Is SciFo a science forum?

[DaveC426913]

In my experiences (mostly with children - my own and with patients I cared for who acted like children) the effective way to modify behave is by ignoring it

Except it's not a good analogy.
A child has max two figures from whom it seeks attention. It's not hard to get two (coupled) people to shut out the child's behavior.
These threads are essentially an unlimited supply of attention-providers, none of whom have any common fealty. There will always be someone to step in.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

To be clear, I don't want to see Jan banned. It's the behavior I want curtailed, with consequences. That's how one learns.

Yeah i have discussed wit Jan an enjoyed it… when i tired of it i quit discussin wit Jan… an i dont want Jan baned ether… but i also dont thank Jan needs to be modified or "punished" sinse other people still like to discuss wit Jan.!!!

If one cant ignore stuff in a discuss forum they dont like they ant gonna be a hapy camper.!!!

 

[DaveC426913]

... dont thank Jan needs to be modified or "punished" ...

If one cant ignore stuff in a discuss forum they dont like...

It's not about 'punishment', or about 'stuff one doesn't like'; it's about the reasonable expectation of grownup discourse.
And that does not involve the tactic of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and essentially repeating an 'I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I?' mantra over and over.

 

[Kittamaru]

It's not about 'punishment', or about 'stuff one doesn't like'; it's about the reasonable expectation of grownup discourse.

Right now, sadly, this is something SciFo seems to have deliberately avoided. I don't know a solution that would satisfy everyone involved. As it stands, though, there appears to be no reason, or compulsory reason at least, to keep to the point in many subforums.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

I enjoy the diferent styles an personalities that Sciforums has always offered an im never disaponted.!!!

 

[Michael 345]

Except it's not a good analogy.
A child has max two figures from whom it seeks attention. It's not hard to get two (coupled) people to shut out the child's behavior.
These threads are essentially an unlimited supply of attention-providers, none of whom have any common fealty. There will always be someone to step in.

I would contend many more than two. Aunts uncles and a host of parents friends
Plus a unlimited supply of supermarket shoppers
Almost each time I shopped with my children I would state the shop we were going to was a "hands behind your back" shop
If, and only if, they kept them there would they get a treat. By accident I noted, apart from not touching anything or placing items they wanted in the trolley or pulling / knocking stuff off shelves the "hands behind your back" seems to act as a damper on unruly behavioral in general. Sometimes they did seem a bit moody and sullen but the treat brought back smiles

As for attention providers within a thread, why does it matter to me how much attention they give to trolls since I have them on iggy?

I never disciplined other people's children or even made suggestions to the carers they should do so. Occasionally I would offer help like push their trolley while they carried the child. Or I might just glare at the child behind carers back which tended to sent them quietly to the carers. Not sure would be appropriate in this PC world

 

[DaveC426913]

As for attention providers within a thread, why does it matter to me how much attention they give to trolls since I have them on iggy?

Because, as members, we are entitled to voice our desires about what standards our forum should uphold.
At the very least, it involves the social contract of good faith discussion.

 

[DaveC426913]

I enjoy the diferent styles an personalities that Sciforums has always offered an im never disaponted.!!!

Well, except for the mods that you take potshots at. Presumably, there's something you're unhappy with.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Because, as members, we are entitled to voice our desires about what standards our forum should uphold.
At the very least, it involves the social contract of good faith discussion.

If Sciforums goes to that im fine wit it an i thank you woud be a good person in charge to see that it gets done corectly.!!!

Well, except for the mods that you take potshots at.

The best "potshots" ive seen here was handed out by mods... but thanks for noticin me

Presumably, there's something you're unhappy with.

I'm hapy wit Sciforums the way it is an wit the mods it has... but i thank my suggestons woud make Sciforums even more successful an more fun for all.!!!

 

[Michael 345]

Because, as members, we are entitled to voice our desires about what standards our forum should uphold.
At the very least, it involves the social contract of good faith discussion.

Granted

My "standards" involve a three Pong rule

I send out a Ping (statement, idea, response). If I do this three times and get three stupid replies (no good faith involved hence designated as Pongs) from a poster iggy is invoked

No point in playing Ping Pong if your Pings are ignored or neutered

 

[Seattle]

Maybe our "goals" should be more modest. If it were possible to get everyone to use many more paragraphs then all posts would be far less annoying.

 

[birch]

You are becoming a master at deception James. I said, "You seem to have a great knack and probably a bias over many months in quickly jumping in to silence or question Jan and MR at every opportunity. And certainly they deserve that rebuffing and debunking,"
. I'm not criticising you for rebuffing them...Understand?

i was just curious and wondered why you left originally complaining about MR and here you are complaining about MR again and how their is a lack of science and blah blah.

i am very curious then, why don't you just post in the science section? you don't have to answer that, it's rhetorical. it's pretty obvious why.

it's like you are a weird snob to the point you enjoy actually engaging in the fringe subforum but want to attack it at the same time because you are ashamed that you do actually engage there.

ridiculous! there is nothing unusual or really wrong with the fringe subforum. it's common to be fascinated with the unexplained.

 

[exchemist]

i was just curious and wondered why you left originally complaining about MR and here you are complaining about MR again and how their is a lack of science and blah blah.

i am very curious then, why don't you just post in the science section? you don't have to answer that, it's rhetorical. it's pretty obvious why.

it's like you are a weird snob to the point you enjoy actually engaging in the fringe subforum but want to attack it at the same time because you are ashamed that you do actually engage there.

ridiculous! there is nothing unusual or really wrong with the fringe subforum. it's common to be fascinated with the unexplained.

If the forum mission statement is that it has a scientific ethos, and is for discussing topics scientifically, you cannot expect unscientific ideas to go without challenge in any section of the forum.

Fascination with the unexplained is what motivates science. However preferring to leave it unexplained, rather than attempting to explain it, is not a scientific attitude.

I deplore Paddo's predilection for personal attacks, but you can't fault him for challenging unscientific ideas.

 

[birch]

If the forum mission statement is that it has a scientific ethos, and is for discussing topics scientifically, you cannot expect unscientific ideas to go without challenge in any section of the forum.

Fascination with the unexplained is what motivates science. However preferring to leave it unexplained, rather than attempting to explain it, is not a scientific attitude.

people do explain it, just not to your satisfaction. that's what is called different points of view. considering we are talking about fringe topics, i already have told you before it's not completely understood and you and along with some others continually ignore that point and that is also intellectual dishonesty.

you just made, again, a hypocritical statement in your absolute assertion that all unscientific ideas not go unchallenged. many unscientific ideas go unchallenged but are missed on this forum, predominantly because it fits a conventional worldview. i am not saying they shouldn't go unchallenged, that is the point of discussion. it's that the fringe recieves more harsh bullying to the point of shutting down the discussion than other subfora. even when whatever evidence is available is presented.

i agree that the fringe should be deleted because it is contradictory to this forum's members and it's mission. even though i know that some paranormal events legitimately occur, that is not enough for a forum such as this to discuss. partly because most members do not have the philosophical tenacity or flexibility to understand or question a topic except for the banal, "there is no scientific evidence, dismiss'. how ingenious and brilliant; even i or anyone can do that very easily.

yes, literally most members here do not understand a different type of intelligence.

 

[exchemist]

people do explain it, just not to your satisfaction. that's what is called different points of view. considering we are talking about fringe topics, i already have told you before it's not completely understood and you and along with some others continually ignore that point and that is also intellectual dishonesty.

you just made, again, a hypocritical statement in your absolute assertion that all unscientific ideas not go unchallenged. i am not saying they shouldn't go unchallenged, that is the point of discussion. it's that the fringe recieves more harsh bullying to the point of shutting down the discussion than other subfora. even when whatever evidence is available is presented.

i agree that the fringe should be deleted because it is contradictory to this forum's members and it's mission. even though i know that some paranormal events legitimately occur, that is not enough for a forum such as this to discuss. partly because most members do not have the philosophical tenacity or flexibility to understand or question a topic except for the banal, "there is no scientific evidence, dismiss'. how ingenious and brilliant; even i or anyone can do that very easily.

yes, literally most members here do not understand a different type of intelligence.

Where is the hypocrisy? I am simply saying that unscientific ideas must expect to be challenged on this forum, because it is a science forum.

It follows that you can expect those areas of the forum containing the highest proportion of unscientific ideas to attract the most challenge.

"Bullying" is a tendentious term. Challenge is legitimate. A person who persists in putting forward unscientific ideas on a science forum should do so in the full knowledge that a fairly fierce challenge can be expected - and that after a while their personal standing will drop, perhaps eventually making them an object of ridicule. What do they expect? It is a science forum. If they don't like it, they can go instead to a woo forum, where they will be greeted with open arms.

 

[Seattle]

yes, literally most members here do not understand a different type of intelligence.

No one understands a different type of intelligence. If they did, it would be included under the banner of "Science".

 

[birch]

A person who persists in putting forward unscientific ideas on a science forum should do so in the full knowledge that a fairly fierce challenge can be expected

this is your and the member's blindspot here. you are challenging as much from an ignorant position when it comes to fringe topics. this is why it the fringe subfora is pointless and gets nowhere.

there is no way to present physical evidence for occurrences anymore than a person can recreate an exact event in present time that happened in the past with exacting variables.

what i mean is that this 'challenge' is bogus and moot just as much. there is nothing to be gained either way.

unlike religion that has a conventional philosophical value and therefore interpretation, the fringe topics are viewed very literally where tangible evidence is demanded for ufo's, apparitions, ghosts, etc. since that is impossible, there is no point in any topics there in the first place and therefore the subforum.

 

[birch]

i am actually agreeing that the fringe has no place on a forum that is science-oriented. it cannot present concrete evidence that is required of science. it only serves to exacerbate both those who present topics or anecdotes as well as those who demand evidence for it. and that is what you see with every topic in the fringe. so what is the point of it being here?

 

[Michael 345]

so what is the point of it being here?

Perhaps those who put forward strange experiences, of any flavour, are genuinely looking for explanations
There's a thread here somewhere about seeing something before their eyes
The mundane explanation is that they are floaters
From memory that along with other suggestions was rejected
So if putting forward strange experiences is not looking for mundane explanations are they looking for extraordinary explanations?
History would suggest that would be a forlorn hope

 

[exchemist]

this is your and the member's blindspot here. you are challenging as much from an ignorant position when it comes to fringe topics. this is why it the fringe subfora is pointless and gets nowhere.

there is no way to present physical evidence for occurrences anymore than a person can recreate an exact event in present time that happened in the past with exacting variables.

what i mean is that this 'challenge' is bogus and moot just as much. there is nothing to be gained either way.

unlike religion that has a conventional philosophical value and therefore interpretation, the fringe topics are viewed very literally where tangible evidence is demanded for ufo's, apparitions, ghosts, etc. since that is impossible, there is no point in any topics there in the first place and therefore the subforum.

So you say. I and other scientifically educated people will obviously dispute that. As (a) this is science forum and ( b ) what you are saying is anti-science, you won't get much traction for that point of view here and you can expect a lot of challenge. That's all. If you are willing to put up with that then fair enough, but do not complain about it or pretend it is "bullying".