• 3 years - 70 posts - Latest - RSS
• OP: 47 Goods vs 2 No Goods
• Thread: 761 Goods vs 155 No Goods

1. Fortune
   

   Some in the discipline just have this ridiculous sense of entitlement and privilege and think that the because they've "made it" -- or because they're at a prestigious institution -- that the rules of peer review somehow don't apply to them. When their papers get accepted, it's all because of their infinite talent and wisdom, but when the papers are rejected, it's because of flaws in the peer review process.

   Yep.

   I also agree that the process is flawed.

   But I also recognize that sometimes the flaws work in my favor.

   It's really weird that everyone who seems to be vocal about the process being "broken" never think that those 'breaks' work in their favor.

   3 years ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 0 NAY!

2. Algar
   

   Wow, the moderators removed my metoo warning about GG. Just know that it was credible enough for his own advisor to rebuke him in an open letter last year.
   http://www.macartan.nyc/comments/poor-allies/

   Which part of this post is about GG?

   3 years ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 0 NAY!

3. Delma
   

   Literally everyone feels this way; those at prestigious institutions just (necessarily, by virtue of being there) have had more experience with success. Its a hard emotion to fight because rejection triggers very personal feelings, and because most referee reports are so very poor and stupid in their actual written content, even when often reaching the correct conclusion.

   Some in the discipline just have this ridiculous sense of entitlement and privilege and think that the because they've "made it" -- or because they're at a prestigious institution -- that the rules of peer review somehow don't apply to them. When their papers get accepted, it's all because of their infinite talent and wisdom, but when the papers are rejected, it's because of flaws in the peer review process.

   3 years ago # QUOTE 3 YEA 0 NAY!

4. Delma
   

   I hadn't read this. Its a nice piece.

   Wow, the moderators removed my metoo warning about GG. Just know that it was credible enough for his own advisor to rebuke him in an open letter last year.
   http://www.macartan.nyc/comments/poor-allies/

   Which part of this post is about GG?

   3 years ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 1 NAY!

5. Veronique
   

   I hadn't read this. Its a nice piece.
   Wow, the moderators removed my metoo warning about GG. Just know that it was credible enough for his own advisor to rebuke him in an open letter last year.
   http://www.macartan.nyc/comments/poor-allies/
   Which part of this post is about GG?

   You do know there are real problems in the world— like opioid addiction and poverty, right ? Political scientists show just how far they have thier heads up thier own @##$# and how sheltered they are when you get to read a long peice about the injustices of having to view an all white/ male panel or when someone is rude to you in seminar. Oh the indignities!

   3 years ago # QUOTE 3 YEA 4 NAY!

6. Chance
   

   You do know there are real problems in the world— like opioid addiction and poverty, right ? Political scientists show just how far they have thier heads up thier own @##$# and how sheltered they are when you get to read a long peice about the injustices of having to view an all white/ male panel or when someone is rude to you in seminar. Oh the indignities!

   This is a non-sequitur, and a silly one at that. The existence of big problems in the world does not mean we should not also fix the small ones closer at hand. Especially when they are so easy to fix by not being a jerk.

   3 years ago # QUOTE 4 YEA 2 NAY!

7. Pelosi
   

   Which part of the letter is about GG?

   3 years ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY!

8. Kenton
   

   I hadn't read this. Its a nice piece.
   Wow, the moderators removed my metoo warning about GG. Just know that it was credible enough for his own advisor to rebuke him in an open letter last year.
   http://www.macartan.nyc/comments/poor-allies/
   Which part of this post is about GG?

   You do know there are real problems in the world— like opioid addiction and poverty, right ? Political scientists show just how far they have thier heads up thier own @##$# and how sheltered they are when you get to read a long peice about the injustices of having to view an all white/ male panel or when someone is rude to you in seminar. Oh the indignities!

   Whataboutism

   3 years ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY!

9. Kaycee
   

   This x 100

   Some in the discipline just have this ridiculous sense of entitlement and privilege and think that the because they've "made it" -- or because they're at a prestigious institution -- that the rules of peer review somehow don't apply to them. When their papers get accepted, it's all because of their infinite talent and wisdom, but when the papers are rejected, it's because of flaws in the peer review process.

   3 years ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY!

10. Sotomayor
    

    Wow, the moderators removed my metoo warning about GG. Just know that it was credible enough for his own advisor to rebuke him in an open letter last year.
    http://www.macartan.nyc/comments/poor-allies/

    The mods are still covering up what Guy did

    4 months ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 1 NAY!

Reply

Post

Markup: a blockquote code em strong ul ol li.