3 ms·

But did the authors of "who's afraid of peer review" face censure? The only difference is who's ox got gored.

• tptacek 6y ago
  No, that's not the only difference. In fact, the two projects were more dissimilar than similar. Notably, the point of "Who's Afraid Of Peer Review" is that no reasonable reviewer could accept the paper for any reason; the papers (they were all practically identical) contained self-contradicting data; in fact, the plots in the paper were contradictory, so you couldn't even just skim the abstract and the graphics and then reasonably accept the paper. And, of course, the WAOPR papers were claiming to have cured cancer. The WAOPR papers were designed to be trivial to spot. That's not the case for the S2 papers; the "dog park" paper, for instance, intricately describes 1000 hours of field work. And, of course, there's the distinction that WAOPR papers targeted commercial services asking for money to publish papers, not volunteer peer review time.
  • free_rms 6y ago
    You're saying it's reasonable to publish "main kampf rewritten using woke language", and "a study on how men should regularly use dildos on themselves to improve their social attitutes"? If it was just the dog park paper, I could see your point, but come on, those papers are completely farcical.