Guillaume Dumas @introspection@scholar.social

It’s not data ethics, it’s ethics.

It’s not data privacy, it’s privacy.

It’s not digital rights, it’s human rights in the digital/networked age.

Let’s make sure we keep the focus on what’s important and not allow well-understood terms, concepts, and existing rights to be redefined by those with vested interests in clouding* the conversation and eroding our human rights by backdooring in a new set of lesser rights for the digital/networked aspects of our selves.

* See what I did there? 😛

* Done quickly
* Done correctly
* Interesting result

Choose two

@introspection As for being "neutral," depending on what you mean by that, https://scholar.social isn't planning to be that either

We are explicitly anti-Nazi, anti-homophobia, anti-transphobia, anti-sexism and anti-racism

We are explicitly pro-inclusion and pro-accesibility

We ban people for harassment

We take sides, because failure to do so suggests a moral equivalence that undermines academic freedom itself

So we are not "neutral" in that sense

@introspection At the moment, it's being paid for out of my own pocket, because it's not too much

I'm looking into ways for people to chip in because costs are rising, but it's not a big crisis as the server's been paid for, a year in advance now (it's cheaper that way!)

As for Elsevier, I will burn Scholar Social to the ground before I let their former-arms-dealer hands touch my users' data

As for a business model, Scholar Social isn't a business!