3 ms·

I don't like the tone of that article, considering there is no reason to suspect that any part of this story resulted from an act of bad faith.

• BeetleB 4y ago
  I'm aware of Retraction Watch, and I did not sense that tone at all.
• astrange 4y ago
  Indeed, a publishing everything and sometimes retracting it system would work better than our actual system of peer review, which has little to recommend it, isn’t very historical, and mainly leads to unreadable papers. https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/the-rise-and-fall-of-peer-review https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/the-rise-and-fall...
• mcphage 4y ago
  What in the article did you feel implied an act of bad faith on the part of the paper author?
  • boomboomsubban 4y ago
    I also don't feel the article was trying to accuse the author. That said, their quoting of "crucial mistake" when contacting the author makes it look like they are doubting it was actually a mistake, indirectly suggesting that they suspect some kind of misconduct. I think they actually quoted the term because that's the correct grammatical rule, at least from my memories of school. Still, the practice is so often used by accusatory journalism that it now makes the usage look suspicious.