Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-l] Rude? Was: Re: citations (Was Re: the role of simulation)

"Frankly, I have found the responses on this issue to be pretty rude! Amazing! It probably stems partly from the fact that you all know each other very well, but as primarily a lurker here, I was taken aback a bit."


This has come up before WRT people who hesitate to post because of their fear of being pilloried. I've been both pilloried and praised (indirectly) by the same person(s), and just decided to get a thicker skin -- it was already necessarily rather thick due to my increased stupidity.
Re. top posting: I much prefer that, but the appropriate sentence or two should be quoted above if thought necessary, and the full quote "cut" if very long.

bc attempts (cliché warning) to practice what he preaches

p.s. [Skip this if you don't want a story.] The invidious valuable time comparison reminds me of the discussion I had w/ a high energy theorist from an "important" U. (prob. thru Berkeley's convenio) visiting the U. of Chile in Santiago. He asked me how one could justify paying the custodial staff any less than he was for teaching there, or any one else. Among academia this was partially true at Keele (England). I was paid more than half the salary of a Sr. Lecturer while a demonstrator. Remember; except at large U.s, there is (was?) only one Professor in a dept.


Brian Blais wrote:

The citation is here:

When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment
N. D. Finkelstein, W. K. Adams, C. J. Keller, P. B. Kohl, K. K. Perkins, N. S. Podolefsky, S. Reid, and R. LeMaste
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 1, 010103 (2005)

(http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.1.010103)


On Jan 20, 2008, at Jan 20:11:05 PM, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:


Ain't rocket science Jack - just search "circuit simulation" - pops right up.




yes, it ain't rocket science to include the citation, clearly, in the email either and it's more direct and useful. Since I was the one who set off this flurry of citation emails, I would like to comment. It reminds me of my students who cite google as their source, and are really confused when I say that isn't a proper reference. Then there are those who quote the entire website, where the url is the only useful thing. When I asked about the citation, I had seen the link to the journal, but somehow missed all the stuff below even when searching the archives. It seems common on this list to top-post, so many times I skip things on the bottom, because I already read it earlier. Honestly, saying "Search the archives" when the citation is so easy to obtain seems to me to be saying "my time is more valuable than yours", which isn't very nice.

I think it is common internet courtesy if someone asks for reference, to give it, and not to say "oh, search the archives" or "go search this journal", unless one is referencing an entire thread (which wasn't the case here). Frankly, I have found the responses on this issue to be pretty rude! Amazing! It probably stems partly from the fact that you all know each other very well, but as primarily a lurker here, I was taken aback a bit.



bb