This appeared in a post* in the https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=113862", which due to my clumsy thread surgery, seems to have temporarily disappeared (it'll be back soon).ratfink said:If you don’t mind me saying so, we seem to have a problem here Nereid. We have a conflict of interest on your part. As a participator in the discussion you are clearly in error with your evolution explanation. However when this is pointed out, instead of accepting this you seem to be using the power of your position to ask me to stop posting.
This is something the board administrators need to address. Should a person taking part in a discussion be allowed to moderate it as well?
ratfink said:Nereid said:As has already been pointed out to you, your analysis here is far too simplistic - quasars have several components (which contribute to the observed light), and quasars evolve.
Or perhaps I've misunderstood - do you have a study which you can provide a link to which shows that no 4-component model of quasars can possibly reproduce the observed (Hawkins) power spectra? Or you've done this (quantitative) work yourself, and are considering submitting it to ApJ (or PF's IR section)?
If you've got nothing better than this simplistic handwaving, please stop posting such.And your references for this are (I assume they are papers published in peer-reviewed journals)?To reproduce the Hawking results with evolution one has to assume that all quasars were produced in the Big Bang itself – otherwise you wouldn’t get this ‘nice’ relationship with the greater the redshift the older the quasar. If quasars were to be formed after this point and at different eras, some of the older ones could have larger redshifts than the younger ones and hence ruin the Hawkins result. The assumption you make is not valid.Nereid said:As has already been pointed out to you, your analysis here is far too simplistic - quasars have several components (which contribute to the observed light), and quasars evolve.
Or perhaps I've misunderstood - do you have a study which you can provide a link to which shows that no 4-component model of quasars can possibly reproduce the observed (Hawkins) power spectra? Or you've done this (quantitative) work yourself, and are considering submitting it to ApJ (or PF's IR section)?No problem. Will the ApJ do you?If you've got nothing better than this simplistic handwaving, please stop posting such.And your references for this are (I assume they are papers published in peer-reviewed journals)?If you don’t mind me saying so, we seem to have a problem here Nereid. We have a conflict of interest on your part. As a participator in the discussion you are clearly in error with your evolution explanation. However when this is pointed out, instead of accepting this you seem to be using the power of your position to ask me to stop posting.SN 1996bj aged 3.35 +/- 3.2 days, consistent with the 6.38 days of aging expected in an expanding Universe and inconsistent with no time dilation at the 96.4 % confidence level
This is something the board administrators need to address. Should a person taking part in a discussion be allowed to moderate it as well?
The purpose of receiving feedback from Ratfink is to improve the overall quality and fairness of moderation on the platform. Ratfink, an external moderator, provides an unbiased and objective perspective on potential conflicts of interest and the effectiveness of current moderation practices.
Ratfink uses a variety of methods, including reviewing moderator actions and communication, to identify potential conflicts of interest. They also consider user reports and feedback when evaluating conflicts of interest.
If a conflict of interest is identified, Ratfink will work with the platform's moderation team to address the issue. This may include removing the moderator from the situation, reassigning moderation duties, or implementing new policies to prevent conflicts of interest in the future.
Ratfink provides feedback on a regular basis, typically on a monthly or quarterly basis. However, they may also provide feedback in real-time if a significant issue arises that requires immediate attention.
No, Ratfink does not accept direct feedback or concerns from users. However, users can report any issues or concerns to the platform's moderation team, who will work with Ratfink to address them.