Watch a BAUT

[astrotech]

How would you answer Henrik about surface loading, now that you are not under their threat?

Start a new thread for that.

By the way, since you were shown wrong to claim that Henrik wasn't a mod and backpeddaled to your original "don't know" position, even though you can simply ask Henrik when he stopped being a mod and compare the date on the post, are you going to be sticking to your position that you don't know? In effect not correct your ignorance and it's resulting cognative dissonance? He may lie but I think I can prove he is if he does.

On second though I'll spare you that game and just prove he was a mod at the time. http://www.bautforum.com/showthread....57#post1563057

Took me all of 2 minutes and didn't even need the search function.

[grapes]

I concede the point. IIRC, Henrik took some time off from moderator-hood, then went back on, then resigned finally. It doesn't really matter as far as this discussion goes, I've already said it shouldn't have been called ATM, it should have just been called "wrong" (IF it is wrong--I guess you still have something to say about that, I'd like to hear it)

[astrotech]

Where's the link to the new thread then?

BTW

Nice of you to "concede the point" after I've already proved it rather than simply finding out for yourself and casting false aspersions on my accuracy and sowing doubt.

What about my accuracy on the rest of my report on that bit of mod dishonesty that you attempted to cast doubt upon? To whit.;

When I point out to a mod that a discussion is about airships not airplanes and he doesn't admit his mistake but another mod (to childishly evade a charge of non impartiality) posts that by defending my position in the thread "so vigorously" I'm "sounding ATM" and he gets away with it.

[grapes]

Where's the link to the new thread then?

Me? I thought you were going to do that.

Nice of you to "concede the point" after I've already proved it rather than simply finding out for yourself and casting false aspersions on my accuracy and sowing doubt.

Thanks, I do try to be nice.

What about my accuracy on the rest of my report on that bit of mod dishonesty that you attempted to cast doubt upon? To whit.;

Which part?

ETA: Looking back through a search of the reported posts, I see where you reported posts by Henrik, but not that one. Why not?

That's a rhetorical question, it's been a couple years, so I can't expect you to answer it. My point is, he got away with it because you let him get away with it. You abandoned the thread, and didn't report it. Who else is even going to read the thread? Why would you expect anything to be done about it?

[astrotech]

This should be the last post on mod to member ratio of BAUT. Seems the ratio stays around 1 mod to every 10 active members.

Interesting to note that the a typical ratio of guards to convicts in prison is around 40 or 50 convicts to 1 guard. So BAUT has about 4 to 5 times more guards on its members than a prison.

<sarcasm>I guess they see each other as a pretty unruly bunch.</sarcasm) Didn't used to be that way.

I think the next stat that may be revealing would be to monitor the actual number of posts per 24 hour period the mods are moderating. My guess is that it'll be around 3 posts to each mod. Of course most of those will be utterly inoffensive. Then mod action taken against "rude" members should be compared to not taken against other rude members. That's where I see the most corruption and which is amenable to statistical pattern analysis. I see some members there are very appreciative of all the "hard work" the mods do. However we must remember that some "appreciative" members are possibly mod puppets. I know I proved one was. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if some mods are puppets of other mods. It fits the pattern. The puppets "out vote" any dissenting mods and if a mod is dismissed (though I've never seen it happen) he can still have access through the puppet. I suspect the system problems there that cropped up after I told tooseek about pzkpfw was related to that. IE pzkpfw causes the system problems then "solves" them and is allowed to remain a mod even though the admin knows about his corruption. Classic hacker pattern. toosek is just naive and ignorant about hacking.

Note; based on pattern analysis I suspect 2 members here of being sock puppets. One is the member his puppet is the goad. That's the same pattern BAUT uses. It's what BAUT mod pzkpfw used his sock 11001001 for.

[mugaliens]

I suggest a forum for posting threads about the badness of BAUT.

While BAUT holds the entire universe up to their form of dishonest dispute no one can dispute bad science and bad moderation on BAUT.

BAUT only thinks they're holding the entire universe up to their mishappen "standards." Most of the saner folks left BAUT for clearer waters when the science of political correctness eclipsed science, ration, and reason on BAUT.

This forum would be for that. For example a recent suspension was handed to someone for "rudeness". The rudeness was that he said "grow up". Prior to that many others posted rude and childish phrases such as "puh leeze",
"oh come off it" and "You're soooo expert" etc. you get the picture. No warnings or infractions for that.

When rules are enforced sporadically, it often appears as if favoritism and slight rule the day, but the truth is that while being "fair" on a message forum is a worthy goal, it's difficult to achieve in practice, particularly with multiple moderators. Thankfully, this forum is largely self-policing.

Many threads there simply end unfinished because a mod or mod "puppy" says something that is so wrong that to dispute it would surely get mod action of some kind and thus would make any further comment a waste of time.

BAUT, Physics Forums, and other "science" forums often stray from pure science, which actually invites question and open discussion. Instead, they resort to censorship, sometimes at the drop of a hat. Initially, it's slight, but over time the censorship often progresses to the extreme, usually in the form of rampant thread closures any time a dominant mod feels like it, with or without basis. Don't get me wrong - I think it's fine to close a thread which purports Fruit Loops as the basic building block of life, though I'd rather see it progress, just for laughs. On occasion, some well-intentioned "scientist" idiot who has wormed his way into being a mod will draw a politically correct line in the sand at the expense of open discussion on issues which are in reality far from being resolved. Global Warming is one such topic, a big "no-no" on both BAUT and PF.

That's not science. That's some mod having a bad day and taking it out on the forum as a whole. Put simply, it's abuse. Don't believe me? Ask any marriage counselor about how abusive constantly slamming the door to conversation can be to a relationship. Bottom line: Rampant thread closures = abuse.

There are so many examples a forum would be needed to discuss them all. This new forum would be for discussion of it.

I think it would suffice to group them into major categories...

This forum would also be a document of the strategies methods and results of bad moderation. Even some long time and entrenched members of BAUT like Jay Utah is beginning to come around to seeing that moderation at BAUT causes harm.

Good for Jay! I realized it long ago, but bringing it to BAUT's attention just gets one banned. It's long since being a science forum. Right now, I'd call it a social forum organized around science, with ramparts of rampant political correctness woven throughout.

A watch thread I would maintain...

I don't think posting a bunch of stats is going to help BAUT pull its collective heads out of...

...but at least this might slow them down some.

I seriously doubt it. Knock yourself out if you'd like, though.

This is just A priori wrong. One in ten members is given the power to lord it over the other 10 without their consent.

BAUTs demise began when they wrongly vetted an expanded bunch of mods around 2006 or 2007. I've been an admin on dozens of forums, and half of them were good choices, but the other half were absolutely the worst, most horribly wrong choices for moderator.

Of course they can just leave the group. Abandoning all the work done to help develop and build the group before the betrayal by Phil Plait.

In Phil's defense, he's not been an active part of the forum in seven years.

By the way Phil Plait is the original traitor of the Badastronomy group and a betrayer of science.

In support of your statement, Phil's adherence to political correctness (as opposed to science) sewed the seeds of BAUT's demise.

[astrotech]

When rules are enforced sporadically, it often appears as if favoritism and slight rule the day, but the truth is that while being "fair" on a message forum is a worthy goal, it's difficult to achieve in practice, particularly with multiple moderators. Thankfully, this forum is largely self-policing.

To be honest I think we can agree that calling what they do at BAUT "sporadic" enforcement of the "rules" is inaccurate. More accurate would be to call it one sided. They enforce the rules agains those who dare to point out when they're wrong. And they refuse to enforce against those who also are rude on their behalf. When they're wrong on a scientific matter they repress criticism of that. When they're wrong for rudeness or other rules they also should obey like principles and rationality they repress criticism of that. And finnaly as that type of enforcement and abuse of their power and the membership they repress criticism of that.

Use and abuse of power like that is so obvious as well as common in its pattern that it is recognizably childish to mental defectiveness.I don't think it's effective mental degeneration but I do think it's affective. They are fooling themselves.

Letting them off the hook by calling their behavior, which shows such an obvious intent, "sporadic" is not helpfull. In fact it only helps in the persistance of their belief that they are fooling others. Fooling others of their intents, of their direction, of their one sided repression.

[mugaliens]

To be honest I think we can agree that calling what they do at BAUT "sporadic" enforcement of the "rules" is inaccurate. More accurate would be to call it one sided. They enforce the rules agains those who dare to point out when they're wrong.

I certainly agree with you there. Moreover, PhysicsForums (PF) does the same thing. They didn't use to be that way, but they've become as bad as, if not worse, than BAUT.

And they refuse to enforce against those who also are rude on their behalf.

It takes a rare character to shoot their own cheerleaders.

When they're wrong on a scientific matter they repress criticism of that.

I've found nearly all the time they're wrong on a scientific matter is when it's a matter that's been "settled" by the media or some of the more outspoken in the scientific community, but remains contested by others within the scientific community.

When they're wrong for rudeness or other rules...

You mean when they're being arrogant, ignorant jerks?

...they also should obey like principles and rationality they repress criticism of that.

Again, it takes a rare individual to invite and welcome dissent and criticism. Most forum mods and admins are nowhere near that caliber. I know of a couple on BAUT who are/were, as well as one on PF who was. PF is run by a Canadian, however, and they tend to be greener and more PC than most, to the point where idealism and political correctness has replaced serious science in their decisions.

For example, Physics Forums just banned a neighbor of mine who moved here last summer. He posted a link to Congressman Sanders (VT) page about the recent U.S. Government Accounting Office's investigation of and report on the Federal Reserve.

Not very conspiratorial, coming from official government sources. PF's response?

You have been banned for the following reason:
Conspiracy theory/misinformation
Date the ban will be lifted: Never

About the only science that's left on Physics Forums is the greenish-brown cultures into which they're engrossed as a result of their collective HUA experiences.

And finnaly as that type of enforcement and abuse of their power and the membership they repress criticism of that.

What admins/mods like that fail to realize is that the only ones who stick around their forums are ass-kissers and brown-nosers. In genetic terms, the gene pool is very small. They're severely inbred, and showing it.

Meanwhile, the intelligent ones smell the stink and move on, hopefully to some place like this forum or other greener pastures. Those who're intelligent, but stubborn, keep pressing the issue until they're banned, hoping against reason that the admins/mods will pull their heads out of their asses. Sadly, most admins/mods of those two "science" forums seem to like it up there. Perhaps it's the view. I dunno.

Use and abuse of power like that is so obvious as well as common in its pattern that it is recognizably childish to mental defectiveness.

I'd say it's a combination of immaturity and social collectivism (birds of a feather syndrome). It's not exactly rare - just look at the cliques which form in high school. Is there any rationality who's in and who's out? Most folks out-grow it. The admins/mods of BAUT and PF have not.

I'm pretty sure Tom has outgrown it, and I'd like to think I have, but I could be fooling myself. At least I'm open to the possibility...

They are fooling themselves.

Yep.

Letting them off the hook by calling their behavior, which shows such an obvious intent, "sporadic" is not helpfull. In fact it only helps in the persistance of their belief that they are fooling others. Fooling others of their intents, of their direction, of their one sided repression.

I believe the only appropriate response is to clank their heads together until they grow up. Unfortunately, that's a little difficult to do when they've grown used to silencing dissenters while surrounding themselves with ass-kissers and brown-nosers.

[mugaliens]

One thing you could do if you feel you've been improperly or unfairly banned by bad science and political correctness under the guise of good is to find out if the forums have any partners. If they do, write them. PF partners with Scientific American, a very reputable magazine. You'll find their contact information here.

[astrotech]

Recent suspension of William for "rudeness". Writing "Oh my dear" being the extent of his rudeness. But earlier in the thread Tensor (one of BAUT's well known henchmen) wrote LOL HA HA HA (derisive laughter) several times. If "Oh my dear" is rude then derisive laughter is more so. But of course no infraction or suspension of the henchman. By the way the BAUT mod dodge that not all infractions are visible doesn't wash because if the rude henchmen were infracted for as much as they are rude they would be banned.