Close

Complete Captcha

• 1 year - 3710 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 5290 Goods vs 1838 No Goods

1. Economist
   c9a8
   

   At this point, yes.

   Is CMU a joke?

   5 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

2. Economist
   14d2
   

   Dear SKABers,
   If you are anyway making up stuff, please dream big and give us something awesome. Ideally, two papers with a common theme. Citing each other. And upending some fundamental economic concept in a tangential way.
   First one to JAR
   Second one to RFS

   5 months ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

3. Economist
   e563
   

   ^ Accompanied by a “certified-fresh” letter from Carnegie Lemon U

   5 months ago # QUOTE 2 Good 0 No Good !

4. Economist
   6413
   

   I see this SK paper, accepted by AK’s buddy and SK’s dinner date in Pittsburgh David Denis, still has 0 cites. Not even 1 Google Scholar citation.

   https://academic.oup.com/rfs/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/rfs/hhy110/5106046

   Keep up the good work EJMRers.

   5 months ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

5. Economist
   d456
   

   I see this SK paper, accepted by AK’s buddy and SK’s dinner date in Pittsburgh David Denis, still has 0 cites. Not even 1 Google Scholar citation.
   https://academic.oup.com/rfs/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/rfs/hhy110/5106046
   Keep up the good work EJMRers.

   They should change the first sentence of paper from "Relationships are an important feature of the syndicated loan market." to "Relationships are an important feature of this paper getting accepted."

   5 months ago # QUOTE 10 Good 0 No Good !

6. Economist
   f924
   

   ^ careful. AK now handing out favors to those that cite SK.

   5 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

7. Economist
   1c51
   

   ^ careful. AK now handing out favors to those that cite SK.

   AK has no more favors to hand out, with the possible exception of positive tenure letters. No more power over the RFS or WFA. This is not a bad thing.

   5 months ago # QUOTE 5 Good 0 No Good !

8. Economist
   ceca
   

   FTFY

   I see this SK paper, accepted by AK’s buddy and SK’s CHEAP dinner date in Pittsburgh David Denis, still has 0 cites. Not even 1 Google Scholar citation.
   https://academic.oup.com/rfs/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/rfs/hhy110/5106046
   Keep up the good work EJMRers.

   5 months ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

9. Economist
   0c02
   

   I see this SK paper, accepted by AK’s buddy and SK’s dinner date in Pittsburgh David Denis, still has 0 cites. Not even 1 Google Scholar citation.
   https://academic.oup.com/rfs/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/rfs/hhy110/5106046
   Keep up the good work EJMRers.

   This is an important point. The profession as a whole needs to (and I guess it does) punish cheating.
   I, for one, don't trust and cite any of these authors' work unless they post their replication program for the RFS paper.

   5 months ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

10. Economist
    8ea0
    

    CMU gave tenure to SK

    What a joke!!!

    CMU Accounting is a complete joke.

    5 months ago # QUOTE 7 Good 0 No Good !

11. Economist
    415b
    

    36.7% of firm-year observations announce restatement.
    Accounting research is a joke or what???
    https://aaapubs.org/doi/pdf/10.2308/accr-51567

    5 months ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

12. Economist
    f6b2
    

    CMU and RFS
    Guinness World Joking Record

    CMU gave tenure to SK
    What a joke!!!
    CMU Accounting is a complete joke.

    5 months ago # QUOTE 5 Good 0 No Good !

13. Economist
    97ca
    

    DD gets a D-
    CMU gets an D-
    CMU Accounting gets an F
    SKAB get an A+ for getting away with this s**t

    SKAB ready to go to White House. Talent urgently needed to make up s**t about trade wars, unemployment, etc.

    5 months ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

14. Economist
    fde5
    

    bump.

    5 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

15. Economist
    1fd4
    

    You are such a sore loser. Drop it already,

    bump.

    5 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 4 No Good !

16. Economist
    a4b6
    

    ^ not worth dropping
    Worth mocking
    And not citing, which enables even further mocking

    I see this SK paper, accepted by AK’s buddy and SK’s dinner date in Pittsburgh David Denis, still has 0 cites. Not even 1 Google Scholar citation.
    https://academic.oup.com/rfs/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/rfs/hhy110/5106046
    Keep up the good work EJMRers.

    This is an important point. The profession as a whole needs to (and I guess it does) punish cheating.
    I, for one, don't trust and cite any of these authors' work unless they post their replication program for the RFS paper.

    5 months ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

17. Economist
    dc17
    

    They didn't do anything wrong. Their department agrees.

    5 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 3 No Good !

18. Economist
    e6a5
    

    They didn't do anything wrong. Their department agrees.

    So does TAR.

    Oh wait... oops

    5 months ago # QUOTE 2 Good 0 No Good !

19. Economist
    e563
    

    Are you a sub-til troll ir really that effed up?

    They didn't do anything wrong. Their department agrees.

    5 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

20. Economist
    8c60
    

    buuuuuuuump

    5 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

Reply »