7 ms·

Why does a medical researcher need to be on Twitter?

by ayvdl 8y ago

akerro 8y ago
Because they can and want to. Why are you on HN?
- ayvdl 8y ago
  Because I want to comment. But if someone replies to my comments with the equivalent of hate mail, I won't say that they are "silencing" me. If I go to that scientist's profile I can read his tweets just fine. Someone quoting him and saying he's an idiot is not "silencing" him.
  - StavrosK 8y ago
    If someone makes it cost more to express your opinion, that has a silencing effect.
  - lawnchair_larry 8y ago
    I don’t think you understand what silencing means.
  - theandrewbailey 8y ago
    If you plan to comment at a conference, and someone tweets the conference organizers, then your panel gets canceled, is that silencing you? > Fink said he and the organisers of a conference he addressed at Columbia University in New York in October 2018 were hounded by complaints and protests from CFS/ME activists. A petition calling for Fink to be disinvited was signed by 10,000 people. Tuller – who in his blog wrote that the person who invited Per Fink to speak at the conference must be “uninformed or stupid or both” – called Fink a “scary guy” whose methods had “destroyed families.” Tuller urged readers of his blog to go to the Columbia conference and demonstrate. This kind of stuff happens to IDW members constantly, except their venues have a pattern of giving in to the activists.
beobab 8y ago
Need vs want. I don't NEED a computer at home, nor a mobile phone. But I want one. And I am allowed to have one. And someone else's dislike of my having those things does not stop me from being allowed to have them
- ethbro 8y ago
  Possibly a bit need? I'm not sure if academia actually uses Twitter to network, but I wouldn't be surprised. Last exposure to university was in proto-FB days. Per analogy, one could probably argue that you need a phone of some sort (per professional expectations).
  - beobab 8y ago
    During work: I think it depends on your profession. If your job does not involve interacting other humans in any way, or you are all in the same room, then you do not need a phone to communicate. Job hunting: This would be significantly harder without a personal phone, but regular trips to a recruitment agent's office could make it possible. I can certainly see that it would be a significant advantage to have a phone. At home: Hugely depends on how far and wide your family have spread. If they are all within walking distance, then you don't need a phone. Sure it's more convenient, and sure, you'll spend a lot of time outside people's houses wondering if they're actually in, but that's how I grew up without a mobile phone. Interestingly, I would counter-argue (with myself) that you do need a phone if you are the only family member in a remote area, if only for your mental health. Emergencies: Yes, sometimes you just need a phone. So yes. A bit need.
- ayvdl 8y ago
  I don't dislike people having Twitter, but to be on Twitter you need to have a thick skin, and if you don't then you shouldn't be there.
  - ativzzz 8y ago
    Instead of normalizing outrage and harassment, why not say the opposite: 'To be on twitter you should treat others with respect, and if you don't then you shouldn't on there' Obviously that's not representative of Twitter right now, but why can't it be?
aaron695 8y ago
Exactly Although arguably no one should be on twitter, they are on there with regard to their research, which makes it worse - https://twitter.com/profmsharpe?lang=en https://twitter.com/profmsharpe?lang=en You enter 3 billion homes and expect everyone to behave, and worse, believe what you say without question. Knowing you're talking to mentally ill people, murders, rapists, Right wing, Left wing, people having a bad day, people having a bad week, people having a bad life, fundamentalist religious people / who believe in God / who believe the world is flat / who believe aliens will save their soul, your competitors, children, the infirmed.

Why does a medical researcher need to be on Twitter?

by ayvdl 8y ago

Why does a medical researcher need to be on Twitter?

akerro 8y ago

Because they can and want to. Why are you on HN?

ayvdl 8y ago
Because I want to comment. But if someone replies to my comments with the equivalent of hate mail, I won't say that they are "silencing" me. If I go to that scientist's profile I can read his tweets just fine. Someone quoting him and saying he's an idiot is not "silencing" him.
- StavrosK 8y ago
  If someone makes it cost more to express your opinion, that has a silencing effect.
- lawnchair_larry 8y ago
  I don’t think you understand what silencing means.
- theandrewbailey 8y ago
  If you plan to comment at a conference, and someone tweets the conference organizers, then your panel gets canceled, is that silencing you? > Fink said he and the organisers of a conference he addressed at Columbia University in New York in October 2018 were hounded by complaints and protests from CFS/ME activists. A petition calling for Fink to be disinvited was signed by 10,000 people. Tuller – who in his blog wrote that the person who invited Per Fink to speak at the conference must be “uninformed or stupid or both” – called Fink a “scary guy” whose methods had “destroyed families.” Tuller urged readers of his blog to go to the Columbia conference and demonstrate. This kind of stuff happens to IDW members constantly, except their venues have a pattern of giving in to the activists.

beobab 8y ago

Need vs want. I don't NEED a computer at home, nor a mobile phone. But I want one. And I am allowed to have one. And someone else's dislike of my having those things does not stop me from being allowed to have them

ethbro 8y ago
Possibly a bit need? I'm not sure if academia actually uses Twitter to network, but I wouldn't be surprised. Last exposure to university was in proto-FB days. Per analogy, one could probably argue that you need a phone of some sort (per professional expectations).
- beobab 8y ago
  During work: I think it depends on your profession. If your job does not involve interacting other humans in any way, or you are all in the same room, then you do not need a phone to communicate. Job hunting: This would be significantly harder without a personal phone, but regular trips to a recruitment agent's office could make it possible. I can certainly see that it would be a significant advantage to have a phone. At home: Hugely depends on how far and wide your family have spread. If they are all within walking distance, then you don't need a phone. Sure it's more convenient, and sure, you'll spend a lot of time outside people's houses wondering if they're actually in, but that's how I grew up without a mobile phone. Interestingly, I would counter-argue (with myself) that you do need a phone if you are the only family member in a remote area, if only for your mental health. Emergencies: Yes, sometimes you just need a phone. So yes. A bit need.
ayvdl 8y ago
I don't dislike people having Twitter, but to be on Twitter you need to have a thick skin, and if you don't then you shouldn't be there.
- ativzzz 8y ago
  Instead of normalizing outrage and harassment, why not say the opposite: 'To be on twitter you should treat others with respect, and if you don't then you shouldn't on there' Obviously that's not representative of Twitter right now, but why can't it be?

aaron695 8y ago

Exactly Although arguably no one should be on twitter, they are on there with regard to their research, which makes it worse - https://twitter.com/profmsharpe?lang=en https://twitter.com/profmsharpe?lang=en You enter 3 billion homes and expect everyone to behave, and worse, believe what you say without question. Knowing you're talking to mentally ill people, murders, rapists, Right wing, Left wing, people having a bad day, people having a bad week, people having a bad life, fundamentalist religious people / who believe in God / who believe the world is flat / who believe aliens will save their soul, your competitors, children, the infirmed.