Silent and Failsafe Overflow System

Time to look up some electric efficiency threads I guess. that is where the heat normally is. Hope they let him come back... He is one of the most helpful members on RC... A little stubborn on his points of view, but always helpful.
 
:confused: moved on ??? Bean is one of the most respected forum members, spends countless hours to help us with technical advise... I know there is a strict policy on what can and can not on RC, but i truly think this is sad.

Whatever was the cause of the dispute, i hope it can be solved.

A good forum need members like Bean !
 
Quick question for anyone who knows... Does the emergency drain have to end in the sump or could I plumb it over a floor drain?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15300688#post15300688 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ironwill723
Quick question for anyone who knows... Does the emergency drain have to end in the sump or could I plumb it over a floor drain?

only if you want to empty your tank if it is needed.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15300708#post15300708 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Reefski's
only if you want to empty your tank if it is needed.

yeah I meant the emergency line only...obviously the other two would flow into the sump. I have a long run of plumbing to make to the sump room so I am trying to find out if the emergency can end in a floor drain or if for some reason it absolutely has to end in the sump with the other two drain lines.
 
I think the point wast that, if you emergency drain ever gets used, your tank water will end up down the drain.....if that happens catastrophically, your entire tank volume goes down the drain.

In short, no, it will not work.....it defeats 90% of the point of having an emergency drain.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15301588#post15301588 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by luv951
Here is the thread that got Bean and another member banned. Nothing but an argument and nothing out of line was said. If we can't argue points with one another, how will this hobby grow? Do we all just have to say "OK, thats cool" and walk away to let others be misinformed. Its pretty draconian if you ask me.....

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1659553&perpage=25&pagenumber=2
Bean and the fatman have gone at it many times before. This back-and-forth was ridiculous. It was about the math. Kind of like arguing about gravity! One was clearly wrong and one was clearly right but no one else independently did the math to see who was right.

The person who was right must be sooooo ****ed they got banned for standing up for science!
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15302837#post15302837 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ah30k
Bean and the fatman have gone at it many times before. This back-and-forth was ridiculous. It was about the math. Kind of like arguing about gravity! One was clearly wrong and one was clearly right but no one else independently did the math to see who was right.

The person who was right must be sooooo ****ed they got banned for standing up for science!

Not entirely true. Some of us HAVE done the math, many times over. Some of us can look at the math, and how it is being applied and make an informed determination of what is fact and what is fiction. Many cannot do this, and therefore the challenge is to separate what is correct and what is incorrect.

The laws of physics cannot be changed, altered or skewed to make yourself "more right" or "more correct". When up against someone that knows the laws and the math, and how to apply them--The B*** S*** will be called rather quickly. It is not so much an argument about the math, rather about the quality of the information.

None of us really likes to argue, in a drawn out fashion. But you get more than two people in a room, and some one is going to disagree. Arguing opinion is one thing, and we all know about opinion, but arguing facts is quite another-- As you pointed out, "arguing about ytivarg."

This was Bean's calling, along with others. Not to be troublemakers, but rather to insure the quality of the information, separate the fact from the myth. The very thing that will make RC work best: Quality information--especially for those just entering the hobby.

From my perspective, Bean's input is needed, and will be missed. (though I don't like the line by line disassembly debate, sometimes it is the only way) :)

Regards,

Jim
 
I could not agree more Jim. I did not see any name calling, or either party making personal or disparraging remarks about one another, so why were they banned?
I think if the thread had been left open a bit longer, the math would have proven the point. That would have made it simpy "peer reviewed research". Not an arguement as I think it may have been percieved by some. We need this forum for true, respectful debate - not arguement -in order to continue to learn.
Reefkeeping has a rare opportunity to truly push the science about the animals we are keeping forward faster than it would otherwise being moving. But this requires quality information as you point out Jim.

And quality information is a distillation process born out of debate.
T
 
The fact that they were banned for a clean debate is very very shallow on the part of whomever banmed them
 
Bean (and his deep wealth of knowledge) will be missed, however I believe der_wille_zur_macht said it best here.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15254850#post15254850 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by der_wille_zur_macht
I am saying this with nothing but the best of intentions and trying to be politically correct in my delivery, but I hope you guys realize that your constant habit of attacking eachother's posts with nit-picky page-long replies does nothing but alienate the general public and turn people off to all the positive information you could be contributing to this community if you left your egos at the door and/or thought a little more carefully about delivery

In addition, there are knowledgable people out there with good information to contribute who have told me that they have recently decided to post less in this forum, because they don't think it's worth the risk of getting dragged into a fight.

Please, rather than getting so wrapped up in who's right, can we take a moment to consider the impact on the community? I appreciate the strong quest for truth and knowledge, but sometimes it reaches a point where it becomes harmful.
 
Valid point..................
less ego, and more info = happy reefer.
That is my kind of math <G>
But - it is not like there has to be two extremes in how to deal with this....
We still need respectful debate. Non-offensive questioning of one another's methods is an effective tool we should all be able to use, without getting our but in a sling with any of the moderators.
I think we can become known for a certain "style" of posting - one that has a reputation of being polarizing. That is dangerous.........I know.
T
 
Last edited:
I would strongly caution everyone in this thread to not make it a habit of discussing banned members or who banned whom for what reason a topic of discussion, or else further moderation may result.

Due to the sensitive nature of these topics, and the fact that it's easy for such discussions to be highly speculative (i.e. inaccurate) when they happen in public, If you do not understand a moderator's actions, or have questions or concerns about these sorts of matters, the best practice is to IM or email one of the forum moderators or admins, rather than discussing the matter on the open forums. If you are unsure of *who* to contact, then post a question in the help forum.

Now, please, let's get this thread back on subject, i.e. silent overflows. :)
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15326112#post15326112 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by der_wille_zur_macht


Now, please, let's get this thread back on subject, i.e. silent overflows. :)


It would be a shame to have to close this thread, although that's exactly where I'd have gone with it if der_wille hadn't gotten here first and requested that you get back to the topic at hand.
Consider that the only warning this thread gets.
 
Back
Top