You mention toxicity, and your conclusion is that overall scientists are a friendly bunch and that you can mostly stay out of trouble by avoiding certain topics. I'm not sure if that's coming from a privileged vantage point (which I share with you): middle-aged white males attract less toxicity than other groups who are disproportionally the target of toxicity, and different platforms care quite differently about this. So you could say that your use of Twitter/X is apolitical and non-toxic, but others will bear a higher cost for being there and/or missing out by not being there. So like many conferences and courses now have code of conducts to make sure everyone feels welcome, we should also consider if the spaces we use for professional communication are safe for everyone. (I have drawn my conclusions and recently deleted my Twitter account, which I've had since 2008.)
I don't disagree as such, but my point is "relatively speaking". I'm not talking about what I post on Twitter or CZcams, but rather what I see in general in my Twitter feed and the comments sections of CZcams channels I follow. Toxicity is certainly much less of an issue than if I make the mistake to venture outside the scientific community on those same platforms. That is why I argue that while toxicity is a huge issue on Twitter and CZcams more broadly, that is not representative for the bubble of scientists that I see (but as we have seen the past days, it is not always a safe space, also not for middle-aged white males).
Great post.
Thank you, glad you enjoyed it :-)
You mention toxicity, and your conclusion is that overall scientists are a friendly bunch and that you can mostly stay out of trouble by avoiding certain topics. I'm not sure if that's coming from a privileged vantage point (which I share with you): middle-aged white males attract less toxicity than other groups who are disproportionally the target of toxicity, and different platforms care quite differently about this. So you could say that your use of Twitter/X is apolitical and non-toxic, but others will bear a higher cost for being there and/or missing out by not being there. So like many conferences and courses now have code of conducts to make sure everyone feels welcome, we should also consider if the spaces we use for professional communication are safe for everyone. (I have drawn my conclusions and recently deleted my Twitter account, which I've had since 2008.)
I don't disagree as such, but my point is "relatively speaking". I'm not talking about what I post on Twitter or CZcams, but rather what I see in general in my Twitter feed and the comments sections of CZcams channels I follow. Toxicity is certainly much less of an issue than if I make the mistake to venture outside the scientific community on those same platforms. That is why I argue that while toxicity is a huge issue on Twitter and CZcams more broadly, that is not representative for the bubble of scientists that I see (but as we have seen the past days, it is not always a safe space, also not for middle-aged white males).