The Rules - Page 4

bossman20081 · #91 (**permalink**) 04-September-2004, 12:19 AM

Too bad we cant have politics on this board, I would love to debate some people on it, my family and friends dont really care so.... but I guess its for the best....

galaxygirl · #92 (**permalink**) 04-September-2004, 12:27 AM

Yeah, political debates on a forum like this can get pretty ugly. If you would like to have a political debate with someone on this board, send a PM or e-mail. I'm sure many people would be glad to do so, including me.

bossman20081 · #93 (**permalink**) 05-September-2004, 03:47 PM

Alright, sure galaxygirl, Ill debate you, but dont say I didnt warn you

suntrack2 · #94 (**permalink**) 24-September-2004, 11:23 AM

its fine Fraser, it was essential.

sunil

ChromeStar · #95 (**permalink**) 14-December-2004, 05:54 PM

I LIKE YOUR RULES

#96 (**permalink**) 08-January-2005, 09:09 PM

Fraser, in your rule on No Politics/Religion, you should also add No Philosophy. Some new users (like myself in the early days) might think that philosophy is allowed on the forums as long as it 'sounds' scientific or astronomy-related. A new member might invoke philosophy in the name of cosmology. Do not tell these users that make that mistake that no philosophy is implied in the rules. Include the phrase 'No philosophy' in rule No. 7...this will certainly guarantee less religion on UT.

Matthew · #97 (**permalink**) 08-January-2005, 10:49 PM

I could say that discussing the String theory is a philosophy discussion.

#98 (**permalink**) 08-January-2005, 11:17 PM

It may be philosophical, but it's not philosophy, per se.

Matthew · #99 (**permalink**) 08-January-2005, 11:29 PM

And that is why legal systems around the world are so complex, and end up being counter-intiutive.

#**100** (**permalink**) 09-January-2005, 12:02 AM

This is not a legal system.

Would you prefer users constantly thinking that philosophy is closer to science than theology and thus opening philosophic strings that you'd have to close down again and again, or would you rather have "NO PHILOSOPHY" etched in digital stone so that people don't make that mistake in the first place?

wjwduke · #**101** (**permalink**) 10-January-2005, 01:52 AM

Why not open a "pinned" thread that can be referred to whenever somone wants to interject a theological, political or philosophical point of view?
Any topic that sways into to one of these areas and a poster has a strong point of view can simply say "I have an opinion/objection "outside of the rules" on this topic, refer to "pinned" thread for my opinion." That way anyone that may or not be offended by his/her opiion has the "option" to chose to read and/or post to it. Simple no?

Fraser · #**102** (**permalink**) 10-January-2005, 03:22 AM

I've banned Religion and Politics because people get so cranky about it. I haven't seen a lot of flamewars over Philosophy. But if they happen, I'm banning that too.

#**103** (**permalink**) 10-January-2005, 03:55 AM

Fraser, I agree.

Duke, I don't think that's possible.

ferg.c. · #**104** (**permalink**) 11-January-2005, 10:22 AM

I strongly oppose the idea that philosophy might be banned from discusions of physics. The raison d'etre for physics or any science for that matter is to explain the workings of the universe in concrete terms (i.e. mathematics etc.) and the riason d'etre of philosophy is to convey these concrete terms in language. If you want to own a car and then refuse to go anywhere with it that's your desicion, but you won't have me (for one) in the passanger seat!
Ferg

Jakenorrish · #**105** (**permalink**) 11-January-2005, 03:20 PM

Time for a grovelly one I'm afraid, but I for one trust Fraser and the moderators to judge what goes and what doesn't. We may sometimes need to touch on certain subjects, like religion or philosophy. After all astronomy as such wouldn't be here if it weren't for people's crazy ideas being disproved by people who looked to the skies and actually worked it out. (Catholic church vs Galileo anyone?- still a bit controversial hundreds of years on!)

However when things move away from science and starts arguing using their beliefs and not the facts to try and prove a point, then the moderators are the people for putting their feet down I reckon!!

antoniseb · #**106** (**permalink**) 11-January-2005, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fraser@Jan 10 2005, 04:22 AM
I haven't seen a lot of flamewars over Philosophy. But if they happen, I'm banning that too.

Heck, I've wondered whether we ought to ban discussion of the possibility of faster-than-light travel. Some people don't want to hear that it may not be possible, and they get pretty cranky when you say it. So far, we haven't had to ban it, but a few people left the forum because of the flames.

Chook · #**107** (**permalink**) 11-January-2005, 09:57 PM

Sure - Religion and Politics (philosphy too) attract more flame than other topics.

But I suggest that the primary cause of "flame" is a disrespect for the other's point of view and letting it be known - which hurt feelings and is to be avoided - hense the Rules, which only ameliorates the problem.

The real answer is to foster a gentlemany attitude to oneanother on the UT forum, the hard-working Moderators providing counsel, when necessary, or harsher penalties for those who just will not act properly.

I think that this is how it works at the moment.

galaxygirl · #**108** (**permalink**) 11-January-2005, 11:48 PM

It's for everyone to develop that kind of attitude in a public forum with such a large and diverse group of people. If anyone wants to have a political or religious discussion they can always do it through e-mail/PM/IM.

ferg.c. · #**109** (**permalink**) 12-January-2005, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jakenorrish@Jan 11 2005, 04:20 PM
...the moderators are the people for putting their feet down I reckon!!

That's what I believe too. I only said that they would not have my delightful company if they put thier foot down on philosophy. And I gave my reason I think.

Mine is an empassioned plea unto the moderators to see the impropriety of excluding philosophical debate regarding the physical world from this forum. Thanks.
Cheers
Ferg

ferg.c. · #**110** (**permalink**) 12-January-2005, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chook@Jan 11 2005, 10:57 PM
The real answer is to foster a gentlemanly attitude to one another on the UT forum

Damn right it is too, old boy!
Chook's hit the nail right on the head here!
Cheers
Ferg.

vet · #**111** (**permalink**) 02-March-2005, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fraser@Nov 8 2003, 05:02 PM
Welcome to the Universe Today Forums, we hope you have a great time in the community we've built. Like any well-run community, we have some rules. They're generally common sense, but please take a moment to look through them so you understand.

The moderators and I will strictly enforce these rules. We reserve the right to edit topics and posts, delete stuff, move it around, split off or merge topics together. We will also warn and eventually ban users who violate these simple rules.

This isn't a public place, and the laws of freedom of speech in whatever country you come from don't apply here (I'm Canadian, if that matters). You're my guest, in my house, and I expect you act accordingly.

Thanks!

Fraser Cain
Publisher
Universe Today

--------------------------------------

1. Stay on Topic... Space and Astronomy

This is a space-oriented dicussion forum. That's what we're talking about here, so if you're going to start a topic or participate in a conversation, please stay within this area. Obviously this can be open to interpretation, but please use your common sense.

We've got an area called "Totally Off Topic", where you can talk about anything else you like. That section still falls under the rest of the rules, though, so we expect you to be polite, respectful of copyright, etc.

2. No Swearing or Adult Topics

We encourage all ages to read this discussion board, so there are going to be children present. Please watch your language. Same goes with adult topics - talk about it somewhere else. If you do need to say something... racy... I expect to see the most scientific terminology used.

3. Be Nice

Attack the ideas, not the person. If you've got concerns with what someone is saying, feel free dismantle their arguments, but don't make personal attacks. You might think you're making a joke, but it could really hurt someone else's feelings, so steer on the side of caution. If you feel that someone has crossed the line and insulted you, please email one of the moderators. Don't write some scathing post in the forum to try and humilate people publicly - we probably won't listen to you then.

4. Don't Quote Emails

Please don't post a copy of something that somebody emailed to you. There are legal and copyright reasons for this. I'll post emails from time to time in the forum, but I'll be getting the proper permission to do this from the source.

5. No Copyright Material

Don't quote articles available on other websites, it's a copyright violation. If you want to reference material somewhere else on the web, just link to it. People can go take a look at what you're talking about and then come back to talk about it.

6. No Advertising

Don't use the Universe Today forums as a way to promote your own website, product, or forum. And don't use the forum as a platform for your ideas or theories. We'll give you a little leeway if you're an active contributor to the forum. And don't think we won't notice.

7. No Politics or Religion

Discussions about politics and religion nearly always turn ugly, and frankly, I don't have the time or interest in policing conversations that do little but make people angry at each other. So, don't start or contribute to a topic that's going to just start people yelling at each other. The moderators and I will shut down or delete any thread that has obviously taken an overtly political/religious direction.

8. DON'T MAKE ALL-CAPITAL TITLES

That's generally perceived to be yelling on the Internet. If you make an all-capital title in the forum, we're more than likely to rewrite it.

9. Only one account per person

Don't get a second or third forum username so you can have different personalities and have conversations with yourself. This is not helpful to the forum.

10. We'll Add New Rules on a Whim

The moderators reserve the right to moderate postings and users on the board for any reason whatsoever. Obviously with great power comes great responsibility, but if we see something that needs to be fixed, we'll fix it.

as an ex-biz, now 'burned-out' author, my concern is 'copyright'. on one hand, a half-century of gathering data, which i feel should be shared (in the advent of pre-publication of my work be 'terminated' w/me), i yet share every writer's concerns on 'copyright', and retaining such right.

certainly any freely dispersed data is 'free-game'. no problem. you have no control over posters---however, my concern centers on not being able to find Your
'rights revert to author' clause, usually found---all i may find is a copyright symbol.
i've searched for your terms of 'rights'---found nada. 'net-publishing' remains a grey area, so i keep my corraboration sources to myself, as a rule.

simply put? are my posts yet my 'property'? or yours?

#**112** (**permalink**) 02-March-2005, 12:18 AM

You may find some answers, Vet, if you look in the UT FAQ at the bottom of the page.

vet · #**113** (**permalink**) 02-March-2005, 01:27 AM

tricky call---if one's beef is the defense budjet vs. nasa's---that's political, but still relevant to this site, assuming its goal of promoting astronomy. and philosophy had displayed disastrous links to astrophysics---the worst on recent record being Helhholtz's century-old bunk, 'the universe is dying from thermodynamic heat-death'. this concept spawned existentialism, the 'roaring twenties', hedonism---only in the early 1980's was 'the inflationary' paradigm predicting cosmic background radiation heat differentials as eternal energy sources. COBE confirmed this. whoops. suddenly Life had eternal enegy.

as this site has a catagory for 'alternative's', and 'everything else'---perhaps those should be elimitated? goodness knows there's enough 'newbies' in need of no bs data on eqiptment, technique---let alone sub-diameter aspherising methods for making large mirrors, or even decent flats.