2 ms·
> He did so without the consent of many of his co-authors and despite having been told of problems that should be corrected before publication. I think they ar
by quadrifoliate 3y ago
> He did so without the consent of many of his co-authors and
despite having been told of problems that should be corrected before publication.
I think they are point out consent issues in multiple cases, but also talk about "problems that should be corrected before publication".
I can't really see how there would problems to be corrected before publication.
If it's only a consent issue but the rest of the methodology is sound, they should just say "Drori should have waited for the consent to go ahead with publication, but the paper is fine"?
- bluepod4 3y agoTo clarify, when I said this was the _conclusion_ of the memo, I meant that it was the literal closing statement (besides the one-liner/quip about GPT-4 not being able to earn an MIT degree). I didn’t mean that it was the be-all and end-all of those CSAIL profs’ perspective(s). The wording is still very suspect to me and seems like the Writing Center would have some constructive feedback for them (unless the meaning of words doesn’t matter).