dextercioby said:
If the article has already been published in peer-review-ed journals, therefore it is accepted and seen as valid by the scientific community, i can only ascribe this gesture to vanity.
The new forum is intended to be the place in which we host work that has
not been peer-reviewed. And even our professional physicists and grad students can use it to inform the PF community of work in progress that hasn't been published yet, kind of like a "PF Preprint Server".
Trust me, everyone, people who want to get posted with the latest developments in theoretical physics read written journals, not internet forums.
Not everyone. There are plenty of bright amateurs who are don't have sponsorship to post even in arXiv. The new forum is a place for them to be heard, if they can meet the requirements of the guidelines.
If the article hasn't been published yet, or it has been rejected by the journal reviewers, what USE would it make to the author ? With what does this posting on PF help him/her ?
It would certainly help him/her to find out what is wrong with the idea.
If the article has been rejected, then it has the name NONSENSE attached to it, therefore, upon posting it on the PF, it should be deleted without any discussion and whatsoever explanation via PM-s.
Rejection by a journal doesn't necessarily mean "nonsense". It could mean "wrong format" or "not original". And if an idea really is nonsense, or even if it is poorly formulated, then it
will be deleted under the new guidelines. But it will be accompanied by a PM with an invitation to try again in the new forum, subject to the guidelines. Don't get me wrong, we do delete spam and posts that are considered "trolling", without notification, and we will continue to do that. But deleting a sincere, serious attempt to communicate one's thoughts, without any notification, is extremely rude, and considered by the Staff to be an abuse of power.
So, Greg, why did you do it in the first place (the infamous "Theory Development") ? Why did you do it now?
Greg can speak for himself if he wants to, but since I know the answer I'll tell you.
TD was originally created as a means to clear the main section of PF from overspeculation and crackpottery, and it was not a bad first try at improving the signal-to-noise ratio. But then TD kept growing and growing, and became more and more of an eyesore.
Then chroot imposed a new policy: No new threads in TD, and we would keep a close watch on the existing ones, locking them at the first sign of trouble. The problem there was that people would just post their threads in the main section, because they couldn't do it in TD, and we would just have to move them. So TD really never stopped growing.
This move is the third step: No more TD, and anything that was formerly considered TD material will be deleted, with notification. Home grown theories can still be discussed here, but only under the Independent Research rules.
Tom, why did you offer yourself (i assume you did, pardon me if I'm wrong, and Greg named you to the job with/without consensus with the rest of the staff) to manage such-pointless in my view-project ?
I offered myself, because it was my idea.
Does anyone think new and sound theoretical physics is done on an internet forum? (even though it's the best of them all)
Who knows? It hasn't really started yet.
I think you're missing the same essential point that marlon did. This isn't intended to be comparable to Phys Rev Letters. This isn't pointless at all, because it has all the pros of the old TD policy, none of the cons, and some new benefits that we did not enjoy before.
The whole process can be very educational for everyone who is not involved in professional science, but wants to learn about how it is done. Have you ever heard of schools that hold "Model United Nations" or something along those lines? Each participant plays a role, the moderator comes up with some issue for them to work out and sets the rules, and they simulate the workings of the real UN. Is it real, professional international politics? No. Is it going to change the face of world government? No. Does everyone learn something from the process? Yes, they do.
If it helps you to understand why we are doing this, try to think of it as a "Model PRL".
In fact, this is not the first time PF has tried something like this. In 2002 we had a "Mission to Europa" forum, which was kind of a simulation of the preparation for a space mission. Everyone who participated had fun with it, and this can be the same way if it is done right.
