otherwise we run the inherent risk of making URMs think science is not a place for their skills.
-
-
2nd, there is no such as "you have to be a nice person" for many reasons including that "nice" is undefined/subjective. But there are
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
standards of behaviour relating to professionalism (you don't go to work in your bikini or your pyjamas (usually!), you don't insult people
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
(usually!) and etct etc) and relating to the ethics of carrying out experiments. If you violate these rules and norms you run the risk of
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
being fired by your uni/PI which runs the risk of you eventually not being a scientist.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
I would like such norms, especially relating to behaviour and ethics of data use and reuse to me made explicit (not set in stone!) so we can
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
have meaningful conversations about them and so we can say "X violated this rule" and so we can say "is rule 8243 a good rule or shall we
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
change it" and so on.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
I think this should clarify my thoughts — pls feel free to ask me more. I've a feeling u misunderstood (prob my fault) — hope this helps.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
I think a lot of what you have in mind is already spelled out in ethics codes (sth
@eplebel & I pointed out here https://proveyourselfwrong.wordpress.com/2017/04/04/need-for-new-code-of-ethics-compliance-for-professional-researchers-in-era-of-hyper-competitive-high-stake-academic-culture/ …)2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Great — hopefully these codes will be read, understood, abided by, and improved on. 
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.