AJPS editorial board insiders « Political Science Rumors

8 months - 60 posts - Latest - RSS
OP: 7 Goods vs 12 No Goods
Thread: 148 Goods vs 96 No Goods

Political Science Rumors » Off Topic » Off Topic

AJPS editorial board insiders

« Previous 123 Next »

Alana

The latter.
Apparently, you're having a pretty tough time finding anyone else on planet Earth who comes to this same conclusion aside from KarI and his handful screeching Chymps.
It's in the report, sweetie.

If someone sent a basic report showing the data problems, then a replication of Enos models and how the results changed with stripping the WN nonsense from it,

I am sure there are some reputable people who would put their name to it.

All that is done in the report. And the AJPS is aware of it but refuses to do anything about it because the report is anonymous

8 months ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 0 NAY !
Alana

Remember, the onus is on him to show these were honest errors.
Remember, only a completely deIusional nuttter would think the onus is on any academic to answer a shjtflood juveniIe accusations of random internet troIls like KarI or his anonymous gaggle of high school dropouts.
Nah, that's not what happened.

Nah? Then who, exactly, is demanding responses to Karl's shjtflood of unsupported accusations, other than Karl and a handful of anonymous Chymps on the internet?

The accusations are very supported. It's all in the report.

8 months ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 1 NAY !
Peronel

It's in the report, sweetie.

An anonymous report that was so terribly done nobody else on the entire planet bought it?

And you think that by repeating "its in the report" that was dead-on-arrival, you'll eventually convince someone besides yourself?

Do you really think that's how a mentally stable person would act?

8 months ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 6 NAY !
Jeffry

I'm way too junior to say something without it being a risk to my career (already worried I'm saying too much to risk revealing myself), but there are people I know of in behavior who both believe racism is real and don't like research misconduct who would speak up about this. Look for the recently tenured behaviorists at lower tier places who do not have much to lose.

8 months ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 0 NAY !
Alana

It's in the report, sweetie.
An anonymous report that was so terribly done nobody else on the entire planet bought it?
And you think that by repeating "its in the report" that was dead-on-arrival, you'll eventually convince someone besides yourself?
Do you really think that's how a mentally stable person would act?

Nah, that's not what happened.

8 months ago # QUOTE 1 YEA 0 NAY !
Alana

Look for the recently tenured behaviorists at lower tier places who do not have much to lose.

Such people have plenty to loose. The woke is strong is places like that.

8 months ago # QUOTE 1 YEA 0 NAY !
Peronel

The accusations are very supported. It's all in the report.

And yet, not a single person on the entire planet, besides you, Karl, and a couple of other committed nutters, agree.

Just keep repeating "it's in the report" another 10,000 times, and see if it helps your image of being unhinged.

8 months ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 4 NAY !
Jeffry

The latter.
Apparently, you're having a pretty tough time finding anyone else on planet Earth who comes to this same conclusion aside from KarI and his handful screeching Chymps.
It's in the report, sweetie.
If someone sent a basic report showing the data problems, then a replication of Enos models and how the results changed with stripping the WN nonsense from it,
I am sure there are some reputable people who would put their name to it.

All that is done in the report. And the AJPS is aware of it but refuses to do anything about it because the report is anonymous

You can see how I'm confused because Karl literally never mentions if the results change or not. Like I said, he doesn't seem very bright, but that's what matters and him saying nothing about it strikes me as curious.

8 months ago # QUOTE 1 YEA 1 NAY !
Reine

The problem is that the report is anonymous and probably from some random grad student. Maybe it is correct and maybe it isn't. No one apparently wants to spend the time figuring out whether it is, and that includes Karl. No sensible person would simply believe the report, however many times people repeat its thesis on here or in angry substacks. Karl, if you actually do the work you said you would do of replicating Enos' code, post it publicly, show that the results depend on deletion and addition of precincts not in official data then yeah people will definitely listen. Otherwise you are wasting our time like Jesse did.

The latter.
Apparently, you're having a pretty tough time finding anyone else on planet Earth who comes to this same conclusion aside from KarI and his handful screeching Chymps.
It's in the report, sweetie.

If someone sent a basic report showing the data problems, then a replication of Enos models and how the results changed with stripping the WN nonsense from it, I am sure there are some reputable people who would put their name to it.

8 months ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 1 NAY !
Jeffry

Look for the recently tenured behaviorists at lower tier places who do not have much to lose.

Such people have plenty to loose. The woke is strong is places like that.

I am trying to hint at a few specific people who have been angry with the state of academia or have perhaps even left academia who are absolutely woke but maybe also do not like seeing people at top 10 programs committing fraud.

8 months ago # QUOTE 1 YEA 0 NAY !
Makayla

The latter.
Apparently, you're having a pretty tough time finding anyone else on planet Earth who comes to this same conclusion aside from KarI and his handful screeching Chymps.
It's in the report, sweetie.
If someone sent a basic report showing the data problems, then a replication of Enos models and how the results changed with stripping the WN nonsense from it,
I am sure there are some reputable people who would put their name to it.
All that is done in the report. And the AJPS is aware of it but refuses to do anything about it because the report is anonymous

You can see how I'm confused because Karl literally never mentions if the results change or not. Like I said, he doesn't seem very bright, but that's what matters and him saying nothing about it strikes me as curious.

Add 1,000 observations that contradict your pet theory to a dataset of 1,800 observations. What do you think, do your results change, or not? It's simple math.

8 months ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY !
Alana

You can see how I'm confused because Karl literally never mentions if the results change or not. Like I said, he doesn't seem very bright, but that's what matters and him saying nothing about it strikes me as curious.

I haven't read what Karl has written on it. He may not have had access to the report initially. It was available online for a short while and then disappeared and then resurfaced again.

8 months ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY !
Reine

Karl, the foundation of modern conservatism is a belief in personal responsibility. If you want anyone serious to take you seriously you're simply going to have to put in the work. Screeching on your substack that someone else should do the work when all you have done so far is send some angry emails and copy and paste from psr and ejmr is frankly unbecoming. You can handle data, can't you? Get to work, show that the report is right by posting code and results anyone can easily run, and then you will be a hero. It is the only way.

8 months ago # QUOTE 5 YEA 1 NAY !
Kam

Karl, the foundation of modern conservatism is a belief in personal responsibility. If you want anyone serious to take you seriously you're simply going to have to put in the work. Screeching on your substack that someone else should do the work when all you have done so far is send some angry emails and copy and paste from psr and ejmr is frankly unbecoming. You can handle data, can't you? Get to work, show that the report is right by posting code and results anyone can easily run, and then you will be a hero. It is the only way.

You apparently have absolutely no understanding of Karl's mental health problems or his motives.

8 months ago # QUOTE 5 YEA 2 NAY !
ExogenyKarl
Rep: 4

Karl, the foundation of modern conservatism is a belief in personal responsibility. If you want anyone serious to take you seriously you're simply going to have to put in the work. Screeching on your substack that someone else should do the work when all you have done so far is send some angry emails and copy and paste from psr and ejmr is frankly unbecoming. You can handle data, can't you? Get to work, show that the report is right by posting code and results anyone can easily run, and then you will be a hero. It is the only way.

There is no more work to do. The current report proves the data is fabricated beyond any mathematical possibility. The code which, anyone can run, is included in the report. What more do you want from me?

8 months ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 17 NAY !
Reid

There is no more work to do. The current report proves the data is fabricated beyond any mathematical possibility. The code which, anyone can run, is included in the report. What more do you want from me?

Good lord. "beyond any mathematical possibility"?

Poor Karl...

8 months ago # QUOTE 15 YEA 3 NAY !
Miranda

Good lord. "beyond any mathematical possibility"?
Poor Karl...

This proves that Karl's lQ is below 90 beyond any mathematical possibility!

8 months ago # QUOTE 5 YEA 3 NAY !
Toinette

Karl is absolutely right. The work of documenting the irregularities in Enos' work has already been done. And he has done a lot of hard work himself by setting the accountability wheels in motion. In do doing, he exposed himself to an egregious amount of cyber|b|ullying from someone close to Enos whose job and tenure are in jeopardy if the whole house of cards fueling the Harvard cor|rup|tion falls apart. He persevered despite all this, and with multiple emails by PhDs to AJPS and increased public awareness of the misconduct, we are now close to a resolution of this case and to justice prevailing. We owe him a huge debt of gratitude for this.

8 months ago # QUOTE 5 YEA 8 NAY !
Peronel

Have you told Mother, Babu?

Karl is absolutely right. The work of documenting the irregularities in Enos' work has already been done. And he has done a lot of hard work himself by setting the accountability wheels in motion. In do doing, he exposed himself to an egregious amount of cyber|b|ullying from someone close to Enos whose job and tenure are in jeopardy if the whole house of cards fueling the Harvard cor|rup|tion falls apart. He persevered despite all this, and with multiple emails by PhDs to AJPS and increased public awareness of the misconduct, we are now close to a resolution of this case and to justice prevailing. We owe him a huge debt of gratitude for this.

8 months ago # QUOTE 5 YEA 0 NAY !
Burt

Karl is absolutely right. ...

Karl could say the moon is made from cheese, and you baII-Iicking Chymps of his would follow up 2 seconds with with "Karl is absolutely right!".

That's why Karls juvenile attempt at cyberIynching a Harvard prof has the appearance of a spaztic bunch of deranged nutters.

8 months ago # QUOTE 4 YEA 1 NAY !

« Previous 123 Next »

AJPS editorial board insiders

Reply »