4/ WWIC is Internet equivalent of academic WWIC: "Why Wasn't I Cited?" that unfortunately drives 80% of peer review.
Conversation
Replying to
5/ In both cases, academic and Internet, WWIC is a bid for a share of unexpected attention oil strike.
1
1
Replying to
6/ Right answer to WWIC in most cases is, "because you didn't contribute enough to the genesis and aren't adding enough post publication."
1
Replying to
7/ Internet makes it easy to cast wide net and cite/consult 10,000 things for tiniest idea. Acknowledging all is cowardice, not generosity.
3
2
3
Replying to
8/ You don't do your idea or your readers any favors by burdening your every thought with the weight of massively trivial provenance.
1
1
Replying to
9/ This is why reinvention is *more* valuable when there is more history. Assume every thought is a rediscovery. Let WWIC handle links.
2
1
Replying to
10/ The value of the conceptual integrity you bring through reinvention usually exceeds potential missteps avoided through too much citation
3
2
Replying to
—or not, because what you end up spouting is so utterly banal. Like: "My New Thesis! Remix culture values copies over originals!" Ugly.
1
Replying to
and most citation laden stuff is not banal?
2
Replying to
— citation at least forces you to engage with others, & if banal & brainless usage, then YOU look stupid compared to citations.
3
Replying to
90% is going to be banal and stupid anyway. Might as well boldly rethink big instead of original leftover scraps.
Replying to
Bold is key term. The banal papers I've seen that lack citation *think* they are bold, but in reality only boldly display ignorance.
1

