Criticisms and questions could arise out of a lack of understanding. This to me is a call for greater detail. We agree mostly to what we perfectly understand. Explanations often are details necessary for the understanding of others.
I am informing you of the standards of this forum and of the possible consequences of not reaching them. This is not a discussion. If there was a discussion and a time for it, that has now passed. The only course forward is to internalize the criticism and do better.
Yes. I ever bear in mind my personal responsibility for my posts. I am not banned nor am I helping any evasion. Bear in mind that I have been in close collaboration with DaveS for nearly two decades now after he found me early in my Low Wind Energy solutions foray. DaveS, Wayne German, Joe Faust and yours truly did found AWEIA as the global Industry Association. Our relationship now transcends AWE and Kiting and we interchangeably represent our teams on different platforms which today include Engineers Without Borders, Union of Concerned Scientists, Association of Nigerian Artists, Jalbert Laboratory LLC, KiteWorks, AWEIA, etc.
I choose therefore to quote DaveS or simply adopt his wordings as mine where I am in full alignment with or without editing as I find comfortable.
With that you are helping with ban evasion and you are indistinguishable from a sock puppet, even if you are technically not one. Again, ban evasion and also helping ban evasion would usually be a reason for a ban.
Your posting is also indistinguishable from that of a sock puppet; your main activity on this forum has been to either advocate for the lifting of Santosā suspension, which suspension he has stated he prefers over being moderated - without actually submitting an appeal acknowledging the problematic behavior -, or the promotion of whatever Santos has written, without independent thought from you.
As now you choose to ignore my repeated request as a moderator; act as a better editor and credit writing that is not your own, I guess I will stop ignoring this and make some kind of decision.
Iāll silence you for 6 months, starting a few days from now. If after the silence period the behavior hasnāt changed, another silence period is likely. At any time you can make an appeal where you promise to do better, or someone else can argue on your behalf to reduce the length of the silence period or that the decision is wrong and something else should be done instead, in public or private.
@dougselsam, you created this new topic The New "Million Flies": EVTOL I moved it to the right place. If you were born the moment this forum was created you would have figured it out already. Since this is a too frequent occurrence for me to tolerate, Iāll silence you for a bit.
Am unaware of principled justification for such harsh Moderation.
Please explain.
Example of wrongly suppressed power kite expertise-
[During my forced absence, it became apparent that a kite flying eights or loops in its kite window develops DS forces by flying upwards in the wind gradient and into the wind at the edge of the window. This accounts for why these patterns are so powerful, with a dynamical DS pop in the pattern, giving maximal pump-cycle amplitude without long reeling phases.
Unfortunately, kept at New User posting limits, I cannot properly share the large backed-up volume such new technical kite insights during censorship.]
Here is one comment about this for example.
The sanction is left up to the moderator. I decided that this was an appropriate course of action. The alternative was an indefinite suspension. You, or someone speaking for you, could have made an appeal during your suspension.
Your judgement was badly mistaken. I did nothing wrong.
JohnO and Pierre both made appeals on my behalf. They were ignored.
Your judgement was badly mistaken. I did nothing wrong.
You would need to write the appeal yourself, promising you would from now on follow the FAQ. Someone else could then post it here. This was not done.
Off topic.
Thatās a conclusion or a claim. It gets credibility by the reasoning or empirical data supporting it.
You are wrongly concluding or claiming the kite-window DS insight lacks supporting reason and empirical data.
It was not provided.
Regardless, that topic is not really for sharing your own research. I intend it to be a resource for myself and others for when we want to learn more about dynamic soaring. You can make one short comment in it linking to your research, but that would be pretty much it. Start your own topic if you want to talk more about your own work.
In your own words-
" There are several topics and comments on this forum that touch on dynamic soaring . Here is a topic for linking to those and to any other content on dynamic soaring."
Identification of DS dynamics in the Power Kite Window was an ideal post in the Topic as defined.
No link was given to the research mentioned, so no it was not an ideal comment. Even disregarding the off-topic comments about moderation which were in itself a reason for rejection.
There was more information posted on DS dynamics in the Kite Window, that simply disappeared. I am eager to share abundant new AWE info, given a fair chance. Readers here deserve to know that technical ideas and information they are allowed to see are heavily censored by anonymous Moderation, with approval by Tallak and Rod.
Every AWE expert is well aware of Wind Gradient with height, and how Power Kite trajectories in the Kite Window curve upwind at its lateral and upper limits.
Let the technical idea be tolerated here, that DS like classic albatross model is how a power kite pattern flies, similarly involving pop-up into higher wind velocity in an upwind-turn phase. Let the details be elaborated over as many follow-on posts as needed, without undue Moderation interference
To increase the chance of a somewhat peaceful and enduring coexistence on this forum, from now on any mention of or allusion to moderation from you will result in the comment being rejected and a week-long suspension.
I will also not approve more than 2 comments per day. Persistent attempts to comment more will result in a 3 to 7 day silence period.
Because misinformation, particularly about the topic of this forum, is particularly toxic, I will also generally not approve unsourced or insufficiently sourced claims. You can ask limited feedback about that in private to me, on how to improve the comment, or you can try to point out an oversight by me.
Limit yourself so you donāt take up too much moderator time.
1 Like
Funny to now see a reactivated ābattle of the overactive moderatorsā, as when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object, more comedy in wannabe or would-be AWE. I had always hoped the people deleting messages from the old forum while denying it, could have the experience of the same thing happening to them. Surprised it ever came true! Some would call it āKarmaā! 
1 Like
I created and now archived this related topic: The Dave Santos Quandary
While I put off making a decision, Iāll update these previous rules to now be:
I will also use my own judgement more as to which topics and comments I think add value to the forum, and so I will reject those that I think do not.
This just reads like him daring to ban him to me. There is no hope with this kind of hostility, so I did.
Maybe I was asking for too much. Iām sure it gets tiring if you try your best and someone shoots you down every time, without you understanding why, or assuming hostility.
Try a course in academic writing where you receive feedback on what you write.
You can submit an appeal when youād like to give it another go, I guess.