Not STEM inherently, but I thought this community might have a handful of sympathizers
You must log in or register to comment.
The “Peter” bit reminded me: Years back, there was a viral trend on Dutch socials where women shared a hashtag “I am Peter” to raise awareness that there were more people named Peter in Boards of Directors than women.
Imagine seeing Ted Kacynzki in your math proof.
Better known for other work.
Oh no, APA style
Hey, what’s wrong with APA?
Author-date systems create line noise that makes text hard to grok. Numeric systems (with or without footnotes) don’t have that problem. Honestly I don’t see the point of author-date. If a a paper is really important then it should be referenced in prose, otherwise “(Kowalchuck et al., 2018)” doesn’t tell you anything more than “[11]”; you’re still gonna need to look it up in the bibliography. And that looking up is actually made harder: finding [11] between [10] and [12] is easier than finding Kowalchuk between Kowal and Kowalski or whatever other names happen to be there.
Makes sense
As an R&D engineer I feel both seen and offended by this meme. Excellent work, am I ok to cite this meme in IEEE format?
