Comments should be always be taken in context and actions like this should be taken according to some standard of due process, rather than rushed to keep pace with the half-life of twitter hashtags.
P
Peter Sandin
11 years ago
Can we stop judging people on rumours, and start judging them on facts and things in context.
Stop this modern day witch hunt.
Reinstate Tim Hunt and show some character.
A
Anonymous
11 years ago
Regardless of whether it was a joke or not, the social groups that forced Tim Hunt's resignation are acting in a manner that is contrary to freedom of speech. Furthermore, while I cannot condone the comment, it has clearly been taken out of context. I'd like to finish by saying that Sir Tim Hunt's contributions to human advancement throughout his career clearly outweigh any harm or offence that may have been caused by one daft comment.
J
Jay
11 years ago
Reinstate the valuable professor and sack the useless idiot professional offendee.
R
Rubi P
11 years ago
This is an injustice.
A
Anonymous Academic
11 years ago
Let's have a closer look at Connie St Louis's official publications webpage at City University London.
http://www.city.ac.uk/people/academics/connie-st-louis#profile=1
As pointed out by this Daily Mail report, the two BMJ articles are actually the same paper. Furthermore, the full pdf file of this "journal article" available at the following address shows that it has only two and half pages (including references).
http://healthmap.chip.org/documents/BMJ_Twitter_May2012.pdf
BMJ's online archive shows that this journal article is not regarded as a research paper. All research papers would have appeared in the "Research" section, but this article is placed in the "Features" section and its content is something that one expects to read in a newspaper or magazine. It is very questionable to call such a piece of writing (similar to those in "News" and "Letters" etc.) an academic journal article.
http://www.bmj.com/archive/online/2012/05-14
Comparing BMJ's online archive and its print archive in May 2012 suggests that this "journal article" is published not in the printed issues of BMJ, but online only.
http://www.bmj.com/archive/print/2012
The other so-called "journal article" was published on WI-2011 which is a conference. So it can only be categorized as a conference paper but not a journal article. Everyone who has ever been in the academia knows that it is unacceptable to claim a conference paper as a journal paper. Furthermore, the full pdf file of this "journal article" available at the following address shows that it is a 4-page short paper but not an 8-page regular one.
http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/1634/1/wi2011%20Twitter%20Short%20Paper%20-%20final%20CR.pdf
Are those "three" "journal articles" her only research output in the past years?
I hope that this post can be brought to the attention of genuine journalists for further investigation, so please share/retweet it to spread the message out.
A
Alex Ward Robinson
11 years ago
Guys let's be serious. I have read Tim Hunt's comments and it is obvious it was a joke, maybe not a hilarious one but it was not malicious. The real joke here is that he had to resign over this. Reinstate him and tell everyone to behave themselves. I am generally ashamed that this has been allowed to happen because of a few stupid journalists posting something out of context. I think his views on working in science are interesting and if you don't agree you can fuck off.
T
Tessa Horan
11 years ago
they must re-insate Tim Hunt and apologies public ally for the damage done to his reputation, especially that woman who started it all.
D
David Brightly
11 years ago
Not the way to treat an esteemed colleague. The UCL officials responsible should be ashamed of themselves and should consider their own positions.
B
Barbara Alexander
11 years ago
I worked with him and he is a genuine lovely gentle man.
B
bulletbites
11 years ago
victim to feminism retardedness, get those that helped boot him in the first place replace instead because they can be easily swayed which is bad for science
C
Catherine mccall
11 years ago
read this and you will have not doubt
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3141158/A-flawed-accuser-Investigation-academic-hounded-Nobel-Prize-winning-scientist-job-reveals-troubling-questions-testimony.html
J
John Lidstone
11 years ago
It is an absolute disgrace to sack a man for a perfectly harmless jocular comment. This really is PC gone mad.
M
Margaret Lidstone
11 years ago
Pc brigade as always ott. I am ashamed of my so called sisters
E
Elise Histed
11 years ago
I'm tired of people's comments being taken out of context and used to vilify them without proper investigation. This is not science! Bring him back please.
C
C Buckley
11 years ago
Political correctness gone mad...
R
Robert Covington
11 years ago
He deserves his job, or a better one, back. He told his truth based on personal experience, and what he said was then purposely taken out of context, and quoted to purposely ignore his obvious higher intentions.
A
Anonymous
11 years ago
ff
M
Mike Vicary
11 years ago
I especially despise that former seat of learning, UCL.
G
Giusse Walker
11 years ago
First they came for the blacks, then they came for the asians, then they came for the spix and the wasps and nobody was left to defend them but a homogeneous angry mob.
Comments should be always be taken in context and actions like this should be taken according to some standard of due process, rather than rushed to keep pace with the half-life of twitter hashtags.
Can we stop judging people on rumours, and start judging them on facts and things in context. Stop this modern day witch hunt. Reinstate Tim Hunt and show some character.
Regardless of whether it was a joke or not, the social groups that forced Tim Hunt's resignation are acting in a manner that is contrary to freedom of speech. Furthermore, while I cannot condone the comment, it has clearly been taken out of context. I'd like to finish by saying that Sir Tim Hunt's contributions to human advancement throughout his career clearly outweigh any harm or offence that may have been caused by one daft comment.
Reinstate the valuable professor and sack the useless idiot professional offendee.
This is an injustice.
Let's have a closer look at Connie St Louis's official publications webpage at City University London. http://www.city.ac.uk/people/academics/connie-st-louis#profile=1 As pointed out by this Daily Mail report, the two BMJ articles are actually the same paper. Furthermore, the full pdf file of this "journal article" available at the following address shows that it has only two and half pages (including references). http://healthmap.chip.org/documents/BMJ_Twitter_May2012.pdf BMJ's online archive shows that this journal article is not regarded as a research paper. All research papers would have appeared in the "Research" section, but this article is placed in the "Features" section and its content is something that one expects to read in a newspaper or magazine. It is very questionable to call such a piece of writing (similar to those in "News" and "Letters" etc.) an academic journal article. http://www.bmj.com/archive/online/2012/05-14 Comparing BMJ's online archive and its print archive in May 2012 suggests that this "journal article" is published not in the printed issues of BMJ, but online only. http://www.bmj.com/archive/print/2012 The other so-called "journal article" was published on WI-2011 which is a conference. So it can only be categorized as a conference paper but not a journal article. Everyone who has ever been in the academia knows that it is unacceptable to claim a conference paper as a journal paper. Furthermore, the full pdf file of this "journal article" available at the following address shows that it is a 4-page short paper but not an 8-page regular one. http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/1634/1/wi2011%20Twitter%20Short%20Paper%20-%20final%20CR.pdf Are those "three" "journal articles" her only research output in the past years? I hope that this post can be brought to the attention of genuine journalists for further investigation, so please share/retweet it to spread the message out.
Guys let's be serious. I have read Tim Hunt's comments and it is obvious it was a joke, maybe not a hilarious one but it was not malicious. The real joke here is that he had to resign over this. Reinstate him and tell everyone to behave themselves. I am generally ashamed that this has been allowed to happen because of a few stupid journalists posting something out of context. I think his views on working in science are interesting and if you don't agree you can fuck off.
they must re-insate Tim Hunt and apologies public ally for the damage done to his reputation, especially that woman who started it all.
Not the way to treat an esteemed colleague. The UCL officials responsible should be ashamed of themselves and should consider their own positions.
I worked with him and he is a genuine lovely gentle man.
victim to feminism retardedness, get those that helped boot him in the first place replace instead because they can be easily swayed which is bad for science
read this and you will have not doubt http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3141158/A-flawed-accuser-Investigation-academic-hounded-Nobel-Prize-winning-scientist-job-reveals-troubling-questions-testimony.html
It is an absolute disgrace to sack a man for a perfectly harmless jocular comment. This really is PC gone mad.
Pc brigade as always ott. I am ashamed of my so called sisters
I'm tired of people's comments being taken out of context and used to vilify them without proper investigation. This is not science! Bring him back please.
Political correctness gone mad...
He deserves his job, or a better one, back. He told his truth based on personal experience, and what he said was then purposely taken out of context, and quoted to purposely ignore his obvious higher intentions.
ff
I especially despise that former seat of learning, UCL.
First they came for the blacks, then they came for the asians, then they came for the spix and the wasps and nobody was left to defend them but a homogeneous angry mob.