@VictorVenema @FrankSonntag @steve @RARohde If you accept these students who don’t yet have publications, then why does it say the opposite in the signup form?

Folks can claim “performative vitriol” if they want, but there’s a very particular narrow demographic of scientist who this particular hoop/gate appeals to. You’re getting feedback from many of the rest (a far more diverse crowd) that find it extremely off-putting and needlessly exclusionary right at the gate. It’s worth asking why.

@dantheclamman @FrankSonntag @steve @RARohde @VictorVenema
It is a tough balance, and I don’t envy y’all for it. Something akin to “actively involved in the production of scientific knowledge” might not feel so restrictive. (I have not thought this suggestion entirely through, feel free to toss it or go with something better if you have it).

If you need more help keeping the conspiracy-theorists & bad-faith trolls out, you can probably recruit some more volunteers to help w that.

@VictorVenema
If the stated policy is more restrictive than the enforced policy, and the key to getting in (for instance, for an MS student or an undergrad RA working in a lab) is to implicitly “know to ask for an exception”, then that is a barrier to diversity. It creates an insider club, between those who know the unwritten rules vs those who don’t. There are too many “unwritten rules”in academia already.

Stated policy can (and should) be written honestly, imo.

@RARohde @steve @FrankSonntag