Im a bit concerned about 28 minus points

[thethinkertank]

I hope there are no lasting ill effects to be gleaned from excessive minus points?

Such as being muted or banned for instance?

I hope this is not the case for if it is so, I shall immediately cut down on my creative output and confine myself to a propounding on existing ideas alone. 

Right now I'm balancing a 3 dimensional tightrope of creativity, learning and discussion. However if my tenure on site is at stake I shall proceed to leap off said tightrope like a leapin lizard, cut down on creativity and learning and merely focus on discussion. 

 

[Sensei]

Start writing senseful post, then maybe you will reverse this bad trend.

Refrain for a while from making your own new threads. Instead participate in existing threads. But participate in such good, constructive way, being helpful member of the community.

Don't hijack threads (i.e. don't write something else than the main thread topic)

2 minutes ago, thethinkertank said:

Such as being muted or banned for instance?

People who are getting many negatives, start being aggressive, start insulting other members of the forum, and ends up suspended then banned. I am writing from past history of such members.

[thethinkertank]

Just now, Sensei said:

Start writing senseful post, then maybe you will reverse this bad trend.

Refrain for a while from making your own new threads. Instead participate in existing threads. But participate in such good, constructive way, being helpful member of the community.

Don't hijack threads (i.e. don't write something else than the main thread topic)

People who are getting many negatives, start being aggressive, start insulting other members of the forum, and ends up suspended then banned. I am writing from past history of such members.

I normally don't visit other threads, but maybe I will. 

Its unlikely that I will start getting aggressive due to many negative points because there is nothing to be gained out of it, and it contributes nothing to my ideas to get aggressive. 

I am only concerned about the possibility that many negatives automatically qualify one to banhood.

[Endy0816]

It's at the moderators' discretion.

You are not realizing how much you don't know. You come off as ignorant on a number of subjects and how Science actually works. Learn to ask questions instead.

[thethinkertank]

Just now, Endy0816 said:

It's at the moderators' discretion.

You are not realizing how much you don't know. You come off as ignorant on a number of subjects and how Science actually works. Learn to ask questions instead.

I did take that seriously, the asking questions bit. yes there are areas I dont get without researching, and Im willing to do this.

However I stand with my ideas as verifiable means to innovating ground breaking theories or innovations. 

For example despite the banter, nobody has yet come up with any way to refute my idea on Undersea emissions. Wheras I have shown many times how why and where it could be implemented. 

Point is, you're right I need to research. But the theories that first founded the research are in most cases valid and worth the research. 

[Strange]

1 minute ago, thethinkertank said:

However I stand with my ideas as verifiable means to innovating ground breaking theories or innovations. 

every single one of your ideas has consisted of random buzzwords strung together in a way that makes no sense.

1 minute ago, thethinkertank said:

For example despite the banter, nobody has yet come up with any way to refute my idea on Undersea emissions.

Look up the phrase "not even wrong". 

35 minutes ago, thethinkertank said:

I hope there are no lasting ill effects to be gleaned from excessive minus points?

Such as being muted or banned for instance?

No. The negative (or positive) points are purely a community reputation thing. They are not taken into account in moderation decisions.

But keep posting nonsense and the moderators might get fed up with it.

[thethinkertank]

Just now, Strange said:

every single one of your ideas has consisted of random buzzwords strung together in a way that makes no sense.

Look up the phrase "not even wrong". 

Maybe some but not the one about undersea emissions. 

OK. I will stop posting unresearched ideas and incline my attention further, towards discussions on existing ideas. That should help. 

 

Edited June 18, 2019 by thethinkertank

[Sensei]

15 minutes ago, thethinkertank said:

yes there are areas I dont get without researching,

..yes, you should start your ideas from researching subject..

in the case of "underwater facilities" search net for what is pressure at what depth below ocean surface..

in the case of pumping CO₂ (or O₂) from air below water: how much of air is CO₂, how much energy is needed to pump 1 m^3 of air, where you will get this energy (renewable energy source needed otherwise it'll all have no sense) etc. etc.

RESEARCH, RESEARCH, and RESEARCH..

...and then MORE RESEARCH!

 

Edited June 18, 2019 by Sensei

[swansont]

41 minutes ago, thethinkertank said:

I normally don't visit other threads, but maybe I will. 

Its unlikely that I will start getting aggressive due to many negative points because there is nothing to be gained out of it, and it contributes nothing to my ideas to get aggressive. 

I am only concerned about the possibility that many negatives automatically qualify one to banhood.

Banning happens if you break the rules. It’s not a function of your reputation, though a large negative rep might have a correlation.

[Strange]

20 minutes ago, thethinkertank said:

Maybe some but not the one about undersea emissions. 

It is complete gibberish. It has no basis in any sort of science.

[nevim]

29 minutes ago, thethinkertank said:

For example despite the banter, nobody has yet come up with any way to refute my idea on Undersea emissions. Wheras I have shown many times how why and where it could be implemented. 

 

DrP has given you quite a few things to think about, but ignore them if it makes you feel better.

[J.C.MacSwell]

I've said this before but IMO the points system is not fair to new posters. Thethinkertank is currently -33 after 67 posts. Let's say there is an improvement over the next 67 posts and it is only -17...that would put them at -50...

Not a great hole to dig out from, after having originally started at 0, and improved.

The reputation system here is not meaningless, but it should be taken with more than a grain of salt...which is a shame when a good amount of it is based on well written posts.

 

[Strange]

14 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I've said this before but IMO the points system is not fair to new posters. Thethinkertank is currently -33 after 67 posts. Let's say there is an improvement over the next 67 posts and it is only -17...that would put them at -50...

While I have doubts about the reputation system, if someone writes posts that merit that number of negative votes (and I think Thethinkertank has go off relatively lightly) then those posts don't stop being nonsensical just because the person later improves their posting. 

And, most people do not change their habits or posting style. I doubt the level of self-delusion and ignorance displayed by Thethinkertank is going to change. They are obviously too confident in their own abilities to wish to learn anything. And so they will never know how profoundly ignorant they are. A classic example of the Dunning-Kruger syndrome.

[J.C.MacSwell]

26 minutes ago, Strange said:

While I have doubts about the reputation system, if someone writes posts that merit that number of negative votes (and I think Thethinkertank has go off relatively lightly) then those posts don't stop being nonsensical just because the person later improves their posting. 

And, most people do not change their habits or posting style. I doubt the level of self-delusion and ignorance displayed by Thethinkertank is going to change. They are obviously too confident in their own abilities to wish to learn anything. And so they will never know how profoundly ignorant they are. A classic example of the Dunning-Kruger syndrome.

True for many, but I think that is at least in part what the reputation system is attempting to do...or at least what some posters are often trying to accomplish with it when they dole out points.

Edited June 18, 2019 by J.C.MacSwell

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, thethinkertank said:

yes there are areas I dont get without researching

Here is a problem. You don't "get" any "area" in science without thorough study. We haven't seen any evidence that you "get" ANY areas, but it's clear you think you have a great deal to offer.

Part of the reason your posts are getting negative rep is because your lack of methodology is counter to what science is trying to achieve. The steps science uses in order to trust it's explanations on various phenomena are plodding and deliberate and analytical. We make sure our footing is sound before taking the next step.

What you're doing is leaping from one thing you think you understand to another thing you think you understand. You aren't taking the steps in between to build supportive evidence and reasoned conclusions that would allow anybody to see what you're doing and repeat it.

If science is like trying to find the best path to cross a frozen lake, you're leaping from one unsupported chunk of ice to another. You seem to think it means you're abnormally intuitive about science, and don't need to learn about it to criticize it. I think you'd earn the same reputation at a fine arts discussion forum if you suggested flinging randomly colored paints at a canvas is all you need to make a masterpiece.

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

Here is a problem. You don't "get" any "area" in science without thorough study. We haven't seen any evidence that you "get" ANY areas, but it's clear you think you have a great deal to offer.

Part of the reason your posts are getting negative rep is because your lack of methodology is counter to what science is trying to achieve. The steps science uses in order to trust it's explanations on various phenomena are plodding and deliberate and analytical. We make sure our footing is sound before taking the next step.

What you're doing is leaping from one thing you think you understand to another thing you think you understand. You aren't taking the steps in between to build supportive evidence and reasoned conclusions that would allow anybody to see what you're doing and repeat it.

If science is like trying to find the best path to cross a frozen lake, you're leaping from one unsupported chunk of ice to another. You seem to think it means you're abnormally intuitive about science, and don't need to learn about it to criticize it. I think you'd earn the same reputation at a fine arts discussion forum if you suggested flinging randomly colored paints at a canvas is all you need to make a masterpiece.

The Sixties...good times...

[Ghideon]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

I think you'd earn the same reputation at a fine arts discussion forum if you suggested flinging randomly colored paints at a canvas is all you need to make a masterpiece.

Good example and probably a common issue? There are a number of cases where some random idea may generate a decent starting point; some examples:

Movie plot
Mobile gaming concept
Sketching ideas for a painting (as mentioned above)

But it is probably very rarely found in science, and especially fundamental things like relativity, standard model particle physics etc. But some members here, especially with neg rep, seems to fail to identify the difference between a scientific process and incorrect guesses. Of course there are elements of creativity in science but it is not an uneducated random stream of words. It starts with a lot of studying and researching before there is any chance of proposing something that has at least a remote chance of being a successful idea.

[et pet]

3 hours ago, thethinkertank said:

I hope there are no lasting ill effects to be gleaned from excessive minus points?

Such as being muted or banned for instance?

I hope this is not the case for if it is so, I shall immediately cut down on my creative output and confine myself to a propounding on existing ideas alone. 

Right now I'm balancing a 3 dimensional tightrope of creativity, learning and discussion. However if my tenure on site is at stake I shall proceed to leap off said tightrope like a leapin lizard, cut down on creativity and learning and merely focus on discussion. 

 

   The Minus Points mean nothing. I get them all the time from the SAME FEW POSTERS.

[Phi for All]

15 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

Good example and probably a common issue? There are a number of cases where some random idea may generate a decent starting point; some examples:

Movie plot
Mobile gaming concept
Sketching ideas for a painting (as mentioned above)

But it is probably very rarely found in science, and especially fundamental things like relativity, standard model particle physics etc. But some members here, especially with neg rep, seems to fail to identify the difference between a scientific process and incorrect guesses. Of course there are elements of creativity in science but it is not an uneducated random stream of words. It starts with a lot of studying and researching before there is any chance of proposing something that has at least a remote chance of being a successful idea.

Incorrect guesses are one thing, and I agree that people who're simply mistaken shouldn't have their reps degraded. But adamant assertions that are easily shown to be incorrect are another beast entirely, and it often rubs folks the wrong way. Especially people who've bothered to study the material, and so are easily able to tell when someone is guessing but claiming they're correct.

There is a whole class of folks out there who feel studying messes up their intuitive ability to guess correctly about profound subjects. 

 

11 minutes ago, et pet said:

   The Minus Points mean nothing. I get them all the time from the SAME FEW POSTERS.

This isn't true. You assume the points are given by participants in the discussion, and not by all the members reading.

The staff often checks to make sure members aren't singling out anyone for persecution via rep points. Since we discovered you doing just that to someone else a while back, we've checked your points pretty carefully for retaliation. Your negative rep comes from LOTS of sources, not the SAME FEW POSTERS. 

[et pet]

20 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

This isn't true. You assume the points are given by participants in the discussion, and not by all the members reading.

The staff often checks to make sure members aren't singling out anyone for persecution via rep points. Since we discovered you doing just that to someone else a while back, we've checked your points pretty carefully for retaliation. Your negative rep comes from LOTS of sources, not the SAME FEW POSTERS. 

Like I Posted : The Minus Points mean nothing.

 

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, et pet said:

The Minus Points mean nothing.

I find them pretty helpful in determining with whom I'm interacting and what their history is

[et pet]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

I find them pretty helpful in determining with whom I'm interacting and what their history is

You have shown that repeatedly, iNow.

Not a problem, though. I understand that "Rep Points" can be quite useful to small minds, iNow

   "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." by Eleanor Roosevelt

   So, again, iNow :

18 minutes ago, et pet said:

Like I Posted : The Minus Points mean nothing.

 

[Phi for All]

50 minutes ago, et pet said:

Like I Posted : The Minus Points mean nothing.

I can easily see why you feel that way. Why attach a value to something (like wine) based on what others think of it (especially when the grapes were probably sour to begin with)?

[thethinkertank]

Just now, Phi for All said:

I can easily see why you feel that way. Why attach a value to something (like wine) based on what others think of it (especially when the grapes were probably sour to begin with)?

 

 

Just now, iNow said:

I find them pretty helpful in determining with whom I'm interacting and what their history is

But where third party opinions come into play, is there not the risk of unfair judgement, based on provable human phenomena (that have been observed throughout history), things like racism just to quote a random example just out of the blue? 

(Note that I'm not saying that such is the case here.) 

Edited June 18, 2019 by thethinkertank

[MigL]

Minus points don't mean anything, and can be unfair.
But crappy posts do, and there is a correlation.

And I think Phi was being kind when he compared Thethinkertank's posting style to splattering paint on a canvas and calling it a masterpiece.
That's unfair to J Pollock.
Myself, I would have compared it to flinging sh*t at the wall, and seeing what sticks.