What do you want and expect from the moderators of sciforums...

Ok.. really. What's being "controlled?" Examples?

Call the forum "Off Topic" or something similar.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

General Discussion

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There we go... I like that one.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Speakers Corner

 

General Thought Correction Zone

 

i expect fair treatment of the people who post here. it should be one rule for everyone,

either we all get punished for the same thing, or none of us get punished for it, i see people giving out bans and infractions unfairly.

but its what happens when you give anybody power in any form in this world, they begin to abuse it.

peace.

 

I wouldn't doubt that this happens... but can you provide me with examples that I can investigate for myself? I don't actually notice these things so it would help if I can see the problem for myself.

 

Absane:

1. Sciforums isn't even close to resembling a real government, so I don't see the relevance of your analogy. Although ironically, if you attempted to draw parallels, sciforums would be an oligarchy.

2. Governments provide far more consistency than seen here on sciforums. Legislature and precedent, just off the top of my head.

I still stand by my earlier comments. Get rid of all moderators, keep someone around to manage the server, secure it against hackers/advertisers, and assist in prosecuting when a member breaks the law, and all is well.

 

my list:
1. fair
2. objective
3. knowledgeable in the forum they moderate.
4. able to admit mistakes.

for them to be removed when they are unable or unwilling to do their jobs.

 

That must be something new then. I never saw anything like that when I was a mod. If not then I seriously advice you to take a good long look at yourself because clearly you have then lost touch with reality.

Peer review means that manuscripts are scrutinized by peers and judged. And rejected if necessary. We are all quite aware that for instance (Q) has been judged to be unworthy to be a moderator by several moderators and still he is not rejected.

You really are losing it. A good scientist? You know what good scientists do all day? They try to fuck over people in order to get ahead in the game. Can we drop the pedantic nonsense already of a good scientist! The majority of good scientists are class A asshole.

Give us you judgement on your peer (Q) then. Like a good scientist.

 

Amen, I fully concur with this.

 

Hey pal, don't drag me into your childish tantrum.

 

How many real scientists, besides Spurious, with a PhD, are members here? I've always been curious about that. Well, an estimate.

 

You would think that when some members have so many posts, they should be somewhat scientific.

 

Quantity is not proportional to quality.

 

Quantity is proportional to capacity.

 

nearly identical to what i stated above.

 

Being so scientific and stuff—I myself am from a hairy sector of society—I am really impressed with their appeals for foolproof accountability, dignified manners (where warranted, of course), civil guidance from their superiors, and the almighty imperative that Sciforums-dot-com should be paramount in its renown for scientific endeavor for the scientific community by the scientifically minded.

I get such a rush of calculated cultivation when I drop in that I positively shrink in my nescience and am totally baffled as to why they have accepted me within the circles of their prominent and gifted company.

I am definitely honored, and humbled, to be a sub-member to this polyhistoric forum with a beautiful blade-saw crusading above the thermosphere as its logo.

 

i didn't see your post.