Comments on Profile Post by skem

  1. skem
    skem
    Jul 30, 2020
  2. Claritas
    Claritas
    Guideline "4. Do not discuss politics." But you can certainly post it in Marv's "Politically Incorrect" thread. We must prevent politics from taking over SBAF. It happened on CS, and it was bad for everyone.
    Jul 30, 2020
    DigMe and HotRatSalad like this.
  3. skem
    skem
    That’s refreshing, because I fully agree!! But if I might nit pick, that’s why my post carefully did not reference any party, president, etc. It was a musing on the theory of governance in response to NationOf Laws post just below mine. It is not party politics in the conventional sense of political discussion.
    Jul 30, 2020
    NationOfLaws likes this.
  4. Vtory
    Vtory
    Not only in politics but in general, how can we expect one continue to perform as similarly as pre-trial period? Moreover, that naturally de-prioritizes any long term plan/projects (Even 5 yr time window in program planning is criticized for this reason).
    Jul 30, 2020
    skem likes this.
  5. skem
    skem
    I hesitate to respond, but there are many problems with the idea. It basically extends the campaign period into office—not good. Long-term planning functions are supposed to be held by agencies that have permanent staff and programs. Unfortunately, for the last decade+ political appointees heading agencies have discovered that they can re-org divisions to make select programs or competencies go away.
    Jul 30, 2020
  6. Vtory
    Vtory
    Yeah, one of the simplest example might be federal research fund (which I can say less ambiguously). I've witnessed tons of (non problematic) ways to manipulate priority for political needs.. 3 month trial period may dial in more negative directions.
    Jul 30, 2020
  7. skem
    skem
    Do you depend on such funds? What area/kind of research?
    Jul 30, 2020
  8. Claritas
    Claritas
    Jul 30, 2020
  9. Vtory
    Vtory
    Health. Specifically NIH and likes. Looking at which grant proposal is chosen and which not (for R01 or similar ones) give some idea of how they're associated with political focus. And I strongly believe this isn't just about health researches.
    Jul 30, 2020
  10. skem
    skem
    Tell me about. One nameless administration tried to cancel all NIH funding for research on STD transmission—because why?
    Jul 30, 2020
  11. skem
    skem
    I started my research career with a very nice grant that made life easy for a long time. When it came to renew, the granting agency had perverted the original purpose of the program. They no longer review applicants on the merit of the research ideas, but on how convincingly the researcher claims to be training new employees for the granting agency. They’re totally blatant about it too!
    Jul 30, 2020
  12. Vtory
    Vtory
    It doesn't occur that way. I emphasized "non-problematic ways". There are generally tons of proposals wanting money. Money is very limited (year to year varying). In such context, it's pretty easy to make one group less prioritized as grant evaluation process is eventually human-related not fully system-determined. Apply some sensitive issue such as insurance or gov support to this framework. That's what's happening.
    Jul 30, 2020
  13. Vtory
    Vtory
    Seems a little timing issue as I spent too many minutes. Anyway my point is trial-period may cause quite a lot unintended consequences. That's maybe why things are done the way we know. Not fully convinced. But that's my position.
    Jul 30, 2020