[Alpha] So, Er... What's Wrong With Sciforums?

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

redarmy11

Registered Senior Member
Scientists, eh. Fuck 'em. Can't run a piss-up in a brewery - arguing like a bunch of kids.

Personally I think Sciforums is GREAT!! and I absolutely love squirting verbal diarrhoea (nice image, eh :)) all over it's pristine pages.

BUT... it seems like a lot of the scientist types here aren't happy and are busy 'solving' the various problems by arguing with each other and stealing each other's rattles. Pff. Like i said: fuck 'em. I'll be the grown-up instead (me! I can't believe it...).

Here are the rules:
  • NO TROLLING
  • NO FLAMING
  • NO PROFANITIES
  • STAY ON TOPIC
So, if after all that, you've got anything useful to contribute... here's the place to do it.

Thread placed in Free Thoughts, so that Absane, vslayer and Avatar can enforce relevance and civility.

ok, begin. And for fuck's sake, behave yourselves.

(No, seriously. Please respect the rules and either discuss this as adults with due courtesy or go and type somewhere else. Thanks.)

<Doomed>
 
If we really are going to enforce science rules than we should also demand:

references.

And only preferably primary literature and certainly not webpages.
 
Not relevant and surely not needed. Concentrate on being relevant and civil, that should be enough.
 
Let's also try to be positive too. As well as identifying problems, suggest some possible solutions. :)
 
References are a good thing, but most members won't bother themselves with them.
And this is an international community, so if I referenced a Latvian book, it would be of little use to many. Same goes for me, if a German or Indian book is referenced.
Besides not all have the luxury to live close to big libraries.

That's why I think referencing won't fly.

p.s. Thank you for your thread, redarmy
 
Avatar said:
References are a good thing, but most members won't bother themselves with them.
And this is an international community, so if I referenced a Latvian book, it would be of little use to many. Same goes for me, if a German or Indian book is referenced.
Besides not all have the luxury to live close to big libraries.

That's why I think referencing won't fly.

p.s. Thank you for your thread, redarmy
Click to expand...

Books are not considered to be primary literature in most scientific disciplines. Since we are only interested in hardcore science and not the softy social sciences we have to rely totally on peer-reviewed articles.

And they are online! jeehaw! No more excuses.

(is this an alpha topic?)
 
Why would any references, peer-reviewed or otherwise, be needed in a discussion about Sciforums' problems? I don't follow this.
 
And, incidentally, as I've already said: for me, there are no significant problems. It remains - for me - far and away the best discussion forum on the internet (that I've yet come across). Does anyone disagree?? If so, what needs to change?
 
Sorry, I understood spurious meant that a problem with sciforums is that not enough members use references.

Any way, one of the problems that some members think that the mods are out there to get them/kill them/rob them, whatever.
That doesn't really help when you try to keep order.

Any way, I think most of our problems are to do with human nature.
And because we don't restrict it like in other forums, we have more problems floating around.
And I don't think there's an antidote for human nature if those humans choose not to cooperate for the mutual benefit.
 
spuriousmonkey said:
Sorry. Thought this was a general discussion on what alpha rules should be. Ignore my contributions.
Click to expand...
No, clearly stricter rules re. references, etc., would be needed in scientific discussions. The rules I've listed apply to this thread, so that we can discuss this in an adult manner. But to take up your point: do you think an extension of the alpha rules to cover all science discussions would work?
 
The problem is that some [including me] want these to be science forums, but they are not.
That creates tension.
 
So ring-fence the science forums, enforce alpha rules with strict moderation (ie delete irrelevant posts/flaming at will), leave the rest of the forums in their usual state of perpetual anarchy - yes? No? Problem?
 
redarmy11 said:
But to take up your point: do you think an extension of the alpha rules to cover all science discussions would work?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about alpha rules being applied to an entire subforum, since some people come in to kick ideas around and learn. Alpha rules and references are going to put some people off by intimidation.
And now and again a loony idea can kick-start a good discussion.
I believe that repeatedly ignoring requests for supporting evidence (even if its only links) should be penalised. "I said so" is not a defence or corroboration.

In general though redarmy I have to go with this guy (the grown up :eek: )
redarmy11 said:
It remains - for me - far and away the best discussion forum on the internet (that I've yet come across).
Click to expand...
 
Well.. some may see that as less than welcome. The rampant silliness. I think there should be a place for that though. The question is, I think: where? :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top