If Q&A is for space and astronomy questions...

[ToSeek]

then why is it in the "General" section rather than the "Space and Astronomy" section?

(Someone asked me this privately, but I figured it was a significant enough question to discuss publicly.)

[cran]

Good question ...
though I have seen the odd Earth-bound question turn up in Q&A ...

[Van Rijn]

I thought the answer was simply that it would show up at the top of the main page where newcomers were more likely to see it.

Somewhat related to that, though, given the number of non space and astronomy related subjects that turn up in Small Media At Large (a lot of fantasy, non-space comic book, etc.), I wonder if it might fit better in the General section.

[Kaptain K]

Related question: Why is General Science in "Space and Astronomy"?

[ToSeek]

Originally Posted by Kaptain K

Related question: Why is General Science in "Space and Astronomy"?

That was the other question in the PM I got, but I figured I'd take them one at a time.

[Kaptain K]

OK. Works for me.

[Moose]

As I recall it, Q&A had been placed at the top to keep OTB from being the catch-all for Q&A type questions. General Science was placed at the very bottom because it really is a catch-all. Again, IIRC, early BAUT didn't have that forum, and didn't really intend to, but there was a steady and persistent popular demand.

[Tobin Dax]

Moose and Van Rijn have got it, I think. Q&A won't be easily seen that far down. IMO, if this really is an issue (), the best way to fix it would be to put the Space and Astro section at the top with the fora arranged in such a way that Q&A is higher than Astronomy.

[01101001]

Originally Posted by Tobin Dax

Space and Astro section at the top

I think that would work best. It/they are the reason for Bad Astronomy and Universe Today forum, followed closely (or led barely, depending on the proprietors' wishes) by the parent sections for Universe Today and Bad Astronomy.

A General section at the bottom, administration, leftovers, miscellaneous, hard-to-classify is of lesser importance -- valuable, but not the focus.

I'd put space and astronomy Q&A in the one-slot, in Section One Space and Astronomy. Make it the focus of the focus. Questions? Answers! Creme de la creme.

General Science I'd move to the General section with Babbling, with About, with Fun. Maybe move Small Media there?

Or, I'd leave it all alone because change freaks people out. (See Pluto.) Sometimes the furniture is best left where it is. Otherwise, the law of unintended consequences will probably bite back with problems that are worse than the ones solved.

Picture? You want a picture? Roughly:

Space and Astronomy

Questions and Answers
Astronomy
Space Exploration
Astrophotography
Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
Life in Space
Against the Mainstream
Conspiracy Theories
Small Media at Large

Universe Today

Universe Today Story Comments
Universe Today Website Feedback
Astronomy Cast

Bad Astronomy

Bad Astronomy Stories
Bad Astronomy: The Book

General

About BAUT
General Science
Off-Topic Babbling
Fun-n-Games

Edit: Oh! I forgot the new 2012 section over on the other server. In some other forum.

[Swift]

I like 01101001's arrangement.

[HenrikOlsen]

Only problem with that arrangement is that the rules are below the bottom in a small window.

[Moose]

The other issue with that arrangement is that newbie posts and what spam makes it through the filter (though I'm by no means equating them) tend to float pretty high in the forums. Q&A or Astronomy, I think, need a very high signal-to-noise ratio to function properly, while About BAUT and OTB tend to work well as spam lures up top, and don't really need a very high signal-to-noise ratio for their respective reasons.

I guess what I'm not really seeing is a tangible benefit to changing the forum order at this point.

[01101001]

Originally Posted by Moose

I guess what I'm not really seeing is a tangible benefit to changing the forum order at this point.

Leaving Q&A up in the spam-vulnerable top? It needs to be visible to be seen. It needs to be away from the top to not be bothered. Conflict.

[Moose]

Originally Posted by 01101001

Leaving Q&A up in the spam-vulnerable top? It needs to be visible to be seen. It needs to be away from the top to not be bothered. Conflict.

True, but blind spambots seem to either hit the top forum or all of them, and manual spammers make a beeline for OTB right away. 2nd spot, surrounded by spammer lures, might just be the safest place for Q&A. I don't hang out there much, is there much of a spam problem in Q&A right now? Mods?

[01101001]

Originally Posted by Moose

Mods?

Does anyone track it? Do the robots really tend to hit higher sections more frequently? I think the human spammers do go for the activity. I've seen plenty of spam in popular places regardless of distance from top.

[Veeger]

01101001 (0x69)

I would recommend that the mods and/or admins give some serious consideration to moving the "new member introductions" thread to a place where new members can actually find it. I suggest under "About BAUT" near all the rules and regulations...and it probably makes sense to have the "About..." at the top of the board where it is now.

Thanks,
-V

[cran]

Originally Posted by 01101001

Picture? You want a picture? Roughly:

Space and Astronomy >>Mainstream<<

Questions and Answers
Astronomy
Space Exploration
Astrophotography
Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
Life in Space
------------
>> I'd excise these from the mainstream sciences -
perhaps in General with OTB and fun&games<<
Against the Mainstream
Conspiracy Theories
Small Media at Large
------------

Universe Today

Universe Today Story Comments
Universe Today Website Feedback
Astronomy Cast

Bad Astronomy

Bad Astronomy Stories
Bad Astronomy: The Book

General

--------------
About BAUT >> not really General - more Intro and Admin <<
-------------

------------------
General Science
>> the catch-all for non-space sciences, but still Mainstream<<
----------------


Off-Topic Babbling
Fun-n-Games

Edit: Oh! I forgot the new 2012 section over on the other server. In some other forum.



Becomes:

Intro and Admin
About BAUT
New Member Introductions

Space and Astronomy >> and Mainstream Sciences<<
Questions and Answers
Astronomy
Space Exploration
Astrophotography
Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
Life in Space
General Science

Universe Today
Universe Today Story Comments
Universe Today Website Feedback
Astronomy Cast

Bad Astronomy
Bad Astronomy Stories
Bad Astronomy: The Book

General
Off-Topic Babbling
Fun-n-Games
Against the Mainstream
Conspiracy Theories
Small Media at Large

[jlhredshift]

I like Cran's arrangement.

[Tobin Dax]

I don't like cran's arrangement. The ATM, CT, and Media fora are not for discussion of general topics, but for the discussion of space and astronomy topics.

Putting ATM in a general category is a particularly bad idea, IMO. I don't think that we need to have ATM threads on biology, medicine, and non-science topics. We're here to discuss space and astronomy. Those topics can be explored somewhere else. I don't go to the CT forum, but I would apply the same argument there.


ATM, CT, and Small Media at Large need to stay in the Space and Astronomy section.

[Van Rijn]

Originally Posted by Tobin Dax

I don't like cran's arrangement. The ATM, CT, and Media fora are not for discussion of general topics, but for the discussion of space and astronomy topics.

CT pretty clearly has been restricted to space and astronomy topics. That's not quite so clear on ATM, and non-space and astronomy topics are regularly discussed in SMAL (most often fantasy and non-space related science fiction). With respect to SMAL, I've long thought it was silly to see the occasional topic get moved to OTB where it was promptly lost in the clutter, while other non-space topics continued in SMAL. Ultimately, I expect that moving it under general would have a minor effect on topics, since the topics reflect the interest of the board's members.

[cran]

Originally Posted by Tobin Dax

I don't like cran's arrangement.

that's OK ... we're just freewheeling ideas here - pleasing you wasn't a criterion ...

The ATM, CT, and Media fora are not for discussion of general topics, but for the discussion of space and astronomy topics.

Originally Posted by Van Rijn

... given the number of non space and astronomy related subjects that turn up in Small Media At Large (a lot of fantasy, non-space comic book, etc.), I wonder if it might fit better in the General section.

Originally Posted by Tobin Dax

Moose and Van Rijn have got it, I think.

CT has its own set of rules and guidelines about what can or cannot be discussed ...
and the only times I've been into ATM in these past months is for the purely Earthbound ideas ... expanding Earth, whole crustal shifts, and my personal favourite - cave digging mammoths and giant worms in America ...

But mostly it does seem to me that these three sections have more in common with babbling and playing games than in exploring and understanding real or mainstream science - I apologise if that's bruised anybody's ego ...

Putting ATM in a general category is a particularly bad idea, IMO. I don't think that we need to have ATM threads on biology, medicine, and non-science topics.

See above ... and if Life in Space is to continue, then ATM ideas on biology and medicine are bound to arise sometime ... pretty hard to generate ATM ideas about non-science topics - given that our perception of the mainstream is science topics ...

We're here to discuss space and astronomy.

if that's your only purpose for being here, then why are you wasting your time in this discussion?

Those topics can be explored somewhere else. I don't go to the CT forum, but I would apply the same argument there.

ATM, CT, and Small Media at Large need to stay in the Space and Astronomy section.

... thank you for your opinion ...

[Gillianren]

Originally Posted by cran

But mostly it does seem to me that these three sections have more in common with babbling and playing games than in exploring and understanding real or mainstream science - I apologise if that's bruised anybody's ego ...

I disagree strenuously. I have learned more about mainstream science from ATM and CT than from Q&A and General Science. After all, in order to present a viable ATM idea, you must be able to explain how it meet preexisting observations and how it betters all aspects of mainstream theory. In both ATM and CT, the posts of certain of the mainstream/non-CT proponents are worded in ways that bring out the mainstream information, and I learn from them, even if the person on the other side of the discussion seldom does.

[cran]

Originally Posted by Gillianren

I disagree strenuously. I have learned more about mainstream science from ATM and CT than from Q&A and General Science. After all, in order to present a viable ATM idea, you must be able to explain how it meet preexisting observations and how it betters all aspects of mainstream theory. In both ATM and CT, the posts of certain of the mainstream/non-CT proponents are worded in ways that bring out the mainstream information, and I learn from them, even if the person on the other side of the discussion seldom does.

That's a good reason to keep them (ATM, CT) in the forum, but not to promote them as mainstream science ...

and if you don't believe that using science, or even logic, to pick apart a fallacy is not a game, or a challenge, then you're missing out on half the fun ...

[Gillianren]

Originally Posted by cran

That's a good reason to keep them (ATM, CT) in the forum, but not to promote them as mainstream science ...

But we're not.

and if you don't believe that using science, or even logic, to pick apart a fallacy is not a game, or a challenge, then you're missing out on half the fun ...

Yes, but that doesn't put it in the same category as "fun and games," a subforum I never visit.

[Tobin Dax]

Originally Posted by cran

that's OK ... we're just freewheeling ideas here - pleasing you wasn't a criterion ...

Fine by me, so long as pleasing jlhredshift wasn't a criterion either.

[cran]

Originally Posted by Gillianren

But we're not.

by grouping them with Astronomy etc ... the perception might be that you are ... just as by keeping Q&A and General Science (which really could be renamed Other Sciences or Non Space Sciences or Earthbound Sciences, as it automatically excludes space sciences) out of the mainstream science section, the perception might be that these are not considered as seriously - ie, anything space-related (even wild ideas or pseudo science) is the one important group, and all the rest (regardless) can be scattered about somewhere else ...

Yes, but that doesn't put it in the same category as "fun and games," a subforum I never visit.

I don't either, and I don't visit Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories and a few other sections, but that's relevant, how exactly?

Originally Posted by Tobin Dax

Fine by me, so long as pleasing jlhredshift wasn't a criterion either.

it wasn't ...

[Tobin Dax]

Originally Posted by cran

by grouping them with Astronomy etc ... the perception might be that you are ... just as by keeping Q&A and General Science (which really could be renamed Other Sciences or Non Space Sciences or Earthbound Sciences, as it automatically excludes space sciences) out of the mainstream science section, the perception might be that these are not considered as seriously - ie, anything space-related (even wild ideas or pseudo science) is the one important group, and all the rest (regardless) can be scattered about somewhere else ...

Every forum has a description under it. The ATM and CT descriptions make it clear that BAUT is promoting neither as mainstream or accepted topics.

As for the second part of your paragraph, there's a reason this site is called "Bad Astronomy."

I don't either, and I don't visit Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories and a few other sections, but that's relevant, how exactly?

I'm not trying to speak for Gillian, but taking her comment in context with the rest of her statements, she puts Fun 'n' Games in a different category than ATM and CT. I agree with her. ATM has educational merit, while Fun n Games doesn't necessarily. Arguing why the sun is not solid takes more work and is more educational that playing the word association game.

cran, are you intending to come off defensively as you freewheel ideas here? Or am I just reading a little too much into a couple short responses you've given to posters who disagree with you?

[cran]

Originally Posted by Tobin Dax

cran, are you intending to come off defensively as you freewheel ideas here? Or am I just reading a little too much into a couple short responses you've given to posters who disagree with you?

not defensively, Tobin Dax ... it's no skin off my nose if the forum stays exactly as is, or takes on any sort of configuration ...
but disagreement tends to stimulate more dialogue than agreement -
have you noticed?
it gives me the chance to fill in some blanks about my rationale,
and fosters counter views ... that's a good thing, yes?

actually, I've been expecting 01101001 to return - a member who's been around much longer than I, and who knows much more about the place ...

As for the second part of your paragraph, there's a reason this site is called "Bad Astronomy."

Oh? I thought there was a name change a while back because of some merger ...

I suppose where I'm coming from is questioning the associations -
the groupings and how they might be perceived ...
and there do seem to be some mixed bags that could stand rearranging ...

I'd be quite happy if all non space (Earthbound) science questions and discussions were excised out of Q&A, ATM, etc - to keep them pure, unsullied by our dirt - and dropped into a sub forum that stargazers can ignore if they choose ...

but to deny them altogether is like saying that our Earth is not really a part of this Universe Today ...

[01101001]

Originally Posted by cran

actually, I've been expecting 01101001 to return

I'm not really thinking about a big makeover. I don't see big problems, I guess. I was thinking more about a little tweak to a couple subforums' locations to solve some little problems. And, I'm not even convinced my own suggestion -- at first a simple location swap for Q&A and General Science, that grew more radical to incorporate the idea that Q&A should appear toward the top -- solves more than it risks.

Sometimes sleeping dogs should sleep. It's just fun to think about kicking them.

[Halcyon Dayz]

My suggestion...


About BAUT

Space and Astronomy

Questions and Answers
Astronomy
Space Exploration
Astrophotography
Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
Life in Space
Against the Mainstream
Conspiracy Theories

Universe Today

Universe Today Story Comments
Universe Today Website Feedback
Astronomy Cast

Bad Astronomy

Bad Astronomy Stories
Bad Astronomy: The Books

General

General Science
Small Media at Large
Off-Topic Babbling
Fun-n-Games

About BAUT doesn't need to be a sub-forum like all the others.
I'm sure the software allows for this. (And for nested fora as well.)
Binary Man's 2012 list, and an introduction thread, can be stickied in About.
Small Media at Large is IMO more at home in the General section.