of course you are referring to chroot. yeah, that was really annoying. that guy is a fucking jackass. you think banning an offensive poster would be more offensive than censoring every single member of the board? i am sorry, that is nonsense. ban the fucker, and give me back my right to free speech. Believe you me. If this policy stays in place, I will probably do just that. I don't know how to make my opinions known to Porfiry, he doesn't seem to respond to personal messages, but i consider this policy unacceptable.
lethe there is no need to defame chroot. He's a dedicated man and sometimes his drive to success can rub people off the wrong way, but there is no need for name calling. PF has many topics containing the sciforums url and we don't mind it. Can we for one drop this topic because I could really care less.
look, the mod of this forum thinks that chroot's behaviour is bad enough to warrant censoring <i>THE ENTIRE FORUM</i>. this is something that must be addressed. what that means to me is talking about chroot and his bad behaviour. if you don't want to talk about it, then don't. i think you mean you <i>couldn't</i> care less. I will drop it when one of the following two things happens: 1. The mod at sciforums removes the censorship, 2. I leave sciforums.
chroot hasn't posted here in a long time, let it be, then you come on here and start ripping on him Well yes I think it's flat out laughable that they have to censor a web address, but does it really keep you up at night?
look, man. it's not like i just brought this up out of the blue. i just found out about this censorship policy, and i wanted to figure out what was going on. the subject of chroot came up. the guy is an asshole. I am not going to tiptoe around that fact. and it's not like it's a big secret. so what? does it really keep you up at night that i think your coadmin is an asshole? really, what do you care? why do you care what keeps me up at night? censorship is an important issue to me. if you don't care about this, then move along. to me, it is important.
Because I'm not about to let a friend get bashed around behind his back. Ya know, your not sounding like such a nice person yourself, you think your better than he is, you have the right to defame him? Ultimately I don't, your a smart guy and I just hate to see your talent and hard work goto waste worrying about something so trival. This isn't your site, so don't act like you have say on what goes on, because knowing sciforums past you don't and you know that.
oh.. i suspect that chroot will hear about this thread sooner or later. but feel free to stick up for him in the meantime. i love a good spar. 1. For the record, i am not really all that nice a guy. 2. i don't have to be better than someone to speak my mind about him. i don't recall saying that i am better than anyone. yeah, it's tragic. all my hard work wasted in a night of drinking and posting recklessly on the internet. yes, this point has been made clear before. the internet message board is not a democracy. my opinions about what is right and wrong about the community here are irrelevant. elections, if they happen, are only for show. this is a good point. if i am going to be a drama queen about such a silly thing as censorship on an internet forum, then i need a more democratic forum. raising a big stink by posting my petulant whining is not going to accomplish anything, about that, you are correct. I am going to give it a good think. i guess i will just have to decide whether it is important enough to me to leave over.
chroot could just as easily "defend" himself. <strike>He most likely hasn't because he simply doesn't care. Thus, why should you?</strike> EDIT: Well, there goes that point. Let it go. This is an issue lethe (and many other posters) has with sciforums, which coincidentally happens to concern some of chroot's past actions. It doesn't require you to "defend" chroot. I think it's more like his free time. I doubt he has halted his studies to devote his full attention to such a trivial matter, so I conjecture that your concern is unnecessary. I doubt that you are oblivious to the concerns of posters on your forum, and, at least in the time I've been here, James R. seems to be willing to listen to the concerns of the board members. Since he has the ear of Porfiry, there is a chance for wrongs to be righted. Adopting a defeatist attitude accomplishes nothing apart from creating a divide between administration and the members, which leads to the decline of a board.
Well, there are some good points here, after all. 1) I have been quite the jackass in the past, and still have my moments. I've tried hard to become a better person though, and sometimes it even seems to have worked. 2) I shouldn't have gone around advertising pf here. For the record, I only did it twice, both times in the same thread. I actually posted my unsolicited advertisements because people were specifically complaining about the environment at sciforums. I recognize I should have just kept my mouth shut, but I thought I was helping those people. 3) James posted a quote a while ago that I rather liked: "The bottom line is: I don't want this to become a closed forum accessed only by people educated to tertiary level. I want an accessible forum where people can ask questions, challenge existing ideas, and maybe learn a thing or two." That's actually quite close to what I have always wanted pf to be. Challenging existing ideas, of course, needs to be done in the due process of the scientific method; it's a fine line, however, and one that pf's staff struggles with daily. Depsite my view of pf as a rather strongly moderated forum, I don't feel we descened into abject censorship very often. It certainly isn't our policy. 4) I apologize for having offended you in the past lethe, and hope that you'll accept that apology. I actually look up to you quite a lot, and you've been a mentor to me in the past. It's hard for me to accept that there's such bad blood between us. - Warren
It did in the past, it is doing that now, and it will continue to do that in the future. It depends on what kind of audience you want on these forums. Some threads, where people like yourself, lethe, .... don't jump in to point people out that they are wrong, just end in plain crackpot/non-sense/pseudo-science discussions. This makes the people who could explain things there go "well, just let them do their thing, they seem to self-convinved anyway so i don't care" and that is the first step in staying away... Just repeat that a dozen times and you're tired of searching through non-science threads on a science forum. Bye! Crisp
well, we are agreed, then. I said your actions here at sciforums, and Greg thought i was defaming you. i mean, i suppose i was defaming you, but i don't think it was overly harsh. i don't know why greg got his panties in a bunch over it. still, i am sure it is nice to have someone stick up for you. I am glad Dapthar stuck up for me. for the record, a brief survey of your most recent posts here indicates that you have done it in 5 separate threads. i can post links, but i am sure you can find them yourself. that's very magnanimous, but i hope you can appreciate how annoying that is to those of us who stayed at sciforums. i think these fora could learn something from the newsgroups. the groups are moderated, but there is no censorship. as long as it has to do with physics, you are allowed to mention physics-forums, and you can also call someone an asshole, or even *gasp* refer someone to the classic text by Landau and Lifshitz (something that you cannot do at PF, due to their censorship policies). lest we get distracted here, let me just say again why i started this thread: i discovered that this forum practices an unacceptable form of censorship. i wanted to have a discussion about that, not to trashtalk chroot. i agree with the administration here that the spamming that was going on was unacceptable, but i could not disagree more vehemently with solution that was implemented.
after sniffing around here a bit, i think the threads you saw must have been here. i saw them here and here.
lethe: It would like to make it very clear that this is not my decision as moderator of the Physics & Math forum. This decision was taken by Porfiry, as owner and administrator of the entire sciforums. My opinion played no part in this. I suggest you contact Porfiry if it concerns you that much. It is, of course, totally up to you as to whether you want to leave over this. Bear in mind that Porfiry typically doesn't respond to messages quickly. And don't assume the moderators have a hotline to him, either. For example, I sent him a message about a week ago, and so far have had no reply. That doesn't mean he won't reply eventually. You are entitled to your opinion. I suggest that if you choose to contact Porfiry, you include a link to this thread in your message. You may even be able to change his mind. chroot: Thankyou for your comments. It appears you have gained some maturity through your experience as a moderator in your own right. You are very welcome to post here if you wish, and have the time etc.
James R., To which I had posted what I thought was a benign quip: chroot, This is a test. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! In light of chroot's statement and in considertion of his and mine past, I fail to see why it was deleted. That is censorship of an entirely different nature. Care to comment?
Actually I was going to post but have held back on this censorship issue...a little.. The issue is not so much censorship but how deep does it go....is it just a couple of words or does it apply in greater depth..... Personally It is of little relevance to me as this is after all..."the internet" but it does make one question the worth of it all....... also the Censor him / herself assumes great responsibility in the implementation of censor policy......are these policies open to democratic processes or are they more arbitary? From Jame's comments it seems that the later applies.....but I repeat again this is the Internet afterall and as this forum has little in the way of advertising revenue I would assume that it is funded out of somebodies pocket which means that they are not open to normal market pressures that the need for advertising revenues create.
James- Of course, i understand this fact. when i said "mod", i meant Porfory, not you. but i sort of conflate the various authoratative figures in my head. In any case, i didn't mean to imply that i thought you were an unjust censor. on the contrary, i think quite the opposite. So i have known this all along, but just to make it crystal clear, because my language may have been unclear; the ADMIN of this site has chosen to use a form of censorship which i cannot live with. My moderator, James, on the other hand, has never abused his powers, and always errs on the side of freedom of speech, a policy which i wholeheartedly agree with, despite whatever other differences he and i may have. yes, this is a hard fact that i have learned already in the past. this is the reason taht i haven't messaged him already: i assumed that he doesn't read/respond to PMs. he never responded to mine, even though they were missives of money paid into his pocket. I will message him now, because you suggest it. for now, i will not post in any thread but this one until this matter is resolved to my resolution.
a little further thought on the subject.... The success of this forum to the owner is not dependent on it's membership due simply to the fact that there is no reliance on commercial success. This has at least two effects 1) Because the site is funded by the owner we are his guest therefore his ruling applies. 2) Because of the above there is no commercial leverage that can be applied to have things change. I am in no way complaining about this, and just stating a commercial reality....I am grateful that this forum exists in the first instance and thank the owner for allowing me to make use of his generousity.....hmmmmm.....brown nosing.....hmmmm However may be the commercial possibilities are no known by the owners or are known, but are considered inconsequential.
Hey, I suppose ya'll do know Porfs on vacation and won't be back for a few days? Porfiry On vacation in Byron Bay (3,560 posts) Yesterday, 09:35 PM report | reply As my user title suggests, I'm nowhere near my computer. I'm just mellowin' on the beaches of Byron Bay for the next few days.
