No, I think people in general don't know a lot about nature, or maybe they are just not interested. I thought it was a good way of getting at least some people interested in something they are normally not too interested in.
OK. I think quite a lot of people are interested in nature. They may not know that much about it but I would say at the very least they are interested. Just out of interest it may interest you to know that I'm really interested in nature. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
My experience in life and on this forum tells me otherwise. A lot of people just couldn't care less about nature. The idea behind the thread (as the title suggests) was that you get a chain of organisms that are somehow, albeit sometimes very loosely, connected to each other. Plus that, at the same time, people read up on those organisms and may learn some new and interesting things about them. See it as a somewhat more intelligent and advanced form of threads like "Word association", which do seem to be rather popular.. The difference is that my thread requires a bit of work. Oh well..
I just think that alot of people dont have the time to do reading up on animals and this "nature" that you speak of. We are busy browsing the youtube for videos of old people falling down.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Just curious, are you the official spokesperson for the admins and this is they're official response? Seems rather different than Fraggle's remarks.
And in my experience a lot of people could. Stalemate then? Is your experience more valid or is mine? Or are our experiences equally valid. How might a thread on sciforums make people who couldn't care less about nature; care more about it? I see it as a bit teacherish to be honest. It is the sort of project I'd set a class of Year 4 children... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!. Honourable intentions though...... Perhaps some people here are more familiar with words than they are with animals that may or may not be related? The former also being quicker and easier to research?
Our experiences can both be valid even if they appear contradictory Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Anyway, I think "interest in nature" can be interpreted in a number of ways. By liking the game itself, regardless of what it is about.. and then learning about the animals etc whether they really want to or not Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Yea.. I guess you are right lol Well, I have a personal agenda of course..
I just saw Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Thanks though, at least the thread is getting some traffic Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
(Insert Title Here) No, I'm hardly an official spokesperson. To the other, I don't see what's so problematic about the statement compared to Fraggle's response. The admins and moderators would very much like to see this be a place for literate, thinking, rational people. But given how many user ID's, one way or another, won't survive the transition, people are understandably hesitant. So there are a couple factors here. We would like to make this a place of scholarship and rational debate, but the membership isn't on board. At the same time, nobody really wants to stand up and be a part of the inevitable culling that would take place because so many of the members just aren't up for being rational, scholarly, or even courteous. That's where you will see the changes affect the membership; those who don't hop on board with such an agenda will eventually disappear, either walking out the door or being expelled for gross and repeated violations. And since that outcome troubles so many of the moderators' consciences, it's doubtful at this time that we will be instituting such changes in the foreseeable future. Additionally, there are a lot of politics between the moderators tied up in such a decision. One moderator and I used to discuss a theoretical culling initiated by moderators and the administration, which would have kicked a number of our trolls and antithetical posters out of the community, but, to the one, there has never been sufficient enthusiasm for such an undertaking and, to the other, even in theoretical discussion, it became apparent a while ago that there would be political quotas attached to that. You know, if you ban a troll who happens to be politically conservative, you also need to ban a liberal. And, over the intervening time, certain situations have been managed poorly, so that some members, who were formerly of respectable standing, now verge on being banned permanently. And in the broader politics of the situation, it even came about that some would advocate terminating those who responded to declining conditions while retaining those who caused the decline. All based on political sympathies. So whether initiated at our will or a result of circumstantial demand, such a bloodletting simply doesn't inspire the support of the moderators who would have to carry it out. As a result, conditions continue to decline.
The membership won't be on board either if there are moderators who do not adhere to the same high standards set for the membership.....
Is that when they wore crinolines....? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Ah when we were young.....
1 thang i like about Sciforums is that you can ask anythang you want... i jus hope studyin what moderaters thank you ought to learn dont becom manditory... plus i never did like to study or do home-work type stuff anyway... an for me... a list of rules to keep up wit takes the fun out of a fun type thred... but anuther thang i like about the curent Sciforums... each to ther own... eh... well... at leas until the "changes" begin Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
i think sci is doing fine illogic has never been allowed to stand here for the most part make the rebuttal then move on to the next episode
I don't think being courteous has anything to do with this. You seem to be creating a "Catch 22" scenario there. Those who did leave here wanted rational and scholarly discourse, but with the injection of so many religious nutters and nutters in general who flock to this site BECAUSE the mods and admins allowed them to run free here, they left. Now, we've got boatloads of nutters and religious propagandists here pissing off everyone else and they seem to get the preference as to how this site will be run. You guys are chasing your tails with that bit of logic. So, getting rid of the nutters and religious propagandists is a problem? You're all worried they might not be on board? :shrug: It would appear then that the mods really DON'T want to see changes as it affects their "conscience" to do such things. Perhaps, you need to cull the mods who want to continue with the status quo so that conditions won't continue to decline? I'm not seeing the powerful argument you usually present, T.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! take away your reason for being? sci will never be that cruel /pats
Good pont... why... get rid of all the "nutters" an this place will be almos as much fun as readin a dictonary or encylopedia or even phone book... eh.!!!
