Pamela Oliver

I had my old number memorized from having recited it over the phone and typed it into online boxes so many times. But not the new one.

Money Doesn't Buy Elections. It Does Something Worse. Campaign ads barely move the needle. The real influence is hiding in plain sight.

Study after study shows campaign ads barely move the needle. So where does money’s real power come from? I ranked the five ways money corrupts politics—from least to most corrosive. What I’ve learned from 15 years of tracking political money:

I've been avoiding LLMs (AKA "AI") on principle, but I agree that routine clerical tasks like this are a legitimate use case. But if you/I knew how to run a web-scraping program that would also work, right? Or is the AI giving you (or using) the code to do that?

It is a good book! Well deserved.

I am so sorry you have to deal with this kind of thing and think it is helpful to let other people know the kind of stuff people of color in the public eye have to deal with.

There is an underlying principle that those who are privileged will use their privilege to do their best to game whatever system gets set up. Which is not to deny your concern about deflecting from the most urgent problem of the day.

Great news!

FWIW the "other" UW (Wisconsin) is also in a state with very strong open records laws, and that kind of request is often made (has often been made) over the decades to harass professors. We have an entire office with staff who do nothing but respond to those requests.

2+7= _ I caNnot aNswer this qwestion, as it is agaiNst My reLigious principles. ٠١٨٨ IT'S WORTH A SHOT. aMI, 7 january 1986 NAITION

Has this been posted yet

It is hard to make the time but I've developed the theory that it can be good to self-publish descriptive material that you know is too detailed and just descriptive to ever be an article.

Can't dispute climate concerns, but specialized conferences are often a wonderful place to meet people and get a major infusion of knowledge about what is going on in a field, even if your own talk is short. Of course it can be a bust if the other talks are bad and you don't meet anyone.

In light of record submission rates and a large volume of AI-generated slop, SocArXiv recently implemented a policy requiring ORCIDs linked in the OSF profile of submitting authors, and narrowing our focus to social science subjects. Today we are taking two more steps:
/1

is your database public?

I don't really know but from my vantage, once you saw references to "BIPOC people" you could see the end coming. The original was trying to acknowledge the distinct experiences of Black and Indigenous and other people of color, not lump people into some sort of super-category.

If you are going to advocate, please consider asking for work on the Black movement AFTER 1965. My own efforts to characterize the 1990s and 2000s using newspaper data are just a minor beginning. But a lot of "history" happened between 1965 and the 2014 rise of Black Lives Matter.

I recently fought with a guy who wanted me to stay away from the cable machine while he LEFT IT to go rest in another part of the gym. I told him if he wanted to hog the machine he had to at least stay there at the machine. He was mad.

As I said the last time he brought this up, my gym used to have "do not rest on the equipment" signs posted on every machine. They've been gone since COVID.

Thanks for the information. It does sound like a mess.

That was what I found when I started digging into imprisonment statistics.

So we've already established that we agree about giving credit, but note that academics put their names on their manuscripts & publications. School photographers sometimes embed their credit right in the pictures. Some standard technology for embedding credit in the photo would really help.

ugh

Yup. Not disagreeing that moral people should do the work to give credit. Just saying that figuring out how to make credit-giving more automatic would be more effective perhaps by demanding that "free" sites change file naming conventions and/or embedding credit in the image itself.

Not to be excessively argumentative, but when I post my own work on the Internet, my name is part of the filename.

Sure. And also if that were part of the filename in the first place it would be that much more likely that the photographer would get credited by anyone who used the file, right? These days journal article downloads are finally having long filenames like that.

And I said that if the editor didn't trust the initial positive reviewers they should tell the author that the revised MS would go to new reviewers. In sociology we were having a problem with editors repeatedly adding new reviewers. Some papers had 10-12 reviews from one journal. It was bad.

The editor in the OP discounted the 2 positive reviews, discounted the satisfaction of the previously-negative reviewer who said they were now satisfied, and rejected on the basis of review #4, which was 1 negative out of 4. Genuinely curious about how you could possibly defend that.

Nothing coming to mind. I have seen at least drafts of papers with these as the dependent variables (but didn't save the citations, sorry). Any study of the effect of the statements would have to control for the conditions under which the statements get issued, i.e., when the movement is popular.

I'm old enough to remember when my high school banned discussion of UN Day because the United Nations was "too controversial." I was also subjected to anti-Communism curricula. That is, conservatives have long banned the speech they disagree with. (Knowing you don't disagree.)

Yup. Common practice. I'm recalling an early-1970s panel on abortion that included only male panelists.

I think excluding original positive reviewers & adding a new reviewer is bad editor practice. If editor wanted to scuttle the paper they should have done it in the first place. If they had reservations or planned an additional reviewer, they should have told the authors in the 1st decision letter.