No need for poll. Because answer is yes. It is. Problem is how the topic is written. Knowledge Base is not designed to be an ordinary forum. I explained that many times before. It has its purpose: Publishing scientific articles and promoting SciForums community and member's work and accomplishments. Knowledge Base shouldn't be object of mockery. And that was exactly the case in the 'Semen' thread. It was not designed as an article with pattern. Of course that pattern could be changed dependable on your experience and ways you write an articles and reviews. But, it must have some basic components that distinct it from other threads. Other threads are designed for free discussion, with a pinch, or to be precise hand full of trolling, off topic and useless debate. That's ok, sometimes. But, Knowledge Base articles must be based on science. Responds as well should be critical, affirmative, whatever, but they must be on topic, based on arguments. Knowledge Base articles should have references, from SF threads or from other sources (books, sites, forums, magazines,...). That must be stated in the article. Knowledge Base articles shouldn't be based and/or consisted on pointless babbling. Just on facts. 'Semen' thread failed to accomplish all of that. And that's why it has been closed. 'Semen' or its taste after nicotine withdrawal could be (and it is) excellent subject for article, but only if it's written in scientific manner. Anyway, since Knowledge Base isn't active at all, and to avoid misuse of it, I decided to temporarily close this forum. In other words, there will be no free posting in Knowledge Base from now on (my prognosis is that there will be no posting at all, because nobody can respond to that commitment). If you have material for an article, please send a PM to me with an article content. After review, article will be placed in Knowledge Base, opened for discussion.
No thanks. Will publish the new article I had re-written in a proper format on another forum. Do you think it is a good idea to increase the threshold on a subforum that is dead by adding a layer of censorship?
Cool. Will be interesting topic. Well, it's not censorship. I've been thinking what could be the best solution for Knowledge Base and closing it (or deleting) seems to be good idea. It's dead anyway. So, why be concerned?
I'm not concerned, just curious. I have said already a long time ago that the knowledge base subforum wouldn't work. I tried writing an article once and noticed immediately that it takes just too much time and effort to write an article in the proposed format. Moreover, most people can't even write a single coherent sentence on this forum, let alone a whole paragraph, let alone a whole article. For them it would be an excellent exercise to try to write one, but usually these are exactly the people that cannot even be bothered to put effort into writing one sentence.
I also think that time is (was) the main problem. But, it's not necessary that initial article post has to be ample. What is important is that it starts a dialogue, and it could be easily filled with supplements in second, third or 54th post. Article could be written in intervals. For example, OP could give the idea of an article and basic references (putting Pattern aside). After few days, second post could be written with further and ample explanations, citations, examples, etc. After few weeks, author could add more material, or other member could give argument against basic idea that author provided. So, it's not necessary that whole article should be written in one day. It could take days, months,... It could be written by one member or derived from discussion of several members. Well, that was the main idea. To derive useful material to promote our community on the web. Especially through E-Zine where we could publish articles.
Then you would need an editor who actively seeks topics and contributions. People are lazy. They need motivating.
Money, free coupons, season ticket for Barclays Premiership? Just name it. Just kiddin' of course. Well, that would be hell of a load for just one person. Idea was that all members are editors. They could gather material from old SciForums threads and compile them into one article or write their own. It depends on members' wishes. If members decided to write an article derived from old threads, they should first pick the subject, for example 'Global warming', 'Down's syndrome', 'Defining space and the universe', 'Planck constant', 'Extinction of Dinosaurs', 'Football or Soccer', etc, etc., and then write it alone or with another members who are interested in articles. Also, some members who weren't initially interested in KB, could join later when article is created with their own inputs. If members decided to write their own articles, then they have much more freedom in choice of article subject. They have, of course, freedom of choosing titles and subject of derived material from old threads as well. You gave good example of own articles here: http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=63772 But, there is a problem. Actually several problems. First is free time, as we mentioned. Second is motivation. I'm sure that many of SciForums members are scientifically accomplished in real life, so they do not need to 'prove' anything here. Many of members write articles and reviews in their everyday life. They don't need to do that here. Especially, not voluntary, but I'm afraid that SciForums cannot offer anything else (actually could, but not of monetary value Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - Books, magazines' subscription, personal promotion,...) It's not expected that members do anything else, than posting here. SciForums is a form of a valve, where members come to rest from boring jobs and real life commitments. I understand that. Sustainability of SciForums is important thing. But, promotion of forum community and its members was the main trigger for creation of Knowledge Base. Anyway, it's not problem for me to open the forum again, but I'm afraid it will stay empty or will be filled with wrong threads again. I'll post the poll in SF Open Government.
Well, they're in fact two different things. Wiki is casual. It allows a lot of freedom in writing and editing its content. There could be placed a lot of things, from serious articles, to members' profiles and East Korea or Myuu pages. KB doesn't allow that. It is based only on articles. A serious work, without off topic, just facts and arguments. Serious, scientific side of SciForums.
Then you still need an editor in chief who steers the editors and motivates them. I know it is a big job. Done it myself. A magazine needs work. It doesn't come about by itself. There is no instant gratification as is in posting one-liners. Thought has to be put into it. text needs to be edited. shit needs to be whiped. seeds need to be nurtured. you are trying to have a garden (journal) inside a wilderness (forum); it's not going to happen without a motivated gardner. Wishful thinking is just not enough.
My 2 cents 1. It has to have a moderator assigned 2. the posts need to pass moderation before being posted; that will restrict trolling and keep it in the direction required. 3. posts need editing before publishing 4. its a lot of work
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1556695&postcount=19 I wrote an idea down on the KBA poll. As for 'Spunk'... The topic was only being 'disgust' (discussed) for a reaction, not for it's scientific value. Ergo, it's a no-go.
why would [ENC]spunk[/ENC] (would you call a black man nigger btw?) be disgusting? It contains one of the two most important cells produced in the human body. [ENC]semen[/ENC] should be celebrated!
