|
@conselice | |||||
|
Proofread your papers, everyone. Seen at the end of an arXiv paper today with ~100 authors:
"Acknowledgements go here. Include support staff at STScI - does somebody have a complete list of people we should mention?."
I guess not...
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
John Stott
@jps_astro
|
29. sij |
|
Once you've got 100 authors none of them are reading it because they're sure someone else must have 😉
|
||
|
|
||
|
Christopher Conselice
@conselice
|
29. sij |
|
Yes, I'm sure that's part of it.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Charles Danforth →🏔
@c_dan4th
|
29. sij |
|
I once got a paper to review which clearly wasn't the version they'd meant to submit. Included a number of "[who wants to sum up this part?]" or "[still not sure I believe this result]" bits.
I sent it back with some choice comments.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Michael Brown
@MJIBrown
|
29. sij |
|
Usually you should leave this as a LaTeX comment for @LeaksPh to find.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Sandor Kruk
@kruksandor
|
29. sij |
|
I noticed the same thing today 😅
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dr Rachana Bhatawdekar
@AstroRach
|
29. sij |
|
😂 😂😂
|
||
|
|
||