EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

It is almost funny ....
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=21637
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Sep 30, 2012 8:41 am ]
Post subject:  It is almost funny ....

I was approached to do a presentation for a national conference and partly because of the personal relationship with the chair, I accepted. I worked up a short abstract because the conference is a few months off, I have a couple of committees that are taking up more time than I expected, and I had to dig up the data on the subject, which would dictate what I would say exactly. That was not sufficient, so I wrote another .... which was not sufficient. The chair then combined the two previous versions and that was not sufficient as they wanted a "fuller" abstract for the printers. So here I am squeezing work in on the final and improved version of the abstract when I get an email. There is some confusion on an earlier presentation. A search had found I was not the primary author any longer. A former employee, who had minimal data input for the basis, but which had been listed as the third and last author had posted in several places where he was now the primary author and I was secondary. I know this person had been bouncing around in their career, but it was partly due to thing like this. I had just given a good reference for them a few months ago and now I question whether I should have or will do so again.

The original paper was on page 666 of the publication, which made the author index rather amusing ...... :evil:

I am still pondering what I should do while trying to flesh out the next abstract.

Author:  Johhny Electriglide [ Sun Sep 30, 2012 3:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: It is almost funny ....

Sounds like you have some corrections to make in regards to the liar who is taking credit due you.
As far as the abstract goes, step back and look at how it will sound to those you will present it to. Is it understandable, and complete as much as possible? I'm sure you will get it done. :mrgreen:

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Sep 30, 2012 3:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: It is almost funny ....

Johhny Electriglide wrote:
Sounds like you have some corrections to make in regards to the liar who is taking credit due you.
As far as the abstract goes, step back and look at how it will sound to those you will present it to. Is it understandable, and complete as much as possible? I'm sure you will get it done. :mrgreen:


I have been criticized for "dumbing down" my papers, but I do intend for the larger audience to be able to read them and understand them enough to actually use the information I have presented. My problem with the current abstract is that it went backwards. I usually propose a paper to such a conference based on data I have set aside for just that use. Thus, I already know what I will say and what data can be used to support and/or explain what I say. In this case they wanted me to commit to another presentation because of the response to my previous conference presentation two years ago. This time I was asked to cover a topic for which I had not gathered specific data, so I had no specific statements in my abstract. I know what the data will generally indicate, but no speicfics until I start the data gathering and writing process, which will be later this month.

The authorship may be a function of the professional media site as I have found other secondary authors which are listed first. I added one of my papers to my profile there and it automatically wanted to list me as primary author, which is a bit odd.

Author:  Fosgate [ Mon Oct 01, 2012 2:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: It is almost funny ....

Damn Wayne! That's nuts!

Author:  Ann Vole [ Mon Oct 01, 2012 6:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: It is almost funny ....

my guess is they assume the person who actually does the work is just a student or assistant and look for the other name assuming that other name is the actual source of the idea behind the research (or at least the source of the research money).

Author:  mothy [ Thu Oct 11, 2012 4:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: It is almost funny ....

Wayne Stollings wrote:
I was approached to do a presentation for a national conference and partly because of the personal relationship with the chair, I accepted. I worked up a short abstract because the conference is a few months off, I have a couple of committees that are taking up more time than I expected, and I had to dig up the data on the subject, which would dictate what I would say exactly. That was not sufficient, so I wrote another .... which was not sufficient. The chair then combined the two previous versions and that was not sufficient as they wanted a "fuller" abstract for the printers. So here I am squeezing work in on the final and improved version of the abstract when I get an email. There is some confusion on an earlier presentation. A search had found I was not the primary author any longer. A former employee, who had minimal data input for the basis, but which had been listed as the third and last author had posted in several places where he was now the primary author and I was secondary. I know this person had been bouncing around in their career, but it was partly due to thing like this. I had just given a good reference for them a few months ago and now I question whether I should have or will do so again.

The original paper was on page 666 of the publication, which made the author index rather amusing ...... :evil:

I am still pondering what I should do while trying to flesh out the next abstract.



Just as I read your post the rain starting beating on my window.

Allow the holy ghost to enter and stop thinking so much!

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: It is almost funny ....

mothy wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I was approached to do a presentation for a national conference and partly because of the personal relationship with the chair, I accepted. I worked up a short abstract because the conference is a few months off, I have a couple of committees that are taking up more time than I expected, and I had to dig up the data on the subject, which would dictate what I would say exactly. That was not sufficient, so I wrote another .... which was not sufficient. The chair then combined the two previous versions and that was not sufficient as they wanted a "fuller" abstract for the printers. So here I am squeezing work in on the final and improved version of the abstract when I get an email. There is some confusion on an earlier presentation. A search had found I was not the primary author any longer. A former employee, who had minimal data input for the basis, but which had been listed as the third and last author had posted in several places where he was now the primary author and I was secondary. I know this person had been bouncing around in their career, but it was partly due to thing like this. I had just given a good reference for them a few months ago and now I question whether I should have or will do so again.

The original paper was on page 666 of the publication, which made the author index rather amusing ...... :evil:

I am still pondering what I should do while trying to flesh out the next abstract.



Just as I read your post the rain starting beating on my window.

Allow the holy ghost to enter and stop thinking so much!



Or become a Druid and deal with the Holly Ghost .... :mrgreen:

Author:  mothy [ Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: It is almost funny ....

Wayne Stollings wrote:
mothy wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I was approached to do a presentation for a national conference and partly because of the personal relationship with the chair, I accepted. I worked up a short abstract because the conference is a few months off, I have a couple of committees that are taking up more time than I expected, and I had to dig up the data on the subject, which would dictate what I would say exactly. That was not sufficient, so I wrote another .... which was not sufficient. The chair then combined the two previous versions and that was not sufficient as they wanted a "fuller" abstract for the printers. So here I am squeezing work in on the final and improved version of the abstract when I get an email. There is some confusion on an earlier presentation. A search had found I was not the primary author any longer. A former employee, who had minimal data input for the basis, but which had been listed as the third and last author had posted in several places where he was now the primary author and I was secondary. I know this person had been bouncing around in their career, but it was partly due to thing like this. I had just given a good reference for them a few months ago and now I question whether I should have or will do so again.

The original paper was on page 666 of the publication, which made the author index rather amusing ...... :evil:

I am still pondering what I should do while trying to flesh out the next abstract.



Just as I read your post the rain starting beating on my window.

Allow the holy ghost to enter and stop thinking so much!



Or become a Druid and deal with the Holly Ghost .... :mrgreen:


I shall not mention the word prick.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/