Questions about Moderation

[Windy_Skies]

I again gave @dougselsam a time out, for some 18 days this time.

This time I did not bother to moderate his comments from the last couple of days, with the one exception below, except to move some of them.

So, I deleted this:

@dougselsam

It’s amazing to me how complicated people can make what amounts to nothing but a passing thought in a normal brain, and how many years it can take them to slowly grasp the simplest of concepts. […]

And ignored these and others:

@dougselsam

Here are a couple of examples of hos stupid wannabe wind energy “research” can be. I can’t think of a field where most of the “researchers” don’t have even the most basic understanding of the subject matter, as wannabe “improved” wind energy!

Commentary does not add to or improve the conversation.

@dougselsam

Next time someone tries to tell you the Earth is about to go the way of the next closer planet to tyhe sun (Venus) with their 800 degree Fahrenheit surface temps

@dougselsam

Uh-oh - blizzard expected this summer: Global cooling?

Climate change denialism.

@dougselsam

Professor Crackpot never Sleeps!

Commentary does not add to or improve the conversation.

@Windy_Skies

@dougselsam

Just saw this contrary opinion on future fuels, for what it’s worth

Check your sources.

Source has an agenda.

---

@dougselsam you shouldn’t let poets lie to you I’ll declare commentary about the lack of critical analysis in the news off-topic on this forum. Anyone capable of advancing the field has enough scientific and media literacy to not need to be reminded of such basics, and won’t be hypnotized by the TV.

And a negative tone is not a substitute for valid criticism. That’s just negative vacuousness, which I will rate limit, now through time outs.

Questions are welcome like always.