4 ms·

Kind of a corollary: Place something fixable in your PhD thesis so the examiners can find something to write about. Something that doesn't make you look stupid

by roter 6y ago

Kind of a corollary: Place something fixable in your PhD thesis so the examiners can find something to write about. Something that doesn't make you look stupid but will make them feel like they'd done a thorough review and won't focus on your more subtle but perhaps more disastrous errors. Perhaps just a thing PhDs tell other PhDs to do but never actually do themselves.

r00fus 6y ago
Isn't this more of a corollary "remove the duck" principle [1]? The idea being, you expect the reviewer to force some change, so put in a trivial & obvious stylistic difference so their need to make changes are assuaged. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9137736 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9137736
throwaway0a5e 6y ago
I maintain a small fleet of vehicles. I keep a set of worn pads, rotors and tires that I put on every vehicle before it goes for state inspection. Steering/suspension parts replacement fell off a cliff once I started doing this. I would say this approach taught me something but it just confirmed things I already knew.
- nullserver 6y ago
  So needed to something to correct? So you made obvious small issues? Used to do this on mock-ups of apps I was building. They wouldn’t fuss at the core functionality if they changed something obvious and not important.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    >So needed to something to correct? So you made obvious small issues? Exactly. The tall nail gets the hammer. The shop that passes all the shitboxes gets the audit. They don't want that audit and if that audit comes they want the paper trail to make them look like they're hard-asses about everything just like the auditor wants to see so they don't lose their license. The deal is that safety inspections are basically guaranteed work for the shops and exchange they get an incentive to not fudge emissions inspections. I dunno if that's still how they present it but that's what the 3rd party that runs the state training was telling everyone years back and the rules haven't changed since then (other than some more increased reporting requirements that are either to reduce odometer fraud or lay the groundwork for a mileage tax depending on who you ask).

by roter 6y ago

r00fus 6y ago

Isn't this more of a corollary "remove the duck" principle [1]? The idea being, you expect the reviewer to force some change, so put in a trivial & obvious stylistic difference so their need to make changes are assuaged. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9137736 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9137736

throwaway0a5e 6y ago

I maintain a small fleet of vehicles. I keep a set of worn pads, rotors and tires that I put on every vehicle before it goes for state inspection. Steering/suspension parts replacement fell off a cliff once I started doing this. I would say this approach taught me something but it just confirmed things I already knew.

nullserver 6y ago
So needed to something to correct? So you made obvious small issues? Used to do this on mock-ups of apps I was building. They wouldn’t fuss at the core functionality if they changed something obvious and not important.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  >So needed to something to correct? So you made obvious small issues? Exactly. The tall nail gets the hammer. The shop that passes all the shitboxes gets the audit. They don't want that audit and if that audit comes they want the paper trail to make them look like they're hard-asses about everything just like the auditor wants to see so they don't lose their license. The deal is that safety inspections are basically guaranteed work for the shops and exchange they get an incentive to not fudge emissions inspections. I dunno if that's still how they present it but that's what the 3rd party that runs the state training was telling everyone years back and the rules haven't changed since then (other than some more increased reporting requirements that are either to reduce odometer fraud or lay the groundwork for a mileage tax depending on who you ask).