My main worry is that some of these exchanges are putting off people from OS. Not just because of bad actors but because of suggestions that the wider OS community is hostile because of this or a perceived acceptance of hostility. As you said before lots of nuance lost on twitter
-
-
There's one who's bullied me in the sense of making unreasonable and blanket criticisms that my and colleagues' work is worthless. BUT, she actually is the only one I've seen who also habitually questions fundamental assumptions that need more examining. So, I want to stop her
-
bullying but want the solution to be careful not to get rid of her (even though she is rather toxic) which I theorize (based on a lay and possibly wrong theory of personality) also leads her to be the only one who questions certain cherished assumptions.
-
Perhaps if she’s out of the way, others will feel more comfortable raising the same points. Critical thinking is not exclusively bestowed to bullies, luckily. They do, however, benefit from others thinking so. I think if she’s toxic, she’s got to go. That’s where I’d stand.
-
I don’t know, I have never dared criticise research on twitter because I’ve seen how easily criticisms of the science are seen as criticisms of the scientist (of course not talking about cases where people are clearly acting in bad faith). It’s a weird medium!
-
In a culture that doesn't seem to highly value criticism (psychology being one such culture, at least in previous years), maybe the bullies are the ones that disproportionately make criticisms and thus only by making the culture more welcoming of criticism can we eliminate
-
bullying without collateral damage to healthy criticism? (I'm not condoning bullying or suggesting it shouldn't be called out.)
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.