Suggestions, Comments and Support

We ask that if you have an issue with moderation you use the report post function rather than further derail a thread, and we thank everyone for doing so. This thread can be used as a response for communication by the staff, to further clarify the actions. ____ http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/72856-how-many-photonscm3/page-3#entry729892 The post was a hijack with non-mainstream physics ("heavy photons"), though that remark has since been edited; mechanisms for creating and annihilating photons is (currently) beyond its scope. The thread in question was not split off from an existing thread (as the report claimed), though it would not matter — discussion…

Some answers to frequently asked questions (or paraphrases of questions) that have come up in moderation efforts or in the Support forum. This will be amended as needed. 1. Someperson is wrong! Why don't the moderators step in and do something? We don't do that. The role of the staff (when acting as staff) is to enforce the rules, so we don't make determinations on who is correct. We do, however, participate in discussions as members of the site, and may weigh in in that capacity, but generally do not mix the roles of enforcing moderation and participation in a discussion. (Some "housekeeping" actions, such as moving posts to a more appropriate area, can sti…

Since the topic comes up every so often, here's a good summary on why internet moderation (among other things, like boycotts) is not a violation of free speech rights http://xkcd.com/1357/

So normally it takes months to build a good reputation as any good experienced member will tell you, but often times the reputation system is abused for emotional purposes while the reputation itself doesn't seem to have a logical place in concluding of something is logical or not, so instead I propose a new type of reputation system: Instead of having "I like how you talk, therefore you are logical and a good scientist" and "I don't like how you talk, therefore you are illogical and are a bad scientist" and all sorts of other non scientific uses r illogical fallacies, we simply have a button for each post that you can press that says "This post answers your current in…

If you have the last reply in a thread, and you post again, the system merges your new post to the previous one. Unfortunately any delay in the system during that time can cause the user to wonder if the system has recognized their input, and during this time they may click on the Post button again. An example of this may be seen in the 3rd and 4th quote-and-reply sections of this post. I've played around with this a bit and found that it's very easy to reproduce the behavior. It's perfectly understandable because the system doesn't give you a lot of feedback that it's processing your request, and we're a pretty board so it does fall behind from time to time. Be…

How do you do those quotes.If i try to quote 2 people the page changes with only one quote ? and you have a picture as an avatar.How do you do that?

The quote function - a brief tutorial; although I expect/hope that this might grow into a thread as other members explain techniques and tricks that I don't know about. 1. Plain Quote Box The simplest form of quotation is used to make it clear that some text is copied from elsewhere and isn't yours - a link or source is expected as well. From Wikipedia page on Plagiarism - here a. Copy text from source b. Paste - you can just right-click / ctrl-v or you can use the paste plain text button if you want to remove formatting and hyperlinks c. Highlight the text - click the quote button d. Go back to source and copy webpage address e. Paste this into your post…

Michel, very interesting. Could you tell me how you were able to insert your hand-sketch in your post? I'd like to try that.

So. If you were in charge, what would you change about the new ScienceForums.Net?

Please post all such queries here, not in a new thread.

I noticed that there is some bug in the forum software. Look at this: You see? I just wrote the posting, but my last visited is May, 7th. I noticed this also in other profiles, so it is not an error just when I am looking at my own profile.

I've noticed the word being thrown about a lot during debates to try and suppress the offensive nature of debating. I think it's being used out of context at times and should be considered before being put to the table. Almost every thread where a less-educated member debates with a more-educated one, the term is used. It shouldn't be constantly used like that and the debate should be conducted fairly, non-biased and with structure. If someone has a point, and it seems offensive, one shouldnt' take offense -- especially if that wasn't the nature of the post. If you were debating in the presence of a judge and jury, you would not be able to pull the 'suppress' card, and as…

Just wondering why I can't edit my posts - the edit thingy just isn't there. I hadn't noticed a time limit and most recent post appeared immediately without the edit option. Also I got notified of 'react to post' but that display is absent on this comment. (could have been on the later one, which does have the display ... an up and a down to give zero, possibly?) Reloading pages doesn't bring these up. It's not that serious - but I had wanted to do minor edits.

Out of curiosity, I've been doing a bit of searching in the Speculations forum for anything that could be considered a "good" idea by mainstream physics. Really, I'm just looking for anything that isn't obviously nonsense. Unfortunately my search was unsuccessful: I couldn't find any. If anyone remembers any old threads that seem to fit my criteria I would be very much grateful. **Note: I'm unsure if this is the appropriate section for this thread. If not, please move it .

Its pretty aggravating to try and read all the forums, only to get to the physics forums and when im done all the forums below it are no longer lit up as new comments. Can you please put all new threads as "permanant" until we mark them as read? I dont want to be rushed to try and read and reply to all the new threads that I encounter. Thank you.

I've noticed that no justification is ever given for decisions to move threads, especially to the pseudoscience and speculations forum. It would seem to me that this is an important detail in the decision, and that the addition of this to such posts would surely relieve most of the authoritarian, personally-threatening connotation that many misguided minds glean from the terse post, hopefully overall conveying less of a sense of intimidation and more of a sense of rationality versus bias.

from the thread: Politicas/ "Is metadata private?" topic/75732-is-metadata-private/page-2 http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/75732-is-metadata-private/#entry749657 @ 21 http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/75732-is-metadata-private/page-2#entry749762 : "That's not what I'm wanting to discuss. ... "A government abusing its power is a completely separate issue." (my emphasis added) & @ 28 (addressed to "overtone" @ 27) : "If you're not interested in discussing the OP within the parameters I've outlined, please start a new thread for your discussion." As a matter of general principle, I'd like to know what officialdom's formal opinion is conc…

Is anyone else finding that threads they have posts in are occasionally appearing below the line "The threads below have not been updated since your last visit but still contain unread posts" on the search results page, even though they have new replies?

I think we can use a science fiction addition to the boards, where enthusiasts can post stories that are extrapolated from modern science knowledge and prospects, with readers offering input and maybe even critique if asked. Who knows, it could turn out wildy popular, and besides -- it might help a solve an issue we tend to have.... Pseudoscience carries a negative aura. It's like the armpit of the science forums, marring a professionally laid-out website, gathering the ridiculous in its stinky corner, and where little of the discussion is expected to be productive. Maybe we can even rename it to "Science Fiction and Wild Guesses" As a side effect, peop…

What does this mean on SFN screen ? Flashed for about two seconds. What terms ? WHY is it left to guess ?

Hi, I want to discuss the part of forum that is about Religion. People talk over there in humiliating way about one another’s religion. Everyone considers himself to be right. In fact the religion is something very personal to everyone. So everyone should respect it. Over here such a topic just raise “HATRED”. If someone really wants to discuss this he/she should go to the sites where there are scholars, who know every bit about every topic. Over sfn people are saying things about religion without solid proofs, which is painful very painful. We all should respect one another’s religion, no matter which religion we are having. Please CLOSE thi…

Interesting that AI trained on Newton’s laws couldn’t deduce the gravitation law when given orbit data Why “vibe physics” is the ultimate example of AI slop “But did the model take that leap, and discover Newton’s laws? Did it find the underlying foundational model? Or, perhaps even better, did it find a superior model to Newton’s? The answer, quite definitively, was no.” https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/vibe-physics-ai-slop/ Article points out how the chatbot aspect of LLMs are a problem. They aren’t going to tell you you’re wrong We’ve run across folks who insist an idea is theirs but an AI helped, but I think this is still a problem - any AI taints the idea.

I wasted too much time already. I don't seem to be able to post on the philosophy forum as a reply or start a new thread. Looked in the so called help but it was anything but helpful.

I have posted a thread call "About Design and Technology" under General Science.... But now i cannot find it..... Does any one know how could this be?

Hi. I have a PM stuck in my Inbox (don't remember if I had one and got corrupted or it's new). It has no subject, no sender, no nothing. Date is 01-01-1970 (Unix 0 IIRC) With no subject it's unclickable and attempting to get the message via txt or csv gives me an error page. I haven't tried deleting it in case anyone wants to investigate. Error page contents follow: ------------------- Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in [path]/private.php on line 849 Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [path]/includes/class_core.php:3254) in [path]/includes/functions_file.php on line 147 Warning: Cannot…