2004-10-12 - 4:12 p.m.
Well, another day, another rejection letter. One really shouldn't be forced to receive two major rejections in one week.
Furthermore, for this one, one of the reviewers was downright hostile. At least the NSF letter was supportive and made constructive recommendations for improving the project. This reviewer behaved as if we were stepping on his toes. As if he were peeing on the data we wanted to use, to indicate it was his territory and we shouldn't even think of going there.
Admittedly the proposal we wrote was not perfect, and some of the criticisms were legitimate. But others were downright wrong - and nasty. Criticism is always difficult, but it can be delivered in a helpful way. I do solemnly swear that I will always be HELPFUL and CONSTRUCTIVE when I review papers, proposals, and reports.
In other news, the chair fired our department's undergraduate advisor today (via a broadcast email to the entire department, without discussing it first with the now-former advisor), and gave the job to an untenured faculty member (fortunately not me). Now, granted, I am not particularly fond of this particular untenured person, but I do not envy him, or the 100-plus students who are now in his charge. This is a tough job, especially for someone who has little or no clue about what's going on (this is not a job for someone who is just now learning the system, trying to set up a lab, write proposals, etc.)
I wonder if I am somehow, tangentially, spiritually, linked to Mt. St. Helen..
leave a note
...they are just words, Suzi... - 2011-08-29