If one disagrees with another on how to do (open) science that doesn't imply one thinks (open) science as an endeavour is wrong. To frame it that way is a rhetorical trick, which can if successful damage (open) science by shutting down conversations on refining/improving, etc.
-
Show this thread
That's not to say bad actors don't exist, they do. But it's not going to help to apply a heuristic, at all. Case by case evaluation is the only sensible way of understanding what's going on.
4:05 AM - 20 Nov 2018
0 replies
0 retweets
4 likes
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.