[HN Gopher] Prof. Dr. Style (2010)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Prof. Dr. Style (2010)
        
       Author : bschne
       Score  : 43 points
       Date   : 2022-01-07 12:29 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (contemporary-home-computing.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (contemporary-home-computing.org)
        
       | skywal_l wrote:
       | 2010
        
       | dang wrote:
       | One past thread:
       | 
       |  _Prof. Dr. Style: Top Web Design Styles of 1993 (2010)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18440935 - Nov 2018 (4
       | comments)
        
       | Tomte wrote:
       | I kinda like "Prof. Dr. mult.".
       | 
       | Usually only happens with "Prof. Dr. hc. mult.", but there are
       | exceptions where people hold several "real" doctorates.
       | 
       | Back when I was at university there was one professor who didn't
       | use that convention and had "Prof. Prof. Prof. Dr. rer nat. Dr.
       | Ing." or something similar. That was certainly excessive.
        
         | Tomte wrote:
         | And an anecdote:
         | 
         | A bit over twenty years ago I was a young CS student who had
         | volunteered to maintain our "commented directory of lectures"
         | (kommentiertes Vorlesungsverzeichnis) with two other students.
         | 
         | A directory where all the lectures, seminars etc. were listed,
         | with a short abstract what would be covered. This was student-
         | led, but basically everyone used it over the "official"
         | directory, and we got computer resources and some small payment
         | for doing so.
         | 
         | When we took over we inherited a convoluted system of Perl(?)
         | scripts and some database.
         | 
         | We were mailing professors for information about their courses,
         | mailing reminders, and so on. This was all semi-automated. Oh
         | boy!
         | 
         | Professors were really helpful, fast to reply, with high-
         | quality abstracts of their lectures. Except one.
         | 
         | We had decided to include other departments' lectures that were
         | cross-listed in our department, so it was a professor we had
         | never met.
         | 
         | Silence. Absolute silence, we never got a reply.
         | 
         | Until after maybe three mails and a few weeks his secretary
         | sent us a nasty mail: how dare we insult this professor, an
         | absolute authority in his field, with such an inadequate style
         | of address?
         | 
         | We were perplexed. Our mails used the official address "Sehr
         | geehrter Herr Professor X".
         | 
         | (It sounds weird in English, if you translate it literally it's
         | "Most revered Mister Professor X".)
         | 
         | We looked up the mails we had sent them. And were aghast. The
         | mails to this professor (and thankfully only this one) started
         | with "Sehr geehrter X" (double space). Check your database
         | entries for NULL, dummy!
         | 
         | Yes, our mail was unprofessional. We should have handled the
         | database part better.
         | 
         | But this professor was really out of line. Who thinks such an
         | address would be anything else but a mistake and take it so
         | personal as to sick his secretary on us in such a way? "Our"
         | professors would have simply ignored that faux-pas, a few of
         | them would have had a very entertaining riposte, I'm sure, but
         | certainly no bad blood.
         | 
         | How did it end?
         | 
         | We apologized profusely. Never got an reply to that, either. So
         | we simply dropped the lecture from the directory and it wasn't
         | included. We made sure he would never get another mail from us.
         | Nobody ever complained.
        
           | ectopod wrote:
           | If the professor had a secretary it's possible he never saw
           | the email. Some employees like to bask in the reflected glow
           | of their boss's high status (as they see it) and are very
           | sensitive to perceived slights.
        
       | chrisseaton wrote:
       | I thought it was an exclusively German thing to double-up titles
       | like these people are - but this page makes it seem like people
       | are doing it world-wide.
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | In the UK 'Professor' takes precedence (and isn't abbreviated?
         | If it were it would be without the full stop (aka 'period')) -
         | even if someone managed to become a professor at a chartered
         | university without a doctorate it's just irrelevant at that
         | point. Titles can be 'doubled-up' if they convey different
         | things though, for example a knighted professor would be
         | Professor Sir/Dame (male/female).
         | 
         | Debrett's used to have some nice public web pages on this &
         | similar, but it seems to have been removed or paywalled.
        
           | chrisseaton wrote:
           | > even if someone managed to become a professor at a
           | chartered university without a doctorate it's just irrelevant
           | at that point
           | 
           | There's quite a few professors without doctorates -
           | doctorates didn't used to be the done thing until relatively
           | recently. Typical example on HN would be Simon Peyton-Jones
           | who is a professor but doesn't have any kind of doctorate.
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | I didn't mean it to be 'if that ever happens', if that's
             | how it sounded, just that when it does, they've surpassed
             | what Dr conveys in a way, so it's not necessary to
             | distinguish doctored professors from those that aren't.
             | 
             | It probably also contributes to this that it's achieved
             | more readily in the US, 'professor' conveys a much more
             | senior position in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ac
             | ademic_ranks_in_the_United_K...
             | 
             | (Although not at Cambridge any more, according to the
             | section above that linked.)
             | 
             | I recall a few having email signatures that also mentioned
             | their equivalent US title, perhaps having had trouble being
             | taken seriously enough in transatlantic collaborations, I
             | don't know!
        
           | CoastalCoder wrote:
           | That's interesting info.
           | 
           | There's a view that I lightly hold, and I'd welcome to hear
           | others' perspectives on it:
           | 
           | I find myself a bit salty regarding social norms regarding
           | honorifics. Maybe because my first instinct is that it caters
           | to pretensions and is anti-egalitarian (in a certain sense).
           | 
           | To me it feels similar to when people insist on using
           | special, quirky names for various groups of animals, e.g. a
           | "murder" of crows. Some see it as fun, but to me that fun is
           | tainted by some persons being snobbish. I.e., they prefer a
           | version of English whose complexity allows them to be
           | condescending regarding it's "proper" diction.
           | 
           | Any reasons I should feel otherwise?
           | 
           | (This is an earnest question. I'm sure my view needs more
           | balance.)
        
             | iaabtpbtpnn wrote:
             | Academia is all about prestige. You gotta let them have it,
             | it's the main thing they care about.
             | 
             | But you're right about names for groups of animals, called
             | "terms of venery", were originally intended to mark a
             | speaker as educated enough (in hunting traditions) to know
             | the words, not for serious communication about animals.
        
               | OJFord wrote:
               | > Academia is all about prestige. You gotta let them have
               | it, it's the main thing they care about.
               | 
               | That couldn't be further from my experience, I almost
               | always emailed 'Dr Blah', because it just seemed correct
               | to me, but they'd sign off 'Tom' (or whatever).
        
         | p_l wrote:
         | There is a question of system - in some countries, "professor"
         | is a separate title convened by national body, and is separate
         | from whatever status you have at your individual teaching
         | organization - for example, in Poland, we have "professor
         | extraordinary", which is lower rank and convened by specific
         | university and not valid outside, and "professor ordinary",
         | which is presented to you by president after recommendation
         | from scientific body - and is valid everywhere. Both of those
         | titles require having a second-level doctorate (meaning you
         | also did a "habilitation"), but are separate titles and when
         | writing it down formally you're supposed to write them
         | separately
        
       | jvandonsel wrote:
       | As a native English speaker, this page is nearly incomprehensible
       | to me.
        
         | nomorecommas wrote:
         | The title is incomprehensible to me. The page itself won't load
         | in my browser. Possibly net problems, or a bad cert.
        
         | canjobear wrote:
         | The writing is hard to follow but I think the point is you can
         | find a lot of old-style websites by searching for "Prof. Dr."
         | 
         | Or at least you could in 2010
        
       | john-doe wrote:
       | I started collecting examples of what I call "The New Prof. Dr.
       | Style" that shares most of the design constraints/principles of
       | the original, but is mobile-friendly:
       | 
       | - https://urcad.es/
       | 
       | - https://jonathontoon.com/
       | 
       | - https://web.archive.org/web/20210126115413if_/https://maxhaw...
       | (archived)
        
       | analog31 wrote:
       | >>> They look according to the viewer's browser settings. This
       | reveals the belief of the early 1990es that any visual design
       | should be left at the discretion of the user.
       | 
       | I remember first reading about HTML in _Byte Magazine_. The idea
       | was that the tags were supposed to reflect the organization of
       | the text, but not much more, so that your browser could render it
       | according to your preferences. This included the possibility of
       | special browsers for the blind, etc. When I finally got a chance
       | to create a personal web page, that 's how I designed it, and I
       | still do so today. On the one hand, it looks great nowhere, but
       | never fails to be intelligible on any browser, device, OS
       | revision, etc. I never have to test it on more than one platform.
       | 
       | Today, web design treats the browser as a general purpose
       | graphical display, which means you have to consider every
       | possible corner case of every browser and display size. It means
       | that web pages can be as bad as software, because they _are_
       | software. It means that making good web pages requires sweating
       | the details to the same extent as good software, which is
       | phenomenally labor intensive and consequently, rare.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-01-08 23:02 UTC)