3 ms·
> Cited primary sources Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression was that he did cite sources, but that Gizmodo decided to remove them. In addition th
by josteink 9y ago
> Cited primary sources
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression was that he did cite sources, but that Gizmodo decided to remove them. In addition they also re-badged this internal email as a "manifesto" and presented it as a war-cry rather than a basis for discussion. Pretty dishonest changes really.
These dishonest changes certainly helped further this shitstorm. Knowing Gizmodo (and their sister-website Jezebel which has no issues with domestic violence against men), I'm just going to assume this was the intended consequence.
- mirimir 9y agoHe cited some primary sources. And some Wikipedia pages. But I'm comfortable saying that he doesn't review the issues fully.
- wyclif 9y agoIt's a memo, for crying out loud, not a scientific paper. That's why he cites the scientific papers! A full review would require a book-length response.
- mirimir 9y agoHe cites a few papers. And whenever you cite a paper, it's best to cite at least two, to bracket the literature, or a decent review article.
- mjg59 9y ago> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression was that he did cite sources, but that Gizmodo decided to remove them Wikipedia is not a primary source.