01 Sep 13
3 edits
Originally posted by divegeesterMy issue is most definitely with both those things; both an issue with anything religious in the science forum but especially when it comes from him in particular because he is a trolling bully that goes to the Science forum PURELY to push his religious agenda and NEVER has any genuine interest in science and has NO understanding of any science but pretends to know everything about it and, despite having NO scientific credentials whatsoever, pretends to know it better than us scientists!
Maybe it is not clear whether your issue is with RJHinds posting ("his crap"😉 in the science forum, or with anyone posting anything religious in the science forum.
What do you think of my new proposal in my last post?
I really would like to know what other people's point of view is and what they really think about it.
02 Sep 13
1 edit
Originally posted by humyI'm not one for censorship so probably not the best person to ask. however I do feel that you are possibly over complicating this; there 2 good appraoches:
My issue is most definitely with both those things; both an issue with anything religious in the science forum but especially when it comes from him in particular because he is a trolling bully that goes to the Science forum PURELY to push his religious agenda and NEVER has any genuine interest in science and has NO understanding of any sci ...[text shortened]... ly would like to know what other people's point of view is and what they really think about it.
1) Ignore the culprit completly
2) Alert his posts as spam. Most are 'spammish', and other posters have been given lengthy forum bans for doing the same.
02 Sep 13
3 edits
Originally posted by divegeester
I'm not one for censorship so probably not the best person to ask. however I do feel that you are possibly over complicating this; there 2 good appraoches:
1) Ignore the culprit completly
2) Alert his posts as spam. Most are 'spammish', and other posters have been given lengthy forum bans for doing the same.
I'm not one for censorship
Neither am I and that isn’t what I propose at all. I am all for for allowing people to say whatever they want IN THE RIGHT FORUM for what they want to say!
1) Ignore the culprit completely
Sorry, we all already tried that. Didn't work. He didn't go away.
2) Alert his posts as spam.
Sorry, already tried that and tried that the other day. It didn't work.
The ONLY thing that we haven't tried that might work is create a new "Science versus Religion" public forum and make it the rule that all Science versus Religion debates must go in there instead of the other forums.
02 Sep 13
1 edit
Originally posted by humyJust thought of an alternative to making a ""Science versus Religion" public forum; IF no such forum or any other new forum will be made to solve the problem, then how about banning all science vs religion debate from both the Spirituality forum and the Science forum and make it the rule that all science vs religion debate should go into the Debates forum? After all, the Debates forum IS for DEBATES! SURELY that makes perfect sense?I'm not one for censorship
Neither am I and that isn’t what I propose at all. I am all for for allowing people to say whatever they want IN THE RIGHT FORUM for what they want to say!1) Ignore the culprit completely
Sorry, we all already tried that. Didn't work. He didn't go away.
[quote] 2) Alert his posts as s le that all Science versus Religion debates must go in there instead of the other forums.
Personally I think it would be better if we had a new Science versus Religion public forum BUT, GIVEN the fact that I am getting the distinct impression that this will never happen, I think my new alternative proposal would be the very next best one and more likely to be one that the site designers would agree to because it would not involve anything so radical as making a new forum so THIS is the proposal I now make.
Who agrees with me now?
any counterarguments?
04 Sep 13
2 edits
I have some serious questions:
Exactly Who has the power/authority to change the rules for these forums? Is he/she the acting web designer? What exactly is her/his position in relation to redhotpawn? What is his/her name?
I assume that no moderator has the power to change the rules -right?
I would like to put my case here directly to whomever has the actual power/authority to change the rules because I feel that I am just talking to a brick wall here for I am getting the distinct impression that my case isn't even being seen by that person. Is there some way I can do that? -I mean, is there a specific link or e-mail for that?
04 Sep 13
Originally posted by humyThe site is owned and administered by Russ and Chris.
I have some serious questions:
Exactly Who has the power/authority to change the rules for these forums? Is he/she the acting web designer? What exactly is her/his position in relation to redhotpawn? What is his/her name?
I assume that no moderator has the power to change the rules -right?
I would like to put my case here directly to whomever h ...[text shortened]... person. Is there some way I can do that? -I mean, is there a specific link or e-mail for that?
They write the code for the site. They make the rules.
They select the moderators and give them directions and tools.
The "send feedback" link found at the bottom of each page should put you in contact with them.
They are currently busy with getting the site hardware physically relocated so will probably not respond too quickly.
04 Sep 13
Originally posted by mwmillerthanks for that 🙂
The site is owned and administered by Russ and Chris.
They write the code for the site. They make the rules.
They select the moderators and give them directions and tools.
The "send feedback" link found at the bottom of each page should put you in contact with them.
They are currently busy with getting the site hardware physically relocated so will probably not respond too quickly.
14 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by KewpieIt used to be 5. All some groups (clans) had to do was get 5 people online at once and a little communication in the clan forum and they could hold a thread hostage. It happened more than once, so I imagine it was changed, either to more than 5, or the feature was removed entirely. Sorry, I do not know which it is. Perhaps a PM to Russ or Chris might give you the answer.
I keep hearing rumours that a sufficient number of alerts about a particular post will get it removed, whatever the subject matter. Can anyone tell me if there is such a rule, and what number of alerts would set it off?
16 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by humyMaybe there is a possible solution which you are not considering. It could very well be the case that RJH is polluting the Science Forum in retaliation against those of the Science Forum who come into the Spirituality Forum and do exactly the same thing.
Just thought of an alternative to making a ""Science versus Religion" public forum; IF no such forum or any other new forum will be made to solve the problem, then how about banning all science vs religion debate from both the Spirituality forum and the Science forum and make it the rule that all science vs religion debate should go into the [b]Debates foru ...[text shortened]... um so THIS is the proposal I now make.
Who agrees with me now?
any counterarguments?[/b]
Spirtuality Forum threads which have no basis in science are constantly derailed with anti-religious posts. This is what the theists have been enduring for many years. RJH could just be doing likewise in the Science Forum, deliberately.
Maybe one solution is for someone in authority to ask RJH and the perpetrators who foul up the threads in the Spirituality Forum to stop doing it.
I dont particularly like some of RJHs posts myself in the Spirituality Forum, but to make out like its the Science Forum suffering at the hands of religious spammers alone, when science nutcases are doing the same in Spirituality, is biased to say the least.
Fix both problems or leave it alone.
16 Oct 13
Originally posted by Rajk999Maybe we can all learn to ignore the posts of those we consider too far out there to have a productive discussion?
Maybe there is a possible solution which you are not considering. It could very well be the case that RJH is polluting the Science Forum in retaliation against those of the Science Forum who come into the Spirituality Forum and do exactly the same thing.
Spirtuality Forum threads which have no basis in science are constantly derailed with anti-religious ...[text shortened]... ng the same in Spirituality, is biased to say the least.
Fix both problems or leave it alone.
I admit, that is tough for me to do at times. But the alternative is censorship, which IMO is worse.
21 Oct 13
2 edits
eugenics is still in your grandparents living memory... I would give rj a free subscription for life, its only that ugly subject he picks on ... not superconductors or drugs, actual science.
to be honest the way rhp treats Christians and Gay people sometimes too, odd they get put together is almost worth closing the site for. you get stories of troll related suicides and its just a matter of time with this site, you'll get an unstable person on here and mess with there head. I don't believe rj has ever done that, he is good natured there's nothing caustic in his posts.
21 Oct 13
1 edit
to be honest I find googlefudge and humy much more offensive the way they counter arguments would cause fights in real life
this site brings out the worst in trolling behaviour - if you look for reviews of rhp the word troll is the most commonly used
even the adds are troll like
21 Oct 13
3 edits
its noteworthy how chess.com doesn't have any forums like rhp - its strictly chess and they actually talk about chess.
I have many criticisms of rhp forums. But I think they're the products of chess - the game the nerdy kids play at lunch to stop being bullied, its there 'hard' online alter egos that come out.
I wish the forum trolls on rhp would pay more attention to the chess forums. they are really dead for a chess site, so dead I think people just come here for a row and forget the chess.
22 Oct 13
Originally posted by e4chrisI think you are confusing trolling with arguing strongly for a position. Trolling is generally when people post only to get a reaction and don't care about what they actually say.
to be honest I find googlefudge and humy much more offensive the way they counter arguments would cause fights in real life
this site brings out the worst in trolling behaviour - if you look for reviews of rhp the word troll is the most commonly used
even the adds are troll like