fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 9 months agocheck it before you wreck itmander.xyzimagemessage-square44fedilinkarrow-up1915arrow-down117
arrow-up1898arrow-down1imagecheck it before you wreck itmander.xyzfossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 9 months agomessage-square44fedilink
minus-squareCornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11arrow-down3·edit-22 months agodeleted by creator
minus-squareAqarius@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·9 months agoI agree. Except for the “this paper will be sad if you don’t read it” one, that one’s on point.
minus-squareSeptimaeus@infosec.publinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·8 months agoI mean, we’re not talking about mutually exclusive properties. Whether a paper is more or less dry and whether it’s more or less accessible to newcomers is separate from the quality of the contribution. You can have both.
minus-squareCarbonBasedNPU@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3arrow-down1·9 months agoWhen a scientific paper has one of those titles I assume it is bullshit until proven otherwise. I can not trust a paper that does not even trust itself to stand on its own merits.
deleted by creator
I agree.
Except for the “this paper will be sad if you don’t read it” one, that one’s on point.
I mean, we’re not talking about mutually exclusive properties.
Whether a paper is more or less dry and whether it’s more or less accessible to newcomers is separate from the quality of the contribution.
You can have both.
When a scientific paper has one of those titles I assume it is bullshit until proven otherwise. I can not trust a paper that does not even trust itself to stand on its own merits.