How many regular posters left on SF?
- Thread starter GeoffP
- Start date
- Status
If 'postership' is declining - and I think it is - what's the marketing scheme picking up with, then? Who's reading the ads? Lurkers? Spiders? How does the economic model work?
Not exactly sure what you mean by "regular posters left", GeoffP, or if I would be included in any "regular posters" grouping, but I have noticed a decline by several Posters/Members participating in some Threads.
Ironically, there has been a new profusely prolific Poster that has joined within the last 2-years that has averaged well over a single "post-a-day". That particular Poster/Member, in my estimation, at least, has led to a decline in the number of some "regular posters" Posts.
Again, GeoffP, this is just my own personal view and speculation on the subject you have raised.
BTW, average "post-per-day" can be easily enough figured by dividing total Post count by amount of days since joining...but you probably know this, already.
Ironically, there has been a new profusely prolific Poster that has joined within the last 2-years that has averaged well over a single "post-a-day". That particular Poster/Member, in my estimation, at least, has led to a decline in the number of some "regular posters" Posts.
Again, GeoffP, this is just my own personal view and speculation on the subject you have raised.
BTW, average "post-per-day" can be easily enough figured by dividing total Post count by amount of days since joining...but you probably know this, already.
people who love to argue,
are not emotionally stable,
hormones,
they thrive on confrontation and like the attention even if they are in the wrong.
but it's in these peoples personality's they can't help themselves.
a lot of times, people who argue have control issues, and need to be right.
some people are just naturally argumentative, and some people feel like they have to prove themselves.
interestingly, it is not uncommon for a naturally argumentative person to also be suffering from misconceptions
which render their arguments inaccurate
which makes it all the worse.
they don't really care about how it effects other people around them because they are immature and self centered.
and resorts to the more primitive brain center where they react.
it is terrible having to be around people who argue all of the time.
everyone is at different stages of consciousness.
there is a certain stage you reach where your intent is to only speak your truth,
not to convince others of it.
you begin to realize that everyone has their own path.
in other words, you cannot convince a baby they should be walking
when they are at the stage of crawling.
to convince them of that truth, is irrelevant.
are not emotionally stable,
hormones,
they thrive on confrontation and like the attention even if they are in the wrong.
but it's in these peoples personality's they can't help themselves.
a lot of times, people who argue have control issues, and need to be right.
some people are just naturally argumentative, and some people feel like they have to prove themselves.
interestingly, it is not uncommon for a naturally argumentative person to also be suffering from misconceptions
which render their arguments inaccurate
which makes it all the worse.
they don't really care about how it effects other people around them because they are immature and self centered.
and resorts to the more primitive brain center where they react.
it is terrible having to be around people who argue all of the time.
everyone is at different stages of consciousness.
there is a certain stage you reach where your intent is to only speak your truth,
not to convince others of it.
you begin to realize that everyone has their own path.
in other words, you cannot convince a baby they should be walking
when they are at the stage of crawling.
to convince them of that truth, is irrelevant.
I was thinking of a dynamic function that would give total posts from all posters each separate day for reasons of tracking interest. James doesn't have anything like that, so it's not even a mod tool.
Which poster were you thinking of? I have a few individuals in mind that have absolutely contributed to the absence of some members. I suspect this also means average declines, but can't be sure.
...PM me...???
I'm sure that quite a few posters have either left or refuse to take part due to the number of agenda driven, anti science rants that are so obvious.
I would pick Grumpy as one, as he virtually said so himself. I would also mention brucep in his lessening participation, although as a reputable member he can speak for himself.
A former poster who spent his time chasing me around and infecting and messing with threads would also be another...although after a few warnings, he has withdrawn and remained reasonably dormant of late.
I'm sure there are others.
My own personal view is that some posters are tired of the softly softly approach to the anti science brigade and those that infest the science threads with pseudoscience, unsupported alternative nonsense, fanatical religious nuts, and conspiracy ratbags. Some have literally said so..Grumpy I recall.
Other reasons would be in the case of weirdos that at different times have participated in vengeful unnecessary attacks on a particular poster and chasing from thread to thread, making an utter fool of himself as he did.
In essence dmoe, this forum seems far to easy on these type of posters and although we do have the fringe sections, the goal of this forum and its primarily goal is accepted mainstream science, and reasonable speculative processes all supported by evidence either practical or theoretical applications.
As a member who has been here over two years and posted most every day with science content, articles, questioning and keeping "honest" those that sought to gain credibility in posting nonsense in the science threads, I humbly vow to continue to do my best for this forum, and would request that the many respected posters like Grumpy, AquiousId, and brucep return or contribute more then they currently do, to keep it viable and in that first instance, a science forum, operating via the scientific methodology and peer review.
I would pick Grumpy as one, as he virtually said so himself. I would also mention brucep in his lessening participation, although as a reputable member he can speak for himself.
A former poster [who in my opinion is a part of the reasons why the more reputable posters take less of a part] spent his time chasing me around and infecting and messing with threads is probably a prime cause why some leave or participate less...He though after a few warnings, has withdrawn somewhat, and remained reasonably dormant of late. Although I sense an awakening!
I'm sure there are others.
The above is a recopy of my previous post, that after reading again, I realized I stuffed up and did not convey the meanings I wanted to convey....
Too many on line tasks today is my only excuse!
I guess I'm pretty regular around here and have never been banned which surprises me at times. Looks like I'm 4th in line for the keys to the kingdom looking at the amount of posts I've posted so far. Reminds me of an old tune....
Truckin' Grateful Dead
Truckin' Grateful Dead
Along with my other reasons re why people have left [I believe it to be the too softly softly approach taken with trolls, crackpots and the many others spruiking anti science themes] maybe people over time just grow tired....we get older, we may have other Interests, we may move and not reestablish contact...who's to know why some leave in reality, other then for the obvious good reasons I have given.
I'm just happy, actually over-joyed, that I don't live next door to certain people that do frequent here.
I'm just happy, actually over-joyed, that I don't live next door to certain people that do frequent here.
Indeed... too few "regular" posters, and too many "cranks, crooks, and gullible fools" overall - makes for boring conversation.
This is first and foremost a science forum, and it would indeed spell the death knell of the forum, if the cranks, crooks, and gullible fools were allowed to continue un policed.
Sometimes it does seem like the crazy bunch out number those here for the science. :shrug:
As a new member, I have been snidely accused by a moderator (in PM) of being a sockpuppet because I wish to remain anonymous, asked for proof of my gender, had numerous moderators admit to tracing my IP, had a post relevant to the topic of a thread surreptitiously deleted, and was banned without prior warning. If the staff treat their senior members even half as bad as they treated me, I can't blame members for leaving or not putting as much effort in to the content they post here. As several of the staff here are all to happy to point out, they can edit, move or delete posts at a whim. In otherwords, it is the staff who cultivate the content on a forum. If the forum isn't what they envisaged, then they have only themselves to blame.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
I've never had any problems at all on this site. But, having taken a look at your posting history I am not in the least surprised that you have. Perhaps if you too were to compare our respective posting histories, you might begin to notice some differences in approach, which could go some way towards explaining why you have had negative experience here.
I think there is too little real science discussed on this site and I suspect this is due to its high threshold of tolerance for cranks, numbskulls and trolls. However that is the policy the owners have evidently chosen, presumably to offer something different from the other science sites around. There are still a few good quality contributors. What we seem to lack is a stream of good quality issues and queries, brought by curious people. I suspect the cranks, trolls and nitwits put them off coming here.
Yeah... this has nothing to do with who you are and everything to do with how you act... which as exchemist said, your posting history does a fine job of demonstrating.
So you have reviewed every post I have made on sciforums? If not, I don't see how you can pass off the above as an informed opinion.
- Status