Questions and complaints about moderation.

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

https://forum.awesystems.info/t/air-as-the-main-structural-element/942/9

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.

I’ll hide the topic until this is resolved.

Yes.

I’ll hide the topic until this is resolved.

Windy Skies,

Its clear that you know almost nothing about AWE, or engineering generally, nor how new technical ideas can emerge without previous citation. The original reference is precious, not trash for you to take out.

You probably have no idea whether soft kites are subject to brittle aeroelastic failure, or that I am expert enough to be allowed an opinion without censorship.

You clearly have no idea if I actually wrote an incorrect statement about Titanium tethers, but you hide the content as if you did.

Pierre complained that he does not support your censorship in his name, but you continue to do it.

Just who you are, to intend never to be known, while being a troll with moderation power over harder working better informed contributors, is surely a sad case.

The topic covering possible applications of “heat-kites” is valuable, and should not be hidden by Windy Skies with Doug as a pretext.

Heat resistant kites can serve in wildfire-fighting and volcanology, as two active topics of study.

Wayne German’s space-tether kite ideas are worth sharing. Doug’s hate for these ideas is irrelevant.

Windy Skies is incredibly inept at nurturing open intellectual discussion. Anonymous censorship is not helpful.

In Sweden, he would be a criminal-

This topic has been severely censored of current high-value content.

The new topic on soft kites not being subject to classic aeroelastic failure has been wrongly hidden. The reference shows rigid wings suffer from cracking up by aeroelastic failure. Anyone knowledgeable about kites can attest that soft kites are not brittle, but resilient.

Any new AWE idea or insight is at risk under Windy Skies profoundly destructive moderation. Windy Skies has proven to have no AWE engineering insight, but an obsession with hiding information.

No one even knows who this troubled person is, or why they cannot be known openly. They do not add anything on this forum of serious value.

After closer inspection, I’ll unhide the topic for now. It is obvious that a soft wing does not suffer from the mentioned problem a rigid kite has. The claim that therefore soft wings are the solution I consider soapboxing, and therefore the topic overall also, but it also shares some research.

This decision is tenuous. A better topic would have probably been a thorough summary, with references provided, of all the ways rigid wings are bad. Then you have the criticism contained in one topic instead of multiple topics essentially saying the same thing.

I consider soapboxing to be bad because you don’t want to start from a preconceived position – that rigid wings are bad – and then cherry-picking data to support your position. That’s not how science works.

Dear Windy Skies, whoever you are:
I was replying, specifically, to Dave Santos, regarding his statement that his buddy, Wayne German, was “Director” of, oh, what was it, “Boeing’s Flight Research Institute”? Thanks to your weird compulsion toward censorship, I can’t even find the topic you’re referring to. This is one main reason I have pretty much stopped visiting this website. It seems that it is run by what some call “True-Believers”, where the moderators are not the least bit interested in actual FACTS, and instead seem fixated on watering down any actual discourse, eliminating any factual content.
I decided to come back and just check this forum again, only to find literally almost every recent topic with a big red K at the end. Predictably, you guys have let my old sparring partner, Dave Santos, completely dominate your forum. You don’t care about facts. I actually don’t understand what you do care about.
Well, click on any topic, and there is nothing but Dave Santos, who, in my opinion, is spewing nonstop falsehoods. As I’ve long-stated, he seems to be able to fit more falsehoods into a single sentence than you could debunk if you took all day. An amazing talent, which you naive true-believers do not seem to see, as obvious as it is to me.
For example this endless “worship” of his friend Wayne, by not only Santos, but his partner-in-crime Joe Faust (Hey don’t get your panties in a bunch, it’s just a harmless expression).
All I have to do is read any single sentence he writes, find the first untrue item, aand reply to it, and somehow it is ME who gets “censored”. Why don’t YOU MODERATORS try doing some fact-checking? Why is it up to ME to actually READ what is written by the people I see as endless purveyors of false facts, and check their veracity? Why can’t YOU, if you think your role as “moderator” is so useful, try checking on a fact or two?
OK so, like I said in my original post which I now cannot even find the topic of, I did a little checking on Wayne’s supposed involvement with Boeing, and found this from 2012:


And I found the following comment at the end from “Wayne German”:

“I was a project leader at the flight research institute when it was a non-profit offshoot of Boeing at the Museum of Flight in Seattle Washington. While there I discovered a way that it would be possible to fly without fuel by tacking in air only — what I call airSailing among a select few that I have discussed it with so far. I also know how to develop air traffic controlling far better using satellite modems. Two aircraft literally crashed overhead and fell on my street here in Newberg Oregon. The crash was far more the responsibility of the FAA for not using this better and cheaper technology rather than trying to monitor aircraft 35 miles away and over hills etc. There is a lot more that I would like to discuss. Perhaps we should discuss via Webex since it is encripted. Thanks. P.S. I was also the one person at Intel to whom all questions were eventually escalated to and I was the most senior software engineer at Freightliner and I was Intel’s technical liaison to the Ford and the Bausch Motor Company. I will reply with a resume and white paper when you suggest how we should do it and keep our discussion confidential. Thanks, Wayne German”

Reading Wayne’s own words, we find what Santos said WAS WRONG. Rather than being “The Director” he only claims to have been “a project leader”. OK? Maybe an unpaid volunteer? You don’t hear about any actual project, do you? So one more false claim from Santos, documented.
Next Santos was trying to equivocate his buddy Wayne with Dr. Paul McCready and Burt Rutan, people who really were directors? Now if Wayne were really in the same category as these two famous aviation personalities who are at least see as luminaries, don’t you think you’d have heard of him from somewhere besides Dave Santos’ and Joe Faust’s bragging self-promotional propaganda, where they tend to worship each other and Wayne, in a self-congratulatory circle (mutual-admiration society)? Everyone knows who Burt Rutan and Paul McReady are, right? But look up Wayne German and all you find is himself and Joe and Dave bragging about his supposed accomplishments. I don’t find anything else about him. Hmmmm.
It is telling to read Wayne’s “comment” in the above article. It reads like an extension of Wayne’s attempt to dominate the first AWE meeting in 2009: He goes completely off-topic from the article and starts bragging about his idea of two mutually-tethered wings being theoretically able to fly without fuel, as though:

  1. nobody else ever thought of it, which is not true, and;
  2. it has ever been demonstrated, anywhere, any time, at any scale, and:
  3. it is even relevant to the article in any way.
    He goes on to pretend he has all the answers for air traffic control, then we see more bragging, citing more dubious “credentials”.
    He was “the one person at Intel to whom all questions were eventually escalated to”
    OK does that mean he was the top IT guy at Intel? Maybe the president of Intel? Or does it mean he was the only one left working a tech-support line one lonely night? Right before he was “let go” for fixating on his whacky ideas and not letting anyone else talk?
    Next sentence and he “was the most senior software engineer at Freightliner”, but then his mind wanders back to Intel, where he said “I was Intel’s technical liaison to the Ford and the Bausch Motor Company.”
    Well I hate to break the news, but there is no such thing as “the Bausch Motor Company”. There is a “Ford Motor Company”. And there is Bosch. Then there is “Bausch & Lomb”. Don’t you think if Wayne was REALLY technical liaison to Bosch, he would know how to spell the name? And wouldn’t he know there was no such thing as a “Bausch Motor Company”? And why does Wayne feel compelled to start citing these crazy “credentials” in a comment about an article covering something else? What you are looking at is Wayne, Dave Santos, and Joe Faust, endlessly patting each other on the back, sometimes making up complete fictions designed to create an artificial circle of credibility, whereas as fond of them as I might be after all these 12+ years, together, given a combined 36 man-years of supposed “involvement” in AWE, together they have generated no significant AWE power, and contributed no proven useful AWE concept. As much as I have come to in some ways like these guys, they are prettry much all talk. And I liked Joe before I knew who he was. I just know there was someone publishing a magazine called “Low and Slow”, when first tried to build, then ended up buying, my first hang-glider in the 1970’s. So Joe goes way back in my mind.
    But what I see is people with a strong interest in a topic, but with little useful actual input or ideas, nonetheless feel the need to dominate a discussion, they have nothing to do but squelch the truth while pretending to know everything, never able to show us anythig useful or promising of their own creation. So what do they do? They “moderate”. The nitpick people for their tone, or for telling the truth about ANYTHING, eve the weather.
    If you see a car going 90 KPH directly at a stone wall, you can see you are looking at a wreck about to happen, right? By the time the car is a few meters away from the stone wall, you can easily see the car is going to crash, right? How would YOU like to join some supposed “open forum” where your simple observation of fact, that there is a caar crash about to happen is censored by some naive “moderator” because they “decide” your post is somehow “negative”? What about the safety of the occupants? Does that matter? No. Nothig matters but someone’s attempt to dominate a conversation they can barely even understand, with really nothing but propaganda they’ve read elsewhere to “contribute”. So they censor the truth.
    And now we have a “new forum” with the same old ignorant attempts to dominate the conversation s before, except this time it is often from an anonymous censor. How convenient.
    I’ll give you just one example of a simple fact I’ve been saying for years, that nobody wanted to hear, but was as obvious to me as a car about to hit a stone wall at 90 KPH: KPS - Kite Power Systems.
    What did I see? Press-releases “bragging” about “renting office space” and a supposed “test facility” they were hardly ever even allowed to use because of some bird issue? That the main product they seemed to be producing was a group-selfie photo to make a “convincing website”. Read between the lines and you see they were wasting millions of dollars to go nowhere. This was a car headed toward a wall at high speed. Who stood up and called it like it was? Me. The one lonely voice of factuality in a field of nearly complete fantasy.
    And what do I get for telling the truth (again)?
    More censorship. Others call themselves “experts” while I simply tell you what IS, ad yet all you want to do is silence me. Where is the acknowledgement of “Geez, Doug told us exactly what would happen with KPS years ago”? Do you EVER care about truth, AT ALL??? All I have to do is check a single statement in wannabe AWE to find the multiple lies, and if you speak up and say what you see, the desperate-for-influence “moderators” find a way to silence it.
    There are a few things I agree with Dave Santos on, and one of them is you “moderators” here are ignorant know-nothings, without much to contribute besides shutting down factual content, and of course you will probably find some way to eliminate this bit of truth like the rest.