- #1
ray b
- 181
- 0
this whole forum and politics esp has far more overmoderation
then any other forum I visit
why cannot the free flow of ideas take place here
then any other forum I visit
why cannot the free flow of ideas take place here
Empirical evidence and member testimony indicates that our standards are more than adequate for our purposes. What evidence do you have for your assertion?ray b said:your standards need baddly to be revised
We disagree.but think any form of censorship is always WRONG
The primary prerequisite for being a crackpot is a refusal to "learn the true facts".a better idea is to show why the crackpots are WRONG
useing their mistaken ideas to learn the true facts
And the appropriate place for this debate is a physics forum?religion in the post 9-11 era needs open and frank debate
I assert your assessment is inaccurate.and a hint of hot feeling saddly is enuff to lock far tooo many threads here
far too often
Hurkyl said:ray b said:religion in the post 9-11 era needs open and frank debate
And the appropriate place for this debate is a physics forum? QUOTE]
before this was moved, it was in the 'politics and world affairs' sub-forum
i think that section is a non-physics related part of physicsforum.com
We disagree, and will adhere to them. Time has demonstrated they serve us well.ray b said:your standards need baddly to be revised
Then this is probabably not the best site for you to participate, because we will continue to enforce the guidelines to which all members agree to adhere to by posting here. If you don't agree to the guidelines, don't post.I semi understand the anti crackpot bit
but think any form of censorship is always WRONG
even those with the best of intent
We tried that approach, and found that, as Hurkyl mentioned already, the crackpots have no interest in true facts or learning where their ideas are mistaken. They are zealots.a better idea is to show why the crackpots are WRONG
useing their mistaken ideas to learn the true facts
There are vast numbers of sites on the internet where you can post those thoughts and ideas, or even set up your own if you have the inclination. This is NOT the place for it.religion in the post 9-11 era needs open and frank debate not censorship too
as we were attacked by believers at the same time our home grown believers
have stolen our government and are moving our freedoms FROM the rule of law to WE SAY SO LAND
Because experience tells us that "hint" of hot feeling, which is generally far more than a hint when we decide to lock a thread, quickly degenerates into flaming and personal attacks, and we prefer to keep discussion here civil. If you can't remain civil, again, this is likely not the right place for you to air your thoughts.and a hint of hot feeling saddly is enuff to lock far tooo many threads here
far too often
Which is not the correct place to air a complaint about how the forum is run.devil-fire said:before this was moved, it was in the 'politics and world affairs' sub-forum
The primary goal of the site is science education. There is an additional set of guidelines within the P&WA forum, which again, if people post there, they are agreeing to follow.i think that section is a non-physics related part of physicsforum.com
i agree that the poltical and world affairs forum is not the best place to talk about how moderators do their thing. what i was referring too though was that hurkyl's comment "And the appropriate place for this debate is a physics forum" did not apply to the sentence he was quoting, since "religion in the post 9-11 era needs open and frank debate" was not being debated in a physics forum.Moonbear said:Which is not the correct place to air a complaint about how the forum is run.
Moonbear said:The primary goal of the site is science education. There is an additional set of guidelines within the P&WA forum, which again, if people post there, they are agreeing to follow.
Yes, they may, but those are not the primary purpose of this site. We are not, first and foremost, a political discussion site, we are a science discussion site. We limit the political discussions, because as has been discussed extensively in the past, the mentors are here first to help guide the science discussions, and we are not going to waste a lot of our time and efforts babysitting political topics that have a long history of spiraling out of control. There are numerous places on the internet dedicated to nothing but political discussion. We are not one of them. We have discussed eliminating the P&WA forum entirely, but as scientific progress is fully intertwined with politics, both in terms of things like federal funding for science and legislation limiting what can and can't be done (i.e., Bush's current veto of the latest bill on stem cell research, or the appropriations bill from the House that increases NIH's funding BELOW the inflation rate for scientific research, effectively cutting funding AGAIN, or energy policy, or the laws governing patenting of research discoveries, etc.), it was decided that within very narrow guidelines, the forum would remain and discussion would be permitted. So, for those topics that directly affect science and scientists, and for some other topics that interest our membership and don't get overly heated, we have kept the forum open. For those topics that frequently get out of hand, create hard feelings among the members, have required repeated mentor intervention in the past, and overall require a lot of babysitting efforts (and yes, for many of the prohibited topics, it's no longer mentoring but plain old babysitting of people who can't have a rational adult discussion), we are not wasting our time. We are not prohibiting you from having those discussions, we are prohibiting you from having those discussions HERE. As the bartender would say, "Take it outside."devil-fire said:i don't mean to sound hostile. i think the rules you guys have set up here are great for broadening the understanding of physics. i just find that these same rules can be used in a way that prevents some political discussions and opinions from being fully explored.
The Politics & World Affairs forum has it's own unique guidelines addressing issues relevant to that forum.devil-fire said:but its a political forum in this case.
i agree though, i don't think the rules for a forum of physics are the best for a political discussion.
Danger said:I tend to avoid issues like this, but since I'm incredibly drunk at the moment, I'm going to weigh in.
...
I'm blaming any typos on the beer, so am not going to edit myself.
drankin said:The only thing I don't like is that EVO ALWAYS GETS THE LAST WORD IN!
:)
:shy:radou said:Actually, I must say I like it, because seeing some recent threads getting locked down almost turned me on.
radou said:Wow, Danger. No typos.
Danger said:(I also like the auto-censor function; I can just speak my ****ing mind and let the software look out for me. )
Hurkyl said:I don't see the big deal. Whenever I type four asterisks in a row, nothing special happens.
Moonbear said:We are not prohibiting you from having those discussions, we are prohibiting you from having those discussions HERE. As the bartender would say, "Take it outside."
devil-fire said:its good to know the attitude the mentors have tword this particular forum though
Hurkyl said:Empirical evidence and member testimony indicates that our standards are more than adequate for our purposes. What evidence do you have for your assertion?
ANSWER many threads I wish to post in are lockedWe disagree.The primary prerequisite for being a crackpot is a refusal to "learn the true facts".
ANSWER YES BUT others can then see why the idea is wrong
while the crackpot maynot learn others will
And the appropriate place for this debate is a physics forum? ANSWER
in the post 9-11 world anywhere and every where is needed
to show all religions are part of a bigger problem
there is a war of ideas between science and religion
and this science forum is ducking its responceablity
to be part of that fightI assert your assessment is inaccurate.
(edit: I interpreted your statement as accusing the mentors of locking threads when they get angry. I withdraw my statement if my interpretation is incorrect.)
ray b said:and I repeat ALL CENSORSHIP IS WRONG
even if with good intent it is still WRONG
ray b said:and I repeat ALL CENSORSHIP IS WRONG
even if with good intent it is still WRONG
If the people on other forums jumped off of a cliff, would you complain that we didn't? :tongue:ray b said:not only mods but any HINT of heat
by any poster
looks to draw an all toooo quick lock
all too often
on other forums I use, locks are rare.
here they are tooo common
It's ironic that you're exhibiting one of the very behaviors we want to discourage: someone repeatedly asserting their opinion without support, and without acknowledging what others have said.and I repeat ALL CENSORSHIP IS WRONG
even if with good intent it is still WRONG
This is a private forum, we have rules, you follow the rules, you can stay, you don't follow the rules, you can't stay.ray b said:zapper that is really over the top
to question authority is not = to lie
science is the VERY PROCESS of asking WHY
it is NOT following RULES
but trying to figure out what and why the rules are
and then trying every possible and some impossible tests
to break down the rules
I find your post illogical
ray b said:zapper that is really over the top
to question authority is not = to lie
science is the VERY PROCESS of asking WHY
it is NOT following RULES
but trying to figure out what and why the rules are
and then trying every possible and some impossible tests
to break down the rules
I find your post illogical