Science and A Scientist

[Popcorn Sutton]

I know who you are and I saw what you did.

Do you? And what is it that I did? Please enlighten me (but if you truly know who I am, better PM me).

[Ophiolite]

Did I say something to make you guys think I was talking about myself?

The first part wasn't about me.

I have hired scores of individuals and participated in selection panels for hundreds. None have been for research positions, but the majority have been science or engineering graduates. In short, I have some experience of what, generically, employers look for and excellent success in choosing effective employees.

 

Given that you might wish to consider this Popcorn. Based upon what I have learned about you through this forum I would not hire you regardless of how technically competent or innovative you might be. You approach is dissembling and dishonest. I see no evidence that you could be trusted. You are planning, apparently, to dupe a potential employer out of money by lying about how long it will take to complete a project. Integrity is one of the most important characteristics of an employee in almost any role. You appear to lack it.

 

I make these remarks not to insult you, but in the hope that - upon reflection - you may realise how inappropriate your approach is.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Ophiolite, I do not know exactly what will be required of me for the position, but I do know that there is a good chance that I am most suitable. I said that there is a chance that I would have it done in a month, but I've learned that I should never quote someone a timeframe that is uncertain. I've learned that you should always give yourself a timeframe that is ample enough to complete the project within. I told the guy that I should have it done within a year, which, I think, is plenty enough time for me to complete the project. I am the originator of the hypothesis, and by now I have two publications about my experience with it and its potential applications, one of which happens to be of interest for this particular area.

I do feel a bit insulted, you really don't know who I am or what I specialize in. I know that there are people who have spent 40 years on making a prototype, and another 20 years on working out the details, but only to find that their project is a "dead end" and has been terminated. That being said, I think that it's quite appealing to know that it can be done within a year, and I know, personally, that there's a very high possibility that I can have it done much quicker, but I want to know the exact requirements before I can say for sure. Right now, it's a ballpark estimate.

I guess that I'm glad that you're not the one in charge. If I may ask, what is your area of expertise and why might you hire someone?

 

Ophiolite, after reviewing your profile, I've come to the conclusion that we do not share the same interests. In reality, I think that all of my experiences have led me to specialize in something radically different than your area of expertise. I hate to brag, and so I really won't. I specialize in big lists, and I think that that is all I really should say about my expertise. I can bet on the fact that you're most likely not interested in that.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Popcorn Sutton

[CharonY]

It is telling that you completely fail to recognize that Ophiolite mentions qualities except technical competence (whatever they may be) that in his view would disqualify from getting it.

If his perception does not correlate with what you wanted to convey, then I would also polish communication skills.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Alright well thanks for the advice people. I slept on it.

[Ophiolite]

Ophiolite, I do not know exactly what will be required of me for the position, but I do know that there is a good chance that I am most suitable.

I fully accept your judgement that you are probably technically very suitable for the position. I was not addressing your technical qualifications. In over four decades in industry I have yet to run in to a situation where individuals were hired solely on the basis of their technical skills.

 

I do feel a bit insulted, you really don't know who I am or what I specialize in.

I specifically said this: "Based upon what I have learned about you through this forum." I am addressing what I know of you through this forum. You have many posts and, like all members, reveal quite a lot about your personality through those posts.

 

What you specialise in is irrelevant. It is your approach that is questionable. You give me the impression you cannot be trusted. I am being blunt - again, in the hope that you will sit up and take notice. (Your reply makes me less hopeful.) An honest person would have opened this thread by saying something like the following:

 

"I have an opportunity to get a contract for a government project that I am well suited to. My concern is that if I complete the project well ahead of time am I likely to be released, or will I have the opportunity to continue on other projects?"

 

Instead we got this waffle about hiring people with perversions that segued into your own situation. Finding out what you were wanting to know was like pulling teeth - from a crocodile.

 

 

I guess that I'm glad that you're not the one in charge. If I may ask, what is your area of expertise and why might you hire someone?

I specialise in certain tools used in drilling in the oil and gas industry. I have held a variety of management positions in two major service companies, in operational, sales, research and training roles. I spent half a dozen years out of the industry as the production director of a small manufacturing company. I have worked on four continents and in six of the world's capital cities.

 

In almost all of those roles I have had responsibility for hiring and firing. I became competent at a very early stage of picking good people and recognising who to avoid. I repeat, your character - as you have revealed it on this forum - is one that I would avoid for employment. If, and only if, you come across the same way face-to-face then you are going to encounter problems. That is all I am saying.

 

Ophiolite, after reviewing your profile, I've come to the conclusion that we do not share the same interests. In reality, I think that all of my experiences have led me to specialize in something radically different than your area of expertise. I hate to brag, and so I really won't. I specialize in big lists, and I think that that is all I really should say about my expertise. I can bet on the fact that you're most likely not interested in that.

The area of expertise I am bringing to bear here is a proven ability to assess people accurately with minimal input. You have provided more than minimal input on which to base an assessment.

 

I do not recognise the term 'big lists', so I have no idea whether or not I am interested in them. However, I repeat, that is irrelevant, since my comments do not touch on your technical expertise.

 

I do hope that, on reflection, the foregoing thoughts will have been of some value to you. I fear, though, that they will not.

 

Edit: I wrote this post yesterday, but had no opportunity to post till now. I see PS has replied overnight. PS I'm leaving the post in place since I still hope it may be of further help to you.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Ophiolite

[Popcorn Sutton]

Thanks for clarifying Ophiolite. I do think that my specialization requires a different breed of person, and there are several reasons why I choose to remain anonymous over these forums. This is a place where I can talk about my interests and get personal at times without giving out my name or my face.

Why shouldn't I be trusted? If you don't want to post it here, can you pm me about it?

[Phi for All]

Why shouldn't I be trusted? If you don't want to post it here, can you pm me about it?

 

This is a problem.

 

I could easily go through Ophiolite's last few posts and highlight the reasons he's already mentioned why he got the impression you might not be trustworthy. Why are you asking for them again? This tells me you're not using your critical thinking skills while you're reading. We all have a blind spot when it comes to ourselves, especially when criticism is involved we don't want to hear.

 

On the plus side, you're not writing any more of those word-salad posts (that I've seen, at least) that you thought made you sound so knowledgeable but really did the opposite. You used to get called out on that regularly by many members. More evidence of a blind spot that tells you something is OK when you do it but not when others do it.

 

I remember being reminded of high school boys in Colorado winter, who think wearing board shorts and a t-shirt to school when it's -10F makes them look tough and cool, when in reality everyone thinks their idiots. You can't string a bunch of words together on a site like this with so many erudite members without looking like you're trying to dissemble and deceive. You think you're coming off as knowledgeable but in general it just raises red flags with many people. So kudos for moving away from THAT style.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Wow Phi, thank you. Really.

 

Every now and then I do go back and read some of my earlier posts and, honestly, I really know what you're talking about. I was actually banned from the linguistics forums both because I was way too immature when I was posting and because they thought that I was becoming pathological (and I really don't know what that means, even to this day). But really, I know that I had a good deal of influence among linguists. My approach to language acquisition had never even been thought about up to that point, and when I realized that a lot of people were talking about it and publishing textbooks with my ideology in them, it actually made me mad. I'm glad that I am allowed to be on these forums though, and, looking back at it, I really do realize how much I've changed, and I think it's been for the best.

[CharonY]

 

 

they thought that I was becoming pathological (and I really don't know what that means, even to this day)

 

If I had to guess I would have to think they may mean delusional. Or at least a very distinct lack of perspective and ability of reflection.

For example:

 

 

 

My approach to language acquisition had never even been thought about up to that point, and when I realized that a lot of people were talking about it and publishing textbooks with my ideology in them, it actually made me mad.

[swansont]

This is a problem.

 

I could easily go through Ophiolite's last few posts and highlight the reasons he's already mentioned why he got the impression you might not be trustworthy. Why are you asking for them again? This tells me you're not using your critical thinking skills while you're reading. We all have a blind spot when it comes to ourselves, especially when criticism is involved we don't want to hear.

 

On the plus side, you're not writing any more of those word-salad posts (that I've seen, at least) that you thought made you sound so knowledgeable but really did the opposite. You used to get called out on that regularly by many members. More evidence of a blind spot that tells you something is OK when you do it but not when others do it.

 

I remember being reminded of high school boys in Colorado winter, who think wearing board shorts and a t-shirt to school when it's -10F makes them look tough and cool, when in reality everyone thinks their idiots. You can't string a bunch of words together on a site like this with so many erudite members without looking like you're trying to dissemble and deceive. You think you're coming off as knowledgeable but in general it just raises red flags with many people. So kudos for moving away from THAT style.

OTOH there are the continued posts lobbying to be a moderator.

Wow Phi, thank you. Really.

 

Every now and then I do go back and read some of my earlier posts and, honestly, I really know what you're talking about. I was actually banned from the linguistics forums both because I was way too immature when I was posting and because they thought that I was becoming pathological (and I really don't know what that means, even to this day). But really, I know that I had a good deal of influence among linguists. My approach to language acquisition had never even been thought about up to that point, and when I realized that a lot of people were talking about it and publishing textbooks with my ideology in them, it actually made me mad. I'm glad that I am allowed to be on these forums though, and, looking back at it, I really do realize how much I've changed, and I think it's been for the best.

Mad at them or mad at yourself?. If people are publishing books with "your" ideology in them, it means they came up with the ideas independently. IOW, it's not "yours". Independent discovery is pretty common.

[Popcorn Sutton]

I'll stop "lobbying" and I won't mention anything about plagiarism anymore. I was mad, period.

 

Is there anything else I can do to make myself more trustworthy and likable?

Edited February 12, 2014 by Popcorn Sutton

[Phi for All]

Is there anything else I can do to make myself more trustworthy and likable?

 

Actually, going out of your way to "make" yourself more trustworthy and likable usually ends up raising more flags.

 

Try this: put yourself in the shoes of the people who are just about to interact with you. How is what you're about to say or write going to be perceived by those who hear/read it? Have you given them the right information to form a positive perception about you, or are you about to jump out of the middle of your mind with little context and freak the crap out of them? If you give some thought to how others perceive you, I think you'll learn more about what others consider trustworthy.

 

Perhaps first, you should ask yourself what you find trustworthy in others, then just enhance those traits in yourself. You have them all, but maybe haven't updated them in a while. You can't make someone trust you, but you can make yourself trustworthy.

 

As for likable, that's way too subjective. What makes other people likable to you?

[Popcorn Sutton]

Good question. I think it really depends on who I'm interacting with. What makes the posters here likable is that they're smart and they're willing to have intelligent conversations about the stuff that interests me. What makes someone likable in my immediate friends is that they're willing to be playful and they can take a joke. They can be themselves with me and not worry that I'm going to pass judgment on them, and I really don't do that with anyone unless they truly offend me.

 

I think that I am a very trustworthy person in all actuality. I'm not a thief, I'm not a liar, I'm not an addict, I have personality and I truly don't think that I give anyone a reason to not trust me, which is why I kind of feel blindsided by ophiolites remark.

 

I really wish you guys would clarify about that one because I don't know what I did.

[iNow]

Remember when you said in this very thread that you weren't referring to yourself? Stuff like that.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Well you guys can't seriously tell me that you don't like having me around. I'm not worried about what you guys think of me, but check this out. A guy posted to my Facebook earlier today, and I thought that it was ironic given this thread.

 

"dude I have seen like 5 status that u posted that are arrogant as f***. I just want to say to you that you are a quire. educate yourself"

 

"I don't know who you are. Care to clarify?"

 

"not really you just need to take some sort of stick out of ur a** and get off your f****** high horse. I dont doubt your educated on subject matter but perspective of life morals values and dignity is somthing that you should think about inside yourself and instead of brushing me off like a douche try it atleast you might find some things about yourself that you should change to better your life. egotistical. "

 

"I hope you're not judging me by my appearance. I really don't think you know me enough to say these things and truly mean them, but some other people have been doing the same thing with me lately, which is why I'm curious as to why you're saying these things. Most of what you said is completely vacuous, and I'm not judging you for saying these things. Normally I would immediately delete a message like that, but because you're not the only one saying things like that to me, I'll leave it"

 

"No just by a few of your status. im not gonna read the rest of your comment tho :p"

 

 

I really can't believe that I even wasted a single moment talking to that guy.

 

 

I'm sorry guys. Honestly, I am so thankful for being a part of this forum, and there really is no one I respect more in this world than you guys. I can't even describe with words how much I appreciate your input. I wanna say that I love you guys, but I don't know if it's appropriate. Seriously, I wish the best for all of you.

[CharonY]

Read Phi's post again. He asked about how you are being perceive by others. I.e. he asked to try to put yourself in the perspective of others. Your answer is the same as every post you made. All about you, what you like etc. Things that you deem likeable in others are again all related to you.

At best this appears narcissistic, which is very disruptive for a communicative situation. Communication is an exchange between people. That situation does not arise if you believe it is all about you.

[Popcorn Sutton]

I am definitely narcissistic. I'll reread Phi's post now.

 

This is a problem.

 

I could easily go through Ophiolite's last few posts and highlight the reasons he's already mentioned why he got the impression you might not be trustworthy. Why are you asking for them again? This tells me you're not using your critical thinking skills while you're reading. We all have a blind spot when it comes to ourselves, especially when criticism is involved we don't want to hear.

It's not that I don't want to hear it, I appreciate hearing it. I just wish I was a better person. I'm stuck right now and my parents are paying over $600 a month on my bills. I hate the fact that I can't support myself and I really want to believe that I have something good to offer people, but my degree is not the most appealing for industrial purposes, and I'm not going to be happy unless I get a job that makes me feel important, that's really all I want.

 

On the plus side, you're not writing any more of those word-salad posts (that I've seen, at least) that you thought made you sound so knowledgeable but really did the opposite. You used to get called out on that regularly by many members. More evidence of a blind spot that tells you something is OK when you do it but not when others do it.

 

I remember being reminded of high school boys in Colorado winter, who think wearing board shorts and a t-shirt to school when it's -10F makes them look tough and cool, when in reality everyone thinks their idiots. You can't string a bunch of words together on a site like this with so many erudite members without looking like you're trying to dissemble and deceive. You think you're coming off as knowledgeable but in general it just raises red flags with many people. So kudos for moving away from THAT style.

Again, thank you for the sentiment.

 

Will someone give me a job? Please?

[ajb]

Will someone give me a job? Please?

Recent times things have been very hard on a lot of people. The only advice I have is to keep on going and keep on looking for jobs.

[CharonY]

That is very true. Times like these call for persistence and huge deal of flexibility.

[Arete]

I'll relate two situations:

 

1) Regarding "perversions" - I was recently interviewing candidates for a lab tech position. I interviewed 3 candidates, and I had a clear top pick. Upon ringing the provided references, I learned that they'd been let go from their previous job due sexual harassment issues. While they might have been the most capable and experienced candidate, they would have had to work closely with a range of students sometimes in a supervisory role. As a result, they were immediately struck off the list based on information independent of how good their CV/interview skills were.

 

It's certainly not restricted to science, but if there is something about you which is a possible liability in the workplace, it may overrule your technical skills. Science is also competitive, so usually whoever is hiring will have a stack of CV's from qualified candidates to choose from, so most employers will have an adequately qualified alternative than may not come with as much adverse risk of not working out.

 

2) I recently was shopping for a used car. I was looking at a particular car, and the salesman told me "I would've had this car sold ten times if it was an automatic rather than a stick shift." A few minutes later I noticed that the park brake was disconnected, and the cable was laying in the passenger foot well. The salesman said "The car just came on the lot and we haven't had a chance to fix it yet." which is inconsistent with having had it sold ten times. As soon as it became apparent that the salesman was dishonest, I wasn't going to buy a car from him - even if it was the best one I saw (it wasn't) as I didn't want to risk dealing with a dishonest individual.

 

The same applies to the hiring process - if I am interviewing a candidate and I detect inconsistencies in what they are telling me, they immediately lose out to a more consistent candidate, even if that other candidate is not as good on paper. The reason being that, as with most science, what we do is highly collaborative and anyone joining the group will have to work with other people, who will have to trust that person. If a brief interview, or conversation with your references reveals potential liabilities in your character, you're done, even if you have the skills.

[Bignose]

and I'm not going to be happy unless I get a job that makes me feel important, that's really all I want.

If there is one thing to key on, in my mind, it is this statement right here. Letting your happiness be defined by your job is probably a recipe for disaster.

 

There is a job out there that we all think of as 'the one'. And no matter how perfect we all think that one job would be for each of us, that job has got rotten things about it. Without a doubt. Whether it is some annoying paperwork that comes with the job, or duties you don't want to do, and so on. It is almost a guarantee that that job will make you interact with people you otherwise wouldn't care to interact with.

 

There is no such thing as a perfect job. There just isn't.

 

I can say the above with complete and total confidence.

 

Which leads to the conclusion that there is no job out there that will truly make us happy, and tying your happiness to your job is a fool's errand.

 

So what does that mean?

 

In my book, my job is what I do so that I have the means to do what really makes me happy. That is, my job is first and foremost so I can pay my housing and utility bills. But then it is there so I can buy games, sports equipment, computers, etc. etc. -- things that I enjoy. The job is a means to that.

 

And when you come to that understanding, you learn that its usually not so bad to take a job that you maybe really didn't want, because it is providing the means to actually get to that happiness part of the equation.

 

And lastly, even if you take a job that maybe isn't exactly what you think you want to do -- more often than not, if you actually take a vested interest in the job, you're going to find interesting challenges and things in the job to do that you wouldn't have imagined in the first place. That is, take some ownership of your job, and demonstrate to your employer that you do care, and you're usually given even more opportunities. Opportunities that can be steps in the direction of doing what you want to do.

 

What this means is that sometimes you take a job that maybe is indeed beneath your education and experience, but is a stepping stone and a point to begin to demonstrate what you can do. Too many people today expect that the perfect opportunity is supposed to just happen, but that rarely is how the real world works.

 

On the flip side, if you take a job and act uninterested and rely on that job to give you happiness, then you're going to be miserable. Your job is what you make of it, and I don't think it is any job's responsibility to provide your happiness. You need to provide your own happiness, and your job is just one tool to achieve that, not the whole tool.

[iNow]

Bignose hit on the same thought I had. While certain jobs will often lead us to being unhappy, our own happiness doesn't tend to come from any job. That comes from within. A job can only supplement something we already have, not provide it entirely.

 

If you feel the need to define yourself by your work and prove yourself by how others feel about you, then I'd recommend focusing less on finding the perfect job or how best to please others and more on becoming comfortable with yourself as a human and learning what truly inspires you and makes you passionate. If you don't accept yourself for who you are, nobody else will either.

[CharonY]

On a similar note as Arete, assuming that you are applying for jobs you should focus on fit rather than technical abilities (also never assume you are the best at something). And fit is the whole package. If people don't like to work with you, your abilities are secondary.

Work experience is valuable not only because it teaches you the skills you need on the job, but also because you learn to work with other people (most of the time) and in different work environments. Learning that makes one often much more hireable.

[Phi for All]

It's not that I don't want to hear it, I appreciate hearing it.

You definitely don't want to hear it. Nobody does. But a responsible person listens to criticism and makes an honest attempt to acknowledge it for what it is.

 

You asked for an example of your earlier deception, and iNow responded:

 

I think that I am a very trustworthy person in all actuality. I'm not a thief, I'm not a liar, I'm not an addict, I have personality and I truly don't think that I give anyone a reason to not trust me, which is why I kind of feel blindsided by ophiolites remark.

 

I really wish you guys would clarify about that one because I don't know what I did.

Remember when you said in this very thread that you weren't referring to yourself? Stuff like that.

Well you guys can't seriously tell me that you don't like having me around. I'm not worried about what you guys think of me, but check this out. A guy posted to my Facebook earlier today, and I thought that it was ironic given this thread.

["chaff" story follows]

 

Who do you think you're fooling with this shtick? "Oh, yeah, I lied about that, but lookey over here everybody, FACEBOOK!" You don't get to pretend you don't understand what Ophiolite meant about your honesty any more.

 

I hate the fact that I can't support myself and I really want to believe that I have something good to offer people, but my degree is not the most appealing for industrial purposes, and I'm not going to be happy unless I get a job that makes me feel important, that's really all I want.

Can you tell me about one of the last jobs you held? I've known lots of intelligent people who couldn't hold a job because they always knew better than their employer. Problem is, the employer owns the job, and they got where they are without you, so it's usually good to do the job you're asked to do and don't try to treat every systerm as something you have to make better. At least to begin with.

 

You strike me as someone who enters a situation and immediately wants to change it to suit yourself. You don't always get to do that when you work for someone else.