4 ms·

I think part of the author's goal is pointing out that taxonomic consistency is useless if you're using stupid criteria, and then arguing that the criteria are

by _jal 10y ago

I think part of the author's goal is pointing out that taxonomic consistency is useless if you're using stupid criteria, and then arguing that the criteria are stupid. The second point is arguable, the first is not.

masklinn 10y ago
> I think part of the author's goal is pointing out that taxonomic consistency is useless if you're using stupid criteria Of course that falls down when the author is either misunderstanding or misrepresenting the criteria.