universities for lapses of judgement in the choice of friends and associates then let's do it systematically, not selectively according to political preference. There may be few of us left in post. 7/n
-
Show this thread
-
Carl has been treated unjustly by an employer that convened a kangaroo court rather than defend his academic freedom and then threw him to the dogs. Who will be next? Who will speak out for David Graeber if his employer decides his activism is an embarrassment 8/n
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
to a large donor and they cast around for peccadilloes with which to create a bugaboo? I will. I'm sure there will be some on the top floor of UK campus Senate Houses who get the message and are rubbing their hands together. Inconvenient pain-in the-asses that don't toe the 9/n
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likesShow this thread -
party line can now be got rid of with only a small amount of temporary bad publicity. All that is needed is a secret trial & a press-release loaded with dog-whistles. First they came for the libertarian right, but I wasn't on the libertarian right, so I said nothing..." //end
2 replies 1 retweet 13 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @OxSoc
St Edmund's should publish a full report explaining why Carl's scholarship was poor. But having said that, what do you think of (1) using data from http://thereligionofpeace.com (unknown authors, never published in a peer-reviewed journal) instead of eg the Global Terrorism Database?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ur_friend_papu @OxSoc
(2) Publishing in OpenPsych journals, e.g. https://openpsych.net/files/papers/Carl_2016a.pdf … (also the paper using the Islamophobic website instead of a reputable data source). I don't know the field, but this sounds really bad ... https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/OpenPsych_pseudojournals#Unqualified_referees …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ur_friend_papu
What anyone who cares should do: send critical comment to journal; write post publication blog; correspond with the author; if fraud proven ask for retraction. What they shouldn’t do: scream Witch, call people a Nazi, lobby to get political enemies fired, allow no discussion.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @OxSoc
I didn't sign any petitions and I object to people being fired with a single vague paragraph. But on the other hand this is Emil Kirkegaard's blog with occasional guest posts from Noah Carl, not an academic journal: https://openpsych.net/journal/OQSPS It's also where the paper was published.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ur_friend_papu @OxSoc
The collective output of cranks spewing out nonsense far outstrips the ability of reasonable people to respond to it. Kirkegaard is a nasty piece of work and Carl enabled him by acting as a referee with academic credentials (affiliation with Nuffield College) for his papers.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ur_friend_papu @OxSoc
This isn't guilt by association, it's active participation. Being at Oxbridge is a privilege, not a right. Carl wasn't on a permanent contract (JRF?). I'd like to see a rigorous review of the whole OpenPsych phenomenon, but I don't have the resources for it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Various replies to criticisms of OpenPsych are found in our editorial:https://www.openpsych.net/paper/57
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.