Are mods an academic authority?

[Dickfore]

I received a warning by a moderator under the alias 'berkeman' about a post I had made:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2820406#post2820406"

He said the following:

Dear Dickfore,

You have received a warning at Physics Forums.

Reason:
-------
Please don't post unhelpful comments to schoolwork questions

Your comment is deleted as unhelpful (at best), and confusing (at worst). Please refrain from doing this again.

berkeman
PF Mentor

I want to make two points:

1. How was this a schoolwork problem?

2. Why does a moderator dare to assume what is relevant and irrelevant? Is it a common practice to pull sentences out of context and bully regular members just because you have the power to do so?

I am very interested what is the official stance of the administrating staff of these fora and would be very grateful for helpful replies.

Thank you.

 

[berkeman]

1. Any question that looks like it could be schoolwork should be treated as such, per the PF Rules link at the top of the page. We take schoolwork seriously here, and try hard to help students learn how to learn. Telling them that their book is probably wrong certainly does not help their confidence, or their willingness to dig deeper to try to figure out what is going on. Certainly sometimes textbooks have errors in them, but assuming that as a first explanation is not helpful. This thread helps to explain our PF policy on schoolwork/homework/coursework questions here:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=373889

2. The official stance is to try to enforce the PF rules the best we can, and to keep the PF forums as positive and helpful as possible for students and scientists.

 

[Dickfore]

1. Any question that looks like it could be schoolwork should be treated as such, per the PF Rules link at the top of the page.

From the link you had provided. Your own words:

Whether they are take-home exams or not, homework generally counts toward your grade. That is why we have the pretty strict rules that we do for the Homework Help forums section, and why we don't allow homework (or even schoolwork-like) questions in the general technical forums.

The post I had referred to is not in those forums, so your reply is irrelevant.

2. The official stance is to try to enforce the PF rules the best we can, and to keep the PF forums as positive and helpful as possible for students and scientists.

This is not what I asked. Is there any other from the administrating staff that would feel like answering my question?

 

[berkeman]

The post I had referred to is not in those forums, so your reply is irrelevant.

Did you read the thread about schoolwork questions that I posted above? The point is that you may see a thread in the general technical forums before it has been noticed and moved. Or it may never get moved, but may still be enough schoolwork-like that it should be treated as such. In any case, I don't think you can rationally defend your comment as helpful. It only earned a 0-point warning, and was left in the thread because it had been commented upon by other posters.

 

[ZapperZ]

I received a warning by a moderator under the alias 'berkeman' about a post I had made:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2820406#post2820406"

He said the following:

I want to make two points:

1. How was this a schoolwork problem?

Similar issues have been addressed in another thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=373889

We have new members who, for some odd reason, did not pay attention to the Rules and the warning to not post HW/Coursework-type question in the main forum. It still doesn't change the fact that this belongs in that forum.

2. Why does a moderator dare to assume what is relevant and irrelevant? Is it a common practice to pull sentences out of context and bully regular members just because you have the power to do so?

Are you somehow arguing that that particular comment you made in that thread is actually relevant and helpful? Honestly?

This isn't "bullying". If Berkeman wanted to "bully" you, he would have either sent you an infraction, or booted you off. Also note, in case you haven't realized it, that the warning he sent you is so that other Mentors/Admin will also see it. It is not something he can do as he pleases without the rest of us being aware of it. In other words, none of us Mentors can get away with "bullying" another member.

I am very interested what is the official stance of the administrating staff of these fora and would be very grateful for helpful replies.

Thank you.

You got it.

Zz.

 

[Astronuc]

I received a warning by a moderator under the alias 'berkeman' about a post I had made:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2820406#post2820406"

I want to make two points:

1. How was this a schoolwork problem?

We treat such questions as homework. PF is about learning.

most of the books are wrong then.

This is an unnecessary and unhelpful response.

2. Why does a moderator dare to assume what is relevant and irrelevant? Is it a common practice to pull sentences out of context and bully regular members just because you have the power to do so?

That's the function of moderators at PF and other forums. It's a judgement call, and we do the best we can. The warning was reasonable, and the reason was spot on.

 

[Dickfore]

Did you read the thread about schoolwork questions that I posted above? The point is that you may see a thread in the general technical forums before it has been noticed and moved. Or it may never get moved, but may still be enough schoolwork-like that it should be treated as such. In any case, I don't think you can rationally defend your comment as helpful. It only earned a 0-point warning, and was left in the thread because it had been commented upon by other posters.

So, since you certainly had noticed that thread to give me a warning, why didn't you move it into the hw?

Or, do you just pull things out of the magician's hat to justify you actions?

 

[Dickfore]

Are you somehow arguing that that particular comment you made in that thread is actually relevant and helpful? Honestly?

Yes, I am. If you read the post my post was a reply to, you would notice that it didn't cite the source behind the statement 'most books', so my answer was logically consistent because it referred to the set of books they had been talking about.

This isn't "bullying". If Berkeman wanted to "bully" you, he would have either sent you an infraction, or booted you off. Also note, in case you haven't realized it, that the warning he sent you is so that other Mentors/Admin will also see it. It is not something he can do as he pleases without the rest of us being aware of it. In other words, none of us Mentors can get away with "bullying" another member.
Zz.

Actually it is, because it is precisely what 'berkeman' did.

 

[ZapperZ]

So, since you certainly had noticed that thread to give me a warning, why didn't you move it into the hw?

This is moot. That comment you made is inappropriate and unhelpful even for a thread not in the HW forum!

Zz.

 

[ZapperZ]

Yes, I am. If you read the post my post was a reply to, you would notice that it didn't cite the source behind the statement 'most books', so my answer was logically consistent because it referred to the set of books they had been talking about.

Then you have a very strange definition of what "helpful". I would categorize your post as being dismissal and is nothing but noise.

Actually it is, because it is precisely what 'berkeman' did.

No it isn't. Since your definition of what helpful is is rather weird, I am not surprised that your definition of what "bullying" is also similarly skewed.

Zz.

 

[Dickfore]

That's the function of moderators at PF and other forums. It's a judgement call, and we do the best we can. The warning was reasonable, and the reason was spot on.

So, basically, the moderator's judgement is the end-all truth about an issue being discussed on a forum devoted to Physics. If this is not in your rules, I think it is pretty important to include it. Otherwise, people will be scammed into believing things are discussed objectively here.

 

[Dickfore]

Then you have a very strange definition of what "helpful". I would categorize your post as being dismissal and is nothing but noise.



No it isn't. Since your definition of what helpful is is rather weird, I am not surprised that your definition of what "bullying" is also similarly skewered.

Zz.

You had not defined any of the terms you are discussing. Until you do so, your post is random noise.

 

[ZapperZ]

You had not defined any of the terms you are discussing. Until you do so, your post is random noise.

Note that YOU asked for the opinion of other staff. It seems that you're not happy with what you got. Too bad, but that's what it is.

Zz.

 

[ZapperZ]

So, basically, the moderator's judgement is the end-all truth about an issue being discussed on a forum devoted to Physics. If this is not in your rules, I think it is pretty important to include it. Otherwise, people will be scammed into believing things are discussed objectively here.

General:
All messages express the views of the author, not necessarily the views of the forum owners. The owners and mentors of Physics Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason. This is a manual process, however, so please realize that we may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. This policy goes for member profile information as well.

There you go!

Zz.

 

[Astronuc]

So, basically, the moderator's judgement is the end-all truth about an issue being discussed on a forum devoted to Physics. If this is not in your rules, I think it is pretty important to include it. Otherwise, people will be scammed into believing things are discussed objectively here.

No. A moderator's judgement is available to the staff for review. As far as I can tell, we are reasonably objective.

Anyone who receives a warning or infraction may appeal to the staff, and sometimes we reverse the warning/infraction.

 

[Gokul43201]

So, since you certainly had noticed that thread to give me a warning, why didn't you move it into the hw?

This is an oversight that can be easily fixed (and, IMO, should).

It doesn't change anything else though. I don't understand why you are throwing such a tantrum without even first reading the Forum Guidelines (what you call a "magician's hat"). And all this for a 0-point warning telling you to make posts that are more helpful?

 

[berkeman]

So, since you certainly had noticed that thread to give me a warning, why didn't you move it into the hw?

I think that's a fair question. As stated in the PF Rules, there are some exceptions to the guidelines about where schoolwork questions should be posted, based on a number of factors. Plus, I think for Mentors who spend a lot of time in their respective sub-forums (whether Engineering, Physics, Math, etc.), we may allow a thread in the technical sub-forum if a) the student has done their own work, b) it's more of a study question, and pretty obviously not a points-earning question for an assignment, and c) is a moderately hard question that deserves more of a background discussion, rather than just a "solution".

This statement in the OP is pretty key in why I didn't move it to Homework Help (yet):

most books just say that the contact point with the fixed object becomes the fulcrum
but i want to understand how that happens

The OP is not asking a points-paying question on an assignment. It appeared to me that they were genuinely confused about something that multiple textbooks were covering, and as long as the discussion stayed with first principles in mechanics, it seemed like a good technical thread.

As Zapper says, all Post Reports, all Warnings/Infractions, and a bunch of other stuff is posted in the Mentor forums, and generally Mentors review those things daily. We have a great group of Mentors with amazing backgrounds, and we take the Mentoring task very seriously. Especially when it comes to keeping the PF a great resource for serious students, and for straightforward professionals and others interested in science.

 

[Evo]

I think we are ignoring the elephant in the room. Dick's comment was in poor taste, and unhelpful at best. That it was only given a zero point "heads up" shows a lot of restraint on Berkeman's part, especially based on Dick's posting history.

 

[Danger]

Dick, you asked about how other Moderators viewed the situation. You got that, in spades. Now let me tell you from a non-Moderator member perspective. To start with, PF is not a democracy. You have no rights, and if you become a serious-enough pain in the *** you will be turfed. Greg owns PF, instigated it for a specific purpose (furthering scientific education), and selected very competent "deputies" (ie: Mentors) to uphold the standards that he set.
I love this site as a second home, and a lot of the members are family to me, and I have a pretty firm grasp of what PF is about... and I would never in my wildest fantasies be qualified to serve as a Mentor. These people have a tremendous burden of responsibility, and are usually experts in the specific forums that they moderate. If more than one of them disagrees with you, it's pretty much a fact that you are the one who is wrong.
Just take your lumps like a man, retreat to a neutral corner, and be glad that you haven't been banned for your insolence.
(And in case you think that I'm a suck-up, I have received a warning or two myself. In each instance, I was in the wrong.)

 

[russ_watters]

So, basically, the moderator's judgement is the end-all truth about an issue being discussed on a forum devoted to Physics.

I realize ZZ already replied to this, but seriously - does this really even need to be stated in the rules? Obviously, the moderators of a forum are the ones charged with upholding/enforcing the rules, therefore the rules are applied based on their judgement. It is too self-evident to be possible to misunderstand this.

And:

If this is not in your rules, I think it is pretty important to include it. Otherwise, people will be scammed into believing things are discussed objectively here.

We try to be as objective as possible (whether you believe we succeed or not is up to you, but we don't care either way), but no one on the planet is completely free from bias. This is also too self-evident to be possible to misunderstand.

 

[Dickfore]

I realize ZZ already replied to this, but seriously - does this really even need to be stated in the rules? Obviously, the moderators of a forum are the ones charged with upholding/enforcing the rules, therefore the rules are applied based on their judgement. It is too self-evident to be possible to misunderstand this.

Upholding/enforcing rules is one thing. Deciding what's poor taste or unhelpful is quite another.

 

[Danger]

Upholding/enforcing rules is one thing. Deciding what's poor taste or unhelpful is quite another.

And again I stress that this is not your site; it's Greg's.
You remind me very much of some ***** named Audrey who gave me **** for arriving at an SF convention in Edmonton in a 650hp Roadrunner. Yap, yap, yap... environment this, noise that... I sat placidly through almost 2 hours of that moron haranguing me, and the only thing that I could respond with (I left my .45 holstered) was what I'm about to say to you.
You are overlooking the most significant aspect of the conversation: the fact that your opinion is of absolutely no consequence.

 

[russ_watters]

Upholding/enforcing rules is one thing. Deciding what's poor taste or unhelpful is quite another.

Perhaps we should have clearer quality standards or a statement that we requires quality posts, but quality is a goal here and we do attempt to keep quality high by deleting off topic/unhelpful posts. Now you know, so please consider that in the future.

 

[Gokul43201]

Upholding/enforcing rules is one thing. Deciding what's poor taste or unhelpful is quite another.

You're never going to read the Guidelines, are you?

A member may be issued either a warning or an infraction if deemed warranted by an admin or mentor (usually from guideline noncompliance).

(emphasis mine) Clearly, the Mentors are tasked with warning members against things that need NOT be violations of the rules.

This is an implicit admission that the Guidelines can not catch all possible situations that are considered detrimental to the quality of the forums, and that the Mentors will have to exercise their judgment to decide what flies.

There's a reason the mods are called Mentors - they are tasked with policing the forums as well as with improving the quality of scientific/academic content.

 

[zomgwtf]

Upholding/enforcing rules is one thing. Deciding what's poor taste or unhelpful is quite another.

My question to the mentors is: How has a... 'person'... such as... yourself... lasted at PF for a long enough time to even make 590 posts? Really?

 

[Dickfore]

My question to the mentors is: How has a... 'person'... such as... yourself... lasted at PF for a long enough time to even make 590 posts? Really?

I don't have the faintest idea what you mean by this post and who it is addressed to. If you imply that the op is not worth staying at PF, please make a thread about it and file your complaint there stating the reasons behind your decision.

 

[Dickfore]

Perhaps we should have clearer quality standards or a statement that we requires quality posts, but quality is a goal here and we do attempt to keep quality high by deleting off topic/unhelpful posts. Now you know, so please consider that in the future.

Again, you tend to use such vague categories as 'quality', 'off-topic/unhelpful' when it comes to displaying your power over the users who do not have moderating privileges. It is nice to see you fall back using this strategy, because, given the current circumstances, it is the only form of admission that one can get from you that you actually consider yourself an authority on every issue you moderate and have the discretion to decide what is a relevant comment and what is not.

 

[Math Is Hard]

This has gone far enough. You've aired your grievances and received plenty of responses. I'm sorry that none of them satisfied you.

We generally do not discuss specific moderations in public. This has been a pretty generous exception.

Thread closed.