3 ms·
I definitely agree this is an etiquette rules discussion - and that maybe this change has to do with how loud the loudest microphones can get. Maybe pre-interne
by automatoney 4y ago
I definitely agree this is an etiquette rules discussion - and that maybe this change has to do with how loud the loudest microphones can get. Maybe pre-internet, the only people who would see criticism would be other experts in the field. But now maybe even things offline are more public. I've heard many academics use twitter - which means a critique in public could easily become a tweet, and then viral in the community, etc.
I do really like that newspaper comparison, especially because it could prevent misunderstanding what an author was trying to say.
- periheli0n 4y agoTwitter is poison for academic debate. It is already impossible to discuss a complex matter over email—most nuance gets lost. Twitter is much worse, a) because of the character limit, b) because of the crossfire that is a wild mix of relevant and irrelevant comments, plus pure trolling.
- qubex 4y agoIt’s got to the point where if I find myself in cordial debate with so,embody whose thesis I disagree with (in 280 character chunks at the time) I thank them for the debate. And that’s the thing: if you go into a conversation only to ‘right’ the other person’s views and are unwilling to revise/question yours then you’re not debating, you’re preaching… and there’s way too much of that already. Furthermore some of people are very ‘polite’ (in that they let you expound your views) but I’ve noticed many just wait for an option to lunch into their monologue. That isn’t debate either. It’s socially less jarring but in a way intellectually dishonest.