I think the "cabal" hypothesis is stretching it too much (especially where a malicious element is implied). But the whole "at least spinkle some [latest trendi

I think the "cabal" hypothesis is stretching it too much (especially where a malicious element is implied). But the whole "at least spinkle some [latest trending buzzword] in your proposal otherwise you won't get published/funding", is absolutely 100% true. Anecdotally, I wrote a paper a few years back, which solved a problem with fuzzy methods. Fuzzy methods are considered "obsolete and superseded by Bayesian methods" by many, which mathematically is borderline retarded, since fuzzy measure theory is in fact a superset of probability theory. My then supervisor urged me to include a whole paragraph on how "these methods we're proposing are some new kind of fuzzy that draws from bayesian mindsets and any relationship with traditional fuzzy methods is purely coincidental for lack of a better name bla bla bla ..."