| Author |
Message
|
| bit4bit |
 Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:22 pm Post subject: Less tolerance for crackpots? |
 |
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 623
|
I've noticed we have some resident crackpots on the forum.
They seem to be preaching psuedoscience onto other members, and it's hard to tell whether they are forum trolls, who are perfectly aware of it, in an attempt to stir up arguments, or just genuinly deluded customers who cannot accept the rigorous framework of what is globally accepted science.
Either way, I'm sure:
1.) trolling is against the forum rules (?), which members have agreed to on registation.
And:
2.) Being a science forum, members come here to discuss science, so for them to be confonted with psuedoscience at every turn, is a ruining experience. (Especially when a new member is asking a question, and takes their nonsense seriously)
I think that any psuedoscience promoting post, that is discussed outside of the psuedoscience section, should be deleted, and any such threads that are started should be moved to psuedoscience.
I know Ophiolite and Pendragon do a good job when they are online, but they can't see every bad post that is made, and they can't always be online. I think maybe tighter moderation/more moderators are needed.
Yes...There are plenty of other forums to join if you don't like it, but I thought that it was worth mentioning seen as there are obviously others here that genuinly want to discuss science with each other.
I also think it would improve the image of the site, and perhaps lead to a better quality of discussion than we get in some parts of the forum.
Just a suggestion. What do you think?
_________________
Chance favours the prepared mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Pong |
| Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 1192
|
The moderators can't babysit problem posters, or keep a handle on every thread. Warning, followed by ban if necessary, seems to work on most forums.
In fact  , I'm galvanized to high negative potential by bit4bit's suggestions. The energy needed to do all that must come from a white hole. Actually , the posts and even posters should be atomized by superweapon few people have witnessed in use. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pendragon |
| Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 1160
Location: Nederland
|
I'm all for keeping the forum free of crackpot nonsense, but it's a lot of work.
Recently advertisement spammers have taken much of our time, together they posted at a rate of 100 posts per week while we had to wait for them to be banned. At the moment more effective tools against advertisement spammers are under construction, so soon this should stop eating up our scarce time.
You may be right that we need more moderators. Beside that we may need a warning system (so every member can press a 'warning-button' to get attention from a mod), as proposed by members several times in the past.
So it seems to me that our rules and our intentions aren't at issue, it's our lack of anti-spam tools. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| 425 Chaotic Requisition |
| Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Doctor
Joined: 18 Jun 2007
Posts: 3176
Location: Somewhere, nowhere.
|
Incomprehensible kargon is the hallmark of proffession. If people aren't able to at least show some logic in their statements, then people aren't going to listen to them. They know that, we know that, if not what else are we going to do? Why does it bother you so much bit4bit?
As for the rules, I've been insulted by many people on this forum and jack diddly's been done so, meh. 
On contrary to that Pendragon has been very helpful in the past.
_________________
"Laugh at life or it will laugh at you". - SVRDW. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bit4bit |
| Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 623
|
I'm just saying that it's bad for the image and quality of the forum, and might put new members off staying or cause members to leave when they see it.
| Quote: |
Recently advertisement spammers have taken much of our time, together they posted at a rate of 100 posts per week while we had to wait for them to be banned. At the moment more effective tools against advertisement spammers are under construction, so soon this should stop eating up our scarce time.
You may be right that we need more moderators. Beside that we may need a warning system (so every member can press a 'warning-button' to get attention from a mod), as proposed by members several times in the past. |
Yeh I'm aware there was alot of spam recently that you had to deal with. Another forum I visit has a 'spamminator taskforce', where a load of trusted members mark posts as spam, so when the mods come on, all they gottas do is delete the list. (I guess the members are trusted in order to stop people mis-using the spam button). I think thats a good idea (and is basically the same as what you've suggested). Then on top of that, you have 4 or 5 regular moderators, who actually delete/move posts/threads. They also issue warnings to people preaching psuedoscience....three warnings then a ban.
This way, it puts less load on the moderators, since all the forum maintenance is more spread out.
| Quote: |
| They know that, we know that, if not what else are we going to do? |
Get out the dust-pan and brush, and sweep up the rubbish.
I'm also not talking about people who are asking for help, and mis-understanding subjects, but people who refuse to take on board what they are being told when proofs/citations/references are provided, or who openly throw psuedoscience around in response to other peoples threads/questions.
Thats just what I think anyway. 
_________________
Chance favours the prepared mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Selene |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Banned
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 1060
Location: I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
|
Aw come on the crack-pots are fun!
Everybody has the right to be heard don't they? And everyone has the right to ignore anyone else.
I've just had a thought, am i one of the crack-pots?? 
_________________
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I love a bit of SLAP & TICKLE
You Tickle
I'll Slap
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| marnixR |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Cosmic Wizard
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 2401
Location: Cardiff, Wales
|
| Selene wrote: |
| I've just had a thought, am i one of the crack-pots?? |
depends - do you want to be one ?
_________________
if you find this place too crowded or too confrontational, how about trying Philosophorum,
the amicable forum where small is beautiful and even the trolls are intelligent
biology without evolution is but stamp collecting |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| KALSTER |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Cosmic Wizard
Joined: 08 Sep 2007
Posts: 2088
Location: South Africa
|
| Bit4Bit already answered your question, Selene, when he wrote: |
| Selene wrote: |
Aw come on the crack-pots are fun!
Everybody has the right to be heard don't they? And everyone has the right to ignore anyone else.
I've just had a thought, am i one of the crack-pots?? |
| Bit4Bit wrote: |
| but people who refuse to take on board what they are being told when proofs/citations/references are provided, or who openly throw psuedoscience around in response to other peoples threads/questions. |
|
Surely that has to be discouraged? It is fine and dandy to debate against current theory, but quite another to have wildly incorrect ideas and present them as factual answers to innocent questions by newbies who do not yet know who to trust. Reasonable?
_________________
"Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Selene |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Banned
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 1060
Location: I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
|
| KALSTER wrote: |
| Bit4Bit already answered your question, Selene, when he wrote: |
| Selene wrote: |
Aw come on the crack-pots are fun!
Everybody has the right to be heard don't they? And everyone has the right to ignore anyone else.
I've just had a thought, am i one of the crack-pots?? |
| Bit4Bit wrote: |
| but people who refuse to take on board what they are being told when proofs/citations/references are provided, or who openly throw psuedoscience around in response to other peoples threads/questions. |
|
Surely that has to be discouraged? It is fine and dandy to debate against current theory, but quite another to have wildly incorrect ideas and present them as factual answers to innocent questions by newbies who do not yet know who to trust. Reasonable? |
Yes that's reasonable.
But crackpot ideas and incorrect answers soon get shot down and challenged on here.
So at least the newbies get to experience firsthand the nature of debate, the necessity not to take everything told to you as truth and to do your own thorough research, and they are also led by example not to be afraid to challenge or throw ideas out.
People get told incorrect 'truths' all the time.
This environment is at least on the lookout for them.
_________________
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I love a bit of SLAP & TICKLE
You Tickle
I'll Slap
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Selene |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Banned
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 1060
Location: I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
|
| marnixR wrote: |
| Selene wrote: |
| I've just had a thought, am i one of the crack-pots?? |
depends - do you want to be one ? |
Depends if i get spanked or not?
_________________
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I love a bit of SLAP & TICKLE
You Tickle
I'll Slap
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| marnixR |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Cosmic Wizard
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 2401
Location: Cardiff, Wales
|
spanking cracks your pot ?
_________________
if you find this place too crowded or too confrontational, how about trying Philosophorum,
the amicable forum where small is beautiful and even the trolls are intelligent
biology without evolution is but stamp collecting |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bit4bit |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 623
|
| Selene wrote: |
But crackpot ideas and incorrect answers soon get shot down and challenged on here.
So at least the newbies get to experience firsthand the nature of debate, the necessity not to take everything told to you as truth and to do your own thorough research, and they are also led by example not to be afraid to challenge or throw ideas out.
People get told incorrect 'truths' all the time.
This environment is at least on the lookout for them. |
Often the culprits are unwilling (or even unable) to do any proper research of their own....i.e. 'read a book'. If they did so they would find the correct information they need.
Deciding what is and what isn't a reliable source of information/data is part of the skill of doing research. The rest is making sure it is relevant and then using it appropriately. Scientific literature generally is not a big source of bias, propaganda, or unreliability, as some texts are Indeed. The reason is because scientific proofs are pretty indisputable, since they are based primarily on observation (of reality), and the history, and culmination of them is very well documented and accesible.
You are right, it is good to have debate, but it is only constructive when the debate is scientific...that is, justified by relevant research, and not speculative....as said above. This is 'logical progression'.
_________________
Chance favours the prepared mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Selene |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Banned
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 1060
Location: I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
|
| bit4bit wrote: |
You are right, it is good to have debate, but it is only constructive when the debate is scientific...that is, justified by relevant research, and not speculative....as said above. This is 'logical progression'. |
I don't think there's anything wrong with speculative, as long as the speculator makes clear it's not authoritative i guess.
It's good to explore what if's and maybe's.
I mean science does that all the time. It has to probe further into the unknown in order to stretch the boundaries and discover anything new.
There is much of science which is still 'speculative' and theory.
But of course there is speculation which is logical and reasonable and some which is 'crack-pot'
Still at least crack-pots give a good example of the extent of imagination as well as giving insight to insanity, and maybe we'll be lucky enough to get a laugh out of them as well.
Which seems to be lacking amidst some of the dry intellects.
_________________
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I love a bit of SLAP & TICKLE
You Tickle
I'll Slap
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bit4bit |
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 623
|
Imagination is good, but imagination without confirmation is speculation.
To draw a conclusive proof/disproof of something you can only use confirmation from experimental data, and mathematical rigor. Only then does anything qualify as a valid theory.
Yes, there are still areas unkown to us (and probably always will be), but most scientists accept they are unknown, and don't presume to talk conclusively about them. The ones who do are psuedoscientists.
Scientists even admit that current theories are not 100% accurate, but until observation or logic proves otherwise, they are accurate enough to explain all phenomena we are aware of, and are therefore useful and accepted.
Pseudo scientists often dream up ideas that they are convinced no one has ever thought of before apart from them. Fact is many people have great imaginations, and have probably thought of it a million times. They have simply dismissed it in regards to proven theories of science....of which the proofs are rigorous and concordant with real-world experimentation!!
Do you see what I mean? The scientific process is given order by restricting the available tools to observation and rigorous proof. Otherwise anything goes. In my opinion, one who utilises these tools actually needs more imagination than one who doesn't in order to even hypothesize.
_________________
Chance favours the prepared mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ophiolite |
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 4564
Location: Scotland
|
| 425 Chaotic Requisition wrote: |
| As for the rules, I've been insulted by many people on this forum and jack diddly's been done so, meh. . |
I have to practice on somebody.
On a more serious note, this is an important issue, but it is also one with many facets. In no particular order here are some thoughts.
Some people find it difficult to express their ideas clearly. Others can be eloquent and organised. Crazy ideas presented in a concise, structured manner can seem more realistic than valid ideas presented in a haphazard, confused fashion. It is easy, when taking only a quick read of a post, to be fooled by the former and to underestimate the content of the latter.
I continue to be amazed - and sometimes amused - by the desire some people have to develop a 'theory' when it is clear they have only the sketchiest notion of their field. I am tempted to shoot them down in flames for their unique combination of stupidity, arrogance and ignorance. What stops me is the suspicion that they are motivated by the same things that arouse my interest in science: curiosity and a sense of wonder.
We are long past the time when one could be well versed in all the arts and sciences. In Earth science, astronomy and to some extent biology, I can both recognise a faulty idea and demonstrate its weaknesses. In physics I have a real problem distinguishing between sound ideas badly presented and bad ideas soundly presented.
This last point relates closely to the need for more moderators. This is something we are actively considering.
Much of the activity of the forum (and others) revolves around challenging the weird ideas of the nutcases. This provides an opportunity to solidify one's own understanding of a topic and convey that understanding to others. If there were no nutcases we might have to invent them.
_________________
The Universe is not only weirder than we imagine it is weirder than we can imagine. J.B.S.Haldane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
