Group etiquette

Skip to first unread message

Richard Gill

May 18, 2022, 9:31:40 AM5/18/22
to Bell inequalities and quantum foundations
There have been a number of angry statements in recent group messages. People in this group should take the time to study what the others say carefully, and preferably not respond in anger. It is more likely that there are some misunderstandings involved.

They should also realise that we come from different scientific backgrounds where there are different scientific cultures and different scientific languages.

The value of the group is precisely that we disagree about quantum foundations, are passionate about the topic, and hope to contribute to resolution of disagreements.

I know I am no angel myself. But as one of the two group managers I would like to mention:

(1) a lot of messages are being held up automatically in a “moderation queue” by Google’s AI systems, which seem to notice when people’s emotions run high. The AI classifies angry and emotional emails as spam. I get to see a list of them every time the queue has reached size 15. I then manually approve all 15. Just recently this has been happening almost every day 

(2) thoughtfully use the Reply button or the Reply-all button. Probably you just want to mail to the whole group; you don’t have to reply to the individual who last posted on a particular thread. Though in view of issue (1) you might want to add the email address of one or two persons whom you particularly want to address

(3) there is no need to include in your email a complete quoted copy of the previous email, especially not when it contains a complete quoted copy of another previous email, when it contains … You could for instance just quote the sentences which you are particularly reacting to. There is no need to quote the whole discussion. (Possibly the moderation queue is being fed by people whose emails contain copies of earlier emails of others in the group, in which angry words were used)

(4) feel free to start new topics. I believe that you all have permission to do so. This group is hardly moderated at all, we rely on your civilised behaviour and reasonable internet skills

Do ask me (or Alexander de Castro) if you have any problems with all this.

Bryan Sanctuary

May 18, 2022, 8:36:48 PM5/18/22
to Bell inequalities and quantum foundations

I got angry because of contradictions.  When one insists on this, but then does that in practice, it is dishonest, frustrating and wasteful,  It undermines with deceit, and in my book almost anything goes in free speech except dishonesty.

You call this string etiquette.  Recall Stephen Troope, ex-chancellor of Cambridge, a Canadian too, was relieved of his post because of his wokish attitude of requiring free speech to be polite.  Free speech is not polite when the truth is at stake, and this forum is an example.  My only requirement in such exchanges is that people are honest, and will admit an error when they understand they were wrong.


Richard Gill

May 18, 2022, 11:28:46 PM5/18/22
to Bryan Sanctuary, Bell Inequalities and quantum foundations

You see contradictions in my writings and work.

I see contradictions in your writings and work.

I don’t believe either of us is being dishonest.

You say I am deceitful. Fortunately, I gained a think skin over the years.

Did you read my new draft paper? Please tell me about any mathematical errors. If you are unhappy with terminology, let me know too. Maybe it could develop into a joint paper, reporting a dialogue between two world views.

The best way to see this is: we have a paradox. Now we can make progress.

I agree that Wikipedia and Scholarpedia contain a lot of bullshit. I would charitably characterise it as “lies for children”. Certainly they are both incredibly outdated.

I too expect people to admit an error when they understand they were wrong. Right now, you and I disagree, and neither understands they are wrong.

I think that the conflict is not mathematical but conceptual. Because our concepts are different but we use the same words, we appear to disagree. 


Sent from my iPad

On 19 May 2022, at 02:36, Bryan Sanctuary <> wrote:

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Bell inequalities and quantum foundations" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
To view this discussion on the web visit
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages