What are Sciforums' biggest problems?

Since this issue keeps coming up, let's give it proper exposure:


What are Sciforums' biggest problems?


List and discuss.



NOTE: Please only list and discuss the PROBLEMS here. I'll post another thread for solutions later.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

having threads like this that have no real focus is a problem

/snort

blather on, noobs
don't be surprised at the canned responses
it is probably what you deserve

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Members that do not follow the rules for one reason or another.

Moderators that, at times, go above and beyond their duties to rectify members errors of judgement and rule violations.

Members seeing how far they can go and take chances with the moderators even when they are warned.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

^^^^^^ case in point^^^^^^^

nothing has been said except the most vacuous of generalities
why not just roll out the tos and assert that violations of it are the problem?

/snicker

 

Okay. Then what do you suggest?

 

obviously the opposite

 

Such as -


Sciforums posters should get a life first, and only then come to post here!
Moderator XY should step down!
Members X, Y, and Z should leave!
What can we do to improve conflict resolution at SF?

-?

Speak up.

 

in each of those scenarios (disregarding the idiotic first and beyond vague last), one would attempt to prove malfeasance with very specific examples first. establish a consensus on that finding then demand on a penalty.

it really aint rocket science.

 

There's really very little science discussed here.

This forum has become a magnet for wackos.

 

So, basically, you're saying that a problem with SF is that problems are addressed ineffectively?

 

most members get to have their say in sci without interference
i see no big problems here. sure there are some issues but they hardly define this forum.

people have to learn how to navigate life.
if you find yourself censored, figure out another way to get your point across. approach it from a different angle. tweak the rhetoric

the soft sciences do seem to be more popular
still tho....that has an easy solution if one has an issue with that
leave
there are quite a few of us over at tsf

 

while that may be true is particular cases, the issue i raise is that perceived problems are brought up ineffectually

did i not already mention this?

 

Okay. I agree, that is definitely a problem.

Not in those very words (at least not in this thread).
I was just checking to see if I am understanding you correctly.

Chill.



There seems to be an atmosphere of "There is something rotten in the land of Sciforums" among some members, suggesting that the problems at SF are bigger and more pervasive than can be adressed in individual cases of malfeasance.

 

fuck them
wild eyed accusations have no place in a forum that expects a rational and rigorous discourse

 

Like dealing with politicians. The lack of results is no reason to stop asking.
It's not the canned responses I'm after.
I'm here to do the nagging.

 

There isn't going to be any of that.
You are not going to kick a person out of their own house.
You shouldn't be pleading to the pope. You should be addressing the crowd.

 

Not enough bacon themed threads.

 

If SciForums is going to have rules of no-no's, such as no insults against a person (going against idea content is fine) or no just pronouncing truths out of thin air with no backing at all (preaching), then they should really honor these rules instead of the rule-breakers by keeping them around.

 

HERE! HERE! (or is it, hear! hear!?) Kudos for Sciwriter . . .

 

that scientific woo-woos aren't banned faster.