Electric Universe forum policy

[iantresman]

I just wish to express my disappointment with forum policy. zeezishx just started a new thread, "so is Electric Universe Model dead then?". It was closed.

Policy states that only EU proponents may start a thread on the Electric Universe, and must defend it.

• zeezishx was not a proponent, but just an interested person. Not allowed
• zeezishx is on no position to defend the theory
• zeezishx asked a question on standard astrophysics, "Is it true that universe has 99.9 of plasma". If anything, the thread should have been moved to Questions and Answers.

90% of the Electric Universe is based on the Plasma Universe, as published in peer reviewed journals over the decades. And 90% of the Plasma Universe is standard astrophysics.

I would suggest that zeezishx ask his question again, without reference to the Electric Universe, nor perhaps even the Plasma Universe (people here have difficulty distinguishing the two). If you are asked why you are asking the question in the ATM section, just tell them you are investigating dark universes and dark light, on which there are no special policy restriction.

[Kesh]

This should have been a message to the mods, not a new thread. Which will be locked shortly, I expect.

[Cougar]

Originally Posted by iantresman

I just wish to express my disappointment with forum policy.

But then, from what I've seen, you're disappointed with most everything in contemporary science.

Originally Posted by iantresman

zeezishx just started a new thread, "so is Electric Universe Model dead then?". It was closed.

zeezishx's thread title sounds like a question to me. What's so "disappointing" about putting a question in the Questions and Answers forum?

[Nereid]

Originally Posted by iantresman

I just wish to express my disappointment with forum policy. zeezishx just started a new thread, "so is Electric Universe Model dead then?". It was closed.

Policy states that only EU proponents may start a thread on the Electric Universe, and must defend it.

• zeezishx was not a proponent, but just an interested person. Not allowed
• zeezishx is on no position to defend the theory
• zeezishx asked a question on standard astrophysics, "Is it true that universe has 99.9 of plasma". If anything, the thread should have been moved to Questions and Answers.

90% of the Electric Universe is based on the Plasma Universe, as published in peer reviewed journals over the decades. And 90% of the Plasma Universe is standard astrophysics.

I would suggest that zeezishx ask his question again, without reference to the Electric Universe, nor perhaps even the Plasma Universe (people here have difficulty distinguishing the two). If you are asked why you are asking the question in the ATM section, just tell them you are investigating dark universes and dark light, on which there are no special policy restriction.

iantresman, on 1 March, 2007, Fraser announced a new ATM policy. That announcement includes this (my bold):

Okay, so why did we make this decision?

There are two kinds of people who post threads in the ATM section:

[snip]

2. People who are looking to use BAUT as a marketing platform for their alternative theories. Tell us your idea, that's fine. But we're not going to allow the forum to turn into a marketing vehicle for them. 30 days should be plenty of time to present your concept, deal with objections, answer anything else.

There are at least two threads in the About BAUT section with extensive discussion of this new policy: New Policies Regarding Against the Mainstream section, with 233 posts; it's closed, with a request that further discussion be in The Future of ATM thread, which is open and currently has 615 posts. In a quick check I just did I failed to find any posts by iantresman, in either thread (perhaps I missed them?). In any case, the discussion in those two threads spans nearly five months.

If you consider my actions, as a moderator, in closing the zeezishx thread improper, please PM another mod or an admin, per Rule #17.

If you wish to continue the discussion of BAUT's (now not so) new ATM policy, please do so in the About BAUT section.

In closing this thread, let me quote from one of Fraser's posts (in the first of the About BAUT threads linked to above; my bold):

We're trying to come up with a solution that stops the forum being used as a marketing tool by ATM proponents. They can just keep bump bump bumping a thread to keep it going at the top of the list. This isn't a popularity contest.

The problem is that the true believers have stamina but not answers. They're willing to go and go, bringing up the same points over and over again. This has overwhelmed the patience of many valuable members of the forum.

[snip]

[T]he days of BAUT being a promotion tool for ATM theorists are over.

[Serenitude]

Posting to add: This is a moderator and administration team decision, not just a Neried decision, and will be strictly enforced. Thank you.