Register to reply

Who made Physics Forums?

by heman
Tags: None
Share this thread:
ramollari
#19
Mar18-05, 10:09 AM
P: 453
It's a place where newbies become better scientists, and experienced scientists eat up their time. But it is real fun for everyone! Very few forums offer such a community.
russ_watters
#20
Mar18-05, 11:33 AM
Mentor
P: 22,315
Quote Quote by RoboSapien
Dont worry I will soon launch PF2.0 with no moderators. There will be mass moderation. something similar but much more advanced that this
http://slashdot.org/moderation.shtml
that is going to cause quite a mass wipeout of all the forums on internet because it wont be limited only to physics or science.
Actually, this is 2.0 (iirc), but in any case, that mass moderation is an interesting theory. Someone should do sociological research on it...
Evo
#21
Mar18-05, 12:46 PM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 26,664
This wouldn't work in GD.

Stay on topic:
Off topic posts are slapped quickly and consistently with "-1" by moderators.

Be original:
Avoid being redundant and just repeating what has already been said. (Did I really just say that?) Yes, being moderated as "redundant" is worth "-1" to your post and your karma. Especially to be avoided are the "what he said" and "me too" posts.
Gokul43201
#22
Mar18-05, 03:51 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Gokul43201's Avatar
P: 11,155
Quote Quote by Evo
Be original:
Avoid being redundant and just repeating what has already been said. (Did I really just say that?) Yes, being moderated as "redundant" is worth "-1" to your post and your karma. Especially to be avoided are the "what he said" and "me too" posts.
I believe there are several times when it's necessary to second someone's input - especially if a question has several different responses, all but one wrong.
Evo
#23
Mar18-05, 04:31 PM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 26,664
Quote Quote by Gokul43201
I believe there are several times when it's necessary to second someone's input - especially if a question has several different responses, all but one wrong.
I agree, that rule is a bit ridiculous, they're saying no one should post that they are in agreement?
Tom Mattson
#24
Mar18-05, 04:38 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Tom Mattson's Avatar
P: 5,532
Quote Quote by russ_watters
Actually, this is 2.0 (iirc),
This is in fact PF v3.0.
Moonbear
#25
Mar18-05, 10:10 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Moonbear's Avatar
P: 12,270
Quote Quote by Gokul43201
I believe there are several times when it's necessary to second someone's input - especially if a question has several different responses, all but one wrong.
I second that! Oh, wait, Evo already seconded that...I third that!

-1 for me! Or is that -2 for seconding both Gokul and Evo?

I think it's one of those things that sounds better in theory than it would turn out in practice.
Chronos
#26
Mar19-05, 01:47 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Chronos's Avatar
P: 9,491
Girls, go figure. Yesterday they joined the convent, today they are liberated... and they say men are complicated...
RoboSapien
#27
Mar21-05, 07:03 AM
P: 99
Quote Quote by russ_watters
Actually, this is 2.0 (iirc), but in any case, that mass moderation is an interesting theory. Someone should do sociological research on it...
Thanks, I was just joking.

I was a bit off topic but wanted to spread awarness to people like EVO about mass moderation but please Dont give me a minus 1.
Edgardo
#28
Mar21-05, 01:05 PM
P: 686
By the way, what was the the first message ever posted in physicsforums (I guess one by Greg), and what was the first question ever posted in physicsforum?

Who were the first 100 forum members? And how many members do we have right now?
Nacho
#29
Mar21-05, 01:33 PM
P: 170
So, I think a board devoted to the history of physics and her players might be great to have.

There might not be too much discussion there .. but it might be a fascinating read.
Monique
#30
Mar21-05, 02:00 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Monique's Avatar
P: 4,642
may 02 2001 http://web.archive.org/web/200103020...icsforums.com/
Nacho
#31
Mar21-05, 07:44 PM
P: 170
Hmmm .. that's the problem with only leavings links in the body of a response, and nothing more. A person reading them can never tell for sure who they were ment for, and in response to what post.
ramollari
#32
Mar22-05, 02:46 AM
P: 453
So is the current PF a new forum, or did it update the one pointed by your link? I had thought that PF started working in March 2003.
ramollari
#33
Mar22-05, 02:50 AM
P: 453
Quote Quote by Edgardo
And how many members do we have right now?
Regarding your last question, look at the home page. A number of 18,000 and something is given.

Quote Quote by Edgardo
Who were the first 100 forum members?
Those who have the earliest join dates are obviously the first members. True, Greg has to make some statistics to show to us.
chroot
#34
Mar22-05, 03:04 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
chroot's Avatar
P: 10,427
PF members, sorted by join date:

http://www.physicsforums.com/memberl...te&pp=30&ltr=#

Notice that many of the first membes were people who jumped immediately from the previous version of PF.

- Warren
Tom Mattson
#35
Mar22-05, 03:32 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Tom Mattson's Avatar
P: 5,532
Quote Quote by chroot
Notice that many of the first membes were people who jumped immediately from the previous version of PF.
Not just that, but the Mentors from the time were allowed over first to come over and start playing before everyone else.
Monique
#36
Mar22-05, 04:41 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Monique's Avatar
P: 4,642
Quote Quote by ramollari
So is the current PF a new forum, or did it update the one pointed by your link? I had thought that PF started working in March 2003.
The link is a snapshot of how PF looked in may 2001, the forums first started in februari of that year. The current PF is the same forum, but updated. Here is the memberslist of the first start http://web.archive.org/web/200103060...om/members.asp


Register to reply