An open discussion on this forum's direction.

nesf

Ok, this is an "official" opinion thread. Say what you feel here people. What's said in this thread won't be carried outside it. No flaming etc but no one here is right or wrong. It's just going to be a brainstorm of sorts.

I'm going to throw out a few general headings to talk about. I'll refrain from discussion in this for the moment, so as not to sway people.

And btw, disagreeing with me is not something I will ever ban people for. Do not be afraid to argue against me. The only people I'll ban are muppets who don't contribute to the forum or who are flaming etc.


Headings:

1) Should this board's main focus be a place for lay people to ask questions and learn about physics? Or should it be more leant towards academics and academic discussion? Is my present "seperation" of technical threads a good middle ground to this or should we decide on one way or the other?

2) New posters are vital in growing this board further. How can we encourage more and make them feel comfortable posting here? It can be very intimidating posting for the first time in a new forum. Should I protect new posters or let them fend for themselves?

3) I'm talking to some lecturers I know about contributing on here. Just to add some more "educated" opinions to threads. Do people think this is a good or bad idea? Would people in other colleges be willing to do the same?

4) Should we start having article discussions or similar? I'm willing to spend some time browsing journals online looking for good debate material if people are up for discussing things.

5) Is there any other area of the forum that you would like to give an opinion on? Are you happy with it at the moment?


I can't promise I'll do what people say, but I will definitely take opinions on board and will try to reach consensus on issues.

I would appreciate it if anyone who is or who wants to be, a regular contributer on here to answer these or just give an opinion.

Son Goku

In response to the headings:

1)I think that the middle ground at the moment is fine. Most threads aren't technical and you can start a technical thread if you want. Making it purely non-technical would mean people who come here for a theoretical discussion (for instance this is the only place I can discuss advanced physics) would probably leave over time.
Making it purely technical would alienate so many people that there would only be about five of us here talking to each other.

2)I think they can fend for themselves. Basically, I think all that would have to be done is to make sure that some extremely arrogant user doesn't shout them down.

3)I think it'd be great. Next semester I'll try getting people on to the boards.

4)Definitely, I'd help if you want.

5)I'm very happy with it at the moment. The only improvement would be more people.

ApeXaviour

I agree with son goku on all points bar no. 2. If we are to increase the number of posters we really have to go easier on them. Now I don't mean molly coddle them, but maybe when helping/correcting their ideas it would be more constructive if we kept our tone encouraging. Like instead of saying: "No that's completely and utterly wrong!". Say something like: "ah.. I see where you're coming from, however physically that wouldnt hold up cos of blah blah, but if you look at it this way you see how the world makes a little more sense .."

_Dubh_

Let me begin by saying I am new to these boards...(about a week or two)
I spend most of my time reading this forum but there is definitely more room for increased activity.

1) Fine the way it is.
2) I think anyone who posts should be treated with respect...basic manners.... if they are in the wrong, people should explain why...
exactly as ApeXaviour said.
3) Now that would kick ass..
4) that would kick-ass too! eventually a discussion would hammer out a certain topic and get it down as much as we can....great!
5) As I said I'm new here but it is a pleasure logging on and seeing new topics..

Nice idea to post this....

causal

1) I think a mix of academic and hobbyist/lay people is a good thing - the two are not mutually exclusive. imho choosing only one is a bad idea (especially if it's academics only )
In addition, an academic may be expert in one specific area - but they may be a hobbyist in many other areas. I suspect it would be quite hard to get a quorum of academics expert in any given specifc area to hold much of an academic discussion.
Whereas, a well informed academic plus lay person discussion is much more easily achieved.

2) I don't think new posters need to be protected per se - I look at it the other way around - i.e. regular posters should behave appropriately or have the wrath of the mods laid upon them. Personally, I don't like snobs - academic or otherwise - and no-one has the right to show contempt because they perceived another persons lack of understanding of some concept of technical point. Many moons ago on another forum I said: The day you think you know everything is the day you stop learning.

As for encouraging new posters - how about having a sticky where new people can post to say hello and mention any hobbies/interests they have in Physcis / Chemistry. Usually the first post is the hardest - and if people get a warm welcome - they'll come back.

3) I think getting lecturers involved is a fantastic idea. tbh I say that because there are many topics I would like to pick their brains on. It'd be good to know what area they are active in, because in fairness noone is a master of everything.

4) Article discussions - this could be great. Selecting the articles will be vital. It would be great if the articles were tied in with point 3 - i.e. articles in areas that a lecturer is active in - or one of their own papers. Also, how popular or esoteric the article is will be a factor.

5) It's a good forum - would definitely benefit from some more well informed contributors - and lots more hobbyist / popular science / lay peeps.

These are my opinions - please feel free to comment, clarify or contradict
causal

D-Generate

In relation to point 2, I think there should be more of what ApeX has said rather than
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2635234&postcount=4
This is in relation to a previous thread on String Theory, Are you a Believer.
That reply stopped me basically replying to the topic at all because it seemed as if it was only for graduates of Physics.

EDIT: Original thread found here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=247223&highlight=string+theory

nesf

D-Generate wrote:

In relation to point 2, I think there should be more of what ApeX has said rather than
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2635234&postcount=4
This is in relation to a previous thread on String Theory, Are you a Believer.
That reply stopped me basically replying to the topic at all because it seemed as if it was only for graduates of Physics.

EDIT: Original thread found here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=247223&highlight=string+theory

Graduates of physics? Bleh, no physics degree deals with string theory in any substansial fashion. There is already plenty of EM, Quantum etc to get your head around!

I think what the poster there was saying was that string theory is a topic that many people (not all) talk about without anything more than the briefest understanding of the concepts involved. Now, don't get me wrong, it's a very complicated topic and to claim to have a good understanding of it is not someone which many people in the world can claim, but you will see online a lot of people giving an "opinion" on it as to whether it works, or the theory they favour. Now I'm sorry, that isn't scientific and should have little place on a science forum. Sure discuss topics that you don't fully understand, it's the best way to learn about them. But to favour one theory over another when you can't claim to grasp either well?

No that doesn't strike me as fitting for discussion on here. People may correct me on this, as always I have no issue with you guys disagreeing with me on here, but this is the way I'll try to direct conversations.

nesf

My personal views on this: (and please bear in mind there are not sacrosanct. I am perfectly willing to discuss them and reach compromises with regular posters on these. Nothing elitist or anything, I just am more inclined as a person to listen to the views of people who already use this board and who contribute to it.


I view this as a "serious" board. Not in a pure academic sense, or in a "you must back up everything with a mathematical proof" sense, but in a "this is not afterhours" kind of way.

I will lock threads on here that I don't think have a place on here. I will never lock any serious and intelligent discussion on here. If I am participating in a discussion, this is seperate to me as a moderator. I both post on and moderate this forum, I personally view these as exclusive roles and don't think I've a right to abuse my powers as a mod to further my posting on here.


I'm happy with the way this board has grown (slowly) in the past few months and I'm glad to see more threads on here and more activity on here. I will (when I've time, ie back at college) try to add to this forum etc.

Some of the points you guys made above sound very good to me. The welcome thread in particular, I like that.

As most of you know, I'm fairly easy going with most things. I don't like to ban people unless they deserve it. I'm far more inclined to just tell them to shut up and behave. Generally this approach works.

I'll open this to brainstorming now, just throw out ideas and discuss them guys. How can we grow this forum/make it better? There is always room for improvement and we definitely need more chemistry discussion on here for one thing!

Cheers for your input so far!

D-Generate

Can I make a suggestion as to getting rid of the actual Science forum itself. I don't see a great need for it considering Physics is covered here and to a lesser degree Chemistry. Also Biology has its own forum as does Engineering and Astronomy.

Are you suggesting that Pop Science threads don't take place in this forum? The thread on the Freezing Point of Absolut Vodka was probably one of the more popular threads in a last while. It was also not too nerdy so as anyone with a passing interest in Physics could take a gander and understand it. Threads like that are needed to garner an interest in this forum and to suggest that we don't have them would hinder this forums growth.

nesf

Myself and simu have discussed this. Our view on this is, the science board serves a useful purpose as a place for:

1) General science threads. Ones where the subject spans multiple disciplines or ones where they are more concerned with general science than a specific discipline.

2) The philosophy of science itself. This is a crucial part of any scientific community. It doesn't really fit into any one discipline, although the philosophy of mathematics is quite seperate to the others, but this is an exception.

3) "lighter" science threads which don't really deal with any one discipline, just general science questions.

4) The things that "fall between" disciplines. There are a fair number of such topics.

It also has absolutely nothing to do with this thread But I hope the above outlines why it's needed.


Pop science is fine on here imho so long as it is not bull****. Which a lot of pop science threads are unfortunately. I will come down hard on any bull**** I see on here. Sure argue an alternative way of looking at something, but if you're going to argue from pop science don't be suprised if what you think is right is actually wrong. It's easy to misinterpret pop science, it happens to all of us.

That said, imho, authors like John Gribbon and Richard Feynman have done an awful lot in making science more accessible to the masses. But both of these authors share a common trait, they are both trained in science formally and they both only seek to explain scientific theories.

Bad pop science is the stuff that "speculates".

D-Generate

Focus magazine, yay or nay? hehe
I need a gauge of where Pop Sci is, more serious than that or at that level.

nesf

D-Generate wrote:

Focus magazine, yay or nay? hehe
I need a gauge of where Pop Sci is, more serious than that or at that level.

I've never read it so no idea tbh. The only mag I pick up is Scientific American. I don't have the time or money to keep up multiple mags, and I've been reading sci am since I was in secondary school, so I've a bit of loyalty to it.


My personal view on pop science is, it's serious in my mind if it only seeks to explain science to lay people. If it is mostly speculative or if it is not accurate then I consider it fiction to be perfectly honest, interesting fiction perhaps but still not scientific to my mind. It's a hard line view, I know, but it is how I feel on it.

However this isn't my blog, so I'm not going to just use my personal view on this as the rule. I appreciate my hard line attitude to this topic may not be in line with the wishes of this boards users so I'm open to consensus on this one.

I would view "lighter" pop science as having a place in science rather than on this forum. There is a place for it, it's just not here.

For the interim, or until we find a better solution, I'm going to not lock such threads on here but move them to science. This won't stop people talking about such topics, and hopefully will help the science board get more traffic.

Capt'n Midnight

D-Generate wrote:

Focus magazine, yay or nay? hehe
I need a gauge of where Pop Sci is, more serious than that or at that level.

Yay, lots of nice pictures
Nay, it a bit too lite if you have any scientific background.
Have a flick through New Scientist in Eason's some time

BTW: the Italian and German versions of focus have more pages in them than the English language version.

ApeXaviour

nesf wrote:

Graduates of physics? Bleh, no physics degree deals with string theory in any substansial fashion. There is already plenty of EM, Quantum etc to get your head around!

I think what the poster there was saying was that string theory is a topic that many people (not all) talk about without anything more than the briefest understanding of the concepts involved.

I think D-Generate wasn't so much referring to what the poster said, more how he said it. I'd be content if this forum had no place for that kind of belittling aggro.

tribulus

nesf wrote:

There is always room for improvement and we definitely need more chemistry discussion on here for one thing!

yes i agree, a greater number of threads in chemistry would be better. Hopefully if the ratio of physics/chemistry threads were more even this would serve to attract more users as i'm sure some people (myself included ) don't check up here too often because of the lack of chemistry related threads.

for me personally, my degree subjects are all in biological sciences (biochem, pharmacology,chemistry) and to see more chemistry related threads would certainly entice me to post here more often.

causal

tribulus wrote:

yes i agree, a greater number of threads in chemistry would be better. <snip> for me personally, my degree subjects are all in biological sciences (biochem, pharmacology,chemistry) and to see more chemistry related threads would certainly entice me to post here more often.

tribulus - you're the exact type person the forum needs to contribute - you could start some chemistry threads yourself - something of interest to you that you think other people might be interested in too

ApeXaviour wrote:

I think D-Generate wasn't so much referring to what the poster said, more how he said it. I'd be content if this forum had no place for that kind of belittling aggro.

I agree - and that poster (base2 )made two posts that contributed nothing to the thread - and he hasn't posted on this forum before or since. So it'd be a real shame if people were put off by "drive-by posting" (as opposed to drive-by shooting) - and I think this is where the mods have to be firm but fair.

Disagreeing with someone and presenting your argument is fine - but if you have to rely on a personal attack or profanity/vulgarity then it's usually an indication that your argument is weak, imho.

causal

nesf

ApeXaviour wrote:

I think D-Generate wasn't so much referring to what the poster said, more how he said it. I'd be content if this forum had no place for that kind of belittling aggro.

I wasn't modding this forum at the time of the thread. So it's a bit of a moot point for me. I do agree that the original post had no place on this forum, and I would step in if such a post was made now. But since the thread was "before my time", I can't really do much about it.