New Sub-Catageroies Poll

[TimeTraveler]

I have seen a few suggestions for a few extra sub-catagories on SFN. I think this is a great idea, but the problem I see is there are so many catagories of sciences to make. A few more wouldn't hurt I don't think though.

 

Maybe we could suggest some, have the mods put it to a poll for a month and pick the top two sub-catagories that are voted on.

 

I would suggest Environmental sciences and Science fiction.

[Sayonara]

Like you said, this has already been discussed.

[TimeTraveler]

Yes, in a different manner. Such as:

 

Post #1: Hey we should have a new forum for environmental sciences!

 

Post #2: Yeah that would be cool, and we could add electronics and pyrotechnics!

 

Post #3: Yeah and lets add xxxx subject!

 

Post #4: No I like my idea better!

 

The point of this thread was not to re-open regurgatated threads, but to re-establish the merit of those threads and present an idea that might make it something possible and within reason without adding 20 more sub-catagories.

 

If presenting a new idea, and collecting many different threads together is a bad idea, then I apologize.

 

And if this exact same thread has been made in the past somewhere, I did not find it on search, and I apologize for that too.

[5614]

If presenting a new idea, and collecting many different threads together is a bad idea, then I apologize.

 

dont aplogise, but that is not what you are doing.

 

you are suggesting that we have an environemental sub-section - thats fine.... although its not neccessarily what everyone nor the majority want.

 

i think that pyro and electronics would be just as popular as an environmental sub-forum.

 

you might say that you are collecting threads together... but is there deffinitve proof that youre idea is more popular than an electronics one?

[5614]

well, there have been many non-conclusive debates on the subject... so here's a poll which will allow us to see which is the most popular new sub-catagories.

 

base your decision on which you think you'd gain out of the most, which others would gain out of the most and which SFN as a whole would gain out of the most.

[Sayonara]

It doesn't matter what manner you present the question in; you're still suggesting the same thing and since traffic has not spiked dramatically since the last thread on this, the answer is still the same:

 

We condensed the forums because some were practically empty, and none of the topics currently covered by "General Sciences" are drawing enough interest to justify making new forums.

 

The only forum that is likely to be re-split any time soon is Chemistry.

[YT2095]

I vote Other.

Other as in NONE!

 

all those mentioned in the poll will fit somewhere in the Existing cats, so why make more?

[5614]

all those mentioned in the poll will fit somewhere in the Existing cats, so why make more?

i know and i totaly agree. however there still remains the constant flow of suggestions from people to create new sub-categories, so i hoped this thread would finish em off!

 

also, more sub-categories could get more members, as they'd be more specific areas.

for example, someone coming here might not know if they could ask about electronics and just go somewhere else - an electronics sub-section would get them interested and become a member (obviously that works with anything, electronics was just an example.)

[TimeTraveler]

dont aplogise' date=' but that is not what you are doing.

 

you are suggesting that we have an environemental sub-section - thats fine.... although its not neccessarily what everyone nor the majority want.

 

i think that pyro and electronics would be just as popular as an environmental sub-forum.

 

you might say that you are collecting threads together... but is there deffinitve proof that youre idea is more popular than an electronics one?[/quote']

 

I don't think you even read past the first sentance of my original post, yes I am presenting an idea.

 

Have people submit new catagories they would like to see, put it on a poll for the members of SFN to vote and the two with the highest amount of votes could be made catagories. That way the two most wanted (voted on by the majority) catagories would be used.

 

I don't see where I am saying we should use my catagory suggestions because they are better than anyone else's.

 

It doesn't matter what manner you present the question in; you're still suggesting the same thing and since traffic has not spiked dramatically since the last thread on this' date=' the answer is still the same:

 

We condensed the forums because some were practically empty, and none of the topics currently covered by "General Sciences" are drawing enough interest to justify making new forums.

 

The only forum that is likely to be re-split any time soon is Chemistry.[/quote']

 

Hrrm, well since the decision seems to already be made, then this thread becomes completely useless, might as well delete it.

 

But just to satisfy my curiosity before you delete it I have two questions:

 

#1: Do you think that by having more available sub-catagories the site might recieve more traffic? (I personally found this site on google by searching forum: physics section)

 

#2: Does it hurt anything to have new sub-catagories even if traffic is not above "the norm"? (cost more money, or slow server speeds....)

[Sayonara]

It has no discernable effect on traffic (search engines simply do not work that way any more - they now look for semantic context and a scalar value called "authority" which deals with inward and outward links and metadata).

 

The problems with more categories are:

 

- The database gets bigger.

- Moderation becomes more difficult.

- The index page becomes longer than twice the depth of the fold, which is user-hostile.

- Users who bother to post in the correct forum become less confident about where they should start a thread...

- ...then the multiple posting starts.

 

And so on.

[TimeTraveler]

I voted:

 

Environmental Sciences

 

Other: Science fiction

 

If moderation became a problem, I would be more than willing to help if needed. I moderate/own 1 forum right now and have been for 4 years so I have some experience.

[TimeTraveler]

The problems with more categories are:

 

- The database gets bigger.

Would two more sub catagories effect the size of the database enough to cause any problems with site function?

 

- Moderation becomes more difficult.

I volunteer to be a mod if ever deemed necessary.

 

- The index page becomes longer than twice the depth of the fold, which is user-hostile.

- Users who bother to post in the correct forum become less confident about where they should start a thread...

- ...then the multiple posting starts.

 

Since you have been around here alot longer than me I take it this is known from past experience. But I also think posters who want to post in the right area will do so 99% of the time, the posts that end up in the wrong areas are by posters who do not care enough to get it right. I don't think 2 more subsections, especially if they are specific enough, will add to the amount of posts in wrong sections. If the poster does not care enough to get it right it doesn't matter if there is a hundred subjects or five he's going to post where he "wants" to. (That is my opinion)

 

*edit*

 

Also maybe a tradeoff could work better in a benificial way to help some of the problems you mentioned.

 

I for one do not necessarily see the purpose of the Math Problems sub-catagory. For one it has the lowest amount of replies of the major portions of the site ( I am not sure if it is newer or just lacking interest). But also, any of the specific Math catagories catagories could and are used for math problems, as well as homework help section.

[Sayonara]

Would two more sub catagories effect the size of the database enough to cause any problems with site function?

No, but the point is that it has to be worth setting a precedent.

 

 

I volunteer to be a mod if ever deemed necessary.

It's not that it will require more mods, it's that modding becomes more difficult.

 

 

 

Since you have been around here alot longer than me I take it this is known from past experience. But I also think posters who want to post in the right area will do so 99% of the time,

I don't see what you are basing that on.

 

the posts that end up in the wrong areas are by posters who do not care enough to get it right. I don't think 2 more subsections, especially if they are specific enough, will add to the amount of posts in wrong sections. If the poster does not care enough to get it right it doesn't matter if there is a hundred subjects or five he's going to post where he "wants" to. (That is my opinion)

It does matter, because the fewer categories there are the greater the chances of random rightness.

 

 

I'm not saying it's bad to have more categories - I'm saying the benefits need to outweigh the drawbacks.

[YT2095]

I don`t make policy here, nor do any other Moderators.

 

we have a tried and tested method that has worked for us over many years, even before I arrived here.

 

we`ve only just about gotten a new Chemistry area, an Electronics one I`de enjoy also and would happily contribute to.

 

but we have such areas that these will fit into into already

 

to get it 100% correct and keeping all Happy would be a never ending job! in fact I`de go so far as to say you could NEVER keep everyone happy!

[YT2095]

Sayo, any chance we can merge these two?

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7903

 

it`s the same stuff just spread really.

what ya recon?

[YT2095]

nevermind I`ve done it.

 

and yer right it IS easy enough to do!

 

now it`s ALL in ONE place... chat away )

[TimeTraveler]

I don't see what you are basing that on.

 

Just observation and opinion, which i know is meaningless. Thats why I made it a point at the bottom to put: (That is my opinion).

 

It does matter, because the fewer categories there are the greater the chances of random rightness.

 

I do see your point, however I counter with the arguement that fewer catagories have the same effect. For example if one wanted to discuss the o-zone layer, earthquakes, natural resource depletion, weather, atmosphere ect ect. He could post in general sciences or general discussion or biology (in some cases) increasing the chances he is not posting in the "right" section. An environmental sciences would improve the liklihood that these topics were in the right section and being read by people who are interested in environmental sciences. To further the example, almost every topic has an element of science fiction in it, whether it is a question relating to the possibility of a science fiction technology or just discussing basic science fiction it can fit in many different topics it may or may not be related to.

 

(I used examples of the topics I would like to see only because I felt I needed to back them up with a reason they may or may not be needed)

 

As for electronics as some have expressed interest in for a new catagory, I see it would be more fit to maybe make the engineering header Engineering/Electronics as I view them relatively similar. (Opinion again)

[Sayonara]

If you're going to claim "people post anywhere anyway" you can't also have "if the right forum is there they'll use it".

 

I appreciate the idea of having a forum for every science, but it's just not worth the time or effort when we have 5 environmental science threads and 3 on electronics (or whatever it happens to be).

 

There were far more threads than that in the forums we got rid of, and they were still more trouble than they were worth.

[sepultallica]

forensic science

[TimeTraveler]

If you're going to claim "people post anywhere anyway" you can't also have "if the right forum is there they'll use it".

 

Sorry I didn't elaborate that enough. What I mean is "some" people don't care if they are posting in the right area. Yes they may be conscious of the fact of the sections and post in the right area most of the time, but when it comes down to a more in depth or border-line topic they are likely to just post it where they want to rather than taking the time to figure out what science they are talking about. (Confusions of relativity and astronomy/cosmology come to mind)

 

Others who do "care" and try thier best to make sure thier post is in the right section everytime might have a topic that is border-line and have to make a decision (Engineering or computer sciences for an electronics question perhaps) and may make be wrong anyway.

 

So a couple more would be no less or worse, I don't think there would be a spike either way.

 

I appreciate the idea of having a forum for every science, but it's just not worth the time or effort when we have 5 environmental science threads and 3 on electronics (or whatever it happens to be).

 

I think this is where the confusion is, my bad for not explaining myself enough. I did not mean full catagories with different threads. I just meant 1 for environmental sciences, say maybe in the biological sciences area or general sciences area.

[Auk]

I.. decided not to vote. I'm perfectly happy with the sub-categories that are available. Although the mods may feel pressure because many want more sub-cat's im fine with what we have and im sure other's would agree with me.

[Jordan14]

Maybe a dimensions forum??

 

I wouldn't mind that. But it would probally end up with only me posting there.

[MolecularMan14]

optics maybe? I know a few threads that would work better in there.

[budullewraagh]

i think we should have a chem category. chem isn't just an "other" science...we could divide it into organic, inorganic, physical, analytical, theoretical, and another for application and private experimenteurism

[5614]

maybe that's a few too many bud, but it is a popular idea to expand chem esp. amongst admins/mods as it gets a lot of traffic.