RE: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook
Well, maybe it is just me, then!Best regards,Darren-Original Message-From: james.cl...@nist.govSent: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 17:03:53 +To: rietveld_l@ill.frSubject: RE: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook Not a great deal of difference between these entities, IMHO. Jim James P. Cline Materials Measurement Science Division National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Dr. stop 8520 [B113 / Bldg 217 ] Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8523 USA jcl...@nist.gov (301) 975 5793 FAX (301) 975 5334 From: rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr [mailto:rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr] On Behalf Of Darren Broom Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 11:17 AM To: Young Lindsay Kay; rietveld_l@ill.fr Subject: Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook On a related note, with regard to accessing Facebook at work, I generally only use it to keep in touch with friends; and I try to avoid mixing the two. I'm sure I'm not alone in doing this. For work-related activities, etc, I tend to use LinkedIn. Best regards, Darren -Original Message- From: lindsay.yo...@rockets.utoledo.edu Sent: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:40:31 + To: rietveld_l@ill.fr Subject: Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook As one of the younger members of the list, I would like to add a few points. I may never have found this list on my own if my advisor was not kind enough to point it out to me. I have never seen a mailing list before in my life :) To that end social media outlets may be helpful for newcomers.But I am very happy to be a member and will gladly learn/join whatever format is chosen.So many people helped me get to where I am today by kindlyanswering my basic questions that I feel obligated to do the same for other newcomers. I strongly believe in open-mindedness toward the new. Regardless, I think that social media may be mostuseful for publicity and outreachif we wish to seek out new members, but I don't think social media formats arefriendlyto discussion. Facebook's format, for example, would not allow for easy archiving of replies and they would easily become buried as time passed. Another problem with social media is that for those who are at work or school, being seen on facebook or other social media may be forbidden if not frowned upon, even if they were being honestly productive. I agree that fewer streams of consciousness are preferable. If we wish to move at all, I propose that a forum format may be the best for consideration? From: rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr on behalf of Daxu Liu daxu...@yahoo.com Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:06 AM To: Leopoldo Suescun; rietveld_l@ill.fr Subject: Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook Dear prof. Suescun, I agree with you, and I have written to you some times ago. You do be an enthusiastic and generous man. Thank you very much! Yes, many beginners do ask lots of basic points on crystallography and some basic steps on how to use some refinement programmes, and I was one of them. However, someone has no choice to ask someone for help because he/she maybe study oneself, and crystallography is not his/her major. I was crazy on the Rietveld method in the pastjust forthe interest, and I had to write to some people for help because I can not solve some problems even after I searched the answers in Google or other search engines. I am very appreciated for those people who helped me like you and Dr. Toby, Brian H., and Dr. Rodriguez-Carvajal, J. and other respectable and kindpeople. I have studied the Rietveld method for eight years myself through the web and reading some books, and I have published few papers on it, which are colsely related to my research areas. In aword, I feel, if you know about it and have sparetime, it will be possible to encourage and help someone greatly when you answer his or her some basic questions (maybe stupied questions,:) ). Best regards, Daxu From: Leopoldo Suescun leopo...@fq.edu.uy To: "rietveld_l@ill.fr" rietveld_l@ill.fr Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:33 PM Subject: Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook Dear Colleagues, IMHO the Rietveld List is for rather advanced students and scientists that are rather fanatic, not for the kind of beginners that may look for assistance in facebook. One of such students will find our discussions impossible to understand at minimum if not simply crazy, full of self-references, old discussions and rivalries. We have even read some rude replies to students whose knowledge was evidently far below the minimum required to perform a meaningful refinement, or question to the list. So maybe it would not be advisable for a very young and untrained student to join our list and ask very basic questions. I think the facebook page will reach to other public that will never come to us on a first basis and probably shouldn´t, but that will eventually be ready for the list after some time. One poin
Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook
On a related note, with regard to accessing Facebook at work, I generally only use it to keep in touch with friends; and I try to avoid mixing the two. I'm sure I'm not alone in doing this.For work-related activities, etc, I tend to use LinkedIn.Best regards,Darren-Original Message-From: lindsay.yo...@rockets.utoledo.eduSent: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:40:31 +To: rietveld_l@ill.frSubject: Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook As one of the younger members of the list, I would like to add a few points. I may never have found this list on my own if my advisor was not kind enough to point it out to me. I have never seen a mailing list before in my life :) To that end social media outlets may be helpful for newcomers.But I am very happy to be a member and will gladly learn/join whatever format is chosen.So many people helped me get to where I am today by kindlyanswering my basic questions that I feel obligated to do the same for other newcomers. I strongly believe in open-mindedness toward the new. Regardless, I think that social media may be mostuseful for publicity and outreachif we wish to seek out new members, but I don't think social media formats arefriendlyto discussion. Facebook's format, for example, would not allow for easy archiving of replies and they would easily become buried as time passed. Another problem with social media is that for those who are at work or school, being seen on facebook or other social media may be forbidden if not frowned upon, even if they were being honestly productive. I agree that fewer streams of consciousness are preferable. If we wish to move at all, I propose that a forum format may be the best for consideration? From: rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr on behalf of Daxu Liu daxu...@yahoo.com Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:06 AM To: Leopoldo Suescun; rietveld_l@ill.fr Subject: Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook Dear prof. Suescun, I agree with you, and I have written to you some times ago. You do be an enthusiastic and generous man. Thank you very much! Yes, many beginners do ask lots of basic points on crystallography and some basic steps on how to use some refinement programmes, and I was one of them. However, someone has no choice to ask someone for help because he/she maybe study oneself, and crystallography is not his/her major. I was crazy on the Rietveld method in the pastjust forthe interest, and I had to write to some people for help because I can not solve some problems even after I searched the answers in Google or other search engines. I am very appreciated for those people who helped me like you and Dr. Toby, Brian H., and Dr. Rodriguez-Carvajal, J. and other respectable and kindpeople. I have studied the Rietveld method for eight years myself through the web and reading some books, and I have published few papers on it, which are colsely related to my research areas. In aword, I feel, if you know about it and have sparetime, it will be possible to encourage and help someone greatly when you answer his or her some basic questions (maybe stupied questions,:) ). Best regards, Daxu From: Leopoldo Suescun leopo...@fq.edu.uy To: "rietveld_l@ill.fr" rietveld_l@ill.fr Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:33 PM Subject: Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook Dear Colleagues, IMHO the Rietveld List is for rather advanced students and scientists that are rather fanatic, not for the kind of beginners that may look for assistance in facebook. One of such students will find our discussions impossible to understand at minimum if not simply crazy, full of self-references, old discussions and rivalries. We have even read some rude replies to students whose knowledge was evidently far below the minimum required to perform a meaningful refinement, or question to the list. So maybe it would not be advisable for a very young and untrained student to join our list and ask very basic questions. I think the facebook page will reach to other public that will never come to us on a first basis and probably shouldn´t, but that will eventually be ready for the list after some time. One point in favor of the facebook discussion group or other social media channels is that all of our Universities and Institutes(*see below) are on Facebook/Twitter/RG, etc, and more and more "younger" and not quite colleagues are using them too, for dissemination of careers, teaching programs, events, job advertising, and even knowledge, so denying that Facebook, Twitter, Research Gate, etc. may be of help to disseminate the Rietveld Method in particular and knowledge in general is like denying reality. I´m not going to judge if the for-profit, business oriented attitude of the companies that manage these social networks is favorable for spreading science or not (probably not), but it may be a good idea that we use the networks to allow younger colleagues becoming crystallographers to learn the
RE: Apologies... The No Attachment rule.
Hi AlanThanks for the explanation. The point about the archive seems to me to be the most persuasive - I see what you mean. Providing the file sharing links stay active that does ensure the archive remains useful without having to "host" additional files on the archive server.It does seem that removing any attachments automatically would be the best solution. Hopefully Song Zhen's suggestion will help sort that out.Incidentally, Jon nicely illustrated one of the things about the list that I really appreciate, by posting an interesting link that I hadn't seen before and probably wouldn't have come across otherwise.Also, I wondered if you could set up SYMPA so that it strips emails of any unnecessary snarkiness (above a predefined threshold)?Best regards,Darren -Original Message-From: alan.he...@neutronoptics.comSent: Sat, 9 May 2015 11:39:46 +0200To: leopo...@fq.edu.uySubject: Apologies... The "No Attachment" rule.Dear Rietveld list.Good to see so many people asking for the list to be continued. And even an example of an interesting scientific question immediately answered by an expert. Encouraging.So why do I forbid "sinful" attachments ? (No, it's not because I'm getting old and snarky, though we all do eventually :-) Think of the Rietveld list as a kind of relaxed "Twitter", except that you are not limited to 140 characters. And what about Google's decision this month to favour sites that can be used on a mobile phone ? Yes, even oldies use mobile phones for email. SMS is another example of beauty in brevity.Then the Rietveld Archive is an excellent record of past discussions - without the attachments. Messages that rely on attachments are then often incomprehensible - look up that message on https://www.mail-archive.com/rietveld_l@ill.fr/ Frankly, if you need more than that, put it on a webserver with a link to it. Such links are preserved in the archive.If you see my own warning about "no attachments" as an attachment :-) perhaps you should check how your email client is set up. Or tell me how I can do it differently with SYMPA www.sympa.orgI didn't design the mail server nor the mail archive. Clearly, it is difficult to enforce a simple "no attachments" rule, so what would it be like policing a "small attachments" rule ? Even if you personally have lots of space for email, our webserver (for which we don't pay) would still have to distribute ~1500 copies of your "small attachment".In this particular case, a figure from an unpublished paper was published and criticised out of context. Is that really fair? If it's from a referee's copy we shouldn't even refer to it, let alone publish it. If it's a pre-print, just publish a link to it. But there are already plenty of examples in the published literature if you are looking for evidence of regression.So where are the "Apologies"? There are none :-) "Excuse me" is what people say when they elbow their way through a crowd. (I only do that when I really need to). So if you really need to attach a document, go ahead. After all, you can still read the list on the archive.Alan__ Dr Alan Hewat, NeutronOptics, Grenoble, FRANCEalan.he...@neutronoptics.com +33.476.98.41.68http://www.NeutronOptics.com/hewat__ ++ Please do NOT attach files to the whole list alan.he...@neutronoptics.com Send commands to lists...@ill.fr eg: HELP as the subject with no body text The Rietveld_L list archive is on http://www.mail-archive.com/rietveld_l@ill.fr/ ++
RE: Apologies... The No Attachment rule.
Hi KurtMaybe I should let others comment first but I would just like to say that I think a slightly harsh comment to an experienced person who has made a silly mistake is quite different to an abrupt and perhaps patronizing comment to a complete beginner who has asked a legitimate question.I have checked back and it was definitely the latter that Bill Reese was commenting on previously...Cheers,Darren-Original Message-From: ku...@asu.eduSent: Sun, 10 May 2015 13:26:28 +To: rietveld_l@ill.frSubject: RE: Apologies... The "No Attachment" rule. Hi, The subject of snarky comments is a fascinating one. I have definitely been the recipient of snarky comments for some of my more stupid posts on this list. The good thing about them is that it lets you know that you are saying or doing something, crystallographically speaking, that is really unpalatable to someone out there, and you might need to know this for your own good. I have definitely been chastised and have learned some things over the years by being forced to read a snarky response to one of my posts. But on the other hand, to a beginner a snarky comment can be damaging. However, these comments are not confined to mailing lists – they happen at conferences too and they are just part of the fabric of science. As long as the whole list does not descend into a chaos of snarky comments, I think it’s OK to let them get through. One possible remedy is for others to come to the defence of a victim of excessive snarkiness. I have seen that happen on this list sometimes, and other times have been tempted myself to intervene, though I usually have not been brave enough (especially when the snark source is someone famous). - Kurt From: rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr [mailto:rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr] On Behalf Of Darren Broom Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 3:36 AM To: Alan Hewat; Leopoldo Suescun Cc: rietveld_l@ill.fr Subject: RE: Apologies... The "No Attachment" rule. Hi Alan Thanks for the explanation. The point about the archive seems to me to be the most persuasive - I see what you mean. Providing the file sharing links stay active that does ensure the archive remains useful without having to "host" additional files on the archive server. It does seem that removing any attachments automatically would be the best solution. Hopefully Song Zhen's suggestion will help sort that out. Incidentally, Jon nicely illustrated one of the things about the list that I really appreciate, by posting an interesting link that I hadn't seen before and probably wouldn't have come across otherwise. Also, I wondered if you could set up SYMPA so that it strips emails of any unnecessary snarkiness (above a predefined threshold)? Best regards, Darren -Original Message- From: alan.he...@neutronoptics.com Sent: Sat, 9 May 2015 11:39:46 +0200 To: leopo...@fq.edu.uy Subject: Apologies... The "No Attachment" rule. Dear Rietveld list. Good to see so many people asking for the list to be continued. And even an example of an interesting scientific question immediately answered by an expert. Encouraging. So why do I forbid "sinful" attachments ? (No, it's not because I'm getting old and snarky, though we all do eventually :-) Think of the Rietveld list as a kind of relaxed "Twitter", except that you are not limited to 140 characters. And what about Google's decision this month to favour sites that can be used on a mobile phone ? Yes, even oldies use mobile phones for email. SMS is another example of beauty in brevity. Then the Rietveld Archive is an excellent record of past discussions - without the attachments. Messages that rely on attachments are then often incomprehensible - look up that message on https://www.mail-archive.com/rietveld_l@ill.fr/ Frankly, if you need more than that, put it on a webserver with a link to it. Such links are preserved in the archive. If you see my own warning about "no attachments" as an attachment :-) perhaps you should check how your email client is set up. Or tell me how I can do it differently with SYMPA www.sympa.orgI didn't design the mail server nor the mail archive. Clearly, it is difficult to enforce a simple "no attachments" rule, so what would it be like policing a "small attachments" rule ? Even if you personally have lots of space for email, our webserver (for which we don't pay) would still have to distribute ~1500 copies of your "small attachment". In this particular case, a figure from an unpublished paper was published and criticised out of context. Is that really fair? If it's from a referee's copy we shouldn't even refer to it, let alone publish it. If it's a pre-print, just publish a link to it. But there are already plenty of examples in the published literature if you are looking for evidence of regression. So where are the "Apologies"? There are no
