dear team readers…, as postscriptum would be provided in case of postscriptum there comes one: please do pass the information to not open the link in the application pdf if you want to assure anonymity for the readers. in the linked appendix you will happen to find names of team members of the experiment took place which i will review, so for egalitarian reason, do not open the appendix if you not want to connect the abstract to the application.
i am really looking forward to hear from you and will do my very best to not disappoint expectations in my contribue. although i cannot imagine (dream of) going to של זהב it would be an unbelievable honor to be considered worthwhile.
the subject i decided to be occupied with grew mainly out of disappointment over the way the group output ended…, i will dig deeper into that as i announced. can be this ends up too subjective, but i see the problems we encountered as prototypical for zusammengewürfelte gruppen. the observations i made are of interest if it comes to analyzing hierarchic and competence aspects within scientific work. as the class itself is considered an experimental research project, i lay focus on the :experimental: in this notation. i dont know if this involves unintended harm to any members scientific honor, but i risk to again be warned for behaviour like that. its :trotz:, its childish, but necessary to not start new year with debths. so this application was my kol nidre for the passed year, well see whats developing. grüsze, st.
#12381. some beautiful expressions came to my mind thinking further…, like: “i will pose the question…” / finishing that phrase gives birth to another aspect worth (questioning). that is, i will pose the question of research as conducted (deepL) fluide, with more or less open endings. doing my paperworks, i often decide to finish a task at a state where there is still room to perfection; but having in mind to better come up with small results than striving for (perfection) i then stop working on a project and finish it at C-level rather than to dig everything to last extend. integrating new media (still new?) gives me the chance to let one paper appear linked to further exploration where i then maybe facultative bring more details by time/bock as i say. i consider my work always depending on postscriptum ideas and revelations. so i see above FLUIDE aspect maybe as core capacity and opportunity to gain results. away from physical paper the digital offers that bridge to cross states. transparency has a key role in crossing that states from research fixed and in progress, liqude. why not involve interested others, say invite them to traceback your decisions and, delivering side material, maybe help you also in your task. why should not all research be kind of open source, giving capable scientist with spare fever the opportunity to participating in ones questions. my results definitely lack of a manifest character closed to publish, theyre mainly open to discussion. why am i saying 5.24am, sept18. because i couldnt sleep longer, thats all.
we’ll have a little prövening.