Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by cluelusshusbund, Jun 1, 2014.
I have a beef against the moderators.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
@ Captain,,, @ Kitta,,,,,
@ Captain, it's worse over there because of the copy pasting of the same diatribe in four or five different threads who the person it is directed at may or may not be posting on. I do bless them for the 1000 character per post limit though,,,, and the one post per 3 minute flood control.
Maybe they should limit "troll-mod", "collusion", "mafia", "gang" to three uses per post over here. "Do better" should be cause for permanent banning for the first time use in any context.
@ Kitta, you guys do a fine job moderating. Sometimes letting a person like RC some extra slack might even be helpful overall. They might look back at it at some more calm time and feel embarrassed at what they see. Probably not. But I am serious about the "do better" with or without the "mate", it's worse than fingernails on a chalkboard every time I see it. It should be a rule, single use = banned for life.
Yeah, I actually find some of that funny, especially since there is no PM function there anymore. Even had some argue that I didnt know what I was talking about when they got rid of PM's.. the Jeenyus Benni the "Noooclear engineer" LOL
but seriously: I appreciate moderation for the simple reason that moderation should allow for a legitimate exchange of ideas while limiting the Trolling as well as Pseudoscience, of which I have had a hard time with. I read science to learn and it is so frustrating to read about electric universe grand canyon formations etc, or the perfume pheromone retarded crap, and creationist BS...
one personal pet peeve: blatant stupidity.
pardon the rant. Glad to see you over here... hope I can learn more from you Declan. More later!
It is really doubtful that someone like RC will believe he has done anything wrong. One thing I DO know however, is that he CAN NOT argue that you are being strict, or that you are picking on him! You've been very lenient and you've actually given him quite a low ban when, IMHO he should be perma-banned again for starting the same stuff that he was perma-banned for to begin with.
The mind-set is fascinating, but quite irritating. His inability to accept empirical data as well as his annoying habit of "ToE bait" (can you call that ToE jam?) shows that he is baiting for attention and seeking recognition. His posts are designed to give the impression of intellect without actually making any claims or having to provide any information that would prove/show others that his ToE is pseudoscience. This may be fear of rejection, but I think it is more fear of being ridiculed as a crackpot/pseudoscience hack as some already have attested to.
hope to learn more here.
Still a tad confused about seagypsy.
But overall the mods have done well. And the "spam" is kept down. (Yay mods) don't want that job 4 now...
The seagypsy / NMSquirrel thing was... well, ten kinds of weird. That was, if memory serves, ongoing just as I became a mod, so I don't know much about what went down with that
Why should anyone believe your 'version' about me/RealityCheck?
Aren't you the 'personality cult' troll over there, the one who 'friended' with a net-wide manipulative, sockpuppeting, downrating-bot-operating troll over there called "Uncle Ira" (who was later permabanned from here for sockpuppetry and trolling/stalking me from over there)?
And aren't you the troll who attacked me when I suggested in parting (while trying to withdraw from further posting on the net) that you should do your own due diligence on the BICEP2 'paper' because I could see immediately many assumptive/interpretive, systemic and methodological flaws in that obvious 'publish-or-perish' offering?
Didn't other more objective and less 'trollish' mainstreamers (and also professional physicists/cosmologists) also see many of the same flaws I mentioned, once they had taken my suggestion and had a closer look at the 'work' and 'claims' before using same as 'confirmation' for BBang etc hypothesis claims?
You still haven't apologized to me for your shrill attacks on the messenegr (me) while ignoring my parting suggestion for you to look again at that 'work'.
I trust you at least learned a very important lesson for a scientist: don't just believe the 'source' just because you respect them as mainstream 'scientists' and 'source' because they feed into your confirmation-biased way of 'accepting/rejecting things. Be strictly skeptical and objective above all. Don't troll around based on 'personality cult' crap; leave out the excitable 'giddy schoolgirl' type of 'true believing' and think it through for yourselves in future, before sayiong this or that has been 'proved/confirmed' by this 'source' or that. It's the objectively observed reality, and not the believed fantasy/source, that is the final arbiter of what you should accept/reject. That's the real science method. Yes?
Oh, and since you are still in denial about it, you are in for a shock when my 'non-existent' complete and consistent ToE is published, Captn. Don't say you weren't warned to prepare yourself for that shock. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Anyhow, believe it or not, no hard feelings! I have mostly withdrawn from net posting, but will be reading-only you all as I get the time. Bye for now. Good luck and good thinking, Captn S, everyone. Enjoy your discussions. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Welcome back, undefined!
You keep saying and saying and saying that.
Usually that means that we get to watch RC's head burst into flames while he delivers a twenty post diatribe about how unfair the world is to him.
@ Captain I hope you've been well. Anything interesting happening?
Hi Kittamaru. Please check your PM in-box. Thanks. Good luck. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Okay guys, no need to go bashing on Undefined now. If you haven't anything to say on the discussion at hand, then kindly refrain from posting. Taking pot-shots at other members won't be tolerated.
Yes, he made some mistakes in the past -yes, he was granted another chance here. Please just let the past in the past where it belongs.
not really. I was enjoying reading up but then I noticed this post below from RealityCheck AKA undefined
I am gathering info on a study that I would like your assistance with, please. It is not Astrophysics, but I think you will enjoy it.fire off an e-mail to me
my moniker here, periods after every word but stumpy
I have some questions and I still can't PM yet. I am not a prolific poster here... and between PO and my classes and my study that I am collecting data on... things are pretty busy.
sorry for posting off topic. I would like to contact Declan but I can't PM
I did not say anything bad about Reality Check though
I am curious - you cannot PM him? What does it say when you try to? (Might be a post count thing - haven't kept up on the latest updates and changes to user rights in the attempts to curb spam bots)
I will copy/paste it here
To be able to send PMs your post count must be 20 or greater.
You currently have 13 posts and you can send PMs to following users only:
Tiassa, Stryder, James R, zox, pseud0, Plazma Inferno!, kmguru, glaucon, Pete, Bells, Fraggle Rocker, hypewaders, SkinWalker, Hercules Rockefeller, Enmos, madanthonywayne, Billy T, Search & Destroy, Trippy, Kittamaru, superstring01, AlphaNumeric, prometheus
I am not as prolific here as elsewhere. Sorry
I also reported the above post by Undefined as Trolling. You can delete it as trolling and intent to cause mayhem. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
it is designed to get a long stupid flame war going.
unfortunately for him, I can prove everything I said (because I wasn't banned and I didn't have my comments deleted for Trolling etc from the site)
I won't bother you with the details. Unless you want to PM for more info
Honestly, what happened on another forum is none of our concern, unless it was somehow illegal and/or a spambot attack; as I said, he has been granted a second chance, please allow him to have it. If he is incorrect in facts or figures, provide evidence and back it up - however, personal attacks won't be tolerated.
I have no problem with him having a second chance. personally, I don't care much about him unless he says something that is untrue, or is directed at me, which the above comment is.
you DID say Taking pot-shots at other members won't be tolerated, and so I reported the post.
it is intentionally trying to start a flame war. it is also filled with untrue personal conjecture and unless he has some proof (to which I say present it here) then the post is designed to "take pot shots" at me for something he perceives differently than just about anyone on the other site.
This is the last thing I will post on that topic unless prompted.
as I said, I try to ignore him.
Separate names with a comma.