PDA

View Full Version : The Rules



Fraser
2003-Nov-08, 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.

This also goes for the promotion of alternative theories. If you use the forum as a place to promote your theories of the Universe, we will delete your posts on sight and probably ban you from the forum. I don't mind when people question established scientific thinking, and we even have a special "Alternative Theories" section to hammer out ideas, but don't use the entire forum to promote your agenda.

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.

jimmy
2003-Nov-08, 10:55 PM
Good call frasier. Those topics were interesting,but clearly not for this place. :)

rahuldandekar
2003-Nov-09, 10:24 AM
Thanks Fraser.
Great job ! :D :D

DippyHippy
2003-Nov-13, 02:36 AM
I think the rules speak for themselves and are pretty much common sense.

At the end of the day, there's a very simple rule you only have to remember to make your experiences much more enjoyable:

Play nice :P

Planetwatcher
2003-Nov-15, 01:08 PM
Ditto for me. I think they are fair.

deltaangel
2003-Nov-16, 06:25 AM
I completely agree with everything everyone here has said

ariestalk
2003-Nov-27, 05:14 PM
Hi all,
I've been looking at the "Universe Today" for a few weeks and think it is great.
Then this Astrology!!! link gets added. Surely must be a mistake.
Bob

Fraser
2003-Nov-27, 08:03 PM
Which astrology link?

DippyHippy
2003-Nov-28, 11:13 PM
I think ariestalk might be referring to the VisibleSky site, where's there's a link to an astrology website...

Matthew
2003-Dec-01, 02:48 AM
You can search for astrology, (http://www.google.com/custom?q=astrology&cof=T%3Ablack%3BLW%3A323%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.un iversetoday.com%2Fimages%2Flogo.gif%3BLH%3A68%3BBG C%3Awhite%3BAH%3Aleft%3BGL%3A0%3BAWFID%3A85bb1b13c 1dc105b%3B&sitesearch=universetoday.com) and there is only 3 results.

Fraser
2003-Dec-01, 04:46 AM
I think I understand, he didn't like the ad for VisibleSky, but from what I can tell it has nothing to do with astrology. It just shows the position of the stars at a specific place and time. It's not like they're interpreting your personality or anything.

Matthew
2003-Dec-06, 07:08 AM
Well now there are 4 references to astrology on this site. This thread is the newest addition.

major_eh
2003-Dec-06, 11:42 AM
astrology reference #5.
sorry. ;)

Matthew
2003-Dec-07, 01:24 AM
No, this thread counts as ONE astology reference on the Universe Today Search.

Fraser
2003-Dec-26, 12:35 PM
I just added a new rule... NO ALL-CAPS TITLES. There's no need to yell.

Faulkner
2003-Dec-27, 09:54 AM
Just a suggestion...

Why NOT have a post where we can discuss religion? If it becomes ridiculous = censor it. No swear words, etc. Just friendly debate etc... I would LOVE to see where some of these people are coming from? And debating deep issues like this is GREAT! After all, where DID the "Big Bang" come from? Ha...What do you think? Not appropriate? (I really think it would GO OFF!!)

This is the "Universe Today", after all!!! B)

kashi
2003-Dec-27, 10:04 AM
We had that sort of thing before, and frankly, there's always somebody who takes it too far. Some forums have an unmoderated "soapbox" section where you can get this stuff out of your system, but this generally only makes users angry with each other.

There are plenty of forums out there that discuss religion. When you're visiting the Universe Today, let's stick to Astronomy and Space Exploration.

Faulkner
2003-Dec-27, 10:15 AM
You got me all wrong, Kashi. I'm not suggesting a "religion" forum at all. What I AM suggesting is COSMOLOGY...different approaches to it...etc...I've seen posts by people who are christians, hindus, atheists....Let's add to it! (Just one single post thread, is all I'm suggesting!)...I, myself, am a BUDDHIST...I think one post given over to this cosmological topic is more than warranted! After all, isn't western scientific physics a religion in itself? Wasn't it the ancient Sumerians who believed the "Big Bang" was a wave fluctuation (like a squirming dragon)? ;)

Fraser
2003-Dec-27, 11:24 AM
Cosmology topics are totally fine - origin of the Univere, large scale structure, multiple Universes, early moments of the Big Bang, alternative theories to the Big Bang, etc. What we don't want are religious discussions, where it's essentially a matter of faith and therefore pretty much impossible to discuss without someone taking it personally. This decision was made after watching thread after thread descend into fights.

kashi
2003-Dec-28, 01:34 AM
Why NOT have a post where we can discuss religion?

Forgive me for getting you all wrong!

Cosmology is fine.

Dan Luna
2003-Dec-29, 05:58 PM
I can't say I spent much time on the following forum, but if you want to discuss religion it may appeal:

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/god/

Chook
2003-Dec-29, 07:04 PM
The problem with discussing religion, Faulkner, is that Rule No. 3 cannot be maintained by some contributors.

Shame! :(

kashi
2003-Dec-30, 01:16 PM
What a horrible looking forum. I get a headache just looking at it. Yuck....

Dan Luna
2003-Dec-30, 04:54 PM
Such suffering is doubtless good for the soul. :P

I used to look at a similarly tacky Krishnamurti forum, until I realised he would have pulled the plug on it in disgust. Most of it was wannabe gurus just trying to score points off each other. When someone started asking for copies of emails certain people had sent, as evidence for suing them over contributing to her mother's suicide, that was the end of it for me.

I, Brian
2004-Jan-18, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by fraser@Nov 8 2003, 05:02 PM
9. 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.
I like rule no.9 the best. :D

Chook
2004-Jan-18, 07:44 PM
Quote I.Brian:
"I like rule no.9 the best. "

That's POWER, man! But they use it moderatively and with restraint.

They're a really good bund of blokes :D

Chook
2004-Jan-25, 03:32 AM
Fraser,
Could something like the following be incorporated into the rules please:

Contributors, their views, opinions and questions, will be treated with the highest respect by all forum members and visitors. Conversely their views, opinions or questions will not be ridiculed or negatively labelled in any way but, rather, treated seriously and responded to as objectively, positively and helpfully as possible. It is to assumed that we do not have any other agenda but to learn from, and enrich each other, in a scientific context.

Thanks ...

kashi
2004-Jan-25, 02:03 PM
I think the term "negatively labelled" is quite subjective. Constructive criticism is an important part of learning, as long as it doesn't get too personal. Basically, it all comes down to being nice.

I think I know the thread that you are referring to. We should all be very grateful to have such highly respected guests as Tim Thompson who are willing to share their knowledge.

Chook
2004-Jan-25, 07:45 PM
Quote Kashi:
"We should all be very grateful to have such highly respected guests as Tim Thompson who are willing to share their knowledge".

And we should continue to have such eminent gentlemen a long as our demeanour remains gentlemany and worthy of such patronage.

This IS a forum for argument and debate - but at the same scholarly level as you would expect from the same august universities from which these scientists were educated.

I know, Kashi, that you can't legislate to "be nice" - but this should come from within because I hope that we are all friends here and members, as it were, of the same "club" and interest group - with the aim of inspiring and helping each other.

The subject of "the thread that you are referring to" was way beyong me - but I DID understand the continuopus use of words like "Wacky" etc. which was offensive, not only to me (who wasn't involved) but to the recipient of the unbecoming language.

Criticise, by all means, but like a gentlemen!

Fraser
2004-Jan-25, 11:42 PM
I think it's important to distinguish between the ideas and the person. In other words, I think it's fine to think someone else's ideas are fantastic, wacky, genius, unfounded, baseless, alternative, etc. You need to be polite, but I think it's important not to mince words as well. If you think an idea doesn't make sense, that's fine.

If someone says that the "Earth is flat", you should be able to disagree with that in whatever words you choose. We shouldn't hold our ideas so close to our hearts that we feel that an insult on them is an insult on us. I feel that the whole point of a discussion forum is to discuss, and often that means disagreeing.

On the other hand, though, you must always respect the person. I know that's a fine line to distinguish, but it's very important. It's against the rules to attack someone personally.

Faulkner
2004-Jan-26, 12:27 AM
Surely we're made of sterner stuff!? ;)

Chook
2004-Jan-26, 04:59 AM
Fraser,
With respect - I would submit that if you were told - "Fraser, your proposal is wacky!" the statement may be interpreted "Fraser, YOU are wacky to support such a proposal." (And you may substitute "crazy" for "wacky" or whatever.) This is personal criticism.

However, if you were told - "Fraser, current principles do not support your proposal because …" then the emphasis is shifted to the SUBJECT of your proposal rather than to yourself. You don't feel personally criticised.

This was my point.

Anyway - I felt compelled to make these observations.


PS I'm not the footballer type Faulkner.

jimmy
2004-Jan-26, 07:25 AM
I have to back Chook up on this one. I read the thread and felt that VanderL was being belittled and ridiculed because of his viewpoint.

Josh
2004-Jan-26, 08:20 AM
People on both sides need to tone things down. But you have to ask yourselves, if you tell someone over and over and over the fallacies in their arguments and show them how science doesn't back up their ideas, and they continue to spout them as truth, when is enough enough? It doesn't make sense to continue to argue for a theory which is obviously incorrect. The electric cosmos theory is obviously wrong. Just read the thread. I don't think VanderL himself has been called a wacko. The theory he argued for, however,is obviously is a bit wacky given all the evidence. His search for the truth has to be commended and his asking so many questions lately instead of just saying "well this is what i believe so there" is damn impressive. Takes a lot to question the things you hold as truth.

DippyHippy
2004-Jan-26, 11:00 PM
I agree with Josh and I have to say, I too have been impressed at how VanderL has been asking questions lately, in his search for truth. Without wishing to get onto the subject of religion, I think many people develop such a strong "faith" in some theories that it does become almost a religion of sorts and sometimes questions are no longer asked. With that in mind, I commend VanderL for his questioning spirit and his search for the truth.

Faulkner
2004-Jan-27, 12:04 AM
Here, here!

When you stop questioning things, you're already half-dead.

Chook
2004-Jan-27, 03:13 AM
OK - thanks for all that.

Maybe I was being a bit too sensitive to people's feelings.

Debate is great, mate;
but don't hurt the skirt! :rolleyes:

(VanderL is a girl I think.)

jimmy
2004-Jan-27, 07:00 AM
Chook, I think the L stands for Louis.

Chook
2004-Jan-27, 07:41 PM
Hahahahah! :D
Sorry Louis - I thought it stood for "Lulu" :lol:

Debate is great, mate;
but be nice-as-pie to the guy!.

(Geez - I know that's terrible, but it IS 6.30am in the morning (yawn))

Faulkner
2004-Jan-27, 09:31 PM
..."don't hurt the skirt"..."be as nice-as-pie to the guy"...

Ha ha, I can see we've got a lot of poets in this forum?! Maybe we should start a new post to showcase peoples' wares??? :D

VanderL
2004-Jan-27, 10:08 PM
You been discussing behind my back again? All the time I thought you people had turned away in disgust at the discussion.
I am searching for knowledge and the Electric model does give a lot of credible explanations on craterings and stuff like that, it was worth to read it all. I still don't write it off yet (I'm a stubborn as the next guy), it's a "dark horse" for me (better than dark matter or dark energy).
There's one thing I want to add to the "be nice" discussion, I hate the term debunking and utter nonsense in the title. That way, it's not about discussing or disagreeing, instead it starts with the conviction that all that follows is crap, I'd rather discuss how this model can be wrong and still sound plausible.

L doesn't stand for Louis, Lulu or whatever, it's just my "extremely-heard-to-pronounce" last name that I don't want to throw at you all.
Cheers.

Chook
2004-Jan-28, 05:22 AM
Good on ya VanderL - you sound a thoroughly genuine & nice guy.

("L" doesn't stand for Luna-tic does it? :ph34r: )

VanderL
2004-Jan-28, 08:18 AM
I know what Chook stands for, but I can think a whole bunch more.
If you want to know, my last name is: van de Locht (yes, Dutch) and once an American guy shortened it and it stuck.
Cheers.

jimmy
2004-Jan-28, 02:26 PM
Hey VanderL,
The name Lulu is a whole lot easier to say, may we call you that? :lol:

VanderL
2004-Jan-28, 05:06 PM
Right, you deserved it, you can call me Sir.

Chook
2004-Jan-28, 07:16 PM
Is that spelt CUR? :D

Anyway - do you think the rules may be constructively modified in any way to encourage "niceness" or, as they say, is it impossible to "ruleify" it?

Maybe the boys are right - we all keep the tone non-personal, and if somebody accidentaly gets out of hand we mention it to them.

Actually it's been pretty good, up to now, with a couple of minor exceptions.

(PS It was obvious that VanderL(ulu) was of Dutch origin. How long have your antecedents been settled in the States?

Another thing - you say that VanderL stands for Van de Locht. Strange! "De" is usually French, whereas "Der" would be more Dutch. Was the "De" a typo?)

VanderL
2004-Jan-28, 09:01 PM
Sorry, didn't I say? I live in The Netherlands and my ancestors have lived here for at least 300 years, possibly forever.
"VanderL" is what a US guy (he was a visitor to the lab that I work) made of it, the people at my work picked it up, it's just to make an allusion to the Vander"whatevers" that seem to be successful in the States. "de" or "der" are both used in Dutch, the "r" gets added sometimes whenever a vowel follows, and sometimes it is used to make it sound different, like Vanderbilt which would probably have been van de Bilt (de Bilt is a town near Utrecht).
I've been to San Francisco a few times (great city), otherwise I'm happy here in Malden (close to Nijmegen, which is also a great city).

Anyway, the niceness can't really be regulated, but certain words should be avoided, I guess hearing something called wacky or utter nonsense, or even ** is never encouraging. But I'm old enough to decide for myself if the evidence is convincing or not, and if the discussion becomes unfriendly in my opnion, I will say so and hope it gets better, or I just stop posting to that thread or person.
Cheers.

Sphinx
2004-Feb-05, 12:09 AM
just wanted to pledge my show of support. I dislike anti-intellectuals :P

Sphinx
2004-Feb-05, 12:43 AM
Sorry, my last post was refering to the set of rules established by Fraser, Kashi, etc. But I think Chook says it best:

"This IS a forum for argument and debate - but at the same scholarly level as you would expect from the same august universities from which these scientists were educated."

That's why I'm here. It's very hard to find a network of people you can discuss with at a scientific level, which is by far the most enlightening. I believe this to be a fact and I fully support any and all measures that ensures the sustainment of this integrity. I mean, where else can I go to pick the brains of physicists, chemists, engineers, astrologists, cosmologists, geophysicists, etc, etc - in one room?What we have here is something really great and I hope it does not become tainted with the likes of what I consider, "anti-intellectuals." We're all surrounded by them everyday. We don't need them here too.

Robert

Chook
2004-Feb-05, 01:32 AM
..... back to Fraser <_< .

Hoore500
2004-Feb-19, 09:40 PM
You may not post porno, racistic oriented messages and you may not harass people. My question is if you can freely talk about subjects as gay, suicide, murder, psychiatry while there are kids around? I thought about posting an off topic question about the subject if provoking suicide is really punished by law in Great Britain and the US. Because as far as I know, where I live in Belgium the general opinion is people shouldn&#39;t be that weak that they can easily be influenced to commit suicide. I met that kind of histories for the first time in Gibson&#39;s novel "Idoru" and for me it was only (science) fiction until they started to tell a rather vage history about Blair in the news. Maybe now I&#39;m harassing a person, but then I think you should rather blame the BBC and other news sources. Maybe you think I can better discuss this kind of stories in a more to the subject related board and in that case you may be right about that. Only is it worth all the pain to subscribe if it is maybe the only thing you will ever discuss overthere? :ph34r:

Faulkner
2004-Feb-19, 09:57 PM
where else can I go to pick the brains of physicists, chemists, engineers, astrologists, cosmologists, geophysicists, etc, etc - in one room?

Hope there&#39;s room for a few of us "lay" people here, too&#33; ;) There are plenty of other forums specifically geared to professional scientists & grad students etc...where you can exchange all your technical gobbledygook, ha. The beauty of this forum is its openness to all, young & old, professionally educated & (duh) society misfits like myself.

Chook
2004-Feb-22, 09:54 PM
I totally support Faulkner - Quote:
"The beauty of this forum is its openness to all, young & old, professionally educated & (duh) society misfits like myself. "
(- and me).

As long as we respect each other&#39;s opinion, and genuinely like each other, I can see great advantages in being free to debate anything from "Natural Childbirth" to "Does the tree have a brain?" (Or - "I think Christians are misguided&#33;")

The key quality is respect for each other&#39;s considered and unbiased opinion and, being members of this forum, we should be capable of logically and vigorously defending our opinion.

Makes life intresting :D .

Faulkner
2004-Feb-23, 07:48 AM
I totally support Chook here. I have the greatest respect for ALL the members of this forum, and I can see they&#39;re from ALL walks of life. Just goes to show how something honest & REAL like "the Universe" can attract EVERYone... :lol:

Josh
2004-Feb-23, 09:02 AM
I hereby call to order the Chook and Faulkner Mutual Adoration Society. The first item is to elect a President, Secretary and Social Co-ordinator. Any nominations?

Faulkner
2004-Feb-23, 09:18 AM
I&#39;ll nominate myself "Treasurer"&#33; (Hope you all don&#39;t mind a bit of "creative accounting"???) B)

Chook
2004-Feb-23, 12:29 PM
Quote Faulkner:
"I&#39;ll nominate myself "Treasurer"&#33; "

OBJECTION&#33; He&#39;d drink the lot :P

Now Damo would make a good President (he&#39;s qualified in everything else :D )
Reckon Weaselbunny would be a good Secret-ary, assisted by Faulkner. Objections? Carried&#33;

Yes - Damo, Faulkner and Weaselbunny - the Executive of the "Chook and Faulkner Mutual Adoration Society". Excellent.

Chairman Damo - I consider that the title of the Society is too restrictive. I propose we rename it - THE SPACEHEADS&#39; SOCIETY; then everybody would be included. We need a Constitution, annual fees (and keep the cash away from Faukner) and some appropriate social activities. And Guest Speakers on SPACE (of course&#33;). Anybody know a good Guest Speaker? How aboput two Guest Speakers for our inaugral meeting. I propose VanderL, assisted by Dr. Jim Thompson.

The meeting is open for discussion ...

VanderL
2004-Feb-23, 03:02 PM
Count me in&#33;&#33;
Where would this meeting be? Somewhere easy to reach fo all of us, like Hawaii, including a tour at the Observatory.
Cool&#33; Chook you deserve an honorary seat.
Cheers.

Chook
2004-Feb-23, 11:45 PM
What will be the subject of your lecture, VanderL?.................. "The Electric Universe."?
:D :lol: :D :lol: :D :lol: :D :lol: :D :lol: :D :lol: :D :lol:

VanderL
2004-Feb-24, 05:09 PM
Sure, why not?
At least that way we are assured to have lively discussions and maybe we could invite some more speakers. What about Oliver Manuel on "The Iron Sun"? ;)
Cheers.

Hoore500
2004-Feb-25, 09:54 AM
Howdy,

Yesterday I emailed someone to tell about the benefits of the moon Titan. It came that far that I described the biggest poison on earth: KCN (I hope). It seems when you take it in you&#39;re dead within less than half a second.
I hope from the bottom of my heart there&#39;ll be no consequences at my telling this anecdote.

Hoore500

Faulkner
2004-Feb-27, 04:21 AM
Hey "Hoore", what&#39;s KCN? Can you smoke it?

Hoore500
2004-Mar-02, 10:37 PM
When I :( tell you KCN is the biggest poison on earth then it means you&#39;re immediately dead, :lol: as soon as you have put the bottle at your lips, long before the fluid reaches your stomach. Never heared about potassium cyanide?
I swear it, if you don&#39;t believe me ask it your family doctor.
Please don&#39;t help me in troubles, really guys, i already wish I had never subscribed here.
Further I thought you may not smoke overthere.

Faulkner
2004-Mar-03, 03:29 AM
I don&#39;t smoke...tobacco&#33; :P

Tom2Mars
2004-Mar-09, 06:43 PM
I just wanted to say to everyone that I really appreciated the gracious accomodation from DippyHippy regarding the closure of the "Be a Millionaire" topic. I also respected his private comments that I may have been too over-the-top silly in how I presented something which could have merit. I did not take into account that through their experience and intelligence, the Forum members could have easily handled a more direct and scientific approach to the serious questions regarding the costs of space research and development. My casual approach is obviously a sign that I have been in Florida, USA for too long&#33;

Thank You, Dippy&#33; :P

Faulkner
2004-Mar-09, 09:56 PM
I would like to be a millionaire, Tom2Mars, but I&#39;m not gonna sacrifice 30 years of my life to achieve it&#33; I&#39;ve always followed the advice, "life is for living" (not saving up). In 30 years&#39; I&#39;ll be close to 70...doesn&#39;t seem worth it to me.

You got any quicker "get-rich" schemes? :lol:

Tom2Mars
2004-Mar-10, 02:07 PM
Faulkner, you&#39;ve been reading my mind.

Quote from Faulkner:
[I would like to be a millionaire, Tom2Mars, but I&#39;m not gonna sacrifice 30 years of my life to achieve it&#33;]

I&#39;ve got your quicker scheme allright. In fact, when I wrote to Dippy I mentioned that it wouldn&#39;t take the Forum long to think 30 years was too long to wait. Let&#39;s see, that took you a few hours, why, you must have stopped for tea. The "more direct approach" is on it&#39;s way&#33; ;) Cause in 30 years, I&#39;ll be...uhh...hurry&#33;...Tom...Hurry&#33;


And, could someone puuhleese instruct me on how to put the quotes into those neat little boxes?

Thank You...Tom

DippyHippy
2004-Mar-11, 02:17 AM
Hey Tom

I appreciate the sentiment and thank you for it, but at the end of the day I made a mistake. I should have left it open and if I&#39;d had any doubts about it&#39;s legality (forum-wise) then I should have asked the other moderators for their opinion. (Which I did, but only after the deed was done)

Anyway, my point is that - surprise - I&#39;m only human, I make mistakes, but I&#39;m not too proud or pig-headed to deny it when I do and I&#39;m glad this mishap hasn&#39;t discouraged you.

VanderL
2004-Mar-11, 09:56 AM
Anyway, my point is that - surprise - I&#39;m only human, I make mistakes, but I&#39;m not too proud or pig-headed to deny it when I do

That&#39;s honest and all hail for your attitude, other people should take up on this; it would make for a much better forum than it already is.

Cheers.

slartibartfarst
2004-Mar-13, 03:57 AM
Now then dames and guys... boys and girls... ladies and gentlemen..

Whats in a word..

Well, quite a lot it seems.
As a (hopefully, by now) fully logged on member of the forum I would just like to respectfully point out that there may be differences (mainly spelling) but also some slight variance / misinterpretation in words / parlance.

Please excuse me, I-for the most (of English people-) am civilised. The rest , I cannot vouch for. As for youselves - spelling is easy :lol:

Chook
2004-Mar-16, 02:36 AM
Good on you Dips - a True English Gentleman.

lightyear77
2004-Apr-19, 02:11 AM
I&#39;ve been using the forum for 2 days now. I am quite happy of being able to discuss astronomy with others. Finally&#33; People around seem just to look down and do not aknowledge the beautiful universe we were given (probably until the next global extinction...unless we equip ourselves with proper defense systems enabling us to keep going on this marvelous planet amidst an ocean of "voidness" but wonders...

I read the rules, sounds good to me.

:)

zephyr46
2004-May-25, 05:40 AM
United Earth thread (http://www.universetoday.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3299&st=0&#entry29111)

I really wanted to say some things in this thread.

I think it is in an appropriate area, The UN in particular has come up in two other active threads, explore or industrialise and Prioriety Set, I think there is some political discussion that needs to take place. I think the point with no politics is don&#39;t turn the forum into a Party Political free for all.

I am therefore requesting that this thread be opened again. There was no overt political campainging, the discussion was concerned with Governance, not politics, and like with extra sense, I think it is better to have a thread and steer discussion into rather than a plague of political discussions.

Thanks

SkyBoard
2004-May-25, 03:22 PM
United Earth thread

I really wanted to say some things in this thread.

I think it is in an appropriate area, The UN in particular has come up in two other active threads, explore or industrialise and Prioriety Set, I think there is some political discussion that needs to take place. I think the point with no politics is don&#39;t turn the forum into a Party Political free for all.

I am therefore requesting that this thread be opened again. There was no overt political campainging, the discussion was concerned with Governance, not politics, and like with extra sense, I think it is better to have a thread and steer discussion into rather than a plague of political discussions.

Thanks
Though, United Earth is just a thread...but I don&#39;t see anyone supporting the idea of a political forum...

SkyBoard
2004-May-25, 03:24 PM
Speaking of forums, on physicsforums.com
there is a thread with Michio Kaku as guest host...we should have something similar to that on UT...provided someone would be willing to give UT members and guests their time...

DippyHippy
2004-May-25, 04:48 PM
zeph, I&#39;ve raised the issue with the other moderators :)

StarLab
2004-May-25, 07:37 PM
Speaking of guests on UT, I wonder if Alan Boyle would like to host a forum devoted to Q&A with himself and UT users. It would be kinda fun :) ;) :D :P B)

John L
2004-May-25, 10:21 PM
Even on a forum devoted to space topics, you can&#39;t avoid all political discussion. Simply discussing the funding of various missions, the last Hubble servicing mission, and the state of NASA and its relationships with other nation&#39;s space programs are all political discussions. I agree with Zephyr that the United Earth thread should not have been closed. The one on the Copernican Model should have been, and I contributed significantly to the political discussion on that one, but the United Earth should be reopened.

Tom2Mars
2004-May-26, 06:20 AM
I have recently become involved with some folks working on Space Governance and am reading their Journals. You wouldn&#39;t believe how much they are on the side of devleopment in space and how much consideration to all the fine and subtle points of all space activities is being discussed and planned.

Many of the goals of a United Earth, if conducted from the point of view of a Governance actually located in space, could be accomplished without a disruption to current borders and sovereignties.

In other words, the topic can be discussed without necessarily dealing with politics.

However, if we can&#39;t discuss the topic, we won&#39;t be able(allowed) to arrive at the non-political solutions.

Yes Dippy, is there something you can do to reopen this? :)

DippyHippy
2004-May-26, 06:37 AM
Well I don&#39;t have a problem with it myself, but I can&#39;t really re-open it without getting a general consensus of opinion from the other moderators. Give it a few more hours so that the moderators around the globe can post their opinions and we&#39;ll see where we go from there :)

DippyHippy
2004-May-27, 02:25 PM
Since raising the issue with the other moderators, none of them have expressed any serious concerns about the topic so I&#39;ve re-opened it.

Fraser
2004-Jun-11, 12:41 PM
I&#39;ve added a new rule, bringing the current total to 10. Here it is:

9. Only one account per person

Don&#39;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.

StarLab
2004-Jun-11, 05:02 PM
Thank you, Fraser...I&#39;m glad you made that rule for future generations of users. I think I made it clear, though, that after my initial mistake I would never attempt something that stupid ever again, so long as I am a member of this forum.

Tinaa
2004-Jun-11, 05:19 PM
Don&#39;t flatter yourself. You were not the only one.

StarLab
2004-Jun-11, 07:42 PM
Oh. &#39;K.

e_vsevin
2004-Jun-26, 12:36 AM
Fraser. This does not specifically refer to the rules but I could not find where I comment on the website itself. And that is basically my comment, I think your website is great except I find it incredibly difficult to use.

DippyHippy
2004-Jun-26, 01:12 AM
e_vsevin, the whole Website Feedback area is exactly for that purpose - just start a new topic... as it is, there are already a couple of topics with suggestions for the site so feel free to post your own suggestions too.

Fraser
2004-Jun-26, 01:48 AM
And if you find the website hard to use, just drop me an email. I&#39;d love to hear what&#39;s causing you grief.

hoarem
2004-Jul-14, 09:19 PM
I totally agree to abide with these rules, and I feel that the :( rules can only enhance the universe today forums. Well done and good luck with your move.

Betelgeuse
2004-Aug-07, 07:03 PM
I think this set of rules is incredibly fair and I hope, Fraser that everyone will keep to them and make everyone&#39;s visit to this website enjoyable. You&#39;ve worked hard to set it up and therefore I hope people will respect you by following these simple and incredibly reasonable rules.

Excellent website by the way (I may be repeating myself) - I enjoy visiting it and taking part in the forums - nice work Fraser&#33;

bossman20081
2004-Sep-04, 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
2004-Sep-04, 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&#39;m sure many people would be glad to do so, including me.

bossman20081
2004-Sep-05, 03:47 PM
Alright, sure galaxygirl, Ill debate you, but dont say I didnt warn you:)

suntrack2
2004-Sep-24, 11:23 AM
its fine Fraser, it was essential.

sunil

ChromeStar
2004-Dec-14, 06:54 PM
I LIKE YOUR RULES :D

StarLab
2005-Jan-08, 10:09 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 &#39;sounds&#39; 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 &#39;No philosophy&#39; in rule No. 7...this will certainly guarantee less religion on UT.

Matthew
2005-Jan-08, 11:49 PM
I could say that discussing the String theory is a philosophy discussion.

StarLab
2005-Jan-09, 12:17 AM
It may be philosophical, but it&#39;s not philosophy, per se.

Matthew
2005-Jan-09, 12:29 AM
And that is why legal systems around the world are so complex, and end up being counter-intiutive.

StarLab
2005-Jan-09, 01:02 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&#39;d have to close down again and again, or would you rather have "NO PHILOSOPHY" etched in digital stone so that people don&#39;t make that mistake in the first place?

wjwduke
2005-Jan-10, 02:52 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
2005-Jan-10, 04:22 AM
I&#39;ve banned Religion and Politics because people get so cranky about it. I haven&#39;t seen a lot of flamewars over Philosophy. But if they happen, I&#39;m banning that too.

StarLab
2005-Jan-10, 04:55 AM
Fraser, I agree.

Duke, I don&#39;t think that&#39;s possible.

ferg.c.
2005-Jan-11, 11:22 AM
I strongly oppose the idea that philosophy might be banned from discusions of physics. The raison d&#39;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&#39;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&#39;s your desicion, but you won&#39;t have me (for one) in the passanger seat&#33;
Ferg :)

Jakenorrish
2005-Jan-11, 04:20 PM
Time for a grovelly one I&#39;m afraid, but I for one trust Fraser and the moderators to judge what goes and what doesn&#39;t. We may sometimes need to touch on certain subjects, like religion or philosophy. After all astronomy as such wouldn&#39;t be here if it weren&#39;t for people&#39;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&#33;)

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&#33;&#33;

antoniseb
2005-Jan-11, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by fraser@Jan 10 2005, 04:22 AM
I haven&#39;t seen a lot of flamewars over Philosophy. But if they happen, I&#39;m banning that too.
Heck, I&#39;ve wondered whether we ought to ban discussion of the possibility of faster-than-light travel. Some people don&#39;t want to hear that it may not be possible, and they get pretty cranky when you say it. So far, we haven&#39;t had to ban it, but a few people left the forum because of the flames.

Chook
2005-Jan-11, 10:57 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&#39;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
2005-Jan-12, 12:48 AM
It&#39;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.
2005-Jan-12, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by Jakenorrish@Jan 11 2005, 04:20 PM
...the moderators are the people for putting their feet down I reckon&#33;&#33;
That&#39;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.
2005-Jan-12, 11:22 AM
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&#33;
Chook&#39;s hit the nail right on the head here&#33;
Cheers
Ferg. :)

vet
2005-Mar-02, 01:09 AM
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&#39;ve built. Like any well-run community, we have some rules. They&#39;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&#39;t a public place, and the laws of freedom of speech in whatever country you come from don&#39;t apply here (I&#39;m Canadian, if that matters). You&#39;re my guest, in my house, and I expect you act accordingly.

Thanks&#33;

Fraser Cain
Publisher
Universe Today

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

1. Stay on Topic... Space and Astronomy

This is a space-oriented dicussion forum. That&#39;s what we&#39;re talking about here, so if you&#39;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&#39;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&#39;ve got concerns with what someone is saying, feel free dismantle their arguments, but don&#39;t make personal attacks. You might think you&#39;re making a joke, but it could really hurt someone else&#39;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&#39;t write some scathing post in the forum to try and humilate people publicly - we probably won&#39;t listen to you then.

4. Don&#39;t Quote Emails

Please don&#39;t post a copy of something that somebody emailed to you. There are legal and copyright reasons for this. I&#39;ll post emails from time to time in the forum, but I&#39;ll be getting the proper permission to do this from the source.

5. No Copyright Material

Don&#39;t quote articles available on other websites, it&#39;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&#39;re talking about and then come back to talk about it.

6. No Advertising

Don&#39;t use the Universe Today forums as a way to promote your own website, product, or forum. And don&#39;t use the forum as a platform for your ideas or theories. We&#39;ll give you a little leeway if you&#39;re an active contributor to the forum. And don&#39;t think we won&#39;t notice.

7. No Politics or Religion

Discussions about politics and religion nearly always turn ugly, and frankly, I don&#39;t have the time or interest in policing conversations that do little but make people angry at each other. So, don&#39;t start or contribute to a topic that&#39;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&#39;T MAKE ALL-CAPITAL TITLES

That&#39;s generally perceived to be yelling on the Internet. If you make an all-capital title in the forum, we&#39;re more than likely to rewrite it.

9. Only one account per person

Don&#39;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&#39;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&#39;ll fix it.
as an ex-biz, now &#39;burned-out&#39; author, my concern is &#39;copyright&#39;. 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 &#39;terminated&#39; w/me), i yet share every writer&#39;s concerns on &#39;copyright&#39;, and retaining such right.

certainly any freely dispersed data is &#39;free-game&#39;. no problem. you have no control over posters---however, my concern centers on not being able to find Your
&#39;rights revert to author&#39; clause, usually found---all i may find is a copyright symbol.
i&#39;ve searched for your terms of &#39;rights&#39;---found nada. &#39;net-publishing&#39; remains a grey area, so i keep my corraboration sources to myself, as a rule.

simply put? are my posts yet my &#39;property&#39;? or yours?

StarLab
2005-Mar-02, 01:18 AM
You may find some answers, Vet, if you look in the UT FAQ at the bottom of the page. ;)

vet
2005-Mar-02, 02:27 AM
tricky call---if one&#39;s beef is the defense budjet vs. nasa&#39;s---that&#39;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&#39;s century-old bunk, &#39;the universe is dying from thermodynamic heat-death&#39;. this concept spawned existentialism, the &#39;roaring twenties&#39;, hedonism---only in the early 1980&#39;s was &#39;the inflationary&#39; 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 &#39;alternative&#39;s&#39;, and &#39;everything else&#39;---perhaps those should be elimitated? goodness knows there&#39;s enough &#39;newbies&#39; in need of no ** data on eqiptment, technique---let alone sub-diameter aspherising methods for making large mirrors, or even decent flats.

vet
2005-Mar-02, 03:23 AM
Originally posted by StarLab@Mar 2 2005, 01:18 AM
You may find some answers, Vet, if you look in the UT FAQ at the bottom of the page. ;)
thank you sir; i found my answer under &#39;writer&#39;s guidelines&#39;---as you age, the &#39;naivete&#39; bullet-holes&#39; increase---i know why, and mr. hawking should, as well, but as maxwell, he has not seen the implications of his own work. as i have 14 heirs, i&#39;d like to leave something to buffer them from &#39;money-stress&#39;---w/o litigation. so i&#39;m &#39;sloppy-cautious&#39;---i&#39;d love to give what i&#39;ve found freely, i&#39;ve even tried with major websites---useless---humanity is not inherently evil or stupid, they are simply living in conditions of pure physics, which renders them so. thanks, and let&#39;s get to hell out of Hell---asap.

Fraser
2005-Jul-15, 04:43 PM
I&#39;ve updated rule #6, No advertising with additional information on our policy with alternative theories.

StarLab
2005-Jul-15, 11:51 PM
Great call, Fraser&#33; ;) :D B)

We all want the forums to be enjoyable. This means respecting other members, and knowing one&#39;s limits. This way the UT forums become fun for everyone to use.