Then none of the reasons why I hate reddit will change.

In all seriousness, such a drastic imposed change to the culture of the site could be devastating.

He should eventually be bold, but although the problems are easy to identify, the best solutions might not be.

11. You publish your paper. For next few years, several other papers are published that build off of your results, but they do not cite your paper, because is would make their results seem less novel.

Actually, I could add a ton. Here's one:

12. NIH releases a exciting new grant fast track opportunity for young researchers! You spend two weeks applying. They receive 20k applications and fund three of them. You realize that you would have been better off working at McDonalds for two weeks and spending the money on scratch tickets.

I've seen all the classics, and I keep up with the newer stuff when I can. Would definitely be interested in being involved.

Ha. Whippersnappers. Speed Racer.

First one I enjoyed? Robotech. Third sequence was the only good one. Watched Genesis Climber Mospeada in my 30s and gotta say - it holds up. There are messages in it that just aren't in most anything else and it's great. Plus Yellow Belmont the cross-dressing fighter-pilot internationally-renowned jazz singer.

Funny story. The arthouse decided to show My Neighbor Totoro a few years after it came out in Japan (prolly woulda been '90, '91). We missed it 'cuz they only showed it once. But no fear, anime fans! Because three weeks later they showed Urotsukidoji.

Which, of course, is a cartoon, right? So why not bring the kids, right? 'cuz it was unrated. And it was New Mexico, and that's just the sort of shit that happens.

So I'm probably one of the very few people who has ever had the opening of Urotsukidoji interrupted by a crying baby. I'll say that the look on the mother's face when she saw what she was in for was priceless... but the ensuing two hours convinced me beyond a reasonable doubt that there's something deeply wrong with Japanese culture.

Manga? I've got the Nausicaa boxed set but I haven't quite figured out how the hell to read it. That whole backwards thing is messing with me. This is a recent purchase, like within the past year.

Go to the users page and filter them. Once they have a lot of filters, they will be globally filtered, meaning they won't show up in global. This is done automatically based on a number of factors, including number of filterss a person has.

If it is a comment, shout out me or thenewgreen and we'll handle it.

Nah, it's not as stressing as it seems in this text, I just focused in those aspects because it's one of the things usually not mentioned. You read about girls' experiences, mostly, for good and bad.

There was a lot of fun, many other times, and many many of the guys wanted to repeat (even after the viagra and the post-orgasm shame).

Yeah, that's nonsensical. Sorry. No kinder way to put it.

You're saying that people shouldn't be able to discuss that episode of Cosmos about black holes unless they've read Kip Thorne's original research. This is a ridiculous standpoint. Stephen Hawking didn't write A Brief History of Time because he wanted to try something without a lot of math, he wrote it to popularize science.

The entire approach of science educators should be to demistify and broaden the appeal of exciting but not-necessarily-accessible research so that people can, say, support the Superconducting Supercollider over the ISS because the SSC would have actually done research. You don't need to read a scientific paper about the likely weight of the Higgs Boson to have an opinion as to whether or not it's worth spending $8b finding it.

Primary research is NOT intended for rhetorical pyrotechnics, nor is it intended for policy decisions. Primary research is intended to broaden the knowledge base of experts so that those experts can advise non-experts. Throwing original research into an internet pissing match simply shows that you don't know how to convince your audience - if you did, you'd explain why that original research makes your point instead of writing "RTFM n00b."

There's a whole subgenre devoted to humiliate anxious and nervous regular guys who want to make porn for the first time. A couple of experienced women and the crew act like real bitches and mock the guys until the small self-confidence of the guy crumbles.

My boss thought on this, but we couldn't afford vehicle and paying two girls for this kind of scene.

That show is one endless AFI video.

That was utterly fantastic. Thank you for sharing--I needed a laugh!

If I had to vote off these I'd go with cyborg master Patki.

You're saying that people shouldn't be able to discuss that episode of Cosmos about black holes unless they've read Kip Thorne's original research.

I think it's one thing to tell someone a cool factoid about black holes you learned from Cosmos. But it's something else entirely to make strong claims about some aspect of black holes (or vaccines, or climate change, etc) and insist you're right to the death when you haven't read any of the literature. These are the situations I was thinking of when I made the original post.

Throwing original research into an internet pissing match simply shows that you don't know how to convince your audience - if you did, you'd explain why that original research makes your point instead of writing "RTFM n00b."

Haha, true! I do have to admit I've been guilty of this (although hopefully with better language ;)). I could certainly stand to improve my public science communication skills.