1. Helping chemists find jobs in a tough market. 2. Towards a quantitative understanding of the quality of the chemistry job market.
I wonder how many people will get #12 (you'll know who the blog junkies are if they do).
Do you remember that picture with the flames in the background on Tenderbutton? Loved it.
I like #5, even though I don't like the fact that they can state #5.
You forgot "I just don't feel like sending it to reviewers". Maybe that's the same as #9?
we got a rather funny acceptance letter for our medchem paper - if all reviewers demands are met. The reviewer demands that optical rotation data is provided for optically pure final compounds and intermediates... He wants hi-res MS also.Its in Med Chem Comm, of all places.
#17: I despise the primary author. We are engaged in an endless war of rejecting each other's papers.#18: Not enough organocataylsis.#19: Not enough click chemistry.#20: My slaves, uh, I mean "group" is synthesizing the same natural product. I can't bear to be upstaged by some two-bit professor at a public university who has a better strategy anyways and ultimately will get the last laugh because a Big Pharma company will license the method to install the essential sidechain on a naturally replenishable precursor to the target molecule. ALL WILL LOVE ME AND DESPAIR!!! (Of course, I'm not naming anyone in particular.)
CJ, I missed the Tenderbutton write-up. I saw Kyle F's, and he had some choice words for Prof. Sames and how he handled the situation.
J, go to archive.tenderbutton.com and type in the login/password. (tender/button)Go to the March 8, 2006 post. It's not as epic as I remember, but it's still quite something.
Thanks A LOT for that. I just wasted my morning reading about biologists being lazy and the ensuing hilarious commentary about being a mayor of some twigs.
@J-bone and CJ: This list is funny even if you aren't a regular at the old blog watercooler....I think several of these (5, 12, 16) have now been woven enough into the lore tapestry of grad school that most folks will get the joke. @ANON 7:52: #21 - Figures mislabeled as Schemes, Schemes as Equations, Equations as Graphs, etc...#22 - Don't put NMR data in your manuscript, you dick, that's what the SI is for!#23 - You're from a group that regularly publishes in Synlett, and even you can't duplicate your own work#24 - Did you just fold together a bunch of unrelated experiments so you could publish something before you defended?
#25 - You KNOW this is more of a JOC...we're not a screening service, you know!