Oliver
@fromoliver.bsky.social
Optimistic catastrophist. Procrastivist. Research comms & impact. Writes books, takes photos. https://oliverfrancis.net/
Reposted by Oliver
Springer-Nature statement
“Whilst the details of peer review are confidential, we can confirm that the article underwent two rounds of review from two independent peer reviewers, supporting an accept decision.”
How am I now expected to believe that two people looked at the paper twice and DGAF?
“Whilst the details of peer review are confidential, we can confirm that the article underwent two rounds of review from two independent peer reviewers, supporting an accept decision.”
How am I now expected to believe that two people looked at the paper twice and DGAF?
Riding the Autism Bicycle to Retraction Town
Does anyone *really* know their Factor Fexcectorn?
nobreakthroughs.substack.com
November 28, 2025 at 1:36 PM
Springer-Nature statement
“Whilst the details of peer review are confidential, we can confirm that the article underwent two rounds of review from two independent peer reviewers, supporting an accept decision.”
How am I now expected to believe that two people looked at the paper twice and DGAF?
“Whilst the details of peer review are confidential, we can confirm that the article underwent two rounds of review from two independent peer reviewers, supporting an accept decision.”
How am I now expected to believe that two people looked at the paper twice and DGAF?
I bet the CMS they're having to use is really glitchy.
November 26, 2025 at 4:57 PM
I bet the CMS they're having to use is really glitchy.
Reposted by Oliver
The 80's were 20 years ago. Just like the 2000's were also 20 years ago. I don't see why this is so hard to understand.
November 25, 2025 at 4:51 AM
The 80's were 20 years ago. Just like the 2000's were also 20 years ago. I don't see why this is so hard to understand.
Don't have nightmares.
November 23, 2025 at 2:49 PM
Don't have nightmares.
Who is this even for?
November 22, 2025 at 1:22 PM
Who is this even for?