By mistake, I pressed "enter" too fast &can't seem to delete this. But what i was gonna say was: oh wow, one of the data thugs got criticized? At a conference? OUTRAGEOUS! Who dared? Then he went off &completely mis-rpresented an article that only mentioned his precious name oncehttps://twitter.com/OmnesResNetwork/status/994501696528244736 …
-
-
Sorry, all of Wansink's critics are men?
-
Involved in what exactly? I am really missing something here.
-
If u mean my initial tweet, it was about a general attitudine (not about Wansink)& I was extrapolating from the (sorry!) I still think emblematic tweet. I think this attitudine is very recognizable on Twitter and others see it too. Had not realized we can only talk about Wansink.
-
Talk about what you want. Are you somehow being silenced? I am just asking for clarification...we seem far apart on what the bigger problem is, and I am not seeing why this has been gendered. Trying to make sure I didn't miss something.
-
Who said anything about silenced? I am also confused what is the big deal here. People should have been more outraged about the PNAS piece? More supporting to Anaya? This is the worst criticism you can get in an academic paper? I believe none of these.
-
Have you ever written something, then had a person with power suggest that people should be "censured" for that type of content? Given the challenges of keeping a damn job in academia?
-
I wrote critical pieces, yes, in academic articles. Not about misconduct, which I never encountered in my topic. Never used with that attitudine or choice of words. Ever. So I guess it we have to choose what the confound and the causal are here.
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.

