Dealing with inexperienced/overambitious members

[Vanadium 50]

It may be that encouraging speculation amongst our younger members is good for them, but that does not mean that PF is the place for it - we have our rules on Overly Speculative Posts for a reason.

It may be that driving at highway speeds is an important skill for a new driver, but that does not mean he should be practicing that skill in a school zone.

 

[Fra]

I just think it is important to keep kids interested in science. Remember science is also meant to be fun! And when responses are written in such a blunt way, it can inadvertently push young minds away from the field.

I agree.

Constructive comments, and help reformulating the questions is better.

It's neither constructive nor pleasant (considering the social aspects) to just get to hear that you are wrong or way off or asking stupid questions. Suggestions, guidance or comments that makes your head spin rather than stop is better.

/Fredrik

 

[MissSilvy]

Can I at least suggest a separate subforum under Academic Guidance for people who are 16 and ready to go and disprove Einsteinian relativity? Academic Guidance is supposed to be:

Which college and degree? Grad school and PhD help

I miss not having to wade through loony middle- and high-schoolers to get to advice on making the transition from Griffiths E&M to Jackson's E&M or when looking for PGRE resources. I think this would alleviate most of the problem. Half of the blunt posts to 'inquisitve young minds' probably stem out of frustration of seeing the exact same posts over and over. That way, the people who would like to nurture and encourage our younger members have a place to do it and the people who don't can get away from it.

 

[DoggerDan]

It may be that encouraging speculation amongst our younger members is good for them, but that does not mean that PF is the place for it - we have our rules on Overly Speculative Posts for a reason.

It may be that driving at highway speeds is an important skill for a new driver, but that does not mean he should be practicing that skill in a school zone.

Are you saying you support a PhD-only website? How many folks might PF have left if that were implemented? I don't think many folks would be left.

If not, then those who're in the know will have to bear with those who are not. That includes guiding them/us onward.

 

[Fra]

I supposed in this discussion one should try to distinguish between

1. inexperienced individuals with a desired to learn and explore, but that aren't always able to formulate correct question and phrase things right - this category should not get blunt answers, should be encouraged and be given guidance.

2. crackpots, that think they've proven Einstein wrong etc... certainly many of these are ALSO inexperienced, but they seem to have a mindset that might not be right - we shouldn't encourage obvious crackpottery, they should work on their self-perception.

3. trolls, which obviously shouldn't be encouraged

Sometimes there are posts where there is someone of category 1 that tries to ask something and he get treated like a unworthy crackpot when it might just be that he was unable to phrase a better question.

Sometimes the two may be hard to distinguish, but often I think you can tell them apart.

/Fredrik

 

[Vanadium 50]

Are you saying you support a PhD-only website? How many folks might PF have left if that were implemented? I don't think many folks would be left.

No, I am suggesting that we all adhere to the PF Rules.

One of the main goals of PF is to help students learn the current status of physics as practiced by the scientific community; accordingly, Physicsforums.com strives to maintain high standards of academic integrity. There are many open questions in physics, and we welcome discussion on those subjects provided the discussion remains intellectually sound. It is against our Posting Guidelines to discuss, in the PF forums or in blogs, new or non-mainstream theories or ideas that have not been published in professional peer-reviewed journals or are not part of current professional mainstream scientific discussion. Non-mainstream or personal theories will be deleted. Unfounded challenges of mainstream science and overt crackpottery will not be tolerated anywhere on the site. Linking to obviously "crank" or "crackpot" sites is prohibited.