Code of conduct

The MIG journal club is a place to read carefully and disagree well. These expectations apply to meetings, to this repository, and to anything published here.

Expected behaviour

• Criticise work, not people. “This design cannot separate cells from donors” is useful. “The authors clearly don’t understand single-cell data” is not.
• Assume good faith. Papers are written under constraints we cannot see, by people who are not present to reply.
• Make space. Journal clubs are dominated by whoever is most confident. Presenters and chairs should actively invite quieter attendees in.
• Ask the naive question. If you are lost, others are too, and saying so improves the discussion for everyone.

Publication and attribution

Meetings are reported and published on this public site. Because of that:

• Reports name the presenter, and may name people who proposed follow-up reading. Discussion points are otherwise attributed impersonally.
• You can ask not to be named. Tell the organisers, before or after the meeting, and we will remove the attribution. No reason needed.
• Criticism published here is directed at the work. Before a report is merged it is reviewed by someone other than its author, partly to check this.

See contributing for the full reporting process.

Unacceptable behaviour

Harassment, discrimination, personal attacks, and dismissive remarks about someone’s background or level of experience are not tolerated, in meetings or in this repository.

Reporting

Raise a concern with the journal club organisers directly. Anything involving the conduct of an organiser can be taken to the University of Melbourne’s staff complaint channels.