On the pecking order in Sci Forums

There is a universal pecking order, if you don't see it maybe it's cause your don't like your rank or the role you play, anyway, - things seem to fall into a hierachy of some sort so why not in sci-forums? Start another thread if you'd like to question the existence of any such order, I'd like to hear about the nature of this order.
Is it the mentally strong preying on the weak & curious? How does an individual gain power & respect.Or is this a role playing scenario where we all naturally assume a 'place" in a virtual society? Who determines the "Chief & Indians"? What personality "gets ahead" or becomes naturally 'attractive'.
There is a way to get ahead in this world but how do you do it in Sci-forums, by the number of posts?? By the filth you spew at others or wit? & the question I really wanted to ask I haven't been here long who is at the top of the hill at the moment?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Some people come here to get in that kind of an internet heirarchy. Reason being because there are people who see these places as a connection to the outside world. And, perhaps, in coming here they will feel better about their status in the actual world.

Of course I could be wrong.

That's why I tend to avoid chit chat, and instead prefer to lurk(notice the amount of time I've been here vs number of posts..). When I do write, I basically cut to the chase. No matter who we're dealing with(*stokes alter ego very softlyyy*).

There is a definite heirarchy. You're right. But that's only because people let themselves get into it. Quite pitiful indeed..

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Knowing the right people has a pretty big impact on whether or not you're taken seriously around here...and how much you can get away with.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Having a big mouth helps. You don't necessarily have to be right.

 

There is a universal pecking order,

if its based on who presents the least fallacious arguments, so what?
if its based on join date or post count, i piss on that
screw the gossip and lets get back to having some fun

*screw the pm's too! imagine all the handles being represented by disembodied brains

 

My PM box has been empty now for several weeks...i must be very unimportant.

 

There's a pecking order?

 

list it.

 

Well....there have been many thread on 'who is your favourite sciforumer' or something close, and always the same pattern of people emerge as the 'victors'.

As a real person I know that it is quite rare to find two people who actually like the same person. This then means that either these chosen people are really the most interesting people on sciforums, or there is some kind of unwritten hiearchy in place.

Since I am a skeptic I vote for the last option.


And yes...obviously I also try to influence the hierachy.

 

heyya all

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

yo firdroirich

to have an idea of a predetermined concept of value suggests a concept of bigotted mind set

why do you assume that you are not as important as anyone else?

groove on

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Interesting question, I am interested in the Psychological and Philosophical answers to these question, anyone have any ideas?
It doesn't matter how many posts you have sent , you are not going to get promoted or anything.......there should be some incentive for people who post more.....on this forum you can shout but you are never heard!!

 

should there be some incentive for people who post more?

should there be some incentive for people who post more?some sort of reward for the time they put in...or is it all a waste of time?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I guess that is a rhetorical question.

 

Well there is the obvious heirarchy of power. Porfiry being top dog, then the mods, and so forth. But there is another heirachy which some so as being related to post count or length of time here. I admit I have more respect for someone with a high post count or been here a while (because I would have conversed with them at some point) but that is unfair. I know this but yet I just can't stop thining that way. I'm weak I know. The amount of posts is irrelevent, people could just spew crap or just don't stop talking. The amount of time here is irrelevant but not as much as since you've been here a while you're a veteran and know the way the system works here. So I guess that deserves some credit. But that doesn't make people smart who make anyone less of a person/member. A new member with a way out idea may come on, tell us and we could ignore them or put them down but for all we know it could have been Stephen Hawking.
Also, there seems to be a system which means people have to gain respect, they start off with none and try and climb their way to the top, get noticed, not through crap, through knowledge. I have been told that I am noticed because of my wit, I'd rather be noticed for my knowledge. I do have some honest!

As for the suggestion to reward people who post more, that idea is kinda...not good. It would encourage spammers and the amount of shit here will increase tenfold.

Wow, I like to talk, sorry for spewing my crap.

 

a qestion asked to produce effect is rhetoric taken to jeremaid(tale of woe)panjundrum self worth.....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

heya all

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

yo Thor

i completely agree with you not wanting to encourage spamming
this is supposed to be a sci concept that builds on people placing some thought into what they post which is (aside from types of comedy)
quality not quantity.
and the more varied opinions the greater the value of information
assuming it is personal opinion and referenced quotation links

groove on

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Yeah, I'd agree with that. Though I've not many posts (and thus I'm theoretically on some lesser footing), there are some people here who have a lot more posts than me that I read their posts and think: "What's your point?" - So for me, post count is not really the yardstick.

 

here, here.

 

Spookz,

Thor kinda dabbled on what I was going to say. An example we see all the time is.. new members who you don't really know anything about. Their positions are a complete mystery, and for all you know - they could be anything. I actually remember witnessing(?) some of the more popular members on the new members thing up atop the front page. Even some of their earlier threads and arguments. MalloryKnox being one of the biggest shocks.

Anyways, when I was new, I had no idea what to expect. Realizing that this place was about science, I had hoped to discuss only that. And maybe.. once in a while hang around in a few of the other topics.

If I tried to describe Sciforums to myself two years ago, I don't think I'd know I'd know what the hell I was talking about. It's such a different environment than I had imagined (remember, this was when I was new to the internet.)

Another example of this 'heirarchial behaviour' happened a few days ago. I know IXL will deny this, but reading the argument between Fred, Xev, and himself..I was surprised (but not blown away)to see that eventually IXL tried to 'patch things up.' Stuff that happens in the animal kingdom all of the time. 'Submitting' in a sense.

People start out by butting heads.. that doesn't leave much to creative debate, right? This place is a bit of a social hall more than any forum. Although I wont deny that I can still find some superb discussions going on. Sciforums is still great

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

In most forums, the people that can burn others, and who are funny are usually popular. I think there should be only a join date, and no post number bacause it encourages spamming. Homaor can bring one a long way in most aspects of life.