this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2025
885 points (98.2% liked)

Science Memes

12503 readers
3442 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.

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.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
885
check it before you wreck it (mander.xyz)
submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

In what way?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I think they’re referring to the implicit exclusion, since it amounts to an “inside joke” which lends to cliquish social dynamics. Gatekeeping proper usually connotes more intentional and targeted action, but I think that’s what they mean. Personally I try to be more selective than I once was, when using references in groups, for that very reason.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Shaka, when the walls fell...

Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

OMG the perfect reference!

For those interested, there’s an episode of Star Trek the plot of which revolves around an extreme example of this style of high context communication.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago

Zinda. His face black, his eyes red.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Not everyone watches or even can watch the same media. It assumes a lot of commonality between the writer and the reader. Is some Indian researcher going to know about some joke from The Office?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Getting the joke is not necessary for understanding the article and even the title has the explanatory other half, right? The joke is just a bonus, not gatekeeping.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

If you dont understand the refrence you probably wont be able to tell if it's necessary for understanding the rest though. Sure youll understand the second line on its own but that doesn't necessarily mean the part you dont understand isn't important. For all the out of the loop reader knows, that's info is pertinent to the title too, how could they even evaluate if it is or isn't if they don't understand it. Less than half of English speakers had English as a first language, its still built up on needless pretense for the sake of what?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

It's just a bit of fun. Scientific papers are mostly read by people who are familiar with the way titles like this work. Also there's no need to understand the whole title perfectly, titles are not that important. It's more like an id number. You read the abstract to see whether you're interested in the article.