Timeline for A new close reason: non-mainstream
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 13, 2018 at 23:50 | comment | added | user1271772 No more free time | Points taken. I just didn't want to rush into making a "policy" which closes their questions, before such a thing is really necessary. My preference is to take it slow. To be welcoming at least in these early stages. | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 23:50 | comment | added | knzhou | I do agree it's not a huge problem now, but it is something this SE needs to think about going forward! | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 23:47 | comment | added | knzhou | Even these people remaining are not "crackpots". There are probably a good hundred thousand people walking around in American right now who fervently believe, without any mathematical training, that they know how quantum mechanics really works and why the scientists are covering it up. They're totally harmless and mostly good people, like everybody else. You just don't want to give them a platform, or else you'll spend all day listening to them. Given that there are no post or comment limits, and it's much easier to post polemics than content, one crackpot can drown out 10 good users. | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 23:42 | comment | added | knzhou | Of these people, there's a significant fraction of the population that just is really strongly predisposed to believe that they're right and everybody else is wrong, without any particularly good reason, say 3%. (I run into these people often. I open my mouth at a dinner to talk about the LHC and occasionally somebody will declare they know it's all a scam.) And a significant fraction of those get obsessed with proving all science wrong, upending the ivory tower, etc, enough to try to spread their theories in public, say 3%. This gets neatly to my 1:100 ratio. | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 23:42 | comment | added | user1271772 No more free time | But those 10000000000000 people are not "crackpots" right? | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 23:41 | comment | added | knzhou | @user1271772 The point is that scientists are extremely rare. How many people would you say are in the quantum computing community? My field (particle phenomenology) is ~1000, let's be generous and say quantum computing is ~10000. Compare this to the ~1000000000 people who speak English. | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 23:15 | comment | added | user1271772 No more free time | @knzhou. I see. Just to confirm I'm understanding it right, you mean for every 10 "standard scientists" there's 1000 people who are somewhat disruptive to the SE? Meaning that there's 100 disruptive people for each non-annoying one? | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 23:12 | comment | added | knzhou | @user1271772 Of course, it's fundamentally up to you and the other users of this SE -- I'm just stopping by to say what it's like elsewhere. For every 10 straight-laced standard scientists, there is 1 curious scientist interested in foundations, playing with the axiom of QM, and so on, but there are 1000 people with zero technical background who think QM proves homeopathy or the like. It's a pretty fine balance including the 1 but not the 1000. | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 22:07 | comment | added | user1271772 No more free time | I see, but right now I don't have a problem with any of the examples you gave. I think we should wait patiently (and keep our eyes on this Meta post to get feedback from other users). | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 21:51 | comment | added | knzhou | I've given a few examples in comments above. The real reason this is a problem is that a crackpot does not play by the normal rules; they have no interest in the subject itself, but will just constantly detail conservations towards their personal theory of everything. Every day on Physics.SE there are about five potential long-term crackpot users that come in with a long treatise on why "Einsten was wrong!!". They're scared off by a flurry of downvotes, snarky comments, and question closure. It would be very bad if this wonderfully efficient machine stopped, and your SE hasn't even started it. | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 21:34 | comment | added | user1271772 No more free time | @knzhou: I wonder if there's any examples of why we need to up our moderation so urgently? | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 21:29 | comment | added | knzhou | Comparisons with Einstein and Galileo are just about a sure sign somebody is a crackpot, though. They laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at Bozo the clown. And there are a million times more Bozos than Einsteins. | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 21:07 | history | edited | user1271772 No more free time | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 234 characters in body
|
| Jul 13, 2018 at 21:06 | comment | added | user1271772 No more free time | First of all it is against SE rules to "name call" people, so you should refrain from calling them "crackpots" | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 21:04 | comment | added | auden Mod | Yes, but they were discussed. People took their ideas seriously, even if it was thought that they were wrong. Therein lies the difference between Galileo and the crackpot dude who mails everyone in the department with their theory of everything. | |
| Jul 13, 2018 at 18:35 | history | answered | user1271772 No more free time | CC BY-SA 4.0 |