yeah I should stop visiting and interview lists should be hidden--we've already made this point where I work.
Same where I work.
Truly a momentum of sock puppets we got here
Tenure track job application results
Can some of you GENIUSES explain the logic to me: you want to keep the interview list secret so that your dear candidates cannot be SAVAGED on an internet forum but once they are hired won't your DEI hires still be SAVAGED on the INTERNUTZ?
It was never about DEI hires. We didn't do those.
I think the opposite of hiding should be done. We should make everything open: shortlist of candidates and who was eventually chosen to get the offer. Why is transparency so bad? What are you afraid of? That something bad will be written about you somewhere on the internet? Then you should probably quit math; you don't have nerves for that.
I think the opposite of hiding should be done. We should make everything open: shortlist of candidates and who was eventually chosen to get the offer. Why is transparency so bad? What are you afraid of? That something bad will be written about you somewhere on the internet? Then you should probably quit math; you don't have nerves for that.
It has nothing to do with fear. It is only about protecting the future generations from getting a false idea about what this is all about.
I think the opposite of hiding should be done. We should make everything open: shortlist of candidates and who was eventually chosen to get the offer. Why is transparency so bad? What are you afraid of? That something bad will be written about you somewhere on the internet? Then you should probably quit math; you don't have nerves for that.
They FEAR the top mathematician. They FEAR they WILL become literal INTERNET FODDER for top mathematicians They FEAR because they are UVLRM.
I think the opposite of hiding should be done. We should make everything open: shortlist of candidates and who was eventually chosen to get the offer. Why is transparency so bad? What are you afraid of? That something bad will be written about you somewhere on the internet? Then you should probably quit math; you don't have nerves for that.
This is how it is done in France for example. All positions are posted on the same website, and the interview lists and the final rankings are all public.
Both are true. People should stop visiting and interview lists are better off being hidden.
There are some things of value here. I hadn't realized exactly how judgemental math folks are until I came here, nor did I have any sense of journals. These are both discussions worth having which people often don't indulge even during department tea (at least not in front of grad students like me).
Not that I have a sense of journals now, but at least now I know what "Top 5" means, and what journals are unambiguously good, and the fact that actually there's no consensus on most things when it comes to journals.
Both are true. People should stop visiting and interview lists are better off being hidden.
There are some things of value here. I hadn't realized exactly how judgemental math folks are until I came here, nor did I have any sense of journals. These are both discussions worth having which people often don't indulge even during department tea (at least not in front of grad students like me).
Not that I have a sense of journals now, but at least now I know what "Top 5" means, and what journals are unambiguously good, and the fact that actually there's no consensus on most things when it comes to journals.
That's the problem. You actually don't get the right idea here. Your advisor/faculty at your school will explain when time comes. A lot of the comments about journals are by other grad students like you, who think they learned stuff here but don't know anything.
Not that I have a sense of journals now, but at least now I know what "Top 5" means, and what journals are unambiguously >good, and the fact that actually there's no consensus on most things when it comes to journals.
But you see this discussions is completely misleading... Math is not judged like that... If we can't tell what is good an impactful; math that is likely to survive the test of time and what is not, without such completely superficial criteria, then we are in trouble..
Not that I have a sense of journals now, but at least now I know what "Top 5" means, and what journals are unambiguously >good, and the fact that actually there's no consensus on most things when it comes to journals.
But you see this discussions is completely misleading... Math is not judged like that... If we can't tell what is good an impactful; math that is likely to survive the test of time and what is not, without such completely superficial criteria, then we are in trouble..
I mean, I have basic critical thinking skills -- it's not like I look at this forum with infinite inc*l comments, racism and whatnot and go "hey these guys have the right idea".
Once you apply a basic filter to get the chaff out, there are certainly things people say here which have the ring of truth, and I doubt I would have gotten some of this info from my advisor -- he's from a very different generation both mathematically and socially, and he doesn't keep up with many things which I have seen is crucial for success in the job market.
Things done in secret is because it's not based on merit and people would be embarrassed if the truth were exposed. Ever since random people were made mods, enough woke people were granted powers to suppress any mild criticism of DEI. Pointing out DEI is flawed and doesn't even help many minority groups results gets you squelched on this site.
Things done in secret is because it's not based on merit and people would be embarrassed if the truth were exposed. Ever since random people were made mods, enough woke people were granted powers to suppress any mild criticism of DEI. Pointing out DEI is flawed and doesn't even help many minority groups results gets you squelched on this site.
I don't see what merit has to do with anything that said here... What really bother me is the completely misguided views about notions of
top" andquality" exposed here and the attempts to badmouth and put down specific people... If this the kind of knowledge that people think will be useful for the future of math then we will be in troubleThings done in secret is because it's not based on merit and people would be embarrassed if the truth were exposed. Ever since random people were made mods, enough woke people were granted powers to suppress any mild criticism of DEI. Pointing out DEI is flawed and doesn't even help many minority groups results gets you squelched on this site.
I don't see what merit has to do with anything that said here... What really bother me is the completely misguided views about notions of
top" andquality" exposed here and the attempts to badmouth and put down specific people... If this the kind of knowledge that people think will be useful for the future of math then we will be in troubleYeah, it bothers me too, but I guess a lot of people in math have always thought this way. This forum just give those people a voice. It makes it more stressful to interact with people, though, as you wonder how they really see you.
I recommend going on information diets with your colleagues if you want to protect yourself.
Your screen is so tiny that we decided to disable the captcha and posting feature
Formatting guidelines: Commonmark with no images and html allowed. $ and $$ for LaTeX. Input previewed in last post of thread. For a link to be allowed it must include the http(s) tag and come from the list of allowed domains.