The reason for the decline in forum membership - anyone?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The reason for the decline in forum membership - anyone?
Click to expand...

We are a species that becomes easily jaded and in search of new areas of interest, based on my own experience and observations.

I am on four science forums and they all seem to have experienced a surge and decline in membership along similar timelines so that inclines me to think that this occurrence has far less to do with people and personalities than it does with trending and people following new technology and mediums. Though I am not one who follows Twitter, it may be having an effect on these special interest forums as people seem to be more interested in social media currently.

Personally, I came to forums 3 1/2 years ago and stayed with just one for over two years and then added 3 others because of the decline in participation at the original forum. I also joined a chess forum about 18 months ago and the activity there seems a bit more consistent, possibly because of the focus of a shared interest with rules which are not subject to discourse, lol...

Just thought I would drop in my thoughts this day. :)
 
Chipz said:
Has anyone addressed the Tiassa problem yet?
Click to expand...

What Tiassa problem?

When you are asked what it is, or when you have been asked what you are talking about, you simply seem to come out and ask if he is going to resign.

The question still stands. What Tiassa problem?

How can I put this blatantly for you...

What problem do you have with Tiassa? Can you provide links to his posts which you seem to believe is a problem?
 
Unprecedented...

Bells said:
What Tiassa problem?
Click to expand...
Chipz, what is the deal? What Tiassa "problem"? That you have to be literate to read his posts? What?

This is probably the first, last and only time that Bells and I share a common POV, but what - exactly - do you have against Tiassa?
 
Chipz, I do hope you stick around. I am not to sure. But IMO, you may be on thin ice. Real thin, Tread carefully.. Ok.
 
Quantum Quack said:
maybe you would care to inform the readers what you mean by intellectual dishonesty and how you can claim such?
Are you suggesting that posters are acting deliberately to commit a fraud ? or is their dishonesty somehow accidental?
Click to expand...

I gave two examples of intellectual dishonesty. I never said fraud. I said intellectual dishonesty. It's the opposite of intellectual honesty. Another example would be insisting something is wrong when it's not. This is a common theme in these public science forums. Making up nonsense and insisting it's not nonsense while providing no supporting evidence [because there is none]. Asking me if I'm suggesting that posters are acting deliberately to commit a fraud without even researching what the term intellectual dishonesty might mean. I can claim it because I actually know what it means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty

http://designmatrix.wordpress.com/2010/11/18/10-signs-of-intellectual-dishonesty/
 
brucep said:
I gave two examples of intellectual dishonesty. I never said fraud. I said intellectual dishonesty. It's the opposite of intellectual honesty. Another example would be insisting something is wrong when it's not. This is a common theme in these public science forums. Making up nonsense and insisting it's not nonsense while providing no supporting evidence [because there is none]. Asking me if I'm suggesting that posters are acting deliberately to commit a fraud without even researching what the term intellectual dishonesty might mean. I can claim it because I actually know what it means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty

http://designmatrix.wordpress.com/2010/11/18/10-signs-of-intellectual-dishonesty/
Click to expand...
thanks...can I ask you what you feel is the difference, if any between : self delusion, self deception and intellectual dishonesty?
premised on the notion : that you can not deliberately decieve yourself...you can not deliberately be dishonest to your self .That what you are really talking about is self deception and self delusion which one is "blind" to or ignorant of [ psychosis ] not dishonesty.
 
What we need is more lolcats.
people will come flooding in.

LOLCat_Bible.jpg
 
Bells said:
What Tiassa problem?

When you are asked what it is, or when you have been asked what you are talking about, you simply seem to come out and ask if he is going to resign.

The question still stands. What Tiassa problem?

How can I put this blatantly for you...

What problem do you have with Tiassa? Can you provide links to his posts which you seem to believe is a problem?
Click to expand...

I would like them to resign, I would like you to resign even more. Both of you moderate posts to fit your personal biases and predilections. You should both resign retroactively resign effective your start dates as moderator and all infractions/bannings should be reversed.
 
Chipz:

You are off topic for this thread.

If you have a complaint about a moderator, please send them (or me) a PM.
 
Certain individuals, not naming names, or P-M'ing. Have pushed certain buttons. An they may have contributed to pushing some people away. With what they wrote.
 
@ QQ

Very valid issue. Its not just the numbers, its the quality of intellect/discourse around here that has (IMHO) declined. In the glory days of Exosci and the first couple of years of SciForums we had some real intellectual giants amongst us, who generally could contain their egos enough so as to allow us lesser intellects, room for movement, room for opinions and thus enable learning, growing and oodles of satisfaction - FUN.

Extremely diverse views were generally accepted here and the factual substance was arrived at by a process of graudual whittling down of weaker logic.

We live in a very different world today where media spin becomes fact and political correctness has become dogma, the norm, and any opinion outside the mainstream is shot down or belittled so rapidly, interesting and challenging discourse seldom gets a foothold. Enter the world of the narrow and shallow path.

It would be be bliss to return to the era of magick and mesmerism where the folk around here believed "If we have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants".

Some of you are still around.
 
thats some pseudo nostalgia taken to the point of delusion kiddo
an acid fueled romanticism?
a tongue in cheek flight of fancy?
historical revisionism?
 
StrawDog said:
@ QQ

Very valid issue. Its not just the numbers, its the quality of intellect/discourse around here that has (IMHO) declined. In the glory days of Exosci and the first couple of years of SciForums we had some real intellectual giants amongst us, who generally could contain their egos enough so as to allow us lesser intellects, room for movement, room for opinions and thus enable learning, growing and oodles of satisfaction - FUN.

Extremely diverse views were generally accepted here and the factual substance was arrived at by a process of graudual whittling down of weaker logic.

We live in a very different world today where media spin becomes fact and political correctness has become dogma, the norm, and any opinion outside the mainstream is shot down or belittled so rapidly, interesting and challenging discourse seldom gets a foothold. Enter the world of the narrow and shallow path.

It would be be bliss to return to the era of magick and mesmerism where the folk around here believed "If we have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants".

Some of you are still around.
Click to expand...

True power is the one that prevails in any and all circumstances.

If one cannot prevail in any and all circumstances, one isn't really powerful.

tornado5.jpg



It's easy enough to live in an ivory tower and think well of oneself.
Try digging in the dirt - and still prove your superiority.
 
"The one who points out a problem is the one who has the problem."
"The one who points out a problem is the problem."


Bye bye, George Orwell.
 
Looking at the number of members that have read this thread at some point reveals that there is still 90115+ real human's (or their proxies) posting on this forum. While the numbers might have dwindled a little, there still here. It's just a shame that the bot to human ratio is something like 350:1

Edit: actually the human numbers are higher, it seems there's a few that never read this thread, most of them I believe hiding out in Maths and Physics subforum. (I suppose you could say, "They need to get out more")
 
Last edited:
Presumably the 'bots' have more time at their disposal and different 'motivation' for their presence. If I knew how to program a bot, I could bid it go forth and return to me only posts with the content of the parameters I set for it and thereby use my forum time more efficiently. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top