Then K said it was all in the name of OS, after "publishing" in "journal" K "edits". @EmilyGorcenski among 1st to take K to task. 7/13
-
-
If we can shun _______ for p-hacking--which conflicts with our scientific values--why not same treatment for K? 8/13
3 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Is p-hacking in research *that* much worse than unethically distributing personal info of thousands, many vulnerable. 9/13
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
That's not *my* OS. My OS gives a shit about ethics/wellfare of "participants" (OKC users are *not* K's actual participants). 10/13
2 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
Its your prerogative whether you call others out for misapplications/misrepresentations of your OS values, 11/13
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
But I think to say OS isn't a group or somehow lacks this capacity (or willingness to use it when it suits them) doesn't quite wash. 12/13
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
So it's an individual decision then, which is fine, and one for which I suspect in the OS community will vary 13/13
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Great thread (but where does one respond? 1st tweet?), I think what rubs ppl the wrong way about this is that if you want open science 1/
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chbergma @JohnSakaluk and
to be adopted widely, shaming and in-group mentality are exactly the wrong way forward, and that's not news to anyone... 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm not sure shaming a racist is bad or indeed comparable to shaming newbies. I'm asking for creating a welcoming atmosphere for URMs.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Which I hope is the opposite of promoting an in group mentality!
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.