This subforum needs another moderator

[MacGyver1968]

Most forums on this board have more than one mod....just to give an extra pair of eyes. While I think Stryder is an excellent mod, and a fair man, he is only one man, and could use some backup.

To me the obviously selection is Dywyddyr, as he is a world class woo wrangler. If Dy doesn't want it...I'm sure there are others.

Just my $.02.

 

[Doreen]

Most forums on this board have more than one mod....just to give an extra pair of eyes. While I think Stryder is an excellent mod, and a fair man, he is only one man, and could use some backup.

To me the obviously selection is Dywyddyr, as he is a world class woo wrangler. If Dy doesn't want it...I'm sure there are others.

Just my $.02.

I think it should have a woo whisperer for balance.
And no I am too lazy and am not volunteering.

 

[John99]

i can be the moderator.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

I vote for me. You're all banned. Especially you, yes you.

Nah, I wouldn't want to do it. I do think a bit more moderation wouldn't go a miss. I understand pseudo is about the more fringe ideas but when people refuse to answer direct questions or even attempt to justify a claim it does get a little frustrating. Saying "Has anyone thought about....." is fine. Saying "Science is wrong, the universe really is....." and then providing nothing to justify that is a different thing.

 

[quantum_wave]

Most forums on this board have more than one mod....just to give an extra pair of eyes. While I think Stryder is an excellent mod, and a fair man, he is only one man, and could use some backup.

To me the obviously selection is Dywyddyr, as he is a world class woo wrangler. If Dy doesn't want it...I'm sure there are others.

Just my $.02.

I thought Dywyddyr was a "she". I guess I shouldn't have sent that Valentine . Any way, I don't think Pseudo needs any moderation at all. Maybe someone to monitor the "report" button and a new rule that if you use the report button you will be banned for three days .

And last of all, only if Stryder insists on there being another moderator would I think it was necessary. In that case Dy, he or she, would be fine with me.

 

[GeoffP]

In line with the nature of this subforum, I make a trancelike prediction that Geoff would be the greatest co-mod possible.

And, that he will not get it.

 

[quantum_wave]

I think this thread should be move to the cesspool. If for some unfathomable reason there is any serious intent on the part of management to add an unneeded new moderator to the Pseudoscience forum I want to interview all candidates and have the right to disqualify any candidate that I don't approve of.

Oh I know, I'll be the first to be banned now by whom ever :grumble:.

 

[stateofmind]

Dywyd would be the absolute worst pseudoscience mod possible. How can you have someone moderate what they don't respect/believe in? It would just turn into a science fan-boy circle jerk.

 

[MacGyver1968]

So you have to believe in unicorns in order to mod the unicorn subforum?

 

[Dywyddyr]

Dywyd would be the absolute worst pseudoscience mod possible. How can you have someone moderate what they don't respect/believe in? It would just turn into a science fan-boy circle jerk.

Ya think?
What makes you think I don't have any respect?
In fact I'm far more widely read on most pseudoscience subjects than the majority of crackpots that turn up here: hence my disdain for the [ENC]idoits[/ENC] that persist in posting stuff that's already been debunked.

I thought Dywyddyr was a "she". I guess I shouldn't have sent that Valentine.

I did tell you to behave!

Any way, I don't think Pseudo needs any moderation at all.

Meh, for what it's worth I do think that a certain nameless poster (Pincho Paxton) requires moderation: he has failed totally to support any of his nonsense and, what is worse, persists in spamming every other Pseudosci thread with the crap. In his own threads, fine (as far as it goes), but post after post after post containing his inane ramblings deflecting from whatever point the original woo woo is trying to make? Not on. It's hyper-trolling.

In that case Dy, he or she, would be fine with me.

Last time I checked I was male.

Oh I know, I'll be the first to be banned now by whom ever

Only if I don't get a Valentine next year.

 

[stateofmind]

So you have to believe in unicorns in order to mod the unicorn subforum?

It would save us from the intolerable redundancy of "unicorns don't exist and you're an idiot for believing in them - one more time and you're banned."

 

[Dywyddyr]

Nope: the intolerable redundancy is largely in the newbies that turn up and start screaming "Unicorns exist!" without checking any of the literature either way (i.e. they've read one book that says they do), and without checking to see if there's any other unicorn threads.
New and original woo woos are welcomed, it's the same old tired topics that end up in bans because the crackpot in question hasn't bothered to do any work whatsoever and is merely repeating the same old arguments, with the same old (lack of) evidence.

 

[quantum_wave]

Ya think?
What makes you think I don't have any respect?
In fact I'm far more widely read on most pseudoscience subjects than the majority of crackpots that turn up here: hence my disdain for the [ENC]idoits[/ENC] that persist in posting stuff that's already been debunked.

I did tell you to behave!

Meh, for what it's worth I do think that a certain nameless poster (Pincho Paxton) requires moderation: he has failed totally to support any of his nonsense and, what is worse, persists in spamming every other Pseudosci thread with the crap. In his own threads, fine (as far as it goes), but post after post after post containing his inane ramblings deflecting from whatever point the original woo woo is trying to make? Not on. It's hyper-trolling.

You don't understand the pseudo mind. The PP type pseudo poster wants to be hand fed the ultimate answers to understanding nature that even you professionals don't understand. Start responding to him by admitting that you don't know the answers to the cause of gravity, the presence of mass, the cause of the Big Bang, and then ignore him and his threads instead of asking for quantification and models that don't exist yet in the scientific body of knowledge.

And as for him posting his wild ideas in other threads, as far as I know he stopped doing that when I pointed out to him how crude it was.

Last time I checked I was male.

Only if I don't get a Valentine next year.

It's over between you and me, at least until you tell me what meh means. I have been wondering about that since we met :shrug:.

 

[Acitnoids]

Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke comes to mind although I can think of a few members (PP) that definitely need a choke collar. I think Dy would be a good addition. A little good cop, bad cop would go a long way.

 

[stateofmind]

Nope: the intolerable redundancy is largely in the newbies that turn up and start screaming "Unicorns exist!" without checking any of the literature either way (i.e. they've read one book that says they do), and without checking to see if there's any other unicorn threads.
New and original woo woos are welcomed, it's the same old tired topics that end up in bans because the crackpot in question hasn't bothered to do any work whatsoever and is merely repeating the same old arguments, with the same old (lack of) evidence.

The very fact that you call them "woo woo"'s is proof that you're not qualified to moderate. You can't remove your own bias. As for merely repeating the same arguments... you "scientists of sciforums" seem to give me the same morbid thrill I expect many nascar fans find addicting. There's nothing but the dross of endless circles but who knows? maybe we'll get lucky one day and there'll be a crash

 

[MacGyver1968]

Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke comes to mind although I can think of a few members (PP) that definitely need a choke collar. I think Dy would be a good addition. A little good cop, bad cop would go a long way.

PP was the inspiration for this thread. I love me some woo...the wooier the better. It's why this subforum is one of my favorites. I just thought 4 eyes are better than two...especially since Stryder has forum-wide responsibilities.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

Hello.. I will only post in my own thread. I only posted in other threads because somebody asked a question that only I could answer. It's hard not to respond in that case, but I'll ignore those questions.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

and then ignore him and his threads instead of asking for quantification and models that don't exist yet in the scientific body of knowledge.

So I shouldn't ask him to provide things he claims to have? By that logic if someone says "I have solved a problem no one else has" they don't actually have to provide a solution precisely because no one else has.

His view of cosmology is as flimsy as yours. At least his pictures are better. When someone says "I have explained...." its contradictory for them to then say ".... but I can't model it". So you've got a perfect understanding of electromagnetism but you can't actually tell me the force between two electrons at a given distance? Then the claim is a lie. When anyone in the physics community publishes something along the lines of "An explaination for ...." or "A new description of...." they will state their assumptions, work through the logic and mathematics, get to some quantitative predictions, stick in some numbers to demonstrate the application to physics or particular special cases and then round off with a conclusion as to what could be done next or how it might be further tested. I have yet to see a hack on these forums do anything like that.

So I think your "don't ask for things not yet in the scientific body of knowledge" implication is wrong. I don't ask anyone here to do anything I wouldn't expect a reviewer to ask me if I made such claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence but its almost invariable that the grander a cranks claims the worse the evidence.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

So I shouldn't ask him to provide things he claims to have? By that logic if someone says "I have solved a problem no one else has" they don't actually have to provide a solution precisely because no one else has.

His view of cosmology is as flimsy as yours. At least his pictures are better. When someone says "I have explained...." its contradictory for them to then say ".... but I can't model it". So you've got a perfect understanding of electromagnetism but you can't actually tell me the force between two electrons at a given distance? Then the claim is a lie. When anyone in the physics community publishes something along the lines of "An explaination for ...." or "A new description of...." they will state their assumptions, work through the logic and mathematics, get to some quantitative predictions, stick in some numbers to demonstrate the application to physics or particular special cases and then round off with a conclusion as to what could be done next or how it might be further tested. I have yet to see a hack on these forums do anything like that.

So I think your "don't ask for things not yet in the scientific body of knowledge" implication is wrong. I don't ask anyone here to do anything I wouldn't expect a reviewer to ask me if I made such claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence but its almost invariable that the grander a cranks claims the worse the evidence.

I told you how to get a working model from reverse logic. Build the physics in 3D, and then take the results from that. It doesn't matter that you don't know some of the sizes of the particles, because they build themselves from pressure. Gravity, and magnetism will then automatically happen from the model, and you can scale everything to match G, and C. The problem is the number of sphere that the computer would have to handle. As many as would fit in the Galactic bubble. Big problem.

See how I have to answer a question, because it has been put in a way that I have to respond?

 

[Dywyddyr]

You don't understand the pseudo mind. The PP type pseudo poster wants to be hand fed the ultimate answers to understanding nature that even you professionals don't understand.

Oops: why do you think I have such a large collection of pseudo books?
Why do you think I turned to science? And philosophy? And half a dozen other subjects? Could it be because because I want answers?

And as for him posting his wild ideas in other threads, as far as I know he stopped doing that when I pointed out to him how crude it was.

Good.

It's over between you and me, at least until you tell me what meh means. I have been wondering about that since we met :shrug:.

Over? OVER?? Fickle person.
Meh? It's a Sciforums (at least that's where I first came across the word) term. It's a sort of verbal shrug. "Whatever"/ "However"...