This website contains age-restricted materials including nudity and explicit depictions of sexual activity.
By entering, you affirm that you are at least 18 years of age or the age of majority in the jurisdiction you are accessing the website from and you consent to viewing sexually explicit content.
I don’t see this as rotten behaviour at all, I see it as a Bobby tables moment teaching an organisation relying on a technology that they better have a their ducks in a row.
It’s still extremely shitty unethical behavior in my book since the negative impact is not felt by the organization that’s failing to validate their inputs, but your peers who are potentially being screwed out of a review process and a spot in a journal or conference
Absolutely. If they don’t care to actually read the texts, they have to accept the risks of not reading it.
Por qué no los dos?
It’s an XKCD comic.
They didn’t ask what the comic was, they asked “but why not both?”. It can be both unethical and a lesson