I also believe what they did was justified. They did actual science and revealed that a number of publishers within this field demonstrate such a strong preference for virtue-signaling papers that they have lowered the bar for critical thought in both content and review.
One of the honeypot papers won an award. That shows you how obvious the publisher bias is, and how obvious it must have been to these people before they decided to do something about it.
Not only did these individuals risk their careers to help save a dying system with this project, they held themselves to a pretty high standard of execution.
We place lots of limits on the amount of heroism individuals are allowed to display, and I think that’s mostly beneficial - but sometimes we need heroes.
One of the honeypot papers won an award. That shows you how obvious the publisher bias is, and how obvious it must have been to these people before they decided to do something about it.
Not only did these individuals risk their careers to help save a dying system with this project, they held themselves to a pretty high standard of execution.
We place lots of limits on the amount of heroism individuals are allowed to display, and I think that’s mostly beneficial - but sometimes we need heroes.