Questions and complaints about moderation.

AWES has no consensus because there are so many possible choices to investigate.
I heart the ideas and discussions which best resonate with my experiences and I see as most progressive. Can the collection of likes inform the iterating attempts of a Bayesain AWES exploration? Yes, maybe. Have we got a better advisor?

tl;dr. But will read as soon as I get around to it. Am aware that my attention is required.

Empirical evidence, and correct maths and physics are better.

We would like to approach the truth about AWE ever closer. We do that by doing research or reading research. AWE is not at all special in that regard. You do tests, you read about tests other people have done, you try to understand the maths and physics and engineering behind it all.

Anyone’s opinion can be wrong. I think most opinions expressed here are wrong. So I try to ignore the opinions. I try to look at evidence. Evidence in this field would be correctly done tests, correctly done maths, and correctly done physics.

If someone claims something or states an opinion without backing up their opinion or claim, a reader cannot verify if it is true independently and make up their own mind. Since an opinion can be wrong, and often is, that’s not good.

Without the rule, you could say: tomorrow everyone in London will lose a leg. I could ask: how do you know that? And you could say: just believe me (I’ve said this before). Without this rule a moderator can’t point to the FAQ and say to you: please don’t do that. You aren’t being rude, you aren’t spamming, and you aren’t calling me names after all.

I’ll say the topic 2020 State of AWE is soapboxing.

If you have a specific, concrete, criticism of an entity perhaps that is a basis for discussion. This is just too vague to be useful.

Also if you want to make a topic about how good the collection of North Kiteboarding is, do that, instead of muddying the discussion with vague negativity.

1 Like

The dramatic success of kite sports continues to build, far overshadowing the tiny angst-world of specific AWE R&D. This video politely shows the engineering culture gap. Even the cinematography and music is better, and the star power kite is dynamite.

Seeing the North 2020 post as representative of kite sport AWE engineering has been removed from view. The probable reason is the term “angst-world”, whose basis ranges from Moderation issues to 2019 being the year of two major crashes, which is very traumatic to those responsible, and also predictable. Ok then, nobody gets to see the cool video of kite engineering success. Blame angst against angst.

Complaints are only noise if Moderation fails to resolve them. Removing knowledge with “noise” is more harmful than tolerating noise. One does not wisely ignore an important message if some noise is present.

At least Moderators can’t change facts by hiding them.

See my position on this after this:

Like invoking weasel words? No, its not allowing sound technical claims or critique that is “suspect”, in an engineering context. The Netiquette crisis is overblown, AWE has not been harmed as much as by aside-comments as by venture technical secrecy, and now hidden Forum content.

I have unlisted Censored Content

I don’t see the value of the back-and-forth between the different people to a wider audience. And @kitefreak used it to make visible a comment I had hidden. To appeal a moderation decision, or if you have a question or a complaint about moderation, go here.

1 Like

The main reason for transparency is for future data-mining and historical research. Its very short-sighted to Moderate AWE as a Chat-room, its far more important to capture all the technical content and let the noise be filtered by time.

Its does not matter to complain or appeal here, current Moderation is poorly responsive to critiques. The appeal to transparency and free-speech is for future readers to best decide.

People are filtered by the noise in an unmoderated forum (also meaning less “technical knowledge,” from more limited perspectives, will be posted). This forum is moderated for that reason.

Just try to play nice with the other kids.

1 Like

Moderation wents nuts over Cosine Gain, Analytic Philosophy, and the best knot expertise. That’s the real noise part.

This is not about “play nice with other kids”, but about destructive mis-moderation of sound AWE technical content. AWE itself is for the kids, who don’t need anonymous moderation either.

Dave spam twitter if you want to post endless trolling or weakly associated AWES conspiracy chat.
This is a forum for people interested developing AWES.

No Rod, my role is to provide knowledge “for people interested in developing AWES”.

Better Knot content is not spam. Kite Cosine Functions topic is not trolling. Twitter is not where Kite-related Analytic Philosophy is discussed.

This is the correct place for “questions and complaints about moderation”.

I have a complaint about moderation.
We’re not strict enough.
The rubbish around the valuable knot data in your posts was spam @kitefreak

I’m considering splitting this recent exchange from the topic if no answer to this is given:

And answer to this could be “I can’t provide examples.” I also fail to see a relevant use case.

Some comments should perhaps also be moderated out of principle:

Let’s not hope we are trying to accelerate kites to relativistic speeds in our, or any, atmosphere.

1 Like

Windy Skies,

Consider revealing just who you are to be constantly messing up worthy technical content.

If you insist on moving my posts from intended topics, they must be deleted in protest. Your moderation is not helpful. Try and add to the discussion, not stop it.

Actually, AWE is highly relativistic due to the acceleration of gravity. That is why the lemniscate in the kite window is flattened.

This is really wonderful stuff for anyone who has done the homework. A moving kite does have a bit more mass, even if this does not interest everyone.

Perhaps that is still a bit too premature.

This is the topic: Patent list It asks for list(s) of patents related to AWE or kites — I’ll say individual links to patents are okay too. Your post is not that, so it is off-topic.

I’ll say after some more patent lists are posted it’s okay to wander a bit from the topic of the thread, but I’d like to keep the topic narrowly focused for now.