My PI wont follow the evidence - (Jul/29/2009 )

Come on folks, this is a technician whining that they know more than the PI and without the guts to provoke the discussion and maybe learn smething. If they're so unhappy with the PI they should get a job at McDonalds.

Though I would have liked a more two-sided conversation, the fact that the original poster is a technician has no bearing -- Einstein was a patent clerk doing physics in his spare time when he came up with the theory of relativity....

eberthella on Aug 23 2009, 07:21 PM said:

McDonald’s eh…and to do what and prove what? Grad school is the better bet, I think.

Although we might see it as bad form for the OP to criticise his PI, initiate a “lively” discussion (with a few ad homs thrown in for flavour) and then never to return to respond to some of the questions/issues raised, we shouldn’t forget that this is the venting rant and rave subforum afterall….

And if you had read his initial post, he already stated that he would leave as soon as he can..and regarding his guts, we don’t know exactly what happened nor what he did or did not do so we can’t conclude that he hasn’t got any….

@Homebrew: there shld be a law against "post and run" or better, "rile then run" .......

I agree with Casandra about "rile and run," but this is the actual reason I am posting:

"to his less experienced and less educated mind, are not driving his employer to a different conclusion.
Elitist or not - the person is a lab tech, not a grad student or post doc., who works at the pleasure and direction of the PI."

A technician for nearly a decade, I am offended by the assumption that technicians are less-experienced and/or less educated. I have had several arguments with PI's who have made this mistaken assumption, especially when the argument pertains to some technical aspect of a project. I nearly always win. (Mind you, I pick my battles )

A PI who hires a technician only to serve at his"pleasure" is probably going to hire an incompetent employee. (or drive off the competent one with his Machiavellian attitude) A PI who hires a technician for his competence is going to expect that employee to demonstrate that competence--ie, when something is amiss or unusual--even if it means the PI loses some face in the process.

lab rat on Aug 25 2009, 04:37 PM said:

I agree completely.

My bet is that this techncian fell into the incompetent status.

And sorry your feelings were hurt lab rat. If you wanted to be more than a technician - you should have been.

eberthella on Aug 31 2009, 04:03 PM said:

How do you know I'm not working on it? Don't condescend to someone based on assumptions inferred from one or two offhand statements on a chat board.

That said, I accept the intended apology.

Ahhh - "working on it." The wishful comment of the dreaming wanta-be's. I do apologize for reminding you - keep dreaming.

Wow, eberthella, what is your problem?? Why the need to denigrade technicians?? They perform a vital role in research, and many of them are far more skilled then their more educated counterparts. Surely you should be able to respect and value the role that they play?

They're typically a pair of hands and skilled in execution not in theory or design. More skilled than their "educated counterparts"? Not sure who they might be - but that's why we hire technicians.

And let me point out the "technician" who started this discussion has run from the field - offering nothing than the initial whines.