Clearance Items

  • Zephir_AWT you should reexamine your goals in light of the goals of the LENR Forum team. We do not aim to promote LENR willy-nilly. We aim to further understanding of the science behind the research of LENR. That requires detachment from goals such as promotion. It requires taking a hard look at things and being as objective as possible. It requires a diversity of opinion. Thankfully we are starting to have a broad spectrum of people willing to make a reasoned and systematic argument for whatever they think to be true.

  • Not quite, Kev. You forget that you're under close scrutiny because your posts are particularly intemperate.

    Deflection. The issue is MaryYugo and the bias you are showing. If the moderators of this forum had simply posted their bias overtly, I would have approached this place differently. But instead, I responded to direct insults with insults of my own. And sure enough, you keyed up on me because of my insults but not on the person who started with the insults. Again, an example of bias. It's not as if bias is unacceptable but there is a lot of pretense that there is no bias or that you're being fair minded. Your comment above about 80% of the participants is an example. And there is my lingering prediction of crickets that you upvoted , yet another example of bias. It is interesting that you hide such bias when operating on Vortex.

  • Nope, I'm asking you to leave calmly and factually. For example the problem of Ukraine (and not just Ukraine) is the feeding of neverending frog and mice battles with Russia. All officers of the separatist forces in the east of Ukraine are members of the Russian army and they have orders to spark and feed boundary conflicts, no matter what. Without Russia interventions the Ukrainians would live in piece already. What you're doing here is the same agenda - just instead of Russian officers you're lurking & feeding here LENR trolls. I've to admit, you're doing in consequentially and in unobtrusive manner - but the more dangerous your agenda is.

  • but there is a lot of pretense that there is no bias or that you're being fair minded.


    Surely you'll be able to point to where I claimed to be without bias?


    But more to the point: even if you disagree with me about the relative disagreeableness of your behavior versus Mary's, I think the people whose opinions I regard highly will not find fault with how the moderation is being done here. Not that Mary can proceed scott free.

  • Those goals are not posted externally, to my knowledge. They are my attempt at a distillation of discussions we've had internally.

    Then how can you fault those who run into your bias without knowing your explicitly posted goals of this forum? It is a form of trolling. You've basically replicated the environment that evolved at EcatNews.net where the bias favors skeptopaths. You should just post that at the entrance and be done with it. Hyperskepticism needs a home, too.

  • My agenda is to make this a sane place for reasoned discussion. That appears to be at cross purposes with whatever your goals are, because occasionally you slip into pretty nasty insults.

    I would say that MaryYugo calling someone a subhuman (among all those other things) is pretty nasty insult, but you are doing nothing about it. Oh well, I can't push uphill on a rope. Your bias is evident, you even admit to it. But intellectual honesty would suggest that what you call "a sane place for reasoned discussion" is really just a new home for skeptopaths.

  • The LENR and lenr-forum exists for years, the trolls like mary hugo also acting at internet for years, but they were always kept low. The only person who could alow to act him here are forum moderators. I'm not insulting anyone here - I'm just describing factually the trend of this forum during last recent months and many people (not just me or sifferkoll) already noted it. The only persons which could be made responsible for this development are the persons of forum moderators.

  • Because these goals have been explained on a number of occasions in different forms. Anyone who has been following posts here for more than a few months will already be acquainted with them. It is a stretch, to say the least, to suggest it is trolling to not refer to some codified list somewhere.


    This environment is not in the slightest anti-LENR. The only thing those whose goals are to advocate for LENR need to do is make a reasoned argument and not attack other forum members. Full stop. It's really pretty simple. Polite, reasoned arguments for LENR. Polite, reasoned arguments against LENR. Polite, reasoned arguments for suspension of judgment. It is only those who don't have an argument that fall back on intemperate behavior and ad homs. And that kind of behavior will eventually get people into difficulties.

  • Because these goals have been explained on a number of occasions in different forms. Anyone who has been following posts here for more than a few months will already be acquainted with them. It is a stretch, to say the least, to suggest it is trolling.


    This environment is not in the slightest anti-LENR. The only thing those whose goals are to advocate for LENR need to do is make a reasoned argument and not attack other forum members. Full stop. It's really pretty simple. Polite, reasoned arguments for LENR. Polite, reasoned arguments against LENR. Polite, reasoned arguments for suspension of judgment. It is only those who don't have an argument that fall back on intemperate behavior and ad homs. And that kind of behavior will eventually get people into difficulties.

    On my thread trying to get to the bottom of how many replications there are for LENR, the polite and reasoned people who acknowledge that there's 153 peer reviewed replications, more than 180 labs, 14,700 instances of replication well those people are being shouted down by the folks you like to call polite and reasoned. They are being piled on by folks who introduce bullshit arguments like "how do you disprove LENR". Jed said that arguing against those 153 peer reviewed replications is a classic example, the essence of trolling. When that is brought up to you moderators for your consideration (with the additional prediction of crickets), you generate.... crickets and an upvote for the crickets. That is what you call polite and reasoned argument.


    It shouldn't take a few months to discover your bias. You should just point newbies to the newbie thread and bring them up to speed. Simple. Full stop. Skeptics are very smart people and need their own place to discuss things; instead you're trolling LENRphiles.

  • Quote

    Polite, reasoned arguments for LENR. Polite, reasoned arguments against LENR.


    1) The people like Yugo don't bring any arguments, simply they have none. The lack of replications of cold fusion isn't the evidence against LENR - only the lack of counterevidence.

    2) The arguments AGAINST LENR don't belong at the forum ABOUT LENR, because they cannot contribute with anything substantial to subject of this forum.
    The people who are interested about mainstream physics opinion about LENR have way better forums where to go.

    3) Soon or later the frog&mice battles would burrow all factual information (links to scientific publications) already presented here.

  • Kev: I suspect you and I have a very different understanding of what "trolling" means.

    I go by the definition at dictionary.com. I do have to admit that when I wrote that sentence I was thinking of how a fisherman trolls a bass with his bait. Either way, since you are encouraging Zephir to go to the LENRphile discussion site, there is some common ground here.