Notices
Results 1 to 91 of 91

Thread: Name your #1 pet peeve about this forum

  1. #1 Name your #1 pet peeve about this forum 
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    So let's hear it, what really irks you about this forum and how can we fix it ?


    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    #1 pet peave
    A spell checker would be a handy addition.
    _____________________________________

    Have some sympathy, and some taste
    Use all your well-learned politesse
    Woo, whooo


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunbury
    #1 pet peave
    A spell checker would be a handy addition.
    _____________________________________

    Have some sympathy, and some taste
    Use all your well-learned politesse
    Woo, whooo
    Just use Firefox, it has spell checking built in.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    google chrome does as well - just now it tells me it doesn't recognise the word "google"
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    I think Bunbury was just making a little joke about the spelling of the word peeve.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    I think Bunbury was just making a little joke about the spelling of the word peeve.
    Ya, Einstein couldn't spell for shit either. Now I have to go edit the topic so as not to look stupid
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Commercial spammers.

    Simple captchas won't block these, for there are networks dedicated to acquiring forum accounts, for sale, harvested by real humans. For example to continue viewing porn (I have heard) one may have to fill out a form belonging to an innocent site. I think we can block these pseudo-memberships with a short quiz, perhaps testing comprehension of the terms of use, or some elementary science like "Dolphins are fish. Type yes or no."

    EDIT: Oh yeah, the subforum descriptions seem excessively wordy... though I've never bothered to read them entirely... :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Email notifications don't include the post, just a link and message saying that there's been a reply. I like getting full posts via email, particularly PMs from the other boards I visit.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Clicking in a part of the reply box and higlighting a part of text and then trying to place a colour.

    However if you have already done that, you can't use the same colour. Here:

    Red
    Blue
    Green
    Green again.

    It won't let me make it green because the font colour list box has already got the variable 'green' highlighted.

    If you select another colour, and go back to green this happens:

    Green again.
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    red green blue yellow orange

    red green blue yellow orange

    red green blue yellow orange

    I don't understand ?


    Just highlight the text you want to be a color, then select a color and it'll make it so
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Try this:

    Highlight this blue. Now leave this bit. Now highlight this blue too.

    To make these highlighted blue you can only drag and highlight the text and then click on the list box and click 'blue'. See what happens. Its me being lazy, but...
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by 425 Chaotic Requisition
    Try this:

    Highlight this blue. Now leave this bit. Now highlight this blue too.
    To make these highlighted blue you can only drag and highlight the text and then click on the list box and click 'blue'. See what happens. Its me being lazy, but...
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Bunk! BUNK I SAY!

    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by 425 Chaotic Requisition
    Bunk! BUNK I SAY!

    I'm still lost,

    But if your trying to make a color inside of a color inside of a color then I could see how this might break. I guess you can't nest colors.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    ok here goes a test for nested colours - if this works you should be see a piece of red text inside a blue one

    [edit]
    so yes, it would appear that you can't nest one colour inside another one
    [/edit]
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    I’m not sure this rises to the level of a pet peeve, but I’ve always thought the grouping of topics on the main page is a bit random.

    The technology forums are more closely related to the natural science topics than the People topics so should not be separated from Natural Science by People.

    Information Technology is a synonym for computer science, yet Computer Science is not under the Information Technology heading.

    Engineering and Transportation fits better with general technology than the other topics it is grouped with under Information Technology.

    I suggest renaming “Electronics” to “Electrical and Electronics.”
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Pet Peeve?

    When you edit a post and hit the Submit button, you get an error message stating that you can't make another post for at least 30 seconds.

    As well, an indicator as to which threads you've placed a post would be nice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    Pet Peeve?

    When you edit a post and hit the Submit button, you get an error message stating that you can't make another post for at least 30 seconds.

    As well, an indicator as to which threads you've placed a post would be nice.
    30 second delay is to slow down bots.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    I’m not sure this rises to the level of a pet peeve, but I’ve always thought the grouping of topics on the main page is a bit random.

    The technology forums are more closely related to the natural science topics than the People topics so should not be separated from Natural Science by People.

    Information Technology is a synonym for computer science, yet Computer Science is not under the Information Technology heading.

    Engineering and Transportation fits better with general technology than the other topics it is grouped with under Information Technology.

    I suggest renaming “Electronics” to “Electrical and Electronics.”
    Come up with a list and we can move stuff around.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    439
    Pet Peeves? He seems to have gone again....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by (In)Sanity
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    Pet Peeve?

    When you edit a post and hit the Submit button, you get an error message stating that you can't make another post for at least 30 seconds.

    As well, an indicator as to which threads you've placed a post would be nice.
    30 second delay is to slow down bots.
    Yes, I understand that for making posts but why does it happen when editing a post?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    Quote Originally Posted by (In)Sanity
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    Pet Peeve?

    When you edit a post and hit the Submit button, you get an error message stating that you can't make another post for at least 30 seconds.

    As well, an indicator as to which threads you've placed a post would be nice.
    30 second delay is to slow down bots.
    Yes, I understand that for making posts but why does it happen when editing a post?
    Its the time you need to reflect on why you wanted to edit and that you should have proof read it before posting it :P.
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by (In)Sanity
    Come up with a list and we can move stuff around.
    Here's my first cut at it.

    Natural Sciences

    Astronomy & Cosmology
    Biology
    Chemistry
    Earth Sciences
    Mathematics.
    Physics

    Engineering and Technolgy

    Mechanical, Structural and Chemical Engineering
    Electrical and Electronics.
    Computer Science.
    Military Technology

    People

    Behavioral & Social Sciences
    Health & Medicine.
    Philosophical Discussion
    History
    Religion
    Politics
    Criminology and Forensic Science
    Business & Economics
    Education

    International Issues

    Environmental Issues
    In the News

    The Science Forum

    General Discussion
    Introductions
    Science-Fiction and Non-Fiction
    Experimentation
    Pseudoscience
    Links.
    Art and Culture

    Site Administration

    Site Feedback
    Trash Can
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by (In)Sanity
    Come up with a list and we can move stuff around.
    This may be because I'm neck deep in a human evolution and primate behavior classes right now, but I don't like the distinction between natural sciences and people. How are people not natural? And since when is behavior a people-only issue? This is my variation on Harold's idea.

    Natural Sciences

    Mathematics
    Physics
    Chemistry
    Biology
    Health and Medicine
    Behavior and Psychology
    Environmental Issues
    Earth Sciences
    Astronomy and Cosmology

    Engineering and Technology

    Mechanical, Structural and Chemical Engineering
    Electrical and Electronics
    Computer Science
    Military Technology

    Social Sciences

    History
    Religion
    Philosophy
    Education
    Politics
    Business & Economics
    Criminology and Forensic Science

    The Science Forum

    General Discussion
    Introductions
    In the News
    Science-Fiction and Non-Fiction
    Art and Culture
    Experimentation
    Pseudoscience
    Links

    Site Administration

    Site Feedback
    Trash Can
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Yeah, "Brain Topics" could easily fill a subforum. I mean cognitive science, loosely, as opposed to behaviour and psychology.

    Divide brain & mind by Natural Sciences and Social Sciences? The latter could mention "human behavior" and "sociology" etc. in the description.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    We'll have to be careful about how much splitting we get into. After all, I could conceivably demand that we divide biology up into molecular, cellular, organismal, and population biology subforums. Or perhaps ask for a different subforum for each kingdom of life, and yet another subforum for laboratory techniques and protocols - after all, there are whole forums devoted to that! Surely it could warrant one little subforum here! Etc etc. I'm sure the physicists in the crowd could do the same. Personally speaking, all my understanding of behavior is rooted firmly in a biological background, so I would be content getting rid of the separate behavior subforum entirely. But, if nothing else, it has a high enough posting volume that it's probably good to keep all the related threads in one spot.
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Ha, when everyone can agree on a list....well at least two of you, then we'll make the change That's unless of course I don't agree with the two that agreed. The disclaimer to keep some wise ass from stepping in on the subject.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    I'm going with paraliths suggestion. Because although behavioural and social sciences aren't primary sciences, they still are sciences whereas religion is not. So they don't go together.
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    i'm in favour of paralith's suggestion too
    rearranging, yes - splitting, no
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Paraliths, with this bit inserted:

    The Science Forum

    General Discussion
    Introductions
    In the News
    Science-Fiction and Non-Fiction
    Art and Culture
    New Theories
    Experimentation
    Pseudoscience
    Links


    ?
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    New Theories is a magnet for something. Maybe that's good?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    The current description of the Pseudoscience forum is: "The Discussion regarding theories, methodologies or practices that do not conform to what is currently accepted by the scientific community."

    Will the proposed New Theories have a similar description, and if so how would you define the Pseudoscience forum?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    This is where the key factor comes into play. Pseudoscience is scientific practice that claims to be scientific, yet has not followed the scientific method. A theory may be following the scientific method and as such forth cannot be branded 'pseudoscience'. If what Pong suggests is implemented. I'd suggest there be a moderator for that sub forum, and if ones theories do not adhere to the scientific method, then it can be chucked into pseudoscience.
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    This is basically it so far:

    "Experimentation
    The testing of ideas, and the application of theories into practice."


    It really pisses me off when people use the word theory when the word hypothesis is what they are looking for. Theories, remember, already have a significant amount of evidence and/or testing behind it. Hypothesis fits more the whole "I have an idea lets talk about it" nature of things like the experimentation forum.

    Talk about a specific and anal nitpick, but it really is important when it comes down to people saying things like "Well evolution is just a theory so don't take it seriously", which we should all be able to agree is wrong if only because the wording is piss poor.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    I complained on page 1 "the subforum descriptions seem excessively wordy". IMHO attempts at definition are gonna fall short or disagree with many readers. But who reads them anyway?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    i'm ok with the description for the earth science section :

    "Geology, Geography, Tectonics, or any of several essentially geologic sciences that are concerned with the origin, structure, and physical phenomena of the earth."

    i suppose for the moderated subforums it could be up to the moderators to decide whether they're ok with the description or not - apart from that, i'm sure (In)Sanity would be open to sensible suggestions for improvement
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Is that saying any more than "Earth Science"? To paraphrase: "Earth Science: This, that, another thing, and besides all about what's mainly Earth and science that deals with everything about the Earth, scientifically." Oops, forgot climate! Better add another clause of verbiage.

    Okay, not nice. I've blurted my point and I shut up now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38 pseudoscience 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that I dislike how pseudoscience isn't moderated. If any one subforum, other than religion, needs a moderator on a science site it's pseudoscience. Look at the exploits of albert chong, bringing nothing to the table but the odd chuckle from me at my own witty retort (being modest is for suckers okay). Without awesome moderation, I bet that the religion subforum would literally be a joke, much like pseudoscience. When I call pseudoscience a joke, I refer to the 'less than par' original posters that are flamebait- someone willing to lock this stuff before idiots like me can use their wit for evil would be awesome and bring threads like the zombie thread to the forefront of pseudoscience, or just dismantle threads that don't promote discussion right out of the gates. Mind you, even the craziest idea, presented properly, can certainly bring forth some good conversation.

    You know, I do honestly believe a subforum like this has more to offer than some random cybernod of "well we'll include it...if we have to". For example, my unreplied to cryptozoology post; this is a field RIPE for conversation within pseudo beyond the odd "bigfoot exists" thread. Even Ghosts, UFO's, psychics etc are legitimately scientific when approached properly.


    Hell, even a set of firm and specific rules could handle this job- and if posters violate said rules their post will get a comment from the mod and then locked, avoiding the flamefest that occurs when idiots like me are left unchecked.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39 Re: pseudoscience 
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that I dislike how pseudoscience isn't moderated. If any one subforum, other than religion, needs a moderator on a science site it's pseudoscience. Look at the exploits of albert chong, bringing nothing to the table but the odd chuckle from me at my own witty retort (being modest is for suckers okay). Without awesome moderation, I bet that the religion subforum would literally be a joke, much like pseudoscience. When I call pseudoscience a joke, I refer to the 'less than par' original posters that are flamebait- someone willing to lock this stuff before idiots like me can use their wit for evil would be awesome and bring threads like the zombie thread to the forefront of pseudoscience, or just dismantle threads that don't promote discussion right out of the gates. Mind you, even the craziest idea, presented properly, can certainly bring forth some good conversation.
    This has been on the table for discussion with myself and all of the moderators for a while now. We are still trying to come up with some ways to handle that section.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Post quality makes me disappointed.

    A baseline for post quality, enforced by moderators, might be a good idea. I'm really pleased with the post quality by many of the members. However, some are falling quite short and it only affords me and people like me the opportunity for increasing post count or 'postwhoring' and a bit of satire. If people don't want to read rules and take time to make a good post, or simply want to troll in a way that becomes unfunny quite fast, is it reasonable for moderators to lock the thread and give a short explaination on what the person can do better, either via pm or right there in the post? I really like to think that a thread is only as good as its OP.

    Not only is locking a bad thread good for not having it bumped over and over again, by idiots like me who prey on that kind of thing, but it will certainly catch the attention of those that can be saved by this simple act; those that are more than capable of making a good OP, but just don't bother. Those that can't be saved...well maybe they can lurk more and find out!

    P.S. Once again I do fully admit to feeding trolls and having some fun with it but at one point the madness must end!!


    Edit: examples of what I'm talking about can and will be provided on request
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    The other moderators can comment on this if they disagree, but it is my feeling that beyond obvious trolls who are simply not taking part in any scientific discussion and clearly have no desire to do so, we do not feel that posting quality needs to be excessively policed. Other types of problems are dealt with as they come.
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Freshman manadude2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    At a computer on Earth in the Milky Way Galaxy... chocolate bar.
    Posts
    41
    My pet "peeve" is the disorganised layout of the forum, I don't like it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by manadude2
    My pet "peeve" is the disorganised layout of the forum, I don't like it.
    Interested, considering we just re-organized it recently. What exactly is disorganized about it?
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Ph.D. Darius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    817
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    P.S. Once again I do fully admit to feeding trolls and having some fun with it but at one point the madness must end!!

    ...

    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    but at one point the madness must end!!
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    the madness
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    madness
    Om mani padme hum

    "In dishonorable things we are not bound to obey any man." - The Book of the Courtier [1561], pg 99 (144 in pdf)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    The data entry is all fucked up.

    Something messes up the refreshment of what is already typed into the window, so it seems as if letters are disappearing, or you are overwriting your own stuff.

    fix it. Now.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    The data entry is all fucked up.

    Something messes up the refreshment of what is already typed into the window, so it seems as if letters are disappearing, or you are overwriting your own stuff.

    fix it. Now.
    Huh - that's been happening to me for while, but that's because I switched to using Google Chrome instead of Firefox. I assumed Chrome was the problem - since it's new the compatibility with websites isn't always spot on. What browser do you use?
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    The data entry is all fucked up.

    Something messes up the refreshment of what is already typed into the window, so it seems as if letters are disappearing, or you are overwriting your own stuff.

    fix it. Now.
    That has to be the browser doing this, or perhaps a plug-in or add on. It's kind of hard to fix something that can't be reproduced in normal environments.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    I use Chrome of course. But why would this be the only Phpbb forum with this problem?
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    I use Chrome of course. But why would this be the only Phpbb forum with this problem?
    I don't know, there's a lot of weird and random things I run across that Chrome doesn't handle too well. I use Gmail and every now and then it simply refuses to load my chat contact list. And you'd think that of all things, other Google applications would work in a Google browser.
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    That's probably a general design parameter of Microsoft OS software.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Nirgendwo und Ueberall
    Posts
    1,296
    My main pet peeve is one I share with the mods here...the posting of pseudoscience in the bio and chem sections...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    well gott everyone thinks their own personal ideas are legit, otherwise they wouldn't think them. It's up to us to make sure they understand they are wrong and it is our duty to take the things they love from them (ie. crazy ideas).

    I must say, this website so slow and it sometimes double posts on me, even when I hit the post button even once.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Ph.D. Darius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    817
    The same thing happens to me, but fortunately I manage to delete them before anyone responds. This isn't 4chan....yet.
    Om mani padme hum

    "In dishonorable things we are not bound to obey any man." - The Book of the Courtier [1561], pg 99 (144 in pdf)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    My biggest problem is that moderators are not very good communicators. So when they get flustered they close a thread or throw away real stuff that is just to amazing to be real to them.

    I understand that many today are frail and do not want to see horrid facts about the collapse of their society day in and day out. But some of us have to see it and live it everyday.

    And we are here to share what we do. Why is it that communication is blocked, or stopped. Doesn't anyone have faith in truth coming out through communication. If you don't, I think you have written your own forums epitaph.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    I suspect some people just don't realize who they really are. Some people just don't understand that what they know is not really what is. Some people actually believe in things that in their mind are indisputable and they just assume that everyone else around them must be wrong. It's pretty sad that some people think this way. The really sad part is no matter what they will continue to live their lives in this way, always feeling that everyone else must really have lost it.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by (In)Sanity
    I suspect some people just don't realize who they really are. Some people just don't understand that what they know is not really what is. Some people actually believe in things that in their mind are indisputable and they just assume that everyone else around them must be wrong. It's pretty sad that some people think this way. The really sad part is no matter what they will continue to live their lives in this way, always feeling that everyone else must really have lost it.

    The Flat World people said that. Those that said space flight was impossible said that. It is funny but it was the modern scientists that said space flight was impossible.
    Turned out the people that thought they knew a lot from real life experiences, did. Sure they might not have wasted any time, or ever gave in to cowardice. They might be a bit strange, if only because they are different. But they get out there and do this stuff.

    After doing it enough. They meet more individuals similar to themselves and with a growing base of experimentation have no doubts that modern science is an Ostrich with its head in the sand.

    There are things that are said on this forum, that are just out and out lies. They are believed because someone put them into a book. I would not even write a book. Because those that only read books will not do anything good with knowledge. And they would just trash what little is still correct, just to hide a good book.

    Knowledge is something you get out and do things with.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by (In)Sanity
    I suspect some people just don't realize who they really are. Some people just don't understand that what they know is not really what is. Some people actually believe in things that in their mind are indisputable and they just assume that everyone else around them must be wrong. It's pretty sad that some people think this way. The really sad part is no matter what they will continue to live their lives in this way, always feeling that everyone else must really have lost it.

    Some people get a little power and they lose touch with reality. They were after power because the world crushed them. They get a little power and they don't want to go back to the unhappy place.

    If something was indisputable to someone, they would stop communicating about it. They would say go ahead believe what you like, and end communications with that person.

    If they know better, they will state how they know better. They will state how they found out, or how they know something. They will not just quote some text that is in conflict with other text. If that is how it worked you could close down the forum and post a link to Wiki.

    After seeing Wiki change back and forth a few times, I am sure there are gaps in the total scientific accuracy of Wiki.

    Science is quickly becoming a vote of popular belief, or whim of the ruling scientific party. Which means there does not even exist a scientific group.

    To stop communication because we are against either form of scientific leadership, is just wrong and unscientific. It has to be against the basic principle of this forum, or this is not a science forum.

    We currently measure an abundance of electricity with a downward movement on an oscilloscope. And an electrical meter.

    It was so embarrassing to some men that found out this was so. That they could not even talk about it anymore. They had no idea of how screwed up science had become. They just never knew, because fools never even told them. Why didn't they tell them, because they knew they were wrong.

    Benjamin Franklin founded this nation on the basics of electricity. And the huge battle against a rude group of failed English scientists that claimed lightning was not static electricity. Even after Benjamin Franklin proved otherwise.

    So resentful were these buffoons that they never stopped trying to undue the embarrassment, of their failure and the end of England as a scientific power. So today we have undone the work of Benjamin Franklin. And we are back to where we were over two hundred years ago.

    All because there were rude clowns that were not good scientists in charge of science.

    Benjamin Franklin called an abundance of electricity the positive source. He called the electromotive force, positive electricity.

    We do the opposite today. And you think anyone, does not have the right to doubt any piece of junk from modern science?

    As far as I am concerned it is over until we get the basics straightened out.





    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Some people get a little power and they lose touch with reality. They were after power because the world crushed them. They get a little power and they don't want to go back to the unhappy place.
    Interesting, william, that you only make these complaints about moderators after they start moving your threads around. I guess all the previous moderators were completely immune to this intoxicating affect of being a big fish in the little pond of a single subforum on one website on the whole of the internet. We have standards and they work well for the administrators, and the posts of yours that are moved are not up to those standards. If you dislike it so much there are many, many other places on the internet where you can put out your ideas and those of us here can't do jack shit about it.
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    William,

    I suspect your peeve is that I ended our discussion regarding CO2. The reason I did this is because it was going in circles and because you were not prepared to provide any empirical evidence to support your claims. Essentially it was nothing more than a sting of assertions backed up by personal anecdotes. Since you were unwilling even to provide evidence of any element of those anecdotes, we reached an impasse. My word based on a (weak) knowledge of modern chemistry, against your word which you were unwilling to substantiate. I would welcome another moderators opinion on this if you feel I have been unfair.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    I think William really just needs to understand that personal experiences are not proof of scientific fact. They are not even theories. The great thinkers from our past that challenged conventional wisdom went on to prove to the rest of the world using actual scientific process that their ideas were correct. William appears to be happy with the concept that his word is enough backing and everyone else should just believe his ideas without any proof once so ever. Just because thousands of people have seen pink elephants doesn't mean they actually exist. Now capture one and invite the whole world to come see it and prove it's not just painted and then you have something.

    I suspect I'm wasting my time.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Forum Ph.D. Darius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    817
    I concur, Biolog. Ironically any suggestion to implement rules of logic or empiricism are always met with disagreement and objection.

    My pet peeve is the logorrhea on this forum.

    Brevity is.
    Om mani padme hum

    "In dishonorable things we are not bound to obey any man." - The Book of the Courtier [1561], pg 99 (144 in pdf)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Darius
    I concur, Biolog. Ironically any suggestion to implement rules of logic or empiricism are always met with disagreement and objection.
    I'm enforcing such rules in as much as that is possible without squashing discussion. Hence my locking of the CO2 thread. It was circling for a while during which I made requests for empirical evidence or good references. I didn't get them and since there were no other new contributors, the thread was done.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Ph.D. Darius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    817
    If you enforced the rules of logic strictly and adequately, you would "squash" discussion. This is due to the fact nobody follows the rules of logic strictly. Fallacies for all! *throws them around*
    Om mani padme hum

    "In dishonorable things we are not bound to obey any man." - The Book of the Courtier [1561], pg 99 (144 in pdf)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Darius
    If you enforced the rules of logic strictly and adequately, you would "squash" discussion. This is due to the fact nobody follows the rules of logic strictly. Fallacies for all! *throws them around*
    Well thankfully we're more interested in promoting discussion than having an empty forum that conforms to whatever you define as logic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Ph.D. Darius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    817
    Yes, because logic is without objective definition or standard axioms or anything.
    Om mani padme hum

    "In dishonorable things we are not bound to obey any man." - The Book of the Courtier [1561], pg 99 (144 in pdf)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Darius
    Yes, because logic is without objective definition or standard axioms or anything.
    You seem convinced that you're being perfectly logical in all of your posts but I think some of your posts have been illogical, so I have to conclude that your definition of logic differs from mine. Maybe not definition so. Maybe the better word would be understanding. Granted the rules of logic are axiomatic, but the understanding of them is not universal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius
    This is due to the fact nobody follows the rules of logic strictly.
    Perhaps I misunderstood this. Were you including yourself and suggesting that we can't practically enforce rules regarding logic?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    LIVE CHAT

    I can't connect and haven't been able to for over a year. I have the latest java update too...

    EDIT: I've changed all my settings in my browser to allow access to the scienceforum so there is no problem on my end. The firewall is allowing it so everything is a.ok on this end.

    EDIT 2: In fact, here's a screen shot:



    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Wolf
    LIVE CHAT

    I can't connect and haven't been able to for over a year. I have the latest java update too...

    EDIT: I've changed all my settings in my browser to allow access to the scienceforum so there is no problem on my end. The firewall is allowing it so everything is a.ok on this end.

    EDIT 2: In fact, here's a screen shot:



    Hmm, it's still working fine on my end. I know IDENT blocking can sometimes cause this, but I doubt that's the case for you.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Mine works as well. I am on Opera and Windows XP Pro SP2.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    I'm running....







    <_<...........(vista)...............>_>




    Anyway the problem is ok now, I've found another means but thank you very much! 8)
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by paralith
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Some people get a little power and they lose touch with reality. They were after power because the world crushed them. They get a little power and they don't want to go back to the unhappy place.
    Interesting, william, that you only make these complaints about moderators after they start moving your threads around. I guess all the previous moderators were completely immune to this intoxicating affect of being a big fish in the little pond of a single subforum on one website on the whole of the internet. We have standards and they work well for the administrators, and the posts of yours that are moved are not up to those standards. If you dislike it so much there are many, many other places on the internet where you can put out your ideas and those of us here can't do jack shit about it.
    Many others here are posting about time travel, and hieroglyphic mathematics. I would not care if they removed those posts.

    But some moderators are starting to see, with my posts, day in and day out. That their world, is not their world.

    And I jam it up their butts whenever, they purposely side track what I am saying. Just not to hear it.
    If you look at the data contained in posts to me, and the basis of objection. You will see that I post real material. That they just do not want to put into their formula.

    Some moderators have called old knowledge less important then knew knowledge. Archimedes called the Heavenly bodies spheres. And later others, MOST, called the world flat.

    So their very insane comments are proof enough to anybody with half their marbles that their basis and purpose are not scientific in nature.

    You are welcome to attack any post I make, using, and with real science. Something we can all go out and try.

    But to just erase or put them in the trash can, is the sign of no science at all.

    I have been asked to prove the basics of a capacitor. The basics of a cathode ray tube. And believe it or not I have some great material here. And as soon as it opens the can of worms to the end of America as we knew it or thought we knew it. Boom, that is not allowed.

    I have posts from Harold that state I cannot post old information from books. I guess I cannot post information about Archimedes or others deciding heavenly bodies are spherical?

    I have other statements from Harold that say I have to post information. Now it sounds like I either only post what Harold does not cry about. Or is not brought to tears about. Or I have my posts removed. If that is science to you, I was to late to meet you.




    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    Quote Originally Posted by Darius
    I concur, Biolog. Ironically any suggestion to implement rules of logic or empiricism are always met with disagreement and objection.
    I'm enforcing such rules in as much as that is possible without squashing discussion. Hence my locking of the CO2 thread. It was circling for a while during which I made requests for empirical evidence or good references. I didn't get them and since there were no other new contributors, the thread was done.

    Now you may feel that only Wiki offers truth. I believe that even Wiki realized that its pages were changing faster then, the Daily News.

    I just recently gained some respect and actually donated a few bucks to Wiki, because they brought out the origin of Universal Science. And of course it was about total truth to oneself, and with that as a basis or a foundation, real science can be achieved. Because it is beyond, greed, power, or lust. It is just truth about Gods laws of the Universe.

    If you only knew how many posts Harold and Janus threw out, because in there words "there never were any Universal Scientists". I was lectured by one, in my public school. I was taking college courses in the fifth grade and six grade.

    I still cannot believe their insanity. A little power and they have gone mad.

    Now that alone is grounds for me having serious grievances with the board. But I let them know about it and figured they would learn from their mistakes. Big assumption on my part.

    But to limit oneself to those big sources like Wiki, believe it or not gives me insight into you. It is not pretty actually. It means you are weak. You need positive peer pressure or, you become afraid of going it alone. Even for truth or God.

    You get three negative peer pressure posts, and you shut it down. No actual scientific basis at all. Not one of the negative posts that are trying to stop communication, has any real information about the reality. Yet the peer pressure grew in you.

    I am going through my bag of tricks as fast as anyone could believe. To try and figure out what it is that you could not understand. And at the same time I am trying to just show you all the angles I have learned about the substance in question from.

    So that maybe others will say "You know you are right Bill" if you read through the posts many do say that. And sometimes they come under attack, for saying it.

    Down right weird if you ask me. Like pod people or something.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    William,

    This is all I could find on Wikipedia about universal science:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics

    It's obviously totally unrelated to your definition, which seems to involve some weird theory about electrons, and denying that subatomic particles exist.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    William,
    you have never defined your term 'Universal Scientist'. You have never provided any references that talk about them. Nearly all of your claims have been unsubstantiated. (Quaint scans of decades old text book pages bearing little relation to the topic being discussed do not consitute substantiation.) Some of your claims have been pure nonsense of the most profound kind, revealing either a startling naivety, stunted intellectual capacity, or the most brilliant sustained piece of trolling on this or any other forum this century.

    As always, warmest regards.

    John
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    William,

    This is all I could find on Wikipedia about universal science:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics

    It's obviously totally unrelated to your definition, which seems to involve some weird theory about electrons, and denying that subatomic particles exist.

    http://www.anl.gov/Science_and_Techn...rs/unisci.html

    Here are all the references I have left to them. And the fact that my teachers invited one who was hired by colleges to teach and lecture. We were receiving college courses in the fifth grade, we were honor students. I wasn't very honorable in fact I was a tyrant. But still, that does not change reality. I blew up and lit the school on fire. But I was still lectured by one of the 17 recognized Universal Scientists.

    The fact that obviously, someone is making information on this slim and none. Is interesting. Because I have gotten quotes from others that there is no such thing as a universal scientist. And they used that to remove my posts.

    Universal Science created the Scientific method. It cuts out all emotion, all greed, all lust, all need for being right. With the scientific method you just keep removing variables until you will bet your own and your children's life on the parameters of your experiment with the variables that you cannot remove.

    Doing experiments at night compared to doing them in the daytime can cause many different effects. Some can kill you. That was Universal Science. It was about removing variables from the lab. To keep the good honest scientist alive and creating. And to get all into the lab one way or the other. The kitchen is an awesome lab. If you know not to put water on oil fires.

    http://www.Rockwelder.com/WMV/KitchenOilFire.wmv

    I went around talking about this and showing it on a laptop all around my town, and most when they see this, their eyes open up, because they had no idea of the scope of the effect. Some had heard not to do it. But few had known this is the reality of it.

    The popular high speed camera show did a special on it. It was pretty good. I believe they left out a few key points though. But still pretty good.

    Benjamin Franklin was a universal scientist, who was only interested in sharing his awesome understanding of the world with others. He felt like God must have chosen him to get truth to all. He was on a mission from God. And if you ever get to read about what he did. Most would not believe one man could do all that. He would probably give credit to those around him.

    He refused to patent his lightning rod. He did not believe in patents.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    William,
    you have never defined your term 'Universal Scientist'. You have never provided any references that talk about them. Nearly all of your claims have been unsubstantiated. (Quaint scans of decades old text book pages bearing little relation to the topic being discussed do not consitute substantiation.) Some of your claims have been pure nonsense of the most profound kind, revealing either a startling naivety, stunted intellectual capacity, or the most brilliant sustained piece of trolling on this or any other forum this century.

    As always, warmest regards.

    John
    You are being a little dishonorable. Those scans were exactly on topic. They just did not agree with modern science. Or the Moderators who claimed the facts have never changed. The moderators claimed that it was always the same. That nothing had changed.

    My scans of course turn that into, something of a joke. And it makes their science if based on lies, a joke as well. If their science history does not take into consideration the many changes and when they occurred. They have no science.

    I have many different scans of teaching materials that show the electron flow from the (+) terminal to the (-) terminal. Now today that is not how the electrons flow from a modern car battery. So when Harold cries "stop posting this crap". I suspect it just undoes his calm, but does not effect his science. Which may be better described by his own terms "crap".

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    William I think you need to give up the past and live in the here and now. It completely amazes me that you think modern science is a joke and the laws are all wrong. Using modern laws we have made great leaps and bonds in technology and continue to do so. If what you are saying is true modern scientists would not be able to accomplish anything at all as their facts would all be inaccurate. You also appear to think that everyone else but yourself continues to be fooled and does not see the truth. Millions of researchers using modern laws and not a single one but yourself understands the true nature of science. Think about that for a bit, it's illogical, improbable, and might need professional help to correct.

    You need to get a grip with reality and come to terms with modern science or find a new place to discuss your ancient warped beliefs that have been discredited by modern science on a daily basis. You also can't seam to back up anything you say without pulling documents from the 1800's. You also claim your version of science teaches that you don't need to be right so long as you spread the truth. This in itself is a contradiction as spreading your version of the truth is the same as trying to prove you are right. I hate to disappoint your ego free self, but you're constantly doing what you accuse others of and claim you are not.

    By now it should have become very obvious to you that nobody wants to hear your version of the truth. You are no different then a religious fanatic spreading the so called word of God based on what you have formulated. It's far from the truth and is not even supported by logic.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Here are all the references I have left to them.
    Now wait a cotton-pickin minute, Bill. You just said you made a contribution to Wikipedia because they brought out the history of universal science. And that article you linked to is about Fermi. You admitted he is one of the hated multi-particle physicists, so that's not the kind of universal scientist you were talking about.

    Bill, you are nothing more than a garden variety science forum crackpot. Complete with delusions and conspiracy theories about some mysterious people removing things from the internet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #79  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    You know, I'm starting to miss poor William... Is he off ban yet?
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #80  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathamatition
    You know, I'm starting to miss poor William... Is he off ban yet?
    I'll lift the ban on Sunday.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  82. #81  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    I would love to see a 'member count' next to the live chat button, if at all possible, please?
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  83. #82  
    Forum Professor marcusclayman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,702
    Someone mentioned a reputation system, maybe not in this thread but somewhere. I like that idea, but more important than a rep system, on this forum anyway, would be a bad rep system. Both might be handy to gauge whether or not something is even worth reading. But then again, SOMEONE will spend their weekend spamming "kudos" and "boos"
    Dick, be Frank.

    Ambiguity Kills.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  84. #83  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    I kind of like that idea, but it should be modified a bit, like allow only reputable members to rate others. and start it with the Mod's so that we have a standard to go by first.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  85. #84  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathamatition
    I kind of like that idea, but it should be modified a bit, like allow only reputable members to rate others. and start it with the Mod's so that we have a standard to go by first.
    This topic was discussed in the past, we don't really need a popularity contest.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  86. #85  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathamatition
    I would love to see a 'member count' next to the live chat button, if at all possible, please?
    Anything is possible, it would not be really easy to implement as the chat is actually IRC. The client runs on your computer and the chat runs on an outside server. It would be difficult to track what members are actually in chat, especially since they often change their names once they enter chat, or don't use the chat client from the site at all.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  87. #86  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    I am by no means literate in any kind of computer programming (of any kind), so I have no idea, in all reality, what I'm talking about, but could you, possibly, have contact with the outside server, and just keep a count of the number of computers logged into that specific channel? Again, tossin in an idea, no clue if it really would work or is even possible.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  88. #87  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathamatition
    I am by no means literate in any kind of computer programming (of any kind), so I have no idea, in all reality, what I'm talking about, but could you, possibly, have contact with the outside server, and just keep a count of the number of computers logged into that specific channel? Again, tossin in an idea, no clue if it really would work or is even possible.
    I could in theory query the outside server and find out how many of our members are logged in based on their user name. Two problems arise, first the owners of the outside freenode IRC server would probably not like me hitting them all the time with a bot, second many of the users change their name once they log in. I could go based on IP address, but I would really consider that a violation of the users privacy.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  89. #88  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    IS, I don't think we're asking to see exactly which members are in the chat room, just the number of people currently in the chat room, regardless of who they are or where they're from.
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  90. #89  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    yes, exactly. just a number of people in the channel. no matter who they are
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  91. #90  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    I would think it shouldn't be too difficult to create a script that fed a field on the forum which took data from another application. My Pidgin client reads "4 people in room" above the names. I don't think it would be a problem with Freenode to create a bot that managed the chatroom if only to keep it open. The application for the bot could be used to get the number of people.

    Just thinking out loud..... but it would definitely entice people to join if they knew the chatroom was occupied.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  92. #91  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    I would think it shouldn't be too difficult to create a script that fed a field on the forum which took data from another application. My Pidgin client reads "4 people in room" above the names. I don't think it would be a problem with Freenode to create a bot that managed the chatroom if only to keep it open. The application for the bot could be used to get the number of people.

    Just thinking out loud..... but it would definitely entice people to join if they knew the chatroom was occupied.
    It's easy to make such a bot, it's hard to know that the people in the chat are actually from the forum. I'll see what I can come up with. I think upgrading the entire forum might be more useful.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •