I also never claimed there was no movement. The point is being open doesn't require being part of "the movement," nor should it. (2/3)
-
-
And finally, I explicitly said that science has a diversity problem. That needs to change regardless of how open or closed science is. (3/3)
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
It does need to change, yes. One of the core tenets of
#openscience is diversity and inclusivity.3 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
I can't stop you claiming the word movement is exclusive. You put it in scare quotes, so you obviously dislike it. But it's unfounded IMHO.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Feminism is a movement. And membership is just about if you believe sexism exists. Maybe you think movement and gatekeeping go hand in hand?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
If it has membership, it is a club. A club you may call a movement but still a club. Clubs are typically (or by definition?) exclusive.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Science has membership too...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Are you saying science is exclusive? To whom? Not everybody can be included. When I say inclusivity I mean appropriate inclusion.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes I literally said that already in the blog. I don't think science has membership by definition. It's only clubby due to lack of diversity
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm so confused. I feel like every word I use you use differently.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
You don't think you can say "this person is in science" and another isn't? That's membership.
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.