sciforums currently has two subforums that deal with site-related issues: Site Feedback and Open Government. I would like to hear from you, in your own words: 1. What is the purpose of the Open Government forum? 2. How does it's role differ from Site Feedback? 3. Do you think there is value in maintaining both forums, or should they perhaps be merged? 4. If you believe that the roles of one or both subforums are not defined clearly enough at present, please suggest how you think they should be defined.
` None, as there is not an "open government" in operation here. Apparently it was intended to address issues relating to the "governance" of the site. Whether it actually amounts to bread or circuses I leave to others to opine on. No. As far as I am able to determine, the sole thing being "accomplished" in OG is the increased risk of carpal tunnel syndrome incurred by persons typing entries in it. Why not ? In the end anything submitted here is, in effect, Site Feedback. You might replace the words "power to the people" as the descriptive blurb beneath OG in the list of sub forums to "exercise in futility". LoL
I agree with pretty much everything Killjoy posted, including the merging of Site Feedback and Open Government. I would still call it Site Feedback. The one thing I think should be clarified is the rule about complaints over moderation. Currently the rule states that such complaints are not tolerated in OG and should be done via PM. That's not a rule that's been consistently enforced. Some threads are closed immediately, others are kept open for a while.
Thats because only supermoderators and admin can moderate SFOG and Site Feedback. They may not be online.
Both can be merged, James, however there is a distinction. Open Government is a forum dedicated to issues with members, moderation and administration, while Feedback is a forum dedicated to issues with the forum's technical structure and content.
I thought Open Government was the forum that we'd be able to voice our concerns and perhaps have a say in what goes on here. That's what the title implies, anyway. I was deeply saddened to discover that we have no say in what goes on, and to top it off, we're not allowed to publicly voice our concerns about certain people (such as moderators, who are apparently "above" such things). It's bogus.
The title of this thread is just plain frightening. Are science forums entirely dominated by gangs of bullies?
It would be interesting if this was a place to bring baseless allegations against each other, with the expectation that the one who is deemed 'wrong' is publicly moderated.
None, it was created for the purpose of having common members vote for changes and new mods, since neither of these function exist, it serves no purpose now.
