Dude we've just had a whole discussion about this. Tbh I'm too tired to trawl up examples. This constant doubt + disbeleif is tiring.
-
-
Ducking in to say- so you know how there's no bigger open sci advocate than me, right? Well, OS has an issue with invitingness
-
It was a damned hard community to break into. Any step I took to be more open, I felt attacked for not doing enough/doing it right.
-
And costs- I didn't get into it in the article I wrote, but I think the advocacy I do probably affected the 'fit' factor on the job market
-
It was just another think marking me as different- and we know URMs pay greater social penalties for not towing the line
-
Anyway- I believe in the open sci mission- that's why I'm still here- but we need to really think about how we move forward.
-
It's not just about choosing right licences and putting code on github, it's about actually improving accessibility and bringing people in
-
And I also think "is OS worse than the traditional model" is the wrong approach. I was under the impression it was meant to be better
-
Sorry I jumped back in here but had to mute the thread for a bit while i felt it was going in circles
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.