What do you not like about SFN?

[Klaynos]

Do you check the "Remember Me" box when you log in? That should fix the problem.

 

iNow: functionality, policy and the atmosphere in general, really.

 

All the IRCops on IRC are just evil and should be banned! Atmosphere problem!

[thedarkshade]

I was thinking that there should be a panel that would show whose birthday is today (or any day), just like the online panel that shows who's online!

[jeremyhfht]

I'll make it simple. The politics forum. Politics, while it could be discussed in terms of rationality, is just too open to lunatics and people generally uninterested in any science.

 

It would be better replaced with something like "Government & Economy" where discussions will focus on various types of government and economic discussions.

[Phi for All]

I was thinking that there should be a panel that would show whose birthday is today (or any day), just like the online panel that shows who's online!

We used to have that under What's Going On? at the bottom of the main Forum page. I'm sure it's something that can easily be switched back on.

 

Just not by me...

 

Cap'n or dave will swoop in soon and fix you right up, mad one.

[thedarkshade]

We used to have that under What's Going On?

What made it go off?

 

Cap'n or dave will swoop in soon and fix you right up, mad one.

I love the TMO thing:D:D!

[Phi for All]

I'll make it simple. The politics forum. Politics, while it could be discussed in terms of rationality, is just too open to lunatics and people generally uninterested in any science.

You've only been eligible for posting in Politics for the last 17 posts (takes a minimum of 30 posts to be eligible). If you'll give it a chance you'll see that it's well moderated and, while more opinion-prone than the science sub-fora, Politics at SFN is discussed rationally and logically. Fallacious logic is frowned on as elsewhere and lunatics are dealt with pretty harshly. And the focus is often how politics will affect scientific inquiry.

 

I think you are premature in your judgment.

 

It would be better replaced with something like "Government & Economy" where discussions will focus on various types of government and economic discussions.

So were supposed to ignore current events and just discuss *types* of governments and economies? Pass.

 

I think we'd spend more time telling people they have to stop talking about current events than it would be worth. Politics is one of our most-viewed sections. And we try to encourage members to post in all the sub-fora; you'll get a verbal warning if you spend *all* your time in Politics.

 

But I'd like to hear from anyone else on the subject. Anyone else feel the same way jeremyhfht does about our Politics section?

 

What made it go off?

The same guy who will probably turn it on again.

[jeremyhfht]

You've only been eligible for posting in Politics for the last 17 posts (takes a minimum of 30 posts to be eligible). If you'll give it a chance you'll see that it's well moderated and, while more opinion-prone than the science sub-fora, Politics at SFN is discussed rationally and logically. Fallacious logic is frowned on as elsewhere and lunatics are dealt with pretty harshly. And the focus is often how politics will affect scientific inquiry.

 

I don't post in politics. I don't need to. Instead I watch. The quality of discussion for "recent events" in which people have beliefs is normally very low, especially compared to more scientific discussions.

 

I feel that, rather than discussing events singularly, it's better to discuss the whole form of government. America's democracy has its flaws, after all. Such flaws are the driving problem behind most criticism of various politicians or legislations. It makes more sense, therefore, to restrict conversation to the fuller scale. It helps people learn more about the big picture.

 

So far all I've observed in the politics forum is useless discussions of recent events such as the iraq war, upcomming election, word-salad posts, posts without useful content, etc. I've seen barely any useful discussion come from that thread. Even going back quite a ways, the ratio of good quality posts to bad is very low.

 

So were supposed to ignore current events and just discuss *types* of governments and economies? Pass.

 

I think it's a little more than just that. One could discuss the interaction of governments with its populace, the interaction between two governments, etc. It's not such a limited spectrum. It only carves out meaningless posts.

 

I think we'd spend more time telling people they have to stop talking about current events than it would be worth. Politics is one of our most-viewed sections. And we try to encourage members to post in all the sub-fora; you'll get a verbal warning if you spend *all* your time in Politics.

 

Thus the problem. Politics is a science forums most viewed forum. If you do not see what is wrong with that picture, I'm not sure how I can make you.

 

P.S: I've had access to politics for quite a long time. In fact my recent posts are only a fraction of my initial ones. I had over 30 before I stopped posting before, after all.

[Phi for All]

I don't post in politics. I don't need to.

Ahhh.

Instead I watch. The quality of discussion for "recent events" in which people have beliefs is normally very low, especially compared to more scientific discussions.

Observers who don't participate are almost always scathing in their critiques.

I feel that, rather than discussing events singularly, it's better to discuss the whole form of government. America's democracy has its flaws, after all. Such flaws are the driving problem behind most criticism of various politicians or legislations. It makes more sense, therefore, to restrict conversation to the fuller scale. It helps people learn more about the big picture.

Those sound like some excellent thread ideas.

So far all I've observed in the politics forum is useless discussions of recent events such as the iraq war, upcomming election, word-salad posts, posts without useful content, etc. I've seen barely any useful discussion come from that thread. Even going back quite a ways, the ratio of good quality posts to bad is very low.

Since you don't post there, no one knows what jeremyhfht would find useful. How is that our fault?

I think it's a little more than just that. One could discuss the interaction of governments with its populace, the interaction between two governments, etc. It's not such a limited spectrum. It only carves out meaningless posts.

Good idea. But since you don't post there, no one knows what jeremyhfht would find meaningful. Again, how is that our fault? Without your input *in Politics* there is no one to lead by an example that would satisfy jeremyhfht.

Thus the problem. Politics is a science forums most viewed forum. If you do not see what is wrong with that picture, I'm not sure how I can make you.

And a university's most frequented building is usually the student union or the campus pub. So what? People who spend a lot of time learning like to share that knowledge. They also like to apply what they learn to situations other than the classroom or laboratory. Discussing Politics is a way of using what you know to influence your opinions on things that are happening in the world around you.

 

Go check out some other Politics forums online. I can't stand them. I like reading about current events as discussed by people who's opinions I've learned to respect.

P.S: I've had access to politics for quite a long time. In fact my recent posts are only a fraction of my initial ones. I had over 30 before I stopped posting before, after all.

Good. Please feel free to start some threads. Remember, the OP sets the tone and you can request serious adherence to your topics. The Mods will help too.

 

Or, you can go on criticizing without participating. Which kind of makes you like those folks who gripe about the government but don't bother to vote.

[doG]

I was thinking that there should be a panel that would show whose birthday is today (or any day), just like the online panel that shows who's online!

 

Just see the default calendar for the site....

 

P.S.

Now I see that it's only set up through 2006....

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

That's weird. I'll have to take a look at that.

[iNow]

But I'd like to hear from anyone else on the subject. Anyone else feel the same way jeremyhfht does about our Politics section?

No. Not at all. I find the contributions there to be (as a general rule) well thought out and supported, and I enjoy it as a very useful place to ping my thoughts and ideas off of other intelligent beings.

 

I must commend you on your patience, though. I'd have told jeremy to bugger off and go elsewhere if he didn't like it. I respect the fact that you gave him both a voice and a listening ear in this thread. Well done, sir.

[jeremyhfht]

Congratulations iNow. You've supported someone who thinks objective observers are by definition not objective.

[iNow]

Congratulations iNow. You've supported someone who thinks objective observers are by definition not objective.

 

I happen to agree. As even that which is labelled as "objective" must first pass through one's own "subjective" filters.

 

 

Quit posting off topic.

 

 

Cap'n... I'd like to be able to ban people for 24 hours for being stupid. Can we set something like that up on my account? Just don't let others use it, or I'd be banned in perpetuity myself.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I can loan you Dogbert's scepter from my avatar.

[Phi for All]

Congratulations iNow. You've supported someone who thinks objective observers are by definition not objective.

My comment on your objectivity *in this instance* stands. You criticize without participating. This is not an experiment, it's social discourse and rational discussion of political topics. It's really easy to look down your nose at our Politics section when your insights aren't present. It's also kind of funny that you're telling us we're doing it all wrong when virtually every decent science forum on the web has a Politics section as well. Have you told PhysicsForums their Politics & World Affairs section is meaningless?

 

And btw, trying to argue that my comments *in this instance* apply to all objective observation is a strawman argument. Bad logic. Bad.

Cap'n... I'd like to be able to ban people for 24 hours for being stupid.

Unfortunately, people who tend to let their stupid show a lot would still be angry at the ban in just 24 hours. Most would need at least 3 days to calm down and try to recapture some level of lucidity.

[thedarkshade]

Thanks doG!

[Klaynos]

2 things.

 

The first is finding this thread, type "what do you not like about sfn" into the search box and you'll see what I mean...

 

The second is people not reading replies to threads before they make their own reply, if the thread is long I can understand this, or just read the threads from the people who you know what they're talking about. ESPECIALLY if the person replying doesn't infact have a clue what they're talking about when they answer an OP question and it has been clearly answered above!

 

Thanks for reading my rant

[YT2095]

and 3, People that don`t bother reading the thread before they reply!

Damn that annoys me!

[iNow]

Yeah... and why hasn't anybody said anything about the search feature yet? Gosh...

[Phi for All]

The first is finding this thread, type "what do you not like about sfn" into the search box and you'll see what I mean...

That's weird. Does the Search function NOT look at titles?!

and 3, People that don`t bother reading the thread before they reply!

Damn that annoys me!

You are a funny funny man.

[doG]

"what do you not like about sfn" into the search box and you'll see what I mean...

 

 

There's a reason for that. vBulletin doesn't index words shorter than 4 or 5 characters unless it is specifically configured to do so. Setting it to index all the 2 and 3 letter words so that you can perform searches like your sample could strongly affect site performance. Even Google ignores most common words for the same reason. OTOH, I'm sure the team at vBulletin would love to see any code you have to offer that might overcome some of the obstacles related to implementing the search function.

[Royston]

The second is people not reading replies to threads before they make their own reply, if the thread is long I can understand this, or just read the threads from the people who you know what they're talking about. ESPECIALLY if the person replying doesn't infact have a clue what they're talking about when they answer an OP question and it has been clearly answered above!

 

Thanks for reading my rant

 

I've noticed this a lot in the physics sub-forums, another problem, which is especially annoying, is when new members ask a question (be it homework, or any other section) and the reply is from somebody who hasn't got the foggiest what they're talking about...usually starting with 'Well, I think...' If somebody has come here to learn, then leave it to an expert or somebody who at least has been educated to a reasonable standard (in that field) to respond...if you don't know what you're talking about, then you're not in any position to be giving advice. If it's an urgent question, then provide a link to a reputable source, or wiki (as that does suffice on most occasions) don't make the situation worse with your 'opinion.'

 

Another problem, is the same questions that keep popping up...e.g Where is the centre of the universe ? Answer, it's been discussed here (link provided) thread closed. I can understand this from new members, but not from people that have been on here for some time.

 

Also, people that continually write (blatant) incoherent crap should be warned or banned from certain sub-forums, it really degrades the quality of a good discussion...plus half the discussion can be derailed by trying to work out what that person is going on about. Rambling on generally makes your post less clear, not clearer...if you start off with something you're not sure about, it should be kept short and sweet.

 

I'm glad somebody (Klaynos) brought up the quality of posting, and this is more directed at people, that by now, really should know better.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

There's a reason for that. vBulletin doesn't index words shorter than 4 or 5 characters unless it is specifically configured to do so. Setting it to index all the 2 and 3 letter words so that you can perform searches like your sample could strongly affect site performance. Even Google ignores most common words for the same reason. OTOH, I'm sure the team at vBulletin would love to see any code you have to offer that might overcome some of the obstacles related to implementing the search function.

I believe there's a Sphinx search plugin that offers better performance and better searching. I haven't looked to see what sort of work that would take, though.