Robert Service reports in Science:
Scientific controversies often sort themselves out as new data roll in. But a decade-old dispute in nanoscience shows no sign of letting up. Researchers on both sides are claiming that recently published papers settle the debate in their favor, while one is charging his opponents with resorting to an electronic bullying campaign.
Francesco Stellacci makes again very strong charges of bullying, mentioning my blog, Twitter, PubPeer:
“I have been subject to chemical cyberbullying,” Stellacci says. “I understand what kids that commit suicide go through.” Instead of engaging in such “unethical and unprofessional” conduct, he says, the skeptics should go through the normal channels of peer review and publish their data in journals so the scientific process can work through the issues.
I have disabled comments on this page to avoid duplication of threads: please comment on this article PubPeer page instead.