It seems only a few of the bright spots on sciforums are still around. This place was once so compelling, so intriguing, what with the interesting posts full of thought and intellectual intensity(can I say that?). Invert-Nexus, Spurious, James, Rosa, i'm sure all four of you remember what I'm talking about because you were here back then, and a part of the spirit of what made sciforums great. I've had a lull in my workload for the past week or so, and somehow I stumbled onto an old thread from early '04 I think it was. Then that thread led me to some others, and while a noob to the forum might read them as multipage flame wars, they certainly don't read that way to me. For whatever reason, the back and forth was more real. Yes, that sounds stupid, but that's the only word I can think of at the moment. I'm at work, so I can't really muse over these posts for very long. If I think of a better way to describe, i'll come back and edit tonight. But I digress to my original question, and the point of my post: Who do you blame? Who do you blame for the fact that it's apparently contagious to post non-sequiter one-liners in every single thread, even when you clearly have nothing to say? Who do you blame for the fact that so many threads instantly go off-track and devolve into nothing more than posting competing links to that shit-bag site wikipedia? Was it over-zealous moderation? Or the lack thereof?:shrug: Ive been lurking mostly, and have made a few posts in the past three or four months, and i've not seen porfiry or goofy one time. Are they no longer associated with the site? Is James R pretty much in charge now? Whatever the case, i'll probably pour some beer on my computer tonight, in honor of a fallen site. Wes, you with me?
Who do I blame? Myself. In the end, there is no one that bears responsibility for any event in your life that is greater than your own responsibility for said event. No one. Ever. You create the world you live in. And thus bear the ultimate responsibility. There was a time when I was wonderstruck with the discussions taking place here. A candyland of bushes producing chocolate covered cherries and even the stones were rock candy. I took it for granted. And, when it began to tarnish, I didn't devote the time to maintaining that original luster. Not only this, but I spent my fair share of time pissing on it. And defending the freedom to piss on it. A fine line exists between freedom and neglect. I am to blame. Me. Edit: Of course, the site isn't that different from what it was then, actually. There are just fewer bright lights in the sky. But, what happens now, happened then. It was just that those bright lights danced and frolicked amidst the babbling.
I agree with invert_nexus. I blame him. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Honestly, I pretty much agree with everything invert said. When things started going downhill, I simply started spending less time here. I would, from time to time, try to do my part in starting interesting discussions and keeping others going - but ultimately, this, like any community, is made up of the members and the effort the members put into it.
It was funny to see my first post on sciforums in another thread today. It was all serious. Then I started to read the relevant thread. All serious discussion with only one Woo Woo. The serious people got chased away at one point. One-liners is all that I have left. I thought I could make a difference as a mod. But the discussion was as dead as a door nail in the biology forum after I limited the woo woos. Now that I resigned the woo woos are back. It's a no win situation. The [ENC]sciforums' glory days[/ENC] are real. Even some of the old cesspool threads are better than the ones that are now in proper forums. Do I blame myself? Not really. I just adapted and "devolved".
Well, don't be so depressed! Let me try to cheer you up! If that doesn't work, then blame me for everything. :bawl: That would be the best. Let me start from the beginning. Porfiry sold this forum in late summer 2006 to new owners. I'm the part of new staff, as you could see. Fact is that things are changing, but our main goal is still to keep original spirit of SciForums. Or [ENC]Sciforums' glory days[/ENC] as some members use to say. Oops! I made link to that shit-bag site wikipedia. (silly me) As you could see, Encyclopedia is one of changes made by the new staff and me. Also, there are two new forums created: Chemistry and Linguistics. We are working on Knowledge Base project, which will involved all members who are interested in editing and writing of scientific articles. I disagree that we don't have quality posts and threads. Of course, there is a lot of off topic discussion, but tell me, which forum doesn't have off topic discussion. Forums are made for discussion. Seldom discussion is a straight road. I would describe it rather as a maze, pretty complicated to pass in one turn. It's normal that there are no lot of members that once were active here. Things evolve and move. That because some of them aren't here anymore, doesn't mean that this forum is bad. As you could see, our forum isn't dead. There are lot of things happening here. And my part... I believe it is great place and that it would be even better. Otherwise, I wouldn't accept this position. Cheers!
the loss of: spookz ghassan kanafani pollux V gendeanken fountainhed undecided/nico wraith to name but a few, and you aint on that list. stop bitching, as they say don't curse the darkness, light a fucking candle.
Yeah, I too put much thought to this, this 'glory days'' thing. I think one of the reasons why it's been noticed as much as it is is because it seemed to propel quite swiftly after the site went offline for too long. And although a few members managed to find each other again at a different forum, most did not. So, at a certain juncture, a sudden, quick, forced change of perspective took place, and people... snapped out of it. Now, the real question is what was it that everyone -- popular, unpopular, loud, subdued; everyone -- what was it that everyone was a part of, that was suddenly yanked out of the wall, and that had contributed to the 'glory'?? It was a personality, wasn't it? a mechanism, an entity -- the collective. And components of that collective relied just as much on each other as the collective relied on them. Now, I noticed, that it's not so much a collective but a clique who practically rely exclusively on each other, selfishly narrowing the field, guarding the field, countermanding any chance for potential, change, or variety. The place is flat.
Appreciate all the responses. I had forgotten that the site was down for a time. I tried to read a few threads on that other forum,but something just didn't feel right about it. I'm not sure I ever even bothered to join over there. That probably did disrupt the group more than I had acknowledged. There was a time when I thought this place would erupt into something big, like Fark, but I just don't think Dave ever had the interest or the resources. That's a shame. Invert You seem to be pretty hard on yourself in your post. I wouldn't look at it that way, if I were you. You couldn't will people to stay interested, and connected, especially when the owner of the site obviously never placed that much value on it. It's just hard to see some of you guys trying to get something going, only to have the nattering nabob's show up with their stupid ass one-liners. I wouldn't even care, because I'm a one-liner guy myself at times, but I try to be funny, or drop a bomb or something. What's the point of poking your head into a thread to say "yeah, i agree..."? or "you're stupid!", and just leave it at that? I mean, if you have nothing better to do but flame, at least flame with napalm, right? spurious Sounds like the apathy just became an irrestible force. Probably not much point in trying to craft a decent post if all it's going to get in response is another shitty one-liner from IAC, huh? outlandish You had me until you got to nico. What an insult to the other posters you mentioned to put that guy/girl/eunech in the list. nico would argue that water isn't wet, as long as he perceived the person he was arguing with to have any possible shred of empathy for Israel, or reason and logic for that matter. However, I do miss being told the onus is on you.. Chewing Gum Why the monniker change? I liked your old one better. Excellent observation about the clique. It is pretty much like a high school hallway around here at times, isn't it?
I think all of us who were here way back when, and are still here today are to blame. This site has changed drastically since I first joined in 2001. There was moderation but it was not strict. It just lurked in the background. I still remember getting a PM from goofy telling me to not 'feed the troll' when I went head to head with Proud_Muslim. Those were the days. The days when Gendy and Xev hunted through the forums like a pack and took down anyone in their path. Spookz I miss greatly. His sarcasm that always seemed to point directly at the truth of the matter was at times offensive, but also quite honest. Ghassan, one of my favourite posters on these forums also disappeared. And Dee_Cee.. now there was a character lol.. We've all changed. Personally I can't take issues posted on here to heart or as seriously anymore. It frankly is just not worth the hassle. You have some members who act as if they are about to have a coronary and others who start accusing you of wanting their demise. Lets face it, most don't know how to argue or debate on here anymore.
to name but a few, and you aint on that list. And neither are you. You weren't even here during the golden age of sciforums, so the question becomes, why do you even weigh in on the topic? Is it because you're such an attention whore you just can't stand to be ignored? Or is it because, (like anybody really needs this pointed out..) you were here then, under yet another name, and were also ignored to the point that you finally did something so stupid as to get yourself banned? You see, either way, you are the big loser. Don't you hate it when you get caught in your own mousetrap? You're just as pathetic as Wanderer.
i blame the current state of sciforums on myself...whether it is good or bad. i see it as good. about a year ago, i decided to cease contributing anything worthwhile, because there was no way to have a meaningful conversation about anything. someone just pops up and tells you that you are wrong, regardless of what you are posting. that isnt conversation. that is belligerence. debate is one thing...what goes on here is quite another. at any rate, i noticed when i just started spamming the forum with nonsense that other posters followed. now, there is a whole looney bin of characters that do this. /egomania
Nobody is permitted to argue anymore. It use to be an antic to argue, now it's a sycophantic drool amongst those in the clique, or those wanting in. If a real brilliant argument stirs, it's immediately downgraded into a flamewar—or a revert war, whatever that is. So it's not that people don't know how to argue, it's that those who can, have shown talent; and most who can't, are intimated to abut. So what have they done? Very smart: by popular demand, they've knocked together a bunch of 'rules' to hide face behind.
I disagree: I can debate and argue. The flaming bit is just for my own amusement, and their consternation.
I'm amazed that the oneliners stayed out of this thread for so long. Now I have to make a second line to look intellectual: I find this disturbing.
