3 ms·
Uh, you do know his actual actions was to misrepresent the contents of his talk, and spend time of it insulting members of a selection comitte that didn’t hire
by SiempreViernes 8y ago
Uh, you do know his actual actions was to misrepresent the contents of his talk, and spend time of it insulting members of a selection comitte that didn’t hire him?
The fact is that he thinks open harrasment of people that didn’t judged him less suitable for a position is ok, which in itself is reason to keep him away from any position of imprtance.
- Udik 8y agoThe personal attack (or piece of personal anecdata) in the presentation was certainly condemnable and should have been left out- but let's not pretend the problem wasn't the content of the whole presentation, personal attack or not.
- SiempreViernes 8y agoWhile his whole presentation had serious issues, starting with his misrepresentation of its contents to the organisers, the personal attack is clearly the most important infraction. It is, on its own, enought cause to sanction him as he was.
- tptacek 8y agoThe JusticeForStrumia page (run by supporters of Strumia) showcases an email from CERN that says exactly this: the personal attack was the major professional problem from the talk.
- netsharc 8y agoSimilar to the Googler who got fired after his anti-diversity paper, the content is almost irrelevant, the fact that they're so cocksure of their superiority to dare say what they said meant they were unprofessional beings who didn't belong in a collaborative work environment. It didn't help that they think their research backed up their cocksureness, but in reality the research were painfully biased and incorrect.