Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by quadraphonics, Oct 19, 2012.
maybe I am just weird but I would appreciate a little mod on mod action.....
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
As already stated- moderators cannot moderate each other. What we can do (and what happens quite often) is we can bicker, fight, and outright insult one another in the mod-only forum to the point where super-mods or admins need to step in and put us all in our respective corners Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Lately we've been more focused on this whole spam issue than anything else though, so there isn't much friction atm (trust me, we mods don't always agree with one another - which is GOOD, diversity of opinion is NEEDED on a site like this)
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
With respect (really), there comes a point where something has to be done for the sake of the forum itself. After being given an unjust (again) ban, I recently conducted an experiment using the alias "Mars Rover" to prove one way or the other the extent to which the insidious MOD-TROLL collusion and abuse of power has entrenched itself here under cover of 'unbiased moderation'. I posted on-topic questions/observations and immediately got Tach trolling and baiting instead of engaging fairly on the discussion I wanted.
He started insulting and spoiling the discussion in his usual way. He also started accusing me of being "Reiku". So I just played along with his game to see which of us would get banned. And what happened? He and prometheus colluded to ban Mars Rover! Tach and prometheues ADMITTED in open forum that HE and TACH were more interested in the PERSON than the TOPIC/SCIENCE discussion! prometheus obliged the TROLL (again) and banned me (again)!
Seriously, just how blatant does it have to get before the admin realize that this sort of insidious mod-troll collusion and abuse of power for PERSONAL TACTICS and ego trips is not good for a science forum?
PMing Admin/mods does NOT WORK. It has already been proven to just take the word of the MOD-TROLL perpetrators against the injured party....and when one complains in open forum because the PMing etc does not work, he gets banned some more to silence him and "make him behave better" (a euphemism for "take it or leave because we mod-trolls OWN the place").
It's all there in black and white. The experiment was a success in that it confirmed what everyone knows by now. It can't be hidden behind cynical urgings to use "due process", because due process is FATALLY COMPROMISED when mod-trolls get a free hand and a victim is not even given a chance to defend against their subtle collusion/victimizations and ego-trips at the expense of science discourse and member confidence in the site integrity.
The experiment results support my longstanding observations.
Enough said: After all, no-one has any 'right' to 'upset' the mod-troll clique.
PS: Some of you may already know that not so long ago I also carried out a similar experiment (as "Investigator") at another science site. To great success. There too was demonstrated for all to see that personal and prejudicial and capricious troll-mod ego-trips took precedence over actually answering on-topic questions and discussing the scientific/logic points raised irrespective of the source of those points.
if they thought you were Reiku, it is no small wonder your other account was banned... Reiku has at least two dozen banned sock puppets on multiple similar IP addresses...
Yes, they looked into it and realized Mars Rover was your sock puppet.
Now- here's the bit you didn't know, I argued against it and PM'ed Prometheus questioning his judgment. I argued that You were not Mars Rover. He confirmed that you were Mars Rover.
So while Tach called it into question, so did I, and it had nothing to do with YOU. It had to do with Reiku.
You were not banned until they learned it was a sock puppet. Up until then, no moderator action had been taken against you.
All your chest thumping adds up to this:
I don't care how noble you think your motives were- you lied. You posted in a manner that was untoward, begging for attention. You behaved in a manner to get yourself banned, now you claim that deception and poor behavior unfairly earned a ban?
And during this, you deceived other members, self included.
Yeah- I'm taking it personal. I refuted your bogus claims as Mars Rover- along with others, and am disgusted at how you conducted yourself. We're not here to pander to you playing Detective, we're here to talk about Science- to stand up against bad science and to promote better understanding and critical thinking of the sciences. "Mars Rover" was promoting misunderstandings and bad science.
I've battled hard against Mods on many forums- I almost always lose those battles and I'm permanently banned on three of them, probably soon to be four.
And I have NEVER created a sock puppet and Lied about who I am.
Sock puppetry has to be the ultimately low in poster sneakiness.
You got off light- every forum I've ever been on; a Sock Puppet earns you an instant Perma-ban.
So here's your reality check. You earned those bans.
I am actually surprised that this smelly derriere hasn't been banned forever. If I recall (he has been on my Ignore for 3 or so years) he insults people out of the blue (meaning without reason), and getting away with it. He also must have some sort of record of short term bans...
I don't see why we should keep him around, but hey, apparently Sciforums' pageview is down, so we need every able bodied poster...
Admittedly, RC hasn't done anything (to my knowledge) beyond make himself irritating at times... though yeah, the sock puppet could have easily earned a permanent vacation...
See, that's just it- I've been supportive of R.C. (I'm just as "annoying" as him.) seeing as insulting some people for not understanding something or making a mistake in calculation and such is detrimental to the forum environment. Such as someone calling OnlyMe a crank and a crackpot- clearly undeserved. It was uncalled for.
I can see slamming down the guys like Matsurov, who repeatedly intend to cast doubt on others integrity for their refusal to grasp the concept. Farsight and others- they deter from understanding physics in order to stroke their own ego and I find that worthy of no respect. It's called for at that point.
But pretending to be another person, deceiving the members who are trying to be honest and to promote valid and genuine science- in an arena that already does have enough crackpots confusing the issue on top of a lack of formal education and reasonable issues of explaining complex situations in a forum setting--- Intolerable.
If you're going to fight unfairness, you must fight fairly. You must be direct and honest and uphold that which you are fighting for. Failing those, you only remove your credibility and that makes you worthless in a fight.
And who sanctions their actions?
RC has been given two bans for restarting a closed thread, because he simply has to have the last word and one for trolling, again, because he can't accept that someone else could know more about a topic than he does. I don't find him particularly irritating - more uninformed and vocal.
Admins presumably can police the supermods, and the owners of the site can police the admins. The owners of the site can either do whatever they like or are accountable to god, depending on your preference.
That was the very point of my "Mars Rover" experiment. I posted openly on-topic and what happened? I was immediately trolled and insulted by Tach. And just because of his (and certain mods) personal vendettas against anyone wanting to discuss subtle and novel perspectives of accepted physics, he and prom went to the PERSON rather than the DISCUSSION of the scientific/logical points raised for discussion. That Mod-Troll (ie prom-Tach) 'personal hunt' was initially motivated by some "Personal baggage" with this "Reiku" character; but eventually when it became clear I wasn't "Reiku", they proceeded to justify the ban with attribution to me (RealityCheck").
And it was an EXPERIMENT carried out in the scientific manner and without intent to deceive "forever" (else I would have used a totally different proxy/pathway as Mars Rover, and prom would not have been able to positively identify me as RealityCheck at all).
And anyway, I could have easily waited to get back from my "holiday" to come and complain again about the latest injustice...but what would have happened? Nothing except more bans. The only recourse was to prove my point once for all about the troll-mod tactics/personal agendas. It worked.
And the only thing that the perpetrators and their 'supporters' can do is COMPLAIN about my experiment which proved my point? I would have expected scientists to have been more interested in the experiment/results than in the "rules" which may be used to prevent the truth from being proved once for all.
I therefore stress this point: Mars Rover was not the usual form/intent "sockpuppet" intended to deceive forever and circumvent policy on same; it was an EXPERIMENT to TEST an OBSERVATION. It had a 'shelf life' until that observation was sufficiently tested to confirmation/falsification.
It succeeded. That is the important point. All this talk of "rules" etc is PRECISELY why the experiment was conducted: because the observation was that the "rules" were being misapplied and abused to the convenience of the troll-mod types who will be sticklers for rules when it suits THEM (ie, 'justifying' trolling/interference by them and banning others), but will flout those same rules when others want those same rules applied to everyone.
I trust the point is clear? This was NOT a simple/usual case of making a sockpuppet to flout the rules, it was A SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENT to CONFIRM/FALSIFY the OBSERVATION that those rules were the playthings of the troll-mod types. No more. No less. At no stage was it ever anything else as it is being characterised now by those who have been caught out by that experiment
My "Mars Rover" here at Sciforums (just like my "Investigator" at another site) was SPECIFICALLY CREATED to test the problem/observation which has NOT been properly dealt with under "rules" which are cynically used and abused by the troll-mod types who are in positions of power which puts the VICTIM at a "catch-22" type disadvantage because once the troll-mod injustices are perpetrated the victim is AUTOMATICALLY "in the wrong"...and any attempt to complain and get justice is met with the cynical use of the "rules" to ban and silence and keep the victim "in the wrong" ad infinitum. It's insidious and perfect 'cover' for the mod-troll types.
The fact that the experiment proved that an impression of the PERSON is MORE IMPORTANT than the TOPIC that person wishes to discuss should RING ALARM BELLS....but does it? No, it merely gets more 'blame the victim' responses because the victim has to go around the rules to prove his point which could NOT be proven otherwise. Hence the catch-22 which makes the troll-mod types so confident and even blatant in their 'tactics' which they feel they can perpetrate with impunity because they think that their victims are in a no-win situation (but this is not so when one can conduct a scientific experiment like MARS ROVER was....which proved that my observations about troll-mod behaviour and tactics/collusion was alive and well as previously pointed out).
Please see my reply to Kittamaru above. Thanks.
Nonsense. If you post Bad Science- you're going to get called on it. Unless you can quote in linear order where others oppressed you simply out of spite, you will be hard pressed to justify;
-posing as an alter ego to deceive people
-posting bad science, misconceptions and fundamental misunderstandings of BBT
-posting in a manner suggestive of an ulterior motive, then acting offended when others direct attention to your motives
-claiming to have been unfairly banned (Extension of existing ban) for playing that charade.
I agree that at times, the physics forums get too harsh ( I get too harsh, too)- but I don't agree that your "experiment" was scientific, unbiased nor sound in anyway. It was demonstrated in a way that was bound to fail. And lastly the ban was justified since it's acknowledged and admitted that it was your sock puppet. You were not banned for being wrong, you were banned for sock puppetry.
You should have waited for the ban to be lifted and tried again honestly instead of trying under a pseudonym and posting bad science. If your sock had demonstrated critical thinking, willingness to understand theory before getting in a huff and calling it "wrong" or even been a little less pushy about the arrogance of evil scientists tricking the world with wrong theories- you wouldn't have had any troubles with Tach or Prometheus or myself or everyone else in the threads MarsRover was in, trying to correct the errors in your statements.
You orchestrated your own failure- then complained of the failure by blaming it on others.
Regardless of your outcome or reasons... you knowingly violated the rules of this website and should consider yourself lucky that you did not earn a permanent vacation for that fact alone... if you really believe there is some grand conspiracy here, take into consideration that any one of us could permanently ban you for that reason and nobody else would bat an eye... after all, that rule is spelled out quite simply in the stickied thread...
Actually, it's far more simple than that. Having multiple accounts is against the forum rules, and you created the mars rover account just after you were banned. Experiment (man it makes my teeth ache to call it that) or not, you created a new account to avoid the ban of your old one and as others have pointed out you were treated with great leniency by not having all of your accounts permanently banned. What do you do with that - more trolling...
Nonsense? A scientific experiment (Mars Rover) was conducted in the only way possible if that experiment was to confirm/falsify the observations on troll-mod tactics abusing the rules for personal baggage agendas. The experiment immediately attracted the trolling and personal speculations about the 'messenger' instead of keeping only to the points being discussed. Confirmation hence achieved.
And what makes you so sure it's always the victim who is doing the 'bad science' if the discussion is not allowed to proceed to conclusion PROPERLY without the constant troll-mod incursions which end up derailing the conversation and making it all about 'the messenger' rather than the points raised? For all your claiming to be evenhanded about all this, you seem to be a 'preconclusionary' scientist who makes judgements before completion of discourse, and then proceeds to take the cues from the same mod-troll types who have ABORTED the conversation so that you could not get the full picture at all before making your judgements. You are thus being manipulated by the mod-troll types and you seem willing enough to go along despite the evidence now proved against their insidious tactics to do just that to threads/discussions which they 'deem' by their tactics to be "bad science" but have not allowed/pursued the discussion ON-TOPIC long enough to settle it one way or the other as present rather than as 'preconcluded' by them/you. Perhaps your recent experience at their hands has made you 'more compliant' and not as 'evenhanded' as you think? Just an observation which may explain your own 'reactions' and 'rationalizations' in this matter?
Anyhow, like I said earlier, I am trailing off my internet forums researches/participation to concentrate on my own scientific work/publications. This EXPERIMENT/RESULT was just a 'farewell present' to the forum members as a whole, in the hope that less mod-troll tactics spoil/abort possibly interesting subtle/novel discussions about the universal phenomena set.
Good luck and good thinking to you always, Neverfly, everyone! And no hard feelings against any person here...life's too short for such things! I will be posting sporadically if and when something warrants it. Cheers all!
That sort of rationalization was dealt with before. You are not the first to try it on. The fact that the problem/proof is now there for all to see scientifically that these SAME RULES were the OBJECT of the experiment insofar as they are being abused by the troll-mod types, then such rationalizations are not valid excuses because you use them NOW as post hoc 'justification' for the troll-mod behaviour which prompted (nay, necessitated) the experiment in the first place.
That is what is the essential feature of the "catch-22' which a victim is cought up in when "the rules' are the problem and then these same 'rules' are the 'justification' for continuing the problem! Do you understand this allusion to Catch-22"? Look it up and you will see where the problem is the rules, then the solution must come from outside those rules.
You are being disingenuous in your quoting the rules at me. You know perfectly well that those rules are being cynically used when convenient to your purposes and ignored when convenient to the victim's purposes. Moreover, your disingenuousness extends to your view on the experiment as Mars Rover, because you know perfectly well what that experiment was FOR. And you know perfectly well the motivation and 'time frame' limitations placed on it, because you know perfectly well that I conducted a similar one over at the other site under the name "Investigator".
Both thse experiments were time limited and specifically targeted to the very kind of rules which you cynically quote now in order to deflect from the point and results of these experiment which prove my observations correct.
So, no amount of disingenuous and cynical outrage at my 'flouting' of the rules will avail you now. The rules are proven to be the personal playthings of mod-trolls when they are more interested in scoring personal points and agendas rather than allowing a discussion to proceed without the sort of IMMEDIATE trolling made by Tach and your later complicity in pursuing the person rather than telling Tach to keep ON-TOPIC and avoid baiting/flaming/spoiling tactics for his own personal baggage vendettas against "Reiku" or whomever.
Once you allow Tach to spoil threads/discussions before they have a chance to proceed to proper conclusion, you aid and abet the trolls. That you later aid and abet by banning the victim and/or closing down the thread/discussion through threats both implicit and explicit, you are the problem which keeps on giving to the trolls to do the things which bring this site/science/scientists into disrepute.
You can change your attitude as a mod (I have pointed out before, using your own words, that you seem to have a 'pavlovian response' type kneejerk preconclusionary/hostile attitude before the facts are in when a new thread/idea/person shows up). If you can just correct that, perhaps the damage you do in future may be kept to within 'sustainable levels', and not be so destructive of confidence and fairness and science discourse on the merits rather than the person.
Nothing personal, just objective observations on the mod-troll phenomena which you seem to embody quite well. Unfortunately for all concerned.
Good luck. No hard feelings.
Separate names with a comma.