Rules discussion

[Disinfo Agent]

I agree with you, but I thought it was still an issue worth raising. I remember a discussion on the BABB about whether people should stop using the word "woowoo".

[Arneb]

Copyright Notice Material credited to STScI on this site was created, authored, and/or prepared for NASA under Contract NAS5-26555. Unless otherwise specifically stated, no claim to copyright is being asserted by STScI and it may be freely used as in the public domain in accordance with NASA's contract. However, it is requested that in any subsequent use of this work NASA and STScI be given appropriate acknowledgement. STScI further requests voluntary reporting of all use, derivative creation, and other alteration of this work. Such reporting should be sent to copyright@stsci.edu.

This site also contains material generated, authored and/or prepared by individuals or institutions other than STScI, and those individuals or institutions may claim copyright. Should you desire use of such material at this time, inquiries should be made to those individuals and institutions in accordance with the following:

A catalogue of HST publicly released images on this site may be found at the following location: http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/. If the credit line for an image lists STScI as the source, the image may be freely used as in the public domain as noted above. However, for credit lines listing individuals from other institutions, you will need to contact that institution listed in the credit line to advise you on the copyright policy for that image. If the individual listed in the credit line is a member of the American Astronomical Society you can obtain their contact information from (https://members.aas.org/directory/directory.cfm)

Many thanks, Wolverine, for your explanation concerning image use. The subsequent quoting of the Hubble image use policy by Nereid (posted again above), gave me cause for thought: according to this statement, our avatars - both Hubble photos with some processing to make them fit into the image size limit - would contravene NASA policy: They are not credited and our manipulations were not reported to NASA. Do you think that would be a problem?

[ToSeek]

I have a feeling that by "use" they mean "practical use." If you're not using it for science, merchandise, or advertising, I doubt it makes a big difference.

[Fraser]

Actually NASA has a very open license. For most of their images, you're free to use them for any purpose whatsoever (including commercial purposes) without asking for permission or paying a license fee. I was very careful to choose only license free images when providing all the free avatars.

[agingjb]

If I get banned, then I assume I can still read posts. But can I still search? And indeed what facilities of the site can I still use?

[peter eldergill]

Are you planning on getting banned?

Pete

[agingjb]

It seems all too easy here, except in what seem to be unique circumstances. I post rarely and read much, but I do see people being warned for critical views expressed in an emphatic manner into which I might easily stray.

[TheBlackCat]

As long as you either have evidence to back up your claims or don't present them as fact then you will be fine. The problem is when someone presents their ideas as fact but either refuses to provide any evidence for them or refuses to acknowledge when all of his or her evidence is refuted. And it does not happen suddenly, they are warned to stop before banning occurs, and even then it is usually just a temporary ban unless the offense is particularly heinous. Follow the rules and you will be fine. But refusing to follow the rules despite being warned to do so is not tolerated by the Mods here.

[Candy]

Originally Posted by agingjb

If I get banned, then I assume I can still read posts. But can I still search? And indeed what facilities of the site can I still use?

Being Banned is the same as Guest status.

[peter eldergill]

I like the temporary banning thing. Permanent bannings should be fairly rare. This would have been a good idea on the old BABB (I think someone here might agree with me ...ahem)

L8R

Pete

[agingjb]

Thanks. I must look up the definition of Guest Status. I'm probably unlikely to say anything that would get me banned, and I'd certainly be happy to remove it if challenged by a moderator. It is, however, very clear that there a puzzling difference in tolerance being shown on this board.

[Candy]

Originally Posted by agingjb

Thanks. I must look up the definition of Guest Status.

Guest status is the status you had before you ever registered. Perhaps, this is a better way for an explanation. Remember the difference as guest compared to being a member?

I like having more moderators. I like this system of banning much better than the old way. I haven't seen a difference in tolerance levels. I haven't really followed much of the threads that seem to generate a banning, either. I learned my lesson already.

Yes, Peter, yes!

[Count Zero]

Congrats on cracking 10,000 Candy!

[Candy]

Thank you, Count Zero.

The 10,001 post was in a thread about getting banned.

[Nereid]

Originally Posted by agingjb

[snip]
It is, however, very clear that there a puzzling difference in tolerance being shown on this board.

Would you be kind enough to say a little more about this please?

For example, what differences in tolerance have you noticed (other than between the first month and now; in the first month the rules were different)?

[agingjb]

I would have thought that, were I to assert that the moon landings did not take place, to offer no new evidence of this (false) assertion, to demonstrate an invincible ignorance of the basics of physics and astronomy, and to sustain this against a large number and variety of informed rebuttals, then I would be justly banned, swiftly and finally.

[montebianco]

Originally Posted by agingjb

I would have thought that, were I to assert that the moon landings did not take place, to offer no new evidence of this (false) assertion, to demonstrate an invincible ignorance of the basics of physics and astronomy, and to sustain this against a large number and variety of informed rebuttals, then I would be justly banned, swiftly and finally.

And the evidence suggests that you would be, except for the finally part

[agingjb]

Ah yes. I see that the evidence has arrived.

[montebianco]

Well, I meant the first banning, but now it looks permanent.

Oh well, he wasn't a big fan of evidence, but at least he was less, shall we say, aggressive, than some of the other folks who cruise through here...

(edited for spelling)

[ToSeek]

Originally Posted by agingjb

I would have thought that, were I to assert that the moon landings did not take place, to offer no new evidence of this (false) assertion, to demonstrate an invincible ignorance of the basics of physics and astronomy, and to sustain this against a large number and variety of informed rebuttals, then I would be justly banned, swiftly and finally.

Keep in mind that, despite the number of posts on that thread, Moon Man was here for only about 72 hours.

I do agree that we had ample reason to ban him from the time I first did so on. I was responding to vox populi, and I'm not sure I'll do that again: rules should be enforced consistently and not relaxed just because someone provokes some desired excitement.

[Grey]

Originally Posted by ToSeek

I do agree that we had ample reason to ban him from the time I first did so on. I was responding to vox populi, and I'm not sure I'll do that again: rules should be enforced consistently and not relaxed just because someone provokes some desired excitement.

I'd agree with your reasoning there, ToSeek. I know you were trying to make people happy, but I think your first action was correct.

[montebianco]

Since BAUT is a polite forum, is any reference at all to someidiot automatically a rules violation?

[The Bad Astronomer]

Folks-

The admins and moderators, after a lengthy discussion, have added a new rule to the board. It is Rule 14, "Disruptive Behavior":

14. Disruptive Behavior

The moderators and administrators reserve the right to take action against a poster who is disrupting the normal flow of the board. This includes violations listed in the other rules (trolling, use of ad hominems, posting copyrighted materials, etc.), but may also include behavior we have not yet foreseen. Since this rule is perforce general, we will attempt to correct the problem by warning the violator (via PM, email, or posting in the thread) and giving them a chance to explain themself, and we will take further action only if proven necessary.

If you haven't read the rules in a while, maybe now is a good time to re-familiarize yourself with them.

Thanks,

Phil (on behalf of the BAUT Admin team)

[SciFi Chick]

"Themself" is not a word. I recommend changing this phrase "giving them a chance to explain themself", to "giving an opportunity for a reasonable explanation", but then I'm just avoiding the studying I need to be doing for finals, so feel free to ignore me.

[hhEb09'1]

Originally Posted by The Bad Astronomer

You missed the disagreement between "violator" and "them" SciFi Chick

[SciFi Chick]

Originally Posted by hhEb09'1

You missed the disagreement between "violator" and "them" SciFi Chick

Actually, I didn't. I just didn't want to harp. That's why I rewrote the whole phrase.

Edited to add: I always feel so pedantic when I point out errors like that, and I have a tendency to make dumb errors in the process, so I'm always careful before saying anything.

[The Bad Astronomer]

Everyone's a critic. :-)

OK, I fixed it. Thanks for the help (seriously).

[Wolverine]

No nouns were harmed in the construction of this FAQ.

[hhEb09'1]

Originally Posted by SciFi Chick

Actually, I didn't. I just didn't want to harp.

I should have known better. Sorry.

This is an interesting area of grammar evolution/devolution. "They" or "them" or "their" are being used in place of the singular he (him, his) or she (her, hers) because some writers are attempting to be gender neutral.

[The Bad Astronomer]

I think it's OK to use "themseves". "He/she" and its variants is awkward.

English is an evolving language, and there are times we should let it change. But that's a bit OT...