(and they emailed a lot of admins asking them to ban me!)
wow…
i wonder if they recognize this behaviour, caught after the USA election results came out (viewers discretion adviced) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxZix3EL1Ms&list=PL2DkrnovXSRNHHp1I6KLwsDCHVNZ-lEbl&index=1
i agree on being charitable. That’s the only mindset which overcomes the downward spiral of society giving up on society.
What is “ND expressions”? (im not being funny or something)
imo, it’s more stupid that there’s no mainstream news coverage about this ruling against FDA. i haven’t found a single site reporting about it. you?
Must be because of what i posted.
instead of the article being scrutenized (and educating people on how to detect pseudoscience) the post got removed.
At least i got a nice reply showing what was someone’s reason for doubting the scientific process of that publisher… before it got moderated.
Maybe it’s possible to use a flags of some sort, to indicate that, even though it’s a scientific publication and was peer reviewed, that this Lemmy community thinks it’s a bad piece. (but not by up/downvote as a downvote means it goes to the end of the pile, and the education effect is lost)
Like, i want to put this article under your attention, so that i get an idea of what others think about it https://bmjpublichealth.bmj.com/content/2/1/e000282 But i’m afraid to post it, because of the possible backlash(i.e. moderation and maybe banning?)
Thanks. yes i realized the last one, and know of his work.
Looking at the “method”, it doesn’t look like rocket-science. I’d like to know, is the publication itself a fraud or not?
Thanks for the tip.
The internet page says “Potential predatory scholarly open-access journals”
So i hope at least a few read the paper and assess their method
For those who want a summary in less technical terms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEgjuB-0bw8
The interview actually had much more interesting content…
It says the frontier models weren’t changed though… Do you think this introduction ending is incorrect?