Discussing The Forum Rules

[Glom]

Can I suggest, in light of the last discussion in the old place, that it be made a rule that kilograms measure mass and Newtons measure force?

[Echnaton]

3) Repeated or severe violations of the Proboards Terms of Service

Time to change this rule.

[LunarOrbit]

Doh. I thought I got all of the references to Proboards.

[sts60]

OT, perhaps, but to think we thought LongFuzzy a sock of P1k/fd/DT/BF/BS/etc....  An injustice of cosmic proportions (though long since corrected).

[gillianren]

There is very little which can happen on a message board which deserves to be called "an injustice of cosmic proportions."  Wrong and unfair?  Yes.  Let's save the hyperbole for more serious problems.

[sts60]

The hyperbole was deliberate, but not serious.  Let's just go with an injustice of, say Rhode Island-sized proportions.

[Kiwi]

LunarOrbit:

I wonder if there should be a rule similar to the one at BAUT, about answering pertinent or direct questions in a timely matter. 

13B. Conspiracy Theories
...People will vigorously challenge your arguments; that's what skeptics do. If you cannot handle a frank and critical examination of your claims, then maybe you need to rethink discussing them here. All such discussions must be kept polite and respectful, by all parties.

You must defend your arguments and directly answer pertinent questions in a timely manner. Honestly answering "I don't know" is acceptable. Evasiveness will not be tolerated.

The late, unlamented Dr Socks was a great one for not answering questions and this can cause much frustration and wasted time for debunkers.

[Chew]

LunarOrbit:

I wonder if there should be a rule similar to the one at BAUT, about answering pertinent or direct questions in a timely matter. 

+1. But not as Nazified as the BAUT.

[Glom]

LunarOrbit:

I wonder if there should be a rule similar to the one at BAUT, about answering pertinent or direct questions in a timely matter. 

13B. Conspiracy Theories
...People will vigorously challenge your arguments; that's what skeptics do. If you cannot handle a frank and critical examination of your claims, then maybe you need to rethink discussing them here. All such discussions must be kept polite and respectful, by all parties.

You must defend your arguments and directly answer pertinent questions in a timely manner. Honestly answering "I don't know" is acceptable. Evasiveness will not be tolerated.

The late, unlamented Dr Socks was a great one for not answering questions and this can cause much frustration and wasted time for debunkers.

What on the Moon possessed you to bring this up now?  I really can't fathom.

But I agree with Chew's position.  It sounds like a good rule to have, but not if we go to the point of then banning posters and closing threads because of a few transgressions.

[gillianren]

Define "a few."  I'm all for banning people over it if it becomes problematic.

[Echnaton]

LunarOrbit:

I wonder if there should be a rule similar to the one at BAUT, about answering pertinent or direct questions in a timely matter. 

13B. Conspiracy Theories
...People will vigorously challenge your arguments; that's what skeptics do. If you cannot handle a frank and critical examination of your claims, then maybe you need to rethink discussing them here. All such discussions must be kept polite and respectful, by all parties.

You must defend your arguments and directly answer pertinent questions in a timely manner. Honestly answering "I don't know" is acceptable. Evasiveness will not be tolerated.

The late, unlamented Dr Socks was a great one for not answering questions and this can cause much frustration and wasted time for debunkers.

Isn't that mostly covered under the rules

8. Trolling
b) repeatedly making the same claim or accusation while ignoring responses that dispute it.
c) repeatedly making claims while ignoring requests to either support or withdraw them

[Neil Baker]

I was seeking clarification on the no Holocaust discussion ruling.
It was discussed briefly on the Apollo thread but I wasn't sure if any new rule had been made.
I understand there's a place for "other discussions" but I didn't want to waste my time if there's a rule against it and it only get taken down.

By the way, why don't you want the Holocaust hoax discussed?

[smartcooky]

By the way, why don't you want the Holocaust hoax discussed?

While not wishing to pre-empt LunarOrbit's reasons, I can give you a number of reasons why I think it should not be discussed here.

1. This is an Apollo Hoax discussion board. While we also discuss other issues with regards to Space Science, this is not an appropriate forum for Holocaust discussion. There are specialist boards on the interwebz for what you seek, I suggest you go find them.

2. Apollo Hoax belief is a largely dying branch of conspiracy theory. It attracts a small and declining number of certifiable kooks, e.g. The Blunder from Down Under, Dorkman, the Whimper, Weisbekcer etc. They are, in the words of Ford Prefect, "mostly harmless"; a bunch of fools who are simply incapable of understanding even the most basic science and engineering principles involved.

3. Holocaust Denial is a whole other far more dangerous proposition for discussion. It attracts Holocaust Deniers, a bunch of very nasty people, from all corners of the internet. Some even have convictions for actual violence and threatening to kill people (you being one of them). It also attracts anti-semites, white supremacists, extreme racists and whole a raft of other scrum-of-the-earth ratbags that we, as members don't want to see anywhere near this forum.

4. Holocaust Denial threads inevitably lead to flame wars (have a look at the Holocaust threads at JREF) and just as inevitably, Lunar Orbit's workload would rise and he would have his hands full dealing with it. Better to just nip it in the bud and kill it from the get-go.

[bknight]

...
4. Holocaust Denial threads inevitably lead to flame wars (have a look at the Holocaust threads at JREF) and just as inevitably, Lunar Orbit's workload would rise and he would have his hands full dealing with it. Better to just nip it in the bud and kill it from the get-go.

The subject matter does indeed bring about the worst in humanity and I agree it should not be allowed.  Neil, LO has indicated he doesn't want it and if you want to publish viral trash start and maintain your own forum.

[Echnaton]

Holocaust denial can be a cover for anti-semitism and a great deal of it hinges on claims that are inseparable from those used to support anti-semitism.  Just take it elsewhere.