Aimless original postings -- Do they violate any forum rule/policy?

[ewmon]

I'll be the first to admit that I'm no forum expert, but I've seen a few threads lately starting with posts that, while they can be scientific in nature, are merely simple facts with no obvious point of discussion. I'll make up an example:

 

the sun produces ultraviolet rays from which humans must protect themselves

The only rule they seem to violate is #8 (with my emphasis added) --

 

This is a discussion forum, not your personal lecture hall. Discuss points, don't just repeat them.

These threads seem to lack a specific purpose or direction for discussion. Do I have a legitimate concern, or am I just whining?

[mississippichem]

I'll be the first to admit that I'm no forum expert, but I've seen a few threads lately starting with posts that, while they can be scientific in nature, are merely simple facts with no obvious point of discussion. I'll make up an example:

 

 

The only rule they seem to violate is #8 (with my emphasis added) --

 

 

These threads seem to lack a specific purpose or direction for discussion. Do I have a legitimate concern, or am I just whining?

 

It's usually some little dim-whit deviant trying to get his post-count up to start a rant in ethics or politics. They usually get sacked by an admin or mod eventually.

[imatfaal]

I think there is a very laudable and pronounced didactic streak in many of the knowledgeable experts here and this fosters those posters who are not experienced at correspondence on a forum, nor very learned in science. I agree it can be annoying - but the forum would lose a great deal if they were discouraged too much. The mods are quite quick enough in clamping down if a thread is better suited to speculations or to trash. just my two cents

[jackson33]

I'll be the first to admit that I'm no forum expert, but I've seen a few threads lately starting with posts that, while they can be scientific in nature, are merely simple facts with no obvious point of discussion. [/Quote]

 

ewmon; maybe I'm simply naive, but it seems to me in my years in Science and Political Forums, it has always been this way. Then many people, in their own mind might feel they have asked a question or more likely a questionable opinion. While most people are *interested* in science, especially astronomy, very little has been required classes in k-12 over the past 30-40 years. There's always the "Pen Pall" syndrome, where folks are looking for friendly conversation and this too, has been around for awhile.

 

It's usually some little dim-whit deviant trying to get his post-count up to start a rant in ethics or politics. They usually get sacked by an admin or mod eventually. [/Quote]

 

I wish mississippi, but there are by far more Political Sites out there, they can jump right into, from any ideological viewpoint. This might be possible for the Religion/Philosophy sub-forums, where some religious understanding might mix science into an argument and there are NOT very many such sites available.

 

 

It's been my opinion imatfaal, this forum is TOO restrictive for those finding their way here with a google search, that might not be science oriented. Recently, this exact example happened to me, but on a Political Forum while researching for another project. Their policy was to hold postings until their moderator reviewed/cleared the post, which took some time, but were shown and my third post was not restricted.

 

I've argued this many times here, but generally educated folks in the various science fields don't participate in casual science discussion, but as said earlier, everyone has a certain amount of interest...

[lemur]

I'll be the first to admit that I'm no forum expert, but I've seen a few threads lately starting with posts that, while they can be scientific in nature, are merely simple facts with no obvious point of discussion. I'll make up an example:

the sun produces ultraviolet rays from which humans must protect themselves

 

These threads seem to lack a specific purpose or direction for discussion. Do I have a legitimate concern, or am I just whining?

The problem I think you run into with this is that there's some subjectivity involved in what is obvious to whom based on what they know and don't know. It's true that things that can be googled don't necessarily need to be asked, but sometimes wiki or other pages aren't clear and it helps people to seek clarification. I don't think it would be fun to have a "police state forum" where posts are constantly being censored or criticized for various aesthetic reasons. Better, imo, to ignore posts that don't interest you and respond to ones you find interesting. Maybe there should be a +/- rating system for threads like there are for individual posts within a thread.

 

 

[Spyman]

These threads seem to lack a specific purpose or direction for discussion.

I bet a very large chunk of those threads are made with the aim to return later and edit in spam links.

 

Parallel thread discussing spammers here: No links in the first 2-10 posts? Or 24 hrs?

[swansont]

Rule 8 is generally applied to those who don't respond to legitimate questions, and to posters of the Wall-o-Text™. Both of those are found almost exclusively in posts by crackpots, in part because they get weeded out before they could post in politics/religion. Someone posting random blurbs in multiple posts that don't foster discussion is likely to be considered a potential spammer. If they are they get kicked, and of not, getting ignored makes posting lose its charm pretty quickly.

[CaptainPanic]

I think there is a very laudable and pronounced didactic streak in many of the knowledgeable experts here and this fosters those posters who are not experienced at correspondence on a forum, nor very learned in science. I agree it can be annoying - but the forum would lose a great deal if they were discouraged too much. The mods are quite quick enough in clamping down if a thread is better suited to speculations or to trash. just my two cents

I agree.

 

I will kick myself in the head for saying this (those empty post are really annoying), but I do agree that we should leave them.

 

If it is not spam, and also not a bot, and if it is remotely science-related, then it should be allowed. Those silly posts might grow into decent contributions over time.