Subject: Re: MS data
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 15:20:49 +0100
I am sorry, I cannot comment on this.
I expect you respect your colleagues and able to communicate in a calm and professional manner by email and in person.
I see you do not understand the standardization subject and I am very able to prove it to a professional commission if its needed.
I also clearly see that you are getting passively aggressive and disrespectful, you are trying to undermine me on my professional field which is ridiculous and unacceptable. I think you have to apologize.
So I am sorry, I have nothing to ask you in person.
— this was reply to the email quoted here-above (the one with the red font).
So the actual reason for the dismissal: you «must recognize the scientific authority of Maria as co-leader of the project and work under her direct supervision alone» otherwise you are fired. This is how these cool scientists do science now days.
Murky messages with messy content, several files of >10Mb sent by email, «new format» © Maria Lluch Senar represented by two >100Mb Excel files with 15 spreadsheets with hand copy-paste — to process all this shit into the DB and then harassing a professional who tries to explain how the data should have been processed — these are just ordinary examples from a routine intellectual work process (paid by public money) of a rock star scientist with «I have many publications» (another shining clause of her argumentation).
This rock star scientist which is unable to create on her own a single document (without her promoter), a literate email, to make a tiny bit effort to grasp one simple thing: what the standards are, — whatever you’re trying to explain her, however you try to reach for her mind — «in turn» © this person just harasses you and keeps claiming for recognition of her poor scientific authority. Remarkably all those harassments with these wretched claims were fully supported by the top manager of the scientific institution.
Intellectual reasoning? Logical reasoning? Whatever fair damn reasoning?
Come on, bow and scrape and thank Universe, that these so great scientists could not call for the authorized science gestapo to help them out: they have only fired you because you had dared to question the authority of a really cool scientist whose favorite trip up in reply on any reasoning on the subject was just: «If you cannot do this work let us know and we will look for another way to do that».
Which was exceptionally ridiculous for this really cool scientist because «them» had no clue whatsoever about any way how their data could be processed in particular and how the scientific data are usually processed into the DB as that was not their expertise whatsoever. But surely «they» had authority to impose on you any by-products from «their» so beautiful minds.
Because. You. Cannot. Period.
— intellect, culture, work ethic here are so blatantly demonstrated that you just lose the gift of speech…
Why the data analyst was coerced to work with concocted data and had been denied the direct contact with the data producers?
Do you ask yourself why that so damn bright scientist who, as we’re sure, is Maria Lluch, — why she was so eager to interfere between the data and a data analyst, why the hell she had to concoct that shameful hand made copy-paste Excel spreadsheets instead of allowing the professional to work with the data sources directly?
Why on the Earth she’s been so craving for that bow and scrape?
How the hell they spend public money then? — they hire a professional, perform their mobbing actions against her attacking her purely on personal ground (because there is no other space to attack her) during several months and at the end just fire her after more than 9 months without giving her any credit for the job she’s been doing for them.
Is it Franco’s style but modernized Spanish science or what??
And at the and — why the Staff Scientist Maria Lluch Senar and the CRG Director Luis Serrano Pubul had to lie so shamefully?
These are fairly good questions.
And finally, how come that taking the way of the apparent scientific misconduct was the easiest choice for them?…
Here is my twitter account: @JWapatoo where I post current updates on this case and my relaxed attitude, i.e. after me being put under pressure and stress, it is naturally personalized unlike expressed as such while I am on duty where I’m restrained by professional standing rules and contract clauses.
«You should be stressed as you are still in initial closely watched period»
© Julia Ponomarenko
(4 months after start of the contract)
So these people don’t even give a care about the fact that a professional engineer, doing brainwork, can be only either productive or stressed.
Never both. Obviously, if results quality is to be provided.
Or, no need for data integrity in all this so playful scientific ambiance?
Or, these scientists — do they use their own brain for professional purposes?
P.S. CRG and Luis Serrano do support scientific fraud of their PI MP Cosma — please see by these links an article of Leonid Schneider and PubPeer comments.