Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
So rejecting a paper based on e.g. lack of novelty is ok but rejecting a paper for ethical issues is censorship and therefore wrong?
The point is that I'm willing to delegate the first but not the second.
Ok, but this seems to imply that the harm from blocking a paper because it is deemed not novel is greater than the harm for blocking something that is deemed unethical. That seems incredibly backwards to me.
That doesn't follow at all from what I said.
Why tho?
It sounds like you are saying that *your* ideological biases should determine what counts as censorship?
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
