The reason for the decline in forum membership - anyone?

[Quantum Quack]

You mean the entirety of my argument? I mean, you know what you do here. Unless you're completely deluded, you know full well that you debate dishonestly and that your posts are absolute nonsense. I assume that the feigning of expertise is what makes this whole exercise enjoyable for you, that you like to pretend those who disagree with you simply aren't as intelligent or progressive as you are. What else drives someone who posts like that? Look at Reiku with his open plagiarism. He must know that people are going to catch on, yet he does it anyway. Same goes for his inane physics posts, which aren't much beyond grade-school level, according to the resident physicists.

In other words, you shouldn't have to rely on me to tell you that, you should already know.

No you keep telling us that the truth is, Reiku has resurfaced as a sock puppet.... and you expect the board to simply take your word for it...

You feel I debate dishonestly? yes?
any evidence to support that?
seriously I would like to know why you feel that way....how about an amnesty and you can put it all on the table, you know spit it all out and get it out of your system.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Here's an idea: why not read what they say? The answer to your question is in there. They are available in an announcement posted at the top of every subforum.

I'll rephrase the question:
Is the spirit of the rules at the discretion of the moderators.

 

[Quantum Quack]

The reason I put up the awards in cash is to indicate that the problems faced by this forum are serious.

If debate or refutation can not be entertained properly then discussion is not possible.

On both occassions
re:
"The photon challenge ~$500usd" and the current "Universal frame of reference being zero for all mathematics~ max $300 usd - charity", I and others have yet to see proper arguement to refute any of the contentions yet unsupported claims of illogicality or sheer calls to authority is all that is possible. Take their word for it is all I am asked to do... bah! That is not science, and you all know it.

So to make the situation quite clear the awards have been offered.

If as claimed by the posters my contentions are invalid then they need to be supported properly with real and solid debate, other wise the contentions remain unchallenged.
The rather intiguing thing about this is that in the 6 years that the photon challenge has been offered at all the various forums online, no one actually wants the money now can you explain that?
Supposed to be easy money but I guess everyone knows that the logic is perfectly sound...but can not for various reasons admit to such a thing....yes?

 

[Trippy]

I'll rephrase the question:
Is the spirit of the rules at the discretion of the moderators.

In a sense, absolutely, as are the rules themselves.

The rules are agreed upon by the moderators and the site admin, and rooted in their understanding of the desires of the site owners.

 

[Balerion]

No you keep telling us that the truth is, Reiku has resurfaced as a sock puppet.... and you expect the board to simply take your word for it...

You feel I debate dishonestly? yes?
any evidence to support that?
seriously I would like to know why you feel that way....how about an amnesty and you can put it all on the table, you know spit it all out and get it out of your system.

As I've already pointed out, go look at his posts in the Physics subfora. Look at his posts here. It's exactly the same as Reiku's posting style. I'm not the only one who has picked up on this, mind you. Go read that other forum, you'll see. People know who he is. I have no idea why James allows him to go on as this sock puppet, but he's struck deals with Reiku before, I can only assume the same is true here.

 

[James R]

No deals have been struck.

Aethelwulf does not share an exact IP address with Reiku. There are, however, some IP indicators that suggest that Aethelwulf is Reiku. Other evidence is at present circumstantial.

I am 95% convinced that Aethelwulf = Reiku. When this is verified beyond reasonable doubt, Aethelwulf will be banned and all his posts deleted from sciforums.

The reason this poster is not already banned is due to something known as procedural fairness (also natural justice or procedural fairness).

 

[Quantum Quack]

As I've already pointed out, go look at his posts in the Physics subfora. Look at his posts here. It's exactly the same as Reiku's posting style. I'm not the only one who has picked up on this, mind you. Go read that other forum, you'll see. People know who he is. I have no idea why James allows him to go on as this sock puppet, but he's struck deals with Reiku before, I can only assume the same is true here.

OH I already know you are not the only one...but heresay is not evidence, normally... so why do you expect the board to simply take anyones word for it?
I have "talked" to Reiku on many different occassions around the net over the years and I find it puzzling how you can draw the conclusion that you are....The gramma is more refined, the use of language is definitely different and I might add the general style or signature of his writing is very different as well...His maths is also more complex and use of tex much superior to last I saw his work.
ALso Reiku had a fixation on Luxen hypothesis, trachions and other ideas...

Has Aethelwulf mentioned the Luxen hypothesis? yet? or Harry Zeigler of 1905/7

 

[Quantum Quack]

No deals have been struck.

Aethelwulf does not share an exact IP address with Reiku. There are, however, some IP indicators that suggest that Aethelwulf is Reiku. Other evidence is at present circumstantial.

I am 95% convinced that Aethelwulf = Reiku. When this is verified beyond reasonable doubt, Aethelwulf will be banned and all his posts deleted from sciforums.

The reason this poster is not already banned is due to something known as procedural fairness (also natural justice or procedural fairness).

JamesR I have total confidence what ever decision you make will be the right decision to make...

 

[Balerion]

No deals have been struck.

Okay, it's just that you've allowed him back following perma-bans before on the condition that he behave a certain way.

Aethelwulf does not share an exact IP address with Reiku.

Would you expect it to be? If I powered off my router and turned it back on, I would also be posting from an IP that is not exactly the same as my current IP.

There are, however, some IP indicators that suggest that Aethelwulf is Reiku. Other evidence is at present circumstantial.

Circumstantial evidence can be just as strong as direct evidence.

I am 95% convinced that Aethelwulf = Reiku. When this is verified beyond reasonable doubt, Aethelwulf will be banned and all his posts deleted from sciforums.

If you aren't already convinced that they are the same poster after his identical posting habits in the Physics forum, as well as the ease with which he fell back into his old routine with AlphaNumeric (not to mention the fact that their latest argument is like a cut-and-paste of his previous arguments with AN as Reiku) then I can't imagine a scenario in which you ever will be. It seems like you're setting the standards absurdly high.

The reason this poster is not already banned is due to something known as procedural fairness (also natural justice or procedural fairness).

Oh please. Everyone who dealt with Reiku recognized him immediately. You know it's him, and you owe him nothing.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Okay, it's just that you've allowed him back following perma-bans before on the condition that he behave a certain way.



Would you expect it to be? If I powered off my router and turned it back on, I would also be posting from an IP that is not exactly the same as my current IP.



Circumstantial evidence can be just as strong as direct evidence.



If you aren't already convinced that they are the same poster after his identical posting habits in the Physics forum, as well as the ease with which he fell back into his old routine with AlphaNumeric (not to mention the fact that their latest argument is like a cut-and-paste of his previous arguments with AN as Reiku) then I can't imagine a scenario in which you ever will be. It seems like you're setting the standards absurdly high.



Oh please. Everyone who dealt with Reiku recognized him immediately. You know it's him, and you owe him nothing.

oh no... Balerion, are you questioning a moderators judgement?

 

[Quantum Quack]

Balerion, Could you take your dispute over Aethelwulf to another thread perhaps...

 

[Balerion]

oh no... Balerion, are you questioning a moderators judgement?

Administrator judgment, actually, but yes. When did I ever say they were perfect? I'm pretty sure I said the direct opposite of that. But I'm not endlessly bitching about them, nor am I blaming them for the decline of the forum instead of providing actual content. I'm simply trying to find out why "I'd moderate him, but that would require me to make an effort" is a good excuse for allowing "Fuck off" to an acceptable comment.

 

[Lakon]

Hi all.

I'm quite new here, not a scientist by any means, but interested in many things.

Ah, a discussion about moderators, freedoms, etc.

My cursory opinion after having read many of the threads, is that you enjoy a very high degree of freedoms here.

I used to do a great deal of reading at another site - 'PhysicsForums' (PF) and let me tell you, I don't think I have ever seen a more myopic, self centred crowd of moderators / main contributors anywhere else - ever. So full of their own sense of self worth, overflowing with hubris .. no thinking, other than the party line, ever allowed. Most of them remind me of school yard bullies.

I like it here a lot - even though the mods ARE sometimes brutal, well, so what ? Sometimes deservedly so - and never have I seen an instance where the 'brutalised' didn't have a right of reply, in the same thread or another.

Also, the abundant allowance for discussion of fringe science (though ALL science was fringe, once ..) parapsychology, etc, is great. Sure if, you come up with any crazy (at face value) theory, .. surely you'd expect it to get challanged and attacked even. Nothing wrong with that. You can hardly expect everyone to go "Yes sir, yes, sir, three bags full sir" !

So freedom is a relative thing, and you seem to have an abundance of it here.

Great stuff !

 

[Quantum Quack]

Administrator judgment, actually, but yes. When did I ever say they were perfect? I'm pretty sure I said the direct opposite of that. But I'm not endlessly bitching about them, nor am I blaming them for the decline of the forum instead of providing actual content. I'm simply trying to find out why "I'd moderate him, but that would require me to make an effort" is a good excuse for allowing "Fuck off" to an acceptable comment.

The thing is,I am not actually critical or complaining about thread closure or any moderator action AS Moderators. But I do have issues when a moderator uses their position to post as a normal member would with out adhereing to the rules or even in some cases the spirit of the rules.
Do moderator priviledges extend to their normal posting behaviour?
There needs to be I feel a separation between mods acting as mods and mods posting as a senior but normal member.
Personallly I have no real complaints against moderator action as part of Moderation.

 

[Balerion]

The thing is,I am not actually critical or complaining about thread closure or any moderator action AS Moderators. But I do have issues when a moderator uses their position to post as a normal member would with out adhereing to the rules or even in some cases the spirit of the rules.
Do moderator priviledges extend to their normal posting behaviour?
There needs to be I feel a separation between mods acting as mods and mods posting as a senior but normal member.
Personallly I have no real complaints against moderator action as part of Moderation.

That's not what your complaint was, though. Your complaint was that moderators are, whether individually or as a collective unity, censoring members. This accusation is false. They don't censor people. They never have, and they don't now. Did you not see the whole thing with whats-his-face over the Golden Dawn and how the Holocaust never happened? They don't censor people. What they do is (depending on the subfora) enforce standards of discourse. You can't, for example, make factual claims and then not support them. RedStar recently had a run-in with Superstring over this very matter, and managed to avoid banning (temporarily, anyway) by supporting his claim. Likewise, if you post meaningless trash, you will probably be temporarily banned.

This is standard stuff that happens at most forums, and has always happened here.

As for your new complaints about mods breaking the rules they enforce, well, yeah, that happens. Nor is their enforcement of the rules consistent. But there's nothing you can do about it, because it starts at the top, and James isn't going to budge on how he handles the moderators.

 

[Quantum Quack]

That's not what your complaint was, though. Your complaint was that moderators are, whether individually or as a collective unity, censoring members. This accusation is false. They don't censor people. They never have, and they don't now. Did you not see the whole thing with whats-his-face over the Golden Dawn and how the Holocaust never happened? They don't censor people. What they do is (depending on the subfora) enforce standards of discourse. You can't, for example, make factual claims and then not support them. RedStar recently had a run-in with Superstring over this very matter, and managed to avoid banning (temporarily, anyway) by supporting his claim. Likewise, if you post meaningless trash, you will probably be temporarily banned.

This is standard stuff that happens at most forums, and has always happened here.

As for your new complaints about mods breaking the rules they enforce, well, yeah, that happens. Nor is their enforcement of the rules consistent. But there's nothing you can do about it, because it starts at the top, and James isn't going to budge on how he handles the moderators.

you certainly know how to make a fool of yourself don't you?
here is the OP for you compare with your post...

The reason for the decline in forum membership - anyone?

My take:

Years ago when I first came to sciforums, if I remember correctly, it had a reasonably genuine membership of over 70,000 members. Today it records under 31,000 members.
There appeared at the time and for many years a progressive, dynamic and sometimes outrageous collections of discussions going on where the only rule was that people respect the right of others to express an opinion, ask questions and get egg on their faces with out any harm being done to the fundamental esteem of the member or other members.
This OPEN and respectful forum philosophy under the Guidance of key moderators at the time lead to a vital and vigourous and yet repectful debate and discussion.

An example of which was the incredible tolerance the board had to one poster Macm who persisted in his complaints against AE SRT for almost 4 years until the time of his death not so lmany years ago.

Today however there appears to have been a shift in forum policy where by certain individual posters appear to have taken it upon themselves to censor the board into silence. Whether they are acting as an organised collective or individually is unable to be thoroughly determined but the end result IMO has been the serious decline in openness, and critical debate that had been occuring therefore leading to a significant drop in persons wishing to participate.



care to discuss?

Can you see your mistake or not?
or would you care to quote the parts you are claiming to exist.

 

[Balerion]

you certainly know how to make a fool of yourself don't you?
here is the OP for you compare with your post...



Can you see your mistake or not?
or would you care to quote the parts you are claiming to exist.

Are you kidding? I don't have to quote anything. You just quoted it yourself. Can you not read?

 

[Quantum Quack]

If I remember correctly,
I stopped posting as a regular just prior to MacM's death after a series of altercations with the JREF forum [over AE's SRT] of which some members from there decided to take up residence at this forum. The forum membership was close to 70,000, over the ensuing couple of years I revisited a few times to find the place dead as a door nail. The vitality of the forum had more or less dissappeared. Syndicated and organised destructive activities of certain posters behaviour was evident.

I posted a couple of times and was heavilly censored to the pont of giving up in frustration. One moderators account had been absused [ Glaucon's and yes I have proof - unless it has been erased] and it was obvious that certain members had other than the forums interests at heart.

The Photon Challenge was launched $500 usd prize was eventually offered, a web site was created and then taken down by myself because the embarrassment that it was generating amongst scientists was too strong.
I decided to return to Sciforums to try and work out why this forum had been so thoroughly diminished as an exercise in learning from the obvious mistakes being made.

Why did a perfectly healthy forum go bang? I was running about 3 other forums at the time not related to science directly and knowing why would be priceless.

so here we are and to tell you the truth I believe the board has already started to improve in vitality... which I happen to think is a great thing.
I already know the who and why... now it is a matter of rebuilding.
Yeah I am a pretty smart arse sort of a guy... but you know the greatest gift one can nurture... is patience... and I am a very patient man....

 

[Quantum Quack]

Are you kidding? I don't have to quote anything. You just quoted it yourself. Can you not read?

well show where the word moderator appears in context please... to prove your point.
I'll even bet you $50 usd you can't prove your allegation from the OP
you up for it?
sheesh! I even highlighted in bold for you...

 

[Balerion]

well show where the word moderator appears in context please... to prove your point.
I'll even bet you $50 usd you can't prove your allegation from the OP
you up for it?
sheesh! I even highlighted in bold for you...

Who but a moderator has the power to censor a poster? It appears my mistake was expecting you to use the accepted definitions of words.