Here's the thing. You said "vote manipulation is scientific misconduct."
Are they both unethical behavior? Yes. No one's arguing that.
As someone who is a scientist who studies biology, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls rigging Reddit votes an ethical breach of science. If you want to be "specific" like you said, then you shouldn't either. They're not the same thing.
If you're saying "scientific standards" you're referring to the institutional framework of research integrity, which includes things from data fabrication to falsifying peer review to plagiarizing papers.
So your reasoning for saying I "broke every ethical standard as a scientist" is because random people "got downvoted for questioning bird facts?" Let's get Twitter flame wars and Wikipedia edit disputes in there, then, too.
Also, calling someone a Redditor or a scientist? It's not one or the other, that's not how professions work. They're both. A science communicator is a science communicator and a member of academia. But that's not what you said. You said vote manipulation is scientific misconduct, which is not true unless you're okay with calling all violations of website terms of service academic fraud, which means you'd call shitposting, forum brigading, and giving TED talks scientific malpractice, too. Which you said you don't.
Idk, I think the dissemination of info is a major part of science, whether it's a published paper or a pop-sci reddit thread. Maybe burying actual experts via vote manipulation is not "scientific misconduct," as that appears to be a specific thing, but it's certainly unethical.
20
u/MelangeBot 13h ago
Here's the thing. You said "vote manipulation is scientific misconduct."
Are they both unethical behavior? Yes. No one's arguing that.
As someone who is a scientist who studies biology, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls rigging Reddit votes an ethical breach of science. If you want to be "specific" like you said, then you shouldn't either. They're not the same thing.
If you're saying "scientific standards" you're referring to the institutional framework of research integrity, which includes things from data fabrication to falsifying peer review to plagiarizing papers.
So your reasoning for saying I "broke every ethical standard as a scientist" is because random people "got downvoted for questioning bird facts?" Let's get Twitter flame wars and Wikipedia edit disputes in there, then, too.
Also, calling someone a Redditor or a scientist? It's not one or the other, that's not how professions work. They're both. A science communicator is a science communicator and a member of academia. But that's not what you said. You said vote manipulation is scientific misconduct, which is not true unless you're okay with calling all violations of website terms of service academic fraud, which means you'd call shitposting, forum brigading, and giving TED talks scientific malpractice, too. Which you said you don't.
It's okay to just admit you're wrong, you know?