4 ms·

As a faculty member and PhD advisor, let me offer my reading between the lines. The student and advisor did not get along already. The student went to China and

As a faculty member and PhD advisor, let me offer my reading between the lines. The student and advisor did not get along already. The student went to China and found a girlfriend. The lockdown separated them. Hormones flared, exacerbating what was probably already a tense situation. The student was increasingly a problem (note the screaming at the advisor mentioned in TFA). The advisor decided that it was no longer worth the effort to maintain the unofficial relationship and broke the promise of supporting the student's future re-enrollment. Dealing with unprofessional students sucks. It's very hard to "fire" grad students for unproductivity or workplace issues, unless they are egregious. In this situation the advisor had a convenient out and took it.

amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
Well I got my PhD, so let me read between your lines ([1]). Faculty have little fiefdoms and they expect students to live on salaries bellow minimum wage. If the advisor is sub-par (i.e. the university made a mistake hiring them) it's incredibly difficult to change advisors without poisoning the relationship with other faculty members. Dealing with sub-par professors sucks. Some are not too bright. Others sexually harass the female students. All are protected by the moat the university builds around them. [1] I'll admit it's a bit weird to see a professor that I'm assuming given the forum, is in a tech field "read between the lines" instead of engaging the facts.
- queuebert 5y ago
  You're entirely correct. Academia is broken is so many ways. A lot of my colleagues are wastes of space and some are indeed harmful. I don't think I'm a great advisor either. No one teaches us how to advise students. My take is based entirely on facts of the article interpreted through an advisor's lens rather than that of a journalist trying to get clicks.
  - amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
    You know what, I owe you an apology for this: "[1] I'll admit it's a bit weird to see a professor that I'm assuming given the forum, is in a tech field "read between the lines" instead of engaging the facts." I'll keep it up in my comment because I despise it when ppl scrub clean what they wrote. Either way, sorry for making it personal.
    - queuebert 5y ago
      HN is the best people. Thanks for the apology and no hard feelings here. And I'm sorry if you had some bad experiences in grad school. Some of us, at least, are trying to be better.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    > a journalist trying to get clicks Now you've also fabricated something about the journalist, their motive and character. Do you have any factual basis for that? What do you know about the journalist?
  - ablearcher83 5y ago
    The fact that the advisor in the OP changed their stories multiple times indicates duplicity. Your inability to see that, coupled with an abrupt allegation against the journalist suggests self-deception
ChemSpider 5y ago
Your take is not supported by any of the evidence. The email exchanges (as seen by the newspaper) show a friendly relationship up until the tweets.
- queuebert 5y ago
  Quote from the article: "The professor went on to explain that the relationship of trust had already been strained, because Gerber had «lost his temper» during a conversation a year earlier, and had told her that he no longer wanted to continue his doctorate at St. Gallen in any form, and no longer needed her as a doctoral supervisor."
  - Marvin_Martian 5y ago
    Thats not evidence. That is just a claim made by the professor, which is denied by the former student and which, according the the article, is not reflected in the tone of the emails exchanged at this time, either.
    - queuebert 5y ago
      Isn't eye-witness testimony considered evidence? Maybe the professor is lying, true. But also professional emails tend to be more cordial than in-person conversations. In terms of motives, the student has more motive to lie than the professor, since the professor has nothing at stake.
      - wolverine876 5y ago
        The student has factual evidence, the emails. > Isn't eye-witness testimony considered evidence? C'mon.
      - ablearcher83 5y ago
        > "Ultimately, it may even turn out that I won’t be able to get a visa to China because of you. This is definitely going too far, and I would have to end our advisory relationship" At this point, you're misrepresenting the article completely.
wolverine876 5y ago
> let me offer my reading between the lines But the rest is entirely fabricated and ignores the clear statements of the advisor themself, which is that they didn't want to offend China and would for that reason terminate the relationship. > the advisor had a convenient out and took it How is it a convenient out? 'CCP pressure' doesn't sound like a convenient reason. The advisor could have pulled the 'you're no long enrolled' trick at any time.
- colinmhayes 5y ago
  There was no CCP pressure. Only a Chinese Phd student in Canada who forwarded the supposedly racist meme to the advisor.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    You don't know that, and that's not how the advisor portrayed it.

amrcnimgrnt 5y ago

Well I got my PhD, so let me read between your lines ([1]). Faculty have little fiefdoms and they expect students to live on salaries bellow minimum wage. If the advisor is sub-par (i.e. the university made a mistake hiring them) it's incredibly difficult to change advisors without poisoning the relationship with other faculty members. Dealing with sub-par professors sucks. Some are not too bright. Others sexually harass the female students. All are protected by the moat the university builds around them. [1] I'll admit it's a bit weird to see a professor that I'm assuming given the forum, is in a tech field "read between the lines" instead of engaging the facts.

queuebert 5y ago
You're entirely correct. Academia is broken is so many ways. A lot of my colleagues are wastes of space and some are indeed harmful. I don't think I'm a great advisor either. No one teaches us how to advise students. My take is based entirely on facts of the article interpreted through an advisor's lens rather than that of a journalist trying to get clicks.
- amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
  You know what, I owe you an apology for this: "[1] I'll admit it's a bit weird to see a professor that I'm assuming given the forum, is in a tech field "read between the lines" instead of engaging the facts." I'll keep it up in my comment because I despise it when ppl scrub clean what they wrote. Either way, sorry for making it personal.
  - queuebert 5y ago
    HN is the best people. Thanks for the apology and no hard feelings here. And I'm sorry if you had some bad experiences in grad school. Some of us, at least, are trying to be better.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > a journalist trying to get clicks Now you've also fabricated something about the journalist, their motive and character. Do you have any factual basis for that? What do you know about the journalist?
- ablearcher83 5y ago
  The fact that the advisor in the OP changed their stories multiple times indicates duplicity. Your inability to see that, coupled with an abrupt allegation against the journalist suggests self-deception

ChemSpider 5y ago

Your take is not supported by any of the evidence. The email exchanges (as seen by the newspaper) show a friendly relationship up until the tweets.

queuebert 5y ago
Quote from the article: "The professor went on to explain that the relationship of trust had already been strained, because Gerber had «lost his temper» during a conversation a year earlier, and had told her that he no longer wanted to continue his doctorate at St. Gallen in any form, and no longer needed her as a doctoral supervisor."
- Marvin_Martian 5y ago
  Thats not evidence. That is just a claim made by the professor, which is denied by the former student and which, according the the article, is not reflected in the tone of the emails exchanged at this time, either.
  - queuebert 5y ago
    Isn't eye-witness testimony considered evidence? Maybe the professor is lying, true. But also professional emails tend to be more cordial than in-person conversations. In terms of motives, the student has more motive to lie than the professor, since the professor has nothing at stake.
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      The student has factual evidence, the emails. > Isn't eye-witness testimony considered evidence? C'mon.
    - ablearcher83 5y ago
      > "Ultimately, it may even turn out that I won’t be able to get a visa to China because of you. This is definitely going too far, and I would have to end our advisory relationship" At this point, you're misrepresenting the article completely.

wolverine876 5y ago

> let me offer my reading between the lines But the rest is entirely fabricated and ignores the clear statements of the advisor themself, which is that they didn't want to offend China and would for that reason terminate the relationship. > the advisor had a convenient out and took it How is it a convenient out? 'CCP pressure' doesn't sound like a convenient reason. The advisor could have pulled the 'you're no long enrolled' trick at any time.

colinmhayes 5y ago
There was no CCP pressure. Only a Chinese Phd student in Canada who forwarded the supposedly racist meme to the advisor.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  You don't know that, and that's not how the advisor portrayed it.