[IMPORTANT] Trolling and insulting users / Forum rules

  • Chapter 1 page 1" How to Win Friends and Influence People". There is no such thing as a Bad Guy. Everyone believes in their own goodness. Therefore I beieve in them too. Only if they betray themselves and me do I abandon my faith in them.


    So, as an empiricist, if someone tells me for instance that the results of the Quantum Erasure Experiment imply that history is backloaded to support the present observation then I must concur, no matter if my "common sense" is screaming at me that this cannot be true.


    To my mind a Troll is someone whose paradigms are in conflict with the empirical evidence and he (invariably a he) takes out his neurosis on someone else or on the cat. If he cannot accept the presented evidence the onus is upon him to redo the experiment.


    I should not be exposed to his nervous breakdown. He must pay a psychiatrist for that.

  • Having seen 'independent ecat news' degenerate into a cesspit of insult, put-downs, 'pack-mentality' gang attacks and downright intimidation, I hope that doesn't happen here.


    I am aware that late last year some residents of ecat news suggested moving here because that place had become so poisoned that it had become boring.


    I don't necessarily disagree with many of the points and logic that get expressed there but do find the venom so many of the resident 'pseudo-skeptics' resort to, to be too much. The converse is the random drive by 'shooters' who are LENR fanatics who pop up there seeking revenge attacks.


    So, for me, it has been how long will it take that mob to destroty this forum.


    If particular members get banned, I can assure you that they are highly likely to have been banned over the years, from many other forums. It is in their DNA.


    Doug Marker DSM

  • I prefer firstly Admin will create hidden thread. I think he kows mnimum 10 nicks, he believe there are not trolls. After whille this nicks together with Admin will decide on further possibility.
    Sorry for my english, I hope Your understand me.
    E_man

  • (Sorry for my cross-post from another thread, but this is an important topic.)


    In my view this would be a far less interesting and informative site if a litmus of blind belief was applied to posts, and posters.


    Please, let us not resort to banning any civil discussion of the fascinating subject of LENR. Unicorns, dancing on the F9 key, are entertaining for only so long; a spirited investigation of experimental reports of LENR are of far more interest to me.


    This forum is interesting, and relevant, because of its tolerance of an exchange of a broad range of perspectives, experience, and views. I hope that tolerance continues.

  • Quote

    Having seen 'independent ecat news' degenerate into a cesspit of insult, put-downs, 'pack-mentality' gang attacks and downright intimidation, I hope that doesn't happen here.

    That's true and it was from people like Roger Barker and whoever uses the pseudonym "Greenwin" on e-catworld.com. Both posters wrote things which suggested that they might be truly insane. Fortunately, the administrator banned them. I favor banning for posters who post nothing but insults and outright taunts. BTW, Doug, do you agree yet that Defkalion was nothing but a scam? Do you think investing in them would have been a good idea? Wasn't it a good thing that there were people who called attention to their arrogance, lies, duplicity and false claims?


    Quote

    Mary Yugo, “fraud” is a legal term. If a fraud has been committed or not is up to a court to determine.

    Fraud is both a legal term and a lay term in English. The legal definition per Wikipedia is: "the requisite elements of fraud as a tort generally are the intentional misrepresentation or concealment of an important fact upon which the victim is meant to rely, and in fact does rely, to the harm of the victim..." As it happens, Rossi is a convicted felon many times over. Some of those convictions were for tax fraud and money laundering. That doesn't mean he might not also be a brilliant scientist. But it does mean his word is not to be trusted. And I see nothing wrong with lay people using the legal concept as long as they know what it means. "Murder" is also a legal term. But you wouldn't suggest it be excluded from lay [lexicon]conversation[/lexicon], would you?


    Quote

    If a LENR searcher tries to replicate E-Cat and fails he has fallen victim to his own judgement, not fraud. Bad luck, but it was he who chose to bet on this horse. But, of course we want to be helpful and try to rescue the searcher (and investors!) from spending resources on a lost horse.

    Sure. But if an LENR researcher or more properly, claimant, says he sold 13 megawatt plants to the military, can make isotopes on the cheap, incorporates self-destruct devices and telemetry in his product, has built a robotic production plant for large numbers of units per year, is only held up (for more than four years) by unnamed "certificators", has had a table top nuclear reactor which averages 18kW out and peaks at 135kW and has had this for four years and nobody who can be named bought it, proved it independently, or developed it into something the whole world can believe in... if there is someone like this, and this person gets millions from investors and spend it mostly to buy Florida real estate, I think it safe to guess that the most probable explanation isn't falling to one's own judgement. In fact, the most probable explanation by far is simply fraud. God knows, there are thousands of example of lying, cheating, scamming and fraud in the business world every day. There is an entire TV series devoted to the larger and more flagrant of these: http://www.cnbcprime.com/american-greed/

  • Just a little troll litmus test, should be ok in this thread


    1)
    The main driving force of a LENR searcher is a wish to find a nuclear reaction that can liberate nuclear energy in such quantity that it can replace conventional energy sources.


    2)
    When nuclear reactions set free nuclear energy it is delivered in powerful packages known as ionizing radiation. Such radiation is easily detected by suitable instruments. For instance, 1 watt of 1 MeV gammas would give 6.24*1012 photons per second.


    3)
    No similar radiation has ever been detected from a LENR experiment.


    4)
    In order not to upset anyone I ask you to draw your own conclusions from the above, I dare say, facts.


    Question: Will I blow up tomorrow morning when the sun peeks over the horizon?

  • Branzell,


    for your 1) you are wrong.


    For 2) this does not prove that nature can not produce nuclear reactions without power packages of ionizing radiation. You just state what we know so far.


    This is what drives a scientist: curiosity and a need to understand Nature. Now then, you may think we have reached the end of Science. But I think not. Nature have still mysteries to be solved. Like LENR.


    or to repeat what Dr. Peter Hagelstein said of excess heat if F&P type experiments:"we have experiments confirming the basic effect, we have experiments showing that energy is produced, that the energetic reaction products aren’t there, and the question is what to do about it. Actually, we should be very interested in these experiments. We should be interested, because we have experimental results which by now have been confirmed a great number of times. We learned about nature from doing experiments. So, here are experimental results. Can we, should we pay attention to them? Follow them up, see, where they lead? Today, sadly, the experiments in the cold fusion business are not considered to be part of science. And that’s the resolution that we have come to as the scientific community. From my perspective, having been in labs, having seen the results, having talked to experimentalists, having looked at the data, having spent great time on it, it looks like pretty much these experiments are real. They need to be taken seriously."

  • I am not inclined to baby-sit adults, Mary Yugo. Every adult at every moment is engaged in calculated risk/reward gambles. Mr Darwin remarked on this.
    To assume that the legal system dispenses justice would be naieve. Italy has the Cosa Nostra.
    I concern myself with the science and that means the empirical evidence.

  • Quote

    I am not inclined to baby-sit adults, Mary Yugo. Every adult at every moment is engaged in calculated risk/reward gambles. Mr Darwin remarked on this.


    Nobody advocates baby-sitting adults. Scammers waste resources of time and money and energy. It is stupid to reward them with money. It makes perfect sense to thwart them where one can. Particularly if such actions are educational and fun. Scammers degrade society. Nobody likes them. If everyone ignored them, they'd thrive even more than they already do. Is that OK with you, Arthur?

  • oystla, you retorted:

    Quote

    For 2) this does not prove that nature can not produce nuclear reactions without power packages of ionizing radiation. You just state what we know so far.


    A nuclid is a species of atomic nucleus. It can be stable or it can have excess energy that it disposes of in well known decay channels with different probabilities There are thousands of them, and you can find them all in nuclid charts.


    It does not matter in what way a nuclid has been created. It will obey its destiny that is outlined in the nuclid chart. In any decay the energy will be delivered in a few packages, not hundreds of small ones. This is an empirical fact that trumps LENR theory. Provided there is any theory to trump, of course.
    - - - -
    tempjk, why do you dislike my post? Does it make you disappointed and sad?

  • Yes.
    Allow Mr Darwin to do his job. He has had a lot of practice.
    Baby sitting adults is a distraction and should be dealt with on another platform.
    If you wish to take up the cudgels to protect us from ourselves may I suggest that there is richer fare on Wall St.
    Google Karen Hudes. She is doing remarkably well in that field and could do with some help.
    http://kahudes.net/

  • @"Trolling and insulting users / Forum rules"


    Has there ever been a post on this Forum that directly related to furthering LENR related to helium fusion? Well maybe one that I recall. Now, this is an insult to the users. Maybe what Dylan was alluding to in it's all "Blowin in the Wind"?

  • I'm personally a believer in LENR based on scientific evidence, but I welcome polite discussion and interaction with skeptics.


    I prefer NEVER to use name calling, and in particular labels like "troll" or "pathoskeptic" should never be applied in polite discourse. These are ad hominem attacks that add nothing the discussion -- they are noise and therefore lower the signal to noise ratio.


    Impolite users, or users who simply repeat unsupported attacks over and over are not adding to the discussion, and this should be actively discouraged. Ad hominem attacks should not be tolerated, i.e. [target] is a complete [derisive characterization].


    So in short, Mary Yugo -- bring it on politely, yet judiciously. I find that Mr/Ms Yugo's skepticism sharpens my investigation into LENR, and occasionally reminds me of non-corroborating evidence that I had long forgotten.

  • This is my first post on this forum. I have been following you for about a year as a guest. I don't have a lot to say, as I am here to learn. The forum quality has a lot of effect on visitors and guests, and many of them go away if the trolling level is too great. Too much trolling and the uninitiated can't tell the difference between facts and chanting. One of the professionals recently commented in this thread to ignore the trolls, but that is easier for one who is experienced and knows the facts and history of LENR.


    I don't have a quantitative answer to keep the trolling down, but it seems to me that it is recently becoming a problem.