The Ivory Tower

« first day (2320 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2142 days later) »

8:02 AM

How to become a reliable researcher? I tried to put this question in the context of reproducibility of research and not to be about admission. Is that acceptable? Does title need to be changed also? what is now reopening procedure? is there are need for more explanation?

2 hours later…

scaaahu

9:56 AM

@StrongBad Regarding the cut in line question, I am actually thinking of raising an abusive flag after seeing others' comments. I have not done it yet only because I don't want to cause too serious consequence to the OP. I do think it should be closed.

3 hours later…

Wrzlprmft

1:25 PM

I am closing this question because: 1) The titular question is about an interpersonal issue unrelated to academia, which is evidenced by other incarnations on Interpersonal SE and on Travel SE by the same asker. 2) The question that was answered (roughly: “What can/should I do against this?”) could fit this site, but is very broad without further details such as affiliation between canteen and university, etc. As the scenario is fictive, the asker can obviously not provide these details. — Wrzlprmft ♦ 1 min ago

user358082

I dont understand noting, why my question is abusive?

user358082

I just wanted to offer how to change it, moderator gave comment that I understand

user358082

Moderator’s notice: Please only edit this question if you attempt to make it reopenable. This particular means narrowing down the scope of the question, e.g., by focusing on a particular part of the scientific workflow. Adding evidence that the problem in question exists does not make the question less broad. However, neither does removing it. I

user358082

’ll leave the question at the version without the quote because it is just a dump from Wikipedia without reference. This does not mean that adding the quote (in a proper way) would be a problem, but it does not make the question reopenable

user358082

but I cannot follow that advice since it is locked!

Wrzlprmft

1:36 PM

@Stefan Nobody said anything about abusiveness as far as I can tell.

user358082

@Wrzlprmft Regarding the cut in line question, I am actually thinking of raising an abusive flag after seeing others' comments. I have not done it yet only because I don't want to cause too serious consequence to the OP. I do think it should be closed.

user358082

I dont understand.

Wrzlprmft

@Stefan This has nothing to do with any of your actions (as far as I can tell) but is about another question. Also note that you can quote messages and comments by just pasting the link (which makes it easier to understand what is going on).

@Stefan Said question will unlock automatically in a few minutes. I left it locked to allow everybody to cool down a bit.

user358082

@Wrzlprmft sorry, regarding my question on metta, can I edit the question to be about preparation for PhD, in terms of successful conclusion and finishing of it. How to avoid common mistakes and preconceptions about PhD programs

Wrzlprmft

@MassimoOrtolano: Being curious: Do you see any notice here that the question is to be unlocked soon?

user358082

1:40 PM

@Wrzlprmft so there are two questions, one that I would like to edit so it will fit the scope, and another one on metta asking users of academia SE, on how to deal with this question

Wrzlprmft

@Stefan can I edit the question to be about preparation for PhD, in terms of successful conclusion and finishing of it. – That sounds like a completely different question (and is also overly broad).

user358082

@Wrzlprmft I mean in terms of biology students that would like to know how to not be part of 70% of useless PhDs

user358082

but as you said, quotation is not enough I need I think to spread it more in terms of

Wrzlprmft

@Stefan That’s still sounds like a completely different question.

user358082

reproducability crisis,

user358082

1:45 PM

@Wrzlprmft well that person ask too broad things, but I want to focus on reliable part. as I understood definition of reliable

user358082

consistently good in quality or performance; able to be trusted.

Massimo Ortolano

@Wrzlprmft No (note I was reading from the mobile site, maybe from the full site is different).

user358082

and this is crucial problem in Biology.

user358082

I m not sure if other fields have this problem? if you are compiuter scientists or math? did you ever notice?

user358082

if you allow me of course to interpret Reliable in such a way.

Wrzlprmft

1:48 PM

@Stefan That’s still a very broad thing. It essentially asks: How to be a good scientist? We have entire tags devoted to this. If you focus on a particular part of the research process or a particular part of education, this may be suitable.

Also, why are you so keen on reopening that particular question anyway? Why not ask a new, focused question?

StrongBad

@MassimoOrtolano I think he just unlocked it.

@Wrzlprmft thanks for closing it. I totally agree with your reasoning.

Wrzlprmft

@StrongBad No, it was a timed lock. I could see the remaining time of the lock (when logged in as a mod), but not when logged out. I thus wondered whether regular users could see it.

scaaahu

@Wrzlprmft The lock is gone.

StrongBad

@Wrzlprmft oh, from the time line it looked like the lock ended a few minutes early.

@scaaahu I haven't seen you in chat in a while. Last time you had just gotten out of the hospital. I hope you are doing well?

scaaahu

@StrongBad Thanks. I am fine. I am watching TV now. Taiwan Musical Awards (more like Grammy award in the US. Talk to you later.

1 hour later…

user358082

3:01 PM

@Wrzlprmft hmmm reliable and successful is not the same. Is it? I THINK ppl who finish MIT Princeton, top-tier uni can call themselves succesfull just bcs they finished. is it the same thing?

Wrzlprmft

@Stefan I didn’t say successful, I said good.

StrongBad

3:56 PM

@Stefan everyone who finishes a PhD should think of themselves as successful, but not everyone who finishes a PhD, even from top schools, does. This is actually one of the saddest things about academia.

user358082

4:13 PM

@StrongBad yes, I agree, but are they realible?

StrongBad

@Stefan reliable in what way?

user358082

4:41 PM

@StrongBad aha, so there is more than one way? I thought it has only one meaning of reliable! consistently good in quality or performance; able to be trusted. so good program that can assure that student will become out as good quality researcher, that we can trust, and rely on?

StrongBad

@Stefan some researchers reliably produce 5 good papers a year, other reliably produce one great paper a year. Some researchers reliably tackle hard problems, but leave gaps, others fill in gaps. Some researchers reliably play fast and loose with the methods so they can get someplace interesting while others follow all the steps and only make a little progress.

user358082

5:12 PM

@StrongBad dont they produce 5 papers per year, by exploiting students and stuff?

StrongBad

5:51 PM

@Stefan I would say some do and some don't, but some would say paying students NIH rates is exploitation.

4 hours later…

Meta Academia

9:35 PM

Q: Would this questions be on topic here?

I want to ask a question, but I'm wondering if it's on topic here. It's a question about if I should even bother writing up a paper, but the work is in Abstract Algebra, so maybe MathOverflow would be a better fit? Or if anyone can refer me to duplicates that I might have missed. Let's assume...