Everybody congratulate me!
Everybody congratulate me!
I have been banned from physicsforums.com for crackpottery
That's odd ... the only 'makc' I could find at PF posted only 8 times ... in 2005!
Funny isn't it. Well, you know, on the internet nobody knows you're a dog, right?in the [url=http://www.physicsforums.com/search.php?searchid=663498]page[/url] linked by Nereid they wrote:You must be logged in to view this page
Here is one thread that contains posts by "makc".
Here is another.
There is a third thread with "makc" posts in it.
All threads date to 2005.
So unless we know which handle the NSL "makc" was posting under, in PF, none of us (other than makc!) have any means of independently verifying the claim made in the OP, do we?
Here is another.
There is a third thread with "makc" posts in it.
All threads date to 2005.
Of course.Well, you know, on the internet nobody knows you're a dog, right?
So unless we know which handle the NSL "makc" was posting under, in PF, none of us (other than makc!) have any means of independently verifying the claim made in the OP, do we?
woo hoo, that was my account, too!.... which means I can continue to use it 
and, Nereid, do you really have to verify each and every claim? can't you just take my word for it?
edit: I have tried to log into that account, and it worked. but after I changed my pass (it was saying it's too old) I have found no difference between being logged in or not. probably account was broken during some PF update
edit2: worked out the problem, there was activation link in my mail box.
and, Nereid, do you really have to verify each and every claim? can't you just take my word for it?edit: I have tried to log into that account, and it worked. but after I changed my pass (it was saying it's too old) I have found no difference between being logged in or not. probably account was broken during some PF update
edit2: worked out the problem, there was activation link in my mail box.
I don't have to do anything!makc wrote:woo hoo, that was my account, too!.... which means I can continue to use it
You make a claim about 'for crackpottery' on 'physicsforums.com', then I am very curious.can't you just take my word for it?
[snip]
I expected a quick check would reveal all; imagine my surprise when I discovered that 'makc' had last posted there in 2005![/quote]
well, Nereid, to satisfy your obsession with hard evidence,
and the story behind the ban is a) I was trying to make a point equally valid regardless of validity of its assumptions, which is something people at PF do not endorse, and b) I have accumulated 3 infractions before that for pushing people out of their limits of comfort with things in question(s).
not that I have any regrets for my actions, but I agree that such a behavior was essentially needless, so... r.i.p. my 2nd account 8)
and the story behind the ban is a) I was trying to make a point equally valid regardless of validity of its assumptions, which is something people at PF do not endorse, and b) I have accumulated 3 infractions before that for pushing people out of their limits of comfort with things in question(s).
not that I have any regrets for my actions, but I agree that such a behavior was essentially needless, so... r.i.p. my 2nd account 8)
Thanks makc.
However, all I can see is a PF screen shot with some info about a permaban, due to crackpottery ... how do I (or anyone else* reading this thread) know that's you (whatever 'you' might mean, in the context of On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog)?
And, relevant to the scope of this forum, how could we tell if the alleged crackpottery had anything to do with astronomy (or physics)? After all, despite its name, PF's scope is pretty broad - they even have a Philosophy section!
*other than you of course!
However, all I can see is a PF screen shot with some info about a permaban, due to crackpottery ... how do I (or anyone else* reading this thread) know that's you (whatever 'you' might mean, in the context of On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog)?
And, relevant to the scope of this forum, how could we tell if the alleged crackpottery had anything to do with astronomy (or physics)? After all, despite its name, PF's scope is pretty broad - they even have a Philosophy section!
*other than you of course!
Since you have mentioned that again, I brought that up solely to highlight the fact that same person does not necessary have same UIDs all over the net. I didn't mean I'm not who I say I am, because I am not saying who I am (not that it is impossible to figure out or something... using this very post, anyone can find out my full name, postal address and phone, for example, in 5 minutes or less).Nereid wrote:...the context of On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog...
Oops. In fact, it had nothing to do with astronomy, so I guess you have all the rights to lock this thread as irrelevantNereid wrote:...relevant to the scope of this forum, how could we tell if the alleged crackpottery had anything to do with astronomy...