Could be they let him interview as a sort of compromise or consolation. He's not CP. Given recent hiring trends in CP, hard to see subfield faculty getting behind something like this.
Assistant Professor position at Penn State University
-
speaking as someone who has interacted with him a lot: he is a bad person. one of the only people in our discipline i would say that about without any hesitation. not just awkward. legitimately an unethical, sleazy, mean person. it is very obvious he’s a bad person to anyone who spends more than passing interactions with him. that a department like psu is interested in him is a really big red flag about the culture of the place.
Genuine question. What has he done? Is he phacking type of bad? Or is he running a human trafficking operation type of bad?
Neither. He's just mean and a sleaze apparently.His coauthors the same.
Not the ones I know. Many of his coauthors are fine.
-
To what extent is it defensible for his coauthors to continue working with a known meanie/sleazeball?
speaking as someone who has interacted with him a lot: he is a bad person. one of the only people in our discipline i would say that about without any hesitation. not just awkward. legitimately an unethical, sleazy, mean person. it is very obvious he’s a bad person to anyone who spends more than passing interactions with him. that a department like psu is interested in him is a really big red flag about the culture of the place.
Genuine question. What has he done? Is he phacking type of bad? Or is he running a human trafficking operation type of bad?
Neither. He's just mean and a sleaze apparently.
His coauthors the same.Not the ones I know. Many of his coauthors are fine.
-
yes we should choose coauthors based on advice from anonymous trolls that is a great idea
you have much legitimacy and make excellent points
i now know that this person must be terrible and do no work this seems entirely reasonable given the record and the source of this information
-
i didnt say his work was bad. he seems very successful and accomplished- good for him. but in a market like this with such a huge oversupply of overqualified people relative to jobs, there’s no reason to tolerate a toxic person just because they’re productive. theres lots of other non-toxic productive people to pick from. the depts that are willing to tolerate people like this are telling on themselves.
-
HEY CC HOW WAS YOUR JOB TALK?
yes we should choose coauthors based on advice from anonymous trolls that is a great idea
you have much legitimacy and make excellent points
i now know that this person must be terrible and do no work this seems entirely reasonable given the record and the source of this information -
i didnt say his work was bad. he seems very successful and accomplished- good for him. but in a market like this with such a huge oversupply of overqualified people relative to jobs, there’s no reason to tolerate a toxic person just because they’re productive. theres lots of other non-toxic productive people to pick from. the depts that are willing to tolerate people like this are telling on themselves.
he has no top 3
-
He overcommits to projects, leaves others to do the work, and then bullies others into finishing. That's the gist - it's clear from his publications.
Could someone post an example of the 'sleazy' behavior we're talking about? Did he steal someone's paper? Not pay his share at a group lunch?