Ok, but this is also an internal problem I think should be addressed. I mean maybe @improvingpsych is also a bit responsible about who is speaking in the name of SIPS and might actually address it w/ those people, which at least I would expect a professional society can do?
-
-
Replying to @IoanaA_Cristea @siminevazire and
If you are referring to the chronicle article, I don't think that anyone claimed/suggested to speak in name of SIPS. I certainly don't.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @Research_Tim @siminevazire and
Ioana A. Cristea Retweeted 🐙 🛐Will Gervais 🛐 🐙
See for instance some of the points here: https://twitter.com/wgervais/status/1039915097999724550 … I am no expert but I think some could reasonably go in a code of conduct.
Ioana A. Cristea added,
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @IoanaA_Cristea @Research_Tim and
FWIW, I think the Chronicle piece was bad at describing SIPS. It's more about making good changes than shaming bad past behaviors. That said, there were lots of "this is war" themed karaoke songs, terrorist jokes during intros, etc. That just gives opponents and journos ammo.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wgervais @Research_Tim and
@improvingpsych has the possibility to reply to this piece as I assume the right to reply is guaranteed. Maybe reading some of these things said explicitly in the context of this piece would convince more people data thugs are less central than these incessant advertorials show.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @IoanaA_Cristea @wgervais and
I mean I am really not sure the "be afraid, we are coming for you" approach to open science that continues to get advertised on and on is encouraging a lot of people.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @IoanaA_Cristea @wgervais and
I know less than a handful people at SIPS who genuinely have that sentiment. The vast majority of the times I see this message it's used as criticism, not from people actually advertising it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Research_Tim @IoanaA_Cristea and
And the simple truth is that 99% of the time these comments are intended to be a humorous way of expressing that things should change and this can mean building from scratch.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Sam_D_Parsons @Research_Tim and
It's really not the end of the world that any of this language was used or is used. I really don't get thought why all the going to great length to excuse/justify it. Everyone makes unfortunate language choices, you correct, don't repeat and move on.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @IoanaA_Cristea @Sam_D_Parsons and
"Thugs" is a different story. Because that's not just a random joke, that's a term that needs to go, it's sexist, stupid and offensive. It has DIRECT connotations of physical force if not violence. It puts people off. Several ppl (@AikateriniVK ) have underscored this.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
It's also disturbingly racist.https://www.npr.org/2015/04/30/403362626/the-racially-charged-meaning-behind-the-word-thug?t=1536788863330 …
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @IoanaA_Cristea and
what description do you both think would work? so far I have not seen anything that actually captures the intended meaning (albeit in a flippant way) (also genuinely interested in finding a suitable non-inflammatory version, no flippancy intended)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Sam_D_Parsons @IoanaA_Cristea and
No offence but I'm not on Twitter to help you all find a name for yourselves.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
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.