Dispute Second Warning for Hijacking Thread on PhysicsForums

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hoku
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
A user disputes a warning for hijacking a thread on PhysicsForums, arguing that their contributions were relevant and aimed at clarifying the differences between magnetic and electric fields. They note the original thread had been inactive for over a week and that their questions were legitimate, contrasting them with the off-topic nature of the original poster's query. The user also expresses dissatisfaction with a comment from another member, labeling it as unhelpful and against forum guidelines. They emphasize their intent for constructive discussion rather than insults. The user suggests that if others have new questions, they should start separate threads to maintain focus.
Hoku
Messages
159
Reaction score
0
I was given a warning for hijacking thread https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=4306454#post4306454 and would like to dispute it publicly.

The Forums Global Guidelines says:
"Do not hijack an existing thread with off-topic comments or questions--start a new thread."

First of all, my additions to this thread were not off-topic. I offered a more detailed question about the differences between magnetic and electric fields, just as the title says. Since the thread had been abandoned for more than a week, and because everyone was criticising the OP for not giving a more specific question (something HE was given a warning for) I see no grounds for calling my addition "hijacking".

I also did not get any acknowledgment on my complaint about Naty1, who called my post "ridiculous" without offering any useful thoughts. I come here for help and discussion, not empty or hurtful insults, which are also against Global Guidelines.

I already did internet research on my first question before coming here. I learned that there is a lot about magnets at the atomic level that isn't known yet. Maybe my third question was easy to find elsewhere, but I think the other two are perfectly legitimate -- NOT hijacking -- and condusive to an ultimately good discussion.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hoku, your first post was asking three new questions. Please make new threads for these questions. Thanks.
 
Also, please contact the relevant mentor. If you still disagree after you contacted him, then you can always contact other mentors for a second opinion.
 
I want to thank those members who interacted with me a couple of years ago in two Optics Forum threads. They were @Drakkith, @hutchphd, @Gleb1964, and @KAHR-Alpha. I had something I wanted the scientific community to know and slipped a new idea in against the rules. Thank you also to @berkeman for suggesting paths to meet with academia. Anyway, I finally got a paper on the same matter as discussed in those forum threads, the fat lens model, got it peer-reviewed, and IJRAP...
This came up in my job today (UXP). Never thought to raise it here on PF till now. Hyperlinks really should be underlined at all times. PF only underlines them when they are rolled over. Colour alone (especially dark blue/purple) makes it difficult to spot a hyperlink in a large block of text (or even a small one). Not everyone can see perfectly. Even if they don't suffer from colour deficiency, not everyone has the visual acuity to distinguish two very close shades of text. Hover actions...
About 20 years ago, in my mid-30s (and with a BA in economics and a master's in business), I started taking night classes in physics hoping to eventually earn the science degree I'd always wanted but never pursued. I found physics forums and used it to ask questions I was unable to get answered from my textbooks or class lectures. Unfortunately, work and life got in the way and I never got further the freshman courses. Well, here it is 20 years later. I'm in my mid-50s now, and in a...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top