Who here is capable of deciding what is not valid science vis a vis exclusion of pseudoscientists from posting in the Science sub-forums?

[Sarkus]

I think you're over-thinking the matter, DaveC.
JamesR answered the thread's initial question in post #12 (that it's the moderators).
In post #32 WoW asks about whether there was a chance to appeal such decisions.
Such appeals go to the moderators. Ideally it would be to another moderator, and they might discuss it between themselves behind closed doors, but when we have just one mod, it's unfortunately the same mod.

That's it. That's all there is to his question. Simples.

 

[Wizard of Whatever]

There is one active moderator at the moment. So who will hear the appeal?

The decision does not have to be immediately. All moderators could have time to consider it and make their decision.

 

[Wizard of Whatever]

Wizard of Waffle, Leave the science posts to those that post in the science sections, and others like you, can decide if they want to post on this site at all.
What a waffling willy wonka you are.

What an idiot and poor specimen of human you are.

 

[DaveC426913]

I think you're over-thinking the matter, DaveC.

Well, I am allowing for it to be over-thinked.

It's here in the SciFo OG forum for discussion by all.

JamesR answered the thread's initial question in post #12 (that it's the moderators).

In post #32 WoW asks about whether there was a chance to appeal such decisions.
Such appeals go to the moderators.

That wouldn't need to be discussed openly in the members' forum. On these other fora you speak of, a report to the mods would be sufficient to have it discussed amongst themselves behind closed doors.

It may be a typical procedure, but by no means required. I think what you are envisioning is an apple-picking machine (what works on other fora, under different circumstances) in an orange grove (this forum).

Anyway, it's academic. There's no harm in discussing it openly.

 

[Sarkus]

The decision does not have to be immediately. All moderators could have time to consider it and make their decision.

There is only one active moderator.
There are five listed in the Members under Staff, but one hasn't been seen since Mar 24, one since Jul 17, one Aug 17, and the other Oct 17 (going by the date of their last posts). The active one is JamesR. So if you want to wait until mods other than JamesR hears the appeal, you could be waiting a rather long time.

 

[Sarkus]

Well, I am allowing for it to be over-thinked.

It's here in the SciFo OG forum for discussion by all.

I'm not saying you can't over-think it. But it's not answering his question that I responded to.
He asked whether there are chances to appeal. There are. But if a mod has made a decision, that decision can only be altered by a mod. I.e. they need to hear the appeal. I haven't said how that appeal might be raised, what form it needs to take, who can discuss it, or anything like that. Only that the moderator(s) would need to hear it. And since we only have one mod, it would end up being heard by the same person who made the original decision. Anything here you disagree with yet?

That wouldn't need to be discussed openly in the members' forum. On these other fora you speak of, a report to the mods would be sufficient to have it discussed amongst themselves behind closed doors.

Your point being...? Recall, all I'm doing is answering his question: is there a chance to appeal?. Is there? Yes or no?
If Yes, who hears that appeal?

It may be a typical procedure, but by no means required. I think what you are envisioning is an apple-picking machine (what works on other fora, under different circumstances) in an orange grove (this forum).

What on earth are you going on about???
I haven't mentioned any procedure, other than that appeals do get heard by the mods. And in the situation at this site at the moment, with only the one mod, the mod who made the original decision is also the mod who would hear any appeal, however it is made.
Can the merits of the case, and subsequent appeal, be discussed in OG? Sure. Heck, they could even be discussed in the thread itself, if it doesn't derail that thread too much, I guess. If could be a simple report to the mod. Or maybe a PM. But the fact remains that appeals can be made.

Anyway, it's academic. There's no harm in discussing it openly.

Discussing what, exactly? That there is the opportunity to appeal? There's no real discussion there: it's a closed question and the answer is YES.
Simples.

 

[DaveC426913]

Discussing what, exactly? That there is the opportunity to appeal? There's no real discussion there: it's a closed question and the answer is YES.
Simples.

Discussing the line between science and pseudoscience, of course. That can influence moderators and owners.

It'll surely be a pretty one-sided argument, but never let it be said that Sci-Fo wasn't open to discussion.

Even if nothing comes of it, it may help to gel with the member body what the policy and rationale is.

 

[James R]

On the matter of appeals about moderator decisions, I might remind members that we have a forum called "Open Government". We also have another one called "Site Feedback".

Anybody who feels they have been treated unfairly by a moderator can post in one or both of those forums. Usually "Site Feedback" is the more appropriate one, unless the matter in question refers to the overall direction of the site, suggestions about amending site rules or policies and such.

The "Site Feedback" forum sees quite a lot of activity, including a lot of feedback about moderator actions. Generally speaking, I would note, we very rarely see large numbers of our members posting in strong support and solidarity with a member who posts a complaint about having just been moderated unfairly.