I think this movie sums up this forum. It's about a man who goes looking for a resident in a small town. What he doesn't know is that the resident he is looking for was murdered by the townspeople for being Japanese-American. The reason he is being sought is to be given his son's Purple Heart who died in combat.
And with this forum, if a person wants to pursue a working Bessler wheel, he will offend the senior members of this forum. I can show threads from a few years ago where I was close but the leaders of this forum discredited my work. It is for the most part what the regular members do. After all, I posted some of Bessler's drawings and clues together and nothing but worthless posting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMpV93HPktk
Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
Moderator: scott
James, a working wheel doesn't stop working because of a sudden opinion of forum-'leaders', just as it's also highly unlikely to work on mere hope.
It is simply highly probable a wheel doesn't work for an enormous amounts of reasons.
One reason for example: a wheel will not work by simply following or believing some ancient text or person, at most that explains your line of thought and the direction of the attempt- which are all irrelevant for the actual wheel or mechanism in question.
The basis of all this "negativity" is simply science: You shouldn't even believe yourself, and avoid the invisible confirmation-bias. Confirmation should be objective and measurable.
I haven't checked, but I guess the majority of your experienced resistance is directed towards your possible confirmation-bias or is otherwise not wheel-related .
There's only a single reason a wheel might work: A real life model, working anyway - independent of hope, believe, discredit or other unrelated thing.
In such case: Kudos for the achievement !
(And now the rest of us have to hope it's not fraudulent in any way, especially when there's nothing to measure objectively)
When you have a working device and passed it through this website, you need it to get past the global science community:
If you think this forum was tough, you'll find this new group even less cooperative.
It is simply highly probable a wheel doesn't work for an enormous amounts of reasons.
One reason for example: a wheel will not work by simply following or believing some ancient text or person, at most that explains your line of thought and the direction of the attempt- which are all irrelevant for the actual wheel or mechanism in question.
The basis of all this "negativity" is simply science: You shouldn't even believe yourself, and avoid the invisible confirmation-bias. Confirmation should be objective and measurable.
I haven't checked, but I guess the majority of your experienced resistance is directed towards your possible confirmation-bias or is otherwise not wheel-related .
There's only a single reason a wheel might work: A real life model, working anyway - independent of hope, believe, discredit or other unrelated thing.
In such case: Kudos for the achievement !
(And now the rest of us have to hope it's not fraudulent in any way, especially when there's nothing to measure objectively)
When you have a working device and passed it through this website, you need it to get past the global science community:
If you think this forum was tough, you'll find this new group even less cooperative.
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
re: Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
This might be addressed by increasing the minimum posts that trigger participation in the rep system to something more than 1, say 10.Mark wrote:...all it takes to activate a sockpuppet's ability to influence the rep system is a single post by that member account. A post of any kind would suffice; "Oops, sorry... I changed my mind." - "post deleted" - an empty post with nothing but a 'period' - a spam link - etc.
The participation number has been surprisingly consistent over the years - around 24 participating members at any given time. With around 7.4 billion people currently in the world, that means each of us represents about one in 300 million! Aren't we a special lot :Dagor95 wrote:...I am surprised how low the voter numbers are...
Bill is wrong as usual. The reputation participation rate has in the past been well over 100 members. It currently stands at 33 people giving a vote and 76 people receiving a vote. With 31 members at the "Acknowledged" level and 5 members at the "Appreciated" level.Bill wrote:The participation number has been surprisingly consistent over the years - around 24 participating members at any given time.
From a few months ago...
Code: Select all
Total Members 1586
Giving a vote 259 16%
Receiving vote 477 30%
Thus there is no basis for Bill's claim of "around 24 participating members at any given time", unless he means 24 forum members all at a same time.
-
Furcurequs
- Devotee
- Posts: 1605
- Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 4:50 am
re: Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
jim_mich,
...erm...
With the quote that Bill was responding to, in its full context, agor95 was quite clearly referring to the low voter numbers on the thread poll. ...not the reputation system.
...erm...
With the quote that Bill was responding to, in its full context, agor95 was quite clearly referring to the low voter numbers on the thread poll. ...not the reputation system.
I guess you might now have to go back and do more research to find out just how wrong Bill is. ...lolagor95 wrote:Also a simple vote on a poll is not that hard. So I am surprised how low the voter numbers are when one is done. It's just a descent thing to do for another member.
I don't believe in conspiracies!
I prefer working alone.
I prefer working alone.
re: Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
Dwayne is obviously correct, my post was about participating member poll votes.
JM continues trying to twist everything to suit his wrong agenda. If JM spent more time getting 'something that works' and less time pursuing his wrong agenda then he might be more productive and less frustrated.
JM continues trying to twist everything to suit his wrong agenda. If JM spent more time getting 'something that works' and less time pursuing his wrong agenda then he might be more productive and less frustrated.
re: Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
Quote Jim "It currently stands at 33 people giving a vote and 76 people receiving a vote."
----------
Am I reading this right ?
33 posters have awarded a vote to 76 posters . So 76 - 33 = 43 or 56.6% of posters have not voted , and presumably they qualify to vote otherwise they wouldn't qualify to receive a vote !
In other words a psycho babbler might say they are analy retentive , ie they value their shit to an inordinate degree and probably suffer from constipation .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_retentiveness
So if we had photo ID's of all forum members , these would be the ones with red faces and bulging eyes and who look like they grunt a fair bit .
I think photo IDs for all forum members would allow us to see the Sockpuppets in their true light : )
----------
Am I reading this right ?
33 posters have awarded a vote to 76 posters . So 76 - 33 = 43 or 56.6% of posters have not voted , and presumably they qualify to vote otherwise they wouldn't qualify to receive a vote !
In other words a psycho babbler might say they are analy retentive , ie they value their shit to an inordinate degree and probably suffer from constipation .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_retentiveness
So if we had photo ID's of all forum members , these would be the ones with red faces and bulging eyes and who look like they grunt a fair bit .
I think photo IDs for all forum members would allow us to see the Sockpuppets in their true light : )
Have had the solution to Bessler's Wheel approximately monthly for over 30 years ! But next month is "The One" !
Art, a member may give green or red dot to as many other members are they want. At the time I looked, 33 members had chosen to give dots. And the total number of members receiving the dots which were given was 76. So on average, each member that gave any dots, gave about 1.77 dots. It is obvious many gave a dot to only one member, while other gave dots to a number of members. And many member have not currently given any dots. And many members have received dots but not given any.
As far a far as the poll participation rate, which bill claims as being about 24%, it is actually 18.7 percent over the last 33 polls stretching back over the last five years. And there were a few polls that allowed multiple answers. which I did NOT filter out, and if I had filtered them out, would make the participation rate even lower. So twister Bill's statement of about 24 was way too high.
Anyone can click on the polls icon at the top of each page to view the results of all polls..
Art, there are hundreds of poster that have not given dots. Before the reset, there were over 250 members that had given dots.
As far a far as the poll participation rate, which bill claims as being about 24%, it is actually 18.7 percent over the last 33 polls stretching back over the last five years. And there were a few polls that allowed multiple answers. which I did NOT filter out, and if I had filtered them out, would make the participation rate even lower. So twister Bill's statement of about 24 was way too high.
Anyone can click on the polls icon at the top of each page to view the results of all polls..
Art, there are hundreds of poster that have not given dots. Before the reset, there were over 250 members that had given dots.
re: Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
I did a bit of reading of the reputation system.
There is no cost in hitting the Green Dot. So dot as many virtuous members as possible. Then revoke when they are fall form grace
So if we have an active Green/Revoke Dot community then games theory will have a chance.
It would be good to have a poll on something, as an event, then remove the old polls. That would get the culture in motion and statistics improving.
You loss points for Red Dots so lets flip to the other direction.
There is no cost in hitting the Green Dot. So dot as many virtuous members as possible. Then revoke when they are fall form grace
So if we have an active Green/Revoke Dot community then games theory will have a chance.
It would be good to have a poll on something, as an event, then remove the old polls. That would get the culture in motion and statistics improving.
You loss points for Red Dots so lets flip to the other direction.
re: Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
A candidate POLL Event would be to delete old User IDS.
example: Last Login 12 months o more and Post count less than
0 - 5
6 - 9
etc
Should be created by Admin.
Also POLL Event for moderator elections :-)
example: Last Login 12 months o more and Post count less than
0 - 5
6 - 9
etc
Should be created by Admin.
Also POLL Event for moderator elections :-)
re: Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
@Scott
What happens if the Polls older that Jan 1st 2016 were removed?
Does the post present in the Polls vanish?
Do we need the any old Polls for Historic reasons?
Regards
What happens if the Polls older that Jan 1st 2016 were removed?
Does the post present in the Polls vanish?
Do we need the any old Polls for Historic reasons?
Regards
Why are you guys trying to trash the forum. Past polls are historical records. Why would you ever want to delete them?
Your reputation reset has already caused me problems. I was researching some posts made a number of years ago, and I was wondering if the forum member had gained a good reputation or a bad reputation. But, dang, such info had been scrapped, simply because a few members didn't like the reputation of other members, and wanted to wipe clean the reputation gained over many years. Thus the Rep system became a current popularity contest rather than a helpful tool for knowing if a member had a good Rep or a bad Rep.
And now you want to wipe clean the past polls? Why?
Your reputation reset has already caused me problems. I was researching some posts made a number of years ago, and I was wondering if the forum member had gained a good reputation or a bad reputation. But, dang, such info had been scrapped, simply because a few members didn't like the reputation of other members, and wanted to wipe clean the reputation gained over many years. Thus the Rep system became a current popularity contest rather than a helpful tool for knowing if a member had a good Rep or a bad Rep.
And now you want to wipe clean the past polls? Why?
re: Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System
1) I take great offense by your accusation that my efforts were an attempt to trash the forum.jim-mich wrote:Why are you guys trying to trash the forum. Past polls are historical records. Why would you ever want to delete them?
Your reputation reset has already caused me problems. I was researching some posts made a number of years ago, and I was wondering if the forum member had gained a good reputation or a bad reputation. But, dang, such info had been scrapped, simply because a few members didn't like the reputation of other members, and wanted to wipe clean the reputation gained over many years. Thus the Rep system became a current popularity contest rather than a helpful tool for knowing if a member had a good Rep or a bad Rep.
And now you want to wipe clean the past polls? Why?
2) The rep reset was entirely Scott's idea, no one suggested it.
3) Apparently you missed my comment regarding the usefulness of the rep system?