Why is sciforums traffic so low now?

Status
Not open for further replies.
spidergoat said:
Plazma is currently spamming the forum with cut and pasted click-bait (against forums rules). This cannot be the answer.
Click to expand...
Creating new threads with meaninful and interesting topics isn't by any stretch spamming. I find them interesting. I like Plazma's posts. This is just my two cents, but I think the problems are directly related to site management. Sciforums has had a number of technical and security issues. When the site goes down, there is no explanation. A web page explaining why the site is down and when management expects it to be back up would do wonders. Additionally, I think Sciforums needs to beef up site security. I've been a member for a long time, and Sciforums has a number of very good attributes. I like how easy it is to post. I like the formats and the speed of the search engine. I like how clean the webpages are. However, I think the outages and security problems have driven people away. And that is unfortunate, a little better communication from management during outages would, I think, go along way towards making Sciforums a better site.
 
joepistole said:
Creating new threads with meaninful and interesting topics isn't by any stretch spamming. I find them interesting. I like Plazma's posts.
Click to expand...

Totally agree...And I do not understand how anyone could construe it to be spamming....Isn't this first and foremost a science forum?
 
The site definitely looks like it has an agenda when all the profile posts are generated by Tiassa. If at least one applied to science in general, the forum might be taken a bit more seriously. Let's be honest, this site is progressive left in spirit, and it shows. Maybe Plazma should also focus on the profile posts with science related issues.
 
This is a science forum, and Reality is usually found to also be progressive left in spirit.
 
Bowser said:
If at least one applied to science in general, the forum might be taken a bit more seriously. Let's be honest, this site is progressive left in spirit, and it shows.
Click to expand...
As opposed to what? All that "right wing" science that's so ubiquitous? Right... :eye roll:
 
Well, if Plazma didn't start threads, there would be precious little going on here at all!
I only look in every couple of months now, because there is little for me to contribute, but that's always been mainly because I'm not very knowledgeable in science.
Maybe I'll go see if I can ask a question people are interested in.
 
joepistole said:
Creating new threads with meaninful and interesting topics isn't by any stretch spamming. I find them interesting. I like Plazma's posts. This is just my two cents, but I think the problems are directly related to site management. Sciforums has had a number of technical and security issues. When the site goes down, there is no explanation. A web page explaining why the site is down and when management expects it to be back up would do wonders. Additionally, I think Sciforums needs to beef up site security. I've been a member for a long time, and Sciforums has a number of very good attributes. I like how easy it is to post. I like the formats and the speed of the search engine. I like how clean the webpages are. However, I think the outages and security problems have driven people away. And that is unfortunate, a little better communication from management during outages would, I think, go along way towards making Sciforums a better site.
Click to expand...
Nah. During the "heyday" the site once went down for... what was it, 3 weeks? I don't really remember. Felt like months though.
I remember talking quite a few people during that period, and while I do agree they were annoyed at the lack of communication as to the nature of those "technical difficulties", the general reaction was more one of having their crack taken away from them. Whatamigonnado whatamIgonnado WhatamIgonnado.....

There were a lot of alternative forums around at the time which stricter protocols, were more heavily moderated and had more of a focus on pure science, but had less of a membership base and less traffic. This one had something they didn't.

It's why they felt their crack had been taken away that you need to really look at.
And how you're going to make this site become online crack again.

Go deeper.
 
Retribution said:
There were a lot of alternative forums around at the time which stricter protocols, were more heavily moderated and had more of a focus on pure science, but had less of a membership base and less traffic. This one had something they didn't.

It's why they felt their crack had been taken away that you need to really look at.
And how you're going to make this site become online crack again.
Click to expand...

Then thats it... less strict protocols... less heavily moderated and less of a focus on pure science will make the site more addictive an site traffic will increase;;; hay wait a minute... coud it realy be that sinple.???
 
cluelusshusbund said:
Then thats it... less strict protocols... less heavily moderated and less of a focus on pure science will make the site more addictive an site traffic will increase;;; hay wait a minute... coud it realy be that sinple.???
Click to expand...
Nope. It isn't.

I've never said anything about less of a focus on pure science have I?
Come on, man. Don't go all Bells on me.

Having just come back from another thread, and having mentioned my main man, here he is again:

“When you're Singapore's leader and your existence depends on performance - extraordinary performance, better than your competitors - when that performance disappears because the system on which it's been based becomes eroded, then you've lost everything..."

I do actually have a fairly clear idea of what would be required around here to return this place to what it was. I'm sort of posting little tidbits here and there, when I have a few minutes.
I have a sneaking suspicion it might be too late, though. Perhaps I'm being overly pessimistic.
 
Retribution said:
Come on, man. Don't go all Bells on me.
Click to expand...

Sorry.!!!
I do actually have a fairly clear idea of what would be required around here to return this place to what it was. I'm sort of posting little tidbits here and there, when I have a few minutes.
Click to expand...

Well hell... thanks... lookin forward to more.!!!
 
Last edited:
We'll see how it goes.
I'm not really much of a crusader. Every now and then I'll pick up a lance, but when the tournament starts I have a tendency to drop it half way down the course and stop to look at a pretty face in the stands.
And then I get smashed by those who have more... focus.
 
Randwolf said:
As opposed to what? All that "right wing" science that's so ubiquitous? Right... :eye roll:
Click to expand...
No, just saying that it reflects a political bent rather than one of science. Anyone who might drop in on the forum might get a bad first impression.
 
Bowser said:
The site definitely looks like it has an agenda when all the profile posts are generated by Tiassa.
Click to expand...

Why do "profile posts" exist? What are they? What are they supposed to communicate?

I typically ignore them, because they never seem to have any interesting content.

Subsequent edit: I just noticed that you have put a bunch of science news bits in the 'profile posts'. Good for you. (I still don't know why that feature exists, but giving it science content is a positive step.)

If at least one applied to science in general, the forum might be taken a bit more seriously.
Click to expand...

I think that Sciforums is more of a social-club than anything else.

Let's be honest, this site is progressive left in spirit, and it shows.
Click to expand...

Sciforums definitely has a political-left party-line that has little or nothing to do with science. It's part of what defines the club, what structures the 'us-them' gradient. You agree with the politics, or else you have outed yourself as one of 'them'.
 
No, just saying that it reflects a political bent rather than one of science. Anyone who might drop in on the forum might get a bad first impression.
Click to expand...

I think if anyone attended a science conference they'd find a predominantly left-leaning political persuasion. Academia also tends to be left-leaning. Education is also a big plank in the democratic party platform. It's just the way of the world. The right took religion and and the left took science. It's not a bad impression at all. It's a perception of a global reality.
 
Magical Realist said:
I think if anyone attended a science conference they'd find a predominantly left-leaning political persuasion. Academia also tends to be left-leaning. Education is also a big plank in the democratic party platform. It's just the way of the world. The right took religion and and the left took science. It's not a bad impression at all. It's a perception of a global reality.
Click to expand...
You see, you can make sense when you want to.
 
Magical Realist said:
I think if anyone attended a science conference they'd find a predominantly left-leaning political persuasion. Academia also tends to be left-leaning.
Click to expand...

Higher education wasn't nearly so politically-left in the 1950's and 1960's when professors came from the WWII generation. It's having become so is largely the result of its being dominated today by the baby-boomers. The ones most into the 'student movement' of the late 60's and 70's wanted to stay in the university environment (and not get drafted to Vietnam), so they went on to graduate school. Once they got their graduate degrees, they slipped into university teaching. Gradually they became senior faculty, coming to dominate many departments and started to control hiring and tenure decisions.
 
Yazata said:
Sciforums definitely has a political-left party-line that has little or nothing to do with science. It's part of what defines the club, what structures the 'us-them' gradient. You agree with the politics, or else you have outed yourself as one of 'them'.
Click to expand...
But that might be effecting traffic in general. Yes, it does have a political bent, but it's a science forum first and foremost, I would think. I suppose it really depends on what traffic they are trying to attract.
 
Yazata said:
Higher education wasn't nearly so politically-left in the 1950's and 1960's when professors came from the WWII generation. It's having become so is largely the result of its being dominated today by the baby-boomers. The ones most into the 'student movement' of the late 60's and 70's wanted to stay in the university environment (and not get drafted to Vietnam), so they went on to graduate school. Once they got their graduate degrees, they slipped into university teaching. Gradually they became senior faculty, coming to dominate many departments and started to control hiring and tenure decisions.
Click to expand...

Yes..the post Vietnam, post sexual revolution, post civil rights era of the 1960's and 1970's when half the world woke up and the other half kept sleeping. The world hasn't been the same since.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top