SciForums Policy Discussion

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Plazma Inferno!, Jun 4, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Plazma Inferno! Ding Ding Ding Ding Administrator

    Messages:
    4,610
    Well, forum would be really deficient in content if we allow only one thread per subject.

    But if several threads on same subjects are opened in the same time, there is possibility that they will be merged into one.

    Anyway members, especially the new members, are encouraged to first use 'Search' option and then to create thread.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Oniw17 ascetic, sage, diogenes, bum? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,423
    I mean....
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    My view on this subject is that since our name is SCI Forums, our obviously implied mission is to be an oasis where the principles of scientific discourse are respected. This absolutely does not require that every member be a practicing or student scientist. It merely requires that in an increasingly irrational world (at least from my American perspective), we will always rule for reason over emotion, and uphold some fundamental rules such as the scientific method, peer review and Occam's Razor.
    I think I speak for the moderators when I say that was not our intention. I speak for myself but hopefully for other moderators when I say that I would like to discourage an outright invasion by the forces of darkness. Doubts about the validity of the scientific method, probability analysis of Occam's Razor, the influence of politics in peer review... more-or-less scholarly discussions of this type are valuable in a forum where most of the members are not trained scientists because they demonstrate the robustness of science, and they have their place in subforums like Philosophy and General Science. What I do not condone is trolls stalking threads in the Geology or Biology subforums and inserting off-the-wall posts in a mock-authorative voice, making implicit assumptions that things like Past-Life Regression or Evolution Denial are taken seriously by the scientific community.

    My personal crusade is simply to attract people who are looking for a place like this. If, by Googling a scientific topic, an inqusitive person stumbles into SciForums, I want him to stay, and not run away making crazy-finger-rotations around his ear because the second post he read was by an anti-scientist.
    You don't have to be a "top scientist" to be able to spot bad science.
    My thoughts exactly. Someone comes to SCI Forums looking for scientific discussions, and the lead thread is a poll about which pants leg you put on first. (Apologies to Darky.)
    Personally I want the emphasis to be on things scientific, but in order to serve the community of people we might attract, we also have to provide a chat room, advice column, and after-hours club for them. I would just like to see a good balance. The Arts and History subforums, for example, are the homes of many informative yet entertaining discussions. Even discussions questioning science itself must be hosted, as I said above. But they should be honestly identified, not tossed in subversively to derail the science discussions.
    Of course. Faith and reason are to a large extent opposites. Scientists believe things that have withstood exhaustive testing without being proven untrue, but will cheerfully, even enthusiastically, abandon their beliefs if that proof occurs. Religionists believe things that they hope are true, basically things that cannot be proven or disproven. Conflicts occur at the shifting boundary, when science develops ways to test religious hypotheses that were never testable before.
    Personally I see that type of scholarship as the essence of the Comparative Religion subforum: religion as philosophy. However, since science and religion do not need to conflict (prominent scientists include devout members of most of the major faiths), I think my "chat room" thesis urges us to provide a place for our members to hold discussions of an entirely religious nature, and that is the Religion subforum, where Occam may not be held in high regard. I simply urge us to keep science in our mission. In the occasional instance when science and religion conflict--such as deciding which side gets to slap their forehead in frustration over the other without an Infraction, or which threads must endure editorial and administrative incursions by the other side--I hope we will rule in favor of science.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    what should be done about this?
    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=67691
    in the OP it stated
    14 posts later this post is made:
    not only is the poster non american it's also off topic.

    must posts be reported before action is taken?

    maybe that's one of the mod/ poster problems, posters expect off topic and/ or bad posts to mysteriously disappear when in fact they first must be reported.
     
  8. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Since it is response to the OP it is very much on topic IMO. OTOH, it is a trolling post.
     
  9. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    interesting bit of logic there sam.
    so a post is on topic if it's a response to the OP?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    what if you make the following post in the thread we are discussing:
    according to your logic the above post isn't off topic because it's in response to the OP. correct?
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    What question in the OP is it responding to, specifically?
     
  11. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    i am under the impression that you believe a post is on topic if it's in response to the original post.
    i believe what you actually mean is in response to the issues raised by the original post.
     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Good then we understand each other.
     
  13. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    so, how is the post i mentioned in post 107 not off topic?

    it addresses none of the issues raised.
     
  14. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Like I said its a trolling post, however it is responding to Roman's Americans only invitation.
     
  15. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    i would like to know what others think about your logic.

    i consider the post clearly off topic.

    what about a post that's made in response to the very presence of the OP?
     
  16. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Depends on the intent of the post. I'm not a censor, but a moderator; its my job to facilitate discussion by guidance not by imposition.
     
  17. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    it has no intent. it was spawned by the presence of the OP.
    if the OP wasn't there neither would the post in question.
    its only intent is to exist.
     
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    That was my opinion.:shrug:
     
  19. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    i smell baron max.
    anyway that's what i'm asking you! what is your opinion of a post with the qualities i outlined in post 117?
     
  20. Plazma Inferno! Ding Ding Ding Ding Administrator

    Messages:
    4,610
    Guys you're dispersing this thread too much. There are more important things to discus. Please.
     
  21. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    This is a bit tounge in cheek, but I suggested it in another of the locked thread.

    Why don't we have like a monthly competition, based solely on wit, sarcasm and intelligence, and allow the winner to troll whatever threads he wishes, whether there be alpha rules or rokkon rules, or whatever. So every month, we would have a few people give their best responses to a wide open post, and let the members vote. The winner would be allowed to float from forum to forum and troll at will, within the confines of good taste.

    And no person can be the troll more than once in a six month period.
     
  22. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Permit my humble attempt to make peace and relate this issue to the discussion of the SciForums policy...

    My personal opinion is that we should not over-moderate, and therefore we should err in favor of free speech. This is an international community and we don't all come from the same context. In just the past two days I've seen more than one example of one person not realizing that another person was simply making a humorous but on-topic comment about another person's post. People don't recognize the legislative and cultural environment in each other's countries and don't realize that something that is open to reasonable debate in one may be a universal custom in another and a prohibited activity somewhere else. These and many other types of misunderstanding can lead to expressions of disbelief, shock, moral outrage, "how can you stand to live there," "how can you call yourself rational," etc. Sometimes in coarser and more impetuous language, not everyone is an incredibly suave and polished 63-year-old public speaker like me.

    Even in my own country, some kids call me an "old fart" and mean it affectionately, others mean it as an insult.

    It's not easy to accurately identify the intent of a post that seems at first blush to be precocious, trolling or off topic. As I said earlier, my practice is to be harsh with posts that interrupt a scientific discussion with anti-scientific crap. Those are the ones that will frustrate existing members and scare away new ones. With everything else I would allow a little leeway until the offender starts to establish a behavior pattern.

    This is not truly a library or classroom, and let's not forget that a huge percentage of our members--perhaps a majority--are just incredibly young. I suggest that they should be allowed to chew gum, tell jokes, complain about the air conditioning, and call each other dweebs. And the next time you see some punk call me "old and stuck up," please remind him that I said this.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I'm a new moderator so I don't know how the others feel about all this.
     
  23. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    You say it so much better Fraggle; I agree with everything you said.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page