Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Too Much Closed Mind Behavior

Too Much Closed Mind Behavior

HgDinis25 - 20-4-2014 at 14:53

I decided to open this new thread on the light of recent evevents that I believe that cant happen in a Scientific Forum. Science is all about discussing ideas, sharing knowledge, brainstorming and experimentation. That's how science works, that's how scientists think. And that's what a Scientific Forum is all about : sharing knowledge, constructing new ideas, DO SCIENCE.

The main reason I joined this forum is because I love chemistry and it seemed to me that everyone else here did too. Thus, we could all ask questions, learn more and more, build new ideas and mad plans, solve puzzles, etc. So I thougt.

Turns out it's not quite like that.

For instance, aga decided to opnen a new revolutionary thread:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=30060

I could immediatly see a lot of potential in there, every mastermind here joining together to make the life of every home chemist easier. However, in the first posts, all I saw was members complaining about the impossibility of the project or about double posting and detritus. No science, just logistic. In my opinion the posts only warn about detritus or that point a tiny mistake the OP did are just as useless as the suposely useless OP topic. Just my opninion.

Another example: I opened a topic about azides (it's in detritus):
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=30128

The main worry of a moderator, instead of SHARING KNOWLEDGE was to simply delay an answer and to see if I had done my homework. Until then, it didn't seem that bad, but we had the following message enchange:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Him:
We may discuss this via U2U, I suggest you wait at least 24 hours before doing so though.

From Me:
I'm sorry, I didn't get it. Discuss what?

From Him:

24 hours.

http://www.apa.org/topics/anger/control.aspx#

From Me:
With all due respect, I didn't intend to make a post that appeared to come out of anger or rage. I merely wanted to make my point clear, that I dislike your aproach. And I did it in my own way.

Anyway, who gets angry because of an answer of an online guy? Don't get me wrong, but I don't even know you...

Anyway, I still don't know what you wish to discuss. If it is about my answer in the topic, it's nothing personal to you, seriously. If it's about the topic itself, we can discuss it right there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He simply stopped answering me. That seemed to come from a guy that likes to be cynical just because of the fun of it, instead of a science guy, that loves knowledge.

Anyway, i followed woelen's great advice and decided to open a new topic, again about azides:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=30177

If you're interested, you can all go see how hissingnoise made false assumptions and mistakes, and instead of helping just posted useless stuff.

Sorry for the long post, but now I ask: Is this what this forum is all about? Because you all seem to be in a "Catch the Newbie" mode and when you see a new topic about something that seems that has already been answered you don't take a time to really see what the OP wants and just start with the fake assumptions that we need to go look somemore or that we are not worthy of the knowledge you have.

Sorry, I just had to unburden this. Thanks for reading.

macckone - 20-4-2014 at 17:10

I think you should try to work this out with the moderator via U2U.
Most are reasonable. I think his point with your post is that
it should have been added to an existing thread rather than
start a new one. Every forum has its rules. Here it is considered
bad form to open a new thread if you can bump an existing one.
Other forums it is the exact opposite and you should open a new
thread.

As for aga's post on home made analysis gear, I don't think the
post has actually generated much besides ideas yet. It is a
topic with a lot of interest. IR spectroscopy should be easy
for a home scientist to accomplish and I believe there is now
a specific thread on that. GC is also potentially easy.
MS and NMR are another level of difficulty. Not impossible
but not within the range of most home scientists. Of course
someone may come up with some unique ideas that prove
me wrong.

I think Bert was wrong in asking for immediate references in
an idea thread. But aga was drunk posting by his own admission.
I think the two worked it out via U2U but the thread seems to
be alive and well. In fact via well.

Etaoin Shrdlu - 20-4-2014 at 18:19

I found it a little worrisome that when you tried to confirm the effects of changing a cation in a synthesis of fairly hazardous chemicals, you got jumped all over for not simply running with your first guess. The kind of question you asked is the kind of question people should be asking, never mind that NaOH and KOH are often interchangeable. The obvious answer is not always the correct one.

EDIT: As for the original thread, you were being pretty snarky. (And yes, I've been known to do that myself.

)

[Edited on 4-21-2014 by Etaoin Shrdlu]

Zephyr - 20-4-2014 at 18:29

You are correct, this forum is about scientific experimentation and the generation of ideas.
For this forum to maintain it's ability to be informative, while at the same time productive; users double posting, asking to be spoon fed, and not UTFSE, must be encouraged do their research and be respectful of the forum guide lines. That being said, these destructive habits musts be discouraged in a constructive and respectful way.

HgDinis25 - 20-4-2014 at 18:40

Etaoin Shrdlu, hehe Snarky, pretty much me. I think you're the first person to actually see the problem here. You completrly understood me.

Pinkhippo11, nobody asked to be spoon fed. If you think that's the case, you probably didn't read very well the topics in question or you misunderstood them (or I didn't made my self clear). Either way, it was asked, after long term search, about a specific mechanism of a reaction and on how that could affect ion interchange. I can't see how that is asking to be spon fed.
About the double post: Do you prefer a topic with average information and compeltry organised, or a topic with outstanding ideas, but a little bit deorganized because of double posting? Yes the double posting was unnecessary, as were the detritus threatning posts.

Zephyr - 20-4-2014 at 18:47

No, I was not referring to the example you presented, and I agree with you about the fact that the reaction to your question was unnecessary. I was referring to the issue as a whole, I believe that it is important to maintain an organized thread and forum, so that it is simple to find the answer to a question that has already been covered without starting a new thread. This encourages the "outstanding ideas" and makes it simple for beginners to learn from this forum.

macckone - 20-4-2014 at 18:54

The two basic problems as I see it related to your thread were double posting
and opening a new thread on an existing topic. Obviously a double post is
going to get sent to detrius or at best combined by the forum rules.
The second problem is not as clear cut but the general rule of this forum
rather you agree with it or not is to bump the most relevant thread related
to the topic you are asking about. In this case it would have been most
appropriate to bump an existing azide thread rather than start a new one.
In your thread you objected to that, but that is a forum rule that serves well
as the search engine is rather inefficient. Again that is specific to this forum
and rather you agree with it or not, it is a rule in this forum. I don't always
agree with it but I follow it as should you.

As for aga's thread, I think that is a different issue. I would vote for a
wild ideas section under non-chemistry. Most users don't have access to
whimsy so suggesting such a thread be sent there is probably inappropriate
as well. The thread seems to be productive and definitely is a spawning ground
for useful ideas. Unfortunately, it hasn't yielded much actual usable information.
I don't think it is detrius but it also isn't yet 'science'. It is just ideas.
Perhaps it is appropriately miscellaneous.

DistractionGrating - 21-4-2014 at 03:41

Quote: Originally posted by macckone

IR spectroscopy should be easy
for a home scientist to accomplish and I believe there is now
a specific thread on that.

As a clueless new user to the forum who is here specifically to discuss my earnest desire to be able to come up with a DIY NIR spectrometer, I'd welcome direction in terms of whether I should contribute to an existing thread that I may or may not be already aware of, or if I should simply continue the thread that I recently started. My thread can be found here: https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=30...

I am used to forums preferring that slightly different subject matter = start your own thread, but reading the previous comments in this thread, I see that perhaps I should pile onto an existing thread. I want to be a good sciencemadness.org citizen, so direction in this regard is welcome.

Thanks in advance.

EDIT: I find your comment very encouraging, by the way

[Edited on 21-4-2014 by DistractionGrating]

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 05:05

macckone, Thanks for the insight about the forum rules. Like you said, I may not agree very well with such rules, but I'll make sure not to make the same mistake again, regarding opening a new thread. I could discuss the matter further, about disagreeing with the rule, if you're inclined to do so.

Bert - 21-4-2014 at 05:17

Quote: Originally posted by DistractionGrating

I am used to forums preferring that slightly different subject matter = start your own thread, but reading the previous comments in this thread, I see that perhaps I should pile onto an existing thread. I want to be a good sciencemadness.org citizen, so direction in this regard is welcome.

Thanks in advance.

EDIT: I find your comment very encouraging, by the way

[Edited on 21-4-2014 by DistractionGrating]

There is a FAQ that explains site policy on this clearly.

Look here- new members, please read this FAQ before you begin posting.

DistractionGrating - 21-4-2014 at 07:01

I guess the only response I can make to that is to apologize, and ask your forgiveness for being so stupid and lazy.

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 07:47

Quote: Originally posted by DistractionGrating

I guess the only response I can make to that is to apologize, and ask your forgiveness for being so stupid and lazy.

Stupid and lazy? I guess you didn't even take some time to read the all thing and then comment on the issue...

Bert - 21-4-2014 at 08:34

Quote: Originally posted by DistractionGrating

I guess the only response I can make to that is to apologize, and ask your forgiveness for being so stupid and lazy.

Probably 90% of the people who find sciencemadness.org come from a web search, going directly to their topic of interest in the forum. Then they register, and head RIGHT back to what interested them to research, read, come up with a question and then make their first post- Often starting a new thread on an existing topic to do so.

Then moderators then get to decide how best to handle this- Check the number of new members joining every day, it's a regular part of our work. The Energetics Materials section in particular is a magnet for incorrectly formatted, repetitive first posts starting a new thread on previously covered topics- That will need to be shifted to "beginnings" or "detritus".

You're pretty average in that regard, quit worrying about it!

The only stupid question is the one you were too self conscious to ask.

.

The sad part is, the home page with the FAQ also has links to the VERY useful library and some other excellent resources

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 09:17

I didn't get if you were talking to me or not, but the topic about azides isn't at all my first post here. Search around and you shall find many more posts of me. IIRC I've opened only two threads, regarding doubts I had about certain compounds.t And I guarantee you I researched everywhere, before opening the threads.

Still not sure on why so much agression about a topic in Begginings, coming from you, too. Superiority Complex, perhaps? Do you feel complied to ram your way through threads, posting like if you were a big mentor, like you did with my thread? Because, I didn't need it, I but needed an answer. And probably, so many others like me.

blogfast25 - 21-4-2014 at 09:36

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

Superiority Complex, perhaps? Do you feel complied to ram your way through threads, posting like if you were a big mentor, like you did with my thread? Because, I didn't need it, I but needed an answer. And probably, so many others like me.

Can you stoop any lower, HgDinis25?

I see a lot of utter stupidity being posted on this forum. Managing that via detritus and thread merging is necessary.

When someone who knows more than you corrects you no 'superiority complex' comes into it.

Here's another part of science: LEARNING.

As regards keeping an open mind, that's a two sided argument: do you also keep an 'open mind' about things like the Holocaust? Some things have been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Open mindedness is necessary but it's often used as a stick to defend whacky ideas with. For open mindedness [in science] to work it needs to go hand in hand with skepsis. The two don't always sit nicely together though...

[Edited on 21-4-2014 by blogfast25]

elementcollector1 - 21-4-2014 at 09:45

I'm beginning to think this is some psychologically ingrained response - after all, how many times have we seen a moderator, accused of being arrogant, close-minded, and now superior after they locked and nuked a thread of the OP's? They're never correct, either - they're just resentful. Frankly, I'm surprised we haven't been handing out bans like they're Easter chocolates.

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 10:02

Ellementcollector1, this isn't a topic that goes against a moderator. Read the all thing, and you'll find a member (not a moderator) making false assumtpions just like Etaoin Shrdlu stated, wich, in my opinion, points towards a close mind opinion. Just first go read it, ok?

And I don't resent any moderator,actually there's only one moderator that posted in any of the topics I made reference off. That argument is invalid.

blogfast25, Indeed science is all about learning. However, if you read the topics referenced, you wont see anyone correcting anything scientifical. If so, I ask you to point where that happened. You won't be able to. But I welcome the effort.

Anyway, I really feel you're missing the point. Like Etaoin Shrdlu stated, it very worrisome when members jump on you because you simply didn't assume a general fact as true in a specific case. The worst: said member was wrong (in ethanol use, go read it).

I may be wrong but I'm getting the feeling most of you who are talking about moderators and posts in the wrong place didn't actually read what i posted or missed the point completly.

Etaoin Shrdlu - 21-4-2014 at 10:11

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

Still not sure on why so much agression about a topic in Begginings, coming from you, too. Superiority Complex, perhaps? Do you feel complied to ram your way through threads, posting like if you were a big mentor, like you did with my thread? Because, I didn't need it, I but needed an answer. And probably, so many others like me.

What? Bert was polite and pointed out a potentially useful thread. You are the one who took time out of your day to post "Now, with all due respect, cut that Noob treatment attitude, ok?" That's the only superiority complex I'm seeing. If you would just have responded in a similarly polite fashion that you read the thread and couldn't find any information about using NaOH in your procedure of interest, or even that your question was misunderstood, somehow I doubt there would have been any trouble.

There's nothing wrong with asking questions, but there's also no reason to assure everyone they're not your "Mentor Teacher" and should refrain from posting. Chill out a little.

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

Anyway, I really feel you're missing the point. Like Etaoin Shrdlu stated, it very worrisome when members jump on you because you simply didn't assume a general fact as true in a specific case. The worst: said member was wrong (in ethanol use, go read it).

That particular thread was downright scary. I know nearly nothing about manufacturing azides but I know I wouldn't belittle someone for trying to confirm how to do it properly. Bert didn't contribute to that, though.

[Edited on 4-21-2014 by Etaoin Shrdlu]

elementcollector1 - 21-4-2014 at 10:18

Quote:

This was the basis of my post. Note the resentful attitude. Towards a moderator.

Only thing Bert was doing was posting the forum rules, which is something everyone should have read by now. But no, you decided to jump down his throat for it, and therein lies the basis of my argument: That you (and so many others) are behaving like children. Perhaps the reason the thread was closed was twofold: One, that we are already drowning in azide threads and really don't want a new one (and thus, as has been said almost every time a duplicate thread comes up, you should have UTFSE'd and appendixed your queries onto an existing thread), and two, these:

Quote:

Now, with all due respect, cut that Noob treatment attitude, ok?

Quote:

I'm here to learn some good, advanced chemistry, so why don't you stop pretending you are the Mentor Teacher trying to guide the poor soul who isn't aware that google exists and simply answer the question. It would have saved time to the both of us. Or, if you don't know, please restain from posting.

Fact number one: You are a noob. I am *also* a noob. And until we go through college, and get a degree in chemistry or a related science, we won't be anything else.
Fact number two: The moderators are, in fact, smarter than the rest of us.

They're not closing your topics due to a lack of "correcting anything scientifical". Your topics are being closed because you continue to whine when you aren't getting your cookie.

Bert - 21-4-2014 at 10:48

Quote: Originally posted by elementcollector1

I am *also* a noob. And until we go through college, and get a degree in chemistry or a related science, we won't be anything else.

College can be great, but it will only be what you make of it. Get all you can-

But when you step out the gate with your degree and go into industry or academia- Noob status is instantly restored! Just be ready to be the best noob you can... A lot of amateur/student hands on experience will be your friend.

Quote: Originally posted by elementcollector1

Fact number two: The moderators are, in fact, smarter than the rest of us.

Thanks! But no, we're not. We ARE often more experienced at certain things we've done a lot of though...

Some of you are certainly smarter than I am. And some of you have more modern or deeper knowledge of the subjects you've invested time & effort in than I do. I sweep the floors here partly to listen in on what regular members have thought up.

woelen - 21-4-2014 at 11:19

@HgDinis25: As I expressed in my U2U with you some days ago, I partly understand your feelings. When I was young, I also sometimes had ideas and when these ideas were dismissed, then I felt bad about that.

Now from the other side. Bert has many years of experience in pyrotechnics and energetics, as an advanced amateur and also professionally. Energetics is one of the least forgiving parts of chemistry if something goes wrong. It is his main task as a moderator to assure that especially in the field of energetics sciencemadness obtains a certain level of accuracy, quality and responsibility. So, especially in the field of energetics rules may be adhered to somewhat more strictly, just to assure that sciencemadness does not become the home of k3wls and wannabee bombers who just want a cheap quick BOOM. Btw, just to assure that you do not understand me wrong, I do not say that you are such a k3wl (actually, based on your posts I think you definitely are not).

What I want to say to you, with an age of 17 (according to your profile) and with only little experience in the field of chemistry and particularly in the sub-field of energetics, it sometimes is wise to listen to more experienced members. Sometimes it is wise to know your limitations and to be humble.

I adviced you to create a new thread, making clear what is new and different, compared to already existing threads and if you do so, then no one will remove the thread. Good that you created that thread. I think, however, that it was not that wise to create this thread about closed mind behavior.

Then there is some other thing. On a forum, any forum, you sometimes need a thick skin as well. Not everybody is soft and gentle in his/her responses and you simply have to cope with it. It is a sign of wisdom and being grown up if you cope with such posts in a calm and easy way and if things become too bad, simply ignoring them is the best (and you may always report to one of the moderators if posts become really insulting).

I wish you the best on sciencemadness and I sincerely hope that you will like sciencemadness (even after the little initial hassle) and become a good contributor with experiments and ideas. Newbies are not haunted, but are encouraged to learn, experiment, teach themselves a scientific way of thinking, and sometimes they need to be corrected. That is just as in real life, nothing personal.

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 11:27

Quote:

Did you search the sciencemadness.org forum for information on azide synthesis? If you did, you would have found a LOT of threads on Azides and azide syntheses, some of which could have answered your question.

Elementcollector, that's a quote from Bert. Notice how he asks a question and then cotinues stating what would have happened if I had read all the topics. He never gives the benefit of the doubt, he never gives the second alternative. Problem is, I did went through it all, like I stated in my second topic.
Now, I understand that spoon feeding users isn't an alternative around here, however I merely asked a question about reaction mechanisms (in OC they are usually complex) hoping to get some expert answers about them. Is that asking to be spoon fed? I don't think so, and I challenge you to go through this entire forum to find a direct answer to my question.
So that's one of the points I wanted to cover with this thread: directly assuming someone doesn't do the homework.

I understand that Bert could have been acting in the best interests of the forum rules. But he could have done so and tried to give an answer. That's the scientific spiritus, share knowledge. I didn't know, he acted like he knew: logical outcome - share it.

Off topic: If you consider the entire world of chemistry and everything it reaches, so much knowledge hidden in books and people, you'll never get 1% of it and you'll be forever a noob. That's our fate xD
Willingness to learn more and more, to share knowledge and brainstorm ideas - seems to me the great spiritus of the amateur that diferenciates them from a, lacking a better word, Noob.

[Edit]
Woelen, thanks for your response. About the energetic part, I totally agree with you. When getting into such field, one quickly sees that there's no forgiveness: look in the wrong way to a fulminate and it will take an eye of you. Speak too loud to an organic peroxide and it will rip of your fingers and scare your pretty face to the rest of your life. I also understand the heavy treatment kewls receive. Let me assure however, that my question was merely theorethical on how the mechanics worked out (my question about swapping KOH and NaOH was to see if there was a HN3 intermediate). i simply got too curious to let it go. Like I said in my posts, I had started wondering about it for more than a month.

Also, about the crital replies, thats usual when you talk with mad scientists xD A scientifical personality usually likes to shread ideas apart and handle them to they useless creator (just exagerating a bit here). My responses where exatly like you described, I don't expect anyone to take this personally. I criticize facts and actions taken by people, not people themseleves. I believe Bart acted wrong with me, but I also know is one of the best chemists around here.

[Edited on 21-4-2014 by HgDinis25]

elementcollector1 - 21-4-2014 at 12:00

Quote:

Notice how he asks a question and then cotinues stating what would have happened if I had read all the topics. He never gives the benefit of the doubt, he never gives the second alternative.

And, looking back, would any of it have answered your question? Bert claims it would, you claim it would not.

Quote:

and I challenge you to go through this entire forum to find a direct answer to my question.

Not being an EM expert or even novice (no experience whatsoever), I politely decline, as I would likely get quickly lost.

Quote:

I understand that Bert could have been acting in the best interests of the forum rules. But he could have done so and tried to give an answer. That's the scientific spiritus, share knowledge. I didn't know, he acted like he knew: logical outcome - share it.

To be honest, I can't say I like that type of attitude either - "You should already know the answer!" However, expound upon your problems and they'll generally answer, assuming they haven't been answered already by a previous topic.

Quote:

Off topic: If you consider the entire world of chemistry and everything it reaches, so much knowledge hidden in books and people, you'll never get 1% of it and you'll be forever a noob. That's our fate xD
Willingness to learn more and more, to share knowledge and brainstorm ideas - seems to me the great spiritus of the amateur that diferenciates them from a, lacking a better word, Noob.

The fool thinks he knows and can explain everything, but the smart man knows that he knows almost nothing.

That being said, reaction mechanisms are complex. My best guess as to the answer can be found here.

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 12:09

Thanks for the link but (like I stated on the thread I made) I found the anwser already. It was "hidden" in an awsome, and quite pricy, book:
http://books.google.pt/books?id=VqosZeMjNjEC&pg=PA119&am...

It was referenced in the video, but it took me quite some time to find a link that allowed me to enter and read a part of it.

hyfalcon - 21-4-2014 at 13:54

If you want the whole book here:

http://lib.freescienceengineering.org/view.php?id=661636

Bert - 21-4-2014 at 14:47

Now THAT was a VERY nice thing to do for the forum!

Thanks-

(Edit)
Downloaded it to my iPhone, away from the office for a week. No problems, hopefully no malware...

May go blind reading it that way, but what the heck-

[Edited on 21-4-2014 by Bert]

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 14:52

Hyfalcon, Thank you very much for the link. Isn't the book copyrighted or anything? It costs around one hundread bucks in the link I found.

Bert, What are you talking about, exactly? If it is about Hyfalcon awsome link, I totally agree.

hyfalcon - 21-4-2014 at 15:04

Thank the Russian's I guess. Unfortunately, I don't seem to be able to download it. Guess I'll have to look into a proxy.

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 15:15

Well, thank you Mother Russia. Does your country block you from downloading it?

BromicAcid - 21-4-2014 at 15:59

Not only is the book copyrighted, but it was actually penned by a member of this forum, Len1 who has not been active in some time but was a great resource when he was around. And yes, it's expensive, as an author myself of technical manuals, the audience is very small and hence the number of books sold is small as well. Prices are jacked up so you can make <i>something</i> reasonable but in the end with all the work you put into it you might only end up making $2 an hour or so

Personally I won't take part in downloading the book since it is the spawn of one of our own. Though I may purchase it someday if I can wriggle a signature from the author.

On the subject of closed minded behavior, it's not so much that as you have not proven yourself yet. Yes, everyone is welcome to post to this forum but there is a degree of respect that must be earned by giving consistently good posts over time. Everyone here is judged by the body of their work and for the moment your body of work is small and new. But there are a number of members that have stuck with this forum for years myself included who started off asking naive questions and getting scolded by moderators.

Take your time, earn your stripes, and respect will follow. Until that point, back up your posts with research and post references. The burden of proof lies with you to show you're putting the effort fourth.

plante1999 - 21-4-2014 at 16:21

May I get a list of your publications, bromic?

BTW, I got a copy of len's book.

S.C. Wack - 21-4-2014 at 17:05

HgDinis25, your mind seems to be closed to the idea that this forum existed before you joined and probably everything has come up too many times already. Don't expect the members to be an answer monkey for new kids. If you would UTFSE, you'd find that azide production and len1's book are not news, and they have been discussed at length.

The greatest book ever written is an amazing new discovery? Most downloads of it came years ago. He sold the book to the publisher and gets nothing further from it, it's all there in the past.

Zyklon-A - 21-4-2014 at 17:11

I cant download it either, my computer keeps saying there's a virus.

HgDinis25 - 21-4-2014 at 17:24

For me yes, it is a new discovery (I didn't found out about the book here, I just found that you could download it for free). I don't expect no one to be an answer monkey. Please just go read the threads we're talking about because you obviously didn't read them. You missed the point where a member is jumped, just because he didn't assume that something that usually happens would happen in a certain situation. Please, actually read the entire thing or don't comment on matter you don't fully understand.

Zephyr - 21-4-2014 at 21:16

Quote: Originally posted by Zyklonb

I cant download it either, my computer keeps saying there's a virus.

My computer says the same thing, but McAfee just deletes what ever my computer thought was dangerous. I wouldn't worry about it if you are confident I you security soft ware.

blogfast25 - 22-4-2014 at 04:39

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

Please, actually read the entire thing or don't comment on matter you don't fully understand.

Please stop telling us we 'don't understand'. We do, we've been here many times before.

HgDinis25 - 22-4-2014 at 06:01

Blogfast, if you did, then you should be noticing a member jumping on another member because he didn't want to take something for granted (I'm talking about the last thread abouy azides and the ethanol issue).

Mailinmypocket - 22-4-2014 at 07:08

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

Etaoin Shrdlu, hehe Snarky, pretty much me. I think you're the first person to actually see the problem here. You completrly understood me.

I don't think this thread has become anything close to what the title leads to believe. Is this about close minded behavior or a whining zone about one new member's inability to follow the normal forum decorum?

Zyklon-A - 22-4-2014 at 08:06

Exactly what I'm thinking. You have to be open-minded, but not so open-minded that your brains fall out!

hissingnoise - 22-4-2014 at 11:28

HgDinis, you appear to have the extreme sensitivities of a prepubescent girl and the aspirations of a crack-addled unabomber . . .

And the two don't seem to sit together very well!

Why don't you try to man up or boy up, or whatfuckingever?

HgDinis25 - 22-4-2014 at 11:55

hissingnoise, Seriously I don't even know how to answer propely to you. That's too much unfounded insults for me to try to reason with you.

Mailinmypocket, actually the goal of the thread was mainly to report hissingnoise behavior on a reaction mechanisms thread. In the post you quoted, Etaoin Shrdlu pretty much states the main problem. Re-posting the link:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=30177

Zyklonb, fully agree with your metaphor. That's the reason we generally don't accept people trying to sell us chemical free prodcuts.

Etaoin Shrdlu - 22-4-2014 at 14:16

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

Please, actually read the entire thing or don't comment on matter you don't fully understand.

Please stop telling us we 'don't understand'. We do, we've been here many times before.

Shaking my head. All emphasis in following quotes is mine.

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

Can this reaction work to produce Sodium Azide, if the KOH is substituted by NaOH? I ask this because I don't know the reaction mechanisms nor what's happening. Can someone share some information about the mechanisms?

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

I want to understand the reaction mechanisms, and the multiple reactions happening. That way, I can acess if Sodium Azide can also be produced, by using NaOH instead of KOH.

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25

I'll try to give more details about where I'm stuck.

I know that IPN reacts with Hydrazine Hydrate, Potassium Hydroxide and Ethanol, yelding IPA, Potassium Azide and water. Now, is the KOH there to react with any HN3 produced to form the KN3 or does the potassium ion plays an important role in the reaction?

Responses:

Quote: Originally posted by hissingnoise

OK, don't take this the wrong way, but if your understanding of inorganics is so lacking, you probably shouldn't attempt any but the simplest procedures until you, at least, get a feeling of how they proceed?

Quote: Originally posted by BromicAcid

As for your question on KOH vs NaOH, hissingnoise was on you because most chemists lean early on that the two are pretty much interchangeable, being that they are strong bases and dissociate 'fully' in water. There are a few compounds stabilized more by the larger potassium cation but for the most part you can swap the two with impunity.

1. Yes, HgDinis was touchy, abrasive, and acting superior throughout most of the thread.

2. The lack of theoretical knowledge, the need for extreme caution, a mention of the existing literature reference, a recommendation not to be foolhardy, all relevant. But getting on someone's case because they didn't assume without asking that NaOH and KOH could be swapped out is not an appropriate response to a question about *profanity-of-choice*ing azide production.

HgDinis25 - 22-4-2014 at 14:24

Etaoin Shrdlu, I take responsability for your topic 1. I was aready caustic because of the first topic I made. Like I said, that's the closed mind aspect: something that generaly happens don't always happens. And assuming that it always happens is not thinking outside the box. Like I stated, though, the book really helped and I got to understand the mechanisms proving, for instance, that hissingnoise on assuming that ethanol was present because of end product solubility (something that generally happens but doesn't in this specific case).