Zeitpunkt Nutzer Delta Tröts TNR Titel Version maxTL Sa 04.05.2024 00:00:09 61.806 0 3.339.819 54,0 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 Fr 03.05.2024 00:00:07 61.806 +1 3.337.826 54,0 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 Do 02.05.2024 00:00:08 61.805 -1 3.334.316 53,9 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 Mi 01.05.2024 00:00:21 61.806 +2 3.331.371 53,9 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 Di 30.04.2024 00:00:09 61.804 +2 3.328.863 53,9 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 Mo 29.04.2024 00:00:09 61.802 +1 3.325.581 53,8 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 So 28.04.2024 00:00:09 61.801 0 3.322.868 53,8 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 Sa 27.04.2024 00:00:08 61.801 +4 3.319.966 53,7 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 Fr 26.04.2024 00:00:09 61.797 +1 3.316.567 53,7 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500 Do 25.04.2024 00:00:08 61.796 0 3.313.320 53,6 Fosstodon 4.2.8 500
Mike Mahoney (@MikeMahoney218) · 10/2022 · Tröts: 1.513 · Folger: 919
Sa 04.05.2024 06:19
I made the mistake of reading comments on the orange site (about some AI tiff I don't care about) and this one actually made me close the tab
how dare you, the author of a paper, decide what information is relevant to your topic
> Whenever you cite papers just because you're "politically supposed to", even though you don't think it's really intellectually useful for anyone to be aware of the cited paper, you're making the citations less useful for everybody. The audacity of deciding on behalf of readers whether information is valuable to them when publishing an academic paper is quite an interesting concept to me. I'm not published in journals, but I do have a "professional" writing background. There's only a few ways I can imagine to read into your statement. Either you think you're above citation, or so much smarter than the reader you're qualified to decide on their behalf whether it's relevant, or simply hiding it for nefarious reasons.
[Öffentlich] Antw.: 0 Wtrl.: 0 Fav.: 0 · via Tusky