Nominate a moderator for this sub forum.

[(In)Sanity]

We are looking for a moderator of this sub forum. Nominees should be of good standing on the forum with at least 200 meaningful posts relevant to this sub forum.

We are not looking for someone to clarify who is right or wrong on any topic, we are looking for someone who will uphold the basic forum guidelines.

Those guidelines can be found here

You are not allowed to nominate yourself or nominate a member if you yourself have less then 100 posts.

The first person to reach 5 unique nominations will be considered for the job. This will not be an automatic win for the nominee in all cases. Multiple nominees will be looked at and one chosen by myself or through further debate.

[Guitarist]

I nominate DrRocket, who is knowledgeable and temperamentally restrained. I think he would do a great job as moderator (if he has the time); there is little doubt in my mind that he would interpret the guidelines in the spirit they are intended.

[organic god]

River Rat

[JaneBennet]

I nominate Guitarist because (i) he’s been around for a long time (so he should be familiar with a few faces) and (ii) he visits very regularly (so he’ll be around a good deal to keep an eye on things).

[Demen Tolden]

There are too many choices for me to nominate only one person. I think that the mathematics subforum is by far the safest residence of both common sense and "forum etiquette." I almost never see the need for moderation here.

[DrRocket]

I nominate DrRocket, who is knowledgeable and temperamentally restrained. I think he would do a great job as moderator (if he has the time); there is little doubt in my mind that he would interpret the guidelines in the spirit they are intended.

Thanks for the vote of conficence guitarist, but I don't want the job. It is easy to be temperamentally restrained in this forum. The only challenge is William McCormick, and I may yet lose it.

I agree with the comment made that the mathematics forum really doesn't need much moderation. However, if a moderator is needed then I think that guitarist, river rat or Jane Bennet would each make fine moderators.

But (to the admin) you need big help in the physics forum. That forum is the dandiest collection of outlandish and plain crazy ideas that I have ever seen masquerading under the banner of science. There is even a thread dedicated to the question of whether the participants are just plain crazy. Unless you do something there it will sink deeper into the depths of "science of the weird". You need a moderator there who can and will either delete the wacko threads or move them to "Pseudoscience". I don't want that job either.

[KALSTER]

Don't really post here, but Guitarist is a good choice from what I have seen here and on another site. And yes, the physics forum needs some serious house cleaning!

[(In)Sanity]

Guitarist , are you interested ?

[river_rat]

Perhaps we need "forum expert" and "dissident" tags we can attach to posters who either show great skill and knowledge in a certain area so that newbies can assume these people know what they are talking about or constantly go against the scientific mainstream respectively. (Not that this of itself is a bad thing, more so that they don't trust this guy to help them before their calc101 exam.)

[Demen Tolden]

Perhaps we need "forum expert" and "dissident" tags we can attach to posters who either show great skill and knowledge in a certain area so that newbies can assume these people know what they are talking about or constantly go against the scientific mainstream respectively. (Not that this of itself is a bad thing, more so that they don't trust this guy to help them before their calc101 exam.)

In my opinion, labeling causes more harm than good... as long as it is conducted with the judgement of a human being I think. Perhaps labeling isn't so bad when a label is acheived through self accomplishment. One example may be completing the required collection of classes to attain the label of graduate, or doctor or such in real life. When a label is always attainable by any individual and is not dependent on the judgement of others, the negative effects of labeling probably are not as great I think.

[JaneBennet]

However, if a moderator is needed then I think that guitarist, river rat or Jane Bennet would each make fine moderators.

Thanks. :-D But I don’t think I’m up for it either. I don’t visit as often now as I did several months ago. It is cretins like William McCormick who have put me off coming and browsing this site as much as I used to. Nowadays I just pop in once in a while to check the Mathematics subforum for any interesting threads, and the Introductions section to see if there are any new members interested in maths.

IMHO Guitarist is the best person for the job. If he doesn’t want it, then I would vote river_rat as my second choice. 8) (The reason river_rat is my second choice is because he seems to pop in less often than Guitarist. I just think that someone who is frequently around would, ceteris paribus, moderate better than someone who pops in less frequently. :P)

[(In)Sanity]

I think we are going to go with Guitarist who has accepted the nomination. I forgot to tell him it only pays in virtual dollars

[river_rat]

Congrads Guitarist, i'm positive you will do a great job. I agree with Jane, my presence here is a bit too erratic for me to do any meaningful moderation.

[DrRocket]

However, if a moderator is needed then I think that guitarist, river rat or Jane Bennet would each make fine moderators.

Thanks. :-D But I don’t think I’m up for it either. I don’t visit as often now as I did several months ago. It is cretins like William McCormick who have put me off coming and browsing this site as much as I used to. Nowadays I just pop in once in a while to check the Mathematics subforum for any interesting threads, and the Introductions section to see if there are any new members interested in maths.

IMHO Guitarist is the best person for the job. If he doesn’t want it, then I would vote river_rat as my second choice. 8) (The reason river_rat is my second choice is because he seems to pop in less often than Guitarist. I just think that someone who is frequently around would, ceteris paribus, moderate better than someone who pops in less frequently. :P)

I understand your position. I pretty much share it.

I hope the mods are paying attention. William McCormick and his ilk have pretty much destroyed the physics forum. He has the potential to do likewise to mathematics. Unless something is done about the posting of off-topic, ridiculous, patently false, and truthfully insane ideas in legitimate forums the forums will collapse. Debunking his drivel takes far too much time and makes no dent whatever in the volume of crap that he produces and posts. I'm getting pretty tired of it myself, and won't hang around unless something is done.

Unfortunately the authority quoted for the position of "moderator" is not sufficient to fix the problem. Repeated posts of the nature that we are discussing anywhere other than in Pseudoscience ought to result in a banning, and apparently that power is reserved for the administrator.

[KALSTER]

I have shared your feelings for a long time, DrRocket. Unfortunately Ophiolite in his lone moderator mode was relatively powerless to do an effective job. The choosing of the new administrator is that much more important, since he would be the one that would dole out bannings. IS has set the limit aim for nominations to 25 which could make it a long process though, especially since it would be difficult to even find 25 qualified members to make the nominations in the first place, even if they all voted for the same guy. At the moment Harold seems favourite and I am sure that he would be able to get things done. Here’s hoping for a speedy election.

[Harold14370]

Have you guys tried using the ignore feature? Click on a post by William, then click on profile. When that comes up, click on Ignore This User. This will help quite a bit until a more permanent solution is effected, if such occurs. It cuts down the volume and removes the temptation to rise to the bait.

I would hope something could be worked out short of a ban. William is sincere, if somewhat deranged.

[KALSTER]

He is the only guy on my ignore list. :wink:

The general damage to the forum goes on regardless if he is ignored by us or not though. I do agree that a ban need not come immediately after an administrator is crowned. A final and exact explanation to him of exactly what he is doing wrong and what the consequences will be if he continues in the same vein would be a good thing IMO. If he continues to ignore such warnings, then I can't see any other way of dealing with him than at least temporary bans or a perma ban if that still doesn't help. No?

Another way to curb the non-ending wave of pseudoscience might be to make an extra Alternative Theories sub-forum. It is much less derogatory than the term Pseudoscience and might not hurt the pride of the occasional crackpot as much.

[(In)Sanity]

I have shared your feelings for a long time, DrRocket. Unfortunately Ophiolite in his lone moderator mode was relatively powerless to do an effective job. The choosing of the new administrator is that much more important, since he would be the one that would dole out bannings. IS has set the limit aim for nominations to 25 which could make it a long process though, especially since it would be difficult to even find 25 qualified members to make the nominations in the first place, even if they all voted for the same guy. At the moment Harold seems favourite and I am sure that he would be able to get things done. Here’s hoping for a speedy election.

We'll see what happens. It's not a choice I want people to take lightly. Let's give it at least a week or so to have a solid preferred choice.

[Harold14370]

We'll see what happens. It's not a choice I want people to take lightly. Let's give it at least a week or so to have a solid preferred choice.

To tell you the truth, I'm kind of hoping somebody else will take me off the hook.

[GenerationE]

I definitely believe that something needs to be done about William. He is the main reason I don't view that forum anymore. It's sickening trying to have an intelligible conversation with someone who retorts any argument you make by reverting back to "The multi subatomic particle... blah blah blah... Universal Scientist."

I believe that the Physics forum needs more structure in general though, Physics, I believe, is the most broad science and needs some kind of organization.

As for who should take over the job, I think Harold would be good. But also Janus or Magi. Really anyone who has consistently monitored the forum, other than William of course.

Also the math forum seems pretty healthy with out a Moderator. It really lacks a significant number of posters if it lacks anything, but I don't think that can be easily remedied.

[DrRocket]

I have shared your feelings for a long time, DrRocket. Unfortunately Ophiolite in his lone moderator mode was relatively powerless to do an effective job. The choosing of the new administrator is that much more important, since he would be the one that would dole out bannings. IS has set the limit aim for nominations to 25 which could make it a long process though, especially since it would be difficult to even find 25 qualified members to make the nominations in the first place, even if they all voted for the same guy. At the moment Harold seems favourite and I am sure that he would be able to get things done. Here’s hoping for a speedy election.

I have not seen any post regarding selection of a new administrator, only sub-forum moderators. Where is the discussion on a new administrator ?

[marnixR]

under general discussion

[Harold14370]

Another way to curb the non-ending wave of pseudoscience might be to make an extra Alternative Theories sub-forum. It is much less derogatory than the term Pseudoscience and might not hurt the pride of the occasional crackpot as much.

I like the way Wikipedia handles it. They ban all "original research" meaning that you cannot post stuff that has not been published in some respectable journal or book. They don't need to make a lot of value judgements; they lump quackery, crackpottery and original brilliant ideas all together.

So maybe you could call the "pseudoscience" forum the "original research" forum. This would mean that Cosmo and WM would both be pretty much banished from the cosmology and physics forums.

[MagiMaster]

What about questions about original research? I generally agree that passing off original research as truth or highjacking threads to talk about original research is bad, but I think that making a seperate thread (one thread) to seriously discuss new ideas should be allowed. Of course, I'm sure that's more or less what you meant anyway, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

[KALSTER]

What about questions about original research? I generally agree that passing off original research as truth or highjacking threads to talk about original research is bad, but I think that making a seperate thread (one thread) to seriously discuss new ideas should be allowed. Of course, I'm sure that's more or less what you meant anyway, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

Agreed.

[DrRocket]

Have you guys tried using the ignore feature? Click on a post by William, then click on profile. When that comes up, click on Ignore This User. This will help quite a bit until a more permanent solution is effected, if such occurs. It cuts down the volume and removes the temptation to rise to the bait.

I would hope something could be worked out short of a ban. William is sincere, if somewhat deranged.

The problem is not in annoying me or in any likelihood that I will believe one iota of his nonsense. The problem is that he has the potential to harm young lurkers who have not had enough experience to know the difference between solid science, responsible speculation and garbage.

I have seen this effect before. Unless the responsible and competent participants take someone like William to task the young lurkers may not recognize that what he is posting is utter bullshit.

I can ignore William without help from the computer. But I don't think that I can ignore him responsibly, since I can recognize the potential damage from his posts and because I am quite capable of debunking him.

But it is getting very tiresome. And there are more efficient means of handling someone like him. Those means should be employed.

Sincerity in this case is not a virtue. It is merely a sign of delusion. If the only victim were the poster, then it would be amusing. But there are probably other victims, and it is not amusing.

If the nonsense were properly confined to "Pseudoscience" then it might be amusing. That is where it belongs.

[DrRocket]

Another way to curb the non-ending wave of pseudoscience might be to make an extra Alternative Theories sub-forum. It is much less derogatory than the term Pseudoscience and might not hurt the pride of the occasional crackpot as much.

I like the way Wikipedia handles it. They ban all "original research" meaning that you cannot post stuff that has not been published in some respectable journal or book. They don't need to make a lot of value judgements; they lump quackery, crackpottery and original brilliant ideas all together.

So maybe you could call the "pseudoscience" forum the "original research" forum. This would mean that Cosmo and WM would both be pretty much banished from the cosmology and physics forums.

Wikipedia is a different animal. It is supposed to be an encyclopedia. That implies that the subject matter is factual, and documented as being factual. Original research is appropriate in research journals, not in encyclopedias.

"Original research" is evaluated through the peer review process in professional journals, and "peers" are really supposed to be subject matter experts. I do not use the term "expert" lightly. For purposes of expert review of real no-kidding research, an expert is someone who knows everything that is known in the area, knows what research approaches are being taken and generally by whom, and has a pretty good idea of what approaches are likely to be fruitful and what mistakes are likely to be made. False results are not likely to make it through an expert. Unfortunately in some areas there are no experts.

In an open forum such as this, I would not expect to see real "original research" presented by anyone who is actually competent to perform such work. I don't think that using that title on a forum would help, since a good deal of McCormick's nonsense is not his original research, but simply misquoting Benjamin Franklin or the "universal scientists", whoever they are. Another forum has successfully handled drivel by creating a section called "Against the Mainstream" (ATM), which seems like an appropriate titel, and by limiting discussions in that forum to 30 days so that the inevitable illogical battles do not go on forever. They also keep order by banning people who post threads or foster ideas that ought to be in the ATM forum. I think they are bit too quick with the bans, but it does seem to keep reasonable order in the legitimate threads.

But something needs to be done, and done soon. The loony ideas are proliferating and choking the legitimate forums. They need to be quarantined. If not this forum will lose legitimate participants (note that Jane Bennet is not very active anymore) and die. I've had about all of McCormick that I can take, but I'll hang in there a while longer, maybe. I am taking off the gloves though.

[Guitarist]

But something needs to be done, and done soon.

Hopefully, the appointment of mods for specific sub-fora will sort that out. I, for one will endeavour so to do

The loony ideas are proliferating and choking the legitimate forums. They need to be quarantined. If not this forum will lose legitimate participants (note that Jane Bennet is not very active anymore) and die.

Yeah, I am really sorry about Jane, she has so much to contribute

I've had about all of McCormick that I can take, but I'll hang in there a while longer, maybe. I am taking off the gloves though.

Please please hang in. I am sure that the new mods can sort it out. If you feel they're not, PM them, keep them honest (they are well-paid after all) And yeah, take off those gloves, why not.....?