BTW, I refrained from posting because I had made three posts already with my alternate story that I finally finished and didn't want to clutter up the friends list. Silvolf, thanks for reading it. I appreciate the feed back and always enjoy it. Those of you on my filter please don't forget to check it out when you can. I'd really like to know what you think.
Have you ever had anyone get pissed at you because you agreed with them? I never had until today. Nowhere is safe. Not even communties about gourds and pumpkins from overly sensitive types. I'll post what happened behind the cut.
Ok, we were having a nice conversation about pumpkins and this user made this post concerning a short informal paper writen about the pumpkins I want to order.
Well I certainly don't claim to be any kind of scientific guru but one thing I can do is translate scientific language into plain English, so that might be useful here I suppose. Eg whoever wrote that the Orange Bulldog was developed from 'germplasm' deserves a telling-off for being pretentious. They meant 'seeds'.
All well and good. I agreed that it was funny that he used that word when he could have been more simplistic so I responded.
Well, I hate the scientific paper format but they require everyone to be redundant and use huge words when you could suffice in one sentence or so. Since Germplasm is such a broad term meaning a collection of desirable traits it encompasses natural and artifically occuring traits. So yes, Seeds can hold the desirable traits they are looking for. You just have to make it sound fancy or you don't get the grant money hehe.
This is a statement in agreement with her. Now do any of you, my rational friends, see an attack anywhere in my satement above? No of course not because there is NONE. But "offensive" people see attacks in EVERYTHING. Her response.
We've only just e-met and I'm sure you didn't mean to be rude, but what you said about scientific journals and grant proposals is a little insulting. I follow the principle 'never use a long word where a short one will do' and so do all the scientists I respect. If we can make our point in 'one sentence of two', we do that.
When writing for other academics, we use a very structured format and very specific jargon to make things very clear to those who know that jargon. Redundancy isn't encouraged at all, and 'huge words' are there only when necessary. When writing for a broader audience we use words that are easier to understand, but which often are also easier to misunderstand. I personally take real pride in my ability to write, or talk, for different kinds of people. The paper I linked to is for academics. For farmers or for people in general, I greatly enjoy translating the science, but I'm always aware that I can only do that by glossing over some of the technicalities.
For instance, that paper I linked to can be translated as 'Sheep get this infection. You can detect it by looking for its DNA or by looking for the sheep's antibodies. We've been working on the DNA test, and it's now more reliable than it was. We found that it often gave results wbich didn't agree with the antibody test.' But that's just a summary. I hope that other scientists will continue to build on what I've done and to do that, they need the technical details that are in my paper.
Uh, this warranted the use of my Freddy WTF? icon. Blah blah blah, my paper this and that. I didn't even read her "paper" which was nothing more than a paragraph on a website anyway. So how could I possibly attack something I don't know anything about (unlike idiotic trolls I don't attack without knowing what I'm getting into. Also I don't just attack unless I'm taken on in the first place. Like here. The conversation quickly turns hostile when it had been going fine. Tuche (sp?), to arms then. I will not sit idly by and let her speak that way to me. My response.
Wow, up in arms are we over something that wasn't even a personal attack? What happened to that scientific detachment? First of all the statement was not directed at you or the paper you linked me to. That paper was nicely short compared to the usual formats. Second, I was refering to the whole: Abstract, Introcution, Materials and Methods, Results and Discussion/Conclusion. The Abstract, Introduction and Discussion parts Are redundant. You're just finding new ways to rehash the same info. Sometimes all I do is read the abstract or the Discussion to get what I'm after. As far as writing goes I think that's boring and annoying. But it's the way it's been dones hundreds of years. It's the way it will be taught and yes that's what the big wig companies and universities want and make everyone write that way. But lots of scientists don't care for it. In fact the ones that are famous and making big money higher others to do that for them. I would. I do not see how you could have misunderstood something I was clearly agreeing with you about since you had said
developed from 'germplasm' deserves a telling-off
For using a "big word" instead of saying seed. Here I am expanding on that and you totally take it in the wrong direction. So now that you're defending these "big words" (and taking the opposite stance) then the guy doesn't deserve to be told off for saying "germplasm" instead of seeds and once again I use the argument that it's a broad all encompassing term. So, it was not a personal attack. I do not see how you could think that in the first place so I do not retract any of my words above. So you're good at writing papers? That's wonderful. You even enjoy writing them? Good. You're better at that than I am then, but I still don't like it.
EDIT Edited for typos. Also to make note that "You're" can be used as singular and plural. In this case it's plural so once again not a personal attack. I could have said "one" like they do in scientific papers but again, I don't care for that.
I've been breeding birds for about 20 years so no need to worry. I know what I'm doing.
Those of you that know me and are my friends know I'm blunt, up front and don't sugar coat anything. But you know what? I still don't think I was being blunt as stated many times this was not a personal attack. Sheesh. It's not about the contents of HER little paper if you can even call it that since it wasn't in journal/scientific format. I'm also logging this because I'm not expecting the "You're mean. I'm leaving and deleting everything I said." What she wanted to hear was me to say I was sorry. Well I'm not because if she can't handle an honest open conversation she's got issues, is too sensitive and is not at all open minded like she likely claims to be. If she's going to get that bent out of shape over nothing then she needs to resolve some major issues. I just love the whole "I'm leaving" whine fest if that even gets used because I'm supposed to experience some sort of loss. Nope, not gonna happen. Joy, my community's first flamewar. *sarcasm*
Whatever. It's an anniversary. My day's been great. This is mildly amusing.