most researchers have mediocre, marginal, or straight up "un-sexy" contributions to a field, that's just how most research happens. it doesn't make anyone "less

most researchers have mediocre, marginal, or straight up "un-sexy" contributions to a field, that's just how most research happens. it doesn't make anyone "less of a researcher" though I also would also everyone look at Gebru's work [1] - certainly seems like they're an established research who comes from a top university, has published in top conferences, and has a good understanding of the technical parts of the field one's past experiences with something they are criticizing or defending is probably a good prior to have, but also shouldn't be the sole criterion. "leading" scientists are more often than not wrong on plenty of things http://ai.stanford.edu/~tgebru/ http://ai.stanford.edu/~tgebru/