5 ms·

> Spent a lot of time in academia, and I quite disagree. He's pointing out something that is very common in academia - common enough to be widely accepted. Sayi

> Spent a lot of time in academia, and I quite disagree. He's pointing out something that is very common in academia - common enough to be widely accepted. Saying he is unprofessional in criticizing his supervisors is like saying someone is unprofessional in criticizing his boss for demanding Leetcode style interviews. I specifically said the issue isn't criticizing. The issue is criticizing in a way which is so vague as to be impossible to defend. It's exhausting commenting on HN. You have to append every minor observation of a laundry list of responses to likely misinterpretations.

cinntaile 4y ago
The whole purpose of not being specific is to not implicate certain people. This way he can criticize the "whole" industry.
Benjammer 4y ago
>It's exhausting commenting on HN. You have to append every minor observation of a laundry list of responses to likely misinterpretations. Interesting seeing this response after you just posted: >If you can't be specific enough to be scientific about it, just keep it to yourself Was this a tongue-in-cheek demonstration of your point? Or is vague criticism only unacceptable in academia?
- sdfhdhjdw3 4y ago
  The post I was responding to was the example. I wanted to claim that you shouldn't make vague criticism. I immediately expected that people would respond as if my claim was that you shouldn't criticize. And sure enough, that's what the post I responded to did. Me: "You shouldn't make vague criticism" Response: "OMG you're saying university professors are above criticism." Do you think I'm being vague here? :-)
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    You should re-read the response to your post. You are upset because you feel you are not being read, but the problem is that you are not reading others.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
Kranar 4y ago
It's not exhausting, you're just refusing to understand the other side of the argument. Criticizing in a vague way is precisely appropriate in a situation where you don't want to make the criticism specific to a single circumstance but are instead trying to make a broader point about a systemic issue.
- passivate 4y ago
  >It's not exhausting, you're just refusing to understand the other side of the argument. Do you also accept the "other side" of the argument that the author of the blog post could be wrong?
  - cinntaile 4y ago
    The grandparent misunderstood why the author was being vague. This is a separate issue from whether the author of the blogpost is right or wrong, it gets very confusing if you try and conflate the two as you are doing right now.
    - passivate 4y ago
      >The grandparent misunderstood why the author was being vague Perhaps, but only the author can confirm this.
  - Kranar 4y ago
    I don't accept either side of the argument as true, my point is simply that telling someone to keep their story to themselves unless they can present an argument that satisfies a scientific standard is missing the point being made. People make arguments that are purposely vague to avoid causing undue harm both to themselves and, believe it or not, to the people they are accusing. Usually you do this because you're not interested in bringing to light the specifics of one particular instance as if this is an isolated case, but rather to let others who may find themselves in a similar circumstance know that they aren't alone.
    - 4y ago
didericis 4y ago
Although its exhausting, one of the things I most appreciate about HN is the willingness of people to sort through those misinterpretations; thank you for doing that.
BeetleB 4y ago
> I specifically said the issue isn't criticizing. And my issue wasn't about whether it's OK or not to criticize, nor about the level of detail, but whether his manner of criticism was unprofessional. It was not. You can argue that it's not effective, but there's nothing unprofessional about it.

cinntaile 4y ago

The whole purpose of not being specific is to not implicate certain people. This way he can criticize the "whole" industry.

Benjammer 4y ago

>It's exhausting commenting on HN. You have to append every minor observation of a laundry list of responses to likely misinterpretations. Interesting seeing this response after you just posted: >If you can't be specific enough to be scientific about it, just keep it to yourself Was this a tongue-in-cheek demonstration of your point? Or is vague criticism only unacceptable in academia?

sdfhdhjdw3 4y ago
The post I was responding to was the example. I wanted to claim that you shouldn't make vague criticism. I immediately expected that people would respond as if my claim was that you shouldn't criticize. And sure enough, that's what the post I responded to did. Me: "You shouldn't make vague criticism" Response: "OMG you're saying university professors are above criticism." Do you think I'm being vague here? :-)
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  You should re-read the response to your post. You are upset because you feel you are not being read, but the problem is that you are not reading others.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Kranar 4y ago

It's not exhausting, you're just refusing to understand the other side of the argument. Criticizing in a vague way is precisely appropriate in a situation where you don't want to make the criticism specific to a single circumstance but are instead trying to make a broader point about a systemic issue.

passivate 4y ago
>It's not exhausting, you're just refusing to understand the other side of the argument. Do you also accept the "other side" of the argument that the author of the blog post could be wrong?
- cinntaile 4y ago
  The grandparent misunderstood why the author was being vague. This is a separate issue from whether the author of the blogpost is right or wrong, it gets very confusing if you try and conflate the two as you are doing right now.
  - passivate 4y ago
    >The grandparent misunderstood why the author was being vague Perhaps, but only the author can confirm this.
- Kranar 4y ago
  I don't accept either side of the argument as true, my point is simply that telling someone to keep their story to themselves unless they can present an argument that satisfies a scientific standard is missing the point being made. People make arguments that are purposely vague to avoid causing undue harm both to themselves and, believe it or not, to the people they are accusing. Usually you do this because you're not interested in bringing to light the specifics of one particular instance as if this is an isolated case, but rather to let others who may find themselves in a similar circumstance know that they aren't alone.
  - 4y ago

didericis 4y ago

Although its exhausting, one of the things I most appreciate about HN is the willingness of people to sort through those misinterpretations; thank you for doing that.

BeetleB 4y ago

> I specifically said the issue isn't criticizing. And my issue wasn't about whether it's OK or not to criticize, nor about the level of detail, but whether his manner of criticism was unprofessional. It was not. You can argue that it's not effective, but there's nothing unprofessional about it.