Although to clarify, my take isn't aligned with a lot in these blogs lately — they all think #openscience isn't a movement. 
-
-
I think there is a sentiment, that I share, that there should really be no distinction between open science and science. >
1 reply 2 retweets 4 likes -
I'm worried twitter's lack of nuance will carry us out into an is-ought fallacy. But sure, all science should be open, yes.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Another question is whether we should worry about it. I suspect the in-group aspect has marginal effects compared to changing incentives.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Well, insisting we're not a movement = rhetorical play that has been used in and by other groups to sidestep criticism. I've seen it before.
3 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @BrentWRoberts and
Does the movement refer mainly to those influencing others to do open science? Or also include anybody who just does open science themselves
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @CookieSci @BrentWRoberts and
I'm not prescribing the use. I'm merely starting that like
#opensource it's certainly an ideological movement.2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @CookieSci and
when you put it that way, its pretty damn obvious it is a "movement"
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @elneurozorro @o_guest and
to me, the debate seemed to be more about the breadth. as in: if someone ostensibly aligned with OS does something naughty, should i care?
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @elneurozorro @o_guest and
And to the extent that we are a movement should we police our own activities which gets you into the PsychMAP quagmire.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I don't even know what happened in that group.
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.