You can look at the research (or Twitter) landscape from above and identify people who talk about it more than others. But this 9/14
-
-
Replying to @annemscheel
"community" is a very fuzzy concept. You won't be able to definitively tell members from non-members. This is not how it works. 10/14
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @annemscheel
ANYONE can do open science. ANYONE can talk about open science. ANYONE can ask for help with open science practices. 11/14
1 reply 2 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @annemscheel
We should call out abusive or discriminatory behaviour, but on the grounds of being researchers or simply decent people. 12/14
1 reply 1 retweet 11 likes -
Replying to @annemscheel
It's a good idea to confront someone making racist statements. But I'm not responsible to do that just b/c open data were used 13/14
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @annemscheel
to make those claims, not even if the person making the claims explicitly identifies as an open science advocate. 14/14 \end{rant}
4 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @annemscheel
I'm sorry you feel this way, because without calling out (and calling in) people we end up at a sort of mod rule mentality where people can
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel
get away with hijacking open science for very unfortunate rhetoric and propaganda.
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel
Mob rule is basically a status where URMs are squeezed out by definition and that causes tons of related other problems too.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel
Responsibility to take care of what values co-occur with the open science label is shared amongst all of us, in the same way we all try to
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes
take care of what kind of rhetoric out subfields employ.
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.