Etiquette is an old fashioned word. Here it’s about the commenting policy for this blog.
The point of the blog is to look at climate science critically. That’s all. Of course, it’s fine to examine inconsistencies, poke holes in arguments and generally have fun with the whole thing. I sure will.
Psychology, fascinating subject though it is, can be left for others. If you want to delve into people’s motives or assumed personality problems, insult people, or guess their politics by their scientific points of view then there are much better blogs to go to.. Much more popular blogs. Go there, and let it all out!
This blog is about climate science. If you can add to our school of knowledge, you are extremely welcome. If posts or comments are poor, bad science, or missing the point, you don’t have to spare the punches. You can even be insulting in an amusing/satirical kind of way.
And if you have a wide-ranging essay on why it’s all over for planet earth, or why it’s not all over for planet earth, save it for elsewhere.
What is the protocol, or etiquette, at the scienceofdoom ?
Swearing – even though on a personal level I find swearing to be a great way of expressing my frustration even at inanimate objects that annoy me, here on the blog, no thanks.
Insults and pettiness – please don’t let your discussions descend into this, otherwise comments will be deleted.
Peoplewhodontagreeus-ists – we all know the words. Again, no thanks. Usually these words are created as insults. What’s the point? We are looking into the pros and cons of the science.
Political affiliation – just because someone might be a [political party 1] or a [political party 2] doesn’t mean anything – not in science terms. So it’s irrelevant.
Motivations – how and why various groups or individuals might benefit financially from some point of view being true, false, falsely claimed to be true, etc – all irrelevant.
Essays – generally no, but if you have one that is science-based that builds on – or destroys – the post in question, that’s probably fine. I’m not trying to stop genuine debate. I am trying to keep posts and comments on topic. If the article happens to be about the future of the world, go right ahead with your essay, otherwise try and stay roughly on the topic.
On topic – even if it’s not an essay, but has little to do with the subject under discussion, it may be removed. This is at the discretion of the moderator and is very subjective. That is, off topic comments will often be allowed. But not ones that monopolize or hijack a discussion.
Repetition – it’s frustrating when no one answers your question the way you want it answered. Maybe people have just missed your point or ignored you or haven’t understood what you are really getting at. However, at the discretion of the moderator, continual repetition may be snipped or just deleted to avoid a discussion being hijacked or just made less interesting to other readers.
“Stuff People Might have Done” – or should have done, or even did do. Generally, this subject matter is to be avoided when it’s not about measuring things or calculating things or generating theories. Please try and stay with the science discussion.
Attributing Ideas to People Incorrectly – and then not facing up to that when it is pointed out. When you claim someone said something and it is pointed out that you have made a mistake, the etiquette of this blog demands that you accept your mistake and apologize and especially don’t keep repeating the same mistake. Failure to do so indicates that you are not able to understand the basic concept of “an argument” or “a position” or anything we are interested in at this blog and so you really should invest your time at other blogs.
Basic Science is Accepted – This blog accepts the standard field of physics as proven. Arguments which depend on overturning standard physics, e.g. disproving quantum mechanics, are not interesting until such time as a significant part of the physics world has accepted that there is some merit to them.
The moderator reserves the right to just capriciously delete comments which use as their premise that standard textbook physics is plain wrong.
This is aimed to reduce the continual stream of unscientific rubbish that gets placed here as comments.
Those interested in such entertainingly bad ideas, just Google “physics is wrong”, “quantum mechanics flaws” and so on.