The following will be posted on Wikipedia as the new article for SciForums whenever it is sufficiently completed. I will update this original post as comments and suggestions are given. Fill in the blanks: "SciForums.com (an acronym for Science Forums) was founded in May 1999. It's goals were general science discussion, with a specific interest in machine intelligence and "exoscience" - the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Since then, the forum has diversified considerably, so that now discussions tend to focus more on the social and ethical implications of science and technology, rather than "hard science" as such, although there is still room for such discussions. And in fact, many discussions have delved into topics of considerable hard science interest. Discussions of current affairs and politics have also proven to be very popular, along with general discussions of ethical issues and religion. Today SciForums has evolved into a more general user-based forum. The SciForums community is composed of all levels of experience and expertise; and as such is a valuable educational resource where ideas can be proposed for critique by peers and practising scientists. The following subject categorizes are listed on its website for its members to post on. Feel free to browze through its collection of thoughts and to join in on humanity's quest for knowledge, answers and discussions about today's imposing topics: Life (Free Thoughts, Art & Culture) World (World Events, Politics, Business & Economics, History) Science (General Science & Technology; Science & Society; Human Science; Earth Science; Astronomy, Exobiology & Cosmology; Biology & Genetics; Physics & Math) Technology (Computer Science, Intelligence & Machines) Philosophy (General Philosophy, Religion, Eastern Philosophy) Subcultures (SciFi, Pseudoscience, Parapsychology)
First, make sure it is sciforums, with an "s". It was founded in May 1999, with Dave W as the first registered user (as can be seen from the member list). Originally, as I understand it (I joined in 2001), it's goals were general science discussion, with a specific interest in machine intelligence and "exoscience" - the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Since then, the forum has diversified considerably, so that now discussions tend to focus more on the social and ethical implications of science and technology, rather than "hard science" as such (although there is still room for such discussions). Discussions of current affairs and politics have also proven to be very popular, along with general discussions of ethical issues and religion.
How many times does it need to be pointed out to you that this is wrong? This forum was not created for the general scientific community. Sorry that you seem to draw some sort of prestige from the idea, but it's just not the truth. Not only this, but the forums were an afterthought. You don't even know the history of the place. Now, you mention updating your orignal post? You might think to update it first to humbly ask the people who do know the history of this place to write the story, instead of providing a mad lib in which they might 'fill in the blanks'. Plus, I note that you missed four forums. Wonder why?
I would also point out that it is hardly a science forum at all. It is rather a general forum with a science subsection, which is generally minimalized for the other sections, in which far greater discussion takes place. It was originally called Styleforums, too.
Invert: Add content not criticism. The last four are for Sciforums internal issues, not original posts. "Cesspool" is where the garbage is redirected. Remember, this will be a guiding force into who and what Sciforums is. We must not dwell on downward trends [questionable]: look toward the future. James R: New edit/update/suggestions? I could post it now as is but will let this thread run a few days.
Sciforums Members' Favourite Threads: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=58686 It needs to be noted at some point on the main page that - as the forum elders constantly remind us - Sciforums was far, far better in the old days before we all came along and spoiled it.
This we be added at the discretion of the "forum elders." This is not a "history," nor a "revisionists history," of any kind. It is an intro.
invert_nexus: If you think you ought to write the article, have a go and post it here. Put your money where your mouth is.
The community is composed of all levels of experience and expertise; and as such is valuable educational resource where ideas can be proposed for critique by peers and practising scientists.
First thread 06-22-99, 10:38 PM "Evolution vs. Creation." http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=2106? Also, maybe we should add something about the humor, sarcasm and wit?
05-29-99, 11:07 PM "Re: Netscape difficulties" http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=90 Not as interesting, I grant you.
Valich, Communist Hamster had this idea before you. And it failed. However, he had started it with little actual content. It wouldn't hurt to try it again. I just don't think it should usurp my idea of a dedicated wiki. In fact, I think having our own wiki would strengthen the relevance of a Wikipedia article on us.
Also: SciForums. It shows this at the top of every page in the link to the index page. It's also the title of the webpage which shows in the top bar thing in your browser window.
16:21, 14 May 2006 Bhadani (Talk | contribs) deleted "Sciforums" (content was: '{{db-empty}}' - contents described as nonsense) What I have above is not nonsense. The Wiki Users who deleted those first posts seem a bit on the nonsense side to me and I'll take care of that. I don't know what the original article stated; but, we have good content: it will fly. I can't double bold the "S" and the "F" because Wiki style dictates that the first word of the entry be entirely bold and be the title of the article itself. I will add links so that anyone who searchs "Sciforum" or "Sciforum.com" will be redirected to "Sciforums." Cases have been corrected.
Perhaps it would help cement the article's relevance if a lot of members from here on SciForums went and did some edits on the article where they could. I'm already there under the same username. I can certainly get on it. If you believe the article will survive as it is, create it. Then I and hopefully others will go over and do our stuff. And make sure the article's title is SciForums note the cases.
I remember that month fondly. I hit my best score in Links386 of -19. Last shot just made it over the water and bounced within 9 feet of the hole and I sank it for an eagle and punched the air in delight. lol
