2 ms·

I don't understand this argument. Why do the providers of the feedback need to be unmasked? So they can be disregarded because of their race or gender or "posit

by gundmc 6y ago

I don't understand this argument. Why do the providers of the feedback need to be unmasked? So they can be disregarded because of their race or gender or "position of privilege"? From what I can tell, she doesn't seem to address the points raised at all and instead complains they won't tell her exactly who said what.

omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago
The anonymity of the reviewers might be somewhat detrimental, but it might not. https://www.nature.com/articles/nn0399_197 https://www.nature.com/articles/nn0399_197 I think the process being opaque is more detrimental, because there's no way for anyone outside of the process to know it happens. If it wasn't opaque, then everyone could see when it happens. Not being able to engage in a debate about the merits of something is also sketchy. It seems like an order being dressed-up as peer feedback.