Yes it does. Open your mind. You have suffered it yourself, it is not nice to be standing on this side, where you are personally labelled. I seen (and comprehend) your rants about it. That's a double standard. That you were the small guy, doesn't make it different.
-
-
Replying to @federicolois
You don't like the paper. Fine. I might even agree! Still fine. But none of this makes attacking the PhD student who is first author ~based on nothing but eminence~ ok. It is unscientific, regardless of the paltry excuses
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
If I would be the one writing this paper, and I would write this I am guilty first of breaching the scientific ethics. Whatever happens after, I would have to deal with it, as I strike first. It doesn't matter if it is a PhD student or a researcher with h-index of 110. Irrelevant
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @federicolois
What total garbage. A bad paper does not then justify any and all attacks, nor does it make ad-hominems somehow more scientific. Your argument makes no sense whatsoever
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
There are bad papers, and this class of papers. This is an entirely different category. This is a hit piece disguised behind a methods section, that looks good to the untrained eye. Doesn't fool people that has been doing this for years.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @federicolois @GidMK
You engage with a bad paper, explaining what they did wrong. Showing potential new avenues to analyze data, errors in the analysis, hidden biases. How do you engage with a hit piece? I can tell you I don't know. Probably I am too inexperience in mud fights.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @federicolois
Let's put it this way - when someone lied about me in public in a paper that similarly lied about my work and was filled with errors, I somehow managed to critique it without doing something like this It is not that hard
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Let's agree to disagree on that first part. I followed the entire drama. Didn't like any side, the before, the after and the after-party. Don't know, as I said, inexperienced in the mud fights. And I disagree on many things with Ioannidis approach too.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @federicolois @GidMK
What I would say is this. I have seen this things happening on closed doors at university settings. These fights end up bad for every party involved. Noone wins, because it is blow after blow until everybody is hurt. What changed is now they become public.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @federicolois @GidMK
That's among the reasons why I left academia immediately after graduation. I couldn't stand it. The double standards, the backstabbing, the fiefdoms, the egos, everywhere you look it's dirty.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
There is indeed a great deal of disgusting behaviour in academia. Often, it happens behind closed doors, but sometimes as in this case it is out in the open. If you don't like it, why are you supporting it
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.