Rules discussion

[Paracelsus]

Originally Posted by Doodler

I've seen some debates in ATM eventually cover quite a bit of a document in contention over the course of 40 pages plus as people perform some impressive ginsu work on a paper to aim the discussion in their direction.

[Van Rijn]

Originally Posted by Neverfly

You know... now that you mention it.
I have noticed that some members here post a link to someplace like The New York Times.
But to read the article they are talking about- I would have to subscribe.

That is annoying.

You can always check www.bugmenot.com

I do that when I see subscription requirements for news sites when I want to check the article, but I don't want to go on their list.

[Neverfly]

Originally Posted by Van Rijn

You can always check www.bugmenot.com

I do that when I see subscription requirements for news sites when I want to check the article, but I don't want to go on their list.

Van Rijn, You Rock.

[Paracelsus]

Hmm....I'll try that with the Royal Soc. thing and see if it works. Thanks, Van Rijn!

[JayUtah]

In this thread The 'faces' Of Mars!! the OP's writing style has become an impediment for some regular readers. His posts are long, rambling, and disjointed. The OP's real-world identity is known, providing an ability to see other examples of his communications.

There is testimony that his writing here at BAUT is an affected style, deliberately adopted for effect. I understand that this is an unresolved question of fact. My question instead has to do with whether the general requirement to provide direct answers might have something to say about an elective writing style: might an artificially obfuscatory, disjointed, and rambling style be construed as evasive?

I fear the slippery slope. Not everyone has an equal command of the English language, and it would be unfortunate to squelch important discussion by imposing stylistic requirements that some other posters legitimately cannot attain.

[Kaptain K]

Well, since the OP has been banned, it seems to be irrelevant.

[Neverfly]

Originally Posted by Kaptain K

Well, since the OP has been banned, it seems to be irrelevant.

Suspended.

I think it's a valid point. Deliberately falsifying your writing style can have many implications- all of which are to confuse.

[The_Radiation_Specialist]

What do we do in situations where a member publicly posts message included in a PM (Private Message) without the express permission of the original sender?

As explained in the rules here:

5. Privacy Issues

Do not post private email you have received without the express permission of the sender. There are legal and copyright reasons for this, not to mention that doing so is very impolite. The same caveat applies to private messages, whether they're from this forum or anywhere else. If you receive rude or abusive private messages on this forum, please contact the administrators/moderators for assistance. Posting private information about forum users that is not available otherwise publicly will not be tolerated.

How long does the message have to stay there (before they delete it) for the user to get a warning or possible suspension? 10 minutes? an hour? a day?

[Moose]

I may be speaking out of turn, but like any other major violation, you report it.

As for how long an offender has, they have had, judging by past observation, exactly as long as it takes as a mod to notice, and rarely so much as a second more. There has never been much visible leeway in the enforcement of rule 5.

[Neverfly]

It's being taken care of TRS.

[Jim]

Originally Posted by JayUtah

... My question instead has to do with whether the general requirement to provide direct answers might have something to say about an elective writing style: might an artificially obfuscatory, disjointed, and rambling style be construed as evasive?

I fear the slippery slope. Not everyone has an equal command of the English language, and it would be unfortunate to squelch important discussion by imposing stylistic requirements that some other posters legitimately cannot attain.

I think you have a vaild point and I'll be sure to bring it to the attention of the other Moderators.

No, we do not want to enforce any specific style on posters; many regulars here (me included) will vary their posting style to suit the topic or for effect. Nor do we want to make command of English a requirement; we'd lose too many members... whose first language is English! People need to be able to write in a style that is comfortable for them; this makes it easier for them to express their thoughts.

However, to deliberately alter your style to mislead and/or evade is deceptive at least, possibly fraudulent.

Let us think on it some.

[The_Radiation_Specialist]

And BTW- to anyone interested to know, the issue was settled mutually. So my previous post and its implications can be considered void.

[Van Rijn]

What are the general considerations for what should be in the Q&A forum? My impression is that that forum is for space and astronomy related questions and answers, and is supposed to show a straightforward "good face" for new and rare posters. So, my question is, should we report threads like this:

http://www.bautforum.com/questions-a...ms-anyway.html

I don't see an astronomy or space related question and answer session there, and the science content itself is pretty thin. What I mostly see is a back and forth argument about what one person thinks the other person said. In other words, they're debating the person, not the subject.

I would PM this, but threads like this seem to turn up in Q&A fairly regularly. Are they considered acceptable for that forum, or not?

[Paracelsus]

Well, I've asked paleontology/geochemistry questions there and have gotten good feedback.

Should I not have done that?

[Van Rijn]

Originally Posted by Paracelsus

Well, I've asked paleontology/geochemistry questions there and have gotten good feedback.

Should I not have done that?

It's a good question. Perhaps it should go in "General Science." But there are two issue here: One is if there is a science question that is subsequently answerd. Another is if there is not a question and answer thread, but a debate that might or might not be scientific in nature, let alone astronomy or space related.

[hhEb09'1]

Originally Posted by Van Rijn

I don't see an astronomy or space related question and answer session there, and the science content itself is pretty thin. What I mostly see is a back and forth argument about what one person thinks the other person said. In other words, they're debating the person, not the subject.

That sort of thing happens in threads sometimes, it's part of the process of working out the misunderstandings. You have to offer a paraphrase, and evaluate the response.

Should Q&A be for science Q&A? or just space/astronomy Q&A? I don't start very many threads there (search says none), I just try to answer the posted questions.

I would PM this, but threads like this seem to turn up in Q&A fairly regularly. Are they considered acceptable for that forum, or not?

You are supposed to PM a mod if you don't like what you see. I'm pretty sure, for instance, you're not supposed to accuse people of being a troll, you're supposed to PM a mod that they might be a troll.

[Jim]

Use the little red triangle. That alerts all the Mods.

[01101001]

Originally Posted by hhEb09'1

Should Q&A be for science Q&A? or just space/astronomy Q&A? I don't start very many threads there (search says none), I just try to answer the posted questions.You are supposed to PM a mod if you don't like what you see. I'm pretty sure, for instance, you're not supposed to accuse people of being a troll, you're supposed to PM a mod that they might be a troll.

The subheader says "Got a space/astronomy question? Get it answered here."
I take that to be exclusionary.

If I don't see a topic's connection to space or astronomy, even a tenuous one, I just ask the participants. They should have an answer. I don't see bothering the mods until the poster plainly states that there is no connection, or the proffered connection is nonsense. Sometimes a good explanation is offered, one I didn't expect; usually not.

Edit: But.... in light of the very recent Rule 16 change, I must ask: is asking such a question "talking about bad posts or anything else you consider to be inappropriate user behavior"? What is talking and what is asking?

[ToSeek]

Rule 16 has been further modified, as follows:

Before:

If you feel a post breaks one of these rules, please report it by clicking the 'report' button (the red triangle with the exclamation mark inside it, located at the top right hand side of every post). Do not talk about bad posts in the forum itself or suggest, speculate on, or threaten what the moderator response should be. All reported posts are reviewed by moderators or administrators, and are treated very seriously (so do not report frivolously). If you have concerns, please PM a moderator or administrator.

After:

If you feel a post breaks one of these rules, please report it by clicking the 'report' button (the red triangle with the exclamation mark inside it, located at the top right hand side of every post). Do not talk about bad posts or anything else you consider to be inappropriate user behavior in the forum itself or suggest, speculate on, or threaten what the moderator response should be. All reported posts are reviewed by moderators or administrators, and are treated very seriously (so do not report frivolously). If you have concerns, please PM a moderator or administrator.

This is to forestall another meltdown of the sort that occurred in a recent thread, where one poster criticized another poster's pattern of behavior, whereupon a bunch of other posters got on that poster for being critical, etc., etc.

[Van Rijn]

Originally Posted by 01101001

The subheader says "Got a space/astronomy question? Get it answered here."
I take that to be exclusionary.

You might, but I'd like to know the moderator position on this. I don't want to bother them reporting a thread if they would have no intention of moving it anyway.

If I don't see a topic's connection to space or astronomy, even a tenuous one, I just ask the participants. They should have an answer. I don't see bothering the mods until the poster plainly states that there is no connection, or the proffered connection is nonsense. Sometimes a good explanation is offered, one I didn't expect; usually not.

I would consider a non-answer (ignoring the question) to be a default answer. But I also wonder whether there should be ongoing debates (per the non-ATM rules) in Q&A at all? Or would that be more approprate for other sections?

[Tinaa]

It is supposed to be astronomy/space only. We are a bit lenient...unless someone reports it. If I see a thread that obviously doesn't belong, I'll move it.

[publius]

Well, I started the Godel thread, and what's going on there is exactly the sort of thing it leads to. Well, one of the many ways it can play out. And I'm still enjoying it.

And I like to petition the court of moderators here for a ruling. The question I posed was not of the sort that a little Susie might ask, "What makes the stars shine?", nor even a more advanced question. It was a "what should we think about this" type of question, the purpose of which was to get into the sort of debate about the meaning of Godel's Theorems.

Now, Godel is not "space and astronomy". It might not even be "science". However, it is certainly mathematical (big time), and Principia Mathematica is both the master and servant of science. So to me it's certainly a matter of scientific merit and debate.

So, should something like that go into Q&A or it should go into General Science? Or, gasp, OTB?

-Richard

[Fortunate]

I think that Godel's theorem is definitely an appropriate topic for bautforum. I don't really care how it is categorized or where it is placed - it merits a place somewhere. That the discussion has become a bit adversarial does not represent a general problem - the topic is almost unique in inviting squabbles over definitions and disection of hypotheticals. Godel's theorem may well be humanity's greatest achievement in the field of logic. The thread does not constitute a "problem," so we do not need a "solution."

[ToSeek]

Originally Posted by publius

Well, I started the Godel thread, and what's going on there is exactly the sort of thing it leads to. Well, one of the many ways it can play out. And I'm still enjoying it.

And I like to petition the court of moderators here for a ruling. The question I posed was not of the sort that a little Susie might ask, "What makes the stars shine?", nor even a more advanced question. It was a "what should we think about this" type of question, the purpose of which was to get into the sort of debate about the meaning of Godel's Theorems.

Now, Godel is not "space and astronomy". It might not even be "science". However, it is certainly mathematical (big time), and Principia Mathematica is both the master and servant of science. So to me it's certainly a matter of scientific merit and debate.

So, should something like that go into Q&A or it should go into General Science? Or, gasp, OTB?

-Richard

I figure Q&A is for simple issues with simple answers. If it leads to a discussion, it belongs somewhere else. I'd be inclined to move the Godel discussion to General Science.

[publius]

Originally Posted by ToSeek

I figure Q&A is for simple issues with simple answers. If it leads to a discussion, it belongs somewhere else. I'd be inclined to move the Godel discussion to General Science.

Very well. Next time I get the desire to pose some "Whither Hermeneutics of Principia Mathematica?" or some other such nonsense, into General Science it shall go. Thanks.

-Richard

[hhEb09'1]

Originally Posted by publius

General Science

works for me

[Van Rijn]

Originally Posted by ToSeek

I figure Q&A is for simple issues with simple answers. If it leads to a discussion, it belongs somewhere else. I'd be inclined to move the Godel discussion to General Science.

General Science seems to me to be a reasonable place for the type of question Publius asked. I still wonder about the direction the discussion took, however.

[Thanatos]

Disparaging remarks about ancestral heritage should be avoided.

[AndreH]

Wow.....and I always thought Germans are the ones who do need a rule for everything..

[Whirlpool]

Hello reach919,


Welcome to BAUT. We're glad you read the Rules here.
We have the Space and Astronomy Section , wherein we have the topic for Astronomical Equipment and you can find other telescope owners there to share with , with your new telescope.

Happy Bauting.