ECW Commenting Rules Updated

It’s been a while since I looked at the Commenting Rules page here at E-Cat World, and I have gone through the page and made some updates and clarifications, and wanted to bring it to the attention of readers. Below is the text most recent version of the page which can also be accessed via the navigation bar above.

E-Cat World is a site that takes LENR seriously, and accepts it as a valid field of research, and a potentially useful energy source. , this site is not a venue where  LENR/cold fusion skeptics are given free rein, or a place to debate whether LENR/cold fusion is real. Here we assume here that LENR/cold fusion is a valid scientific phenomeon, an important topic, and one worthy of mature discussion.

This being the overall philosophy of the site, readers are invited to comment, but there are guidelines regarding comments, and moderation is used which can result in comments being deleted.

The following types of comments are subject to moderation:

  • Comments that state openly or by implication that LENR/cold fusion/E-Cat (etc.) is a fraud or hoax
  • Comments of a deriding or mocking nature
  • Personal attacks on other commenters and/or other persons
  • Comments by commenters who continually make off-topic comments
  • Comments that could be considered defamatory, slanderous or libelous
  • Comments that are excessively obnoxious
  • Comments that include profanity
  • Needlessly repetitive comments
  • Comments arguing for or against political ideologies, parties, or candidates
  • Comments arguing for or against religious beliefs or practices

The content, context, tone of comments are taken into account when making decisions about moderation.

Not every comment goes into the moderation queue, but there are many that do. There is also an automatic spam filter in place which I have no control over. Occasionally, and for reasons I don’t understand, perfectly innocuous comments end up in the spam filter. Since I rarely check the spam file, you may need to contact me to let me know if your posts are disappearing for no apparent reason.

  • Anon2012_2014

    Your comment moderation rules are fine and fair.

    Thank you.

    • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

      Ditto

  • builditnow

    I find the moderation quite excellent and I don’t have to read comments from the Maryugo group. The Maryugo group has been around the LENR / Cold Fusion for long enough to know that it’s a lot more credible than they make out. Their behaviour could easily qualify as a crime against the entire planet and all it’s inhabitants. They must think they can’t be tracked down.
    Thankyou to Frank for your excellent work.

  • GreenWin

    I hope the few cogent escapees from the dark side continue to comment – with renewed respect. 🙂

  • http://www.facebook.com/ian.walker.7140 Ian Walker

    Hi all

    In Reply Henry on the matter of “subjective condition”
    Yes this is how the world works 🙂 people make decisions. Other wise we would not need to comment at all, one could just tick boxes.

    This is Frank’s website and he is responsible for it, so his decision gets to be final. 🙂

    Kind Regards Walker

  • Henry

    “Comments that are excessively obnoxious”

    “obnoxious” to whom?
    “excessively ” measured from who? What does it mean?

    This can be seen like censorship against any users thinking different from believers that are here.
    Has someone fear of criticisms or something to hide?
    Do this Blog like to give voice only to those follow to the unique thinking or not “disturb” the faith?

    • ecatworld

      Merriam Webster defines obnoxious as: ” unpleasant in a way that makes people feel offended, annoyed, or disgusted”

      You can’t always stop people from offended, but when someone is excessively offensive, it shouldn’t be posted here.

      Common courtesy and respect is far preferable

  • William D. Fleming

    Good rules. Civil discussion makes this my favorite forum.

  • Mark

    Ya know what I think would be a good rule to add that I wish more moderators would have? You are not allowed to state your opinion as if it is objective fact. Everything that you say has to be labeled as your opinion, even if most of the world agrees with you. I hate when people state their opinion as fact, especially when they know (or should know) that I disagree with them. That’s disrespectful.

  • Fyodor

    Hi Frank

    I would ask you to reconsider allowing comments like this.

    “Comments that state openly or by implication that LENR/cold fusion/E-Cat (etc.) is a fraud or hoax”

    I think that we should all try to be polite in our comments and in general try not to be unnecessarily inflammatory . But “LENR” covers a lot of claims of varying credibility and I think that it would be harmful to censor legitimate skepticism, including skepticism about the veracity and truthfulness of the people involved.

    Certainly a lot of Defkalion’s claims, including specific timelines and performance have not been validated and it seems pretty much impossible to me that they had devices that worked the way they claimed but have subsequently failed to ever validate them. My general recollection is that people with close connections with them (Strememnos) have accused them of making false claims. It would be unfortunate if you deleted comments calling their claims into question.

    This site also covers LENR-ish technologies such as Blacklight Power and Solar Hydrogen Trends that claim miraculous results based on either technologies that contradict generally accepted scientific principles (BLP) or through completely unexplained phenomena (SHT). It would be similarly unfortunate if you deleted comments calling their claims into question.

    • ecatworld

      This site operates on the assumption that the E-Cat, Rossi Effect, LENR+, New Fire (there are various names applied) is real. My point here is that this site is not a place to argue against that overall assumption. There are other places online where those arguments take place, but ECW is not to be that kind of venue.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        Perhaps you could write “the phenomenon LENR/cold fusion/E-cat etc…”, to make it clear that it is within the scope of the forum to check the authenticity of the various individual claims, such as Parkhomov’s.

      • Omega Z

        Frank
        It is my opinion that your moderation is very lenient within the confines of your commenting rules. Maybe at times to much so. I occasionally wonder what someone did that got them banned. They must have really pushed the limits.

        Tho individually many of us may disagree with one another, I think most of us can agree on this.

        Your doing an “Excellent Job”.

        Thank you for all the work you do to keep this site interesting & it’s followers well informed and up to date.
        OZ…

        • ecatworld

          Thanks, OZ. I do try to give a wide berth.

    • MontagueWithnail

      Good point, I would really like the LENR community to define exactly what it considers to be LENR. In the absence of strong guiding principles it is easy for groups like SHT to attach their claims to it in a way that is highly damaging to the rest of the field. For an example check out this article http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/22/transmutation_claims_us_lenr_company/, in a very popular online tech magazine, where the entire LENR community has been damned by the SHT claims.

      I wouldn’t presume to be the one making the definition; it should be wide enough to capture any version of hydrogen isotopes loaded in condensed matter being stimulated to produce non-chemical reactions; but it should specifically exclude claims that contradict basic physical principles like conservation of mass/energy. This is not to say that those things are dishonest or even untrue (I stay silent about that) but simply that they are not the same thing as LENR which explicitly does not contravene any fundamental princples.

  • WayneM

    @ Frank Acland

    It’s good to see blog moderation rules. It is difficult to read other blogs where any comment is allowed. People usually can’t disagree without being disagreeable. The conversation usually degenerates and I think it has to do with anonymity and / or not being face to face.

    Regardless, can you tweak your rule a bit?

    From:

    · Comments arguing for or against political ideologies, parties, or candidates

    To:

    · Comments arguing for or against ideologies as they relate to LENR.
    For example: political parties (or candidates), capitalism, communism, mainstream scientists / academia, socialism, evil vs. good corporations, rants against skeptics, all East is good vs. all West is bad, and conspiracies holding back LENR.

    I understand there are quiet periods were not much is happening. People will fill in the void with their ‘world view’. That’s fine, but some of the comments get vile.

    • ecatworld

      I try not to be too heavy handed here. Public policy and politics will come up in the context of LENR, and I don’t object to discussion of politics or policy when it is relevant. However the site should not become a battleground where people argue about political systems and ideologies.

  • Bob Matulis

    Sound reasonable and will help keep us on our defined purpose of advancing the field of LENR reactions (and ultimately its adaptation to other technologies).

  • Gerrit

    Have these rules been replicated or are you aware that these rules will be replicated in the near future ? Just asking.

    • Omega Z

      They will be replicated,
      But understand that they will need to be replicated multiple times by multiple parties before we can take it seriously.
      🙂