Cyrus
- 3,237
- 17
now the trick will be to tie anything and everything to science some how 

Evo said:I think P&WA can remain as is, if we tighten the posting rules. That way people that are serious and can post in a non-combative, non-redundant, non-sarcastic/insulting manner can enjoy participating.
Like I said, we might keep it as is, but with stricter posting guidelines.cyrusabdollahi said:now the trick will be to tie anything and everything to science some how![]()
No, read my lips. (and we like you SOS), no flaming, no baiting, no sensationalism, no sarcasm, no insults, no redundant posts, no mindless lemming mentality. The mentors here are actually fairly divided between right and left. If we're doing our job, you can't tell who's right and who's left because we don't take sides but call anyone to task that is posting questionable information or is just plain out of line.SOS2008 said:Okay, it makes more sense to me what the real objections are. It isn't so much the subject matter and how it relates to the sciences, but how much resources a subject requires. So the way to reduce the resources needed, P&WA will be restricted to members who primarily participate in the science core, but who like to dabble in politics on occasion. The general public, even if more politically astute, are really not welcome. This section will return to a less diverse, conservative viewpoint that I saw when I first became a member. I think this is what is desired, and that's cool if that's what is wanted. I just prefer honesty about it.
Why does Greg have to do it? There are plenty of free places to set up discussion groups...MSN has them, Google has them, Yahoo has them, etc. If you prefer the unmoderated, or lightly moderated, anything goes, can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen, format and want to discuss politics without having to back up your claims, without having to be respectful of the others in the discussion, etc., then nothing and nobody is stopping anyone from setting up your own group in one of those places (or, if you have the time and money, get your own dedicated server for such a forum). I would even argue for a one-time lifting of the restriction on advertising other sites if someone wanted to create such a site and would like to post a link here while we are under transition so folks who do not wish to participate in a forum with more restrictions can regroup elsewhere. Something is going to change, and when things change, inevitably some people will love the change, and some will hate it. For those who do not like it, I personally have no objection to a brief post offering a new location for like-minded individuals to join them (though I can't speak on behalf of all the admins and mentors on this point).cyrusabdollahi said:Sadly, I have to agree that this forum is for physics as much as I love the P&WA forum. I really think that another forum made by Greg for the other topics would be best. This way we can talk about anything we want, and not have to stictly adheare to science in the news. I would vote for Greg to make an appropriate forum (www.politicsforums.com or something like that), and retitle the sub forum from P &WA to something more along the lines of "Politics and World Affairs in modern science."
Evo said:No, read my lips. (and we like you SOS), no flaming, no baiting, no sensationalism, no sarcasm, no insults, no redundant posts, no mindless lemming mentality. The mentors here are actually fairly divided between right and left. If we're doing our job, you can't tell who's right and who's left because we don't take sides but call anyone to task that is posting questionable information or is just plain out of line.
I've always found it amusing that the conservatives think I'm liberal and the liberals think I am conservative.
Evo said:That still wouldn't remove the need for constant moderation, which is the problem.
I think P&WA can remain as is, if we tighten the posting rules. (snip)
Not to belabor this further, I was referring to the members in general, not so much the mentors. (I personally feel you, Moonbear, etc. are moderate, and of course fantastic at making green apple martinis.) The workload has certainly increased because participation has increased. There are the occasional flames, usually associated with a new member, and I can understand the distraction. Restrictions may have a trade off of less participation and a slower, less interesting board. This would probably be a good thing for me—I might actually increase productivity in other areas of my life.Evo said:No, read my lips. (and we like you SOS), no flaming, no baiting, no sensationalism, no sarcasm, no insults, no redundant posts, no mindless lemming mentality. The mentors here are actually fairly divided between right and left. If we're doing our job, you can't tell who's right and who's left because we don't take sides but call anyone to task that is posting questionable information or is just plain out of line.
I've always found it amusing that the conservatives think I'm liberal and the liberals think I am conservative.
But think about this. If you want to discuss political issues, you look for ... er ... a PHYSICS FORUM? What's wrong with this picture?
That makes as much sense as me going to a Psychology forum wanting to discuss the controversy between the phonon picture and the spin-fluctuation picture as the mechanism for High-Tc superconductor. Unless, of course, I'm full of it and I am hoping that people who actually know about such area of study would not tend to be in such a forum. That way, I can bluff my way through all of it, and there wouldn't be that many people who can dispute me.
The "experts" in many of the issues being discussed are not here, the same way that there is very little chance that experts in physics would be found in a psychology forum. If one thinks one has a valid point, then go test it out at the obvious place where there are people more familiar with the issues hang out. Or is this not obvious?
Zz.
The mentors here are actually fairly divided between right and left. If we're doing our job, you can't tell who's right and who's left because we don't take sides but call anyone to task that is posting questionable information or is just plain out of line.
Anttech said:Dont take this personally, but it is obvious you don't know how SEO works, or how google page ranks work, traffic is the life and soul of a forum, and to be honest PF right now is not doing as well as it was, so perhaps Greg is right to change some stuff. But again, if you remove this forum, it will effect the whole site, and really you don't want to happen here what happen to "talk root"
What you did was speculation. I suppose that is a common practice in this sub-forum without anyone raising an eyebrow, but speculation nontheless. And yes, I am aware that there are people who found the Politics sub-forum via a net search. But that still doesn't detract from the fact that this isn't a forum dedicated to that discussion. I've found "physics" forum in an antigravity forum. I certainly wasn't going to STAY there just because they opened a platform to discuss "physics", unless I wish to talk about quackeries.
My point still stands. There is a greater probability that a forum dedicated to Politics would have people who (i) are very inclined to carry such discussion (ii) have a greater expertise and background of various political issues, history, knowledge, statistics, etc. To me, using PF solely for political discussion means that one wants to be a big fish in a small pond.
Pengwuino said:What is the GM forum?
Anttech said:Well since we are in the "sub forum" then I suppose you can also speculate on the intent of people who post here.
I am not arguing with your point. I was making another point, that you will find a negative effect on Google statisics, page rankings, traffic through this site, backlinks, pay per clicks, if you close this forum.
That aside, if you close this forum I would also suggest you close the GD forum, so everyone can consentrate on Science, and go elsewhere to disuss General Politics and day to day stuff
No Google isn't that clever! You get page ranks and hits, due to the content and TrafficIf we get page rankings because of the catfight and mudslinging in the Politics forum, I personally can do without that.
ZapperZ said:I personally don't care if those go away. I came here because of what this forum was called and have no delusions that it can be everything to everyone. However, there are many members here who do find other forums beneficial and even entertaining. And if PF has the resources (as in HUMAN resources) to moderate and monitor those forums, so be it. Evo doesn't get paid to monitor GD and this sub-forum and can't be here all the time. The rest of us have other forums to monitor but also lend a hand in looking after GD. But even *I* gave up on the Politics forum. The effort required to maintain even a level of civility for this forum has EXCEEDED its role as a minor player in the whole scheme of things. It has taken a disproportionate amount of attention, and a distraction away from what PF is.
One of the things that attracted my attention about this forum was that while some people involved in dicussions here were trying to present evidence and discuss interpretations and conclusions based on that evidence, others were completely ignoring both their evidence and their arguments.Moonbear said:I used to find it so refreshing to come in here and read threads where people were airing differences of opinion without bickering; it was so different from all the other places I see politics discussed, because it was being done in the same manner as all our other science debates where evidence was presented, and various interpretations and conclusions discussed, and it wasn't necessary to "win" or browbeat everyone to your side as long as you had fun in the process of debating and learned something by having to support and explain all your arguments. Unfortunately, that quality has been declining, and rapidly, so we're trying to find ways to re-focus the forum to either re-attain that quality or know we gave it our best effort before pulling the plug.
Anttech said:No Google isn't that clever! You get page ranks and hits, due to the content and Traffic
I fail to see how your or anyone elses credibity will wain due to a Political sub forum![]()
Yes, this sounds like an excellent solution. It would be great to feel like one can safely present one's arguments (with evidence) here and invite debate about them without being personally attacked. I, for one, would feel a lot more comfortable about posting here if that happened, in any case. I have hated both the personal attacks I've been subjected to and the personal attacks I've seen others subjected to in these discussions. Apart from how awful such attacks make me feel personally, they also sabotage the discussion itself and the issues do not then get the attention they deserve.Evo said:I think P&WA can remain as is, if we tighten the posting rules. That way people that are serious and can post in a non-combative, non-redundant, non-sarcastic/insulting manner can enjoy participating.
The others can find more appropriate places to post.
Art said:The quality of the discussions
Politics is by definition opinion based. There is no definitive right answer to any political issue and so disagreements without conclusions is part and parcel of political discussions.
Equally regarding sources quoted to promote a point of view, there are no peer reviewed political papers available to provide definitive analysis of a current affairs subject and so what constitutes a 'good' source or a 'bad' source is entirely subjective with 'beauty' being in the eye of the beholder.
I personally have no objection to impartial moderating. I do object when a mentor picks an argument loses it and then 'deletes' his embarrassment. Which goes back to my suggestion if the current moderators see this sub forum as a waste of their time then put in a moderator who's primary interest is politics and who will moderate impartially.ZapperZ said:And I would like to remind you of that next time a mentor comes in and delete/edit one of your posts. Would everyone participating in this sub-forum be undertanding and respectful of that? So far, I've seen nothing but griefs and accusations of certain mentors being "liberal" or "conservative" for taking actions on various posts around here. I see no sense of understanding of the "beauty being in the eye of the beholder".
Zz.
On the contrary: political science is by definition a science and while a lot of what is discussed is matters of opinion in application, a lot of what is discussed here is a matter of fact and logic. My biggest problem here is that people don't correctly differentiate between what is opinion and what is not.Art said:Politics is by definition opinion based. There is no definitive right answer to any political issue and so disagreements without conclusions is part and parcel of political discussions.
Art said:I personally have no objection to impartial moderating. I do object when a mentor picks an argument loses it and then 'deletes' his embarrassment.
Art said:I personally have no objection to impartial moderating. I do object when a mentor picks an argument loses it and then 'deletes' his embarrassment. Which goes back to my suggestion if the current moderators see this sub forum as a waste of their time then put in a moderator who's primary interest is politics and who will moderate impartially.
ZapperZ said:Can someone here truly claim that he/she can always make an impartial decision without all the baggages and personal views surrounding his/her decisions? Seriously?
Art said:Edit - As an observation see how easy it is to slip into the sort of behaviour you denounce? Here we are having a general discussion about a new format for PWA and you start to personalise it.![]()
vanesch said:Me, of course!![]()
(although that by itself, may be a partial claim...)
Yes... look at my first ever post, I was interested in PHYSICS!Let me ask you this: are you aware of PF's reputation and caliber as a PHYSICS forum?
Yes I personally have no problem in being impartial. As a firm believer in free speech I may disagree vehemently with someone else's opinions but I would argue as hard for his opinions to be heard as I would my own.ZapperZ said:And what exactly is an "impartial" moderating? Where do we find such a perfect human creature? Are you yourself capable of being impartial? And what you call "impartial", someone else can easily argue to the contrary.
Can someone here truly claim that he/she can always make an impartial decision without all the baggages and personal views surrounding his/her decisions? Seriously?
Zz.
This forum is self moderating to a large extent. If somebody continuously posts silly, unsubstantiated posts then they are soon ignored by their peers.Russ- On the contrary: political science is by definition a science and while a lot of what is discussed is matters of opinion in application, a lot of what is discussed here is a matter of fact and logic. My biggest problem here is that people don't correctly differentiate between what is opinion and what is not.
This forum is self moderating to a large extent. If somebody continuously posts silly, unsubstantiated posts then they are soon ignored by their peers.
Bystander said:Re. Nereid's OP, it's a bit maddening that the voice of experience can post twice to the thread, explaining that "editorial review" procedures for government labs have been in place for many years, and are not "censorship."
As interesting as discussing me isZapperZ said:Sorry, that wasn't meant as a personal editorial. But I "personalized" it because you want us to take a "high road" in terms of this forum, but from what I have seen, it doesn't corespond to your actions in the past.
It is one thing to say something. It is another to truly abide by it. I truly question if people who want this forum to survive can really adopt that philosophy.
Zz.
Art said:Yes I personally have no problem in being impartial. As a firm believer in free speech I may disagree vehemently with someone else's opinions but I would argue as hard for his opinions to be heard as I would my own.
Anttech said:Yes... look at my first ever post, I was interested in PHYSICS!
Art said:This forum is self moderating to a large extent. If somebody continuously posts silly, unsubstantiated posts then they are soon ignored by their peers.
Anttech said:Zz I don't waste my time looking at many forums, this is one of the few non-technical forums I visit.
I have been around the internet for a long time. I work in IT (Actualy a crossbreed of telecoms and IT) I was looking for info on Physics, I wouldn't have posted here if I didnt think it was any good. Th fact I am 964 posts (965 now) doesn't tell you I think this is a good place?
OK, so this is not an attack, but I'm just a bit amused that you consider PF as "non-technical". :)
I believe Anttech is referring to P&WA, not to PF.ZapperZ said:OK, so this is not an attack, but I'm just a bit amused that you consider PF as "non-technical". :)
I agree, this place is far above the rest!ZapperZ said:And it is why when I consider PF as being "special" as far as physics discussion forums, I'm not making that statement lightly. There truly is an effort to separate this forum from your run-off-the-mill mediocrity.
I take my activities here quite seriously, and in fact I pay attention to the young people here who might be potential employees! That means I also look how they behave in forums like P&WA.ZapperZ said:. . . . even aware the reputation of PF as a physics forum, as in how do people who are either in the academia, students, and even physicists, are starting to view PF. I have enough personal evidence and anecdotes to indicate that PF is slowly but surely gaining a reputation among the peers in this area to be considered as a respectable source.
Ditto! I have recommended this site to others in my field, as well as other scientific and engineering fields, but I usually have to warn people about GD and P&WA.ZapperZ said:I certainly have a vested interest in it. When I recommend PF to other physicists and students, I stake my reputation on it. I do not want to see its image being smeared because something that's supposed to be a minor player in all of this blew its top.
I should have been more precise I was referring specifically to the PWA section.ZapperZ said:Sorry, but I seldom see that happening. In fact, it is those types of posts that incites the most responses.
We were buried under a ton of crap with crackpot postings. They were silly, unsubstantiated, and downright wrong. Yet, those were the ones getting the most attention (and the most effort from the moderators to correct). You just need to look at the old TD section if you don't believe me.
So yes, PF HAS taken drastic actions to reduce the noise-to-signal ratio. And as far as I can see, it has done nothing to diminish its stature as a legitimate physics/science forum, which is the main reason for its existence.
Zz.
Anttech said:Hmm good point ;) I was referring to technical Forums for Telecoms/IT related topics. Not 'Science' related.
Zz So instead of closing it down, promote someone to mentor this forum.
If you want my suggestion someone like Art, who is adapt at communication :)
Art said:Personally I think people are adult enough to make hard distinctions between the 'serious' forums and the 'less serious' and so IMO the discussions in PWA have no bearing on folks opinion of the hard science forums. Afterall serious science magazine publish cartoons but that doesn't mean the readers think the whole magazine is a joke.