[The motivating context for this has been removed because subsequent developments made it obvious that it was such a unique event that my post would violate the confidentiality of all concerned. In both minor and major ways. -DM]
I keep meaning to talk about “member conflict” SEP review and there is no time like the present.
April 18, 2008
I just started reading a piece in Nature Reviews Neuroscience entitled, “Choices in Neuroscience Careers”, and by the second paragraph I was totally enraged. Some huge-ass PI dude named Tamas Bartfai had the following advice for grad students and post-docs concerning choosing an area of research and laboratory for their training:
April 18, 2008
Karen Ventii of the Science to Life blog recently announced that she will be the editor-in-chief of a newly hatched science magazine at her local University. A comment brought my attention to the Berkeley Science Review which first published in 2001 (first editorial) with significant contribution from Jessica Palmer of bioephemera. This is the first I have run across this idea and it sounds really intriguing to me.
The implications of more direct outreach from scientists to an interested public are topics I have discussed before in the context of how scientists might blog and potential ethical considerations for scientist-blogging. Topics I solicited reader input on as well. Other than that, I’ve tended to leave implicit that which I’ll make explicit.