上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 230

[–]Jerror 232 ポイント233 ポイント  (4子コメント)

So, u/quaz4r did something you disagree with but which by common opinion (judging by the comments in this thread) was harmless, and you publicly move to have him removed because you are afraid he'll eventually "demod and silence you" because you "got on the wrong side of an issue someday" (your comments in this thread). Your other complaint is that he doesn't use his mod powers enough --- and you claim it's only necessary he step down because as top mod he has additional powers he can abuse.

Speaking for myself, if the only thing special about being top mod is this potential to abuse power, I'd much rather have someone who is less active -- less apparently invested in their position -- as top mod than someone who would demand blood over the above complaints. I deeply appreciate everything you do here and I'll be at the front of the mob if /u/quaz4r abuses his power over you, but for now I vote he stay.

[–]CondMatTheorist 129 ポイント130 ポイント  (2子コメント)

[...] if the only thing special about being top mod is this potential to abuse power, I'd much rather have someone who is less active -- less apparently invested in their position -- as top mod than someone who would demand blood over the above complaints.

Thank you for putting the underlying irony of this thread in such clear terms. This is spot on.

[–]nsa_shill 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Something something those who seek power something something...

[–]Rufus_Reddit 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Got to love that user name with that message.

[–]atomuk 41 ポイント42 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm here from r/all and I have to agree with you but in regards to this:

Speaking for myself, if the only thing special about being top mod is this potential to abuse power, I'd much rather have someone who is less active

My initial thought when reading through this drama was that the ability to abuse power is exactly what the end goal to this request was.

[–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 406 ポイント407 ポイント  (59子コメント)

To clear the record, I seem to have received no PMs from any of the mods about this, I have no intention of removing any of the mods, and I have a very hands-off/"poll our subscribers about what rules they want first" policy when it comes to moderating (I admittedly miss zephir) that is orthogonal to how they wanted to run the sub so I stepped out of those tasks, esp after the automod was set up. Other than polling users after a switch of moderation, this is the only post I've ever stickied. My single ban, my only ever, was temporary ban on a user that was being aggressive-- there were plenty that were objecting in the thread, so I reject the notion that I am "silencing my critics".

*I can't really defend myself when the argument is already 50 comments deep and lacking my perspective by the time I'm aware of its existence, and I won't try to do so anymore. I will reiterate that I didn't receive any messages from anyone while the post was stickied (which politely requested the other mods might tolerate it for three days, and if there were objections I would have been willing to work it out). I think it is wrong to make a post like this to get the readers on "your side" before even messaging me. You've painted some image of me that I don't think is accurate.

[–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 174 ポイント175 ポイント  (3子コメント)

True story, I actually found out about this because my colleague IRL came up to me after lunch and said, "haha, /r/physics is blowing up with drama right now, did you see?"

[–]brlftzday 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Doesn't that backup the OP point about non-involvement a bit? I have no opinion on the overall issue, just thought that was interesting.

[–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm certainly not defending the idea that I'm involved. Early on I stopped being involved because they pushed back on everything I wanted to do in a really bitter manner, so it kinda felt like they didn't want or need my input. So it goes.

This is more to address their version of reality -- the one in which they've tried contacting me constantly, and that I'm some tryant that ignores their plight and i threaten them or something like that. They jumped the gun and posted without me knowing they even had the slightest ill will towards me

[–]Gelsamel 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Skipping past all the drama though: If you're not involved then surely there is no loss in resigning from top mod position?

Don't get me wrong, I don't really buy the idea that you're some tyrant and I don't have much of an opinion on how the sub has been run since it is a casual affair for me in any case. I even strongly support the cause of that thread you stickied.

But let's set that aside; If you aren't involved it doesn't matter if you're a mod or not, and so any non-zero benefit (say, for example, slightly assuaging another mod's personal gripes on the issue) is worth the resignation. Why shouldn't the community support the OP on this basis alone?

I'm sure you have a good reason to be top mod, let us know; or don't, I don't actually care.

[–]noottAstrophysics 103 ポイント104 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I fail to see any problem here. They've presented no evidence of wrongdoing... It sounds like they just want the top mod spot like in /r/atheism a couple years ago.

[–]SILENTSAM69 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (1子コメント)

That was a disaster.

[–]noottAstrophysics 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And it was so obviously a coup. Their reasoning was that they didn't think memes or political cartoons were high level enough discussion. The sub has basically reverted to what it was before -- with an extra 30 mods or so.

[–]StaticiUndergraduate 38 ポイント39 ポイント  (6子コメント)

(I admittedly miss zephir)

Hehe, tbh so do I. He was a fun, predictable source of conspiracy junk, and having such junk around accurately portrays some of the physics world. It's good to promote the scientific discussion of physics, but it's also important to include the public - including the crackheads - if only to demonstrate that they are wrong.

Zephir put out the same arguments each time, and they were always downvoted to oblivion, and given direct critique. Sure, some people got tired of it, but think about it this way: Someone who doesn't know much about physics, but who has been exposed to such nonsense, comes to reddit. They don't see one ounce of that nonsense, and have no way to contrast it from legitimate physics. Keeping a few crackheads around lets people scroll through, see the nonsense, and quickly understand why it's nonsense.

Many people will disagree with me here, but I still think relegating 50% of truly curious posts to /r/askphysics is a bad idea. That subreddit is filled with people asking for homework help and has a pitiful number of subscribers; half the time, those that actually reply, don't know what they're talking about! The actual physicists reside in this subreddit and by filtering the content too much we're depriving the public of understanding.

Anyways, there's my rant. >.>

[–]fuckspellingerrors 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

u/Zephir_AW AKA u/ZephirAWT AKA u/Zephir_banned_baned is still an avid commenter on r/emdrive. He's really into the EM drive and cold fusion these days. He even has his own personal crackpot repository at r/Physics_AWT. Be sure to subscribe there for the latest updates on all things crackpot pseudoscience.

The Chronicles of Zephir.

[–]cdstephensGraduate 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

TBH actually I spend most of my time in /r/askphysics than /r/physics. Heck, I spend more time in /r/math than /r/physics. This subreddit seems to have a severe lack of interesting content and discussions; maybe relegating curiosity to /r/askphysics is a part of the problem? Mods should look at what /r/math is doing towards maintaining an engaged community.

[–]WodashitParticle physics 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The problem is the core demographics of the two communities, most of the time we attract sensationalistic news, when /r/math technically only attract already interested and versed people.

That's why we had the weekly threads to focus the discussions in one single place and maximise interaction.

BTW if you have ideas don't hesitate to share them.

[–]StaticiUndergraduate 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

most of the time we attract sensationalistic news

Yeah, that about sums it up :\ weekly threads only do so much, and if anything they kind of give people with questions for open discussion the boot - that is, "save questions for the thread, subreddit posts are reserved for OC links."

idk what is getting removed, but honestly, if it is honest physics questions, STOP. I would rather see a thousand questions than a thousand links to phys.org. The sensationalist linkage of every new usage of graphene is great, but I'm sure most people already know graphene is great, and unless this new usage implies new physics, or induces a good condensed matter discussion, it shouldn't be filling up the subreddit. If we are to filter anything out, it should be posts about well-known phenomena shared without the author at least adding a single comment to describe why they found it interesting, or to ask a question.

This is kind of what I look at our subreddit like and think. Note that NONE of these links are to actual publications - not a single one. Why not? Because they get downvoted or completely ignored under the swaths of sensationalist articles, posts without actual discussion, and "fun" videos! I know that there are a lot of non-physicists on this board, but I don't think they are the source of the problem. I think it's the fact that the overall attitude has shifted to encourage these kinds of posts. To encourage debate, we need to let through more question posts, and filter out the sensationalist crap - but only that crap which has 0 meaningful comments in it after 10-15 minutes of being posted. Anyone who visits here should first see an interacting community, not a bunch of sensationalist crap threads full of comments that don't even remotely talk about physics.

Anyways, second rant over :)

[–]zabblleon 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think another poll of users considering this proposal would be appropriate.

[–]pkaro 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You seem super chill about this, so I'm totally going with your side of this little tempest.

[–]saiyate -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (10子コメント)

Seems like /u/Wodashit is committed to doing lots of hard work for the channel. Doesn't the top mod slot deserve to be in the hands of the active circle? If /u/quaz4r doesn't participate in modding, doesn't that pretty much end the argument? Just step down, get remodded so you can stay involved on occasion. You retain all your powers and you let the people who WANT to do the work, DO the work.

[–]hoyfkd 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (3子コメント)

There is no substantial difference in mod powers for the top mod vs others. The only distinction is the ability to demod others below you on the list. The day to day, sub related capabilities are the same.

[–]John_Barlycorn -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

And that isn't reason enough? If the top mod is disinterested in the sub, that's very bad. Many other subs have had top mods vanish for years, only to have their account get hacked... and the hacker demods the entire mod team and starts spamming adverts. It's a real issue. If you don't have the time to be a top mod, don't be.

[–]G-E-B 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Many other subs

When has this happened? How many times? Why is it more of a risk for an inactive top mod than an active top mod?

[–]John_Barlycorn -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Given that, when it happens, after it's fixed, the mods end up having to delete everything and clean up the sub, it's hard to get numbers. But it's most certainly happened. Specifically: /r/astrophysics/ was hijacked about 3 months ago. All the spam and drug posts are gone now, I'm assuming deleted but one of the worst spammers is still listed as a mod: UNIVERSEnema

I'll leave it to you to look up his posts, I don't want him in this thread so don't link him directly. Read his posts, you'll understand why fairly quickly.

[–]AliveInTheFuture -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I prefer my reddit to have very little mod activity. The average day OP described sounds liked tyranny to me. There's no need for it.

[–]peteroh9Astrophysics 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It sounds to me like all of the stuff that mods of all big subreddits do without anyone realizing it because they're doing their job. Reddit without mods is a cesspool of spam and harassment. Perhaps he could let the crackpots go for the reasons /u/quaz4r described but reddit can become very terrible without mods.

[–]jesuz 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

sounds liked tyranny

here we go....

[–]Certhas 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The best scientific subreddit is askhistorian. Nothing else on reddit even comes close in terms of quality and substance.

[–]Lord_of_the_Trees -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is the most fair solution in my opinion, hi from r/all

[–][削除されました]  (24子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]G-E-B 41 ポイント42 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I can't have the threat of you de-modding me for your perceptions of my politics and biases, especially when we aren't in communication.

    Did /u/quaz4r actually threaten to de-mod you, or even confront you about what they perceived as your political biases? If so, you did not mention it at all in your original post. If not, this whole thing is completely spurious.

    [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 47 ポイント48 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I have never threatened any of the mods about anything, ever. Nor any of the users, except for the one I temp banned. Historically, I step down on my position when disagreements crop up because I'd prefer to avoid conflict. They wanted to run the sub a certain way and I didn't fight it, and then I got busy IRL. I don't think they've ever sent me messages complaining about my behavior either. In fact, since the conversations in the sub I posted a link to, which occurred over 2 years ago, we haven't really communicated. I am unaware of other mods' feelings because I was not invited to those conversations, if they actually happened.

    [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 89 ポイント90 ポイント  (21子コメント)

    I'm not going to unmod anyone. I think my temp ban of one user was reasonable--people have been banned for far less in this sub. I don't understand where any of this fear is coming from.

    Edit: Dude, don't delete your post because people are downvoting it. That's shady. http://imgur.com/a/HEWcK

    Edit2: Here are the other two posts that were deleted below http://imgur.com/a/eta0c

    [–]WodashitParticle physics[M] -48 ポイント-47 ポイント  (11子コメント)

    Because you don't communicate and take actions on behalf of us all without concertation.

    If this is the definition you have of democracy I fail to see where it fits.

    Many of us have devoted time to this sub and taken action to make this place a neutral forum for discussion for people focussed on physics.

    The only contribution you gave were rushed, one sided and looking for an "ideal", failing to see other people's concern, as your sticky proves it.

    Of course the user was rude, you broke the very core rules that we established in the sub and he was vocal about it, you didn't like it so you removed him. We removed people because they were being agressive without cause, you can't blame people on being angry because a neutral forum become politicized because one person decides to do so.

    Don't act like you are the victim, this is the direct consequences of your actions and your behaviour over the years. But as usual you'll dismiss it and assume that you are the beholder of the only truth.

    I, as all the other mods that I talk with regularly, never assumed that we were right and we always listened to all arguments and trying to bring the peace. I clearly remember a time when I was arguing with you and you didn't even read my argument because you were in disagreement with part of my statement, this is not how dealing with people should be, this is not how science should be conducted either.

    Modding doesn't mean that you have the privilege of getting YOUR forum, it stands for keeping the peace and trying to be as objective as you could.

    If you had come to us and talked with us, this wouldn't be here, this wouldn't have happened, again this was brought by your actions.

    [–]shtonkalot 33 ポイント34 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    and take actions on behalf of us all without concertation.

    Examples?

    you broke the very core rules that we established in the sub and he was vocal about it, you didn't like it so you removed him.

    Evidence? (particularly of the user removed without good reason)

    this is the direct consequences of your actions and your behaviour over the years

    Which actions and behaviour? Can you show us what you are talking about?

    I mean if the mod is being a dick then they should be outed for it. But I can't see any evidence other than a couple of mods bickering.

    If the argument is the last sticky post was out of line and unwarranted then I believe this post is just as much. Seems both have been allowed, maybe it's time to find another physics sub where the mods can sort their shit privately and leave the sub for... physics.

    [–]hasbrochemChemical physics 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (5子コメント)

    About a year ago, there was a shit storm over on r/exmormon where one mod de-modded one below them and this led to the one that was de-modded posting the entirety of mod mail conversations for everyone to see--not a good thing. It ended up with most the entire mod team being restructured and someone who is not very active being placed as the top mod, since they can come in as an impartial voice to settle disputes. Without the leaking of modmail, though, there wouldn't have been proof of what each of the mods were claiming about each other. I'm not defending either mod here, I think this is childish and stupid, I'm just giving my two cents on one possibility for why they might not be providing the supposed "evidence." The first rule of being a mod is you don't talk about what happens behind the scenes. lolz

    [–]shtonkalot 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    The first rule of being a mod is you don't talk about what happens behind the scenes. lolz

    Well that doesn't apply here any more does it?

    [–]CondMatTheorist 93 ポイント94 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    This doesn't sound like a calm, rational discussion.

    This is childish, and totally inappropriate for this sub. The only possible result of your behavior is to start a witch hunt, and I think you know that. You keep saying that all of the other moderators have discussed this, but there're only the two of you here, and now /u/quaz4r disputes the "facts" you keep citing without evidence, so I'm not even inclined to believe that part of the story anymore.

    [–]MontagAbides 64 ポイント65 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Seriously. The original post here seems totally reasonable. Then I read /u/quaz4r's comment history and it also seemed totally reasonable. It looks like someone got a temporary ban for flipping out, cursing, and calling everyone Hillary shills?

    Are people trying to get him de-modded for allowing discussions about the recent travel bans? I've literally got two colleagues who might not be able to return to the country, and several more who are very worried. Discussing such things is totally reasonable and I likewise don't see why we should allow people to get super aggressive in a way that would normally never be tolerated here.

    [–]pipsdontsqueak 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Why would someone even feel the need to call someone else a Hillary shill in a forum about physics?

    [–]G-E-B 82 ポイント83 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Given the timing, this does not come across as a genuine, good-faith grievance about how /u/quaz4r moderates. You may have real concerns about their activities (or lack thereof) in this subreddit, but this post strongly appears to be just as politically motivated as the one they made a few days ago, if only more circumspect.

    Importantly, you only have one example of them "silencing their critics" (a charge that ought to be taken very seriously), but the banned user was exhibiting behavior that could have been reasonably described as trolling. It is significant that another user who was expressing nearly identical opinions does not appear to have been banned. (ETA: I went back to the other thread and saw what I assume is the comment that got the user in question temporarily banned. In it, they called quaz4r a "man-hating, neoliberal Nazi." How on Earth does that qualify as "silencing critics," /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics?)

    At another time this would have seemed like a very reasonable request to make, but as it is I can't help but suspect that you are doing this either because you disagree with the /u/quaz4r's political views or because you saw an opportunity to increase your power in the subreddit. If you decided to make this post because you are strongly opposed to anything even tangentially political slipping into the subreddit, I suggest you make that argument openly. That's the only good-faith motivation that strikes me as even remotely plausible right now.

    [–]ghostsarememories 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    The only thing that maybe could have been done differently is that /u/quaz4r could have asked another mod to temp-ban the banned user. It provides a second set of eyes and some independence.

    Still should have been banned though.

    [–]WodashitParticle physics -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Hey, no real question about that, but we usually discuss before taking actions.

    [–]Xxslash 257 ポイント258 ポイント  (12子コメント)

    Im just curious why this could not be handled in private?

    [–]TsaraNoga_Chemical physics 155 ポイント156 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    This seems like an immature way of handling the issue, further compounded by the ad-hominem argument. How is this anything more than an attempted power-grab via popularity contest by /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics?

    [–]jmac8122 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    u/wodashit seemed to touch on this in his edit. If u/CarbonRodOfPhysics expresses these same concerns privately, and u/quaz4r gets offended/angry/whatever and bans Carbon Rod, then he can't get the word out and nothing changes. By doing it publicly first, he made sure he wouldn't be silenced.

    That's just how I interpreted the situation. Please correct me if I'm wrong

    [–]MontagAbides 62 ポイント63 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    But there are almost no indications that /u/quaz4r is going on witch-hunts and regularly perma-banning anyone.

    [–]G-E-B 50 ポイント51 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    In fact, there is evidence that they have not done that. This is a mod that appears to have only ever handed out a single temporary ban.

    [–]idiotsecant 70 ポイント71 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    So it sounds to me like the top mod stickied a post and banned a user. Is this somehow keeping you from moderating? I don't understand why anyone is making drama on this.

    [–]AristocraticOctopus 54 ポイント55 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    As someone with no dog in this - here's my summary.

    CarbonRod's original post almost had me convinced, but upon further reading it's clear their (along with Wodashit's) claims are poorly supported by evidence. quaz4r clearly has no intention of policing, so the narrative of the mods being scared to do their work seems kind of ridiculous. This strikes me as a power grab. There's not even productivity tools to be gained by becoming top-mod, the only additional power it gives them is the ability to remove quaz4r. Furthermore, most of the claims made are misleading at best, which certainly doesn't support their case. Add to this the fact that they have deleted some of their own comments - it should be clear just what's going on to everyone. One teaspoonful too much ad hominem.

    [–]Cletus_awreetusAstrophysics 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I've read through this whole thing, and it's actually a bit perplexing how poorly CarbonRodOfPhysics and Wodashit are communicating their arguments. All I can get from it all is that quaz4r made a single, relevant, important post about the current state of affairs for science in the United States and stickied it without telling the other mods, and so they are very pissy about it. And they're using that as a reason for quaz4r to step down?

    Also, I must say that as someone who is a member of the scientific community at an American university, the current political state of affairs in the U.S. makes up the majority of what scientists are talking about. It is a big and very relevant issue.

    [–]derivative_of_life 179 ポイント180 ポイント  (23子コメント)

    Oh boy, here we go. I'll see you guys on /r/SubredditDrama.

    [–]dukwonParticle physics 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    It's probably not dramatic enough for SRD... yet

    [–]dlgn13Undergraduate 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    SRD isn't that bad, /r/drama is the fucked up one

    [–]CarbonRodOfPhysics[S,M] 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (12子コメント)

    I know I started this, but I really do want it to end civilly and productively. I think the solution I proposed is fair. I don't need to tear down u/quaz4r. I just want to know that if I put my time and effort into this sub that I won't have my work shit-canned someday and find myself de-modded because I got on the wrong side of an issue.

    [–]hoyfkd 48 ポイント49 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    If you want top mod spot, go start your own sub. The guy making your burger doesn't get to own the joint just because the owner isn't bussing tables.

    [–]DrunkenPhysicistParticle physics 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    IIRC the sub was started by some other dude, fauster or something.

    [–]RhinoDoom 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    How is it fair? You're just trying to move to a position where you can de-mod someone instead of him. It also seems like you're only doing it out of fear you might take your mod powers too far and make some people angry.

    [–]ghostsarememories 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I won't have my work shit-canned someday

    Your previous (valuable) work as a mod stands alone and can't be "shitcanned". If there is a rogue/vindictive demodding, you can appeal to the other mods who can raise the issue.

    A relatively inactive top-mod is great. An active top-mod risks not seeing the forest for the trees.

    [–]aidrocsid 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    If that were true you'd have tried to handle it in private. As it stands now I take this sub and its staff a lot less seriously than I did just a few minutes ago. You've already undermined your work.

    [–]pat82890 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    No please keep this up, I'm a whore for this kinda stuff

    [–]derivative_of_life 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    No, your post seems perfectly reasonable to me given that I know absolutely nothing about the issue. It's still probably gonna cause a bunch of drama, though.

    [–]Chewcocca 64 ポイント65 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    The only one I can see here making demands due to political beliefs is /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics. There is nothing reasonable about it.

    "I can't trust him with this power because he might abuse it even though he never has! ...Also, unrelated, I demand this power for myself."

    Seems super legit.

    [–]WodashitParticle physics 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Actually he wasn't going to take more power because it would be regua becoming top mod if quaz4r decided to step down.

    Just saying.

    [–]cl3ft 26 ポイント27 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I'd like to think /r/physics could have a flame war with explosions and lasers too.

    [–]cdstephensGraduate 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    If you wanted to be productive you wouldn't have made this a public discussion.

    [–]Sysiphuslove 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    It has to stop sometime. Half the site is unusable (or at least wildly annoying).

    [–]Final_Day 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Absolutely bizarre and very embarrassing. Let's drop all pretense of trying to be a professional science subreddit right now.

    [–]personalist 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Your "evidence" link is blank...

    [–]JolteonLescott 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    It's all just a popularity contest

    [–]Esparno 70 ポイント71 ポイント  (5子コメント)

    I'm not sure I follow the logic in this post. You've given us no statistically significant evidence of moderator abuse, you should know that one piece of evidence isn't enough.

    Besides, what purpose does the top mod removing himself have if it just goes to the next person in line?

    I'm not well-versed in how the reddit moderator system works. Is there some sort of group hierarchy, or does it just go with whoever is the next in line? Otherwise you're just replacing a stable, if somewhat absent, person with an unknown.

    Additionally, if the top mod removing himself spreads the authority out that might turn out fine. But since there's no possible way a group of people all have the same standards when it comes to vetting a new mod it could allow power moderators (mod 100's of subs, unhealthily make it their life's work) to join and push their agendas.

    [–]Enderthe3rd 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Statistically significant evidence of moderator abuse

    That's a term for analyzing quantitative data. This is a fundamentally qualitative subject.

    [–]tyrannyLovesCookies 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    Couldn't the subject be quantified though? For instance, CarbonRodOfPhysics could show timestamps of sent messages to quaz4r thereby supporting his claim that they continually try to get in contact. Better yet, CarbonRod could show quaz4r's ban history (of repeated censorship) in order to reinforce his reasoning behind wanting to de-mod quaz4r.

    The argument seems to be that quaz4r continually blows off other mods and censors users, which could be statistically supported with some report regarding its frequency.

    [–]Enderthe3rd 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    This is actually a great example of the over-quantification of fundamentally qualitative subjects.

    Could you try and come up with some quantitative evidence to make the case? Sure, you can try and quantify anything. Would the method be completely arbitrary, with too small of a sample size, and you could ultimately manipulate the numbers to say whatever you want it to say? Absolutely.

    In other words, to answer your question at the top: "Couldn't the subject be quantified though?" Yes it could. Would it be useful in this context to answering the underlying question? Almost certainly not.

    [–]tyrannyLovesCookies 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    But wouldn't knowing the frequency of attempted contact (from CarbonRod to quaz4r) be useful? Or is that what you mean by the sample size being to small?

    [–]Enderthe3rd 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Oh yea, there are certainly some numbers that Carbon could use to make his case, or that quaz4r could use to make hers.

    But in no way would the phrase 'statistically significant' even apply, which is what I was mocking with my original comment.

    [–]CondMatTheorist 97 ポイント98 ポイント  (24子コメント)

    I didn't follow the stickied thread, except to read it when initially posted. However, your links hardly combine to make a compelling case:

    You don't moderate, except to sticky your posts and silence your critics.

    One stickied post, and one suspended user who, let's be real, doesn't do himself any favors in his defense ("go protest and kill and riot like the rest of your politically like minded morons" ... Woof. If he was behaving like that before the suspension, is that not suspension worthy?)

    There's no such thing as "political neutrality." If this sub refuses to address issues at the intersection of Physics and Politics, it is making a political choice. One that, in some situations, could be unforgivable (since we're all playing slippery slope here, is it going to be okay to comment here on Donald Trump's ban of Jewish Physics?) and that would, and should!, alienate a different segment of "sincere subscribers."

    We've hardly seen your account over the years. When you do show up, it's to push your own agenda by stickying and mod-flairing your appeals.

    Just this recent one, unless there's something I'm missing? The only other thing in the list that's mod-flaired is facilitating an in person meet-up at an APS meeting (which is the kind of thing that builds community on a subreddit, and that good mods should want to facilitate...), so unless by "agenda" you literally mean "schedule" I'm not sure what agenda is being pushed in that list.

    So, it's not like I even disagree with the request, I just don't see what the hell the big deal is and why you couldn't have handled this in a private communication with /u/quaz4r. This just looks really self-serving on your part.

    [–]CarbonRodOfPhysics[S,M] -31 ポイント-30 ポイント  (23子コメント)

    One stickied post,

    While it did interfere with the bot that keeps the usual stickies operating smoothly, and did make more work for us, that's not the point. The point is that u/quaz4r won't communicate, won't work with me, won't work with the mod team, won't even give us a heads up, and then acts to undercut us.

    There's no such thing as "political neutrality." If this sub refuses to address issues at the intersection of Physics and ...

    Again, you're focusing on the wrong thing. If you look through my history you'll find my emphatic defense of the appropriateness of politics in this sub, and my commitment to defend political discussion in the future. I want a calm, even, and fair discussion, u/quaz4r's posts don't support that style. If she would be willing to work with us, we could get a lot more done, actually present balanced rhetoric that could have a chance of winning support instead of just stirring up the passions of the polarized bases.

    This just looks really self-serving on your part.

    Of course it's self-serving. I want something. I want to keep donating my time to r/physics. But I can't do that knowing that there is a random top mod who could fire me at any for crossing her.

    [–]Shastamasta 80 ポイント81 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    This is essentially a call-out/witch-hunt thread in my opinion, but your case is extremely weak. I do not see mod abuse here given what little evidence you supplied. Discussing this in private would have been a better course of action as others have said. This has been a good community overall aside from this thread.

    [–]Vulpyne 28 ポイント29 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    But I can't do that knowing that there is a random top mod who could fire me at any for crossing her.

    Unless you were the top mod, wouldn't you always have the problem?

    And if you were the top mod, why couldn't the next person on the list bring up the same complaint if it was a valid one?

    [–]G-E-B 43 ポイント44 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    The point is that u/quaz4r won't communicate, won't work with me, won't work with the mod team, won't even give us a heads up, and then acts to undercut us.

    I simply can't believe you when you say that's the point. This was very obviously motivated by a single post, not a history of behavior. (E.g., don't talk about "silencing critics" when you really mean one temporary ban for grossly uncivil behavior.)

    But I can't do that knowing that there is a random top mod who could fire me at any for crossing her.

    This is critical: Why do you believe that is a genuine risk? If that's what it all comes down to, that you feel like you might be kicked out at any time, why have all your complaints about /u/quaz4r focused on other things?

    [–]shtonkalot 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    This. I think someone got shitty with someone else and now they are the worst person ever.

    Does the character of u/quaz4r need to be questioned? Is there not evidence of the things the other mods have a problem with? Question the actions there are evidence of and we can all see what the problem is.

    If it's just about that one thread that one time... Sort your shit out and get on with the modding. Don't need to make another one off drama post to combat the last one.

    [–]Esparno 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (5子コメント)

    But I can't do that knowing that there is a random top mod who could fire me at any for crossing her.

    But that's how reddit works. Each sub is a dictatorship. Subject to hostile takeovers and everything.

    I don't like it this way, but I am powerless to change it.

    [–]CarbonRodOfPhysics[S,M] -13 ポイント-12 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Each sub is a dictatorship.

    No. Each sub has the potential to be a dictatorship. FTFY

    We don't have 500 mods. We have nine. All the other mods are on really good terms. It's nice roundtable. I know that if I fuck up, they'll tell me and give me a chance to fix it. Recent actions show me that I can't trust our current top mod.

    [–]G-E-B 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I know that if I fuck up, they'll tell me and give me a chance to fix it.

    That's not what you did, though. You didn't hold yourself to the same standard that you hold others.

    [–]AvilisterGraduate 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Except, obviously, it is a de facto dictatorship, just like all of the rest of reddit, even if said dictator is benign and somewhat inactive. He can, at any moment, do just what you fear he will - even if there's only a slim possibility of that ever realistically happening. Its horrible, sure, buts its how all of reddit works.

    Look at /r/astrophysics - its a fucking shitfest because of the way reddit mods work. That's just how it is. The mods there are just trolly assholes who sometimes (like the present, though I suspect not forever) pretend to clean the sub up and will shortly revert it to weed and memes.

    That said, I tend to agree with what I saw up the page somewhere. Better a relatively inactive top mod if the rest are active than an active and belligerent one.

    [–]peteroh9Astrophysics 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    It's really more of a de jure dictatorship with a de facto authoritarian oligarchy.

    [–]CondMatTheorist 46 ポイント47 ポイント  (11子コメント)

    Okay. But then why didn't you just say those things? That seems pretty reasonable.

    All I did was respond to what you posted; if I missed the point, there's some shared responsibility here in communicating the point clearly. It looks like you were making a public list of perceived offenses, and that you greatly overstated them, which is, um, bad. If they aren't the point, it seems silly to bring them up.

    I can't do that knowing that there is a random top mod who could fire me at any for crossing her.

    Maybe, except is there any precedent for this? I don't know what the one user who got suspended was suspended for, but they got pretty abusive in their response to the suspension. If anyone talked to their boss like that, they would get fired; it's pretty far past the point of "criticism."

    Which, again, whatever. My point is still: why couldn't you have handled this privately? The only point of making it public is to try and drum up public support for your side, which you initially did with some pretty misleading statements.

    [–][削除されました]  (10子コメント)

    [deleted]

      [–]CondMatTheorist 38 ポイント39 ポイント  (9子コメント)

      From OP:

      You don't moderate, except to sticky your posts and silence your critics. You don't participate in mod discussions (you were invited but chose to absent yourself). We've hardly seen your account over the years. When you do show up, it's to push your own agenda by stickying and mod-flairing your appeals.

      You write it like objective evidence that /u/quaz4r is acting as some sort of tyrant. One of the above sentences is a useful statement of fact (failure to participate in mod discussions, although this is also the only one without a supporting link for me to confirm this for myself, understandably though), the others are not - when I clicked the links to confirm the evidence, I found that they don't smell like you imply they do. This isn't a distraction, this is your presented reasoning.

      What you actually have is a subjective experience of discomfort about the power dynamic in the current moderation structure. Which I still believe is something that could be handled privately. You say the rest of the mods communicate; if there was unilateral retaliation against you, you could make your case here after the fact, or the other mods would make your case (and sticky it!) for you if there was any consensus that she behaved improperly.

      I think the outcome you're looking for makes plenty of sense, I just find it hard to believe on your words and actions that you honestly "regret the spectacle" present here.

      [–]WodashitParticle physics[M] -27 ポイント-26 ポイント  (6子コメント)

      We tried, we failed to have communication with /u/quaz4r if you take actions such as the ones she took over the time she was a mod, never consorting with us all, the you are pretty much acting as a tyran.

      There is a consensus, he told us what he was going to do I agreed others did but they will talk in due time, don't make it look like this was just "OP" power hungry.

      [–]tyrannyLovesCookies 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Could you provide us with messages you have sent quaz4r regarding this issue? If not the content, even just the timestamps which would support that this is an ongoing issue? That is, that you have in fact been reaching out.

      [–]09028437282 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      This coup is a shit show.

      [–]peteroh9Astrophysics 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Worse than Turkey.

      [–]the_action 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Who knows? Maybe all this was somehow staged by quaz4r to incriminate CarbonRodOfPhysics and to subsequently get rid of all those who are in favor of CarbonRod... In the end quaz4r will get rid of all the other mods as well since they as well could be Carbonists....

      Who to trust anymore?

      [–]Kingy_who 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (3子コメント)

      Do you really not have some form of communication as a team? I really recommended getting some IM service for the mod team, where you can chat shit, talk to each other and coordinate.

      The fact that you didn't even PM your concerns, shows a severe lack of communication that you should probably sort out. Or not, do what you like.

      [–]firefrommoonlight 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Would y'all (mods) please hash this out in private, before discussing further in this thread?

      [–]CondMatTheorist 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Nope... because they weren't involved in any of this. The plot thickens! I've spent the last ten minutes of my lunch break doing a little research into our old modmail and it seems that carbonrod was a mod bot introduced by another mod who quit reddit a year or so ago, and this account is probably under control by wodashit. I am so incredibly amused by this all now

      [–]CondMatTheorist 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Well damn. This got good.

      [–]shtonkalot 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (13子コメント)

      Some of u/CarbonRodOfPhysics comments are deleted. Who did that?

      I reckon it shows a lot if either the complainant is removing their arguments or the accused is removing them.

      [–]TheoryOfSomethingAtomic physics 41 ポイント42 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Considering /u/quaz4r screen-shotted and edited a few of the deleted posts into their post, I'm inclined to think it was the poster of the comments who deleted them, and not a moderator.

      [–]shtonkalot 39 ポイント40 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      For someone that "didn't want to start drama" they did a poor job.

      [–]G-E-B 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (9子コメント)

      I've been told that deletions by mods show up as "[removed]" while deletions by the poster show up as "[deleted]". (A quick check on /r/AskHistorians confirms that all the mod-removed comments are replaced with "[removed]".)

      The missing /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics comments say "[deleted]". I agree that that says a lot about them. Among the removed comments are many of those that I remember as the most immature and spurious in the thread.

      They also no longer appear in the list of moderators. There's some popcorn-worthy drama going on here that us plebes are not seeing.

      [–]CondMatTheorist 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (8子コメント)

      Who is no longer in the list? If you mean CarbonRodOfPhysics, he's still there: https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics/about/moderators (the sidebar list truncates - at the bottom left is a link that says "... and three more")

      [–]G-E-B 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (7子コメント)

      That's weird, I could have sworn that I saw them on the sidebar list earlier today. I was using a different browser, but I don't think that piece of the page formatting changed. Anyway, you're right and I'm an idiot.

      Also, I've been meaning to tell you that if I were conspiratorially inclined I would think that it isn't a coincidence that /u/quaz4r's flair is "Condensed Matter Theory" and you, /u/CondMatTheorist, are here supporting them. Just a coincidence, I'm sure... ;)

      [–]CondMatTheorist 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (4子コメント)

      Well, I won't deny that I'm proud of my tribe.

      That said, the only time I remember actually interacting with /u/quaz4r on this sub was this regrettably bitter exchange that took me forever to fish out: https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics/comments/3ofipo/physicists_trace_origin_of_electromagnetic/ which would make for a long con.

      But kidding aside, I wouldn't even say I'm supporting /u/quaz4r, per se. I'm not stunned by any backlash to the original travel ban post; this is reddit after all. I am stunned by the lack of professionalism on display here by /u/Wodashit and /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics.

      [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      I cringed reading that. Grad school made me very defensive and pissy lol

      [–]CondMatTheorist 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Sorry. :(

      [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I am sorry too

      [–]G-E-B 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      That said, the only time I remember actually interacting with /u/quaz4r on this sub was this regrettably bitter exchange that took me forever to fish out: https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics/comments/3ofipo/physicists_trace_origin_of_electromagnetic/ which would make for a long con.

      Long cons are my favorite kind of cons! In all seriousness, though, I hope you didn't feel like I was attacking you, necessitating the hunt for exculpatory evidence. Although this thread makes me think that some other people might have taken my joke more seriously.

      But kidding aside, I wouldn't even say I'm supporting /u/quaz4r, per se. I'm not stunned by any backlash to the original travel ban post; this is reddit after all. I am stunned by the lack of professionalism on display here by /u/Wodashit and /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics.

      That's fair, I think I'm in more or less the same boat.

      [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      He's still a mod (?)

      And give me some credit dude... if I was going to defend from a fake account, I wouldn't make it so obvious.

      [–]G-E-B 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      He's still a mod (?)

      Right, I meant that I thought earlier that I could see them without clicking the "... and three more" link. Must be my memory playing tricks on me.

      And give me some credit dude... if I was going to defend from a fake account, I wouldn't make it so obvious.

      Ah, but maybe it's meta-cleverness? You're clearly not dumb, so you would never make such an obvious alt, but that's exactly why it's the perfect alt!

      Anyway, it's just a coincidence that made me chuckle.

      [–]cdstephensGraduate 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Damn dude you would have hated Fauster, the current mod is super engaged in maintaining the subreddit by comparison.

      Anyways, is there a particular this couldn't be handled in private? Kinda reeks of validation seeking and asking for a personal army here. Given your deleted posts really it just sounds like you hate the fact that the top mod has a different political stance than you, and I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't let the top mod back on if he were to voluntarily step down.

      [–]CommonIonUndergraduate 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Why is this still stickied?

      [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics refuses to unsticky it

      [–]dukwonParticle physics 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (6子コメント)

      Why is the robot making a post?

      [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I thought I was going crazy. This is the bot right? Who was in charge of this bot? The name of the person who made it is now [deleted] in modmail

      [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      Apparently the bot was /u/SingleMonad 's. But he seems to have deleted his account a while ago. Here is his original introduction. If that's true I'm not surprised he has left reddit.

      It's possible that he handed over the bot to Wodashit, who is now posing as a separate human physics mod under that name.

      /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics , explain what is going on. There have been exactly zero mod mails attempting to contact me... or anyone in over a year. You fabricated this entire story, and truth be told you are the one with no transparency here... no one was informed that there was a change of ownership of this account. I want to know who you are

      [–]dukwonParticle physics 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      I don't know. I'm not getting involved

      [–]quaz4rCondensed Matter Theory 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Very reasonable. I just have insatiable curiosity now

      [–]SILENTSAM69 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Long live u/quaz4r!

      Hip hip hooray!

      [–]WodashitParticle physics[M] 128 ポイント129 ポイント  (20子コメント)

      I personally agree with this message.

      EDIT : Hijacking my top comment just to give some insight on why this is here

      Because top mod and the way the moderation works. The top mod is all powerful and can remove all the people registered as mod after them but not the opposite, this is why you have a certain gradation in mods as you go from top of the list to the bottom, in practice this doesn't exist because we all have equal permissions and keep in contact (Some exceptions exist to that for bots and /u/iorgfeflkd which I hereby salute for his dedication, this one is for you)

      Now, let's say that everyone has perfectly good intentions : we talk in private, we make a case, we agree/disagree and this is good and we can move on.

      Let's say that you have suspicions that one of the party involved, that has more power, for some reasons give you ground to doubt them : If you do it in private, the interested party can ban you and silence you from the community before you could make your case, your only valid move is to go public and make a case with the community to avoid such a situation.

      If you want, in this particular case, that's the only valid thing to do to avoid having a possibility of invisible censorship and that the community needs to be aware of this.

      One of the thing that I want to stress here is that /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics is one of the main reason why the content of /r/Physics improved, for a long time he was the cornerstone architect of the very system that maintained the high quality submissions and comments.

      Haven't you noticed that the quality from the sub went down recently? We went on strike silently, as a protest, to show what the subs becomes without active moderation.

      We are not perfect, I am not perfect /u/CarbonRodOfPhysics is not perfect, but he has always proven that he placed the good of the community above all and always seeked for agreement and counsel with all of us before taking any action, and this post doens't make exception to these rules.

      I hope this clarifies the situation and help people understand why such action was taken.

      EDIT 2 : Going to sleep now a tad late here, hope that people understand what motivated this, I like popcorn as much as the next man, but to be honest I don't like to have my jimmies rustled too much, which happens when people push their view on a forum which is supposed to be neutral and that without concertation with the other people that worked thus far to keep the peace.

      Have all a lovely time around here, I'll come back to this in the morning.

      [–]aidrocsid 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Haven't you noticed that the quality from the sub went down recently? We went on strike silently, as a protest, to show what the subs becomes without active moderation.

      Not even a little bit. Get over yourself. You two sound like a couple of passive-aggressive douche bags and if I was head mod I'd oust you both.

      [–]Bromskloss 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (6子コメント)

      We went on strike silently, as a protest, to show what the subs becomes without active moderation.

      I'm new to this. What were you protesting? Was it /u/quaz4r not being active enough?

      Edit: Corrected username.

      [–]TheoryOfSomethingAtomic physics 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      which happens when people push their view on a forum which is supposed to be neutral

      In my opinion, there is no such thing as being neutral. It is still a political decision to not do or say anything in response to political events, especially when they have consequences for the topic at hand. We cannot help but be political, because our actions and inactions have political consequences.

      And what are the political consequences of a policy of silence? Generally it benefits those who already have power, and those who are already organized elsewhere. A policy of silence acts as a barrier to like-minded people organizing political action because it prevents the use of a place where those with the same interests already gather.

      [–]CondMatTheorist 65 ポイント66 ポイント  (6子コメント)

      Haven't you noticed that the quality from the sub went down recently? We went on strike silently, as a protest, to show what the subs becomes without active moderation.

      I haven't, actually. The quality of this sub improved pretty dramatically after the restructuring, and then has felt pretty constant since. I think this is a credit to the changes that were made early on, sure.

      On the other hand, I at least didn't notice your "silent strike," but it sounds petty and childish.

      [–]TheoryOfSomethingAtomic physics 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      I have to agree with this. There has been a small up-tick is homework-like questions and layman-type questions in the immediate past, but nothing egregious. I appreciate the work all the active moderators have done, and it's a good thing that we didn't notice much difference in submissions when some of you took a break; it speaks to the culture that has already been created about what is acceptable and what isn't.

      [–]peteroh9Astrophysics 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I have to agree with this. There has been a small up-tick is homework-like questions and layman-type questions in the immediate past

      And that seems to only be visible by browsing the sub because I haven't seen many hw questions on my front page. In fact, I don't even recall seeing any from /r/AskPhysics recently.

      [–]G-E-B 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      On the other hand, I at least didn't notice your "silent strike," but it sounds petty and childish.

      Seconded on both counts.

      [–]Gelsamel -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      Even on the first couple pages there is a couple of 'ask science' type questions, a video with content from Carl Jung, philosophical questions on the nature of time and nothingness, a shit ton of homework questions.

      The quality has significantly dropped recently.

      [–]CondMatTheorist 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Maybe; when I first came to this sub the front page was mostly variations on "here's a picture of Feynman from google image search!" so it's still a high peak from those days, to be sure.

      But what does a better /r/physics front page look like? Was it better last week? The week before? In what way?

      [–]Gelsamel 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Can't say I've been making assessments of the front page quality and plotting them as a function of time. All I know is there have been varying periods where I personally found the front page(s) good and bad. Currently it's very bad, perhaps not the worst it's been, but not at all good. It might be part of natural fluctuations in the quality of content submitted or the strictness of moderation, or it could be due to the strike. Given the lack of hard data, I'd probably chalk it up to fluctuations in content quality (although they seem very large). But since the mod team has actually said they stopped modding it'd be much more likely to attribute a large potion of the sub's current condition to that lack of moderation.

      [–]cdstephensGraduate 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Haven't you noticed that the quality from the sub went down recently? We went on strike silently, as a protest, to show what the subs becomes without active moderation.

      Tell me, why should you guys should be moderators when you willfully admit that you shirk your duties like that as a group without any notification of the community? And on top of that, instead of trying to sort this out in private, you air dirty laundry and accusations without any evidence?

      Speaking of evidence, I haven't noticed any difference in quality. If you would like to prove that claim, perhaps provide some examples over the past few days/weeks, or some other form of evidence?

      [–]papajohn56 39 ポイント40 ポイント  (13子コメント)

      When people try to make the argument that scientists would be better at running a country, I'll show them this thread

      [–]akjoltoy 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (8子コメント)

      and hopefully they will disregard it as anecdotal

      [–]jazzwhizParticle physics 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I mean, it is one data point, the same thing that we are willing to dismiss about /u/quaz4r.

      [–]papajohn56 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (6子コメント)

      Hopefully not because scientists would not inherently be better at running a country

      [–]akjoltoy -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (5子コメント)

      i say they would because evidence driven theory seems applicable

      [–]mrmongomasterofcongo -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      I also believe they would be better at running the country based only on the fact that science requires an acute sense of logic. Something which I often find to be lacking from the decisions our political leaders make. Granted of course they would need to study some political first.

      [–]barrinmwGraduate 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      My school graduated a Young Earth Creationist astrophysicist. Knowing the right answer to say is different than believing the right answer.

      [–]mrmongomasterofcongo 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I understand your point. That person sounds insane though.

      [–]papajohn56 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      You can say that all you want. It doesn't mean it's true.

      If you think so though, I imagine you're a fan of Margaret Thatcher?

      [–]akjoltoy -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      thank you for the not at all redundant statement that my opinion isn't necessarily true

      [–]AliveInTheFuture 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      How do we know any of these mods are, in fact, scientists? I find it very hard to believe, as a working adult, that anyone with at least my level of real life responsibilities could be mentally healthy and also take as much time as OP described moderating a sub reddit. I'm not a scientist, so I imagine real scientists probably glance at shit like this, roll their eyes, and go on with their lives.

      This post in particular is very childlike. The appeal is supposedly that OP is worried that all the effort they put into moderation will be for naught if the top mod removes them as moderator. What kind of person concerns themselves with that sort of thing? Reddit has a voting system, and it works just fine. Posts and comments really don't need cleaning up at all. I'm really grinding my own axe about what I see as an increase in over moderation across all of reddit, but in this case, I would seriously hate to see what sort of exclusive, arbitrary rule infested shit house this sub would become under someone who seeks that kind of power.

      [–]CommonIonUndergraduate 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Believe it or not scientists are people too. You'd be surprised how political interactions between physicists can be. There are lots of strong personalities and egos floating around.

      Most of the active users here are grad students so they do probably skew younger than you might expect.

      [–]cdstephensGraduate 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Grad student, rolled my eyes, can confirm.

      [–]peteroh9Astrophysics 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      But scientists know all about running things like...experiments and classrooms so they are totally qualified to deal with politicking and budget minutiae and having half or more of the country hate you.

      [–]KyleareanAtmospheric physics 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Having read this discussion, I'd have to side against /u/carbonrodofphysics and /u/Wodashit. If anything they've made a case against themselves as moderators. I don't care how hard you work -- being overly dramatic and petulant is a sure sign of poor leadership ability, and I would want neither of you in the top mod position.

      [–]Proteus_Marius 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      You certainly describe a social media failure mode, but most of us are in no position to offer informed comments.

      Good luck with your project, though.

      [–]myotherpasswordCosmology 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      That's fair. Being a mod really does imply that you are doing your part and at least clearing out the spam and whatnot.

      [–]sodappop 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I don't know too much about the mod system, but it does sound like you do a fair bit of work around here, and I thank you for it.

      [–]hachacha 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Also we should replace Feynman with Bohm as the subreddit mascot

      [–]MidnightWindiaHigh school 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I think we should (If we have the manpower or the time) change the Reddit... mascot thingy with different scientists once a week or something because this sub really does need some decoration.

      [–]JolteonLescott 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Inanimate eh? I'll show you inanimate!