text:
Text-box quotation
I am a second author on a paper with two other researchers, and something has made me very uncomfortable. In the article in question, we are referring to a model which we use to produce our analyses. The model was developed by some third-party agency. The other two authors think it is a good idea to make some description of the model in the article, and I don't disagree. The problem is how they want to do it.
They actually copied some text that is from a publication of one of the makers of the model and pasted it as such in a box. They want to place the box somewhere in the body of the text. More precisely we have:

/Box Starts/
The model we use is bla bla bla. This model has been
described elsewhere (citation). Briefly, [quotation of someone else's
work, about seven lines]
/Box ends/

As I try to show, they do cite the article from which they took the description of the model. But then they go on with text from that article without relying on any quotation convention. I thought the right way to do this was to first implicitly introduce the paper from which the text comes, e.g. "According to Smith 2015, ...", followed by a section of indented or otherwise visually distinctive text. Do these conventions not apply when using a text box? Should I worry about citing this way or can this be a case of plagiarism?

Could you tell us which field you work in? This can be relevant for different established citation styles.

Social sciences.

APA format requires indenting:

For direct quotations of more than 40 words, display the quote as an indented block of text without quotation marks and include the authors’ names, year, and page number in parentheses at the end of the quote.

IEEE style requires surrounding the relevant part with quotes.
That said, both of the previous links recommend that direct quotes be used very sparingly. A reference followed by a summarization is definitely preferable.


text:
How to cope with feelings of powerlessness on a PhD?
I am currently a third year PhD student of pure mathematics.
I've been dealing with a feeling of burn out for a long time now. Quite frankly I struggle to find interest in anything related to my branch of science right now and am all but fully decided not to pursue academic career afterwards anyway. This furthers the feeling of disinterest in my field as anything I do seems irrelevant to me in the future.
Furthermore, I have a major personality clash with my supervisor in that I would like to approach PhD as a regular job, establishing a routine et caetera, while he is a very spontaneous person, often coming up with a brilliant idea in the middle of the night and wanting to share it ASAP. Also I am sure that if I told him I want to abandon academia he would be quite disappointed in me (to put it mildly).
Because of that I find it very hard to motivate myself to read papers or even textbooks on my chosen subject. The feeling of falling behind furthers the depression and inability to progress in anything. While everyone talks about how much new skills and knowledge they have mastered throughout their PhD, I feel as if I haven't learned almost anything new since I finished my Masters. I look at my PhD and don't know what I can do to make it better and I am very unsatisfied with how it is going so far. I thought that maybe trying to just write up everything I have so far would rekindle the motivation in that I would at least see I already have 20/50/100/whatever pages worth of work, but just thinking of writing everything up is so intimidating I am unable to even start doing it.
I feel like a terrible student and a horrible person in that I am wasting so much time I am, in principle, getting paid for (from my funding). What can I do to get as much out of my PhD as possible and to finish it to satisfaction of all interested parties?

You are not a horrible person for struggling during your PHD. The quality of who you are has nothing to do with your PHD performance. This sounds like depression (i am not qualified to provide a diagnose) and you should prhaps consider seeking professional help.

Related: How should I deal with discouragement as a graduate student?

Check out the similar question: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28257/overcoming-depression-and-getting-back-on-rails-with-phd-work/28260#28260

Seems like you could make the decision between getting your PHD and experiencing happiness every now and then

There seems to be a basic boundary issue between your advisor and you. You want to work some standard hours. He knows this but still wants you to be available in the middle of the night if that's when inspiration strikes him. Not respecting your sleep is no trivial matter.

@JonathanHayward His advisor wanting to share an idea might means he just sends the OP an email. You could be offline at night if you do not want to be bothered by emails at night.

Thank you all for the comments. I have been seeing a student counsellor, who said I do not have depression, just the "normal" stress related to being in a situation where I feel powerless and can't find a solution myself.
What mainly disturbs me (and perhaps sets my question apart from the similar ones linked - thank you!) is this feeling that I'm not really learning new things or getting as deeply into my subject matter as I "should". That's why I am not entirely sure how much of my struggling is due to my supervisor/external issues and how much is really my unsuitableness (?) for research.

Although I agree it may be worth considering whether you're suffering from depression as Alexandros suggested in his comment, and it's something you should bear in mind. However, I think that's either a symptom or a related-but-not-the-main-problem-here-problem. This seems to be, at the core, a case of professional burnout. Possible triggered by depression, possibly causing you to feel depressed, and certainly something you should bear in mind if you feel it is affecting your life: but for the rest of this answer I'll focus on the direct issue, while suggesting you consider seeing a counselor.
You've likely been in education or academia for the last 20 years or so by now, possibly including 3-6 at your current institution, and perhaps you need a change. If you were in the working world, you'd probably be starting to look for other opportunities if you felt like this: moving on to pastures new, the next challenge, something which interests you. This is pretty common at this stage of a career, most people move on from their first job within 2-4 years of graduation (as an undergrad). If you see your PhD as employment following your degree (albeit one that confers another degree) you can draw the parallel (lol, maths joke)
Unfortunately with a PhD, you're "locked in" for a fixed period. You have a vested interest in time and, likely, money, along with a concern that if you back out of it before it's completed, it will look bad on your resume.
It's certainly a slightly tricky problem to negotiate, but let's look at your options

Continue with the PhD, battle through, get it done and then look at what you really want to do. This has the advantage that you'll complete the task, which looks good on your Resume, but may be too much if you're still fairly early in your PhD
Back out gracefully. Accept that you've made a mistake in your career path, apologise to your supervisor that you've only realised this now and then move on with your life in the direction you'd like to go. Your supervisor will likely be disappointed, yes, but I hugely doubt he will think any less of you. People change their mind, people realize that they're on the wrong career path all the time, and people involved in education tend to understand that. His disappointment will not be that you've upset him, but because he almost certainly believes you will be an asset to the discipline/department.
Try to change the current situation - talk to your tutor and explain your issues and concern. See if there's any "wriggle room" for changing the approach and the way you interact. State it tactfully, in a "Would it be possible to try xyz, which I think will help me because abc and def" way, rather than a "You do abc, and it annoys me". This may help you to actually enjoy the PhD for a while.

My personal opinion is that you're better off backing out unless you're in the last 18 months of the PhD (in which case you've already invested a lot of time/effort and it's probably worth powering through). If you intend to move away from Academia, you probably don't really need a PhD anyway, and I think it's better to cut your losses and go find something you really want to do.
I'd also recommending this answer which covers some of what I've just said, but also some things I haven't.

Thank you Jon for this answer. I am past the 18 month mark so I will (try to) power through, but all these insights (and encouragement) are very helpful.

Past 18 months, irrespective of the time frame of the PhD? In my institution, PhDs are between 3 to 3 years and 9 months roughly. So potentially, 18 months could be halfway, which might not be 'in too deep', depending on how you would look at it.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
Expletives in academic writing for coursework?
I was just wondering if I should include an edited expletive in an essay I have to write for a Software Development class. I'm currently writing a paper about debugging techniques and I wanted to talk about reading documentation to ensure the correct use of libraries and algorithms. This is commonly referred to as RTFM or "Read The Fucking Manual". So I was wondering if I should change it to "Read The [expletive] Manual", replace a couple letters with *'s, or scrap the idea entirely.
I just thought the teacher may enjoy a break from reading the same essay over 50 times that will include the exact same content (there are only so many debugging techniques).
I'm also thinking about including the "It's not a bug, it's a feature" with the following image while expanding on the line of thinking.
The reason why I think I can get away with this is because the teacher frequently cracks jokes during his lecture, and he has actually used the bug vs feature joke in class before.

I edited your title to specify that this writing is for a class, because conventions for coursework are often different from writing for publication.

You are in America, aren’t you?

Please clarify: Are you planning to include the expletive for what it says, as a message to the reader ("While the architecture of the software will be described in this chapter, it is not meant as a user guide. If you just want to use the software, RTFM."), or as an on-topic citation/pop-culture reference ("Unwillingness of users to indulge in lengthy documentation materials to find a solution to their particular problem, instead of directly asking for help, can be observed in many contexts. This goes so far that a widely-known acronym, 'RTFM', has been coined in response.")?

Read the friendly manual.

Or fine. Or furnished.

I was wondering if I should change it to "Read The [expletive] Manual", replace a couple letters with *'s, or scrap the idea entirely.

I'll opt for "scrap the idea entirely". You are misinterpreting what the purpose of class essays is - this isn't supposed to be a witty, innovative text that entertains the lecturer, and the lecturer will likely not mind so much reading about the same debugging techniques over and over again. The purpose of this text is to explain what you know about said debugging techniques. A secondary purpose is that you show that you know how to write an academic text. Some semi-witty text is likely to fail the second test, and spending a lot of paper space on an unrelated joke is likely to at least be a bad indicator for the first test (that is, if I get a paper where the author spends a lot of time writing about semi-related nonsense, my initial impression is that the author didn't really know what to write about the actual topic).

The reason why I think I can get away with this is because the teacher frequently cracks jokes during his lecture

There's a place and a time to be humorous. Presentations and lectures can be a good time (because, if well done, jokes break the ice and keep the audience's attention), academic papers are notoriously a very bad time to crack jokes. That the lecturer cracks jokes in class does not necessarily mean that he wants to see them in your manuscript. I tend to crack the occasional bad joke in class, and as you may be able to tell, I am no fan of humour in student assignments.

and he has actually used the bug vs feature joke in class before.

So he won't even laugh because he already knows the joke :) at least come up with something new.

For the record, I as a software engineering researcher found the image quite amusing, but I still would want to see it in my Twitter timeline much rather than in a class text.

Presentations can also be a bad time for jokes that could even be conceivably offensive to someone. (I once got an email from someone I don't know, who had just attended my coauthor's talk at a conference. He wrote to all the authors of the paper to comment on the "needless sexual innuendo" in a joke the presenter used to highlight a certain idea. It definitely wasn't the kind of feedback on our work I was hoping for.)

@ff524 I am well-known to shoot myself in the foot in lectures, that is true. In one lecture I later found out that one of the authors of a software I was constantly using as a negative example was in class. However, he was cool about it and we had a good laugh.

The only student assignment I would consider putting a joke in would be a comment in source code (or, as this answer mentioned, maybe a bit in a slide for a presentation.) Even in those situations, it should be clean and short (e.g. no expletives.) I've heard of instructors counting off significant amounts for students putting profanity in variable names or comments.

No expletives in writing. Ever. What distinguishes good from bad writing is the ability to be precise with words like a pincer. Expletives are like verbal Molotov cocktails. Easily prepared and cheaply effective, but actually a replacement when more sophisticated options are lacking. Humour is a different thing, but, again - it has to be very accurate. If in doubt, leave it out. A good place for humour may be mottos at the beginning of chapters. Choose them well, though.

RTFM: Read The Fine Manual.
The documentation in question is, naturally, an exquisite treatise about the product in question. It is well-written, indexed, cross-referenced and contains ample anecdotes and code samples. It has it's own series (complete with a new animal sketch) in the O'Reilly collection and will soon replace The Camel as the canonical example of how documentation should be written.
That's the marketing version.
The actual documentation is 3 pages of semi-illiterate spew that a 9th-grader would mark as bad grammar. It's barely useful in launching the software and contains enough errors to be dangerous.
The user will replace "Fine" with the other word all by themselves.

How does that answer the question?

@xLeitix " So I was wondering if I should change it to "Read The [expletive] Manual", replace a couple letters with *'s, or scrap the idea entirely. " - it provides an alternate title?

@xLeitix : Q: "How should I edit this phrase?" A: "Like this". I refer you to the first sentence, words 2 thru 5.

I like the general idea, but I wouldn't use Fine to replace the expletive. In fact, there's no need to stick with an f-word here – something like Read the Dang Manual! conveys the same sense of frustration without the questionable language.

Generally speaking, expletives are frowned upon in academic writing.  You can give any rationale you feel justified, but here's my personal take:
Expletives serve a purpose in language.  They serve as an emotional utterance that provides additional emphasis to the reader, at the expense of clear reasoning.  Creating a visual analogy for this, they act as a bright strobe-light emphasizing a detail.  On a dance floor, with illicit drugs all around, use of a strobe-light is acceptable for emphasizing the beat of the music.  In the viewing room of the Mona Lisa, it is decidedly less acceptable.
If you were a curator for the Louvre, and recently came into possession of a piece of art which uses a strobe for artistic effect, that would be fine.  However, you would choose not to put said piece of art in the same room as the Mona Lisa, so as not to disrupt the more academic viewers.

"same room as the Mona Lisa, so as not to disrupt the more academic viewers" (emphasis by myself) - you have obviously not been to Louvre :)

@O.R.Mapper: Touché

I don't agree that expletives are frowned upon in academic writing. Instead, they are not introduced by the academics themselves. One does not write "and then I put the fucking beaker over the Bunsen for the fourteenth fucking time", however it's also not academic to censor swearing in the source material, and so if a paper is talking about RTFM I'd expect it to use "read the fucking manual" and not any bowdlerised or censored version.

When I was grading lots of lab reports I appreciated jokes, provided that:

They were funny
They didn't detract from the point of the paper (one sentence saying explaining RTFL is probably fine, figures with no relation to the assignment may be too much)
The student doesn't think they could get away with lousy work by being chummy

The last point is probably the most important; if your instructor sees lousy work and jokes together he may think you're unable to take his class seriously. That makes his job more stressful.
Personally I think expletives are cheap. If I were your instructor I'd probably chuckle, and then leave a comment "Read the Fucking[friendly] Manual".

Whenever I've needed to explain RTFM, I just say it stands for Read The Manual. Inevitably the other person says "but what does the F -- ? Oh." All by themselves. However, I would only use this in an academic context in someone else's mouth. Something like

When you don't get the results you're expecting, and the only technical support you can find is someone telling you to "RTFM" (Read The Manual), don't give up! Some simple debugging techniques can give you the ability to watch your program execute and understand why it's misbehaving.

Be careful though. A feature is not a bug in a suit even if you think it is, and debugging is rarely a substitute for reading documentation. Your efforts to liven up the essay may reveal errors of thought that end up costing you more than they gain.

If you make a point of making it clear that you're quoting from another source then it shouldn't matter too much. For example, 'As so and so says, this is called "Read The Fucking Manual"', or 'On x webpage/ x page of y book this is referred to as "Read The Fucking Manual"'.
Saying that, I would use discretion when adding something like this into an essay, if you're 100% sure the professor will find it humourous then go for it, if not then avoid using the explicative and go for a ...softer or censored version of it.
Like I said, it all depends on the prof, a friend of mine once gave an answer on a Java exam about a magical elf being responsible for one of the programming concepts and he still got full marks for the question because the prof had a sense of humour. Had it been another prof they'd just give him 0 for that question, all depends on the prof, plain and simple.

Totally disregarding the context of your work, like the previous answers have touched on. I am studying at a university, and thus am writing at a university level.
If I were in a position where I had to choose whether or not to use an expletive, so long as there was a valid reason for it being there, I would totally go for it. This is not high school, where a repremand would be in order. In academia, one should not dilute one's thoughts, so long as the thoughts are on the right track. I would go for it, but like the previous answers have touched on, you may be totally out of context in using that kind of language. It may not be needed.. If it's not needed, definately don't do it, but if it is needed, don't second guess it.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
As a TA, what should I do about an error in the professor's lecture that I repeated in the lecture notes?
Here is the somewhat awkward situation.
I am a TA for a class that I have never taken before.  The professor (probably) knows this, but I don't think the students have caught on, since it is a lower-division class and as a graduate student I have significantly more mathematical maturity than most of them.
As a TA, I am responsible for preparing the lecture notes for the class.  A different TA is responsible for grading assignments.
A few weeks ago, the professor made a (small) mistake in his lecture, and I transcribed the error onto the lecture notes without realizing it was a mistake.
Recently we had a midterm, and the other TA noticed that a lot of the students were making the same mistake.  The other TA recognized it was wrong and is now docking points for the error, even though I told him there was a mistake in the lecture notes.
What should I do?  I think the students will be mad when they hear about this, and if I tell the professor, he might get mad at me for preparing bad lecture notes.
Edit: It was the kind of error that would be confusing after the lecture, but hard to spot during the lecture.  Basically he used a matrix where he should have used the matrix's transpose.  And in the example problem he solved on the board, the matrix was a diagonal matrix, so it made no difference.  But the matrix on the midterm wasn't.

Just tell the professor: "The transcription of the lecture included an error, and many students made the same error on the midterm." (It really doesn't matter whether the mistake was made first in the lecture or the notes.)
He will decide what to do about the midterm.
He will almost certainly be very happy to hear about his error from you, rather than from a large number of irate students (which is likely to happen if you don't tell him).
Nobody is infallible - not professors, not teaching assistants, not students. If he gets mad at you for preparing "bad lecture notes" for proliferating one mistake that he made, he is completely unreasonable.
As an aside: this evening, I gave my students a quiz, and during the quiz my TA - who was helping me proctor - pointed out an error. I thanked him and told the students to disregard that question.  Then, after the quiz, I had the students get together in groups and work on "fixing" the question (the nature of the error made the fix non-trivial). It was an interesting and helpful educational exercise, for my students and for me. Errors can sometimes be an opportunity for good things.
Of course, I told my students that this is an important lesson on the dangers of taking code snippets off the Internet or from a book without carefully checking them :)

What if he doesn't remember he made the error, and assumes I just mistranscribed his lecture?  It's the type of error that anyone could make and he might not remember making it.

@user29315 it really shouldn't matter. Everyone makes mistakes, and it's totally unreasonable to expect you to never make any mistakes.

I think this atleast partially depends on the maturity of the students. Are these first year students? Or perhaps students who struggle with math? Shouldn't they know enough to realize the error?
If you honestly transcribed the error as presented by the professor, I can't see where you're at fault. Your job isn't to fact check entire lectures. Since the other TA doesn't seem too keen on making adjustments, you may mention about asking the professor for input. If they don't seem keen on that, go to the professor anyways so they won't be blindsided with angry students. Mistakes in notes can be a headache.
Of course, to play devil's advocate, the case can also be made that the students didn't understand the material.  They're regurgitating the same mistake made in the notes without asking questions.
It's a tough call, but at the very least (regardless of point deductions) the professor needs to know the situation.

I don't think the TA's action depends on the maturity of the students. The professor's actions, perhaps, but that's not what's asked here. (I agree with your second paragraph, though.)

The thing is there's no proof that the professor made the error and not me.  Because the official record of the class is my lecture notes.  I think the professor has his own handwritten lecture notes but I don't know if he still has those or if he threw them away.  So for this reason I feel skeptical of saying "hey professor, you made a mistake three weeks ago and now all the students are mad".  What is the best way to approach the professor?

I wouldn't outright accuse the professor of making a mistake, I don't think anybody here would tell you to do that. Rather, I suggest telling him that there is a discrepancy in the class notes that went unnoticed until after the midterm - and show him the exact issue in the notes.

@Ramrod That sounds like a good idea, thanks.

I wouldn't outright accuse the professor of making a mistake, I don't think anybody here would tell you to do that. — I would.


text:
Referring to professors by their first names, when giving a talk,
I find then when giving a talk it feels weird / too formal / easy to stumble with my words when having to refer to a professor in the audience as "Professor Last Name", especially when their last name consists of multiple syllables.
As a student, is it acceptable to address professors by their first names, when giving a talk about my research?

I'm not sure why you would be addressing professors in the audience while giving a talk.  But if the need arises, could you just look pointedly at the appropriate person, and call him or her "Professor" -- just that?  Without articulating the name?

@aparente001, I have found that I need to bring up past work done by Professor Last Name, past collaborations between me and another Professor Last Name, or recent discussions with yet another Professor Last Name.  It seems weird and just feels easier to say, "based on recent work that Paul did with topic X..."

Helpful.  I've edited your question to "refer to a professor" instead of "address a professor."  Do you see the difference? // In a small department seminar "Paul" would probably be fine, but if you have a fair number of undergrads in the audience, or it's a more formal event, then be more formal, and practice plenty first.  Also, since this varies so much from one place to another, why not get someone's opinion locally, e.g. your advisor's?

It also depends on your audience. Do they know who you mean when you say "Bob"? Sometimes I see it at conference where the insiders refer to eachother by first names only, but it makes it harder for me to follow who's who.

Are you American or French?

I find life easier if I do what the Japanese do: If you're in any professional environment, use the last name and their title/honorific. It makes all interactions easy when you're not sure. The only time you use given names/nicknames is when you know the person and you're not in a professional environment.

I have the reverse problem sometimes: how to refer to colleagues who I would usually call by their first name when talking to students who probably aren't on first name basis with them.

This is culturally specific: in Australia new baby undergrads would normally use their lecturers' first names.

Some professors are comfortable having students call them by their first names. You should wait until individual professors let you know that this is acceptable to them before you do so.
However, others are not comfortable with this. So, to be on the safe side, I believe that it is best to refer to them by their formal title and last name during a public talk. Many professors do this with their peers during public talks, even if members of the audience are their good colleagues. Plus, you won't run the risk of mistakenly refer to some professors by their first name and others by their formal name, which could be viewed as disrespectful.
I also caution to graduate students that even when they feel comfortable calling individual professors by their first name, they should refer to the same professor by their formal name when talking to others. It's usually best to err on the side of greater professionalism.

I can't speak for other disciplines, but in Computer Science, it is highly uncommon to refer to other researchers by title during a talk or in a publication. (Very rarely, there are students giving a talk who refer to their own advisor as "Prof. Smith" but to other researchers as "Miller and Jones". I find this quite awkward.)

My assumption from the question is that the person wants to know the etiquette of referring directly to professors who are attending the talk. If I were a graduate student and my adivsor was in the audience and asked a question, I wouldn't have said, "Do you have a question, Mike?" I would have said, "Dr. Smith, you have a question." If referring to researchers that one cited during a talk, yes, just the last names are fine.

Here is what I believe to be the standard conventions in math in the US when referring to another researcher in a talk:

You write their full last name on the board (unless they're a collaborator and you've already written their name out and then an initial only may be fine).
If the person is not in the audience, then you say their last name only with no title.  Or firstname lastname if they're on the job market.
If the person is in the audience you may instead refer to them as you would ordinarily (typically this means by first name or nickname, but in some situations this could mean using a title) and you look at them as you do so.  You still write the last name on the board.

Yes in the US and no in continental Europe, but that should not be your main concern.
You main concern should be that your talk remains intelligible. So, you want to say "Jane Smith" instead of "Jane" or "Ms. Smith" or "Professor Smith" simply to be as clear as possible to the vast audience. Different people in the audience might simply mishear you. Or they might know the person only as Jane or only as Ms. Smith.

This very much depends on the circumstances: the audience and the cultural setting, but simple rules are

Use the title (Professor) only when predominantly addressing those who know that person only with that title (undergraduate students), but not at a scientific conference.
At a scientific conference, use the first name if this is customary among academics in that setting (usually in small communities, such as astrophysics), otherwise use the surname (and optionally also the first name).

I like to close with an anecdote. As PhD student (looong ago), I attended an international conference in Elba (Italy), where all Italian PhD students referred to their supervisors as Professore XXX, while nobody else used titles (nobody would ever think of mentioning Professor Einstein). I found this very funny at the time, but those poor Italian students must have gone through a mighty cultural conflict.

Totally wrong. At least on premise. 1) Italian students are not much poorer to call professor xxx than american ones to call Jim or Kate.  Do you really think of cultural conflict? The fact that english might be the official language of a conference, does not make that the culture of attendants from the rest of the world must change as well.

@Alchimista - I don't think Walter is saying that Italian students were "much poorer" to call a professor by a more formal name; I think he's merely saying that, when you customarily do something in a different way as everyone else around you, it can potentially create feelings of awkwardness. (The word "poor" here is indicates sympathy for a predicament.)

@J.R. Again, I do not think that italian students were the only ones to refer to their supervisor in that way. Unless there were only italians and americans at that conference. Second point : Might be sound funny that a young Italian student can say "il mio professore" but not more than earing "my chef or" my boss". I actually think that my professor sounds even better, but this is realm of uses and opinions.

@Alchimista If you don't trust my factual statements about that conference, than you are one of those preferring alternative facts. But then you should perhaps better tweet them. BTW at said conference were Dutch, Belgian, German, Mexican, English, American and potentially other students.

@Walter. No, let us say that italians were the only ones. Then they were almost the only ones to keep their register instead of switching to an unusual one. Never saw a single german student that does not address his/her supervisor by "Her Professor" literally "Sir Professor" in their group or for private reasons. Shall be the supervisor a lady, than I do not know. In spite of years, I still have to meet one (in chemistry and physics).

@Alchimista Actually, I was (many years ago) a German PhD student addressing my supervisor by his first name, both privately and publicly. And none of my co-students used "Herr Professor" to refer to or address their supervisors.

What can I say? Perhaps that this show that is hard to define what is customary. It is not that I do not believe you. But if you have been a student in Germany you will agree that it was rather unusual. Especially years ago

Besides that we're moving from the actual question (referring to a prof in a talk, "this has been shown by Smith.." as well as "as professor Smith just told us in the morning..." I want to offer to hypothetical readers a more solid ground. I adressed/referred to my supervisor in many ways depending on audience, situation, and aquaintance. https://www.google.it/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwisj6Cdxb3VAhXDWBoKHcunC4wQFggwMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Facademia.stackexchange.com%2Fquestions%2F71078%2Fdo-german-professors-like-to-be-called-herr-x&usg=AFQjCNHF9zfRWzE1okzRoCKTLwLnebRTtg

And pearl, but you could be aware http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/contributors/brianmelican/10024859/Trust-him-hes-a-doctor...-and-a-professor...-and-an-engineer.html

@Alchimista That newpaper article was not about referring to somebody in the context of the question. It was about the job title being used in a professional setting. Same in UK: everybody has their full degree title on their business card.

Sometimes. (Anyone who says 'no, never' doesn't understand context.)
Things you need to consider:

What does your professor prefer? -- this is probably the ultimate
consideration. All things considered it is your obligation not to
offend.  If your professor doesn't want you call him 'Jack', then
don't do it.  If they are fine about it then it may be okay, depending on other factors.
What would the audience prefer?
Age/level difference between you and the 'professor' -- are you a
undergraduate researcher? If you're a postdoc it would be very
strange to call them 'professor X' among colleagues for a seminar
(again, in the US and not for bigger talks)
Relationship with 'professor' -- are you his/her graduate student?  It would be strange for a student to use 'Professor X' with their adviser in
the States (in a formal talk with many 'outside' individuals it would
be more common.)
Your country's academic and social norms -- many parts of the world a student would never do this, but in the U.S it is quite common especially if your professor is a
Gen-Exer or Millennial that care less about the ego-trips that are
often associated with titles.

Best to ask them and consider the rest of the context.

Another consideration arises if you need to refer to two or more people, one of whom you'd ordinarily refer to formally, and the other informally. It would sound strange (to me) if you said "This topic was studied by Professor X and by Charlie." In that situation, you should probably say "Professors X and Y," even if in other contexts you'd refer to Professor Y as Charlie. In other words, when referring to several people, lift the references up to the same level of formality.

Also, it is rarely "Professor X' (even if the person has a chair) in an academic talk. It is safe to say Dr. X, or Dr. Y X (or without a doctorate Ms. X, Mr. X), although in the US you can informally refer to academics by their job title. In the US, associate professors and assistant professors are informally 'Professor X'.

No, never.
The whole point of addressing people respectfully is to demonstrate your effort to learn and memorize their tittles and names. Otherwise, you're sending the message "I can't be bothered to spell your names right". Yes, it is easy to stumble, that's the point. You prove yourself by not stumbling.
When you're giving a talk, it's giving a talk. It's not relaxed chitchat. Giving a talk is formal, so your feeling that something seems "too formal" misguides you. It's better to come out as too formal rather than as fraternizing.
Besides, there is a simple matter that you don't have control over the audience. Some may not know who "Paul" is. Someone may record it and then watch 5 years later on another university. "Professor X Y" leaves no room for mistake.

@DSVA 1) Just because it happens doesn't mean it's fine. 2) If OP's peers were referring to professors on first name basis, OP wouldn't have doubts, would he? So, I conclude that in his environment it's uncommon to use first names. 3) I'm referring to the reasoning behind general concept of name decorators, be it company structure, academia or nobility title. How it shows your respect. 4) "Peter is an expert in..." is informal. Also, it implies you are on the first name basis with him. OP is a student, so it's unlikely. 5) I'm Polish, but points  #2 and #3 are not relative to locale.

It really depends on circumstances and audience. However contrary to some statements in the previous answer, in international conferences is normal to refer to scientists by

name surname
professor surname
surname, via their group, like in "research done in the group of xxx"; xxx is surname, but you can add name or title.

Shall I give you examples?
Me, speaking to a relatively small and "friendly" audience about my supervisor : "as name told us, recently a new..."
Me, speaking in a big session: "as professor yyy told us....."
If that professor did not tell us anything, because physically absent, but I really have to use his/her work in a technical way, of course I will say "surname showed that equation x has a solution...... " (although it is much better to show a useful reference without mentioning it, but I think this is another issue).
Referring to someone that is not a professor, is less common to ear of doctor, but possible. I would say "as name told us" or "as *name surname * told us..." in the two distinct audiences as above.
Imagine a student... If he and the supervisor are known, it is easy to say "my supervisor....".
A lot of registers are possible, those above are just indication.
If two bigs refer to each other, they will call each other by names. It can happen they are sharing the stage.
It is also related to the age difference between speaker - audience - spoken name , which again is subjective and cultural.
So be flexible.
But I would say that calling someone Professor is almost the norm.
To give a ground to my answer, I have attended hundreds of conferences and meetings worldwide.
Ps: I never noticed it in real conferences, but often the impression is that US Americans think that their way is the standard, but it is not. The fact that international conferences are hold in English has nothing, or little to be precise, to do with the manners within the conference, and even less with the cultural background of the participants.
Coincise: you can easily imagine a summer school, a session of a conference, or even a conference, all having English as official language but no American participants. I think this render the idea of what we are discussing about.

I disagree that calling someone professor when referring to them in a talk is the norm. This might be field specific, but in math it would sound very odd to hear of the result proved by professor X rather than simply those proved by X or maybe firstname X.

@Tobias Kildetodft. No your are right. I meant referring to somebody that is present, just gave a  talk before, he/she present or felt as present to the audience. A merely technical citation is like in a paper, just simple. Perhaps I should edit my answer.

It is even not very common to refer to a person in a talk, except for the case in which the author name became the name of the rule theorem reaction scheme etc....

Its OK to take the first name .culture to culture the practice varies .one must observe the protocol and environment of the  college, university or university .please note that person to person it varies as well.try to analysis the liknkng disliking of teacher .regards


text:
Where does one draw the line to determine what is ethical to share and what isn't?
I am starting to design my personal website and I would like to devote part of the site to sharing knowledge in the fields of Mathematics and Computer Science.
My main concern is determining what is ethical to share and what isn't.
I don't plan on publishing solutions to homework exercises or questions from my previous exams, as this seems obvious to me.
What I would like to share is the content of the individual subjects such as:

Definitions
Theorems
Examples (Those of which I create myself)
References
My personal interpretation of the subject matter

My concern is in regards to sharing definitions and theorems is ensuring I am not plagiarizing works from textbooks and professor's lectures.
Since there is only but so many ways to rephrase a definition before it loses its meaning, how much should I change the representation of a definition (or Theorem) so I am not plagiarizing how it appears in particular text?
My final concern is in regard to reference other sources of knowledge. Throughout my college experience, I am constantly looking for multiple resources to supplement my learning. For example, YouTube video series X does a really good job with an introduction to Linear Algebra. Would it be ethical to reference or add links on my personal website to YouTube video series X?

"I don't plan on publishing solutions to homework exercises or questions from my previous exams, as this seems obvious to me." - I'm curious, can you clarify? This is not obvious to me.

@Hamsterrific I am guessing this is for courses the OP has taken as a student rather than is teaching.  Most faculty I know don't want their old exams/homework solutions posted online.

@Kimball Ohhh OP is the student, not the teacher, it's amazing how that didn't even cross my mind. Makes sense, thanks!

You can avoid plagiarism the same way you would in a research paper: by citing your sources! So long as you’re not just quoting the same sources over and over again, you can quote a short excerpt from a relevant source and cite it. It’s also worth noting that definitions of common terms, as well as equations, are not normally subject to copyright, because of the exact reason you mention: there are only so many legitimate ways to define a term or write an equation, which places a constraint on expressing them without using someone else’s definition.
As far as links go, there’s no reason you can’t cite what you want.

You can avoid plagiarism the same way you would in a research paper: - I agree with this words, but for me the next natural ones would be: "write things in your own words."

That works if it’s something other than stating definitions. There are only so many scientifically or mathematically accurate ways to define a term. At some point, every definition is a paraphrase of somebody else’s.

My point is, even for definitions, there's a difference between copying and writing something on your own.  There are lots of ways to phrase things, and I agree that two independent write-ups may have many phrases in common because of the issue you point out, but it's very unlikely that they will have long paragraphs in common if they are written independently.  Anyway, I agree that depending on what exactly the OP is doing, it might be good to say something like, "these notes are based on course X by prof Y in spring 2018."


text:
How do I talk about my abusive former advisor if people ask?
I was just at a conference where I met another grad student who - upon learning about my specialization and university affiliation - excitedly asked me if I knew Dr. -- and if he was my advisor (she's a fan). Deer in the headlights moment for me, as I did know Dr. --; he had been my advisor - one that until recently I admired and was very fond of. Only he's not my advisor anymore, because our once enviable mentor/mentee relationship is now in ruins. (In sum: he crossed a professional line with me, I called him out on it, he started punishing me for it in various ways, and it culminated in him stepping down from my committee and me reporting him to HR (human resources) when my dept chair dismissed my complaints about his abusive behavior. After effects: we're not speaking to each other, avoid each other as much as possible, I get panic attacks/have some sort of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) whenever I have run-ins with him, and I've slowly become isolated from the rest of my department because he practically runs it and no student or faculty member wants/dares to step on his toes).
The thing is, I came to this university primarily to work with him...he and everyone in the dept knows this..and pretty much anyone in our field of research would assume that he and I are connected somehow, given that we're at the same university, and how much our research interests align. So, as I've discovered from this conference incident, I need to come up with a response for if/when people ask me if I know him/work with him/why am I not working with him. Personally, I'd love to just answer truthfully and throw him under the bus since that's what he's done to me several times over these last few months, but I know doing so will hurt me more than it'll hurt him. Any suggestions on how to handle those types of questions?
EDIT:
First, thank you so much to everyone for taking the time to respond. I really appreciate everyone's feedback and different opinions. You've definitely given me a lot to think about. From reading the responses, I think I can clarify a few items if you think it'll alter your suggestions:

"crossed a professional line" - admittedly, I intentionally used that vague term because it's very complicated, and also because he crossed that line in a few ways. One is of a sexual harassment nature, but I was reluctant to use that term because it happened in a very subtle and covert manner - so much that the Title IX (gender equality) office at my university said that technically his behavior (both initial line crossing and his reaction to me standing up to him) - however unprofessional it was - did not rise to the level of sexual harassment. But as I said, he was unprofessional towards me in other non-sexual ways as well. Ultimately, for the scope of my question, I don't think it matters much, because regardless of what he did to me initially, regardless of whether or not I had any right to be offended, and regardless of which specific incident he took issue with when I confronted him, nothing justifies how he subsequently treated me/how he handled his anger, which was essentially bullying me and then later gaslighting me and becoming verbally abusive/hostile when I tried to address the bullying.
HR investigation: the investigation is ongoing; I filed my official complaint about a month ago, so hopefully I'll hear back soon re: next steps/resolution.
I'm an American student in the U.S.
The extent to which others know: a few of the the graduate students/TAs/my friends do know about everything that's happened. Some of the faculty do as well (including my other two committee members, one of whom is my new advisor; the other was also willing to take over as advisor) Outside my department: HR, Title IX office, the graduate ombudsperson, assistant dean of the college of arts & sciences, university police (Dr. - didn't do anything criminal...it was just a formality that HR had to observe when I filed my complaint) so his behavior has definitely been publicized a bit, but in a very hushed/behind closed doors sort of way.

Just to clarify for people unfamiliar with the term "crossed a professional line." This phrase probably means @Ace is talking about sexual harassment/abuse (rather than general academic bullying - which I initially assumed this question was about). Its really unfortunate that going through the universities official reporting mechanisms didn't lead to a better outcome. I'm very sorry that this happened to you.

@einpoklum why? I think it's irrelevant to everything but our curiosity. Op doesn't want to talk about it with others, so we don't need to know to tell op how not to talk about it.

I think the question about how the line was crossed is very important. "He crossed a professional line with me." is very subjective. Maybe you get offended easily, or maybe there is a cultural specific that doesn't really apply to others in the program. The fact that everyone else seems to be happy with him tells me it's not as cut and dry as him being a creepy pervert or anything like that... If you are going to throw him under the bus, I propose that it should be done objectively. Tell the entire story, not just how you felt about it. Or say nothing at all.

"The fact that everyone else seems to be happy with him tells me it's not as cut and dry as him being a creepy pervert or anything like that" - in every instance I have known, people have favored the perpetrator (at least initially). I don't think you can really rely on opinion here to suggest what did or did not happen, there are stronger influences, some potentially biological (e.g., observing power-structures, blaming the victim) and some personal (e.g., self-interest), for whether people look-upon (or say they look upon) someone favorably.

I suggest deleting edit all 4 point bcs it expose you too much, we all understood context.

Since there is not even a single example given of anything negative from the professor here (only vague accusations, which according to the question are disputed by the professor and Title IX) Then why is this question (about how to talk about the professor behind their back, escalating the situation with unrelated people) not violating any of the 'be nice' policies?
My answer was deleted from the echo chamber

@DrunkenCodeMonkey: I dont think it was stated that everyone was happy with him. But given that the cost/benefit of making a public deal about it are already doubtful for those directly affected, those who are not directly involved with it tend to work pretty hard to keep it that way. Personally I feel that there is a broad range of inappropriate behaviors inbetween things that should end you on the sex offenders registry, and things that are none of the business of HR; but from experience do not put much hope in administrators; they will not be volunteering to take your hot potato either.

@NickCardoso OP is asserting that important negative things happened. The answers here accept that premise, and a few offer different advice for different levels of seriousness of the events. You too could offer a response conditioned on how widely the facts are widely accepted by others and how serious the infractions are. Further, OP only asks "Any suggestions on how to handle those types of questions?", and is NOT set on "talk[ing] about the professor behind their back [or] escalating the situation with unrelated people]." Those are instead ANSWERS suggested as appropriate in this case.

Just a general response to all: thanks again for all your thoughtful comments. Amid the discussions and disagreements I can't tell you how touched I am by the attention you've given my situation (and equally disheartened that some of you are speaking from personal experience). I think I can use a number of these suggestions, depending on the situation. I don't know if I should reach out to the student I met at the conference since she already asked Dr - to be on her committee and it's a done deal, but I definitely feel more prepared to handle questions should they arise in future interactions.

Just to add a little levity (not really a real answer), you could always take the dilbert approach: http://dilbert.com/strip/2005-10-08

I think this question is much better suited for interpersonal or workplace se. I don't see what is specific to academia related to talking about a bad business relationship.

@NickCardoso: This answer does not name the professor in question (otherwise it would indeed be violating be nice). We are not even able to decide whether the question is completely hypothetical. Also, in general we do not need to and cannot check the premises of a question in all detail. We just accept as, well, premises. It is the asker’s responsibility to ensure that these premises are correct.

Mostly to anyone else going through something like: "Title IX (gender equality) office at my university said that technically his behavior (both initial line crossing and his reaction to me standing up to him)... did not rise to the level of sexual harassment" Always consider contacting the OCR too. While your Title IX coordinator/OIE or whoever you talked to might be right, they might also be wrong (and might not have your interests at heart), particularly as Title IX deals in more than just "sexual harassment", and Title IX also explicitly covers retaliation. Sorry you went through this.

I am very sorry to hear about your situation - that sounds very painful and I wish you the best in healing from it.

Personally, I'd love to just answer truthfully and throw him under the bus since that's what he's done to me several times over these last few months, but I know doing so will hurt me more than it'll hurt him.

Probably the biggest argument for answering truthfully isn't payback (no matter how richly deserved) but protecting your peers from the same experience you had. Against that, as you've identified, there is a risk of retaliation if he hears that you're doing this.
By reporting him you've already taken action to deal with this missing stair. This may discourage him from repeating the harassment and/or improve the outcome for the next student to report, if it comes to that.
I've been in a similar situation (not sexual harassment, but bullying and professional retaliation from an academic superior) and I understand that it's exhausting. Nobody here can tell you whether you ought to do more than you already have done.
With that said...

After effects: we're not speaking to each other, avoid each other as much as possible, I get panic attacks/have some sort of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) whenever I have run-ins with him, and I've slowly become isolated from the rest of my department because he practically runs it and no student or faculty member wants/dares to step on his toes).

To be honest, it sounds as if this bridge is well and truly burned. You've formally reported him to his professional colleagues. This is a much more threatening step than informally warning off a potential student. At this point I expect the only thing restraining his behaviour is fear of professional consequences if he gets too blatant about it.
To be blunt, whatever you might have stood to lose in your relationship with him by warning off another student, you've already lost it.
What you do need to consider is the risk of giving him ammunition. If you make specific accusations against him, and he or colleagues find out about it, there's a chance that this could be used against you. You are probably best keeping it to things that are incontrovertible fact.
Other answers here have suggested deflecting the question. I'm not a fan of this; some people may notice the deflection and read between the lines, but not everybody catches that kind of subtlety.
You might consider something along the following lines:
"Yes, he was my advisor for a couple of years. I'm afraid we don't have a good relationship and I ended up making a formal complaint against him, so I'd prefer not to discuss the details."
You're not making any accusations there, so it'd be hard for him or anybody else to take this as an attempt at escalation. At the same time, it lets her know to keep her eyes open for trouble. In the event that she doesn't take the warning and he harasses her, it also lets her know that there is already a formal complaint on record against this guy, which may help then.

I like your suggestions, and they realistically consider the situation while embracing OP's underlying desire to reveal the truth. (My answer took a more conservative approach and emphasized it's OK to weigh OP's own well-being, but feeling freed to tell the truth can also be good for well-being.)

@cactus_pardner Upvoted yours - indeed, when I was in a somewhat similar situation, my response was closer to your suggestion than the one I've given here, and much less public than what OP has already done. I don't think any of us can tell OP where to pick that balance between self-protection and fixing a problem that shouldn't be hers to fix; the best "answer" here is a bunch of Pareto-efficient options at different points along that spectrum.

@cactus_pardner also, it's profoundly sad how many of us here are speaking from experience :-(

First, let me say that I'm sorry to hear that your relationship with your original advisor has deteriorated to such a state that you have been emotionally scarred by the relationship. That is certainly not the desired outcome.
That said, you have a very important cautionary story to tell. Unlike cactus_pardner's answer, I don't think you should "jokingly defer," but instead take a very serious tone about the situation:

I wish I could be more positive about my relationship with Prof. X.
If you are serious about working with Prof. X, then there are some things that you should be aware of.
This may not happen to you, but I had some significant issues during my time working in that lab.

You can then offer to talk with the asker in more detail, if she so wishes, and leave the choice up to the asker. But do not blow off the discussion. Hiding the situation will just allow it  to continue unchecked, which is exactly what you do not want to see happen in the long run.

I don't think @cactus_pardner is suggesting jokingly deferring. The cautionary story is only worth telling if the other person is planning to work with the old advisor. If not, changing the subject to research and your new advisor is good advice, it's best to stay positive. If yes, telling the cautionary tale in private is a nice thing to do.

On second read of the question, I now realize that the euphemism "crossed a professional line" is probably talking about sexual harassment (rather than general academic bullying). In such a case, it may be appropriate to talk about this more directly, as this answer suggests. You may unfortunately take some damage, but you might also deem the personal sacrifice worth it. Its really unfortunate that going through the university's official reporting mechanisms didn't lead to a better result.

It is a sad society we live in where the "evade/defer" suggestion gets many upvotes. This is the appropriate and morally upstanding approach.

This is the correct answer, in my opinion, but this whole situation is a roll of the dice (more so than other situations, with more severe consequences). It could backfire if the professor takes retributive action, but in this case I think it's more important to try and take control of the narrative and hence, be honest. I have known people who have regretted saying and doing nothing, and people that have faced some difficulties after saying something (but in the end managed to control the narrative). In short, this is perhaps the least risky, but there is risk.

Are there any legal or ethical risks around that fact that investigation is on-going?

@WetLabStudent I did use the phrase "jokingly defer," but sort of as a last resort where someone is asking and OP does not want to talk about it. It is a serious matter, but it is also OP's choice about what to say when. Changing the subject does not have to be a joke, but keeping the tone light means the other person is less likely to dig for gossip or make OP relive the details. I like aeismail's answer for when the OP wants to reveal information, but it might be wrenching to do.

@einpoklum While this is indeed the "morally upstanding approach"; it is important not to dismiss the OPs psychological well-being. Depending on this, it may at times be better for the OP to defer the question to protect themselves. They should only share their story to warn others when they have sufficiently processed their trauma, and/or when they have discussed how best to approach this with a therapist.

@J.Doe: "Better for the OP" - there. You see? You switched the question from "what's better (overall)" to "what's better for the OP". Can you make an argument that it is better overall for the OP not to speak? Of course, if it's too much for her, then she won't, but she asked up for our opinion, so I believe she should be encouraged to speak. On the other hand, OP's edit suggests that things might be more complex than they seem, while my comment was written before the edit.

@J.Doe I don't think it is that easy to make claims about the psychological well-being of strangers. No, I think the main reason some people prefer "evade/defer" is that this is the "socially safe" option. That is, you avoid the risk of social 'failure' by avoiding to talk about sensitive topics. Whether this is in your advantage or not is something one has to decide on their own. I think this answer provides a good 'middle road', as the 'introduction' doesn't lay blame or talk about the specifics and therefore gives a chance for the other to abort the conversation without issue.

@einpoklum I agree with you that ideally they would warn others. I'm merely pointing out that I believe it is important to make explicit that one should keep themselves in mind as well. Also note that the question is "How do I talk about..."; I believe "Do in this and this manner if X, don't if Y" is a legitimate answer to that.

@Discretelizard I don't mean to assess anyone's psychological well-being, hence my mention of them discussing with a therapist if they feel that is necessary. I completely agree that in most cases this answer will be the right approach.

@einpoklum Besides OP's psychological/emotional well being, we should also consider OP's future career prospects. It's depressing as hell that "morally upstanding" can be so divorced from "healthy" and "best for one's financial situation", but under such a reality, the "right" answer depends on one's priorities.

This answer is focused on keeping the OP well and advancing their career.
I fully support the right of OP to warn others about the professor, but it need not be done every time his name comes up in conversation. Having to warn all askers is a huge and unfair burden, and the topic of OP's grad study is [awesome topic that fits with the conference], not [setting the record straight about Dr. --]. Further, sometimes hearing or talking about a person can trigger PTSD (possibly part of the "deer in the headlights" moment--fight, flight, or freeze), and certainly telling her experience in any detail, in a convincing way is even more liable to bring up those memories.
Even in the comments on this SE question, people asked questions to try to get at the nature of "crossing a line," offering that maybe the OP misunderstood, that it would help to know what kind of line was crossed. As Thomas King commented, "in every instance I have known, people have favored the perpetrator (at least initially)." People are often skeptical and don't want to believe people who have gained their (professional) respect can do awful things.
OP should not have to spend valuable time at a conference rehashing Prof. X's misdeeds, convincing skeptical strangers who started with idle curiosity, and being remembered as "that student bitter about Dr. --" rather than "the grad student who's pursuing [awesome topic]."

A friend leaving an abusive advisor was told by someone in charge of her department that students are admitted on the basis of many opinions, and during the admissions process other professors acknowledge that this is someone they think would add to the department. This may not be universal, but your identity as a student is linked to the department/university, not just your former advisor. Further, your research interests have a (potential) audience and community of scholars much broader than Dr. --.
The main advice for the conference: focus on the positive! For the most part, you are dealing with strangers who are rarely going to interact with Dr. --.

With or without a new advisor, you could say:

I've worked with him, but it seems that our university has a [growing | large | passionate] group of scholars interested in [awesome topic].

If you have a new advisor, you can answer with:

I'm really excited to be working with Dr. Y.
I chose to work with Dr. Y, who [brings expertise on velociraptors | has a high energy kitten lab | is a great collaborator].

What you choose to praise about your new advisor may be an implicit critique of your old advisor. Calibrate what you say for how much you want to throw shade on your former advisor.
For a fellow grad student (e.g. who might apply to work as his postdoc or otherwise work with him in a junior position), it may be appropriate to sound a bit of a warning; for someone who already knows you and you trust, you can similarly also let on some misgivings.
If you're talking to an established professor you do not know, try not to waste time talking about your old advisor and the past, but instead talk about what you're excited about.

Talking to senior scholars is a key opportunity at conferences!
Only if you know the person is likely to be sympathetic (e.g., just gave a speech about rooting out bad behavior in the discipline), you might choose to reveal something to them.
Someone established is more likely to already know and somewhat trust Dr. --, knowing him in a context that had a very different power differential, and you would be much more likely to get disbelief and/or be seen as unprofessional for airing dirty laundry.

If a stranger--someone you don't trust yet--asks about what happened, you can jokingly defer. Or even if there's someone who you trust but you do not feel like going through the torture of talking about it, you can still change the subject. Some possible ways of saying this are:

How much time do you have? Really, though, I'd love to hear more about what you're working on.
I value qualities in an advisor beyond a great research reputation. But I don't want to spend all my time at this conference talking about him, when I really want to talk about that amazing keynote.
Get in touch if you're thinking of applying; I'd be happy to talk more about the research environment in my department. But for now, I wanted to ask you about X...

The way you defer does not have to be joking. To prevent unwanted follow-ups, though, you should try not to have an air of mystery about it. You could try being extremely dull about the answer.

Oh, the story's more about paperwork than about [field of study].

Nic Hartley suggests in the comments another approach, that is candid but limited:

Unprofessional behavior happened and HR is looking into it.

He's right that this approach is "honest, makes it clear that nothing is set in stone ('looking into it', rather than 'he was fired'), and gives some idea as to what happened, without requiring OP to go into possibly painful detail." However, even when asked point-blank, there is no duty to answer personal questions. One could also just say:

I'd rather not go into that.

Comments are suggesting that this answer is artificially happy and papers over the problem. I was wrong to say in the original version that you should fake excitement, but if you can feel excitement about the conference, then hold onto that and don't let the bastards get you down! There are a range of legitimate options, and you will know what feels like the right direction in the situation.
Few other answers really acknowledge the stressful reality of your situation and PTSD. Extrapolating from my own related experience, I imagine that even being at the conference--perhaps hearing citations of Dr. --'s work or remembering how he explained a concept someone's talking about--may feel like a minefield. It is so easy for thoughts to return to a trauma and force you into those same feelings, especially if you are having to talk about anything remotely related. It can also lead to worry that the road ahead on your career is still under Dr. --'s control, leading to panic or despair or anger. And in my case, having had the emotions brought up once made it more likely that panic or tears would return later in the same day. Especially when the cost of disclosing something to a stranger is spending most of the conference holding back sobs and periodically leaving to cry in the bathroom, it is clear that you are not morally obliged to take on that burden.
(In my case, therapy has helped a lot, as has learning how to reclaim my identity in that realm, separate from traumatic incidents. You have plenty of time ahead to share your truth on your terms. In my own case (with different details), I have discreetly warned many people one-on-one and encouraged policy changes that make it unlikely for similar things to happen again.)
Good luck! Especially with the PTSD, I hope you can get some counseling resources to help. The power dynamics and uncertainty that grad students face makes a lot of problems especially stressful, and it can even be common to doubt oneself when lots of people are questioning you. You are not morally obligated to disclose this beyond the formal avenues you are already pursuing, and you have a scholarly identity and future that's not just tied to Dr. --.

I hate this culture ( probably ethical in USA academia, correct me if  I am wrong) where you need to sugarcoat abusive behavior. Where everyone have a right to the opinion. I mean he is the predator, needs to be exposed in order other prospective students to find out. However, I agree with your observation that you should focus on new advisor.

I can't imagine that third point working very well for non-subject matter critcism. "Dr. Y is great! He never yells at me to go die in a fire!"

@ssimon until i read this comment, I didn't even realize the question was about sexual harassment and/or abuse. I hate this culture too.

This is absolutely terrible advice. Just think what that person might go through - and that you may be responsible for him/her being somehow abused by said advisor.

@Ssimon I've tried to edit the response to be less focused on sugar-coating. My point is not to smooth things over for the predator, but to allow OP not to be held back by him.

@einpklum "Just think what that person might go through - and that you may be responsible for him/her being somehow abused by said advisor." No. That advisor is an adult and the person at fault for future abuse. The people employing him (department, HR) may be at fault for future abuse, but OP is pursuing official channels to make the problem known and correct it. There are immediate costs to the OP that counterbalance the possible risks to the stranger down the road.

@NicHartley Thanks for your comment. I added that text and reasoning into my answer--though let me know if you want to add your own answer and I can remove that part. I agree that your suggested approach is a good approach for disclosing the incident, but in my opinion OP is not obligated to disclose anything if asked point blank. (I did not advocate lying, though I can speculate on situations where even that might be an appropriate response.)

"Further, sometimes hearing or talking about a person can trigger PTSD" - yes, absolutely. The original grad student who asked me about Dr. - excitedly told me the next day that she asked Dr. - to be on her dissertation committee, and he accepted. I smiled, congratulated her, and after sitting through lunch with her while she giddily recounted their entire exchange and went on about how sweet he was, I left the conference in tears. Hearing about him definitely triggers PTSD.

@Ace I'm so sorry to hear what happened and how you left the conference in tears. Remember that academia moves deliberatively in many ways, and that you rarely have to make a final decision in-the-moment. So while PTSD or other emotions can shape or necessitate your immediate reaction--usually to help you "survive"--you can also take time to consider the situation and what you want to do. For instance, if you talk over your situation with a counselor, you could plan whether you want to give more information to this other student, and if so, how. I'm so sorry you have to deal with his mess.

@Ace - I would bring this information to your university.  Perhaps not your department, since  it seems to be heavily influenced by your ex-advisor.  From what you've described, it doesn't sound like a good idea for your ex-advisor to be sitting on anyone's committee.  At least while the investigation results are pending.

Cactus_pardner, thanks for sharing your story.  Glad to hear therapy is helping you recover.

@aparente001 I don't think he should either. However, he's already directing a few dissertations and sitting on a few other committees w/in our department, and is on a few other committees outside the department. I'm not sure HR/grad school/college of arts & sciences would want to do anything to cause such an inconvenience to so many students, especially if none of them share my concerns.

@Ace - Why not give them the chance?  They might get smart and realize that they're taking a big risk by giving him so much access to students in a one-on-one format.

You observed, "I know [that throwing him under the bus] will hurt me more than it'll hurt him."
There is no reason to keep the truth from people you have a trusting relationship with.  However, with someone you are meeting for the first time, it's probably better to protect yourself.  It is possible to draw an emotional curtain during that part of the conversation, and then open it up again when you and the person are ready to move on to another topic.  Here's one possible way that might play out.  I'll call the student from another university "S."
S: Oh, you work in (name of subfield)!  Do you work with Prof. X?
You: No.  I work with Prof. Y.
S: Oh.  I thought Prof. X was the only person working in (name of subfield) at your university.
You: How did you like the keynote presentation this morning?

Comment: if you are in the US, and if I understood correctly that your ex-advisor engaged in sexual harassment and then retaliation after you reported him to HR, then I would strongly encourage you to file a complaint with the US Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights.  If you decide to do this, don't forget to describe any wrongdoing on the part of other members of the department, and please note that there's a time limit -- complaints must typically be filed within 180 days.

Edit 4/8: In your update, you said, "It happened in a very subtle and covert manner - so much that the title IX office said that technically his behavior (both initial line crossing and his reaction to me standing up to him) - however unprofessional it was - did not rise to the level of sexual harassment."
What your Title IX office may be overlooking in their assessment is the professor's subsequent retaliatory behavior.  OCR takes retaliation very seriously.
Please keep in mind that the reason Title IX offices have sprouted up all over the country recently is that colleges and universities were pushed by OCR to create effective internal structures and protocols for dealing with sexual harassment complaints.  Some institutions have really gotten it and their Title IX officers are doing an excellent job; some, on the other hand, mainly function as a means of keeping a lid on any problems that may exist.
I haven't seen the evidence in your case, and I'm not a lawyer or an expert in this area.  But I do know two things, from personal experience filing an OCR complaint about disability discrimination (on behalf of my son who has Tourette Syndrome): that filing a complaint with OCR can be an effective way of protecting oneself from further retaliatory actions; and that the process is such that an ordinary person without legal training such as you or I can file meaningful OCR complaints.
Regarding this sentence: "I get panic attacks/have some sort of PTSD whenever I have run-ins with him."  "Run-in" might mean you have some unpleasant verbal encounters with him, or it might mean you pass him in the hall.  Or something  intermediate between those two.  Regardless of exactly what you meant, I have a suggestion regarding these run-ins.  Did you know that you can request an Order of Protection?  I've seen this to protect a secondary school student who had received death threats from specific fellow students.  The perpetrators' class schedules were changed so they were no longer in any of the victim's classes; but also, the perpetrators were not allowed to traverse certain hallways at certain times in the school day so that they would not cross paths with the victim.  An on the most basic level, the Order of Protection prevents the perpetrator from speaking to the victim.
I'm suggesting this because after trauma, one needs time to heal.

Late comment, but just an update: I ended up filing a complaint with OCR, so thank you for the suggestion. I'm not sure if anything will come of it, but having one more office looking into this whole situation is comforting (especially since HR is currently being unresponsive).

@Ace - I would be happy to look at what you filed.  Maybe I could give you some constructive comments.  I'm not a lawyer but I've filed several by now and so I have some experience with what appears to hit the mark or not hit the mark. You could ping me in a chat room and we could figure out how to communicate directly if you're interested. // The way it works is that they do an initial evaluation, perhaps requesting additional information as part of that process, by asking a list of questions.  Then they issue a letter stating which, if any, of your allegations they are accepting for ...

... investigation.  The initial evaluation is relatively quick.  // Unfortunately there is no appeals process for the evaluation. // If they don't accept any of it for investigation, that's the end of the line for that complaint.  If they open all or part of it for investigation, then depending on how backed up they are, and how complex the situation is, the investigation could drag on for months or years.  Hopefully yours won't.  // During the investigation phase, they may ask you for more information with a list of questions.  Also, they may ask the university for information. // You can...

... request that they send you an electronic copy of all their letters.  I do, because sometimes snail mail is very slow and I like working with electronic records, myself. // They may interview you; they may conduct interviews with certain University employees.// Back to the letter they send when they're done evaluating:  When they send you that letter, they will send a letter to the university as well.  Until that time, I don't think anyone at the University will be aware that you filed a complaint. // When they receive your complaint, they ask you to sign a consent form.  Make sure you...

... sign and return by the deadline. // Make careful note of anything that appears retaliatory, especially after they university has been made aware that you filed a complaint. // Note, the university will not be given a copy of your complaint letter.  OCR plays its cards close to its chest.

So I actually filed the complaint a little while ago, and just had a phone call from their office today, as they wanted some more details about the incidents I reported. They basically told me what you've just explained, so hopefully I'll hear from them soon re: which - if any - allegations they'll investigate. However, they did say that as long as the HR investigation is ongoing (which it is), they won't jump in until it's concluded. Thanks for offering to look at what I filed though - if you don't mind I might take you up on that if I have to submit anything else to them down the line!

Sorry, I forgot about their rule regarding duplication. // If HR doesn't protect you from retaliation while they're investigating, then I'd suggest consulting a lawyer.  (They generally don't charge for the initial consultation, and if they feel it's a strong case, they might take the whole thing on on contingency -- meaning they don't get paid unless/until they win.)  I do think you need to be protected from encounters with him in the meantime, and if HR won't give you that protection, the police will.  (The police don't have a non-duplication rule.)

Edit: The below answer is for general conflicts. However, since the poster used the phrase "crossed a professional line with me" its possible that the OP is referring to a case of sexual harassment/abuse rather than general academic bullying. That colloquial phrase is used in different countries differently, so it's impossible to know for certain that the OP is suggesting that the former advisor sexually harassed them without getting clarification. If the OP is talking about sexual harassment, it's very sad that reporting it to HR didn't result in a better outcome. I'd second aparente001's comment to file a complaint with the US Department of Education - also known as a "title IX complaint. I'm leaving my below answer up in case it helps others who are dealing with more minor advisor/student conflicts rather than sexual harassment."

During the conversation, focus on (1) your research, (2) your current collaborations, and (3) the the person you are speaking to's research. Of course, also let the student know that you are happy to tell them about your personal experience working with the various labs in your university if they are considering a working there.
The reason why you may not want to flag your negative experience with your old advisor at conferences is that going to conferences should be about networking and improving one another's research and careers. There are several scientific studies that show that when you say something negative about someone it reflects badly on both them and you. So from the perspective of one's own career, its best to stay positive when meeting other scientists for the first time. Something you could say is as follows.
"I work with Dr New. Its an exciting collaboration because ... I've worked with Dr Old a bit in the past, and its nice having related research going on next door. If you do end up wanting to work with Dr New or Dr Old in the future, let me know and I can provide information on the culture of the various labs. Here's my contact info. [while exchanging info] Now that was a really interesting question you asked during the last session, what did you think about the speaker's answer?."

It depends a lot on whether you talk to someone within your organization, outside your organization, and whether you still work there.
A general rule of thumb outside of academia, which worked for me in academia as well, would be:

"There were challenges, but I don't discuss my previous employers and
  colleagues".

It may seem like a very business-like attitude, especially talking to someone who is very friendly to you, but everyone who changed employers at least once will understand and respect it and every employer will think you are golden.
There is hardly anyone who hadn't had bad experience with previous employers, ranging from minor things to straight up criminal events. But there is also hardly anyone who wasn't misunderstood, misguided, unfairly judged, treated, or discriminated. If you give someone a story, they will put themselves in your shoes and in the shoes of the opposite side and arrive at a conclusion which may or may not be in your favor. Unless you feel like you really owe something to someone, just give a standard formal response and drop it.

The following may be hard to set up (it really depends on the situation), but would make your life a lot easier:
Ask a colleague that also knows the advisor and who knows the story if it is okay to just send any questioners to him/her.
Then, whenever someone asks about the advisor, just refer them to your friend.
He/she will probably have a lot easier time telling the story and can leave your name out of the story.
Never underestimate how likely people want to help others. I would be very surprised if someone would decline helping out.

Agreed that a (senior) colleague willing to do this would be a great solution. However, it may be hard to enlist someone to do this. It may also be easier to get a colleague (of any level) to spend some time with OP at future conferences, etc. and address questions that come up on their watch.

@cactus_pardner while I'm not sure how feasible Martin's idea is in my particular situation, I actually do have a friend/colleague who was also at this conference with me, and was nice enough to break off from Dr. -'s entourage whenever we had meal breaks (Dr - and several others from my department were also at this conference, and they all stuck together the entire time). Just so I wouldn't feel too ostracized, he would find others at the conference to hang out with and make me join him. (he knows I'm kind of shy around strangers)

I have not experienced anything similar to what you experienced, but I imagine that if I was in your situation, I would mention that you and Dr. --- are not on good terms with each other but I would refrain from mentioning what exactly it was about.  I don't think it would be polite (or professional) to mention to someone who is not close to you information that hurts the reputation of someone else (even if the information is correct).

Grad student:  "Oh, you're affiliated with [university] and you specialize in [specialty].  You probably know Dr. --- !"
You: Yes, I know Dr. ---.
Grad student: So how is it working with Dr. --- ?
You: We are not on good terms with each other and I'd rather not talk about it.
Grad student: Why?  What happened?
You: I think it would be best if you get that information from someone other than me or Dr. ---.

I disagree with this answer, either don't mention it at all and focus on the positive of what you are doing now or provide a bit more information if you really think it is necessary to warn prospective students. There is no reason to tell strangers that you are not on good terms with people.

@WetLabStudent Focus on positive. What is positive in molestation and abuse?

@SSimon I never said there is anything positive about abuse. I said that when talking with academics you don't know at conferences its best to redirect the conversation to your research (focus on the positive about your research), or provide some degree of details about the abuse. One should not sugar coat and just say  "we are not on good terms". Saying you are no longer on good terms puts equal blame on the person being abused! Its the worst thing you can do, be direct or talk about your research. There is no reason to tell anyone you aren't on good terms.

One problem I can see with this approach: who else would be able to give the idle questioner that information?  The administrators are already walking a fine line, needing to support OP's academic progress through the department, and also avoiding legal problems with the professor, given that there is an ongoing, hence incomplete investigation.  Who else is there to provide that information, then?

" I don't think it would be polite (or professional) to mention to someone who is not close to you information that hurts the reputation of someone else (even if the information is correct)." It's important that you brought this up. Many people will feel it is unprofessional to say negative things about a colleague, or will think "it's not their place to judge," or don't want to "get dragged into departmental politics," and will judge OP negatively for any information OP reveals about the issue.


text:
How to get the word out about an academic competition?
I'm hosting an academic competition, and I need to get the word out to any peers that may be interested in participating. My advisor told me to search for academic mailing lists, but I can't find any. What are the best venues to get the word out about academic information? I'm particularly interested in publicizing the competition throughout the USA and Brazil, but any advice is warmly welcomed.
Clarification: My objective is not spamming or any kind of malicious activities. The same way that conferences and activities are spread by someone inside the universities, I would like to reach to reach a wide audience to invite them to participate in the competition, with pure academic interests---specially since the competition is part of an international conference.
The topic is related to machine learning. But any tips for any kind of topic are welcome.

Welcome to Academia.SE. Please don't post promotional links here—they are not actually relevant to your question, and in this case will become "stale."

Perhaps I'm cynical, but you seem to be asking how to get hold of a mailing list so you can spam folks. Please clarify how you would identify people who are interested vs those who would not be interested.

If you do manage to get a hold of a list, not everyone on it will be interested. So I'd suggest emailing some universities and sending posters and such for display.  Those interested might contact you.

"Academic" is rather vague.  Would there be questions on mathematics, on Chinese history, and on the Philosophy of Kant?

If you are aiming to reach out to members of a specific field, then I'd suggest reaching out to the department chairs of universities that offer it. For example, if you are looking into something designed for communications majors, professors, etc., then perhaps look up colleges with communications programs. Then find the contact information for the department chair and send them an email. You can repeat this for as many schools as necessary.
If you are going for something a bit broader, you may want to call the administrative offices for the schools, or see if they have an email address that you can contact them through.
This way, if the message comes across more like spam, then hopefully you've irked as few people as possible. If it's useful and the recipient is interested, then they will have the ability to disperse the information throughout their department or university. It's a lot of work, but sometimes that is what is necessary.

If you know of relevant academic associations, you can see if they have special interest groups (SIGs) or sections for graduate students. You could politely email the graduate students elected to be in charge of those groups and ask them if they could please spread the word, and/or whether they have advice about how you can spread the word. (If those SIGs have Facebook or Twitter accounts, for instance, they might be more willing to publicize a contest there than by sending out an unscheduled email.)
Beyond that, I agree with the advice to reach out to relevant departments with the information. Of course, before you reach out, make sure that your materials are as clear as possible, look official (ask your advisor and colleagues), and have the correct contact information/URL spelled out (in case a rich-text message turns into plain-text and loses its links).

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Can I ask a college prof to help me find a therapist?
A few weeks ago I told my college professor that I'm depressed. She said I can go to her at anytime if I need help.
Then my psychologist kicked me out, because I didn't want to tell her the details of sexual abuse.
Can I ask my prof to help me find a therapist? Or would it be awkward or a burden for her? I really like her, and it felt really good when she offered her help. I just don't know if she truly meant that I can ask her for help, or just said it...

If your professor said you can go to her for help, she probably meant it. She's not going to be in a position to act as your therapist, but I think she would be willing to help you find a new one.

I'm sorry to hear you're going through this.  But one thing you should keep in mind is that conversations with a professor don't typically have the same confidentiality protections as with mental health professionals.  In particular, in some places (e.g. some US universities) if you mention anything about sexual abuse, she may have an obligation to report all of it to the police or other authorities, with or without your consent.  So it would be a good idea, before talking with her, to establish what she can or can't keep confidential.

As long as you recognize that the prof isn't a mental health professional and don't expect her to go beyond her expertise, it would be fine to ask her for help. Especially if what you want is help in finding a proper therapist.
Professors (many, at least) try to be helpful and supportive in such situations, even though solutions are beyond them.
But it is probably a mistake to overload your relationship with her with personal issues. Separating the personal from the professional is normally the right course.
However, your university may also have an office that provides personal support and might also be helpful in finding a compatible advisor.
Finally, if sexual abuse is an issue, then you should think about other avenues so that it stops. Again, the university may be able to help if it is related to actions taken there.

Mentees
Many professors tell their students to go to them for help. They regard their students as their mentees. Mostly they think that they will help the students regarding their studies.
Now this is your personal problem. Politely remind her that she told you to go to her for help and then ask if she could recommend a good psychologist. What ever she answers, take it a final.


text:
How to effectively locate older studies and papers?
Finding studies referenced in books can be nearly impossible.
I was struggling very much to find the original paper by Liebmann (1927) on the, well, Liebmann effect.
Is there a better method to look things up? My usual way is to Google, for example, "Liebmann effect, 1927" or something of the sort.

Although many journals have done a good job of putting their archives online, it does indeed get pretty difficult to find an electronic copy of any but the most prominent publications if you go back earlier than around the 1970s.
Fortunately, there are still people who know how to deal with this, and whose job it is to help with issues like this: university librarians.  When I've faced problems of this sort, working with librarians has been the way to solve it. They often are able to locate a physical copy within their own collection or, if they cannot, often also have relationships with other institutions' libraries who can loan or scan materials from their own collections.
I would also suggest, however, that you may also wish to consider whether you really need to go back this far.  Go back the better part of a century, and you will often find that notations and vocabulary have changed to the point where it becomes difficult to understand the paper. Moreover, if the phenomenon has not been entirely neglected, there will often be later reviews or textbooks that present it much better and more comprehensively. Unless you are specifically interested in the historical circumstances of the original work or the perspective of the particular investigator, such later references may turn out to serve your needs much better.

it does indeed get pretty difficult to find an electronic copy of any but the most prominent publications if you go back earlier than around the 1970s --- However, once you get to the 1910s and earlier, virtually everything is freely available due to various digitization projects (google, archive.org, Hathitrust, Numdam, etc.). About 10 months ago I "updated" something I wrote in 2008, and when I looked for digital versions (continued)

of the 22 rather obscure items I cited (indeed, aside from the book by Todhunter and the book by Edwards, "very obscure" is probably more accurate), I found all of them simply by googling their titles or some phrases in the item.