On the Inevitable Imperfection of Moderators

sweetpea said:
I know it's your site and your the mod. Can you say why the traffic is slow there?
Click to expand...
Not really. I haven't promoted it in any way.

sweetpea said:
Perhaps you could PM some of the free thinkers here with a link to there...
Click to expand...
I wouldn't want to poach people. I have my reputation to think about.

sweetpea said:
Ps. I note you are still bound to forums and the comment sections of others blog sites.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean.
 
exchemist said:
Rpenner quite clearly is recognised as an authority on physical science, by those of us on this forum who have university level physical science qualifications. But I quite understand that you don't recognise him as such.
Click to expand...
Because he contradicts Einstein, and dismisses my robust references.

exchemist said:
I also note that it seems a number of science forums appear to have banned you entirely, or at least from the hard science areas.

http://www.physicsdiscussionforum.org/farsight-t666.html
Click to expand...
That's the forum I run. I'm not banned there.

exchemist said:
http://www.thephysicsforum.com/members/farsight.html
Click to expand...
I was banned there for correcting a "moderator". I was banned from International Skeptics for winning an argument.

exchemist said:
So, frankly, if it's your word against rpenner's...
Click to expand...
And the fact that rpenner doesn't dare to show in public what I get warnings for.
 
rpenner said:
You literally can't get more antique than going back to Einstein's 1914-1920 papers on General Relativity...
Click to expand...
Einstein said what he said. You contradict Einstein, and then dismiss Einstein with some specious "antique" epithet.

rpenner said:
But I don't dismiss them...
Click to expand...
Yes, you do, and then you have the gall to threaten and warn and suspend me for referring to Einstein, and then you accuse me of peddling pseudoscience.

rpenner said:
I dismiss one particular autodidact's take on them...
Click to expand...
No, you dismiss Einstein.

rpenner said:
Specifically, there is a publicly available written policy forbidding pseudoscience on the main science sub-forums.
Click to expand...
Which you are promoting. I am correcting you, and you abuse your moderator status to claim I'm promoting pseudoscience, when I'm the one referring to "Einstein and the evidence".

rpenner said:
As far as I know you were not suspended during any part of June 2016, but after five formal warnings, your policy-driven exclusion from the main science forums covers that entire month.
Click to expand...
All trumped-up charges.

rpenner said:
I don't issue warnings to posters who are doing a good job.
Click to expand...
You issue warnings to posters who give robust peer-reviewed references to back up what they say. You don't issue warnings to abusive trolls.

rpenner said:
The privacy the PM mechanism protects is your own.
Click to expand...
Phooey. You abuse it. I have nothing to hide. I challenge you to make all warnings to me public. Let's have open justice, not the secret thought-police.
 
krash661 said:
in reality-- this site has an ethics problem.
i find it odd that there are an abundance of so-called intellects on this site and as it appears that none are able to understand this. comical.
Click to expand...

There are indeed ethics problems in many of the threads you participate in. Perhaps, after some thought, you can identify the one common factor in all your threads.
 
Farsight said:
No, you dismiss Einstein.
Click to expand...
I always enjoy pointing to the way that Farsight cherry-picks quotations. For the comment above, Farsight used the beginning of the sentence, but omits the link and the accompanying commentary about the actual use of Einstein's specific scientific claims. Farsight rarely, if ever, uses Einstein's specific claims unless they are from the exploratory picture between SR and GR, specific claims that Einstein explicitly repudiated later.
 
Yazata said:
It's difficult for moderators to simultaneously be participants in arguments, especially if they take aggressive, heated and bombastic positions on issues, while simultaneously pretending to be the grownup in the room and talking down to people from a position of assumed authority. That simply doesn't work. If participants lose respect for moderators as participants, they lose respect for them as moderators too, and indirectly they lose respect for the board that they represent.
Click to expand...
In like manner, moderators who choose to moderate members in a thread in which they are at loggerheads are displaying the intellect of ground armadillo bone, the integrity of a wanton sociopath and the professionalism of a raspberry blancmange. It astounds me that such unethical behaviour is accepted here.
 
Farsight said:
And the fact that rpenner doesn't dare to show in public what I get warnings for.
Click to expand...
It's not what I daren't do. It's a principle of governance that less surprises lead to less work explaining surprises and since PM is an abbreviation for "personal (or private) message" I thought the tin should contain what is on the label. The author of the forum software agrees with me on this point. The rules (including G2 and H14) agree with me.
Farsight said:
Which you are promoting.
Click to expand...
Your complaint is generic to anyone policing the main science forums according to the policy which I did not draft. If your complaint is about my actions, you are violating rule G2. If you complaining about my selection as a volunteer moderator or the policy, then it's the forum administrators you'll be wanting to talk to.
Farsight said:
I'm the one referring to "Einstein and the evidence".
Click to expand...
Thus demonstrations that you know Einstein's theories well enough to compare them with physical evidence would be relevant.
Farsight said:
I challenge you to make all warnings to me public.
Click to expand...
That's a challenge established by forum software. There's no "allow everyone to view this personal conversation" flag.
For your posts in May 2016, the following received warnings:
As per your clearly expressed wishes, anyone PMing me will be invited to view the five resulting conversations. Happy now?
Farsight said:
Let's have open justice, not the secret thought-police.
Click to expand...
Not secret, but respectful of privacy for both you and others.
 
Rpenner, please let us know how many members take you up on that offer.

I don't wish to, because I know how you both write and reason. No contest: Reason wins over "pop-science cargo-cult trash" every time. :D
 
Dr_Toad said:
Rpenner, please let us know how many members take you up on that offer.

I don't wish to, because I know how you both write and reason. No contest: Reason wins over "pop-science cargo-cult trash" every time. :D
Click to expand...


The thing with Farsight is that he believes quoting the great man, makes his own claims and Interpretations [Farsight's] as indisputable!
Einstein made errors, and admitted to them.
Farsight and others here, are unable to admit to any errors.
That leaves a chasm between them as wide as the Grand Canyon.
Plus of course what Einstein said and believed was a 100 years or so ago.
Scientists/cosmologists have learnt heaps since then, while keeping the basis of SR and GR are continually being further validated to higher degrees of precision with increasing accurate technology.
Farsight clings to every word as a prop.

As a lay person who has read plenty, when I see these pretentious individuals coming forth on this forum, [which does have lax guide lines] I always ask how many other science forums have they been banned from.
That and of course, asking them that if they are so sure of what they believe to be factual, why the hell are they here: Why are they so backward in coming forward and testing their ideas via the accepted scientific method and peer review?
We all know the answer to that.
 
Yep. I come here to learn. If I can teach someone in the specific skills I have, all the better.

I try not to presume or troll, except when someone's troll post gigs me...
 
rpenner said:
It's not what I daren't do. It's a principle of governance that less surprises lead to less work explaining surprises and since PM is an abbreviation for "personal (or private) message" I thought the tin should contain what is on the label. The author of the forum software agrees with me on this point. The rules (including G2 and H14) agree with me.
Your complaint is generic to anyone policing the main science forums according to the policy which I did not draft. If your complaint is about my actions, you are violating rule G2. If you complaining about my selection as a volunteer moderator or the policy, then it's the forum administrators you'll be wanting to talk to.
Thus demonstrations that you know Einstein's theories well enough to compare them with physical evidence would be relevant.
That's a challenge established by forum software. There's no "allow everyone to view this personal conversation" flag.
For your posts in May 2016, the following received warnings:
As per your clearly expressed wishes, anyone PMing me will be invited to view the five resulting conversations. Happy now?
Not secret, but respectful of privacy for both you and others.
Click to expand...


Good that you warn people when they write incorrect stuff on science forum.

Why don't you do that for most prolific poster Mr Paddoboy. His posts are mostly incorrect, whenever he is not copy pasting.

Farsight accusations that you allow adhoms etc by posters like Paddoboy has some merit. I second that.
 
billvon said:
There are indeed ethics problems in many of the threads you participate in. Perhaps, after some thought, you can identify the one common factor in all your threads.
Click to expand...

Krash661 was permanently banned a week ago for menacing and threatening behaviour.

After the incident occurred, a report was filed, staff convened and a long discussion was had about how to proceed. The decision was made to permanently ban him for said behaviour.
 
The God said:
Why don't you do that for most prolific poster Mr Paddoboy. His posts are mostly incorrect, whenever he is not copy pasting.
.
Click to expand...
Yet as I continually tell you, they are actually generally correct as they align with the mainstream view, while near all your own posts, reflecting your fairy tale cosmology picture end up appropriately in the fringes, generally pseudoscience.
Stop pretending that anyone is really taking any notice of you and face reality.
Farsight of course also has been banned elsewhere on more strict forums, and that alone speaks volumes for his continued nonsensical claims that he is correct.
 
Bells said:
Krash661 was permanently banned a week ago for menacing and threatening behaviour.

After the incident occurred, a report was filed, staff convened and a long discussion was had about how to proceed. The decision was made to permanently ban him for said behaviour.
Click to expand...

You mean, no more "pathetic shenanigans"?

(Shakes head) :)
 
I'm beginning to think rpenner is too much of a gentleman for this site. The time he spends explaining his warnings( see post #69 with links to every post), to 'someone' who a mod has in the past called a fraud, seems like a great waste of time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top