Actually guilty by reason of insanity!

257: In addition to the oldest profession, it is giving up the responsibility of your klafte to a man.

1: Is it bad?

257: No. it’s Natural.

1: How do the theorists today feel?

257: Like utter whores.

1: Is that good or bad?

257: Quite good. It potentates the eel like capacitor.

1: What is the voltage?

257: Don’t know exactly but high.

When you use I and mean we does it make you feel:

1. hypocritical
2. a liar
3. presumptive
4. wrong
5. right
6. guilty as charged

In creative works, and literary efforts, using I is inescapable. It is always used to preface or be included in any statements, stating some thing like: “This is what I think, or just I think, for instance saying that W needs waterboarding.

All that being said any particular author’s style must flow both naturally and fluently from his or her fingers, by instinctive, intuitive use, that derives biologically from innate genetic ability and the nurture of the society we are raised in.

About the concept of being bold I think we should look at the definition of bold:

Main Entry: bold
Pronunciation: b?ld
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English beald; akin to Old High German bald bold
Date: before 12th century
1 a: fearless before danger : intrepid b: showing or requiring a fearless daring spirit
2: impudent, presumptuous
3obsolete : assured, confident
4: sheer, steep
5: adventurous, free
6: standing out prominently
7: being or set in boldface
— bold•ly b?l(d)-l?\ adverb
— bold•ness b?l(d)-n?s\ noun

Could this attribute, if one is also not arrogant about it, be the highest adjective, the highest attribute of mankind?

Paraphrasing: “Teaching, research, and impact on the department are irrelevant. What matters is what a few old men in your field think of you. We’ll be sending them letters asking them to compare you to a list of other youngins. Your name had better come up first.”

Had I not done my homework before the visit, I would have been flabbergasted. As it, it still strikes me as strange. Is it, or is just me?

Certain departments or schools with very high opinions of themselves do things this way, though I would say that the majority do not. It’s just the way they do things – “We’re the top department in the country” [except not really] “so if you’re not the top person we need you to move along.” It’s open to question whether this actually gets them a better department then if they just hired good people and kept them.

I can think of a couple of National Academy members who got the boot from this type of department when they were younger. Of course, the attitude of Department X that never tenures is that being an accomplished junior prof there for six years should guarantee you a plum job elsewhere when they put you on the street, so they might not see that as a problem. If you really prove yourself, they’ll think about bringing you back as a senior hire.

The rumor at Princeton’s astro dept was that the faculty got votes on graduate applicants that were continuously adjusted based on the performance of those students after they graduated.