Close

Complete Captcha

• 4 years - 4862 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 13752 Goods vs 7699 No Goods

1. Economist
   02cf
   

   Why ST must make SS and PS coauthors is precisely what does not make sense in SS story. SSS is cited, and they could discuss how SSS should be cited. That would be the normal course of action. The papers addressed different questions.

   One reason why SS has such agency is that he knows he is considered an RA on his other AERs. SSS is the one paper he could own after multiple papers on various economics of supermarkets. As SSS turns flaccid, he hasn't all that much to applaud left on his CV, and decides to rub himself and PS onto ST. SS is a careerist.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 10 Volod 0 Vlad !

2. Economist
   68af
   

   Of course. Since the main idea was stolen/taken from SSS, it is clear that PS and SS would be afraid that this paper would take away from SSS. Like a referee saying "but the main model is already in ST". HS is such a lowlife that he allowed the junior people he worked with to get into this situation, it is really disgusting.

   The basic model was NOT developed by SSS. The senior author already stated that. SSS cookies the model from OT and then developed their own version, which never worked

   Understood. That's also what I thought. What I am saying is, even if SS is correct, there is no basis for coauthorship.
   

   You really can't read.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 2 Vlad !

3. Economist
   4618
   

   The only damage I control is the one I do to your girlfriend's past, stronzo.

   I am also doing a paper in IO with supermarket data. now I own all your papers coglione!
   Really, this damage control operation is getting more ridiculous by the hour.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

4. Economist
   68af
   

   Why ST must make SS and PS coauthors is precisely what does not make sense in SS story. SSS is cited, and they could discuss how SSS should be cited. That would be the normal course of action. The papers addressed different questions.
   One reason why SS has such agency is that he knows he is considered an RA on his other AERs. SSS is the one paper he could own after multiple papers on various economics of supermarkets. As SSS turns flaccid, he hasn't all that much to applaud left on his CV, and decides to rub himself and PS onto ST. SS is a careerist.

   That's what I thought. A citation should be good enough.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 3 Volod 0 Vlad !

5. Economist
   f867
   

   So sayeth the adjunct at LSE and the failed tenure guy in marketing. You're nobodies. And you're a pair of bullies

   Lol, so many desperate LRMs, so much envy.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 1 Vlad !

6. Economist
   010a
   

   And you can't write, looser. lockquote>
   

   Of course. Since the main idea was stolen/taken from SSS, it is clear that PS and SS would be afraid that this paper would take away from SSS. Like a referee saying "but the main model is already in ST". HS is such a lowlife that he allowed the junior people he worked with to get into this situation, it is really disgusting.

   The basic model was NOT developed by SSS. The senior author already stated that. SSS cookies the model from OT and then developed their own version, which never worked

   Understood. That's also what I thought. What I am saying is, even if SS is correct, there is no basis for coauthorship.
   

   You really can't read.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

7. Economist
   f867
   

   'Looser', lewd 'banging your girlfriend', the 'attack on HRMs'. Schifoldi is in the house, ladies and gentleman. And he's all out of bubblegum.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 0 Vlad !

8. Economist
   4618
   

   Maybe, but other than him I see only a bunch of whiny LRMs, who will never make it.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

9. Economist
   68af
   

   Maybe, but other than him I see only a bunch of whiny LRMs, who will never make it.

   Sure. I will quit.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

10. Economist
    4618
    

    You don't have to. LRMs need "researchers", too.

    Maybe, but other than him I see only a bunch of whiny LRMs, who will never make it.

    Sure. I will quit.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

11. Economist
    68af
    

    You don't have to. LRMs need "researchers", too.

    Maybe, but other than him I see only a bunch of whiny LRMs, who will never make it.

    Sure. I will quit.
    

    Why bother? Should make room for HRMs like you so the world can be a better place. Have fun.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

12. Economist
    20b0
    

    New statement by OT on his page
    https://sites.google.com/site/oyvindthomassen/authorship

    Strong

    4 years ago # QUOTE 10 Volod 0 Vlad !

13. Economist
    ece0
    

    damn. ps and ss destroyed in the new statement. funny how ss overevaluates his contribution which consisted of proof reading ot's emails

    4 years ago # QUOTE 5 Volod 1 Vlad !

14. Economist
    54f3
    

    It is obvious that PSs major contribution is well crafted threatening email

    4 years ago # QUOTE 8 Volod 0 Vlad !

15. Economist
    a0d1
    

    OT is insane. I'm shocked.

    PS is alpha. Everyone else issuing statements like primadonna bitches. f**king disgusting.

    It's enough for me.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 17 Vlad !

16. Economist
    5fa5
    

    New statement by OT on his page
    https://sites.google.com/site/oyvindthomassen/authorship

    wow he's going in strong

    4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 1 Vlad !

17. Economist
    4618
    

    Weak

    New statement by OT on his page
    https://sites.google.com/site/oyvindthomassen/authorship

    Strong

    4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 11 Vlad !

18. Economist
    4b5c
    

    The new statement by Oyvind is more streamlined, and includes the statements by the senior coauthor common to both projects.

    What I am really interested though is whether Oyvind has filed a formal complaint with the employers of the two scumbags. If he has, the two scumbags are done now.

    If he has not, we might be discussing this for ages...

    4 years ago # QUOTE 5 Volod 0 Vlad !

19. Economist
    713d
    

    This received 20 upvotes, more than just about anything else in this entire thread.

    None of the other context matters, just that they're all women.

    And guys laugh off when women point out they have an uphill battle.

    Respect for at least posting some sort of rebuttal. Petra Persson and Maya Rossin-Slater did no such thing instead having their advisor Janet Currie simply dismiss criticism as sexism. Though maybe that's just female privilege at work.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 6 Vlad !

20. Economist
    4618
    

    Of course, Pasquale and Siegfried will only be done in some lmr's wet dreams.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 2 Vlad !

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.