Kite Networks

[Tom]

@dougselsam

I think if you check my patents you will see hundreds of line drawings, rendered from my hundreds of computer simulations of “networked kites”, predating Roddy’s great simulations.

@kitefreak was talking about simulations, he didn’t claim rod invented kite networks in general.

@dougselsam

Realistic physics? How do you know that? Roddy’s last prototype flew apart.

@dougselsam you can voice your doubt about the validity of Rod’s simulations.
A prototype flying apart doesn’t mean the same person can’t do simulations. Only if one has claimed to have simulated the prototype exactly and THEN it flies apart one should conclude that the simulation wasn’t good.

@dougselsam

The soft wings you’ve advocated for ten years lacked performance. Hard blades as I’ve advocated worked better. Like I said on your “forum”, he had been listening to the wrong people.
Yes, yes, we know - you are resistant to facts.

Offtopic, personal attack, big nono

@dougselsam

My early contributions to AWE are adequately documented and explained. When I run a SuperTurbine, you can see the descriptions of performance are accurate.

Offtopic. Noone has claimed you didn’t contribute to AWE or that your descriptions of performance were inaccurate.

@dougselsam

I would prefer to NOT receive any more e-mails with your name on them as this site has just done.

You can alter your notification settings. - Click on avatar in top right, settings, preferences, Emails / notifications
Also: That’s not a nice thing to say. If you must, make it private.

@dougselsam

You’ve already ruined your own “forum”.

Don’t just provoke people!

@dougselsam

Now you seek to dominate the new forum that was started to get way from that.

If you see a problematic post, flag it! You have not flagged any posts. If there are any other issues with moderation, talk to us directly or use the forum feedback category!

@dougselsam

I’m not going to waste any more of my life arguing with your inaccurate accusations. If that means giving up this forum, so be it.

@kitefreak hasn’t accused you of anything in this thread, but you accuse him of making false accusations.
We’re not against you here. You can be a part of this. Or you can provoke people until they turn against you and then leave stating this as the reason.

@dougselsam

OK now you want to drag your judgements of whether someone’s post is “on topic” here?

His judgement was on point.

@dougselsam

You’re going to start pretending to “moderate” the new forum you have not ruined yet?

@kitefreak is not a moderator. Reminding someone to stay on topic is not “pretending to moderate”.
Leave old feuds out of the new forum! We’ll try to make sure noone ruins anything.

@dougselsam

With one of probably ten or less canned responses you have for pretty much anything? “Off-topic”, Roddy fails". Peter fails", “Doug fails”, “Pierre fails”…

Again, if any posts are inappropriate, flag them where they are. Don’t just randomly complain about people!

@dougselsam

Great if simulations include “physics”. Then again they may often just show wished-for motion, as hoped-for by the person drawing them. Do the simulations show rings deforming and changing shape to failure? When the machines fly apart, the accuracy of the simulations is revealed […]

Noone claims the simulation is perfect. You can voice doubts about simulations without being a dick.

@dougselsam

Kite networks have been around forever, for example the world-record kite trains of past century(ies?) you refer to so often, to stacks of flexi-foils of 30-40 years ago, common kite-festival configurations including “line-laundry”, etc. I had published renderings with accurate operational descriptions, of rotating kite stacks, as well as working models, since long before we ever heard anything from Roddy, as much as I appreciate Roddy’s very impressive kite renderings of SuperTurbine™ variants.

Again, noone doubts that kite networks have existed for a long time. @kitefreak has just claimed that rod was to his knowledge the first to simulate them.

@dougselsam

Santos said: “As rotating systems, we use phase-space analysis to interpret topological states.”
Selsam replies: Santos uses big words to pretend he is some sort of “expert”

We had a discussion about ‘big words’. On the importance of writing clearly - off-topic discussion split from "The no Market Hypothesis" topic

@dougselsam

At this point, after ten years of his ever-shifting themes, I don’t see any subject over which he does not pretend “expertise”. Yet in spite of claiming to be the top AWE researcher for years, he has nothing working today to show for all that “research”, all that “expertise”.

Discuss the arguments, not the person! Leave old feuds out of the new forum!

@dougselsam

“We”… “use”… “phase-space analysis”… Sure Dave. What happened to your “Bose-Einstein Condensates”? Everyone is expected to just conveniently forget whatever you said yesterday. Today is a new day, for a new round of complete BS from daveS.

You’re free to doubt things someone said due to their track record. But his is unacceptible. If you spot bullshit, call it out where is, but don’t complain about it on a completely different topic.

@dougselsam please be civil and discuss the topic on hand!