Status of sciforums

It's not the end of the world...

Originally posted by Tyler
What is sciforums now? I've begun to notice for a while the slow degression of sciforums from what it use to be. When I joined it seemed to be about intelligent debate and respect for one another and actually a debate forum. Now, it's something different.

There seems to be a large number of threads lacking any debate. There seems to be a larger number of members who do an even more useless form of what I use to do (that is; back-patting, acting like an idiot, using a thread to just turn into some flirty-esque joke section...). I'm not going to mention any names but I've even seen members who I once saw as incredibly mature and valuable make tiny two-sentance posts in the middle of an actual debate just to make a joke or look funny or cute.

Anyway, you made a congenial point there Tyler. And Congrats also raised a great point, the bigger a forum gets, the more idiots it will have. Why do you think there aren't *that* many intelligent people out there?

But I say we implement something along the lines of a forum debate etiquette:
  1. No flaming.
  2. Do not be rude.
  3. Always have logical, coherent, and reasonable responses, replies, and debates.
  4. Do not take things out of context. Before replying, read the person's post clearly and analyze, then respond. Do not twist a person's words into something they are not
  5. No character judging. Convictions, opinions, and views/perspectives are all different. It is erroneous to say your conviction on a certain matter is right over another's conviction. You can't tell someone that they are flat out wrong if the issue(s) argued does not conflict with reality, truth, and facts.
  6. Consider the other's point(s) then conclude logical and reasonable replies to them. Be open-minded, not in the sense of "believe everything you hear" but in the state of "consider everything you hear." After you consider, then formulate your valid, reasonable, and rational conclusion(s).
  7. Do not go into a debate with the thought that you are going to convince anyone to your point of view. Enter a debate with the thought that you will post your own opinions on a subject and analyze others. If you happen to present your case with such eloquence that people are swayed to your point of view, then more power to you.
  8. Respectfully reply to the opponents assertions and questions, it is not fair if the opponent quotes you word for word and you do not do the same back. There are rare exceptions to this rule, in the case that something might be too long to quote and/or you are in agreement and do not wish to waste posting space to quote something you will not respond or agree to.

A good source

This forum should be, for the most part, essential; for stimulating logic and reason and expressing your viewpoints in a reasonable manner.

The guidelines will solve many problems and hinder fights. The list may change in the future, hopefully for the better.

~The_Chosen~
 
...in theory, yes.

But implementing the points you have outlined would mean Sciforums would be duller than dishwater.

Self control is enough isn't it?

If I DO lay into you big time and I am clearly talking out of my arse then there'll be no shortage of firemen come along to douse me. You could call it infinite justice

:D
 
Re: It's not the end of the world...

Originally posted by ~The_Chosen~
But I say we implement something along the lines of a forum debate etiquette:
  1. No flaming.
  2. Do not be rude.
  3. Always have logical, coherent, and reasonable responses, replies, and debates.
  4. Do not take things out of context. Before replying, read the person's post clearly and analyze, then respond. Do not twist a person's words into something they are not
  5. No character judging. Convictions, opinions, and views/perspectives are all different. It is erroneous to say your conviction on a certain matter is right over another's conviction. You can't tell someone that they are flat out wrong if the issue(s) argued does not conflict with reality, truth, and facts.
  6. Consider the other's point(s) then conclude logical and reasonable replies to them. Be open-minded, not in the sense of "believe everything you hear" but in the state of "consider everything you hear." After you consider, then formulate your valid, reasonable, and rational conclusion(s).
  7. Do not go into a debate with the thought that you are going to convince anyone to your point of view. Enter a debate with the thought that you will post your own opinions on a subject and analyze others. If you happen to present your case with such eloquence that people are swayed to your point of view, then more power to you.
  8. Respectfully reply to the opponents assertions and questions, it is not fair if the opponent quotes you word for word and you do not do the same back. There are rare exceptions to this rule, in the case that something might be too long to quote and/or you are in agreement and do not wish to waste posting space to quote something you will not respond or agree to.

A good source

This forum should be, for the most part, essential; for stimulating logic and reason and expressing your viewpoints in a reasonable manner.

The guidelines will solve many problems and hinder fights. The list may change in the future, hopefully for the better.

~The_Chosen~

Although your notion is a good condition for debates to come, but I believe that's too strict. Let them be rude and flame in an argument, it only makes them look idiotic. :D Many of the people that do this, know they have either lost an argument or just plain don't know how to argue in a civilized manner.
 
go back & reread my post

in which I rewrote congratz post using just the actual words. It is hilarious. It is considered crap but if it is done well, it can be amusing & evoke beauty. I really believe that but you cannot overdo it. all things can be groovy in moderation.:cool: please reread this.
 
With all due respect

Originally posted by Dark Master
Although your notion is a good condition for debates to come, but I believe that's too strict. Let them be rude and flame in an argument, it only makes them look idiotic. :D Many of the people that do this, know they have either lost an argument or just plain don't know how to argue in a civilized manner.

I don't like to debate with idiots. Argue, it's cool. But in formal and respectful debates they can get their asses out of it.

Originally posted by nroweatherman
in which I rewrote congratz post using just the actual words. It is hilarious. It is considered crap but if it is done well, it can be amusing & evoke beauty. I really believe that but you cannot overdo it. all things can be groovy in moderation. :cool: please reread this.

I don't need to reread what you said, in fact, I haven't even read it. :cool: My point is, in debates, those rules should be set as the guidelines. I don't mean to be dyslogistic here, but I'm directing strictly in debate references. So sorry if you could not see that.

People may evoke "crap, beauty, jokes" and all that, but when a debate, not argument, occurs those guidelines should be kept to maintain an intelligent, respectful, reasonable, and courteous forum debate etiquette.

Thank You.
 
Well...

Originally posted by dickbaby
...in theory, yes.

But implementing the points you have outlined would mean Sciforums would be duller than dishwater.

Self control is enough isn't it?

If I DO lay into you big time and I am clearly talking out of my arse then there'll be no shortage of firemen come along to douse me. You could call it infinite justice

:D

I mentioned..."This forum should be, for the most part, essential; for stimulating logic and reason and expressing your viewpoints in a reasonable manner."

You do not agree to that? You think this forum should be mostly unessential?

Reread please, for the most part. So how is it going to be dull? I never mentioned one cannot joke, post crap, evoke beauty, etc. at all.

And yes, get your head out of your ass...:D :p

Thanks.
 
hi tyler, the chosen, wanderer....

i consider myself a quasi-serious poster. i dont think it comes down to intelligence....i think many people who act stupid here on certain threads redeem themselves on others....

part of me believes that these "half-breeds" are really normal people with a sense of humor (in other words, I am the one lacking originaloity and a taste for fun).....

but then, i look at myself and decide that that cannot be the case....:)

so, ive come to the much more unflattering conclusion that these "half-breeds" (again, the smart who act stupid or whatever) are really putting on a facade of "cuteness" or "coyness" or "comedicness" or whatever to impress other people....well, not so much "impress," as to "flirt" with them or whatnot. you know, exercise the sex appeal of their personalities....

which is fine.....if youre on another fucking forum.

i used to believe sciforums was indeed a special place....i still think so....when i look at the general philosophy section.....

but then my faith is tested when i turn my eyes to places like "the picture thread."

im sorry....if anyone is reading this who knows themself to be a "half-breed." know that you can change if you want to.....im sure of it....or you can go ahead and pollute what could otherwise be a beautiful place for your own selfish desires....the balls in your court.....
 
What's in a name, or an Avatar?

When I came to find Exoscience.com, longer ago than most all of you, I found the members to be very critical and quick to snap out an insult to the others. There was certainly less colorful language. One misplaced letter or overly-creative punctuation(s) & would find Boris or Chris (Cris):D trying to psychologically evaluate him. To say nuthin of Tiassa ! !

But I liked Sciforums. Dave (porfiry) was just about the coolest cat on the web to own a site, to say nothing of the fact that it's a site devoted to science!

Whether the science subject has to do with the accepted sciences, or if the thresd is just offhand BS, sciforums has it all!:cool: :cool: :cool:

I might also take this paragraph to mention the fact that Dave created this particular "Free Thoughts" with me (largely) in mind, during the last major re-vamp of Sciforums. At the time, I half assed considered it to be an insult, but truly, Dave saw that there was a need for Sciforum lovers to blow off some steam and post somewhere that would not congest the other posts. There is also the real understanding that occasionally, some Sciforum ideas just can't be classified into the accepted areas that have been set up by Porfiry.

I Wouldn't Change A Godamn Thing About Sciforums ! ! !. It's pretty damn perfect!

Since early 2000, I have gotten into some really incredible science discussions, that have literally spanned the proverbial spectrum of the accepted, as well as the not so accepted ideas_right here at Sciforums!

I have talked about various ideas all over the world to other people of great intelligence. At the same time, I have joked around and posted at threads of some of the craziest jokers that one can ever hope to meet....well maybe not meet the people in person:bugeye: Anyhow, it is certainly true that the higher intellects do need to play more than the mundanes.

The human mind does not become creative....according to the rules!

There are those here, who have managed to gain favor, and now complain about the other posters. It's funny because it's these one's who are the main reason why Sciforums has become insubstantial and lacking it's previous luster. You know, people, it's funny how the rule makers & enforcers always seem to gravitate to the positions of authority, even at a place where they are not needed, or desired.

What's in a name, or an Avatar????????????????????

One of the first things that I learned at ExoScience was that one may find himself "Type Cast" as being a religious nut, or as a believer in UFOlogy. I disliked this typecasting & became set on the idea of that I would be accepted differently if I was not known as being a zealot of one particular set of ideas.

See, I am generally open to any & all ideas. Even the so called proven ideas are still just theories, as far as I am concerned. NOTHING IS ABSOLUTE. If science history has proven nothing else, then any decent scientist, Pro or Amateur, should know this!

I don't have a problem with discussing anything with a person who may post under different handles, even in the same thread. That's not fraud or deception, people! That's damn creative for a person to be able to see various sides of a discussion, or argument, and to be able to carry on a discussion based on the persona of the Avatar that (s)he decides to comment with at the time. It is not something to deride a fellow poster with.

The real problem that I have is with the anal retentive HUNS, who are now moderating and selecting what will be left on the Sciforums Archives & what won't be ! ! ! !

I am being quite honest when I say this. These person(s), I have watched with some sympathetic humor, for some time. The humor increased significantly, when I found that they had been elevated into positions of Sciforums Authority!

Though they will not be named here by me, I wiill say that "they" have yet to post even one decent, creative science post to date_at all! In fact, "they" have done more to stifle and bring down the original quality of Sciforums than anyone else! "Their" abilities seem to mainly be in bitching & complaining to Dave, much the same way as I found them from the first day that I read "their" first post at Sciforums!




FINALLY

The Evolution of Science Ideas
Let us talk Darwin.

Some here don't like all of the different personalities & the many pointless threads. But I see this as the purest form of Evolution!

In all Darwin Ideas/theories, know this as the absolute observation on the whole of the Universe & everything within it: That (he/she/it) which is successful, will continue forth & make generally successful copies of itself, while that (he/she/it) which is not successful will not make successful copies.. and will gradually fade into the extinct category. That which is successful, will continue.

I don't pull any Godamn punches here at Sciforums, unless I have a reason.

I want people to be rude to me. It is to be expected. If I want to feel good about myself, I'll go to some fucking touchy, feel good, liberal site ! ! !

If my ideas are wrong, by god this is the place to get the input from other minds!

When Sciforums becomes a place where everyone is SOOO fu**king nice that they won't even tell the other guy that he is wrong & why...................Then Howard & Elwood will truly leave the building, for good.:cool: :mad: :cool:

I miss Boris. <img src="http://www.sciforums.com/avatar.php?userid=909&dateline=990925548">I think I'll send an insulting Personal Message to him, for old times sake. Hey we're actually the best of friends, now people!!! It's an honest hate/friendship that I have with someone that I met here a few years ago. Actually, either of us would sacrifice his best arm to save the other. You get that by coming to know others and agreeing/disagreeing.

OH Yeah, I forgot about Cris & Bowser!:D Haven't heard much about Bowser lately. Cris still has the same avatar as when I first joined, but he doesn't reply to me anymore....especially since he found out that I have actually smoked marijuana,,,,,and did inhale.. unlike the previous President.

So raise hell & Rock the House, Baby!
 
Last edited:
Re: What's in a name, or an Avatar?

Originally posted by GeraldoRivera
I Wouldn't Change A Godamn Thing About Sciforums ! ! !. It's pretty damn perfect!


Nothing is perfect...:D We could still improve sciforums.com more and make it mostly essential.

There are those here, who have managed to gain favor, and now complain about the other posters. It's funny because it's these one's who are the main reason why Sciforums has become insubstantial and lacking it's previous luster. You know, people, it's funny how the rule makers & enforcers always seem to gravitate to the positions of authority, even at a place where they are not needed, or desired.


Would Congrats' theory of the more members there are, the more idiots come relate to how the more posts you have, the more unessential most of those posts are...? :bugeye: :D :rolleyes: :eek:

Though they will not be named here by me, I wiill say that "they" have yet to post even one decent, creative science post to date_at all! In fact, "they" have done more to stifle and bring down the original quality of Sciforums than anyone else! "Their" abilities seem to mainly be in bitching & complaining to Dave, much the same way as I found them from the first day that I read "their" first post at Sciforums!


True, this I have noticed....:D

I don't pull any Godamn punches here at Sciforums, unless I have a reason.


This should be a good guideline for everyone else to follow. That is, the reason should be valid, reasonable, and rational...:)

I want people to be rude to me. It is to be expected. If I want to feel good about myself, I'll go to some fucking touchy, feel good, liberal site ! ! !


:eek: You want? I don't think you want them to be, you just expect them to be. You want disrespect? Certainly, I hope not...:)

GeraldoRivera, you raised some pithy points. :cool:
 
The real problem that I have is with the anal retentive HUNS, who are now moderating and selecting what will be left on the Sciforums Archives & what won't be ! ! ! !

I am being quite honest when I say this. These person(s), I have watched with some sympathetic humor, for some time. The humor increased significantly, when I found that they had been elevated into positions of Sciforums Authority!

Though they will not be named here by me, I wiill say that "they" have yet to post even one decent, creative science post to date_at all! In fact, "they" have done more to stifle and bring down the original quality of Sciforums than anyone else! "Their" abilities seem to mainly be in bitching & complaining to Dave, much the same way as I found them from the first day that I read "their" first post at Sciforums!

I betcha he's talking about me.
 
Congrats,

For my thoughts, we moderators are not above being taken to task for our actions. For my part I would remain approachable by any member of sciforums. I will willingly discuss any issue that has seemed unfair or may have been misunderstood by any member. I prefer that any such discussion take the form of pm's or other communications as I do not think the boards should be cluttered with such issues unless it is a thread specific to that problem.

Aways there will be differences of opinion no matter what action is taken or even if none is taken.

For my part, I have no problems with constructive critizism, as what I learn may be helpful in the long run.
 
Re: What's in a name, or an Avatar?

Originally posted by GeraldoRivera

I don't have a problem with discussing anything with a person who may post under different handles, even in the same thread. That's not fraud or deception, people! That's damn creative for a person to be able to see various sides of a discussion, or argument, and to be able to carry on a discussion based on the persona of the Avatar that (s)he decides to comment with at the time. It is not something to deride a fellow poster with.

I guess that is okay for you since you appear to have multiple personalities disorder.
 
I have a feeling this post is aimed at me. I can't think of better candidates at this moment.

Originally posted by ubermich
so, ive come to the much more unflattering conclusion that these "half-breeds" (again, the smart who act stupid or whatever) are really putting on a facade of "cuteness" or "coyness" or "comedicness" or whatever to impress other people....well, not so much "impress," as to "flirt" with them or whatnot. you know, exercise the sex appeal of their personalities....

In some cases by some people you can call it trolling, in my case it's called being yourself. You may think you should not be yourself on the internet, that would just be a difference in philosophy. There are 5+ billion people on earth, you won't like every single one of them. You are expected to clash with some of them no matter what. That is what ignore list is for. I have no problem with threads derailed for a few posts. That is matter of tolerance.


im sorry....if anyone is reading this who knows themself to be a "half-breed." know that you can change if you want to.....im sure of it....or you can go ahead and pollute what could otherwise be a beautiful place for your own selfish desires....the balls in your court.....

I find the overall tone of your post prejudiced and self-serving. Nobody has a say on what the culture of this forum should be except the owner. An occasional stupid post or two by a poster is hardly intolerable. Where would Harlem Globetroters be without the Washington Generals? What you described is not even the most serious problem.

Here are some most recent samples of your beloved "full inbred" posters.

Originally posted by Northwind
Well, he's stupid enough.

Wow, that is post of the year candidate. It really adds a lot to the discussion

Originally posted by GB-GIL The Brat
*stRgrL*: these people have constantly been denied POW status by Shrub and his cronies. Holding these people indefinitely without making charges against them or declaring them prisoners of war is illegal by international law.

If I recall correctly, it is illegal by international law to torture POWs anyways, however even so these people have yet to be declared prisoners of war. Call me when they are...

:rolleyes:

just your typical ignorant American... so stereotypical. thank goodness for the people like Xev (I would say myself, however that would be bragging) that break such stereotypes.

A post reeks with ignorance, prejudice, and ass kissing.
 
Here's a question for y'all

One of our posters, about three months ago, wrote in the religious forum: It is by bashing that we separate the wheat from the chaff. It is by bashing that we progress to the truth.

I look to our topic poster:

What is sciforums now? I've begun to notice for a while the slow degression of sciforums from what it use to be. When I joined it seemed to be about intelligent debate and respect for one another and actually a debate forum. Now, it's something different.

And then I look up at this quote I just fished out of a religious debate that took place in April and I wonder if there's any connection 'twixt the two.

I mean, Joeman has an interesting point in this topic:

I don't post because I want to debate. I post because I want to have fun. Being in a debate can be fun, so is fooling around, so is flaming people who insult me. I believe in being yourself. I am being myself. I am acting exactly the same way I would with friends.

This is fair enough because to each their own.

But as such an approach becomes more the norm at Sciforums, we can expect less focus and more acrimony in the debates.

It's the price we pay for being ourselves: the degradation of civility.

The point being that it is up to the posters to determine the quality of Sciforums' posting content.

What are our priorities?

For instance, in accord with the boldfaced note about bashing above: I have separated the chaff, and hopefully, by not having to constantly see as many bashing, pointless posts, I'll spend less time responding to pointless, bashing posts.

My own stand on this? I'm happy to meet anyone at their preferred tone of debate. And if it upsets you to be treated as you treat others, well ...?° Furthermore, I wouldn't mind the bashing and acrimony nearly as much as I do if it was proportionate. 100 bashing posts is 100 bashing posts. But if that chaff constitutes a small portion of each post, I'm more than willing to put up with it. However, such idiotic chaff in lieu of a better argument? What, I'm supposed to respect that?

Notes:

° Treat others: It's one of the reasons I prefer Hillel's Golden Rule to the more commonly-acknowledged one. Hillel's Golden Rule says, Do not do unto others as you would not have done unto you.


thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
 
Re: Here's a question for y'all

Originally posted by tiassa
It's the price we pay for being ourselves: the degradation of civility.

Totally NOT TRUE!!!. You must not have too many friends. If you hang out with your friends or go out to a party, you don't just insult people left and right. Flaming others is NOT being yourself!!!!! I wonder if GB-GIL-the brat will have the guts to insult me in real life. I always believe flaming others under protection of anonymity over internet is act of cowardice. Some people are immature, so I just let it go. From my massive experience posting over the internet, I know people's behavior do improve with age. (I have been posting since internet was dial in BBS.) I do however have problems with older folks flaming others. I never take an initiative to flame a person. If I do it by accident, an apology quickly follows. I do actually prefer a relatively unmoderated board. I am normally a fun loving peaceful guy, but if someone steps on my toe, I will retaliate with a big war hammer. I prefer to deal with problems myself. I don't need or want a moderator to step in between to break up a fight. Sometimes it is better for two people to fight it out.

Again if everyone be yourself, this place would really be pleasant. You very rarely see bar fights.

I actually have a lot more to say in this matter, but I don't want to make a post really long because most people don't read long posts.
 
Back
Top