Sumocat

“Pittman also argued that the defense lawyers would be outraged if prosecutors were to wear shirts that showed pro-ICE or pro-Trump imagery in front of a jury.” — No, they wouldn’t. It would serve the same purpose of showing them the jurors to keep or strike.

Yes. Puerto Rico is a U.S. territory, so any P.R. citizen born there are natural born U.S. citizens, and residency there counts toward the residency requirement.

It’s been a permanent day of recognition in California since 2010 with or without the governor’s proclamation.

“His friends and high school teacher worry they're partly to blame.” — They shouldn’t worry; they should accept that they are partly to blame.

“…now he's being a racist.” — Now? FFS.

Yep, I tracked it back to that correspondence too. Key word there is “correspondence.” It’s not a complete research article, just a single report.

“…plans in early 2024 to scan “all the books in the world” to teach their AI tool “how to write well”.“ — That’s like teaching a writing course by only reading.

The Statue of Liberty is French.

I know of several journals, such as this one… ONCOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND TRANSPLANTOLOGY https://www.onmtjournal.org/home/peer-review-policy

I know this because I work for two single-blind peer-review journals, and we’ve received submissions formatted for double-blind review. We don’t bother because, like your field, ours is narrow, but there’s a lot of research, and we can’t publish all of it.

In single-blind peer review, it’s just the reviewer. In double-blind, it’s both reviewer and author(s) with different levels of author blinding. Double-blind arguably reduces reviewer bias, but depending on the field and subject matter, once an author is recognizable, double-blinding doesn’t truly mask them.

Yes, it should look the same, and some journals go as far as redacting the references on the review copy entirely, so they all look exactly the same. That said, if an author is prestigious enough to be known, they need to do more than that to mask their identity. Writing styles and subject matter can give away an author’s identify even if blinded.

Double-blind review masks the author’s identity, including self-citations that would identify the author. The author may have done this too effectively, and/or the reviewer was not as familiar with the author’s work as the critique would imply.