Why that guy is not on the voting list?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moses
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    List Voting
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the criteria and processes used for nominating individuals for a voting list within the forum. Participants express curiosity about the selection process, the roles of mentors and admins, and the implications of the term "guru" in relation to voting criteria.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the principles behind the selection of nominees for the voting list, suggesting a lack of transparency in the process.
  • Several participants believe that mentors and admins collaborated to decide on nominees based on knowledge, participation, and willingness to help others.
  • There is a concern that members may not fully understand the criteria for voting, leading to potential misalignment in their choices.
  • One participant expresses a desire for clearer criteria to be communicated to all members regarding what constitutes a "guru."
  • Some participants discuss the implications of the term "guru," noting its various definitions and how it might influence voting perceptions.
  • There is a suggestion that the forum lacks political experts, with some participants expressing skepticism about the qualifications of those engaging in political discussions.
  • A participant proposes the idea of an award based on contributions to political discussions rather than expertise, highlighting the subjective nature of political expertise.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the selection process and the definition of "guru." While some agree on the criteria mentioned, others raise concerns about the clarity and understanding of these criteria among voters. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views on the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the understanding of voting criteria may vary among members, leading to different interpretations of what constitutes a suitable nominee. There is also an acknowledgment of the subjective nature of political expertise and contributions.

Moses
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Yeah, say i am nosy, but i do want to know:
What is the hidden principle [at least from me] that the Vote-list "putter" follow in order to chose the names of the guys/girls there...

was it on or more than one who chose the names...
I said that before somewhere on General Discussion ,i guess my vote is really important, and i do not want to vote in a non-clean voting process :briggin:

BTW: Vote Kerry, hahaha
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Moses said:
Yeah, say i am nosy, but i do want to know:
What is the hidden principle [at least from me] that the Vote-list "putter" follow in order to chose the names of the guys/girls there...

was it on or more than one who chose the names...

I believe the Mentors and Admins "got together" and decided the nominees.
 
Gokul43201 said:
I believe the Mentors and Admins "got together" and decided the nominees.
That is correct. For each category we were asked to submit nominees based on knowledge, participation, and a willingness to help others. This was based on personal observations as well as feedback received from forum members over the past year.

The final decision rests with the forum members.
 
Evo said:
That is correct. For each category we were asked to submit nominees based on knowledge, participation, and a willingness to help others. This was based on personal observations as well as feedback received from forum members over the past year.

The final decision rests with the forum members.


Aww, I feel loved now.
 
Evo said:
That is correct. For each category we were asked to submit nominees based on knowledge, participation, and a willingness to help others.

Ah, I wish these criteria were thrown out there for us members too. I wanted mention before, that we don't really know what we're voting for...and members might be basing their choices on different criteria.

The word "Guru" is suggestive of one with knowledge, so if I am to vote for an XYZ Guru, I'm voting for who I think has the most knowledge in XYZ, irrespective of participation or willingness to help. Guess that's not what I'm "supposed" to vote on, is it ?
 
From: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=guru

gu·ru ** *P***Pronunciation Key**(gr, g-r)
n. pl. gu·rus
1.Hinduism & Tibetan Buddhism. A personal spiritual teacher.

2 a.A teacher and guide in spiritual and philosophical matters.
b. A trusted counselor and adviser; a mentor.

3. a. A recognized leader in a field: the guru of high finance.
b. An acknowledged and influential advocate, as of a movement or idea: “In a culture that worships slimness, he was the Guru of Lean” (Erica Abeel).
 
I'm surprised there's no politics guru award
 
check said:
I'm surprised there's no politics guru award

That might have made for an interesting campaign, a bunch of people really into politics. Though, do we really have political experts here? I may have missed someone, but I thought mostly it was a lot of non-experts with lots of opinions (including myself) discussing politics. Not that folks here are ignorant about politics, but just that I'm not sure there is anyone with, for example, a political science degree. Is there someone I don't know about who could be a poli sci expert?
 
Moonbear said:
From: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=guru

Yeah, I know what a guru really means (helps that I have not forgotten all the Sanskrit I learned so many years ago)...but its popular usage is often synonymous to "aficionado", is it not ?

Perhaps I'm mistaken...so how do you use the word 'guru' ?
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Moonbear said:
That might have made for an interesting campaign, a bunch of people really into politics. Though, do we really have political experts here? I may have missed someone, but I thought mostly it was a lot of non-experts with lots of opinions (including myself) discussing politics. Not that folks here are ignorant about politics, but just that I'm not sure there is anyone with, for example, a political science degree. Is there someone I don't know about who could be a poli sci expert?
I will be in a few years :rolleyes:
 
  • #11
Smurf said:
I will be in a few years :rolleyes:

Good ! Now I can start that thread titled "Poli Sci is all bu!$#it" that I've been waiting so long for. :devil:
 
  • #12
Gokul43201 said:
Yeah, I know what a guru really means (helps that I have not forgotten all the Sanskrit I learned so many years ago)...but its popular usage is often synonymous to "aficionado", is it not ?

Perhaps I'm mistaken...so how do you use the word 'guru' ?

I thought you were using it according to definition 3a. I posted the definition because it sounds like the voting is according to a combination of 2b and 3 a, b.

I guess that's how I think about it, not just an expert, but an expert who is also a teacher.

I didn't post that because I really knew a priori what the precise definition was, but because I went to look it up after you commented on it and found there were more definitions than I expected.
 
  • #13
aaaha! and now my skull start knowing what is going around!
So i can go to sleep, sure about what i am goind to vote based on...

But i am still thinking about those innocenet people who vote and did not know on what base they vote "from"... :cry:
 
  • #14
If you vote just based on who you think is the most knowledgeable, that is fine.
 
  • #15
haha
Evo, some people here had a skull with "very knowledge" in science, but still lack the knowledge in dealing with modest people like me, by rudely offended peopl who disagree with, I am generalizing at all, PF has greart & cool members, but some foxes are moving around, and i can't deny that, personally...

If i vote for them as "the best helpers" it will not work.

P.S: Gokul43201, as a whisper: I might have a double major in physics and politics, after dropping electrical engineering. I think we need more skulls in politics than in science now adays. at least to make scientists survive and not doing mass distruction weapons too much, these weapons boring and they will take "steal" a lot of time. [:biggrin:]
 
  • #16
Moonbear said:
... do we really have political experts here? I may have missed someone, but I thought mostly it was a lot of non-experts with lots of opinions (including myself) discussing politics. ... Is there someone I don't know about who could be a poli sci expert?

One man's politicial expert is another's propagandist. What about an award based just on contributions to political discussion? I would have voted for Burnsys whose experience, perceptiveness and intelligence made for some of the most cogent contributions to the politics section. Marks deducted for grammar & spelling though
 

Similar threads

News Should Green Party Voters Consider Voting for Kerry Instead?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
News Reasons To Vote For Kerry: Things He Will Do To Improve America
  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
12K
Graduate Understanding Barandes' microscopic theory of causality
  • · Replies 456 ·
16
Replies
456
Views
32K
News Richard Dawkins on Rick Perry (and the rest of the Republican Party)
  • · Replies 293 ·
10
Replies
293
Views
36K
Guys need to do almost nothing to be great
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
Undergrad Does the concept of infinite parallel universes justify absurdities?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Other Relearning Math: Comparing Resources for the Best Learning Experience
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
13K
Do Non-Physicists Understand the Concept of Determinism in Debates?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Undergrad The initial density of an object and its compression into a black hole
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
News How long until the left labels Zell Miller a traitor?
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K