Does the moderator list need updating?

krash661 said:
what have you back engineered recently.
Click to expand...
Oh, you caught me out.
I have never back-engineered [sup]1[/sup] anything in my life.

Unfortunately I'm one of the dumb bastards that ends up engineering stuff from scratch.
Depending on what you mean by "recently"... take your pick: from here.
Or here.
Or here.
Or maybe here.
Or perhaps here.

1 I'll be nice and assume that this isn't some sort of claim to authority on your part.
 
paddoboy said:
I have mentioned at least thrice now, a method used for Alternative hypothesis pushers in another forum.
They post their hypothesis in the appropriate section...[alternative hypothesis]
They must answer all questions put to them by their critics.
And they have a month to do so, and supply evidence supporting their hypothesis, and/or invalidating the incumbent model.
At the end of that month, if no evidence is forthcoming, the thread is closed.
Needless to say, all have been closed.
Now that would solve it all! :shrug:
Click to expand...

Yes!
 
Heeee's baaaaack!!!...

Holy shit, Not trying to sound "huggy"....

Missed ya man... Welcome back. LOL.
 
Dywyddyr said:
Oh, you caught me out.
I have never back-engineered [sup]1[/sup] anything in my life.

Unfortunately I'm one of the dumb bastards that ends up engineering stuff from scratch.
Depending on what you mean by "recently"... take your pick: from here.
Or here.
Or here.
Or maybe here.
Or perhaps here.

1 I'll be nice and assume that this isn't some sort of claim to authority on your part.
Click to expand...
quite amusing, just stick to your lego building and you will be fine :)
and i'm going to reiterate my post #58
 
krash661 said:
quite amusing, just stick to your lego building and you will be fine :)
Click to expand...
Ah right.
This is some sort of mysterious claim to be working on "back engineering"... what, exactly?
A Large Woo Machine?
An Alien Unsupported Assertion?
Oh wait, it's Yet Another Claim That Can't Be Evidenced, isn't it?
Geez, they're tough.
One of my colleagues once had to take one apart to find the power supply.
And you know what?
There was nothing there after all!
 
Dywyddyr said:
Ah right.
This is some sort of mysterious claim to be working on "back engineering"... what, exactly?
A Large Woo Machine?
An Alien Unsupported Assertion?
Oh wait, it's Yet Another Claim That Can't Be Evidenced, isn't it?
Geez, they're tough.
One of my colleagues once had to take one apart to find the power supply.
And you know what?
There was nothing there after all!
Click to expand...
...
:) cute.
i'm now going to reiterate post #54
 
Gremmie said:
Point taken...
Civility should always be maintained.

But, how can you ask for proof or citations, when someone is only stating their opinion or belief?
It just seems nonsensical to me.

As I said, you don't like "fringe", either don't read it, or remove the subfora.
Seems a simple fix.
Click to expand...

Thing is, there is a difference between stating ones opinion, and trying to pass it off as fact

Regarding this feud between krash661 and Dywyddyr - its obvious you two don't like one another much... but please, stop railroading this thread :p
 
Kittamaru said:
Thing is, there is a difference between stating ones opinion, and trying to pass it off as fact
Click to expand...
I don't dispute that for a second...

But, who gets to decide this?
Is this decision up to a jury of one?
Up to a community?
Seems to me, it's basically all subjective.

Besides, facts are facts... You claim what you say is fact, you show proof, you can't, its opinion.

Doesn't seem very complicated.
 
Gremmie said:
I don't dispute that for a second...

But, who gets to decide this?
Is this decision up to a jury of one?
Up to a community?
Seems to me, it's basically all subjective.

Besides, facts are facts... You claim what you say is fact, you show proof, you can't, its opinion.

Doesn't seem very complicated.
Click to expand...

That's very true - and in the case of the conspiracy / woo woo forums, I often ask my fellow moderators their opinion before taking action if it isn't something as simple as someone being a jackass :)

Captain Kremmen said:
I wonder.
Is it possible to ban people from certain sections but not others?
Click to expand...


Yes and no... it would require completely restructuring the site and having multiple different "member groups" - in essence, we would have to change members assignments/titles/groups anytime they needed 'removed' from a sub forum for a time. It would get... messy... very quickly
 
Captain Kremmen said:
I wonder.
Is it possible to ban people from certain sections but not others?
Click to expand...
I have a vague memory (of many things, but let's not get diverted) that this has been suggested before.
I think the practicality was investigated, but, like Kit says, it wasn't implementable without considerable work and equally considerable potential for a big mess.
 
cluelusshusbund said:
If it coud easily be done... whats you'r idea for makin use of it.???
Click to expand...

Presumably the idea would be to have certain people banned from the sub-forums in which they become a problem (like how we had some people, like Victor, who were verbally banned from posting his "discoveries" in the science forums) for their own good.
 
Dywyddyr said:
I have a vague memory (of many things, but let's not get diverted) that this has been suggested before.
I think the practicality was investigated, but, like Kit says, it wasn't implementable without considerable work and equally considerable potential for a big mess.
Click to expand...

It's possible from a technical angle, however the problem is that us moderators aren't the site owners or developers. While we can press for changes towards things and do our homework, it's up to them at the end of the day. For instance the Forum software is made in such a way where Moderators can be in control of the subforum in which they moderate in regards to who gains access, this of course could be a problem if the moderator in question already has an issue with a member that wants to post somewhere.

One consideration I'd been looking at was the ability for members to "vote" on how helpful/useful a persons post was to define whether they should be privileged enough to post in a subset of subdforums. Again this can cause problems, for instance if there was a land of the blind and the vote was to decide who was king and one guy happened to have the use of one eye, who'd you think would win?
 
Kittamaru said:
Presumably the idea would be to have certain people banned from the sub-forums in which they become a problem (like how we had some people, like Victor, who were verbally banned from posting his "discoveries" in the science forums) for their own good.
Click to expand...

Yes a verbal ban from a certan area woud be easy enuff to do... such as banin people from the "Fringe" forums who just cant manage to be civil in those forums... an then lift the ban after a while an see how it goes.!!!

Like many other thangs... i thank civil discussion can become habit... especialy if thers a positive incentive to try it such as full postin rights in all forums.!!!
 
Stryder said:
It's possible from a technical angle, however the problem is that us moderators aren't the site owners or developers. While we can press for changes towards things and do our homework, it's up to them at the end of the day. For instance the Forum software is made in such a way where Moderators can be in control of the subforum in which they moderate in regards to who gains access, this of course could be a problem if the moderator in question already has an issue with a member that wants to post somewhere.

One consideration I'd been looking at was the ability for members to "vote" on how helpful/useful a persons post was to define whether they should be privileged enough to post in a subset of subdforums. Again this can cause problems, for instance if there was a land of the blind and the vote was to decide who was king and one guy happened to have the use of one eye, who'd you think would win?
Click to expand...

My thinking was to prevent a small number posters from posting in the non-fringe sections.
Leave them to do what they wish in the fringe sections, within limits.
It isn't the fringe sections that are the problem,
they are thriving.
It is the ruining of science threads that is the problem.

Have a look at the thread on organic brains.
The thread is full of complete nonsense.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
My thinking was to prevent a small number posters from posting in the non-fringe sections. Leave them to do what they wish in the fringe sections, within limits. It isn't the fringe sections that are the problem, they are thriving. It is the ruining of science threads that is the problem. Have a look at the thread on organic brains. The thread is full of complete nonsense.
Click to expand...

Indeed, give the eccentrics some slack in Fringe so that the warned and verbally-banned ones will be content to stay there [when it concerns their offbeat passions]. Rather than flushing out the quail so that they scatter all over SF again to carry-on what they still received intimidation for in the Fringe section.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
My thinking was to prevent a small number posters from posting in the non-fringe sections.
Leave them to do what they wish in the fringe sections, within limits.
It isn't the fringe sections that are the problem,
they are thriving.
It is the ruining of science threads that is the problem.

Have a look at the thread on organic brains.
The thread is full of complete nonsense.
Click to expand...

Not forgetting the continued nonsense claiming SR is false by chinglu in the P+M thread, despite the many mathematical results put by more reputable people invalidating his claims........Yet his nonsense continues.
 
Aaaanyway... yes, the moderator list needs updating. Several are almost completely AWOL. A good time to turn the soil as well, IMHO.
 
Currently, there are 15 moderators listed:

AlphaNumeric
Bells
Billy T
Enmos
Fraggle Rocker
glaucon
Hercules Rockefeller
hypewaders
Kittamaru
kmguru
madanthonywayne
Pete
prometheus
Search & Destroy
SkinWalker
superstring01
Trippy​

As far as I can see just 7 of that list are active, namely:

Bells
Billy T
Enmos
Fraggle Rocker
Kittamaru
kmguru
Trippy​

That's less than half. I'd say that's a problem.. yes.

Ok, add supermods Stryder and Tiassa.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top