this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2025
812 points (98.4% liked)

Science Memes

20626 readers
1856 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Click here for our list of resources.



If you are here asking: "Is this a science meme?"

Probably, yes. We use the Dawkins definition of meme: a replicating idea, not just an image macro with a fact on it. A good post here doesn't need to teach you something. It needs to make you ask something: who, what, where, when, and especially why.

Science isn't a filing cabinet of facts, it's a conversation. For example, a photo of an eel or other localized wildlife counts because most people never see one, and wonder is the first step of inquiry. A car meme counts if it makes you curious about what's under the bonnet. If you want to talk about something you noticed in the world, chances are someone else wants to talk about it too.

We moderate for vibe, not category. Pruning is light, especially where a post creates interesting discussion. Experimenting is encouraged.

See the pinned paper on Shitposting as Public Pedagogy if you want the academic case for why this works.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 106 points 6 months ago (2 children)

You do need to do that though.

If someone wants to read further information they need the citations.

You are supposed to cite all your relevant previous works in each paper you publish.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 32 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

She probably did. But the reviewer won't know that as the paper (should) get anonymized before review. The author's own name will be censored all the way throughout the paper with certain publishers.

[–] trolske@feddit.org 13 points 6 months ago

Depending on field, double-blind reviews are rare. In ecology I had maybe one or two reviews in 5 years that were double-blinded, normally you see the author list as a reviewer

[–] fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I doubt that since the comment was a suggestion to read and cite herself. If she did cite herself the assumption would be that she did read the citations so the comment would be moot, no? Why would they suggest to cite herself if she already did?

They only anonymize the author, not the citations right?

Because the reviewer didn't actually read the paper

[–] PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk 17 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You are absolutely right, but how are you going to make a fire Twitter post if you can't engineer a situation like this? 🤔

[–] fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Fire twitter post that reads as incompetence to anyone who matters in their field... Yeah....

[–] PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk 6 points 6 months ago

I mean, I can't really talk, I'm still working away at undergrad level; and I've got all the social media clout of the average housebrick.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Or just a little fun.