Maybe because anyone supporting the strike really surprising 🙊

Hybrid can work, but only when the work structure supports it. In my group, data generation and analysis are shared responsibilities, and that overlap is hard to replace remotely. Fairness and regulatory constraints also matter more than people like to acknowledge.

Does it apply to resubmissions?

In-person work can add value in some roles. It should not come at the cost of health... When necessary, roles and processes can be redesigned.

Fully remote models can work beautifully for some groups. At the same time, we shouldn’t force one approach on everyone. I can train students remotely, but I find it less engaging and less rewarding than in-person mentoring.

Once trust exists, remote collaboration works great. especially if you already have a name and network. You have established your name. For you that works and I can see that. But I am not convinced it is good for training new comers to field.

Starting collaborations usually requires trust, and our social brains evolved to use all senses decide who to trust. Trust is the most important decision for a social animal and we use all senses for this.

As a mentor, I rely a lot on non-verbal cues, informal moments, and students teaching each other often during coffee breaks or after seminar bubblinggs. In a multidisciplinary lab like ours, a surprising amount of learning and trust-building happens in those unplanned, low-stakes interactions.

I agree that collaboration shouldn’t be forced, and there are many valid reasons people work remotely (visa, family, health). I strongly support finding ways to make remote work effective and inclusive. What I’m pushing back on is the idea that one model should fit everyone.

Magic happens when u dont directly tell people work together but they do… that just doesn’t happen over zoom often

Do nerdy posts count?