This is fantastic. Imagine having to cite "Anonymous user on 4chan" on your paper. I'd probably just do it for the novelty (who else can say they have a more unusual source??)
I guess we cite the poster's hash and timestamp?
Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
11–20 of 205 posts
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#12This is fantastic. Imagine having to cite "Anonymous user on 4chan" on your paper. I'd probably just do it for the novelty (who else can say they have a more unusual source??)
Ethically do you even have to cite something properly when the person who solved it was intentionally anonymous? If the concern is that people will think the person writing solved it, they can just write a sentence where it came from.
> Ethically do you even have to cite something properly when the person who solved it was intentionally anonymous?
Yes. Not because they need/want the credit, but because it's important to note that it's not your idea.
> If the concern is that people will think the person writing solved it, they can just write a sentence where it came from.
That is, basically, what a citation is.
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#13An "academically correct" solution (i.e., not to taint the prestige of a scholar who cites the solution) would be to cite a real, proxy scholar who checks the solution, but gives all credit to the anonymous 4chan user. Scientists often abhor citing from blogs, forums, and Wikipedia, as those publications "are not peer-reviewed by trustworthy professionals".
>Scientists often abhor citing from blogs, forums, and Wikipedia, as those publications "are not peer-reviewed by trustworthy professionals".
Academia. And even that is error prone due to bias.
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#14This tweet is misleadingly worded. The solution was not posted on 4chan, but rather by an anonymous user on a “wiki mainly devoted to anime” as the original tweet quoted by this tweet makes clear.
The original tweet is somewhat confused though too because the linked wiki is an archive/summary of a thread on /sci/ which is one of the 4chan message boards. It's copied there because of the ephemeral nature of posts on the actual boards so you can't provide a permanent link, thus linking to the next best source seems the best choice.
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#15An "academically correct" solution (i.e., not to taint the prestige of a scholar who cites the solution) would be to cite a real, proxy scholar who checks the solution, but gives all credit to the anonymous 4chan user. Scientists often abhor citing from blogs, forums, and Wikipedia, as those publications "are not peer-reviewed by trustworthy professionals".
There is precedent for this solution: https://academic.oup.com/biomet/article-abstract/76/1/183/22...
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ethically do you even have to cite something properly when the person who solved it was intentionally anonymous? If the concern is that people will think the person writing solved it, they can just write a sentence where it came from.
> Ethically do you even have to cite something properly when the person who solved it was intentionally anonymous? Yes. Not because they need/want the credit, but because it's important to note that it's not your idea. > If the concern is that people will think the person writing solved it, they can just write a sentence where it came from. That is, basically, what a citation is.
Who can proof that it isn't your idea?
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#17This is fantastic. Imagine having to cite "Anonymous user on 4chan" on your paper. I'd probably just do it for the novelty (who else can say they have a more unusual source??)
Ethically do you even have to cite something properly when the person who solved it was intentionally anonymous? If the concern is that people will think the person writing solved it, they can just write a sentence where it came from.
Academia has no problem with pseudonymous publication. See "Student" of "Student's T distribution" fame. [1]
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ethically do you even have to cite something properly when the person who solved it was intentionally anonymous? If the concern is that people will think the person writing solved it, they can just write a sentence where it came from.
> Ethically do you even have to cite something properly when the person who solved it was intentionally anonymous? Yes. Not because they need/want the credit, but because it's important to note that it's not your idea. > If the concern is that people will think the person writing solved it, they can just write a sentence where it came from. That is, basically, what a citation is.
Not to mention that a citation is there not only to show the world whose content you are referencing, but also because in case the reader doesn't believe you and wants to go check, they can do so by following the citation
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#19This is fantastic. Imagine having to cite "Anonymous user on 4chan" on your paper. I'd probably just do it for the novelty (who else can say they have a more unusual source??)
I guess we cite the poster's hash and timestamp?
You'd need a link for people to see the original content too so you'd want to include a link to one of the archive sites I guess (as a second best source for an ephemeral post). It's odd but there are citation patterns for websites, wonder if they include a standard for including archives of sources not available at time of writing.
Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ethically do you even have to cite something properly when the person who solved it was intentionally anonymous? Yes. Not because they need/want the credit, but because it's important to note that it's not your idea. > If the concern is that people will think the person writing solved it, they can just write a sentence where it came from. That is, basically, what a citation is.
Who can proof that it isn't your idea?
Intentional academic dishonesty is an entirely separate issue. If you're going to plagiarize, it doesn't really matter if there's a formal way of citing the material you don't plan to cite.