-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
R1: conclusions are obvious #42
Comments
The comment notes:
I agree that the lack of diversity has been readily apparent for some time. I curated the list of honorees in 2018 and have shared the issues with ISCB board of directors members for some time. I did not observe any changes for 2019 despite these private attempts to influence diversity. Since our paper was released ISCB has released the 2020 set of fellows: The Award Winners also seem more diverse than past years: https://www.iscb.org/iscb-news-items/4249-2020-feb14-iscb-congratulates-2020-award-winners I suspect that the need for the paper is to provide rigorous analysis in a public setting to back up what has been apparent to anyone who cared for some time: namely that the primary society that aims to represent us as computational biologists needs to do better. Now that this paper exists, changes have begun to appear. |
The upcoming analysis of affiliations from @trang1618 and @dhimmel will help to address the other points related to geographic disparities. |
Would it be okay with you if I paraphrased what you said here for the response to reviewers? |
Sounds good to me! |
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: