Sayonara

I held off buying a Kindle because I was already buying an iPad and thought "well, I can just use the app". I did, and still do sometimes, but I've since bought a Kindle as well and I much prefer it. The screen doesn't tire your eyes anywhere near as quickly as an LCD does, and it's much lighter. It is nice though having the app on a tablet, expecially for books with graphics or charts. And being able to pick up where you left off on your phone when you're in a queue is good too. But I still love my e-Ink device

Which formats do you use? Which is your favourite? Which won't you use, and why? Let battle commence!

Currently reading Jailbird, by Kurt Vonnegut. He's an odd one, but I do like his books.

When all I am doing is suggesting one of many possible explanations as to why your post might not be responded to on a time-scale that would necessarily make you happy, do not start your reply to me with the word "Listen". And don't characterise yourself as "bumping the thread simply to get a status" when in fact you were being deliberately petulant.

You might consider iNow that for most people in academic circles it is currently the beginning of a new semester, and SFN will for many of them be low down on the list of priorities. As always, we will get there eventually.

Just a reminder that there is a Team SFN on the BOINC network, which you can join if you are running programs such as Seti@home. Blike set it up a while ago but I don't think it was ever advertised http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/team_display.php?teamid=134923

I wouldn't have a problem seeing that post in the religion forum. You state your stance on the issue and describe it as nonsense, because it does not make sense to you. Had you added "....the stupid ****s." on the end of it, then we might have a problem.

The rules don't say you cannot call religion nonsense. If someone says something that makes no sense to you, whether or not it relates to a religious topic, then by definition what they said will be 'non-sense' to you. Feel free to express that diplomatically.

And people can still ask for that evidence without making it into an attack. The rule isn't "don't offend people". That would be an impossible requirement. Look, iNow, we are well aware of your stance on religious claims. But we don't base our rules on your opinions. If you can't or won't adhere to the rules, then stay out of the religion forum. There is plenty more internet about the place where you can discharge your opinions.

Yes, but until they become persistently block-headed most people try to help them see their errors in a constructive fashion. The only reason it is pointed out in the religion forum is because some see religion as a soft target, and need it pointing out to them. There is room for diplomacy on all of the SFN boards. This one is not special in that regard - we just want members to be very clear on the policy that the mods will be working to.

Norman Albers has been suspended for a week for spamming the forums after receiving a 4-point infraction for spam.

To add to what Swansont said, there's no reason not to give an academic reference just because you don't think people will have access to it. There are people who have Athens access and similar even though they are not "in science", and there are libraries. Of course, this is not to say that it won't slow the discussion down, but if someone wants an academic source for something you have said and that's the only one going, then that's the only one going. Wikipedia has its drawbacks but it usually gives a reasonable primer and most articles on topics we are likely to discuss give further reading as well as cited sources. Where I think a lot of people fall down with Wikipedia is that they do not check the discussion tab of pages to see what petty arguments have shaped the content of the main article.

A few months ago all the mods and admins adopted BSG avatars... (source). I just haven't changed mine yet.

That one would certainly be a priority in my view. Maybe we could derive some sort of source priority ranking table.

I really don't think that discussing the way you use or do not use sources is quite in the same ballpark as giving you a bashing. Since you didn't feel compelled to make a reported post out of it I am going to assume that actually, neither do you, and your reply is simply an issue avoidance tactic. Well that's fine. Other people can still benefit from this discussion.