and until you become specific, @ManchesterUP, a statement about unspecified “ongoing efforts” is literally worse than nothing.
-
-
Show this thread
-
finally, and importantly, since you’re dismissing the identification of plagiarism in this volume,
@ManchesterUP, why do you say that the blogpost of @adam_miya should have been cited? why should something that didn’t need to be cited have been cited?Show this thread -
“there’s no reason why we should have cited but we should have cited” is not a position I’d have expected a university press to think it could take. your readers are professional readers,
@manchesterUP.Show this thread -
-
PS it is remarkable how the editors refer to @adam_miya’s “blogspot” that should have been cited. it is work that was in his 2005 PhD. work that was presented at conferences. work of which both editors were aware.
Show this thread -
-
like what, you heard of his name but you didn’t know he had citeable work?
Show this thread -
*blogpost. same letters, different order. typing while vacillating between utter astonishment and being totally, totally unsurprised is hard.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What weasel words. This is how a certain sort of British paper-pusher says ‘sorry, not sorry’.
-
and then runs it by the lawyers before sending it off, yes.
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.