The description of the ATM forum says this:
I'm trying to understand what the scope of acceptable topics in the ATM section is. It seems pretty clear that any mention of an ATM idea belongs in ATM. However, the description of ATM says "Post here if you want to
discuss ...". That was a very good description of how it was in the old days of BABB.
Yet it seems that now Nereid has altered the rules of this forum. I say Nereid because I don't see any other moderators attempting to define such a
narrow range of what is considered acceptable discourse in ATM.
If a person has an ATM idea they wish to
discuss, then that might mean:
(1) The person has read about* the idea and wants to know what others think about it.
(2) The person has read about the idea, thinks it is interesting, and wants to know if anybody else knows strengths or weaknesses about it.
(3) The person has read the idea, likes the idea and wants to know if anybody else knows the strengths or weaknesses of the idea.
(4) The person has read the idea, likes the idea and wants to know if anybody can help him/her develop the idea further.
(5) The person has read about the idea, and thinks the idea may be correct, and wants to discuss it as an advocate ... but lacks the math background to defend calculation work.
(6) The person has read about the idea, and thinks the idea may be correct, and wants to discuss it as an advocate ... and has the math background and familiarity with the research literature needed to discuss some quantitative aspects of the idea.
Of course we could probably add other shades to this list of meanings but I hope that captures the range of possibilities we're talking about when the word "discuss" is used.
*Or developed the idea his/herself.
In the old BABB days
any of the above was acceptable discourse as long as you were polite and answered direct questions. Yet since the merger into BAUT it seems that this range has been increasingly narrowed with Nereid as a driving force. This is not meant to be an attack on Nereid. I was active in ATM on BABB long before Nereid was involved, so I'm simply describing what I see.
It seems to me that Nereid is advocating that ATM discussion should be limited to item #6 and all other discussion options are forbidden. Isn't that what Nereid suggested with this:
Discussion options 1-3 listed above have nothing to do with "defending" - simply learning. Discussion options 4&5 certainly involve "defending" the idea, but
Nereid has argued that such non-quantitative discussions are not science.
Do not misunderstand, I'm fully aware that many ATM proponents have difficulty following the rules, but I'd like to know just what the scope of acceptable discussion in BAUT' ATM section is. At the minimum there is heavy pressure in the ATM section to limit all ATM discussion to item #6. But I fail to see why the first 5 discussion options should be off limits. They were always acceptable in the old BABB days. For example, I fail to see why something like
this cannot simply result in discussion. Why can't someone link to an ATM paper seeking to know if someone else has knowledge that would allow them to understand if the ATM idea in the paper is viable?