Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for 'delete account' in content posted in Suggestions, Comments and Support.

  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • News
    • Forum Announcements
    • Science News
    • SFN Blogs
  • Education
    • Homework Help
    • Science Education
  • Sciences
    • Physics
    • Chemistry
    • Biology
    • Mathematics
    • Medical Science
    • Engineering
    • Earth Science
    • Computer Science
    • Amateur Science
    • Other Sciences
  • Philosophy
    • General Philosophy
    • Religion
    • Ethics
  • SmarterThanThat Forums
    • SmarterThanThat Videos
  • Other Topics
    • The Lounge
    • Politics
    • Suggestions, Comments and Support
    • Brain Teasers and Puzzles
    • Speculations
    • Trash Can

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL




College Major/Degree

Favorite Area of Science



Member Title

  1. I can't find signature between the options in account settings?
  2. My signature link to a YT video began rendering (instead of just showing the URL) and I'd like to remove it or maybe surround it by noparse tags. Followed the outlined steps, however clicking Account Settings throws a 502 Bad Gateway error and I cannot seem to get to the sig edit screen. Anyone else seeing this error, or have an alternative path to try?
  3. Click on your user name on the top right and go to "Account settings" in the dropdown. Signature will be one of the options. Use shift+enter to not leave a blank line between lines. Signatures should be fairly unobtrusive
  4. ! Moderator Note To clarify: the staff generally don't delete posts unless they break the rules concerning civility (or spamming; posters spamvertising in the forums are banned and their posts deleted). Post that are off-topic and likely to or actually hijack a discussion are often moved into new threads, especially if the member is new, but it depends on the post. The trash can is used more often for repeat hijacking offenders, when the staff start to get fed up with the rule being ignored.
  5. From: BAL-TORR (BALTORR) Posted: 3/11/99 5:18 AM "Ok, I read this thread (all that hadn't been arbitrarily deleted), and I thought to myself "This guy could be on to something, or he could be completely wrong, I need to hear more to be sure"...Boys and girls, that's called having an open mind. Some of you guys and gals cuffed and stuffed the man for no good reason except that what he was saayin was way out, according to your frame of reference. You know that is not right. Give things a chance. I'm not sayin the guy is right or wrong, but there is really no reason to jump on him with both feet without knowing all the facts. You wouldn't do it on the street, why on a message board? I don't know if his invention or his idea works, and I may never know. Depends on if I decide to research it or not. But I wouldn't want to go down in history as one of the first to trash Fulton, Edison, or Einstein without knowin what I was talking about. You guys know I have nothin but respect and friendship for some of you. On the other hand, I don't see how you stand by and let someone who has no qualifications, scientific or otherwise, delete messages in a string that deals with this kind of subject matter. How are we to develope an opinion or learn anythuing about a possible real breakthrough, if someone who has a closed mind and NO expertise in the sciences is allowed to delete parts of the discussion? Just another reason I don't chat in Copsonline anymore...But aside from that...you guys give new ideas a chance, maybe the guy is on to something, maybe he isn't. Neither is a reason to just shut the door. Nice to talk to y'all again..Bal-torr"
  6. I moved this. I'm a mod and just think I can run everything and rule everyone. Except that's not true; I moved this post in complete accordance with the rules — the opening is an off-topic hijack, which violates the rules, and that means I can delete it or move it. I could have moved it to the trash, where there could be no further discussion, but it warrants a response and perhaps other commentary, so I moved it here. As Ophiolite says, you do not have a right to free speech here; that right is between you and the government where you live; the government is (supposedly) limited in how they can censor you. How much depends on where you live. The price you pay for entering this forum is that you agree to follow some rules, and if you don't follow them, you might be shown the door. If you don't like that caveat, you can go somewhere else and start your own blog and then you can say what you please. THAT is how you can exercise your right to free speech.
  7. Who are you sending PMs to? I don't think I've received any, and only admins can delete an account. However, account deletion is rather messy and we don't generally do it. We can make vBulletin not send any more emails to you, if that would be okay.
  8. I would like to add my voice to that. Quoting is problematic (Safari user here). I have had two problems, both specifically related to the fact that when you edit a reply the quoted text is "locked in a quote box" and I cannot seem to edit the tags: 1) sometimes I'll be trying to delete some quoted text from the top of the quote and if I accidentally backspace when the cursor is right at the beginning, then the server sends me back to the thread and I lose all my reply. (frustrating!) 2) I wanted to break up the quote into separate boxes and put some of my own text in between. It just wouldn't let me because i couldn't put the tags where I wanted them.
  9. Just so your aware, ddos isnt the only way to bring a site down, if you edit your packet you can request a callback from the server but extend the time to like 500ms and delete the return to sender ip, if you spam enough of those kinds of packets the server will hold onto them for the full half a second and then throw them out. Basically clogging up your server with long requests rather than instant you dont need a botnet to grind a server down. You can fine tune this in the config files on the server though, i only know the theoretical side of this type of attack. Regards. (i think the packets are udp, if this helps)
  10. As was stated earlier, they insulted me first. And I repeated the exact same manner of insults they said to me. For instance, Raider said I have a tiny mind. Then I said he had a tiny mind. I get suspended and a warning point on my account...yet nothing happens to him. How is this just? For instance, Zapatos calls me a spoiled brat and a child. Then I call him a senile old man. How is calling someone a spoiled brat child any morally different than calling them a senile old man? Everyone loses their minds, tell me I cross the line, and I get warned. Noone else gets warned. Bullies holding each other's hands and a mutual support circle of bullies. Even though they troll my threads and say I am sick and other insults. Completely unfair and bogus.
  11. If it is gone it is gone there isn't much I can do about it. The fact that it was unfinished, well it is probably just as well that it is completely gone, because I do not want half unfinished thoughts of mine just showing up somewhere. Now what I am referring to is twice maybe three times what I was working on disappeared because of what I did while the work was in progress. Once while writing a response to a post I wanted to review a statement made on a preceding page. It is apparently wrong to assume that just because there is a response box at the bottom of each page that what you are typing will follow you if you change pages. It is also wrong to assume that if you go back to the page that contained the box you were writing in, that what you were writing will still be there. Next it was just a small misspelled word, so badly misspelled that there were no suggestions listed. Seeing that there were no suggestions I clicked on the page to clear the suggestion box then decided to just retype the word. The word was supposed to be that and that is not that difficult to spell, but my fingers do not always go where I want them to go, and yes I was being lazy using the suggestion box to begin with. The problem apparently is that somehow I managed to highlight the word in grey then thinking I could just make the word go away because it was highlighted by hitting the backspace key. Wrong, wrong, wrong, everything gone, and I am on a different page. I looked up my own profile just to see if I had accidentally posted a half thought and simply could not remember which post I was responding to. Some of them do get to look alike sometimes, and I am a little tired. Nothing there thankfully. Though having now read some of my own past post it would be easily understood if someone reading what I have intentionally posted considered them to be half thought out thoughts. Okay, now that I an done howling at the moon, can someone tell me how to use the quote feature selectively? Do you have to take the whole quote, then delete everything but what you want to remain of the quote? How do I single out a single statement? I see where people have done it, while others seem satisfied with quoting the entire post. Is there a copy and paste trick?
  12. This one nails me fairly often. If your cursor isn't in the text box, backspace means "previous page", not "delete text", so clicking in the wrong place makes your browser eat your post. Even worse, on my laptop there's no Home key, so I try to press Cmd-Left to go to the beginning of the line. Nope, that's "Back" in the browser, but "Home" in every other application I use. So I'll be halfway through a post and whoops, now it's gone.
  13. We do use a CAPTCHA -- we use reCAPTCHA. I strongly suspect that spammers pay people a few cents to bust each CAPTCHA for them. They haven't been very effective for years. New users are also required to have a valid email address, are not permitted to have signatures, can't post status updates or connect their accounts to Facebook and Twitter, and have a rate limit on sending PMs. All of these measures were reactions to techniques used by spammers. One popular spam technique was to register an account, set its signature or "About Me" to spam, and then never post, thus never bringing the account to our attention. We've put a lot of time into nuking spam and trying to prevent it. To give you a sense of scale, there are currently 9,103 members in the database marked as spammers, and I've probably deleted the accounts of just as many. What version of IE are you using? You can use up to IE 8 on Windows XP, which should be compatible with IPB. IE 6 accounts for 0.1% of our audience, and is no longer compatible with IPB. IE 7 is 0.7% of our audience. IE in total is only 15%, as it's swamped by Chrome, Safari and Firefox.
  14. In short, no. Being correct has absolutely no relevance to the matter. Only whether the work in itself is complete and with sufficient details (i.e. with supporting experiments and/or calculations). Even if you posted experimental results, there is little to stop someone else to replicate these findings on their own and publish it. The only way to show that it was in fact plagiarized is when significant parts are actually lifted from the post. Otherwise you do not have much of a leg to stand on. And if it is not detailed enough to be a proper publication it does not account to much. A potential case could be made for certain repositories, such as arxiv, provided that the publication is close enough to count as plagiarism. Proving that for a random blog or forums is quite a bit harder. Again, just using the idea counts for nothing. In fact, relatively free exchange of ideas without expecting credit is par of the course. That being said, scooping is also not that unusual, which is why generally you tend only to present stuff that is either unique or (almost) published. Still, it is not unusual that big labs pick up an idea and finish faster than a poor, underfunded assistant prof, for example.
  15. Dear Administrators, This is a copy of a PM to Swansont this morning ! Sat 3rd Aug 2013 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hi swansont, I do not seem to be able to upload any Images . A little sign comes up Error and in the little foot note in brown or blue where it speaks of max [ so many megbytes ] it is overwritten with [ no uploading possible ] if I have used up some form of quota. What do I do about it? wait time, delete somewhere [old threads , messages etc ] or ask for more , or what ? Perhaps you can advise . Also can you fix it somehow please. Thanks. Oh and bye the way i would not mind , my thread on " New Mass Transport system " in speculations , unlocking. I have a Physical Model in UK for proof of concept and . I have a Paper produced by me in University for bringing back from Italy in Mid September also some new drawings of forces ( when I can Upload ,some more ) Mike ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ He says I need to talk to ADMIN so here I am trying to talk with you. Please could you fix for me to continue . Thanks Mike
  16. We never delete anything except spam. We've always hidden posts that do nothing but increase post counts ("lol", "good post", etc.). I'll unhide it, but I don't think krash661's saying what you think he's saying.
  17. Why did you delete the message krash661 when he says he is ok with me on this thread?? ---> http://www.sciencefo...le-mass-motion/ I need some explaination !!!
  18. The moderation deleted an locked messages. Why did you delete the message krash661 when he says he is ok with me on this thread?? ---> http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/77511-static-density-single-mass-motion/ I need some explaination Original construct thread in google cache --> http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:sKHKoAHj0YcJ:www.scienceforums.net/topic/77511-static-density-single-mass-motion/+Static+Density+Single+Mass+Motion&cd=1&hl=fr&ct=clnk&gl=fr&client=firefox-a So I tell you the true, and you, you are so in the lie ..
  19. My inbox has been a bit more full than usual lately but the spam isn't exactly stealthy and the delete button is easy to access, no problem guys...
  20. Definitely IE8 see attachment. Thank you for the nod and wink about compatibility settings I have now set SF and will try that. Please delete the attachments when viewed if you want the space, they have served their purpose, unless they help others somewhere along the line.
  21. @ 60 This _series_ of the O'Neil's five attempts to raise the VM all for a quite specific aim, by the way--soliciting some programmer's help to execute his conception (leaving aside as irrelevant the merits of that conception) -- is neither an ideal example of what strikes me as the worst about the site's moderators' habits nor completely devoid of some of those things. I'm not sure that I'll even have a chance to set out completely what I mean but I can make a start at it here and perhaps continue another time. Though this is a site devoted to science, it's a popular site --or so we're led to believe--where not only scientists but lay people are welcome to read and write opinions and discuss issues of science --and in the extra non-science "areas" discuss things that aren't science at all. I see nothing wrong with any of that so far. Except that there's quite a gap in my opinion and in my experience of this site between the advertized product and what's actually done and allowed here in fact on any typical day. In actual fact, it seems to me, lay opinions aren't really welcome here. Instead there's a subtle but important distinction in operation. This site is really for either working, practicing, scientists or those in training to become that (and those who are doing both at once, of course) and, then, only secondarily, it suffers the participation of those who are not merely interested in science as a cultural asset and a pursuit and intellectual interest but who are also ready to meet the high expectations here for what I'd call obsequious deference to all comment and opinion from the professional scientists here. It would be more honest and it would save a world of trouble if the site were simply much clearer about this rather than constantly doing what looks like a desperate effort to herd cats--the lay members who don't sufficiently get the importance of deference to the ruling science view that prevails here. From scientists to their fellow scientists, there's not the same dismissive style at all. When a credentialed scientist is concerned, I don't see the immediate resort to insult, to sarcasm, to belittling and summary dismissals. I don't think any regular reader here has to strain to grasp the sort of treatment I mean by that. But, of course, those who entirely subscribe to what I see as this site's patently unfriendly attitude toward any but their proven and approved lay membership won't subscibe to this portrayal. They are ready to join in the ridicule and in doing so demonstrate their fidelity to the deferential attitude which wins acceptance here. There is here, in sum, a very entrenched and reinforced attitude and practice of an "in-group" bias which views the non-specialist and the insufficiently deferential lay person as part of a "them" to be treated with suspicion and hostility (unless and until they demonstrate the required deference) and this seeds an atmosphere which is hostile to all or nearly all who the established (by their history of deference to the authorities here) fellow in-group members find lacking in compliance. I posted the Times article so that readers could read from sources they accept and respect the same sort of arguments and reasoning I am making about the implicit bias that is so at home here. Had I simply put those things out on my own account, they'd never have been described as "excellent" by any of the well-received members here. But, from two researchers in psychology at NYU, the same arguments, the same points that apply as criticism, are "receivable" here. Logically, it shouldn't make any difference. But no one wrote in to answer Yudkin and Van Bavel that, if they don't like this site, they needn't bother taking part in it. There's more to say on this topic but I'm not going to have time to develop it all in one session.
  22. That's really not a bad idea, new members would be at a disadvantage but it would also help make them more aware of the rep system and it's impact. If neg rep impacted on your own rep it might keep people from frivolously giving neg rep. Giving out neg rep should be something you give some thought to, making it impact on the giver seems like a good way to do it. of course giving neg rep when you have no pos rep "in the bank" should result in you receiving neg rep in your account as well, kinda like being over drawn.... I have to admit there have been a few threads that would have tempted me to exhaust my account...
  23. "A thread on the legacy of Obama might be welcomed - but not if, from the get go, the thread is designed to provoke and insult." I don't think that the fact that some people are a little upset or disappointed by the results of a democratically decided President Elect is a valid reason to shut down a thread. Why would it be different if the same thread was opened a year from now ( and not provocative ), other than the fact that some are a little sensitive and raw about the election outcome, and so, its considered 'provocative' currently ? Shouldn't we be able to discuss 'sensitive' issues on this forum, or do we need to account for when someone is in a 'bad mood' ? And as far as I can tell, the only person to hurl an insult is Phi, although he did provide the 'reasoning' behind his assertion. Just providing my opinion, which isn't necessarily worth anything.
  24. Your post was hijacking someone else's thread, which I explained quite clearly in my modnote. We try to discuss one topic at a time. Your speculative ideas should be in their own thread. Ordinarily, the staff hides posts like that (we never delete anything). However, after a conversation with michel123456, it was suggested that putting hijacking threads in the Trash Can offered a bit more transparency for the process, so this was the first time I've done this. Apparently, do AND don't = damned. I'm not putting it back in the other thread. I think it's been made the OP of its own thread in Speculations.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.