Independent Research is closing

PF staff has concluded that the Independent Research forum is no longer useful or in the best interests of the community. No new or "in review" submissions will be accepted. Current active threads will remain open until June 27th to allow the participants proper conclusion. Then all threads will be locked and merged into General Physics. Thanks!
 
Last edited:

arildno

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
9,846
130
A wise decision.
 

Evo

Mentor
22,463
2,279
Agreed.
 

dlgoff

Science Advisor
Gold Member
3,628
1,404
Yesss!
 

Pengwuino

Gold Member
4,764
10
Noooooo........ eh sure, why not.
 

rhody

Gold Member
580
3
Greg,

Now if only P&WA would follow a lot of us would be better off, hehe.
How many people who are banned are banned because of what they wrote in P&WA ?
I am willing to bet quite a few...

Rhody... runs for cover from all the P&WA contributors... o:)
 
21,960
3,264
Good decision! :smile:
 

bcrowell

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
6,724
420
Last edited by a moderator:
3,961
20
Why not have a sub-forum ("Non-mainstream views"?) for non standard views with a disclaimer such as:

"The thread starters in this sub-forum clearly acknowledge that their views/ideas/interpretations are not mainstream and their views not endorsed by the moderators. Students following a high school or degree course are advised to avoid this sub-forum to avoid confusion and should instead refer to the mainstream sub-forums on this forum. Enter at your own risk"

I am not sure why Independent Research is being closed but it may be that the moderators think it is too much of an overhead on their time moderating it. The new sub-forum I am suggesting would not be a burden because it would be largely unmoderated except for keeping out offensive/racist/sexist/antisocial/bullying/spamming/non-physics material. At least you would have the people considered as "cranks" clearly identified and penned in one place ;)
 

Pengwuino

Gold Member
4,764
10
I am not sure why Independent Research is being closed but it may be that the moderators think it is too much of an overhead on their time moderating it. The new sub-forum I am suggesting would not be a burden because it would be largely unmoderated except for keeping out offensive/racist/sexist/antisocial/bullying/spamming/non-physics material. At least you would have the people considered as "cranks" clearly identified and penned in one place ;)
Sounds like it would take the same amount of moderation. Most the crap they write is non-physics :P
 

cristo

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
8,045
72
Why not have a sub-forum ("Non-mainstream views"?) for non standard views
No. We tried this years ago, in the form of a 'theory development' forum, which from all accounts, sounded awful. We don't want to go backwards, and allow crackpot views anywhere: PF is a place where real science can be discussed and people can learn.
 

arildno

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
9,846
130
Why not have a sub-forum ("Non-mainstream views"?) for non standard views with a disclaimer such as:

"The thread starters in this sub-forum clearly acknowledge that their views/ideas/interpretations are not mainstream and their views not endorsed by the moderators. Students following a high school or degree course are advised to avoid this sub-forum to avoid confusion and should instead refer to the mainstream sub-forums on this forum. Enter at your own risk"

I am not sure why Independent Research is being closed but it may be that the moderators think it is too much of an overhead on their time moderating it. The new sub-forum I am suggesting would not be a burden because it would be largely unmoderated except for keeping out offensive/racist/sexist/antisocial/bullying/spamming/non-physics material. At least you would have the people considered as "cranks" clearly identified and penned in one place ;)
That would make crackpots feel welcome at PF.
And, they do not deserve to feel welcome here.

Furthermore, as in the TD-period, they tended to ooze outside "their" domain, infecting the forums as a whole.

And, real professionals would not bother spend their time at a forum giving formal acceptance of nonsense.
 

marcus

Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,654
782
The word crackpot has been mentioned. Let's not tar Arnold Neumeier with that brush. He is a professor at University of Vienna with a good publication track record.
He has a thread in IR that is still attracting people's interest. It is 6 pages and up to post #92.

A new person "my_wan" just arrived who has been reading Neueier's draft book on QM and seems to have intelligent comments (as well as I can tell.)

All Neumeier posts I've looked at seem to me calm reasonable and well-spoken. I didn't notice any evidence of moderation by Mentors in the thread. In other words the other people seem to stay calm and reasonable too.

Maybe some other people have taken a closer look and have a negative impression, but based on looking it over I would say that the thread is low-overhead, interesting to quite a number of people, and something of an asset. I want to ask if there is any way it could stay open. (Unless Prof. Neumeier himself has asked that it be locked.)

Could the Neumeier thread be moved to QM forum or BTSM forum and remain unlocked?
Does anybody with more governance&management experience than I think it would be a good idea?

If this has already been discussed, please ignore the suggestion.

In all other respects I'm content to see IR disappear.
 
Could the Neumeier thread be moved to QM forum or BTSM forum and remain unlocked?
Does anybody with more governance&management experience than I think it would be a good idea?
This is a possibility and staff will discuss it
 

marcus

Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,654
782
Thanks, btw I just noticed I misspelled Neumaier's name. Sorry about the goof.
 

dlgoff

Science Advisor
Gold Member
3,628
1,404
This is a possibility and staff will discuss it
As much as I am in agreement with the decision to close Independent Research, the mere fact that he said this in his introductory post:

The goal of the thread is to obtain reader's feedback that helps me to improve the presentation while I work towards a version for publication.
I have to agree with marcus that this thread is important and should be someway maintained.

But I do know you guys will do what is best for the forum.
 

dextercioby

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
12,903
497
As I saw Arnold's thread getting locked, I believe that:

1. From his point of view the >90 posts discussion didn't benefit him too much.
2. From the forum's perspective, the talk had probably no future, thus only the past needed to stay.

As for the fact that snippets from his book are still brought under discussion in the Quantum Physics subforum - thing I find close to breaching the forum's guidelines - perhaps a more active moderation would prevent the topics from running into a desperate need for an abrupt ending (which never occurs).

The dissolution of the IR subforum was a good idea.
 
2,096
16
I noticed that although originally the IR subforum had strict rules to ensure some quality, at some point the moderators started to allow lower quality threads that actually violated the IR rules. Do the moderators have some explanation why they stopped enforcing the IR rules at some point?

I can't help thinking that that the moderators started allowing threads, that violated the IR rules, deliberately so that the quality of the IR subforum would go down, so that it would then be easier to justify the closure without much controversy.
 

ZapperZ

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
2018 Award
34,665
3,596
I noticed that although originally the IR subforum had strict rules to ensure some quality, at some point the moderators started to allow lower quality threads that actually violated the IR rules. Do the moderators have some explanation why they stopped enforcing the IR rules at some point?

I can't help thinking that that the moderators started allowing threads, that violated the IR rules, deliberately so that the quality of the IR subforum would go down, so that it would then be easier to justify the closure without much controversy.
Your assumption is false. No such deliberate decision was ever considered.

Zz.
 

Want to reply to this thread?

"Independent Research is closing" You must log in or register to reply here.

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Top Threads

Top