So, inspired by @chrisdc77 I've now thoroughly unclenched my own arse over this issue: http://wp.me/p5UOkc-2qx "Is open science tone deaf?"
-
-
Just to be clear, it's the latter then? In your understanding/opinion I mean. (Just want to understand what the debate is even about)
-
The debate, if you want to call it that, is what I already outlined. Not about breadth but existence.
-
Okay, I think I see. From where I'm sitting there certainly exists a bona fide open science movement
-
And my point is, if this is true (& as I said elsewhere it is to some degree) then that is really a bad thing. It shouldn't be a club!
-
Anyway I'm happy to discuss in long form in comments on blog. Trying to stay out of endless twitter threads...
-
Feminism is a movement. I don't think movement entails club by definition.
-
More explicitly, we can't solve the club-y aspect of
#openscience by insisting it's not a movement. We have to improve and be inclusive. -
You're worried it's too club-y. We can't fix this by not calling it a movement.
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.

