Fixing Sciforums

I humbly submit the following paper for your review, in hopes of publication.

Fixing Sciforums.com with science.
Badass, R. Beer, Sixer. Night, F.

Abstract: A marked decline of Sciforums.com has been observed by the community. In order to fix the decline, we statistically describe the Sciforums community, concluding that it sucks. Several possible remedies are recommended, including banning everyone.

Hypothesis:
H0: The distribution of people that suck and people that don't on Sciforums.com is normal; that is, for any person that sucks to degree-n there is another person that doesn't suck to an equal degree.
H1: There are more people that suck than don't suck. Sucketh to degree-n > non-Sucketh.
H2: There are fewer people that suck than don't suck. Sucketh to degree-n < non-Sucketh.

Methods:
Think of every person on Sciforums.com that you get along with vs. how many suck. Now pretend you are a member that sucks at Sciforums.com, and imagine how they think about you and the handful of people you don't think suck. Now do that for everyone.

Results:
Everyone sucks. These results agree with similar investigations [Natic, 2005. Xev, 2004].

Discussion:
It's possible, though extremely unlikely, that you don't think anyone sucks. You'd also be wrong. Did you notice there's no intro? I didn't feel like writing one.

Conclusion:
Ban everyone.


Acknowledgements:
spuriousmonkey, PhD.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Anyone else think spurious isn't even funny? I know lots of people think he is. And I know he's supposed to be funny. Maybe it's a problem on my end and I just don't get it. But I find him entirely un-funny. Lou, on the other hand, is a hoot.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I note that in your abstract you state that 'several possible remedies are recommended' but that your conclusion consists of only one. Where are the others?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Obviously only one is the logical conclusion

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Then he needs to amend his abstract before he even thinks of submitting this piece of crap to any science journal worthy of the name. Doesn't he.

 

your dense, arent yu? So, mister smarty(ironed under)pants, how would you fix sciforums?

 

What?

 

Exactly.

 

Well clearly not by 'banning everyone', which would be self-defeating and the action of a complete cretin.

But: you're asking the wrong person. If I 'fixed' it, it would no longer be a science site, nor a forum for 'intelligent discussion' - in name or in fact. It would be retitled 'Jamforums' and would, thenceforth, be a place to swap jam recipes, threats and dubious pornography, presided over by an imaginary 8-foot, claw-handed midget called Freddie Boogers, who would ban members arbitrarily for the most superficial of reasons (eg "not wearing a tie"), and then break into their houses in the dead of night and subject them to all kinds of terrifying, painful and humiliating ordeals.

But then... you already knew that, probably.

 

So you'd keep it the way it is, then.

What kind of Jam?

 

And trolls would post science theses with all the supporting data?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Yeah, pretty much..

Ooh... tough one. Elderberry? Nah. Plum. Yeah. Plum.

 

Well if it had been pineapple...

 

Fine then. Pineapple. Look, I'm just the ideas man. Why are you bothering me with petty details?

 

new poll for for darksidz to run.....on each and every member should they stay or should they go...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

8 foot midget?

 

There's some kind of size limit on imaginary midgets now? When did this come into force?

 

This paper is bullcrap! Gimme my monay back - NOW!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I didn't write that dumbass.

 

How to fix sciforums:

Castrate spuriousmonkey before he procreates again.