EvC Forum: Academic Freedom and Anonymous Peer Review

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Academic Freedom and Anonymous Peer Review

ringo

Member (Idle past 442 days)

Posts: 20940

From: frozen wasteland

Joined: 03-23-2005

Normal Thread Display

Message 6 of 18 (745391)
12-22-2014 12:08 PM

Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
12-21-2014 7:47 PM

RAZD writes:

... we’re going to court to defend the First Amendment right to anonymity.

*alarm bells* The First Amendment is an American institution. Science is not.

Even if it is necessary sometimes to protect people from persecution for their political opinions, it should not be necessary. Personally, I stand by my vote; I will tell anybody whom I vote for and why.

The same ought to apply in science. If you have criticism of a scientific paper, you ought to stand by your criticism.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 1 by RAZD, posted 12-21-2014 7:47 PM		RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 9 by NoNukes, posted 12-22-2014 2:50 PM		ringo has replied

ringo

Member (Idle past 442 days)

Posts: 20940

From: frozen wasteland

Joined: 03-23-2005

Normal Thread Display

Message 11 of 18 (745479)
12-23-2014 10:50 AM

Reply to: Message 9 by NoNukes
12-22-2014 2:50 PM

NoNukes writes:

I will note that the majority of the people here don't give out their names regardless of how strongly the hold onto their opinions.

That's a different issue. What we say here has a bigger (potential) audience than Oprah. If I wasn't anonymous here, any loonie out there could come knocking on my door. (In fact, I have met two people on two different forums whom I deduce live very close to me.)

What I am saying is that I will stand by my views to your face, or anybody else's. If you want to sneak around behind my back, I can't stop you.

NoNukes writes:

In any event, the issue is not whether peer review in general ought to be changed, but whether a court can force an anonymous review site to give up names because someone has gotten bad reviews that they claim are defamatory.

That's the specific example given but the topic seems to be about the broader principle of openness in peer review.

NoNukes writes:

In an ideal world, speech would battle more speech. But in the world we live in, sometimes free speech without anonymity is essentially impossible.

The only way to move toward an ideal world is to take a step forward, even if it means taking a risk.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 9 by NoNukes, posted 12-22-2014 2:50 PM		NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 12 by NoNukes, posted 12-23-2014 7:48 PM		ringo has replied

ringo

Member (Idle past 442 days)

Posts: 20940

From: frozen wasteland

Joined: 03-23-2005

Normal Thread Display

Message 13 of 18 (745559)
12-24-2014 10:54 AM

Reply to: Message 12 by NoNukes
12-23-2014 7:48 PM

NoNukes writes:

But more to the point, if you were liable of being sued for your opinions, I suspect that you'd be more circumspect about what you say.

I'm always circumspect about what I say. I don't fear lawsuits for anything I've said either openly or anonymously.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 12 by NoNukes, posted 12-23-2014 7:48 PM		NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

2 online now:	Pollux, Theodoric
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1