Pertaining to the New Chat Rules

[AnTiFreeze3]

I don't exactly understand why math/science discussion in the chat has been banned as a topic for discussion. Chats are universally used to help people socialize; PF is a forum for science/math, thus its members will probably want to socialize about science and math.

A simple employment of common sense should resolve any discrepancies between what people enjoy doing in chat; if someone is doing something that you don't enjoy, then you either ask them to stop, to move the discussion elsewhere, or to change the topic to something more preferable to you. Entirely banning the subjects of which this forum is based upon makes no sense to me.

I understand if some people feel as though the chat is supposed to be for more social manners, rather than science and math, but if the issue is that we want the chat to be a haven from what we discuss in the forums, then we must ban all content in the chat aside from simple "Hellos"; there's a politics and world affairs subforum, and I see a multitude of political discussions in the chat; there's a pet thread, and I often see discussions of pets; there's a cooking thread, and I often see discussions of what people are cooking or preparing, or what they like to eat.

Finally, I would like to point out that, as an avid chat user myself, I have noticed how the majority of the people who populate the chat do not care if there are science or math discussions. As for the minority, I have already referred to a method for lessening their sorrows without ruining something for the majority.

Thank you for your time

 

[Ryan_m_b]

The rationale behind this is that chat has a tendency to occasionally be dominated by a small number of people discussing math problems which has alienated others from talking. This isn't to say anything negative about those people at all, it has simply been an observation. In light of this it's been decided it would be best if such conversations were kept out of chat. There isn't a blanket rule that nothing forum related can be discussed because there hasn't been an example of a topic that dominated chat like math.

Also it's worth mentioning that whilst it is inevitable that there will be conversations that people don't feel they can or want to take part in the math chat tendency has taken that to the extreme. Again there's nothing wrong with people wanting to discuss maths but we'd like chat to be more inclusive.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

Chat also has a tendency to be dominated by a small number of people talking about the Food Network. I find it dreadfully boring, and stifles more interesting discussions. I think it would be best if such topics were kept out of chat.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Chat also has a tendency to be dominated by a small number of people talking about the Food Network.

Let's not forget illness and medication chat. If that isn't alienating then god knows what is.

 

[micromass]

I think that prohibiting math and science discussions on a physics forum makes as much sense as going to a chat about food and demand that they don't talk about food.

But that is my personal opinion and not my opinion as mentor.

 

[Jorriss]

I agree with Micromass.

This is a silly rule.

 

[jbunniii]

It is ludicrous that science discussion is off limits at "Physics Forum Chat."

The "solution" to create a separate discussion room for science might be OK if it were possible to participate in both rooms simultaneously, but as it stands now, it's either/or. No one is going to want to be the first one to leave the main discussion and sit in an empty chat room, so the result is that no one uses it.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

The "solution" to create a separate discussion room for science might be OK if it were possible to participate in both rooms simultaneously, but as it stands now, it's either/or. No one is going to want to be the first one to leave the main discussion and sit in an empty chat room, so the result is that no one uses it.

I agree it would be good if one could be in more than one room (perhaps Greg can comment as to whether or not this is possible) but I don't see why this is a show-stopper for people who want to have an in-depth discussion about maths or similar topics.

I haven't been on chat in a while (logged on now because it seemed relevant) but it always used to be that when maths discussions started every other discussion would dry up to make way. So there was no GD chat to see anyway.

 

[WannabeNewton]

To be honest I think this is not that big an issue. It seems to be getting heated but without warrant. There are other venues to chat about math e.g. facebook (which micro and I use and it has been perfectly fine thus far) so I don't see it as that big a deal, regardless of principle; if there is really a need to chat about math then other venues can be sought after as mentioned. Best to just let it be. It is hard to cater to everyone.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

I haven't been on chat in a while (logged on now because it seemed relevant) but it always used to be that when maths discussions started every other discussion would dry up to make way. So there was no GD chat to see anyway.

This is no different from normal conversation. When one topic picks up that a few people are keenly interested in, that topic dominates. I don't see why this is a Bad Thing.

People should understand that they are free to interject with whatever they want. Math talk will end if someone starts something more interesting. And we frequently have situations where two unrelated conversations are interleaved with each other...rather like in real life when a larger group of people splits into smaller groups, yet still in the same room, with occasional cross talk.

I don't see why there is a need to have an official policy about specific topics.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

There is a science chat that people are welcome to use of course. The complaint here seems to be that now members have been asked to use this rather than GD chat. I'm not sure why this is a big problem, it would allow the most possible amount of people to enjoy chat.

 

[WannabeNewton]

There is a science chat that people are welcome to use of course. The complaint here seems to be that now members have been asked to use this rather than GD chat. I'm not sure why this is a big problem, it would allow the most possible amount of people to enjoy chat.

I would have to agree with this as it seems unreasonable to have to go out of one's way to program simultaneous chat facilities JUST to please a select few for the cause of talking math but at the same time participating in general chat. Like I said, there are other venues if the desire is so great.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

The problem, as mentioned, is that one cannot be in both rooms simultaneously. Just because one is talking about math does not mean one wants to block out all other conversational possibilities. It just impedes the natural flow of socialization, which is what "chat" should be for.

 

[AnTiFreeze3]

To be honest I think this is not that big an issue. It seems to be getting heated but without warrant. There are other venues to chat about math e.g. facebook (which micro and I use and it has been perfectly fine thus far) so I don't see it as that big a deal, regardless of principle; if there is really a need to chat about math then other venues can be sought after as mentioned. Best to just let it be. It is hard to cater to everyone.

Yeah, I didn't expect for this to become heated. I simply thought it was odd, and like I originally stated, I didn't understand why there was this rule, so I was looking for clarification.

I still don't think that we should be limited to what we can discuss, when there are more viable options like taking discussions elsewhere, only if it has disturbed other members present in the chat. Catering to a select few who don't frequent the chat very often doesn't make much sense, in my opinion.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

This is no different from normal conversation. When one topic picks up that a few people are keenly interested in, that topic dominates. I don't see why this is a Bad Thing.

In normal conversation it's relatively easy for people to assume separate conversations, obviously this is more difficult even with the ability to "interleave" conversations as you say. In addition if there were a situation where one topic of conversation from a minority was dominating it wouldn't be unusual for someone to suggest that this be dropped.

People should understand that they are free to interject with whatever they want. Math talk will end if someone starts something more interesting.

This seems like a quite privileged opinion IMO as it is placing the "blame" for lack of a better word on the people who feel alienated from being able to have a conversation. It also doesn't entirely match with my experience or the experience of others who have brought this up. When certain topics dominate from a few people most people stop paying attention which makes it even harder for a different topic of conversation to be brought up because there are less people to see it before it disappears of screen.

Again I don't see anything wrong with science chat being asked to move to the science chat section. That reflects the forum in that we have the technical forums and the lounge forums. Personally I don't see the need for a hard and fast rule but I can't see it as a bad thing that members move a science discussion if asked to a science chat section.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

The problem, as mentioned, is that one cannot be in both rooms simultaneously.

I refer you to my comment above;

I haven't been on chat in a while (logged on now because it seemed relevant) but it always used to be that when maths discussions started every other discussion would dry up to make way. So there was no GD chat to see anyway.

Just because one is talking about math does not mean one wants to block out all other conversational possibilities.

Of course not, as has been stressed many times there's nothing negative going on here.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

Again I don't see anything wrong with science chat being asked to move to the science chat section. That reflects the forum in that we have the technical forums and the lounge forums. Personally I don't see the need for a hard and fast rule but I can't see it as a bad thing that members move a science discussion if asked to a science chat section.

But this is a science forum. It is for people who want to talk about science. As I see it, this should be the other way around, just as it is on the main forums. Science discussion should be the default room, and excessive discussion about other topics can be asked to move to the GD section.

After all, the GD section of PF as at the bottom of the page, not the top.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

But this is a science forum. It is for people who want to talk about science. As I see it, this should be the other way around, just as it is on the main forums. Science discussion should be the default room, and excessive discussion about other topics can be asked to move to the GD section.

After all, the GD section of PF as at the bottom of the page, not the top.

So you would be Ok with confining some science discussions if science chat was the default room to arrive in when one loads chat? That's an interesting possibility to consider.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

Personally, I think you should use chat software that allows people to be in multiple rooms at once. There are plenty of options, including just a standard IRC channel.

But if you can't do that, then yes, Science should be the default room.

 

[Evo]

Personally, I think you should use chat software that allows people to be in multiple rooms at once. There are plenty of options, including just a standard IRC channel.

But if you can't do that, then yes, Science should be the default room.

But the purpose of having chat was to have casual chat, and a room was created for science chat. When people just drop into chat, it makes sense that the general chat would be where they land, then they can move into science, if that's what they want.

If "science chat" is the default, then people trying to have a serious chat will constantly be interrupted every time someone enters chat for any reason.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

I get the impression several people are alienated by the current political topic in chat. Shall we have a separate room for that?

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I get the impression several people are alienated by the current political topic in chat. Shall we have a separate room for that?

From time to time there is going to be a dominant conversation. The rationale behind the request for maths conversations to be separated is because they routinely dominated chat and this was picked up on separately by a number of people.

If it became common for 3 or 4 people currently involved in the politics conversation to log on and have these discussions and people mentioned to mentors that they felt this was a problem then yes having a separate chat for it would make sense.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

OK, so there are a few chat regulars who like to talk about math. What's wrong with that, exactly? It seems that their discussion should be shunted off to the side because they are regulars.

We also have a few regulars who love to talk about things that I think are boring. I mentioned this already.

In general, any set of regulars is going to have some particular topics they enjoy talking about. That is, after all, why they regularly show up. Essentially you're saying that if any topic gets popular enough to make people show up for the express purpose of discussing it, it should be shunted off because it makes less-interested people feel "alienated".

 

[jbunniii]

Personally, I think you should use chat software that allows people to be in multiple rooms at once. There are plenty of options, including just a standard IRC channel.

But if you can't do that, then yes, Science should be the default room.

Agree fully with this. If people want general chat, there must be thousands of forums and chat rooms available. The reasonable expectation is that PhysicsForums chat would welcome and encourage science discussion, with general discussion permitted but certainly not prioritized.

 

[AnTiFreeze3]

I still think that all we have to do is have people, when they are against a certain topic, voice their opinion, and then the discussion that is currently taking place (whether it's about math, science, politics, or anything else) can either stop, move somewhere else, or somehow become more inclusive.

 

[Evo]

Personally, I think you should use chat software that allows people to be in multiple rooms at once. There are plenty of options, including just a standard IRC channel.

But if you can't do that, then yes, Science should be the default room.

Agree fully with this. If people want general chat, there must be thousands of forums and chat rooms available. The reasonable expectation is that PhysicsForums chat would welcome and encourage science discussion, with general discussion permitted but certainly not prioritized.

The problem with this is we don't want chat replacing what should be discussed in the forum. This is why homework and subjects suitable for forum discussion are sent back to be posted in the proper forum. We would also need a mentor available for whatever subject was being discussed.

I'm not against people having casual "math chats". If that's the majority of chat that is happening, then I just leave as I have nothing to contribute, but it should not become main chat as that defeats the purpose of the forums, we want that out in the forum so everyone can benefit. We are primarily a forum, not a chat room, chat is just a perk for members to socialize.

 

[micromass]

The problem with this is we don't want chat replacing what should be discussed in the forum. This is why homework and subjects suitable for forum discussion are sent back to be posted in the proper forum. We would also need a mentor available for whatever subject was being discussed.

I'm not against people having casual "math chats". If that's the majority of chat that is happening, then I just leave as I have nothing to contribute, but it should not become main chat as that defeats the purpose of the forums, we want that out in the forum so everyone can benefit. We are primarily a forum, not a chat room, chat is just a perk for members to socialize.

OK, but what if some members want to socialize by discussing science??

 

[jbunniii]

The problem with this is we don't want chat replacing what should be discussed in the forum. This is why homework and subjects suitable for forum discussion are sent back to be posted in the proper forum. We would also need a mentor available for whatever subject was being discussed.

I'm not against people having casual "math chats". If that's the majority of chat that is happening, then I just leave as I have nothing to contribute, but it should not become main chat as that defeats the purpose of the forums, we want that out in the forum so everyone can benefit. We are primarily a forum, not a chat room, chat is just a perk for members to socialize.

If the goal is for the chat to be primarily for items not discussed in the forums, then general discussion, politics, relationships, etc. don't really belong there either. Just philosophy and crackpottery.

 

[Evo]

OK, but what if some members want to socialize by discussing science??

Like I said, I'm not against that.

 

[Evo]

If the goal is for the chat to be primarily for items not discussed in the forums,

Not the science forums, GD type topics are *primarily* what chat was intended for and requires minimal mentor involvement.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

The problem with this is we don't want chat replacing what should be discussed in the forum. This is why homework and subjects suitable for forum discussion are sent back to be posted in the proper forum.

I can't imagine a consistent interpretation of this opinion that allows a chatroom to exist at all. ALL viable topics are covered in some PF forum, be it math, politics, or even general discussion. What's left are topics that are globally discouraged at PF, such as philosophy and crackpot theories.

I do think one can make a consistent exception for homework, in part because homework is a task, not a topic of discussion. I should note that in the vast majority of cases, math discussion in the chatroom has not diverted into tasks (i.e., actually solving math problems), but has focused mostly on math as a topic of discussion which, as should be clear, a number of chatroom participants are passionate about as a general interest.

We would also need a mentor available for whatever subject was being discussed.

I don't understand this statement at all. Is it the Mentors' opinion that an appropriate expert must monitor every last discussion that occurs on PF? And to what end?

I'm not against people having casual "math chats". If that's the majority of chat that is happening, then I just leave as I have nothing to contribute, but it should not become main chat as that defeats the purpose of the forums, we want that out in the forum so everyone can benefit. We are primarily a forum, not a chat room, chat is just a perk for members to socialize.

We have been primarily having sociable math chats. If anything gets to the point of requiring LaTeX, it always ends up in the forum, because the chatroom is rather unwieldy for that.

 

[Evo]

I can't imagine a consistent interpretation of this opinion that allows a chatroom to exist at all. ALL viable topics are covered in some PF forum, be it math, politics, or even general discussion. What's left are topics that are globally discouraged at PF, such as philosophy and crackpot theories.

See my above reponse to this.

The alternative being discussed is to just close chat and not have it anymore if it is this contentious and upsetting for members. That would be a shame. It is a nice way for members to get to know each other, which was the intent.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

I agree it would be a shame to shut it down. I have enjoyed getting to know some of the people who show up. I would prefer a more "live and let live" attitude.

 

[WannabeNewton]

I agree it would be a shame to shut it down. I have enjoyed getting to know some of the people who show up. I would prefer a more "live and let live" attitude.

Awww, I love you too Ben :)

 

[AnTiFreeze3]

Awww, I love you too Ben :)

... He's talking about me?