Moderation problem in the Sci / Physics & Chemistry forum

Zanket

I believe the moderator of the Sci / Physics & Chemistry forum, Son Goku, closed this thread because he disagreed with me, and because he could not support his claims.

It can be seen there that I remained polite and scientific, and always gave support for my claims. The mod kept repeating a claim without showing evidence for it, despite my requests, like in this post.

Actually the discussion was one of the best I’ve had on any board. My only complaint is that the thread was closed for an unwarranted reason. Mods should not close a thread to stifle disagreement. They should respond to requests for evidence of their claims, the same as other posters.

ecksor

I've been skimming over that thread since the beginning. You're arguing with 3 qualified theoretical physicists about a rather esoteric topic. As far as I can see they've been quite civil, if at times exasperated (although planck2 has been a bit blunt at times) and would have closed it earlier if they were merely out to shut you up.

My analysis isn't quite up to scratch to go assessing the argument there so I'm not much good to judge the point in question.

DeVore has a maths degree and an interest in relativity if memory serves so perhaps he will be able to offer a closer examination. Otherwise, how do you propose that we judge this?

Zanket

I think the specific topic is not the issue here. In science, qualifications do not excuse someone from supporting their claims. Plenty of theoretical physicists strongly disagreed with Einstein’s special theory of relativity in the first couple years after it was published, and he was a patent clerk then. Scientific progress depends on people being scientific; namely, supporting their claims until only one viewpoint is reasonably left standing. Nobody should assume they are right just because something new disagrees with what they’ve learned. Often in the history of science established ideas have been overthrown, and probably never without heated controversy. (That said, I do not assume that my own ideas are valid.)

Participants in a thread should be judged by asking: are they being polite?, and are they supporting their claims? Disagreement between participants, even if it’s ten working physicists against one patent clerk, is not a good reason to close a thread. Closing a thread for that reason is simple censorship. In a true scientific discussion, no one should have to convince anyone else, especially the mod. Rather, participants should try to refute the bases for claims with which they disagree (including refutations of their refutations), by giving their own bases.

In the thread in question, the mod expected me to simply trust a key claim of his, made without support. He ignored my requests for support of it, and then closed the thread because he thinks I didn't meet a scientific standard.

ecksor

Well, if I was taking them at their word merely because they're TPs then I wouldn't have suggested the idea of having someone else look at the thread from a technical point of view. It just seems to me that the topic is relevant insofar as it informs the actual reasoning behind the ban, the significance of the contentious point and the calculations that haven't been published.

However I'll think about what you've said and get back to you.

Zanket

Any word on this?

Can you confirm that boards.ie does not condone the closing of a thread simply because the mod disagrees with the thread starter?

I hope you can take this as the constructive criticism it is: people are not going to be too interested in a forum where the mod closes threads for reasons other than those stated in the rules.

ecksor

Zanket wrote:

Any word on this?

I have been away.

Can you confirm that boards.ie does not condone the closing of a thread simply because the mod disagrees with the thread starter?

Well, I don't believe the issue is that simple. The nature of the disagreement is technical and you yourself are making claims about the impartiality of the moderator that are highly technical to assess.

I start modules on Complex and Functional Analysis on Monday, I'll come back in December and re-assess then if you wish?

I hope you can take this as the constructive criticism it is: people are not going to be too interested in a forum where the mod closes threads for reasons other than those stated in the rules.

Well, I notice that you started a new thread with the same subject matter in that forum so apparently you are still interested in the forum.

Talliesin

In fairness, if I'd disproved relativity like this I'd just rub the mods faces in the glowing feedback I got after addressing many conferences on theoretical physics.