What would make BITOG better?

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by FordBroncoVWJeta
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter


Originally Posted by 4WD
Like the guy who put CEO of your mom … and when he came back under a new name … just CEO



I guess I missed that one. Not something I would do but kinda funny, childish, but funny.

So the guy thought he was being slick except for the fact the two profiles gave him away... what a dolt....‚




That same poster is still here under a new name or even two.

Lots of recycles/reincarnations here.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
The idea of having something that identifies someone's profile as actually having subject matter expertise ("SME") i think would be welcomed by many.

What would be the criteria for becoming an SME? I have a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering but I'm not an expert in engineering by any means. Nearly every job I've had since college has been in the sciences, not engineering. And the last 20 years it has been management so I do little of anything technical any more.

I also have a minor in chemistry so although I know more about chemistry than most people, I learned my lesson early on during my first "real" job that a minor means you know enough to be dangerous and little else. Run up against a PhD in Chemistry and you will be put in your place in a hurry.

So what constitutes SME for Bitog?

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
So the guy thought he was being slick except for the fact the two profiles gave him away... what a dolt....‚

Most repeat trolls give away enough clues here and there to give them away.

Some are smarter however.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
The idea of having something that identifies someone's profile as actually having subject matter expertise ("SME") i think would be welcomed by many.

What would be the criteria for becoming an SME? I have a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering but I'm not an expert in engineering by any means. Nearly every job I've had since college has been in the sciences, not engineering. And the last 20 years it has been management so I do little of anything technical any more.

I also have a minor in chemistry so although I know more about chemistry than most people, I learned my lesson early on during my first "real" job that a minor means you know enough to be dangerous and little else. Run up against a PhD in Chemistry and you will be put in your place in a hurry.

So what constitutes SME for Bitog?

Dunno..I'm certain if there's enough interest in this I'm sure the powers that be can work that out. Or not; there may be some potential "liability" issues that need to be thought through for starters. Would BITOG be able to absolve themselves of any potential liability claims through disclaimers, similar to how advice columns do???

 

[ZeeOSix]

Typically, self proclaimed SMEs won't be believed. Anyone reading this board long enough will know who knows alot about a subject matter. The collective brain trust of the site is the "SME".

The super knowlegable members that leave because they're tired of contributing, or get banned for some stupid reason is what erodes the board's knowlege level.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Typically, self proclaimed SMEs won't be believed. Anyone reading this board long enough will know who knows alot about a subject matter. The collective brain trust of the site is the "SME".

The super knowlegable members that leave because they're tired of contributing, or get banned for some stupid reason is what erodes the board's knowlege level.





Exactly. Just stating that you are something doesn't mean much unless you can prove it in discussions. The real experts here are clearly known without any label.

On the Internet one can be pretty much anything ranging from a wealthy person to a member of a Seal Team. Labels mean very little.

 

[RDY4WAR]

Originally Posted by kschachn

So what constitutes SME for Bitog?


Someone who demonstrates exceptional knowledge and experience with solid contribution to the forum.

Education is important, but not the end all, be all to knowledge. I personally tend to put more weight on experience than education.

Being a veteran, I like to look at it like a military structure. On one hand, you have a Sergeant Major with 25 years of experience, 5 deployments, and airborne tab. On the other, you have a young Lieutenant, fresh out of West Point, who's closest combat experience was hazing in his freshman year. Yeah, the Lieutenant outranks the Sergeant Major, but who is really calling the shots there and who do you trust to lead you into battle?

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
Education is important, but not the end all, be all to knowledge. I personally tend to put more weight on experience than education.

Being a veteran, I like to look at it like a military structure. On one hand, you have a Sergeant Major with 25 years of experience, 5 deployments, and airborne tab. On the other, you have a young Lieutenant, fresh out of West Point, who's closest combat experience was hazing in his freshman year. Yeah, the Lieutenant outranks the Sergeant Major, but who is really calling the shots there and who do you trust to lead you into battle?

That may work well in your situation but when it comes to many scientific subjects it does not. This board is rife with people postulating conclusions about experiments and informal tests they have performed, all the while scoffing at the need for statistically valid data analysis (it is especially acute with one particular website full of "tests.) It just doesn't work that way unfortunately and the loudest objectors are generally those who don't understand why.

There's a reason valid tests are run in laboratories and via standardized test protocols with tightly controlled parameters, and it's not because "they" are trying to shut out Joe Engine from participating in the discussion. You bring up the military, the military is highly invested in scientific research and they do it in accordance with their military specifications and tests, some of which are the basis for civilian standards.

 

[RDY4WAR]

I place high value on scientific data. Absolutely. However, it can only get you so far. As with anything, you still have to test it in the field. The product that shows the most promise in the lab doesn't always perform best in the field. I experienced this first hand recently with A-B-A track tests with two oils in two of our race engines.

 

[Lawn_Care]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by PimTac
Looks like another vacation coming up.


Or at least a thread lock.


Kinda makes one wonder - how many previously banned members come back, just to get banned again?
Personally I see no point in it, but who am I to question the motives of another.

As a long time lurker, there are quite a few members who ended up getting banned that I wish were still here.
Some of them - while they had some unique personality traits, were actually very intelligent people who honestly contributed a lot (most of which was positive) to the forum. Mori - for instance.

But alas, this situation is not unique to BITOG. It happens all over.

I applaud most of the moderators (admins, and those higher up) for the jobs they do, but there have been a couple of mods who honestly needed (and still need) their wings clipped. I won't mention any names, but the one I had a legitimate gripe against (and I was in the right) was from Utah. I not no ban, no vacation, etc. but I did speak my mind in PM's, held my ground firmly, and proved that I was in the right and he was in the wrong. Unfortunately he's not been active in a while now.

I kinda miss the guy.

 

[Kjmack]

It might make this place better for all if people didn't start a thread knowing deep down it's going to get ugly fast . Just the mention of CxN is going to twigger people to argue .

 

[Lawn_Care]

Originally Posted by Kjmack
It might make this place better for all if people didn't start a thread knowing deep down it's going to get ugly fast . Just the mention of CxN is going to twigger people to argue .


True Dat ^^^

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Kjmack
It might make this place better for all if people didn't start a thread knowing deep down it's going to get ugly fast . Just the mention of CxN is going to twigger people to argue .

But of course there are individuals that post such things just for that reaction because they like the attention. We often have threads that are generated or propagated only to cause (repeat) dissension.

Or people that insist on posting political comments just because they apparently cannot control themselves.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I place high value on scientific data. Absolutely. However, it can only get you so far. As with anything, you still have to test it in the field. The product that shows the most promise in the lab doesn't always perform best in the field. I experienced this first hand recently with A-B-A track tests with two oils in two of our race engines.

Field testing still has to go scientifically. Rat, for instance, doesn't do testing. He plays with an apparatus and reads the numbers like tea leaves.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Garak
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I place high value on scientific data. Absolutely. However, it can only get you so far. As with anything, you still have to test it in the field. The product that shows the most promise in the lab doesn't always perform best in the field. I experienced this first hand recently with A-B-A track tests with two oils in two of our race engines.
Field testing still has to go scientifically. Rat, for instance, doesn't do testing. He plays with an apparatus and reads the numbers like tea leaves.

Correct. Field data when stripped of emotion and properly analyzed often yields little useful information. I learned early on that you should pass your proposed experiment past the mathematicians first rather than just handing them data later, it can save a lot of unnecessary effort.

 

[RDY4WAR]

We're deviating from the point... You need a balance of knowledge and experience. That was my point.

For that particular test I mentioned above, those two oils were put together by the owner of the lubcricants company. Oil A was formulated very robust and oil B matched a single parameter of oil A (KV @ 50-60°C) and deviated from there. Oil B performed worse in all lab tests including HTHS, NOACK, and with a weaker anti-wear package. Yet, when run in A-B-A against oil A in a 1300+hp race engine in the same race conditions for the same service life, oil B showed a 78% drop in iron wear in UOA (48 ppm vs 11 ppm). This was confirmed in 2 engines. Everybody from myself, the shop hand, to the owner and formulators are scratching our heads. It was even run through sequence IVA for cam wear and showed higher wear rates. But when put in the field in a much more powerful engine, much more aggressive cam, and higher rpm, it showed a major reduction in wear.

 

[kschachn]

Then that is illustrative of a race oil blender that didn't properly do their job.

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ That, or someone got the oil bottles switched, lol (j\k).

 

[RDY4WAR]

The mastermind behind both oils is a very reputable oil guy. He's written 7 books on oil and additives, and he's working on his 8th now. These tests were material for that 8th book.

 

[edhackett]

Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
We're deviating from the point... You need a balance of knowledge and experience. That was my point.

For that particular test I mentioned above, those two oils were put together by the owner of the lubcricants company. Oil A was formulated very robust and oil B matched a single parameter of oil A (KV @ 50-60°C) and deviated from there. Oil B performed worse in all lab tests including HTHS, NOACK, and with a weaker anti-wear package. Yet, when run in A-B-A against oil A in a 1300+hp race engine in the same race conditions for the same service life, oil B showed a 78% drop in iron wear in UOA (48 ppm vs 11 ppm). This was confirmed in 2 engines. Everybody from myself, the shop hand, to the owner and formulators are scratching our heads. It was even run through sequence IVA for cam wear and showed higher wear rates. But when put in the field in a much more powerful engine, much more aggressive cam, and higher rpm, it showed a major reduction in wear.


UOA does not measure wear. It's quite possible to have high wear and low wear metals or high wear metals and low wear present in a UOA due to the particle size distribution. Abnormal wear generally creates larger particles that are not seen in a standard UOA.

Ed