News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why I left Academia: Part I by kmill on Monday August 07, 2017 @03:59PM (#14950747)
> kept almost deliberately vague

I think it's a mix of lawyer advice and a disavowal of Dr. Mao as her advisor -- a way to maintain some dignity. The member of the dissertation committee who is most likely to be "impossible" to remove is the chair. More evidence for the roles: "I told Dr. Hortense in this November email that I was worried about my ability to pass my defense, especially if Dr. Mao was not going to read it prior to sending it out to the entire committee."

Re:Why I left Academia: Part I by scott_s on Monday August 07, 2017 @04:02PM (#14950784)
Yes, I now agree with you and upvotinglurker. That also explains the mystery, and the hidden horror: her advisor plagiarized her.
Re:Why I left Academia: Part I by vkou on Monday August 07, 2017 @05:03PM (#14951249)
She also mentioned that she would have been elated if Dr. Mao had just credited her in a footnote when he published her work. I imagine that this is shitty, but common in student-adviser relationships.