Why do you always assume the worst?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ubavontuba
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on frustrations regarding assumptions made about expressed feelings and concerns, particularly in response to a previous thread about narrow perspectives in the forum. The original poster highlights a tendency for others to interpret their comments negatively and to shut down conversation prematurely. They reference the MIT fake paper scandal to illustrate issues with jargon-heavy communication in technology reporting, criticizing the lack of clarity and accessibility in many academic and professional writings. The conversation also touches on the difference between technology writing and scientific communication, emphasizing the need for clearer language. Overall, the thread underscores a desire for more constructive dialogue and understanding within the forum.
ubavontuba
Messages
167
Reaction score
0
Why is it that when I express a feeling or concern, you guys seem to assume I mean it in the worst possible way, dogpile on top of me, and then lock me out of the thread before I have a fair chance to respond? My recent comments in the "I am offended by the narrow vision of this forum" thread are a good example.

Have none of you heard of the MIT fake paper scandal in regards to this? Here's a link to the http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6622-2005Apr21?language=printer" article.

It seems I'm not the only one perturbed by the gobbledygook. Here's a direct quote:

Robert MacMillan said:
I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Reporters who write about the technology sector crack themselves up over the abstruse, jargon-laced language of their beat.

Sometimes we'll mix and match corporate tech-talk to come up with our own press releases: "It's a plug-and-play seamless connection paradigm that produces a win-win across multiple platforms for asynchronous synergies." You might think that's laying it on a bit thick, but I've seen worse. Technology writers should get a special bonus check every year for translating geek-speak into plain English.

So, it would seem that my concerns are well founded. Granted, I have read many intersting papers that are simply and eloquently written. But I dare say the majority aren't written with such regards to the reader.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
And reporters writing about technology are NOT professional scientists writing journal articles. We've already discussed the MIT thing too (it was an abstract for a conference...nobody reviews abstracts and they're considered preliminary, so don't get much weight anyway...a lot of hype over nothing).

You had your say on this matter twice already.
 
ubavontuba said:
It seems I'm not the only one perturbed by the gobbledygook. Here's a direct quote: Originally Posted by Robert MacMillan
I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Reporters who write about the technology sector crack themselves up over the abstruse, jargon-laced language of their beat.

Sometimes we'll mix and match corporate tech-talk to come up with our own press releases: "It's a plug-and-play seamless connection paradigm that produces a win-win across multiple platforms for asynchronous synergies." You might think that's laying it on a bit thick, but I've seen worse. Technology writers should get a special bonus check every year for translating geek-speak into plain English.
Your post is about technology, and actually that sentence is corny but not high tech, it sounds like a sales pitch, it's a lame example. It has nothing to do with the sciences, you don't know the difference?

So, it would seem that my concerns are well founded.
You appear to be unable to grasp information, perhaps intentionally, what we refer to as a troll. You're really digging yourself quite a hole.
 
Last edited:
I want to thank those members who interacted with me a couple of years ago in two Optics Forum threads. They were @Drakkith, @hutchphd, @Gleb1964, and @KAHR-Alpha. I had something I wanted the scientific community to know and slipped a new idea in against the rules. Thank you also to @berkeman for suggesting paths to meet with academia. Anyway, I finally got a paper on the same matter as discussed in those forum threads, the fat lens model, got it peer-reviewed, and IJRAP...
About 20 years ago, in my mid-30s (and with a BA in economics and a master's in business), I started taking night classes in physics hoping to eventually earn the science degree I'd always wanted but never pursued. I found physics forums and used it to ask questions I was unable to get answered from my textbooks or class lectures. Unfortunately, work and life got in the way and I never got further the freshman courses. Well, here it is 20 years later. I'm in my mid-50s now, and in a...

Similar threads

Back
Top