Comments and posts archived April 2012 – September 2012<\/p>\n
(I missed the last two weeks due to Good Friday and then a day off last week. Oops – bad blogger!)<\/p>\n
Comment(s) of the Week<\/strong><\/p>\n Apr 20 2012: Michael McCarthy<\/a> for “What do you call a blind antelope? What do you call a blind antelope with no legs? Pika<\/a> for “How do you put a giraffe into a Fiat 500? How do you put an elephant into a Fiat 500? Prof-like Substance<\/a> “I\u2019m sure this will play out like all of these transitions do \u2013 initial screaming by the constituency, followed by screams returning to baseline levels in a year or two. The issue is that funding agencies have to do something to solve some major problems. They are not always going to get it right, but they have the money, so they make the rules. We can complain (and probably will), but it is what it is. Adapt or fall behind.”<\/p>\n Nina<\/a> for “Come on Cath, at least you had a shower at all. Some weeks ago they turned off ALL our water at work without telling anyone and so I didn\u2019t have a shower after cycling, no glass of water, and no cup of tea. Mermaid<\/a> for “I hate the long wait time for Shaw. When they cancelled our cable two days after moving in (activating the previous owner\u2019s disconnect request two days AFTER activating our connect request) they initially told us it would be 4 weeks for it to come back on. In the end, after a combination of complaining that we couldn\u2019t work from home when needed and pointing out the Shaw technician who disconnected us was technically on our land without our permission, they came out in three days. Took lots of complaining though. Perhaps some whining. Might have been a spot of yelling (no, I am not proud of that).”<\/p>\n and Richard Wintle<\/a> for “new poll result \u2013 \u201c1 in 5 fans accurately predict Canucks playoff run!\u201d”<\/p>\n Apr 27 2012: Ricardipus (2011-2012 Regular Season Hockey Pool CHAMPION!!1!)<\/a> for “That was really tense \u2013 5-point margin on a total of 1,091. Quick, someone do some stats to prove my win isn\u2019t statistically significant!<\/p>\n Thank you everyone, fun as always, and mod definitely had me sweating there (who gets 14 points out of a goalie in a single week?!!!!).”<\/p>\n Mike<\/a> for “Well, as a big United fan (that is Dundee, as distinct from the wee Uniteds down south), the mid to later 80s were a time of constant disappointment for me. A string of Scottish and one UEFA cup final(s) have instilled a near permanent sense of impending doom in me. I\u2019m still not completely sure we\u2019ve really won the Scottish cup twice since then. Ya dancer!”<\/p>\n Ricardipus again<\/a> “The problem is, you\u2019ve set your sights too high. If you were a Torquay United fan (and I use that word advisedly) like me, you\u2019d never expect to win anything. Less disappointment that way.”<\/p>\n Chall<\/a> for “(Let\u2019s see if I can remember how to write about anything other than hockey!) and SB<\/a> for “A few people from my new lab commented that they don\u2019t attend these seminars because \u201cjumiping genes\u201d are very confusing to them\u2026 and I\u2019m thinking: hold on, you expect non-stem cell biologists (i.e. most of the department) to understand your limit dilution setup on a tertiary transplant of virus transduced blood stem cells, yet you can\u2019t get your head around a few basic molecular techniques?? Excuses.<\/p>\n The people I feel REALLY bad for are the bioinformaticians, because they put in ten times the amount of work into making their talks comprehensible to people outside the field, yet few people show up to actually hear them.”<\/p>\n May 4 2012: Silver Fox<\/a>\u00a0for “I didn\u2019t know there was a way to automatically turn the font red for added sections\/words and use strikeout on deleted portions, so once did that by hand for a long draft I was editing. It was impossible to read, but my boss wanted it (sodid it and kept my own clean copy).”<\/p>\n Nico<\/a>\u00a0for “We very occasionally get asked by author to track all changes in we make in a manuscript. We don\u2019t, not because we\u2019re all high and mighty, but because every single line of the manuscript is covered in changes when we\u2019re done with it! eXtyles does that, it is much simpler to just make the changes and trust us (you can, really, we\u2019re quite careful\u2026). Eva<\/a>\u00a0for “Is the answer \u201cDownload another browser\u201d? Because it should be.”<\/p>\n Mike<\/a>\u00a0for “I rather hope the answer would be \u201cjump in your jalopy and speed on into the 21st century.\u201d<\/p>\n Or \u201cstill using IE4? Get the hell out of academia.\u201d”<\/p>\n and\u00a0Grant<\/a>\u00a0for “yes, the correct fix is \u201cfor goodness sakes get a current browser for the love of everything sane\u201d.<\/p>\n Besides Safari, Apple\u2019s own browser (which is available for Windows) comes with the OS. Nothing to do \u2013 just use the existing browser.<\/p>\n Disclosure: I no longer know what browser I prefer as I think that while all of them render pages well, have decent user interfaces, etc., they all perform terribly under heavy loads or, in particular, low RAM. (Personally I smell an OS issue, but what gives?)”<\/p>\n May 11 2012: Nina<\/a> for “Now I understand why there was only hockey updates for so long \u2026! Not that I don\u2019t like hockey, but it\u2019s hard to connect when you\u2019re in rugby-land.”<\/p>\n Richard Wintle<\/a> for “The new job will be somewhat similar to my current one, but with much more emphasis on project management and much less on writing grants**.<\/em><\/p>\n HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<\/p>\n I\u2019ll wait for the 5.5 year retrospective post to see just how much grant writing you *didn\u2019t* get involved in\u2026”<\/p>\n Grant<\/a> for “As an independent computational biologist (i.e. a consultant), I can understand your happiness at being part of a team again. There\u2019s that difference between working for a team, even if possibly being quite closely involved with them, and being part of the team. It\u2019s a small difference in some ways, but a huge difference in others.”<\/p>\n Massimo<\/a> for “First of all, congratulations. To me, someone like you is a bit the bellwether of how things are out there. If a person as talented and resourceful as you have proven to be, were one day truly unable to find employment, then we would know that things have gotten really, really bad. Fortunately it is not like that \u2014 yet.<\/p>\n Secondly I do not understand your misgivings and feelings of guilt, really. Where do they come from ? Why is it that it is OK for bosses to tell employees point blank \u201csorry your position has been\/will (likely) be eliminated\u201d, while employees have to walk on egg shells when it comes to firing their own employers ? You are on soft money, being told by your boss that at any moment your job may be no more, and you feel \u201cguilty\u201d about looking for something, anything to stay afloat ? I say you do what you gotta do, and if your boss should resent you (which I am sure he won\u2019t), !@#$ them. Supply and demand must work equally in both directions, it cannot always be the employee to take the shaft. So, you have the perfect job now. You know what I say ? Say, hypothetically, you get a phone call tomorrow from someone else \u2014 heck, your current boss, telling you that a permanent position may be available for you if you are interested \u2014 are you going to \u201cfeel guilty\u201d about telling your new employer that you are quitting ? I sure as hell hope not. […]<\/p>\n Any employer demanding undivided loyalty of employees should commit 1) never to lay off anyone (unless the employee commits a crime) 2) always to beat any competitive salary offer and\/or pay better than prevailing wage. Heather<\/a> for “I like Massimo\u2019s comment about the non reciprocity of the power structure. But I think there is nothing to be done except to be so good as to get some practice in asserting your choices.”<\/p>\n Richard Wintle again<\/a> for “In the C. elegans <\/em>world, there was for many years (and maybe it still exists now) a newsletter type of journal called The Worm Breeder\u2019s Gazette<\/em>. People would submit all kinds of unpublished things to it, in a format more or less like meeting abstracts. It was not, of course, peer reviewed. It served as a community publication so that people could know what everyone else was doing and spur discussion and collaboration, in the best spirit of the worm community, which has always been a very collegial bunch (in general).<\/p>\n Sounds great, right? Well, it was\u2026 to a point. It also, of course, served as a sort of virtual pissing post, so that people could essentially stake their claim to certain research areas and implicitly discourage others (or, if you like, encourage them to do something else). Yes, it kept people from duplicating efforts, thereby avoiding scoops. But it also meant that those researchers not playing the WBG game could sit back on the sidelines and keep an eye on what their competitors were (quite publicly) up to.<\/p>\n So \u2013 as an \u201copen community\u201d approach \u2013 same old same old. If everyone plays nicely, it\u2019s great. But we all know that science doesn\u2019t work that way.<\/p>\n Last related point \u2013 there are many examples where full-on competition has sped things up (public Human Genome Project vs. Celera; the Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, CF and retinoblastoma genes, structure of DNA, you name it). It doesn\u2019t stretch the imagination much to think that fully open science could actually slow a lot of discoveries down, rather than speed them up.”<\/p>\n Gerty-Z<\/a> for “Adam, I\u2019m sure that [if everyone is open, no-one gets scooped] is true in some fantasy world where everyone has everything in the open. And also there is no one that would see your \u201copen\u201d work and instead of being all warm and fuzzy collaborative decides to speed up their work in the same area to beat you to the punch. But in the real world, that is not how it works. It seems ridiculous to ignore that. Do you want to be the one that sacrifices their ability to publish (and perhaps your career)?<\/p>\n Open science is an interesting idea, but I\u2019m with Cath here\u2013I can\u2019t really get on board. I\u2019m a junior faculty member, so I need to publish in order to keep my job. And my grad students and postdocs need to publish to advance in the careers that they want.”<\/p>\n Casey<\/a> for “In almost every case I know of where one group scoops another, each group could have benefited from the collaboration. If you think about it, the only way this can\u2019t be the the case is if the final papers contain exactly the same data. Is it really a good strategy to fund two, or more, labs to do the same research? In my mind, it\u2019s a no-brainer that the cause of science would be advanced greatly if scientists worked together.<\/p>\n Of course, it sucks to get scooped, and no one working on p53 in HeLa cells would be wise to do it. If the field began to recognize the contributions that each scientist made to a project, instead of characterizing them simply as \u201cfirst author\u201d, \u201csenior author\u201d, or \u201cmay-have-done-slightly-less-work-than-first-author-or-may-have-just-done-a-couple-ligations\u201d it would help a lot.”<\/p>\n Zen Faulkes<\/a> for “There\u2019s a another issue here, which is the underlying reason why \u201cscooping\u201d is a problem.<\/p>\n We place too much priority on being first and not enough on replication.<\/p>\n You would think that two labs arriving at the same conclusions independently should be reason for both papers to be published as complementary findings. It would show that the finding was rock solid.<\/p>\n The arsenic life story was also a good example of how completely ambivalent people are to replication, even of a big, high profile claim.”<\/p>\n and Austin Elliot<\/a> for “What Zen said -replication is important, and underestimated.<\/p>\n If two labs do arrive at something simultaneously, so much the better. Less chance it\u2019s wrong.<\/p>\n It is also a major way fraud is uncovered, I would have said.<\/p>\n Re \u2018too much priority on being first\u2019 I once had the experience of publishing a idea nearly at the same time as another lab. One of our more bitter professional rivals took exception to our later being credited with \u2018simultaneous but independent\u2019 in a commentary, and wrote to a journal editor (!) who\u2019d published the commentary, pointing out our paper had been submitted a month later than the other discoverer\u2019s. Coincidentally, other discoverer and bitter rival were friends.”<\/p>\n May 18 2012: SB<\/a> for “One caveat to \u201copen science\u201d that is seldom discussed is the importance of achieving intra-group consensus on this issue (and the consequent difficulty it poses to individuals wishing to adopt this model in practice, even if they fully back it in principle); I wouldn\u2019t dream of posting any of my findings online because they rely heavily on other group members\u2019 unpublished data.<\/p>\n […]<\/p>\n Also, my gut feeling is that people who are most heavily invested into their projects have the least to lose from posting the data online before submitting to a journal; if your experiments take years to do, it is very unlikely that someone could replicate them before you submit yours for publication\u2026”<\/p>\n Beth Snow<\/a> for “My first few papers from my PhD are under my former (i.e., ex-husband\u2019s) surname, with more recent papers under my maiden name (i.e., the one I currently go by). I put a note on my publication list that older papers were published under a former surname, and it\u2019s not been a problem for people reading my CV. Without the note, however, people could not figure out why I had \u201cM.E. Simpson\u201d underlined for the older papers and \u201cM.E. Snow\u201d underlined for the more recent ones. I thought it would be pretty obvious, but honestly, people were totally flummoxed without the explanation.”<\/p>\n Massimo<\/a> for “I am so jealous, I wish I could change my name too, and then tell everyone that my h-index is actually twice as much as it is, it is just that I have been publishing under different names\u2026”<\/p>\n CromerCrox<\/a> for “Modesty is an overrated virtue. Publication entitles you to a certain amount of self-congratulation.”<\/p>\n Elizabeth<\/a> for “I got married about 6 months after receiving my PhD in 2010 and changed my last name to my husbands (which I also consider an upgrade, went from 6 letters to 9, there\u2019s a very cool looking family crest associated with the name in Norway, and I\u2019m the only one with my new name in Pubmed that I can find so far). ”<\/p>\n Bean-Mom<\/a> for “It can feel strange to still publish when you\u2019re not still at the bench, no? When I held a science writing\/editing job somewhat similar to yours, I was offered authorship on a manuscript that I worked very hard on. It was so disorganized that I basically had to rewrite it from scratch\u2013including giving advice on experimental design, figures, etc. It was a really weird position to be in; I\u2019d been hired as a writer, not a postdoc or staff scientist, so it felt odd giving scientific input. But everyone was appreciative, particularly the Very Busy Supervisor who was too busy to supervise. When they offered me authorship on that paper, I turned it down as I didn\u2019t feel I\u2019d quite met the standard for authorship, but also because I thought it was an awful manuscript (even after all my help) and I didn\u2019t want to be associated with it!<\/p>\n And the review that I worked on in that particular lab, which I thought I really did deserve authorship on? Not only did I not get authorship\u2013they forgot to acknowledge me!<\/p>\n C\u2019est la vie. New lab now, working at the bench and writing for myself. Okay, this comment has gone on too long. I just remember how odd it felt to be in that position, and to realize that you can still publish even when you\u2019re not at the bench. (I guess no PIs are actually at the bench, and they all publish!)”<\/p>\n and Frank Norman<\/a> for “Always good to see your name up in lights.<\/p>\n Maybe you could have put both names (CA Dunn and CA Ennis) on? \ud83d\ude09 ”<\/p>\n May 25 2012: Liz<\/a> for “Oh, this is too funny! I was just talking with friends this week about how interconnected the Canadian science community is. The discussion stemmed from how many friends\/lab alumni\/collaborators we ran into at a conference last week. And one of those collaborators I unexpectedly ran into? You guessed it- the infamous David Kent.”<\/p>\n The Infamous David Kent<\/a> for “while flattering re: networks, the comparison to Kevin Bacon did really make me shudder\u2026 ”<\/p>\n Bob O’H<\/a> for “Do they indicate well organized places of worship with a church bible? And well organised speleological attractions with a holey bible?”<\/p>\n Nina<\/a> for “Cool! That means I practically live in Canada. Christchurch, the Vancouver of Canada\u2019s East coast.”<\/p>\n Richard Wintle<\/a> for “\u201cCustomer Ratings: We have not received enough ratings to display an average for the current version of this application.\u201d<\/p>\n Here\u2019s one: on average, your application sucks.”<\/p>\n and ModScientist<\/a> for “Mock away, IndyR is my brother. And a Canucks HATER! And continue to mock me too, yeah yeah you didn\u2019t make picks and still almost beat me. My Skillz died with the Canucks season \ud83d\ude41<\/p>\n Also, cowy is my 9 year old nephew and JasonDoc is his dad. Mock them too while you\u2019re at it. Especially Jason, he is a Flames fan (barf)”<\/p>\n July 13 2012: Ian<\/a> for “Einstein was born in 1879, and didn\u2019t speak or write until many years after that. Thus, it is unreasonable to believe that he posited this riddle early in the 19th century, 60-70 years before his birth and ability to speak. So, the correct answer is that it is a trick question. Einstein ate the fish for lunch. I determined this in 12 seconds.<\/p>\n What did I win?”<\/p>\n Megan Cully<\/a> for “I can\u2019t believe I spent that much time on a quiz but I hate not getting the answer once I\u2019ve started. Probably why I\u2019m a lousy scientist, beating uninteresting projects into mediocre publications”<\/p>\n Bob O’H and Steve Caplan for the following exchange:<\/a><\/p>\n Bob: “It\u2019s obvious that the solution in nobody. The Norwegian ran out of cigars, so he smoked the fish instead.<\/p>\n He nicked it off the German, who was too busy making an extension to his living room.”<\/p>\n Steve: “Sorry Bob, that\u2019s a smokescreen and red herring”<\/p>\n Bob: “It was closer to brown after it had been smoked, though.”<\/p>\n Nina<\/a> for “NZ celebrates \u201cthe queen\u2019s birthday\u201d too. But always on a Monday, because otherwise what is the fun of a dead queen\u2019s birthday.<\/p>\n My Spanish colleague was equally confused when me and a German colleague tried to explain 2 long weekends to her. A few weeks back was ANZAC day, which is something like memorial day for Aussie and NZ. There is also an ANZAC Biscuit (which the girls used to sent to the boys at the front). So My German colleague said \u201cYou know, ANZAC, like the biscuit\u201d. To which the Spanish lady answered \u201cA holiday for a cookie, and one for a queen that is not there anymore and not on her real birthday either. It\u2019s fine by me, but I don\u2019t understand\u201d.”<\/p>\n Bob again<\/a> for “Oh, [Newcastle United] are in that state when they\u2019ve just been doing really well, and they\u2019re getting everyone\u2019s hopes up, so they\u2019re going to crash and be awful next season.”<\/p>\n and Michelle<\/a> for “In Ontario, Victoria Day long weekend Is the weekend that signifies people can go back outside again, open up their cottages for the summer, plant their gardens, and barbecue. Hence it is colloquially known as \u2018May 2-4\u2032 weekend. As in case of beer. as in time to start partying and drinking around a bonfire whilst Lynard Skinard\u2019s \u2018Sweet Home Alabama\u2019 blares out from the pickup truck\u2019s sound system.”<\/p>\n Jul 28 2012: Nina<\/a> for “reading this, I realize perhaps it is a good thing that my parents think NZ is too far away for a visit. Just imagining getting the right cereal and yoghurt and having prying eyes through all the cupboards makes me shiver. ”<\/p>\n Mermaid<\/a> for “I also buy \u2018special\u2019 cereal, milk, juice, peanut butter, etc when my parents visit. I would have assumed that most of us would continue to use the same basics we were raised with, but it doesn\u2019t seem to work that way. My parents often stay for a couple nights on their way to or from someplace else, so I stock up the fridge and then they leave without eating it all and I throw it out. Then they come back a month later and I do it all over again. I once tried to just feed them what I eat, but there were so many pointed comments and heavy sighs during breakfast that I never tried it again.”<\/p>\n Ricardipus<\/a> for “I don\u2019t understand the empty inbox. I suspect you Photoshopped it to look like that. ;)”<\/p>\n and then<\/a> “First day at the new job:<\/p>\n \u201cGood morning Cath. Nice to see you. Please complete this 400-page Genome Canada progress report by Tuesday morning. Thank you.\u201d”<\/p>\n Bob O’H<\/a> for “Silence is not an option? Does that mean we all have to say someting? Anything?<\/p>\n Well, PTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! to you then.<\/p>\n There. Said it.”<\/p>\n Beth<\/a> for “I am the champion!! I am the champion!!<\/p>\n OK, that\u2019s all the socialization time I\u2019m allowed for June. See you in July?”<\/p>\n Beth Snow again<\/a> for “I\u2019m a little intimidated to start any book so large as Game of Thrones (let alone an entire series of such huge books) while I\u2019m in school. But I have been watching the TV series and since Devon has read the books, I just annoy ask him what the hell is going on and who the hell everyone is. Related: did you see that tweet (I can\u2019t remember who tweeted it) about how the Game of Thrones is just like Twitter because there are 140 characters and terrible things are always happening? So true.”<\/p>\n Mike<\/a> for ““Some people are still getting used to the way in which us Brits speak to each other, in particular the use of insults to show affection”<\/em><\/p>\n No we don\u2019t. Idiot.<\/p>\n Sigh, I\u2019m all out of GoT books now. Maybe Dunk and Donut will have to fill in for a while. I suspect it might be easier for those who haven\u2019t read the books to watch the TV series. They don\u2019t have to keep turning round to ask Mrs F\/Mr E Man\/Relevant other (del as approp) \u201cThat didn\u2019t happen in the books, did it?\u201d”<\/p>\n and Ricardipus again<\/a> for “ust re-read the \u201csilly signs on lab instruments\u201d part, which made me smile \u2013 I just did a tour of our shop and was reminded again that one of our racks of thermocyclers is named after members of the Wu-Tang Clan: U-God, Method Man, RZA, Ghostface Killah, Raekwon, Inspectah Deck, and so forth. They used to be Sleepy, Happy, Sneezy, Doc, etc. \u2013 not sure quite what happened there but I\u2019m sure there\u2019s some profound social commentary that could be derived from it.<\/p>\n \u201cGhostface Killah\u201d. I might start signing my emails that way. Suits me perfectly I think.”<\/p>\n Aug 19 2012:<\/p>\n Bob O’H<\/a>\u00a0for “Pro tip: don\u2019t follow up Y with X by email. If someone calls themselves X then they\u2019re probably illiterate anyway.”<\/p>\n Richard Wintle<\/a>\u00a0for “I\u2019m glad you haven\u2019t yet rapidly progressed to using the terms \u201ccrap\u201d and \u201ccrud\u201d instead of \u201cthingy\u201d and \u201cstuff\u201d.”<\/p>\n ScientistMother<\/a>\u00a0for the outstanding typo “you are free to come hang out with my demo spawn”<\/p>\n and\u00a0Alyssa<\/a>\u00a0for “the picture you painted of the long weekend with no one around was heartbreaking yet funny (only because it\u2019s in the past, and we can laugh at that, right?).”<\/p>\n Sep 14 2012: Bob O’H and Mike for the following exchange:<\/a> Bob: “So, a grant entitled Deciphering Concerted Improvements Towards Linking Mechanisms would have a pretty good chance.”<\/p>\n Mike: “And it still manages to say more than some abstracts I\u2019ve read”.<\/p>\n Me: “It would probably do better than Unraveling a Comprehensive Investigation of Evaluated INTERROGATION techniques, yes (depending on the funding agency, of course).”<\/p>\n Bob: “Wasn\u2019t that a leaked repot about water-boarding?”<\/p>\n Richard Wintle<\/a> for “I see an opportunity for an iPhone app that generates sure-to-be-funded grant titles based on your input keywords (or maybe just by examining your existing publications from PubMed).<\/p>\n Hm, Genome Canada has a bioinformatics competition going on right now\u2026 do you think developing such an app would count?”<\/p>\n Richard Wintle again<\/a> for “Wow. That must be the fastest thing the Royal Mail has ever done!<\/p>\n \u201cA fleet of 90 Royal Mail vehicles will deliver the stamps across the UK to over 500 Post Offices to be on sale tomorrow\u2026\u201d \u2013 which begs the question\u2026 where is this fleet of vehicles when UK denizens want a regular bit of mail delivered on time?”<\/p>\n […]<\/p>\n “I once received a postcard from my parents, sent from Germany, overnight. I have no idea how that worked.”<\/p>\n Nina<\/a> for “I had the exact same experience in the NL some weeks back. Everybody rapping along with some super lame Dutch song and I\u2019m the only one thinking \u201cWTF is this?!?! Dutch rap?!?!\u201d.<\/p>\n The whole expat thing is starting to annoy me too. all these misunderstandings.”<\/p>\n and Pika<\/a> for “And for this, You stand absolutely no chance of winning a trivia quiz in either your native or your adopted country<\/em> we actually made an experiment with some local friends when I was living in Sweden with the \u201cWho wants to be a millionare\u201d quiz (you\u2019re bound to have a local version of this everywhere). The locals breezed through the easier questions, which the expats had no idea about (Children\u2019s rhymes in local language? Who was that politician from 10 years ago? No idea for someone who is not local\u2026), while the expats aced all the harder ones, particularly the geography\/world related ones. We joked that we should take two people, one local, one expat and disguise them into one person, who would then go there and win all”<\/p>\n Sep 21 2012:<\/p>\n Mike<\/a> for “Pfpfpffff, give me a speccy 48k anytime over those clunky ol\u2019 commodores. Especially as I\u2019ve had a heated argument with my (non-British) brother-in-law about the presence\/absence of rubber keys on the 48k. Apparently the designs differed between the models released in Spain and the UK. We UKites apparently have a thing for the feel of rubber on our fingertips that is not shared by the more continental.”<\/p>\n Mermaid<\/a> for “With apologies to Willie Nelson (and to any readers offended by my butchering of classic lyrics):<\/p>\n To all the genes I\u2019ve harmed before Jenny and Bob for the following exchange:<\/a> Jenny: “Don\u2019t worry, it\u2019s not really gene torture as defined by the Geneva Convention unless you also Bend, Fold and Spindle them as well.”<\/p>\n Bob: “That would be the Gene-va Convention, of course.”<\/p>\n Richard Wintle<\/a> for “You swam in the St. Lawrence River? Forget creepy tickle monsters\u2026 *that\u2019s* brave.<\/p>\n That salt shaker is hilarious. And what the heck is that tickle monster sign supposed to be, anyway?<\/p>\n Final point \u2013 if you want some fun, find someone from Montreal and someone from New York, put them in a room together, and say the word \u201cbagel\u201d. Instant argument.”<\/p>\n Mike again<\/a> for “I\u2019m pretty sure the tickle monster sign is actually a warning: \u201cDanger! Canadians aren\u2019t quite as good at the Gay Gordons as they think they are.\u201d<\/p>\n And the next one is a warning for French breast implants.”<\/p>\n Nina<\/a> for “As someone who notoriously refuses to incorporate any mobile device that can also be used as a phone into her life, I could write a long, long, long rant about all things wonderful in the world that are becoming obsolete to my great regret with the evolution of smartphones. However I will keep it short: it is amazing how many people forget they have a brain as soon as they get their hands on a smartphone. Steve Caplan<\/a> for “The timer-trick is a \u201ctime-honored\u201d way of extracting oneself from many unpleasant circumstances in the vicinity of the lab!”<\/p>\n ScientistMother<\/a> for “essentially I use my smartphone for: twitter, FB, email, ipod & camera. I\u2019m such a luddite.”<\/p>\n and Professor in Training<\/a> for “I would comment about how sad you are but that would be the pot calling the kettle black (but with a different, much cooler band, obviously). At least you didn\u2019t meet them in person and gush about how totally amazing they were and how much you totally loved them and how this is the very best moment of your life. Of course, I never did that. That was someone else. A friend.<\/p>\n Excuse me while I go and hang my head in shame.”<\/p>\n Post(s) of the Week<\/strong><\/p>\n Apr 20 2012: <\/strong>Prof-like Substance<\/a> for “In writing, your audience matters” and<\/a> “Is there room in a review for grantsmithing feedback?”, and Sylvia McClain<\/a> for “Why can’t we write like other people write?” (a theme, this week! Three great conversations about the definition and importance of good scientific writing)<\/em><\/p>\n Massimo<\/a> for “Give him a chance? Sure, as long as…” (now that Canada has a new leader of the official opposition, does the end (getting rid of Harper) justify the means (a move to the centre)? Massimo and I disagree, but what do you think?)<\/em><\/p>\n Steve Caplan<\/a> for “Accountable anonymity” (cyberbullying and the blogosphere)<\/em><\/p>\n and Jennifer Rohn<\/a> for “In which the light bulb’s on the other foot” (last week we found out how many Belgians \/ Torontonians \/ engineers \/ psychiatrists it takes to change a light bulb; this week we find out how many light bulb changers it takes to break into a Tab-Seal closure full of isopropanol)<\/em><\/p>\n Apr 27 2012: <\/strong>Charles Pelkey, guest posting on the “Breast cancer? But doctor… I hate pink!” blog<\/a> for “Tits-on-a-boar: a male’s thoughts on his own breast cancer” (one man’s story of a disease that’s rarely discussed)<\/em><\/p>\n Ann, usual author of the same blog,<\/a> for “This surreal life” (beautifully written post about “mourning your own life while you’re still living it”)<\/em><\/p>\n Stephen Curry<\/a> for “What’s your favourite colour?” (I agree with the commenters who argued that X-rays aren’t a colour, but also agree with Stephen that they’re pretty damn cool anyway. Great comments section on this one, too)<\/em><\/p>\n Jenny Rohn<\/a> for “In which necessity’s a MoFo” (excellent examples of MacGyvered lab equipment)<\/em><\/p>\n Richard P. Grant<\/a> for “Gonna build a house” (Yes. This. SO MUCH this.)<\/em><\/p>\n and Eva Amsen<\/a> for “Hoping they’ll lose pinterest” (does <\/em>every new medium need to be used for scientific messages?)<\/em><\/p>\n May 4 2012:\u00a0Stephen Curry<\/a> for “Eyes on the prize are blind to reality” (would replacing the current impact factor system with post-publication review and prizes for the best papers be better for open science?)<\/em><\/p>\n May 11 2012: <\/strong>Athene Donald<\/a> for “Conferences and courage” (the importance of women asking questions at conferences – and of everyone asking good questions)<\/em><\/p>\n Nina<\/a> for “Noho Marae” (interesting post about Maori culture, including musings on the meaning of “home”)<\/em><\/p>\n and Erika Cule<\/a> for “You’re turning into your supervisor” (is it inevitable that trainees will inherit some of their supervisor’s habits and even personality traits? If so, is that a bad thing?)<\/em><\/p>\n May 18 2012: <\/strong>The Excitable Scientist<\/a> for “(Im)perfect role models” (on “the lack of correlation between having pleasant interactions with somebody, and that person\u2019s ability to influence your life in a positive way”)<\/em><\/p>\n and Massimo<\/a> for “An ordinary Sunday evening” (buying train tickets in Italy is apparently much less straightforward – but much more hilarious – than in normal<\/span> other countries)<\/em><\/p>\n May 25 2012: <\/strong>BiochemBelle<\/a> for “Science & self-promotion” (does science blogging cross the line between effective science communication and self-promotion? (answer: not in most cases, and why is a little self-promotion a bad thing anyway?))<\/em><\/p>\n and Pharma Strategy Blog<\/a> for “ASCO 2012 acronym mania!” (fun with clinical trial acronyms)<\/em><\/p>\n Jul 13 2012:\u00a0Stephen Curry<\/a> for “A bill to amend the law of defamation” (good news on the British libel law reform front)<\/em><\/p>\n Steve Caplan<\/a> for “The most important biomedical science technology advance: do we have a consensus?” (interesting discussion about the technologies that have had the greatest impact on research)<\/em><\/p>\n Massimo Boninsegni<\/a> for “Sorry, can’t work with you” (should recruiters always reach for the stars?)<\/em><\/p>\n and Jenny Rohn<\/a> for “In which they don’t make ’em like they used to” (“back in my day we ran our samples backwards and we were grateful for it”)<\/em><\/p>\n July 28 2012:\u00a0Masks of Eris<\/a>\u00a0for “Prometheus: idiots killing themselves”\u00a0(every movie review should be like this! And no, I still haven’t seen it)<\/em><\/p>\n GMP<\/a>\u00a0for “Tales of author a$$holishness”\u00a0(how NOT to respond to reviewers)<\/em><\/p>\n Eva Amsen<\/a>\u00a0for “The kitsch quiche niche”\u00a0((some) Americans are so weird!)<\/em><\/p>\n Prof-like Substance<\/a>\u00a0for “A little appreciation goes a long way”\u00a0(every PI – indeed, every boss – should read this post)<\/em><\/p>\n CromerCrox<\/a>\u00a0for “The Boson”\u00a0(Higgsle giggles – don’t miss John the Plumber’s contributions in the comments!)<\/em><\/p>\n and\u00a0Austin Elliot<\/a>\u00a0for “No passion please, we’re scientists”\u00a0(“semantic bleaching, PR bullshit, and scientific job ads)<\/em><\/p>\n Aug 19 2012:\u00a0Masks of Eris<\/a> for “The real ninth Doctor: Doc Bucket” (where *was* Dr Who hiding between 1989 and 2005?)<\/em><\/p>\n
\nNo idea.<\/p>\n
\nStill no idea.”<\/p>\n
\nOpen the door, put giraffe in, close the door.<\/p>\n
\nYou can\u2019t, there\u2019s a giraffe inside already.”<\/p>\n
\nOr the time when the fire alamer went off when I was in the shower. Or the time we had a major earthquake and two of my colleagues were in the shower. Always bring a towel that is large enough to cover all your precious bodyparts.
\nThe internet-thing is really realy stupid though.I suppose they will still bill you for the weeks without internet, as any self-respecting internetprovider would?”<\/p>\n
\nWhy? It\u2019s the PLAY OFFS!! \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\n[…]
\nI can\u2019t stand Comic Sans, but my better half has it (or some similar derivative) as the default font on her phone. I think that\u2019s a ploy so that I don\u2019t touch the thing.”<\/p>\n
\nYour soon-to-be-former boss may be the greatest person in this world, but if he cannot afford you, he has to settle for less, simple as that. The only chance to go back to a reasonable job market, in which mission critical individuals are hired as they should be (i.e., permanently) and paid as much as they are worth, is precisely by making employers realize that unless they put more on the table, they are not getting the performance.<\/p>\n
\nIf someone out there is willing to offer you more (either by way of better salary or stability), it means that that is what you are worth in a market economy. So, why should you settle for less ? If you want to do charity, I can name many worthy causes before either your current or past employer, believe me.
\nI don\u2019t know, maybe I have gotten disillusioned with unions, but I do feel that unless employers start getting burned by employees leaving, things won\u2019t get better.<\/p>\n
\nIf they don\u2019t, they are delusional and\/or bullying thugs.”<\/p>\n
\nWho traveled in and out the lab door
\nI\u2019m glad they came along
\nThis post will right the wrong
\nTo all the genes I\u2019ve harmed before”<\/p>\n
\nOr maybe that\u2019s a good thing?”<\/p>\n