So, as you may or may not know, my place of work basically likes to have sessions where we "review" each other's manuscripts and presentations. What a waste of time when I could basically be talking to/travelling towards/visiting/publicly groping Ursula. I guess "review" is their way to basically set up a plausible scenario for being able to absorb my vast intellect. I mean, really, why do they want ME, studliest of all people, to stand up there and have to pretend that I care what they say, when obviously my presentations and articles are superior to anything they could possibly dream of creating. Basically. Here are a few examples, i. e., one time they told me that my figure caption was basically the biggest figure caption they have ever seen in their entire life. Even though aformentioned figure caption was pre-approved by my supervisor. So there. Or that my poster was too packed with information! Basically, they are just jealous that they are not able to add that much information to their posters. And they basically objected to my presentation referring to "asses". I use asses to pack my gear into my site, and when Ursula comes down, sometimes we play ass polo. They basically thought that asses could be miscontrued as something else! What I want to know, is who had a problem with my use of "asses"? Who?!
It's a waste of my time and intellect to sit there and listen to my worthless coworkers try to wreck my perfection with their so-called improvements. Then they think they should be "acknowleged" just because they spent half a day reading my paper and suggesting things like "oh, maybe your paper shouldn't include a graph of how long you spent driving to your field site" or "oh, that graph of the variation in mm with SEs, and box-plots and histograms and bell curves and t-tests showing that there was no significant difference in inner-diameter circumference of the bird bands we used is not very useful". Basically, I'll probably just acknowledge Juan, because he rented me this ass.
Posts
