The SIPS COC only applies at SIPS principle cuts thru much of this controversy. What people do *at SIPS* is SIPS business. What they do outside, including on Twitter, is not. Thus, the "bropen science" document is probably a violation and is probably actionable.
-
-
Replying to @PsychRabble @bradpwyble and
If anything else is actionable, it has to have happened *at SIPS.* If there is any evidence of such things having happened, other than "some people were sometimes offended," let's see it. If not, everything else is just personal, not official. END.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @PsychRabble @bradpwyble and
Epilogue. We all screw up, sometimes saying things that, later, we wish we hadn't. An occasional incident of bad behavior should be forgiveable (whether by the bropen science group or anyone else) and not be the end of the world for any of us.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @PsychRabble @bradpwyble and
(I'll also state for the record that I don't agree with your legal analysis, I think your accusations of sexism on the part of SIPS are risible, and I will treat any semblance of argument on that point as a rhetorical playground for future reference.)
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @VandekerckhoveJ @bradpwyble and
I did not accuse "SIPS" of sexism. I accused the "bropen science" working group of using a sexist slur, at SIPS. SIPS as an organization cannot possibly marionnette the behavior of every one of the participants at its meetings. It can choose how to respond, tho.
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @PsychRabble @VandekerckhoveJ and
I don't think it's fair or useful to call the diversity workshop at SIPS the bropen science working group (if I understand you correctly), nor to call their product the bropen science document.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @bradpwyble @VandekerckhoveJ and
It was their term. Much of it violates the first principle of the COC (as well as the harassment proscriptions): "SIPS is dedicated to diversity, equity, inclusion, and the free expression of ideas."
2 replies 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @PsychRabble @VandekerckhoveJ and
What do you mean "it was their term". Do you mean that they called themselves the bropen science working group? I'm just trying to understand. The term bropen science was Introuduced on Twitter over a year ago
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bradpwyble @VandekerckhoveJ and
This document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15cIXHSuGxHZkYyFKbV2HbcA_paaqEP_G93-WQ-LQ93Y/edit# … Was produced by/at SIPS. 1/2 or 3 ending in END.
2 replies 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @PsychRabble @VandekerckhoveJ and
Ok, thanks. As I said, the term was not introduced at SIPS but has been in use for about a year, maybe 1.5. I don't think the diversity panels would want their session known as the bropen science working group.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Olivia Guest | Ολίβια Γκεστ Retweeted Olivia Guest | Ολίβια Γκεστ
I made the pun #bropenscience up in 2017:https://twitter.com/o_guest/status/871675631062458368 …
Olivia Guest | Ολίβια Γκεστ added,
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @bradpwyble and
Olivia Guest | Ολίβια Γκεστ Retweeted Olivia Guest | Ολίβια Γκεστ
And I recommended the hashtag in 2018:https://twitter.com/o_guest/status/1030450596908818432 …
Olivia Guest | Ολίβια Γκεστ added,
0 replies 2 retweets 4 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.