If a top scientist loses a grant, science loses.
Toxic environments and abuse in academia causes science to lose. How many great minds have quit science because they decided the pathetic salary isn't worth being harassed at work?
Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
41–50 of 55 posts
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#42Well I'm of two minds about this. Linus Torvalds is, by all accounts, a bully. But that's how science goes sometimes; it is unforgiving and will make you feel stupid and inadequate, why blame the messenger? And science is hard! People regularly get in your way with shitty ideas, especially when you've hit upon something great like Linux or cancer gene discoveries. I kind of dealt with this at work recently. We were a…
> I really just wanted to call this BA an idiot and bully the problem away, it would have saved a significant amount of time and frustration for multiple parties. That's about as effective as solving your problem as disabling the contextual menu was for solving theirs. That ensures they'll be working against you and not with you.
Absolutely, which was why I fought the urge and didn't say it. But if I was getting these requests all the time, all throughout my career, yeah, my guard would get worn down and some harsh words would slip out.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can be linus style direct, more efficiently, by removing the irrelevant insults and swearing. They really serve no purpose other than to make linus feel good and others feel bad. So its not net good for the world. You can say "This commit is garbage I am really angry about it and expected better from you" and not add "you are a fucking abortion" or whatever.
Even that is not helpful to the recipient of the feedback. How about: "Here is a list of standards every code check-in is required to meet. Here are the standards that your current P/R fails. Try again. Do you need help with anything specific? When can you have a new P/R ready?." If applicable: "This delays the schedule, what is your recovery plan?: And occasionally: "At your pay grade, you are expected to know these…
I find this kind of dispassionate feedback both condescending and nauseating tbqh.
A few f-bombs let me know you care.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#44Since no one here has the facts, people are mostly just arguing about their different associations with the word "bullying". That makes the thread basically about nothing. This is an example of how an intellectually curious discussion requires a minimal level of information. We don't have that in this case.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#45Well I'm of two minds about this. Linus Torvalds is, by all accounts, a bully. But that's how science goes sometimes; it is unforgiving and will make you feel stupid and inadequate, why blame the messenger? And science is hard! People regularly get in your way with shitty ideas, especially when you've hit upon something great like Linux or cancer gene discoveries. I kind of dealt with this at work recently. We were a…
> A business analyst thought that it would solve a session management problem and instead of asking us how to solve the problem, thought that they would prescribe this solution to us. ... I really just wanted to call this BA an idiot and bully the problem away, it would have saved a significant amount of time and frustration for multiple parties.
I totally understand your frustration and reaction here, as I've had the same.
I've found the best way to deal with this is right away start reframing this back to a business problem, often in the form of a user story ("As a _____ user, I want to _____ so I can _____"). Keep asking "why" to refine it down to what is really trying to be accomplished. The point is to not get into an argument about a technical implementation with someone who doesn't have the knowledge to argue about it (whether they realize it or not), because it's nearly impossible to not come across as a bully.
In this situation I would almost outright dismiss the suggestion of the right-click, saying something like "Forget the right-click thing for a minute; In business terms, what is it you're trying to prevent and why?". We're both trying to solve a business (or user-facing) problem here, let's make sure we're both on the same page about that before we even begin to discuss how to do it.
I am very up front with people about my process: If you bring me a perceived solution, I'm always going to boil it back to a problem and work from there. Sometimes I -- or more often we, the dev team -- might come to the same conclusion, but I'd say the vast majority of times, in my experience, we will come up with a better implementation that takes less time to implement, has other benefits that are not part of the original objective, and/or avoids a major downside not originally thought of.
Arguing is going to make you seem like a bully; calmly reframing the discussion shows you're trying to work together.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#46Well I'm of two minds about this. Linus Torvalds is, by all accounts, a bully. But that's how science goes sometimes; it is unforgiving and will make you feel stupid and inadequate, why blame the messenger? And science is hard! People regularly get in your way with shitty ideas, especially when you've hit upon something great like Linux or cancer gene discoveries. I kind of dealt with this at work recently. We were a…
> I really just wanted to call this BA an idiot and bully the problem away, it would have saved a significant amount of time and frustration for multiple parties. If someone with authority over you isn't willing to take "no" for an answer, they're not going to take "no, you idiot" either. That doesn't save time, it just takes you from "wasting time" to "wasting time and also people are pissed at you."
> If someone with authority over you isn't willing to take "no" for an answer, they're not going to take "no, you idiot" either.
They might! An insult is like a splash of cold water to the face, it's a wake up call. When used surgically, it can push people to do great things. The BA was so, so grossly wrong about what the right click menu does and how websites work that maybe an insult would have caused him to go back and google a few things.
Have you ever seen the movie Whiplash? Without the anguish caused by the conductor, do you think our drummer would have pushed himself to become a better drummer?
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even that is not helpful to the recipient of the feedback. How about: "Here is a list of standards every code check-in is required to meet. Here are the standards that your current P/R fails. Try again. Do you need help with anything specific? When can you have a new P/R ready?." If applicable: "This delays the schedule, what is your recovery plan?: And occasionally: "At your pay grade, you are expected to know these…
I find this kind of dispassionate feedback both condescending and nauseating tbqh. A few f-bombs let me know you care.
Dispassionate? Let me tell you, if you have ever had an ex-commando officer from the Israeli Defense Force as a boss, you will know with every fiber of your being that those words can be delivered with passion.
A passion that leaves no doubt in your mind that "What is your recovery plan?" is not a soft-ball question, and that a soft-ball answer will be promptly discarded. In my case, said boss took part in Operation Entebbe. He ran a very low-BS engineering organization. It was refreshing in a very good way.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Like a disciplinary hearing? No, a face to face meeting between adults. Not hiring lawyers to do background research and pulling her in in front of a committee. Like you would in case of such a situation in a normal company. Once you pull an "independent investigation", you're far beyond taking things like adults anymore. I wouldn't want to work at a place where I get inspected like that. She might have been an ass…
Why do you assume a face-to-face meeting wasn't tried? The exact details are confidential, for the protection of both accused and accusers. Neither one of us knows what really happened. But I can say from experience that someone who is habitually a jerk to their subordinates is not likely to change their habits when called out face-to-face by the same subordinates. They're likely to react with the same hostile dismis…
I assume that she was not called in by her superiors due to an "independent investigation" being started.
There would never be a need for such thing. If her superior receives complaints from her employees about her, then they already know that she has problems. In management and human psychology, evidence does not matter—if her employees are all dissatisfied with her, then that is all you need to know. They can then either correct her or fire her.
The presence of an "independent investigation" seems to look like someone didn't want to deal with the situation, and instead have an external party be responsible for it. That is irresponsible management from her superiors.
Now, again, she might have been a prick worth firing, but I certainly do not find this response to be sensible, nor is her resignation proof of anything as any sensible person would quit a workplace that runs "investigations" against them (just like you are likely to quit a place where your boss is a bully).
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wrong. According to the article, the "punishment" on table was a disciplinatory hearing. The PI decided to resign rather than undergo that. The situation is not materially worse than someone getting fired for a reason, and I don't see many stories on HN about that.
Regardless of what she chose (resign or be disciplined), her career may never recover. I meant "punishment" in a more abstract sense.
You complained they never got a "trial." The person you're responding to was quite correctly pointing out that was completely their choice, a disciplinary hearing would allow all sides to present information, but she effectively plead guilty instead (i.e. take the ultimate sanction).
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regardless of what she chose (resign or be disciplined), her career may never recover. I meant "punishment" in a more abstract sense.
You complained they never got a "trial." The person you're responding to was quite correctly pointing out that was completely their choice, a disciplinary hearing would allow all sides to present information, but she effectively plead guilty instead (i.e. take the ultimate sanction).
That isn't necessarily true. Even being accused of things can cause significant damage. Also, a huge grant organization had already pulled their funding.