No, I won't read your amateur Covid-19 “research paper”

Re:No, I won't read your amateur Covid-19 “research paper” by bargl on Monday May 04, 2020 @12:19PM (#23069887)

So he didn't think he needed a disclaimer, had a discussion around it, then added a disclaimer. That's exactly what I want from another human being. Someone who is open minded enough to have a discussion, opinionated enough to back up what they think, but in the end plyable enough to make an important change when they see it.

I might suggest you edit your post to include a nod to his disclaimer, as you've shown now that you know about it but don't mention it in your article.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:No, I won't read your amateur Covid-19 “research paper” by ryanwaggoner on Monday May 04, 2020 @12:24PM (#23069961)

I didn't include mention of the disclaimer because it wasn't in place when I saw the article in question, and I didn't link to the article because I don't think it deserves any more visibility.

Also, just looking at the comments on the original article, I don't think the author is open-minded or pliable, but that's just my .02.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:No, I won't read your amateur Covid-19 “research paper” by bargl on Monday May 04, 2020 @12:30PM (#23070028)

But now you know, you could easily add an edit and an "This wasn't originally there but after being outted the author added it."

No I'm not saying link the paper, I was saying your HN link that's all.

[ Parent | on HN ]