Why is sciforums traffic so low now?

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by Magical Realist, Apr 7, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Good as any, if the board is literally to remain as is.

    Back in those frontier days of Webtv discussion groups, I recollect the infamous[*] Tyhart frequently reprimanding club members for their disruption of shop talk with subjects other than coding. Finally he created a second club purely for the non-technical topics, referring offenders and the need for casual conversation over to the second group.

    I don't know how difficult it would be to split the top section of this forum from the lower, creating two discrete boards with different stated purposes, while stilling maintaining links and announced associations between the two. But sometimes it looks like "getting the bottom section out of sight" is the only thing that would make the top happy. Though doubtless there would eventually be an outcry that even all lingering relations between two such sister forums should be abolished. "The taint .... the taint of the Other still wafts in the air here!"

    - - - - - - - -

    [*] "Infamous" after his partial, non-criminal involvement with the hacker responsible for that "Dial 911" malware stunt, anyway.
     
    hardalee likes this.
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,780
    Lots of grate wevtv discuss-forum experiences... an i dont want to bragg... but... my very successful 3 year forum was my favort due to my no ban/no censorship policy... whare everbody was welcome (includin Grackle an Curly) an wild an crazy discussions on any topic coud go on an we had Zero moderation issues (ie... those who didnt like free speech stayed away)... an for example... whare me an others learned a lot of science about the moons rotation from you... raoul... an Yazata... an you was the one who gave me a moon gif idea to help poor Ken Dine try an understand.!!!

    You took over an abandoned webtv forum... whare ther was no moderation an i dont recall you havin any prollems wit posters.???

    Anyhow... i thank less is more... but Sciforums wants moderation to facilitate in havin more focused discussions an help thangs to run more smoothly wit site traffic bein a top priority.!!!
    An yep... i thank havin the best of both worlds (science an "woo" but in separate areas) will benifit site traffic an is the way to go.!!!
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    That Moon debate was the wildest donnybrook I've ever seen. It was literally like one of those brawls in a movie Western that spills outside of a saloon, into the street, and across town. Began in Atheism&Agnostic, migrated to your club, then even had cameo appearances in some other groups. Finally busted beyond the firewall to here at Sciforums. If Ken Dine, Marksman and other involved parties chanced upon each other yet somewhere else on the web, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that "tornado" has still been raging and hopping around from place to place to this day.
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,689
    Huh. Here I was looking for a user called donnybrook.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Nope.

    Now the lyrics to Carbon Leaf's The Donnybrook Affair finally make sense to me...
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  8. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,780
    The moon donnybrdook was hot an heavy for about 1 1/2 years an grate fun was had by all... even the idgets who coudent grasp that the moon rotates on an internal axis.!!!

    BTW... grate song Dave... it realy took me back

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Ultron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    243
    Im quite new, so I could write some first impressions. I been member of Physics forum for 5 years until I had some minor discussion with moderator and this caused permanent bullying from the moderator and I was banned after few minor discussions for what could be shortly discribed as "overly speculative posts". I have changed the IP adress and registered again, but somehow lost the interest to discuss things there. So Im trying to discuss physics here. Will see how it will work out

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    My first positive impression is that Sciforums are more relaxed about physics discussions as compared to Physics forum. Surely this has also a negative effect of attracting people who post really silly theories and dont react reasonably when they meet with criticism of their theories. But I like the possibility to discuss things without the need to be strictily within limits of citing only peer reviewed papers and not to be able to speculate how some new experiment or observation could change physics.
    But my second main impression was rather negative, with some members insulting others. I do understand, that some educated and smart people get upset when they react to opinions which are obviously stupid from their viewpoint, but this is not really nice and doesnt really help anybody and also does not help to increase the popularity of the forum.
     
    Schneibster likes this.
  10. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,780
    Good ponts... makin Sciforims the place to be for many-an many more to come... welcome

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Are not just derogatory personal insults a problem ?

    River
     
  12. Retribution Banned Banned

    Messages:
    200
    Yes, that's more or less correct. There was a thriving community a decade ago and yet had probably some of the most savage flame wars I've ever seen. It was precisely this which created some interest in the site from outside, and in fact a quick google back then would throw up some of the more entertaining set-to's being copy-posted and attributed legendary status on other websites. The difference between then and now, however, was that the lively discussions were of a more intellectual nature and far more carefully crafted and linguistically creative; today's insults are simple disgruntled name calling in most incidences. Most, if not all, of those members now have been banned, and there have been few to replace them of a similar nature and artistic ability. Obviously the problem always was defining what was artistic and creative and what was not, but unfortunately a situation which lent itself very nicely to selective and intelligent moderation became far more generic... and then swung back the other way once all those of interest had left or been forced to leave. Personally, I have come to the theory that it may have been the linguistic and creative aptitude of the flame back then which actually helped prevent the typical "your mother" type insults in that many members who thought they could not compete simply didn't, and watched from the sidelines or left themselves. That is certainly no longer the case.
    In essence, those who have stated above that insults in themselves are a reason for non-participation appear to be blissfully unaware that the period in which this forum was wildly successful coincided with the period in which flame wars were quite common, and rarely led to anyone noticeable leaving to pursue other interests as a result of them occurring.

    The moderation has become not only far more forceful, but is being performed by members who are not exactly intellectual giants themselves. Members will find themselves banned, warned or have posts simply deleted more due to a moderators dislike of them than any particular rule bending, which is further compounded as an issue when other members more sympathetic to that particular moderators own ideals are permitted more leeway, not only where the rules are concerned, but in general posting. The result has been that most members who had ideas regarded as left field have become bored with being constantly harassed and either left or were banned after losing patience with it all. I'm not speaking strictly of any science-related forums here, rather more in general. The human science and philosophy sub-forums were once very entertaining areas to be a part of; now, any discussion of those ideas not generally accepted as being "truth" are simply shut down by one passive aggressive (what I used to refer to as the "soft shutdown") means or another. The vast majority of discussion has become dry, uninformed and stale, something one might easily find on the internet using a search engine.

    You'll notice the moderators have become very generic in terms of their political and social outlooks. Moderation in general has become a very one-sided affair, and it has led to a certain sterility, and the loss of several members of an entertaining nature.

    There are a few other considerations in the decline, some of which have already been mentioned. The media itself is becoming a little old fashioned, and is fading quickly in the face of Facebook, Twitter and the like. Walk for five minutes around town, and you'll notice most of the younger generations are more or less permanently focused on their phones. They are at home, too, unless of course they're glued to reality TV, which in itself is a form of entertainment similar to a good old flame war, and requires less attention and ability. In essence, the flame war has now been trumped by the annoyingly despicable couple on My Kitchen Rules.

    In order for the situation (and as an extension, this site) to become successful again it must attract both interest and participation. Basically, in order for a forum of this nature (to whit: one fast being relegated to the past) to survive, it must offer a form of entertainment which can compete with those seen elsewhere. Under the current circumstances, it does not and is not likely to again.
     
  13. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    But without those kind of posters there would be little opportunity to use words like egregiously and so a little delight would go out of life.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Could you give an example of a non-derogatory personal insult?
     
  15. Retribution Banned Banned

    Messages:
    200
    Wouldn't you rather use it on someone who knew what it meant without having to google it first and then respond pretending they always did?
     
  16. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Nah. I like to make the bastards work.
     
  17. Retribution Banned Banned

    Messages:
    200
    I had to look it up - I had the word confused with gregarious. A phonetic association, probably.
    Not not to be confused with "a" or "the" Phonetic Association.

    A pox on it.
     
    Confused2 likes this.
  18. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,199
    Well you were right to associate the two words. Egregious means standing out from the crowd (strictly "flock", as in sheep) , while gregarious means liking to be in or belonging to a flock.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Latin: grex, gregis.
     
  19. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,795
    Are they in the phone book?

    The name "Gregory" has the same derivation. and ,because they like "flocks" (=grex) 16 Popes chose the name.
     
  20. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,225
    I've noticed this too, and not only on this science forum, but on another one I used to frequent. Typically, this happens when a forum becomes little more than an echo chamber, and not enough of a balanced group of opinions. I haven't been posting here in some time, and return to see your posts for example, mocked and ridiculed like they were in the past, ad homs flying about. Kudos to you for hanging in with your threads, but for many, that type of thing gets frankly, very boring. Not saying this site is an echo chamber, but it can become one if only one set of opinions is accepted, and the rest are ridiculed, etc. Could be other reasons, but that is not an uncommon reason as to why forums die - not enough of a balanced set of opinions.
     
    Yazata, krash661, river and 1 other person like this.
  21. Retribution Banned Banned

    Messages:
    200
    Which, again, has less to do with the mocking and ridiculing than it does the gradual elimination of dissenting opinion via authority. You're making a mistake linking the two in an absolute sense.

    In its heyday, this place was a goddamned soap opera, on an epic scale. Abuse, hookups, entertainment and discussion with science and philosophy as a focal point. We didn't need any bloody emoticons or likes. We knew who was who.
    Why can't I edit a post beyond a certain point anymore? I noticed it the other day, something I said I wanted to alter slightly in case it was misconstrued. But I couldn't. I have to sit there and look at it and hope no one will pull me up on it.
    Why. Because someone edited their post after a moderator response once? I'd put money on it.

    All the best ingredients of reality TV, with the caveat being that those who were the lights and leaders, were some very, very intelligent people.
    Basically, you had Big Brother prose TV, with the added bonus of being able to actually find some very interesting viewpoints, those which agreed with your own or otherwise.
    Never make the mistake of assuming that there wasn't anything worth reading back then - there was more than there is now.
    Never make the mistake of assuming that intellect isn't combative. It always has been. Arrogance goes with the territory.

    I'm not talking about the kind of arrogance which assumes everyone has a right to an opinion. Not those who persevere because, as you intimated above, it's socially admirable to persevere in the face of adversity. It really isn't. You need to earn that. Not assume it.

    I'm talking about the kind of arrogance which is able to adequately defend itself, a force in itself. Originality, ideas, and the ability to express them beyond simply saying "this is what I believe, and that's my right, so don't dis me, man".
    The kind of arrogance which knows what a fly is... but over time became less and less able to swat it.
    And the flies just bred, and bred, and bred, until it became just too hard to swat them anymore. Flies given licence and support by the administration.
    Everyone entitled to an opinion.

    The only concession I have to make with regard to current administration is that finding moderators capable of making intelligent decisions with regard to acceptability is a difficult prospect. It's a voluntary, untrained position, and unfortunately (more recently) has attracted those types one might find prevalent in the American police force in Baltimore. With some exceptions... there have been some moderators who were quite good at what they did.
    I should point out that one or two of the moderators I have encountered in the past, even years ago, were not exactly what I'd deem friends. In fact, in most cases, they were the antithesis of anything I'd deem interesting or intelligent.
    I even wrote a parody poem about one of them once.

    At no point, though, did I ever have an issue with them moderating me when I'd overstepped the mark.
    That only happened in recent times. With the Baltimore police types.



    We were the soap opera, we were the entertainment, we were the life, and we knew it.
    But they got rid of us. One by one.
    And here you are now... bored. Looking for answers. But those who knew the answers are gone.


    Chatter among yourselves about abuse and ad-hom. The only thing you'll ever need to understand that there are many things which make a rose beautiful, and among those things are its thorns. Breed those out, and it isn't a rose anymore.
    Reap what you sow.
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  22. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    so in other words, you were once banned from here and now you have returned with a sock-puppet?-- in which your new name speaks volumes.
     
  23. Retribution Banned Banned

    Messages:
    200
    I felt that my username might speak volumes, but so far it has not.
    Had no reason to regulate anyone, yet. Spur of the moment thing.

    I'm not going to make any secret of who I am. I'm not a sock puppet. I haven't changed my style, I haven't changed myself, I haven't changed the way I write. Yes, I was permabanned. Called someone a cunt. First time in several years of membership I'd ever considered the word justified. Normally, that'd earn me a holiday, but this particular person was a moderator. It wasn't that she didn't deserve it, it was that she was a moderator.
    They came fast, and they came hard. Sort of shot a police, know what I mean?

    I'd surmise there are those who already know who I am. I'm rather torn between trying to figure out who might remember, who might be able to work it out, and the... actual boredom, of having to wait.
    Also thinking it's really very annoying I had to create a new username at all, I'd rather use my old one. And there were one or two pm's I never had a chance to read.
    Not really into games until I was forced to be, and now find myself enjoying it - a little.

    You're enjoying it too.

    I suggest you look up the term "sock puppet".
    I'd also suggest you stop looking for excuses, stop trying to figure out who I am and what I might have done, and actually consider what the site has become and what I think as a very long term member of it.
    I got perspective, man.

    I don't even know how long I'm going to bother, it's fairly boring now.

    Who are you? Who the fuck are you?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page