistry
Virginia Tech (aka VPI&SU)
From: paj@uk.co.gec-mrc (Paul Johnson)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions
Date: 10 Sep 92 08:27:40 GMT
Organization: GEC-Marconi Research Centre, Great Baddow, UK

In article <1992Sep9.215223.22997@netnews.noc.drexel.edu> David.Koert@CoE.Drexel.EDU (Dave Koert) writes:

>This summer, I was one of four finalists to interview for a tenure-track,
>faculty position at a land-grant university in New England.  There was enough
>feedback that I felt 99% certain of an offer.  I didn't get an offer.  Oh,
>well.

[A woman was hired in preferance, more because of her sex than her
abilities, although she was well qualified]

>As I read what I have just written I realize it may look like whining from
>a chauvinist, but I'll risk it to ask for a reasonable discussion of the
>subject.  Even though I *feel* I was somehow cheated, I am forced to
>reason by the compelling argument that past and present discrimination
>should to be compensated for by institutional policies of preference for
>under represented groups.  However, I would like to come up with a list
>of reasonable arguments against this practice also.


I do not think it is chauvinistic to object when someone less well
qualified than you gets a job, although I admire your wish to stick to
your past views after their application was to your disadvantage.

"Affirmitive Action" (or "Positive Discrimination" as it is known over
here) is a bad idea:

o It is bad for the employer, as they get less qualified individuals.

o It is bad for all the candidates as they are effectively told that
  what they are is more important than who they are, and that hence
  hard work and excellence will not be rewarded.

o It is bad for the fight against racism and sexism because it
  produces disgruntled people who feel that they have been passed over
  because of their sex or colour (and note that if one ethnic woman is
  hired under such a program then all the other candidates will blame
  the program for their failure).  Such people are ripe for
  recruitment by white supremacists.

o And it is bad for the people who get hired because whatever their
  abilities may actually be the whole office knows "she only got her
  job because...."

I agree that racism and sexism are also a bad idea, but they are a bad
idea for many of the same reasons I listed against AA/PD.  Really
AA/PD is just racism and sexism in new clothes.  Discrimination is
wrong, and two wrongs do not make a right.

Paul.

-- 
Paul Johnson (paj@gec-mrc.co.uk).	    | Tel: +44 245 73331 ext 3245
--------------------------------------------+----------------------------------
These ideas and others like them can be had | GEC-Marconi Research is not
for $0.02 each from any reputable idealist. | responsible for my opinions
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: andersmh@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (ANDERSON  MIKE HOWARD)
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 22:53:49 GMT

>This all seems to boil down to the way that most of these
>posts are phrased:  "A less qualified person" has been
>hired.  How much less?  Can you quantify known cases?  What are
>the criteria used.  I submit in most cases that the 
>magnitude of the difference is not that great. In that case,
>non-technical factors can outweigh the technical.
>
>Have I convinced you?   I didn't think so. 8-)
>
>Joseph S. Merola
>Department of Chemistry
>Virginia Tech (aka VPI&SU)


I agree, here.  The concepts "less" and "best" qualified are simply
ridiculous.  They seem to be very ingrained, judging from the posting.

My worries are those cases one hears about, when males were being considered
for a position up until the point that a female applies, after which
they are no longer considered.  That doesn't mean the female cannot do
the job, just that a mans chances went from whatever they were, to zero.
I haven't heard anyone say that THEY would have gotten the job if a
woman hadn't applied.  I've heard at least 5 or 6 such cases but I won't
post details anymore because I don't know that they are actually true.
However, this thread started by such a case.

The worries may be completely unfounded but many men in 
science it comes down to numbers.  Say only 5% of us will ever get an 
acedemic position.  Say 5% of the graduate students in the pipeline
are women.  If there is strong Affirmative Action for women, that
really is taken seriously, then it seems that the men in science made
a big career goof, because all the remaining room is reserved for women.  
For physics these numbers are not far off.  The
question is how much is Affirmative Action really exercised.  Since I know
some men are getting positions, it isn't as bad as it could be.  But, in
physics, there are enough women in the field to completely fill up the
available positions for the forseeable future.  Very few women, even
fewer jobs.


Mike
From: merolajs@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (JOSEPH S. MEROLA DEPT OF CHEMISTRY VPI&SU)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Date: 12 Sep 92 12:26:00 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Sep12.064909.11480@msc.cornell.edu>, hillyard@lynx.msc.cornell.edu.UUCP (Sean Edward Hillyard,F7 Clark,50649,) writes...

>The best person doesn't always get the job so we add another way
>for this to happen?  Because its in a good cause of course.  This type
>of thinking is very prevalent in Washington and I don't like it one
>bit (Hey, the deficit is 400billion, a few million in pork is no big
>deal.  After all, its for a good cause, the people of my district, and
>everyone else does it for their districts.)
> 
> 

Let me try to put to rest this myth that because of affirmative actio
the "best person" doesn't get the job.  There is no such thing as
the "best person."  Why is is that when several universities have 
advertised the same type of position, and that one "best" person
applies to them all,that that person may get more than one offer,
but that he or she doesn't get all of them?  That is because each
of those departments have different faculty with different
views evaluating those applicants and coming to different
conclusions as to who is "best".  So, if you compile 50
different dossiers on different applicants for a position and
give them all to 10 or 20 different departments to tell you
who is the "best", I wouldn't doubt that you would get 10-20
different answers.  

Okay, now let's get to another important point.  So far, I have
been given my own view of the need for affirmative action from
a role model and mentor point of view.  However, let's also
not minimize the fact that AA may be needed to also help 
women and minorities have a chance in a job market where they
may be "best" under some set of criteria but are not given
a chance because of their race or sex.  I know a large number
of faculty who believe that women can never be as good as a
man.  And these are only the people who openly admit this
belief, so who knows how many believe this and don't
admit it?  In the absence of affirmative action, these "best"
people would not get the job because of discrimination.

One other issue, at least as applies to the last few years
of economic hard times in the US. A majority of universities
have had faculty hiring freezes.  But, special funds were
procured for the hiring of women and minorities.  In those
cases, no one else was "screwed" out of a job, since it 
was set up specifically for the underrepresented group.

Let me get back to the bottom line:  The statements that
a "less qualified" person was hired due to AA are in most
cases wrong and cling to some belief of a single rating
that allows us to rank people on objective terms.

Joseph S. Merola
Department of Chemistry
Virginia Tech (aka VPI&SU) 


Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: andersmh@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (ANDERSON  MIKE HOWARD)
Subject: Re: comment on AA and faculties
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:26:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.205138.18791@unocal.com> stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini) writes:

>preferred hiring those kind of graduates because of reduced paperwork.
>The preference is mainly academic, because very few Americans apply anyways
>anymore.

And that's because Americans have largely ruined science for Americans.
If market forces worked the way they should, the supply of grad
students would have dried up, forcing a change in how science is
done in this country.  The work ethic is that you ae supposed to
work hard and then you are supposed to get something in return.

Mike 

Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: hillyard@lynx.msc.cornell.edu.UUCP (Sean Edward Hillyard,F7 Clark,50649,)
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Originator: hillyard@msc2.msc.cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 03:21:07 GMT

From article <12SEP199215560997@jetson.uh.edu>, by schieber@jetson.uh.edu (Schieber, Jay D.):
[...]
> 
> This is exactly my point; I would respond just the opposite--I would 
> consider that in the black candidate's favor *if* we had no other
> black faculty.  Again, this would be part of a very complex formula
> in the decision, but it would now be important.  Precisely because
> (presumably) white students would make derogatory remarks to other
> black students I would want that professor there to send several
> important messages: we at the university consider blacks to be
> competent, intelligent human beings; to provide a mentor for dis-
> enchanted students who might otherwise feel alienated; to have
> an advocate in the department to protect the interests of our
> black students; etc.
> 

How about this one, that actually exists in real life.  Studies have
shown that height correlates very well with job success in men (some
examples are med school, which tends to admit the taller candidate,
and politics, where the taller man wins 60% of elections).

Should or do you have a policy for granting short men special consideration?

(I believe Clinton is taller, should you vote for Bush because of his obvious
disadvantage :) )

SEH

'Short people got no reason to liiiive.  They got little nose.  They got
little eyes.  They walk along telling great big lies. ...'

Can't quite remember how that song went.
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: guox@mcclb0.med.nyu.edu (Xuan-Hui Guo)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: question of interview
Date: 11 Sep 92 00:54:00 GMT
Followup-To: sci.research.careers
Organization: NYU Chemistry Dept.

When I had interviews, people like to ask me if I have any other offer.
I wonder whether they want to hear I said yes or not. Why do they want to
know
that? how does that contribute to the hiring decision?  Any insight is
appreciated.

--
XHGuo
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: yjj@janus.ctr.columbia.edu (Yuan Jiang)
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Organization: Columbia University Center for Telecommunications Research
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:30:32 GMT
X-Posted-From: janus.ctr.columbia.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

I'd like to see the major leagues and football teams pratice AA. 
I cann't wait to see that women, Asians, Indians, Hispanics,
Blacks and Whites compete on the same ground.  That will be
great.
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: mcgonig@eeserv.ee.umanitoba.ca (Gordon McGonigal)
Subject: Re: Archive of Fabrikant postings??
Organization: Dept. of Elect. & Comp. Engineering, U of Manitoba
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 03:50:00 GMT

ftp-able from ftp.ee.umanitoba.ca (130.179.8.95)

The file is /pub/misc/Fabrikant
--
                                   * * *
Gord McGonigal                                  mcgonig@eeserv.ee.UManitoba.ca
Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, CANADA (R3T 2N2)       phone: (204) 474-6295
From: debray@cs.arizona.edu (Saumya K. Debray)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Date: 12 Sep 92 20:24:21 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

merolajs@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (JOSEPH S. MEROLA DEPT OF CHEMISTRY VPI&SU) writes:

> Whoa!  If you are going to quote and say that I am simply making a 
> leap of faith, then make sure you quote my entire article.  

Sorry, didn't mean to misrepresent you.

> I made the point in that article that in terms of example and mentorship
> based on the percentage of female graduates and undergraduates
> in my program that a valid case can be made for making extra 
> efforts to recruit a female faculty member.  

Well, I guess it boils down to one's opinion of the relative importance
of a faculty member's role as a mentor is, compared to research and
teaching.  You and I clearly have very different opinions about this,
and I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
-- 
Saumya Debray
Dept. of Computer Science, University of Arizona, Tucson
debray@cs.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
From: bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor)
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:47:40 GMT

In article <11SEP199216150518@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu> merolajs@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (JOSEPH S. MEROLA DEPT OF CHEMISTRY VPI&SU) writes:
>In article <1992Sep11.194740.29743@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies) writes...
>
>The funny thing here is that,  in a job search that had 150 "majority"
>applicants and a number of minority applicants, ALL 150 "majority"
>applicants will feel screwed if a minority gets the position.  ALL 150
>will claim that they would have gotten the job but that affirmative
>action forced "them" to hire a minority.  Well, we know that that 
>can't be the case.  

But look at the message you are broadcasing to white males: The
number of positions is depressingly small, and even if you would
qualify, the 1-2 positions cannt be yours because you happen to
have the wrong genes. Do you feel comfortable with it ?

>
>The other funny thing here is the concept that you are being screwed 
>for the sins of your ancestors.  I guess that is one way of looking at
>it, but then you are getting screwed for lots of sins of your
>ancestors.  

So, if we investigate and find for sure that one of your ancestors
hold slaves and mine not, should I get priority over you if
we are candidates for the same position ?

>Maybe you would have gotten that job if your parents had
>been richer and you could have afforde to go to Harvard instead of
>X State. To me, the concept of affirmative action is not to punish
>the majority for the sins of their ancestors, but to help those who
>have not had access to all of the opportunities that the majority
>had.  There was an excellent post here today that spoke to that issue.

You have a very narrow point of view. You cannt separate the issue 
of a benefit to a group from the question: at whose expense ? and
why the person(s) who give it should.  It is like doing physics
without the law of conservation of mass. 

>
>Joseph S. Merola
>Department of Chemistry
>Virginia Tech (aka VPI&SU)
>

Dov


Newsgroups: sci.research.careers