There's a certain poetry to the narrative.

1. a group of ideologues submit a terrible paper about how science is too woke

2. it gets rejected because it is crap

3. they feel feel horribly aggrieved because surely they are entitled to publish this shit where ever they choose

4. these subaltern voices—silenced victims of cancel culture—air their grievances in the NY TImes, WSJ, etc

5. the whole episode disproves their thesis. In science, if not op-ed pages, quality clearly still matters

Meanwhile, I had to send a version of the timeless James Bailey letter to my coauthor Jevin D. West—who is, for the avoidance of any doubt, not an author on the paper.

(For those of you who don't know the James Bailey letter, it's worth two minutes to read the story: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cleveland-browns-letters/)

FACT CHECK: Letter Exchange Between Law Firm and Cleveland Browns

A lawyer received a caustic response after complaining to the Cleveland Browns about fans' throwing paper airplanes during home games.

Snopes
I do love how, even with 29 authors on the paper, they still mangled the first sentence into saying what is true (we live in an untrustworthy time) instead of what they meant (we live in the best of times.).

@ct_bergstrom

So, this paper turns out to be too stupid for even HackerNews (news.ycombinator.com), one of my favorite sources of infuriatingly bad takes, to have cared, despite being submitted twice. But I did like this conversation about an article in the 2021 edition of this "illustrious" journal: