Tesla Wants to Build a Battery for Your House

[inetdog]

The immediately preceding posts, back to LivingLarge's post about Russ, have been copied to a new thread in General Discussion, http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/showth...he-first-to-go!.

Please take all future off topic posts about Forum policy to that thread and also try to keep the personal attacks down in this thread.
Thank you.

[Willy T]

You moron. Liar Liar pants on fire. Such a huge lie any child can detect it. If LL was on your ignore list, you could not respond to him you idiot. Really stupid. Those username and time/date stamps hold up in court. So here are your signs.

Liar
Hack
Stupid.

You earned each and everyone of them. Misrepresentation is enough to get you BANNED WILLY.

You mean that someone would actually think a post like this is inappropriate, seems like it's business as usual. Why would anyone ever answer a post on here when they have to put up with this kind of trash.

[DanKegel]

That sounds fair to me. +1

I'd change "will jump in" to "may jump in". Don't want to overpromise.

If you can make it shorter, though, please do, lest eyes glaze over.

If the board is serious about the "don't mention installers by name" policy,
that deserves a mention, too.

So, maybe something like:

-- snip --
SolarPanelTalk is a great place to discuss anything and everything about solar energy - advantages and disadvantages, how to use it, how to get the most bang for the buck, problems to avoid, applicable laws, etc. etc.

Please do not post names of installers, or advertise your business, on this board. Please see the sister sites
http://www.solarreviews.com/ and http://www.solar-estimate.org/ for info about installers.

Please keep messages on topic. Discussions that veer off topic should move to the General Discussion area.
Personal attacks and trolling are always inappropriate.

Official site moderators may enforce these rules as appropriate; users are encouraged to use the Ignore List
(http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/profile.php?do=ignorelist) setting to avoid seeing messages from annoying people.
-- snip --

?

And please create a new thread for this discussion, it's gone off topic

[J.P.M.]

Tough call, and in any case not mine, but maybe a good start. There are probably no 100% correct answers. I'd favor a bit more structured policy that dealt with personal attacks more vigorously. Such attacks do no good that I can see, and may well hurt the quality of the discourse. Such actions (the attacks) seem petty, childish and non productive.

FWIW, unless it's to correct some error (as I see such an error), I deal with such posters by not responding to their spoor and venom. Basically, I shun them.

IMO, these seemingly interminable and juvenile pissing matches detract from the quality of the forum and (while not assuming for one hot second anyone cares) have made me seriously consider severing contact. I respectfully assign some responsibility for allowing (to the point of tacitly condoning) what I consider abusive personal attacks by posters on a regular and predictable basis to the moderators and owners for letting it persist as long as it often does.

Still, there seem to be more than a few posters here who could benefit from a bit thicker skin.

Just my $0.02. Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

[pleppik]

PS: Compared to many other forums, Solar Panel Talk seems a little light on formal policies.
With the exception of section 10.2 at http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/faq.ph...q_terms_of_use, there is not really much about content. Most of the verbiage there is boilerplate/generic to keep the lawyers happy and to protect Solar Reviews.
I am perfectly happy to continue with "unwritten" policies, but would also be willing to help formalize them if there is enough interest in that.

Moderating an online forum is a hard job, and formal policies are only part of the answer.

Of course there should be a general policy against harassment, stalking, threats, "doxxing," and similar boorish behavior.

But in addition to all that, the Moderator's role is really to maintain the discussion so the community can be the kind of community it wants to be. Like a gardener, the job involves some combination of planting, pruning, and weeding.

There are as many different community standards as there are communities, but the risk in being too proscriptive and rule-bound is that the worst trolls positively revel in exploiting the loopholes. It's behavior any parent will be familiar with, and fortunately most people outgrow it by age three or four...

So personally, I would rather see a general statement of what kind of discussions we're trying to foster combined with moderators who share the same vision and have some discretion to promote that direction.

And props for working to promote this forum. You at least convinced me to come back and lurk for a while if nothing else.

[inetdog]

PS: Compared to many other forums, Solar Panel Talk seems a little light on formal policies.
With the exception of section 10.2 at http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/faq.ph...q_terms_of_use, there is not really much about content. Most of the verbiage there is boilerplate/generic to keep the lawyers happy and to protect Solar Reviews.
I am perfectly happy to continue with "unwritten" policies, but would also be willing to help formalize them if there is enough interest in that.

[solar pete]

OK, here is a draft (just from me) policy statement on the Forum. Others may have a different understanding, and just FYI Russ has not been around for more than a month.

1. In a technical topic area, digressions from purely technical matters into policy and political questions may still be appropriate as long as they are put forward in a way that does not constitute a personal attack or trolling. The moderators will jump in to suppress things that go clearly beyond the pale.
2. In the General Discussion topic there is no need for any technical connection to solar energy at all, although posts in the solar energy realm that do not seem to fit another topic are certainly welcome. The restrictions about politics and religion (including secular humanism ) will be less strictly enforced there but the rules on personal attacks will be in full force.

Note that one man's free speech is another man's trolling, so the Moderators do not have a simple job. I personally will tend to lean toward the free speech side. Until I get fed up, of course.

That sounds fair to me. +1

[inetdog]

OK, here is a draft (just from me) policy statement on the Forum. Others may have a different understanding, and just FYI Russ has not been around for more than a month.

1. In a technical topic area, digressions from purely technical matters into policy and political questions may still be appropriate as long as they are put forward in a way that does not constitute a personal attack or trolling. The moderators will jump in to suppress things that go clearly beyond the pale.
2. In the General Discussion topic there is no need for any technical connection to solar energy at all, although posts in the solar energy realm that do not seem to fit another topic are certainly welcome. The restrictions about politics and religion (including secular humanism ) will be less strictly enforced there but the rules on personal attacks will be in full force.

Note that one man's free speech is another man's trolling, so the Moderators do not have a simple job. I personally will tend to lean toward the free speech side. Until I get fed up, of course.

[Hirox]

And Hello to you Hirox. Welcome to Solar Panel Talk

Please tell us more about yourself and what you want to learn concerning solar technology.

I'm from sweden and interested in engineering, my interest have drawn me to solarpower and rockets.

Russ would have so enjoyed banning you. I almost miss the old guy.

Seems like a healthy message board... -.-

[SunEagle]

Bear in mind that the fossil fuel industry exists almost purely at the leisure of billions in annual subsidies - ditto for agriculture and plenty of other sectors. Sometimes subsidies are just "crony capitalism" but the truth is, sometimes they help beneficial new industries get off the ground floor, which I think is the case with Tesla's electric cars and solar power innovations.

Try to remember that the fossil fuel industry is world wide and subsidies do not necessarily exist in other countries yet those businesses are very profitable.

[rclark]

Its really starting to look like a house of cards......

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...ry.html#page=1

Bear in mind that the fossil fuel industry exists almost purely at the leisure of billions in annual subsidies - ditto for agriculture and plenty of other sectors. Sometimes subsidies are just "crony capitalism" but the truth is, sometimes they help beneficial new industries get off the ground floor, which I think is the case with Tesla's electric cars and solar power innovations.

[Sunking]

Hum wonder who said Musk makes all his money from tax payers. Who said that? He gets $35K of subsidies for every car he sells. If not for that Tesla would have went bankrupt years ago.

[Alisobob]

Its really starting to look like a house of cards......

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html#page=1

[Sunny Solar]

I find multiple references indicating that the two batteries are NOT the same. Here is just one:

"The PowerWall has two different models using 2 different generic cell chemistries.[3] Tesla uses proprietary technology for packaging and cooling the cells in packs with liquid coolant.[3] Elon Musk has given away the patents for Powerwalls as he did with Tesla cars.[4]

The daily cycle 7 kWh battery uses nickel-manganese-cobalt chemistry[5] and can be cycled 5000 times.[5][6] The other is a 10 kWh battery, using a nickel-cobalt-aluminum cathode[5] like the Tesla Model S,[6] and is for weekly or emergency use and has higher energy density but a lesser cycle life of 1000-1500 cycles.[7][8][9][10]"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerwall_(Tesla)

That cant possibly be right as Sunking is never wrong.



Sunking post #200....Beg your pardon but the 7 and 10 Kwh batteries are the exact same battery.

[Samsolar]

Perhaps not the same?

I am typing slowly so you can understand and did not listen the first 50 times when it was announced.

Only difference between them is the firmware to restrict the DOD. Both are a 400 volt 25 AH battery (10 Kwh). Same cabinet, exact same dimensions, exact same weight, exact same battery, just different firmware in the code that restricts DOD.

I find multiple references indicating that the two batteries are NOT the same. Here is just one:

"The PowerWall has two different models using 2 different generic cell chemistries.[3] Tesla uses proprietary technology for packaging and cooling the cells in packs with liquid coolant.[3] Elon Musk has given away the patents for Powerwalls as he did with Tesla cars.[4]

The daily cycle 7 kWh battery uses nickel-manganese-cobalt chemistry[5] and can be cycled 5000 times.[5][6] The other is a 10 kWh battery, using a nickel-cobalt-aluminum cathode[5] like the Tesla Model S,[6] and is for weekly or emergency use and has higher energy density but a lesser cycle life of 1000-1500 cycles.[7][8][9][10]"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerwall_(Tesla)