And I think that is uncharitable. We were not delighted to have deceived people. We were delighted to have a paper accepted and amused by the mad comments.
Try CBC, Radio 5, NPR. I recommend paying more attention to Vrij Links.
-
-
I will leave the conversation here. You have an unfortunately arrogant attitude which manifests by demanding people defend themselves against doing things you disagree with rather than looking up responses to critics and rating organisations on whether or you read/listen to them
-
As I've never heard of you, I see no reason to indulge it and if you already dismissed James' explanations of previous work & his his response to criticisms which he incorporated into the next project, I've no reason to think you'll be more open to me. You've said as much.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I read the piece: https://www.vrij-links.nl/artikelen/nieuws/reeks-hoaxes-laat-problemen-in-geesteswetenschappen-zien/ … I understand why you like it - they just copied text from your own piece, and didn't interview anyone beyond yourself. That is exactly what I am saying is the problem. Maybe a real interview with
@verybadwizards would be good... -
We share aims with Vrij Links, yes. That's not a secret. We are liberal left. You can see me responding to critics here quite a lot. I, however, will not see you. You are self-righteous, egotistical and annoying. Be on your way.
-
I tried to make a point about how you have responded to criticism, but I see you've made it for me.
-
You're not criticising. You're just being rude and arrogant and dismissed the worth of listening to me at the outset. I have to be selective about what is valid criticism and what is egotistical and ignorant snark.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.