Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #544496 > unrolled thread

Newsgroup censorship

Started byPeter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk>
First post2016-01-11 10:41 -0800
Last post2016-01-13 10:16 -0800
Articles 20 on this page of 108 — 19 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 10:41 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 12:55 -0600
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 11:16 -0800
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 13:43 -0600
          Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:04 -0500
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-11 16:29 -0600
        Re: Newsgroup censorship "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 15:54 -0800
          Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 02:48 -0800
            Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 06:06 -0800
              Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 07:12 -0800
                Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:16 -0500
                Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 23:27 -0800
                Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 10:20 -0800
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 10:25 -0800
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 10:30 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 05:58 -0800
        Re: Newsgroup censorship moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-12 16:14 +0000
          Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:36 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-11 19:27 +0000
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 15:21 -0600
      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:22 -0500
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:41 -0600
          Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 17:11 -0800
            Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:55 -0600
    Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 13:42 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-11 22:22 +0000
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-11 16:34 -0600
          Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 14:57 -0800
            Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 20:45 -0500
              Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 20:34 -0600
                Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:01 -0500
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 07:59 -0600
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:26 -0500
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:11 -0600
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:58 -0500
                          Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:07 -0600
                            Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 00:22 -0500
                              Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 08:01 -0600
        Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 14:51 -0800
          Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 00:32 +0000
            Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:00 -0800
              Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 02:16 +0000
                Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:12 -0800
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:34 -0800
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 06:19 +0000
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 23:10 -0800
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 18:35 +0000
                          Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 11:05 -0800
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 03:39 +0000
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 23:06 -0800
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 23:28 -0800
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-12 14:33 -0600
                Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:17 -0500
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 03:41 +0000
          Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 17:07 -0800
            Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:47 -0600
              Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 21:53 -0500
                Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 07:57 -0600
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:21 -0500
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:05 -0600
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 12:12 -0800
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:32 -0600
                          Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:04 -0500
                            Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:09 -0600
                              Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 00:24 -0500
                                Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 08:03 -0600
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:55 -0500
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:04 -0600
                          Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 00:21 -0500
              Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 20:16 -0800
                Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 09:33 -0600
              Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 21:02 -0800
                Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 09:37 -0600
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-12 16:04 -0800
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 16:17 -0800
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:43 -0600
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:48 -0800
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 17:51 -0500
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 14:19 -0600
            Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:13 -0800
              Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 20:37 -0600
                Re: Newsgroup censorship pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-11 19:27 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:33 -0500
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 15:54 -0600
      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:35 -0500
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-12 13:40 +1100
      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:08 -0500
      Re: Newsgroup censorship R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-01-12 03:13 +0000
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 20:56 -0800
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-12 22:21 +1100
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 09:34 -0600
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 22:00 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-12 13:40 +0000
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Catherine Jefferson <spamtrap@spambouncer.org> - 2016-01-12 08:42 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 11:04 -0600
      Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 09:13 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 11:26 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:09 -0600
        Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 12:27 -0800
          Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:38 -0600
            Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 12:54 -0800
          Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:00 -0500
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Rock Brentwood <federation2005@netzero.com> - 2016-01-12 17:28 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 20:23 -0800
        Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:54 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 09:58 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 12:13 -0600
        Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 10:16 -0800

Page 1 of 6  [1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next page →


#544496 — Newsgroup censorship

FromPeter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2016-01-11 10:41 -0800
SubjectNewsgroup censorship
Message-ID<7b40664d-02ab-417e-8016-c8bf51432315@googlegroups.com>
Newsgroup censorship

All persons in the democracies of the West have the fundamental right to have access to all expressions of knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity, and to express their thoughts publicly.

Newsgroups have a basic responsibility for the development and
maintenance of intellectual freedom and the responsibility to guarantee and facilitate access to all expressions of knowledge and
intellectual activity, including those which some some elements
of society may consider to be unconventional, unpopular or unacceptable.  Newsgroups should resist all efforts to limit the exercise of these responsibilities while recognizing the right of criticism by individuals and groups.

I have been denied these rights by the newsgroup sci.physics.research for trying to post four articles. The first (The value of G) made it but was killed after the first reply because my arguments "were circular". The other three were rejected outright. The excuse for the second (The mass of the Sun) was "I had already been told to cease posting after my first thread The value of G". The third post (The aether, Michelson and Einstein) was rejected for being "too speculative". The fourth post (The aether and Einstein) was rejected because "I used Einstein to support my arguments". It was also stated that a post rejected by a moderated newsgroup would also be rejected by other newsgroups.

In an unmoderated newsgroup, censorship is applied by abuse, being called a crank or coordinated silence. Moderated newsgroups like to give reasons for rejections but they do not hesitate to resort to hypocrisy, double standards and the absurd. Replies to their judgments are forbidden and appeals, the foundation of a fair justice system, are absent.

Peter Riedt 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#544500

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 12:55 -0600
Message-ID<EsGdnSqbcokwZw7LnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#544496
On 1/11/16 12:41 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> I have been denied these rights by the newsgroup sci.physics.research for trying to post four articles.


   Moderators in sci.physics.research have the responsibility to weed
   out posts where the content is contradicted by physics observations.
   You can post in unmoderated groups, such as sci.physics, which is
   an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics,
   news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544506

FromPeter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2016-01-11 11:16 -0800
Message-ID<9ad8bedf-5466-4153-8ea8-fdd2bbf891f1@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544500
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 2:55:46 AM UTC+8, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 1/11/16 12:41 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> > I have been denied these rights by the newsgroup sci.physics.research for trying to post four articles.
> 
> 
>    Moderators in sci.physics.research have the responsibility to weed
>    out posts where the content is contradicted by physics observations.
>    You can post in unmoderated groups, such as sci.physics, which is
>    an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics,
>    news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.

Much of the discussions in spr have content contradicted by  preferred physics observations. Double standards are applied to control deviations from dogma like the church did to the scientists in the 17th century.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544519

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 13:43 -0600
Message-ID<EsGdnSabcoltmAnLnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#544506
On 1/11/16 1:16 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> Much of the discussions in spr have content contradicted by
> preferred physics observations. Double standards are applied to
> control deviations from dogma like the church did to the scientists
> in the 17th century.
>


   Perhaps I should have said -- Moderators in sci.physics.research have
   the responsibility to weed out posts that are inappropriate to the
   newsgroup.

   Of course everybody has different opinions as to what is appropriate.
   For example the jimp thinks most of my posting are inappropriate, but
   on the other hand, I get a lot of thanks from others.

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544561

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 17:04 -0500
Message-ID<sFVky.121020$L45.9520@fx09.iad>
In reply to#544519
On 01/11/2016 02:43 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 1/11/16 1:16 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
>> Much of the discussions in spr have content contradicted by
>> preferred physics observations. Double standards are applied to
>> control deviations from dogma like the church did to the scientists
>> in the 17th century.
>>
>
>
>    Perhaps I should have said -- Moderators in sci.physics.research have
>    the responsibility to weed out posts that are inappropriate to the
>    newsgroup.
>
>    Of course everybody has different opinions as to what is appropriate.
>    For example the jimp thinks most of my posting are inappropriate, but
>    on the other hand, I get a lot of thanks from others.

Only proves the old saying: Nobody ever went broke underestimating the 
intelligence of the American public.

You are just lucky that OUR "moderator" HVAC, allows you to post your 
political trash. If he knew any science at all you'd be banned for life 
as a crank.



-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544574

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-11 16:29 -0600
Message-ID<n71ada$ne9$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544500
On 1/11/2016 12:55 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 1/11/16 12:41 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
>> I have been denied these rights by the newsgroup sci.physics.research
>> for trying to post four articles.
>
>
>    Moderators in sci.physics.research have the responsibility to weed
>    out posts where the content is contradicted by physics observations.
>    You can post in unmoderated groups, such as sci.physics, which is
>    an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics,
>    news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
>
>
>

sci.physics is NOT the place for "social issues"


please post them in;

   alt.social.issues.for.non.scientists.types


     this group will not be hijacked into "socialist issues"









and barrel boats are just fine,
that is buoyancy in water which is totally physics

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544604

From"reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 15:54 -0800
Message-ID<0b530fa2-03f5-48f2-a4eb-390515464668@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544574
On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 2:30:08 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 1/11/2016 12:55 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> > On 1/11/16 12:41 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> >> I have been denied these rights by the newsgroup sci.physics.research
> >> for trying to post four articles.
> >
> >
> >    Moderators in sci.physics.research have the responsibility to weed
> >    out posts where the content is contradicted by physics observations.
> >    You can post in unmoderated groups, such as sci.physics, which is
> >    an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics,
> >    news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> sci.physics is NOT the place for "social issues"
> 
> 
> please post them in;
> 
>    alt.social.issues.for.non.scientists.types
> 
> 
>      this group will not be hijacked into "socialist issues"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and barrel boats are just fine,
> that is buoyancy in water which is totally physics

Built my first barrel boat in Fl.to go over the Falls That took  good science.That was 16 years ago.Last one built in early 2015 to sail to Hawaii.Now my boats are to be used to save lives in flash floods. Its nice to stay alive and do good.Hate mongers should try it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544726

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 02:48 -0800
Message-ID<9ca9123d-d3a7-4d73-9c88-774aba5004e4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544604
Built my first barrel boat in Fl.to go over the Falls That took  good science.That was 16 years ago.Last one built in early 2015 to sail to Hawaii.
--------------

Bert's Hawaii boat does not exist.

That's why he will only post pictures of his stupid table cloth boat from years ago.

There is no boat

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544750

From"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 06:06 -0800
Message-ID<c2127a04-4633-47e9-b638-7218b2aa29ec@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544726
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 12:48:36 PM UTC+2, HVAC wrote:
> Built my first barrel boat in Fl.to go over the Falls That took  good science.That was 16 years ago.Last one built in early 2015 to sail to Hawaii.
> --------------
> 
> Bert's Hawaii boat does not exist.
> 
> That's why he will only post pictures of his stupid table cloth boat from years ago.
> 
> There is no boat

========================
Hi anonymous pig criminal HAVAC
what is your real F name 
hey coward !
you delude yourself that pope  here 
will not find quickly 
that you  are a psych criminal parasite 
------
Y.P
=======================================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544761

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 07:12 -0800
Message-ID<00476af1-0628-4b78-b403-0f922bf4d024@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544750
Hi anonymous pig criminal HAVAC 
what is your real F name 
hey coward ! 
you delude yourself that pope  here 
will not find quickly 
that you  are a psych criminal parasite 
------ 
Y.P 
==================================


I was intentionally staying out of this discussion and now i see that Y.Circle Jerk is bringing me up.

All I can say is that obviously not many people realize that *I* am the moderator of sci.physics. Mostly because I maintain a low profile and rarely moderate posts. Only those that directly threaten another are typically subject to my oversight. Other than that I don't actually give a flying fandango fuck.

H.V.A.C.
Moderator Emeritus
sci.physics

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544834

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 14:16 -0500
Message-ID<wicly.179589$rj1.97089@fx27.iad>
In reply to#544761
On 01/12/2016 10:12 AM, HVAC wrote:
> Hi anonymous pig criminal HAVAC
> what is your real F name
> hey coward !
> you delude yourself that pope  here
> will not find quickly
> that you  are a psych criminal parasite
> ------
> Y.P
> ==================================
>
>
> I was intentionally staying out of this discussion and now i see that Y.Circle Jerk is bringing me up.
>
> All I can say is that obviously not many people realize that *I* am the moderator of sci.physics. Mostly because I maintain a low profile and rarely moderate posts. Only those that directly threaten another are typically subject to my oversight. Other than that I don't actually give a flying fandango fuck.
>
> H.V.A.C.
> Moderator Emeritus
> sci.physics
>
HVAC your drool cup is full!

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#545010

From"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 23:27 -0800
Message-ID<8bb401de-6cea-49f3-b445-2e9b0e522486@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544761
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 5:12:20 PM UTC+2, HVAC wrote:
> Hi anonymous pig criminal HAVAC 
> what is your real F name 
> hey coward ! 
> you delude yourself that pope  here 
> will not find quickly 
> that you  are a psych criminal parasite 
> ------ 
> Y.P 
> ==================================
> 
> 
> I was intentionally staying out of this discussion and now i see that Y.Circle Jerk is bringing me up.
> 
> All I can say is that obviously not many people realize that *I* am the moderator of sci.physics. Mostly because I maintain a low profile and rarely moderate posts. Only those that directly threaten another are typically subject to my oversight. Other than that I don't actually give a flying fandango fuck.
> 
> H.V.A.C.
> Moderator Emeritus
> sci.physics

=========================
????
moderator or not moderator ??

Y.P
======================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#545394

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-14 10:20 -0800
Message-ID<221fc89f-e277-4aed-a5d7-e7a6bcfcbd01@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544761
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:12:20 AM UTC-8, HVAC wrote:

All I can say is that obviously not many people realize that *I* am the moderator of sci.physics. 

LOL.  Did I not call it.  So you're the head troll.  The troll of trolls. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#545399

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-14 10:25 -0800
Message-ID<cd4b1177-16ce-4666-a5c2-05d9bf3213b0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#545394
Exactly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#545402

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-14 10:30 -0800
Message-ID<895d36a1-e23d-4c1f-8284-1ff571ac1b50@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#545399
On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 10:25:45 AM UTC-8, HVAC wrote:
> Exactly

Like being the hall monitor in elementary school.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544748

From"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 05:58 -0800
Message-ID<07733dfb-091c-47a1-bdce-e4c7bcc323e7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544500
On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 8:55:46 PM UTC+2, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 1/11/16 12:41 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> > I have been denied these rights by the newsgroup sci.physics.research for trying to post four articles.
> 
> 
>    Moderators in sci.physics.research have the responsibility to weed
>    out posts where the content is contradicted by physics observations.
======================
you can see 
sci research is is moderated by shameless old farts coks like
Philip Helbig
will not get far
you can see whats going there 
it looks like a cemetery of copses 
==================
i have some news for you 
THE DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM  ALONG THE FEW LAST CENTURIES 
THOUGHT ALL IT S 'DISADVANTAGES ' 
WON /DEFEATED ALL  OTHER SYSTEMS 
MOREOVER 

IT IS JUST THE MAIN REASON FOR 
THE INCREDIBLE ADVANCE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
IN EURO P AGAINST   
AL OTHER SYSTEMS I SAY ASIA AFRICA  you nameit
---------------
it was i think   French Decart (spelling ?)
who said 
===
I DON T AGREE WITH A SINGLE WORD YOU SAID  
--YET I AM READY TO BE   KILLED  
FOR YOUR RIGHT -TO SAY IT'  

hi Helbi
(those people think that they can make any private 
motivated! crime
and not  somehow  be punished   for  that
-----  
where are you  old retard criminal shameless fart ??
are you by any chance a French man ??
--i am sure not !!
 
Y .Porat
==========================================


  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544781

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-01-12 16:14 +0000
Message-ID<n738ov$qcr$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#544748
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> writes:

>======================
>you can see 
>sci research is is moderated by shameless old farts coks like
>Philip Helbig
>will not get far
>you can see whats going there 
>it looks like a cemetery of copses 
>==================

Porat, did you see the charter of sci.physics.research? Specifically, the
last line?

From the charter:

|NEWSGROUP NAME: sci.physics.research.

|This newsgroup is to be "lightly" moderated--that is, the moderators
|will only reject clearly inappropriate postings, and will accept any
|that has serious physics content or that is likely to be of interest
|to an audience of professional physicists.  Clearly inappropriate
|postings include:
|
|        (1) Personal attacks;
|        (2) Discussion that isn't about or related to physics;
|        (3) Multiple responses that all say the same things; and
|        (4) Crackpot postings that are "not even wrong."
|
|Note also that this newsgroup is not a peer reviewed journal; the
|moderators are not referees or editors, and they do not have the time
|to check whether the physics (or the grammar!) in each posting is
|actually correct.  As long as an article is readable, and isn't
|blatantly nonsensical, it's fine.

"As long as an article is readable".  You better work at your spelling and
writing if you EVER want to have a post approved there.  I'll ignore the
"blatantly nonsensical" statement for now...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#545076

From"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-13 07:36 -0800
Message-ID<23abe821-e253-4016-a977-1fa736ea8552@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544781
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 6:14:33 PM UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >======================
> >you can see 
> >sci research is is moderated by shameless old farts coks like
> >Philip Helbig
> >will not get far
> >you can see whats going there 
> >it looks like a cemetery of copses 
> >==================
> 
> Porat, did you see the charter of sci.physics.research? Specifically, the
> last line?
> 
> From the charter:
> 
> |NEWSGROUP NAME: sci.physics.research.
> 
> |This newsgroup is to be "lightly" moderated--that is, the moderators
> |will only reject clearly inappropriate postings, and will accept any
> |that has serious physics content or that is likely to be of interest
> |to an audience of professional physicists.  Clearly inappropriate
> |postings include:
> |
> |        (1) Personal attacks;
> |        (2) Discussion that isn't about or related to physics;
> |        (3) Multiple responses that all say the same things; and
> |        (4) Crackpot postings that are "not even wrong."
> |
> |Note also that this newsgroup is not a peer reviewed journal; the
> |moderators are not referees or editors, and they do not have the time
> |to check whether the physics (or the grammar!) in each posting is
> |actually correct.  As long as an article is readable, and isn't
> |blatantly nonsensical, it's fine.
> 
> "As long as an article is readable".  You better work at your spelling and
> writing if you EVER want to have a post approved there.  I'll ignore the
> "blatantly nonsensical" statement for now...

=======================ok
let them cook themselves i their own juice 
they will not go far 
they are a dead cemetery  n g 
others will do better 
even this   n g is  vivid and doing much  better
and **will go **much further 
i hope yousaw my note 
that historically Europe went much further from any point of vew
than all the dictatorship systems  
see the thread
'does light move in a straight line'
that i started there 
and was 'immigrated ' here 
and you will see
which which /where it will go further 
and  more vivid  

ATB
Y.Porat
========================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544512

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-11 19:27 +0000
Message-ID<d9cdmc-nee.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#544496
Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Newsgroup censorship
> 
> All persons in the democracies of the West have the fundamental right to have access to all expressions of knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity, and to express their thoughts publicly.
> 

No they don't; they have the fundamental right to be free of censorship
by the GOVERNMENT.

This means you can stand on a soap box in the public park and spew to
you hearts content, but no non-governmental entity has to pay any
attention to you at all.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544544

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 15:21 -0600
Message-ID<n716cg$ga2$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544496
On 1/11/2016 12:41 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> Newsgroup censorship
>
> All persons in the democracies of the West have the fundamental right to have access
> to all expressions of knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity, and to express
> their thoughts publicly.

No, Peter, you do not.

In the capitalist democracies of the West:
- People may be required to pay for access to some expressions of 
knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity.
- Many expressions of knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity 
are explicitly controlled editorially, which means that submissions by 
contributors can be accepted, rejected, or modified at the negotiation 
between contributor and editor. This applies to the 
letters-to-the-editor section of the newspaper, to book publishers, to 
magazine publishers, to news organizations, to television channels, to 
moderated online message boards.
- You may not have air time to express your views in restaurants, 
libraries, city streets, concert halls, shops, movie theaters, or police 
stations, unless you've been given prior permission to do so.

You do have the right to express yourself, though not necessarily to the 
audience you desire and not necessarily for free. You always have the 
option of creating a web page or a blog site for no cost to you, but you 
will have to create your own audience for it. You do not have the right 
to have access to any channel's audience you desire.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 1 of 6  [1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web