Proposed Forum Changes

[Neverfly]

Do I need to pay NASA to access their website?
Or any other web forum?

Yes, those that own the domain do pay, and that does give them the right to enforce rules of their domain. But it's a domanin- Not a home. That analogy is weak.

Because unlike a home, it's not all out ownership.

Suppose someone joins this forum and repeatedly uses vulgar language. They will get banned after having been reminded of the rules. That seems proper.

Now, suppose someone joined the forum and talked badly about the BA.
Not in a vulgar manner, but essentially made the BA out to be (whatever negative).

The BA doesn't strike me as the type who would want to ban him for that- true.
But...
Even if he did want to, he couldn't.
Not because anyone could enforce that he couldn't- but because the forum relies on membership and contribution and spirit. It would not be a successful forum if it operated that way.
Therein lies the fault in the "house" analogy. The doors were opened here. They are not opened in a house.

To that point, a lot of my original comment made yesterday was a reminder to Fraser considering his response to me.
As participants, we are not guests in a home, we are contibuters to the forum and as such deserve respect as individuals who chose to participate as well.
The analogy can hold, in a weak sense... but on a stronger sense, breaks down.
And I just can't help but wonder if many of us have gotten so conditioned by the analogy to actually consider it to be solid.

[Fazor]

[From Neverfly:]As participants, we are not guests in a home, we are contibuters to the forum and as such deserve respect as individuals who chose to participate as well.

Why are those two seperate things? A "house guest" is still a contributer to a party; and still deserves respect. But in the end, is still a guest and can be asked to leave (or forcefully ejected) from the house, by the host, for any reason.

And while the choice to eject that memeber at a whim is well within the "homeowner's" rights; that doesn't mean there wouldn't be consequenses from the other guests.

Anyway the point is that yes, I feel I deserve at least some respect (in my case, even a little goes a long way to get in my good books); but I still feel the admins have every right to say that I'm no longer welcome here for whatever reason. If I don't aree with how they act, in respect to myself or others, I also have the right to decide I no longer want to be a part of the community.

[Neverfly]

Originally Posted by Fazor

[From Neverfly:]As participants, we are not guests in a home, we are contibuters to the forum and as such deserve respect as individuals who chose to participate as well.

Why are those two seperate things? A "house guest" is still a contributer to a party; and still deserves respect. But in the end, is still a guest and can be asked to leave (or forcefully ejected) from the house, by the host, for any reason.

And while the choice to eject that memeber at a whim is well within the "homeowner's" rights; that doesn't mean there wouldn't be consequenses from the other guests.

Anyway the point is that yes, I feel I deserve at least some respect (in my case, even a little goes a long way to get in my good books); but I still feel the admins have every right to say that I'm no longer welcome here for whatever reason. If I don't aree with how they act, in respect to myself or others, I also have the right to decide I no longer want to be a part of the community.

It is a bit complicated.. and as Swift said, he hasn't seen the whole picture.

I just feel like we've gotten to complacent with the analogy- But I wasn't looking to debate it here too.
And I admit part of my thought processes on this may be swayed by personal reactions...

So I'm gonna leave it to the thinkers and readers of the thread and bow out of this one.

[Fazor]

I'm more of a "skimmer/react without thinking'er" so I shouldn't comment either I was just confused by the house/guest analogy and the, in my mind, lack of contradiction between being a guest and being a contributer to a community.

But I haven't followed this thread closely either.

[Fraser]

I think that the house analogy holds strong. If you build a house, open it up to people to come inside, and operate it, you have the right to decide how it gets used. I think you're confusing rights with consequences.

These are called property rights. I build a house, invite you inside, you start trashing my stuff, I can ask you to leave. It's my right to ask you to not trash my stuff, and it's my right to ask you to leave. That's one end of the spectrum.

On the other end of the spectrum, I can build a house, invite my mother, my boss and the chief of police to dinner. After my mother uses a glass without a coaster, I can throw a tantrum, and then demand that she and her no-good friends leave my house. It's my right to get her to use coasters on my precious table, and it's my right to force her and those other people to leave my house.

The key is that there are consequences in both situations. In the first situation, very little will happen to me. Everyone will agree that I probably took the correct course of action and admire my backbone. In the second situation, my mother will never talk to me, I'll probably lose my job, and the police may take me in disorderly conduct. I was in the right in both situations, but in the second scenario, the consequences were more dire.

When Phil and I administrate BAUT, we're aware of our rights. It's our home, you're guests, etc etc. But we're also well aware of the consequences. We want to make you feel welcome and comfortable. We want you to appreciate that the rules exist so that 8-year old children working on their science projects don't run screaming to their parents. We want people with unorthodox theories to be given a fair chance to present their ideas to a scientifically literate audience. We want to be your friends, and we want you to consider us friends. This list of things we want goes on and on.

Now, if you feel that Phil and I should be forced to maintain certain rules, please convince me. And by what method should be used to make sure we do it? Force from the police? Garnishment from our wages to pay for government-paid moderators to enforce to policies you'd like implemented?

You've said it several times, and we're very well aware of the consequences. If people don't like the forum and the rules, or the administration, they'll vote with their feet and go somewhere else. Since it's so easy to go somewhere else, that ensures that the BAUT team have to be at the top of their game.

[NEOWatcher]

Originally Posted by Neverfly

I have no idea. I just made that up. We all know I'm just crazy...

I was commenting on the use of the word "debate". It has a much different connotation than the word "discussion" or the idea of "forum" in general. So I am giving the benefit of the doubt, and ask why you used that particular word.

[NEOWatcher]

Originally Posted by Fraser

I think that the house analogy holds strong.

I agree, but I also wonder if the issue is the fact that the analogy is a house. Maybe it would be better to be a restaurant, or food court, or some other generally open to the public type of setting instead of a private type of setting.
It would still hold true, but the proprietor does reserve the right to refuse service or entry.

[Jim]

Originally Posted by mugaliens

Thank you, Jim - I'd be delighted. Rather than repost, however, they're right here, just a few scrolls up, same thread.

Edit: Upon re-reading, I think you may have been looking for a word summary, so:

1. Regroup all Space and Astronomy sections into a Space and Astronomy forum.
2. Regroup all Mainstream, but non S&A sections into an Off-Topic Babbling forum.
3. Regroup all Against the Mainstream sections into an Against the Mainstream forum.
4. Leave UT and BA sections alone.
5. Arrange the forums in order of the most pertinent and most-used towards the top, and the least-pertinent and least used towards the bottom.

Note: The use of the term "forum" is as per vBulletin's definition. For example, BAUT is an internet message board. General is currently a forum. Within the General forum there are several sections, including About BAUT, Questions and Answers, etc. Each of those sections has many threads; each thread has many posts...

I just wanted the current list... so my very useful comments aren't wasted. Your proposal and my comments:

About BAUT
Space and Astronomy
--Questions and Answers This is where it really belongs; I just wonder if folks would find it one level down
--Astrophotography
--Space Exploration
--Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
--Life in Space
--Small Media at Large If we keep this to Bad Astronomy - as originally intended - this would be okay; as it is now, no so great here. Maybe OTB and add a sub-fourm to Bad Astronomy?
Off-Topic Babbling
--Original OTB (includes all current OTB threads) I don't think so. See below.
--Science and Technology Does this replace General Science, now in S&A? Then calling the main forum OTB might not fit.
--Human Interest Make this General Interest and put all the OTB threads here.
--Fun-n-Games
--Yarns Naah, it wouldn't keep yarns out of General Interest.
Universe Today (no change)
Bad Astronomy (no change)
Against the Mainstream I like this! ATM and CT follow generally the same rules anyway.
--Space and Astronomy
--Science and Technology Phil and Fraser really wanted to keep ATM astronomy related; this would open it up to evolution and 9/11, to name two.
--Conspiracy Theories
--Unidentified stuff (belongs no where else) Ditto.

To clarify, how about:

About BAUT
Space and Astronomy
--Questions and Answers
--Astrophotography
--Space Exploration
--Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
--Life in Space
General Interest
--Off-Topic Babbling
--Science and Technology
--Fun-n-Games
--Small Media at Large
Universe Today (no change)
Bad Astronomy
--BA Stories
--BA: The Book
--BA in the Media
Against the Mainstream
--Space and Astronomy
--Conspiracy Theories

[Moose]

That makes a lot more sense Jim. If a change is really needed (saw nothing compelling to convince me it is), that one would be okay.

[NEOWatcher]

Originally Posted by Jim

To clarify, how about:

Looks good to me too.

I would ask that the descriptions be a bit more concise. Opening with a witty comment is ok, but there are two in particular that seem to be open to interpretation. (at least in my mind)
- Life in Space seems to be inviting the ET Visitor group.
- SML as I have explained above.

[Fazor]

If this were a vote, my ballot would be of the "If it aint broke" variety. Could things be re-arranged? Probably. Do they need it? IMHO, no.

[mugaliens]

Originally Posted by Jim

I just wanted the current list... so my very useful comments aren't wasted. Your proposal and my comments:

About BAUT
Space and Astronomy
--Questions and Answers This is where it really belongs; I just wonder if folks would find it one level down
--Astrophotography
--Space Exploration
--Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
--Life in Space
--Small Media at Large If we keep this to Bad Astronomy - as originally intended - this would be okay; as it is now, no so great here. Maybe OTB and add a sub-fourm to Bad Astronomy?
Off-Topic Babbling
--Original OTB (includes all current OTB threads) I don't think so. See below.
--Science and Technology Does this replace General Science, now in S&A? Then calling the main forum OTB might not fit.
--Human Interest Make this General Interest and put all the OTB threads here.
--Fun-n-Games
--Yarns Naah, it wouldn't keep yarns out of General Interest.
Universe Today (no change)
Bad Astronomy (no change)
Against the Mainstream I like this! ATM and CT follow generally the same rules anyway.
--Space and Astronomy
--Science and Technology Phil and Fraser really wanted to keep ATM astronomy related; this would open it up to evolution and 9/11, to name two.
--Conspiracy Theories
--Unidentified stuff (belongs no where else) Ditto.

To clarify, how about:

Now this is collaboration! My thoughts prefaced with a *, below:

About BAUT
Space and Astronomy
--Questions and Answers *I think they'll find it - it's visible from the root forum
--Astrophotography
--Space Exploration
--Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
--Life in Space
General Interest *good - agreed
--Off-Topic Babbling *agreed
--Science and Technology *Yes - it would replace General Science
--Fun-n-Games
--Small Media at Large *Well, the subtitle does say "space and astronomy in the media...
Universe Today (no change)
Bad Astronomy
--BA Stories
--BA: The Book
--BA in the Media *If original intent, ok, but see my SMaL comment. Perhaps a subtitle change? Or two media venues, one for BA, one for S&A?
Against the Mainstream
--Space and Astronomy
--Conspiracy Theories

Very good - and agreed on the yarns (I had my own doubts about that), as well as your reduction of ATM sections to S&A and CT.

Fancy thoughtwork, Jim - Thanks for the additional perspective!

[mugaliens]

Originally Posted by Fazor

If this were a vote, my ballot would be of the "If it aint broke" variety. Could things be re-arranged? Probably. Do they need it? IMHO, no.

Could:
- the oil use changing?
- the tires be properly inflated?
- the windshield cleaned?
- the engine tuned?
- the belts tightened and replaced?

Probably. Do they need it? No, and "Hey, it ain't broke," why do any of that?

Because it runs better, smoother, and more enjoyably. It looks nicer, too - more professional. Think of it as straightening up your room for visitors/guests, or performing a tuneup on your car - less chance of breaking down, or at the very least, fewer problems.

[NEOWatcher]

Originally Posted by mugaliens

Could:

- the oil use changing? - and change it to a different type?
- the tires be properly inflated? - With a flammable material?
- the windshield cleaned? - with acid?
...
Ok; kind of absurd, but the analogies are not that simple.

We do those things because it is thier nature to break down, and we have evidence to the rate at which they break down. So; in a sense, those are not things we change, just to change, we change them because we have a history of failure.

I think what Fazor is saying (which I agree with) is that we have no history or solid indication of failure. I just hate the premise of change for the sake of change.

Now; does that mean I don't agree with you? Of course not. I think you have sparked some thought on a bit of re-org that might be better overall. In other words, you brought forward some indications of failure.

[Fazor]

Yes; I'm not criticizing your point of view (mugs ... or anyone else for that matter). What I simply meant is *I* do not consider it "broke" or "breaking", and feel (as Neo put it best) I don't want change just for the sake of change.

Additionally, I do not mean to state that I think you want change for the sake of change. You have reasons for the changes that are, in my opinion, very valid. I just don't feel the same way. But I also don't think the proposed changes are bad, and wouldn't "throw a fit" if they came to fruition either.

[Nick Theodorakis]

I usually hate to make "me, too" posts, but I agree with Fazor, who expressed my opinion better than I could have.

Nick

[01101001]

It looks to me like too much change for the tiny improvements it might deliver.

[mugaliens]

Originally Posted by NEOWatcher

Ok; kind of absurd, but the analogies are not that simple.

Yes they are. Perhaps my perspective is different than yours. I've worked behind the scenes on about a dozen boards for more than two decades. Been there, done that. To me, the analogies are quite clear.

We do those things because it is thier nature to break down...

Some of us do (the procrastinators). Others don't. We see it as a way to improve on something good. Make it better. I've seen better, and I'd like to see this board follow suite. Call it pride of ownership. Well, since I don't own it, call it pride of stewardship. It's the same thing that drives us to take time fleshing out a response, when warranted.

...the rate at which they break down...

There you go, breaking down on me again....

I just hate the premise of change for the sake of change.

Me, too. That's why I put hours into the proposals, gather up other people's comments.

You folks keep missing the point: Post 66 shows it clearly - these are your suggestions for improvement. Jim waded in with his own, all good, and better than the previous. He improved on them, and I included them, not because the original proposal was broken. It's better than the status quo. But Jim's recommendations added yet another layer of improvement.

Now; does that mean I don't agree with you? Of course not. I think you have sparked some thought on a bit of re-org that might be better overall.

Thank you!

In other words, you brought forward some indications of failure.

(sigh) one need not encounter failure to find room for improvement...

Originally Posted by Fazor

*I* do not consider it "broke" or "breaking"

Good! Neither do I.

I don't want change just for the sake of change.

Good! Neither do I.

Additionally, I do not mean to state that I think you want change for the sake of change. You have reasons for the changes that are, in my opinion, very valid.

Thank you.

I just don't feel the same way.

That's a perfectly reasonable opinion!

But I also don't think the proposed changes are bad, and wouldn't "throw a fit" if they came to fruition either.

On the boards I've admined, the deliberations never took more than a week, if we had any at all. If we did throw it up for discussion, we'd collect those responses which included counterproposals (other than "don't change it"), then simply change the board. Most users simply went, "Huh?" before scratching their heads and getting right back down to business.

I've long since discovered it's not the changes people fear. It's change itself. If you tell people you're going to put a curve in the road, I'm amazed at how many of them freak out. But if you just lay down the curve, do they go crashing off into the woods? Of course not. They make the curve and continue - no big whoop.

I have proposed no sweeping changes. These changes are miniscule. Very miniscule, as board/forum changes sometimes go. No split threads. No deleted sections. No thread mergers. For crying out loud, people - it's only a couple modifications to some section titles and moving of a couple of sections around. If you experience difficulty finding your way around afterwards, perhaps a science/astronomy board isn't quite your cup of tea... I don't think there's a single individual who'd have any trouble, and quite a few new ones who'll find their way to the right forums, instead of the (yes, broken) mis-posting in the wrong sections which is all too rampant with the few mislocated sections that we have now.

[Fazor]

instead of the (yes, broken) mis-posting in the wrong sections which is all too rampant with the few mislocated sections that we have now.

I've never been convinced that the majority of "wrong section" posts are people who either didn't try to find the right section, deliberately posted to the wrong section, or simply didn't care. That doesn't mean there isn't a measurable number of posts that are honest confusion; I've been here for just over two years and sometimes have trouble deciding where to post something.

And you're right about change; a lot of people resist it just because it takes away something familiar, which is our comfort zone. I've always thought it was odd that OTB and F&G were in the same catagory as About Baut and Q&A. I've found it odd that Q&A is seperated from Gen Sci [edit: seperated as in different sections. I understand the need to have the different sub-sections], when they're both fairly closely related (only difference is one is strictly Space/Astro, which related Physics and the other is Science At Large). As noted above, I've always been a little hazy on the exact pupose to the Small Media section (space only? any media that would be of interest to this community at large? any media period?).

And a few other oddities. But my point was, none of this has ever been anything that's meant more than a passing shrug to me. That's why I said it's not like I'd go up in arms if they were changed. I just never thought it was something important enough to have long drawn-out discussions about.

In other words, like usual, I'm saying a lot but meaning very little.

[Neverfly]

Originally Posted by Fraser

Now, if you feel that Phil and I should be forced to maintain certain rules, please convince me. And by what method should be used to make sure we do it? Force from the police? Garnishment from our wages to pay for government-paid moderators to enforce to policies you'd like implemented?

I feel nothing of the kind

Originally Posted by Fraser

You've said it several times, and we're very well aware of the consequences. If people don't like the forum and the rules, or the administration, they'll vote with their feet and go somewhere else. Since it's so easy to go somewhere else, that ensures that the BAUT team have to be at the top of their game.

Is that the case?
Participation on BAUT has rewards and consequences too.

Why does JayUtah adamantly fight ignorance while posting in response to what would appear to be nonsense? Example: Illuminati etc. I mean, we can pretty well guess that anyone posting in the manner of MoonMan is not going to change their mind. They're stuck. Yet, JayUtah persists.

Many of the people here feel like they are a part of something. Like Gillianren. Even myself.

I have removed my avatar and all personal information under the assumption that my actions will result in the removal of my participation on the board. To me, it is more worthwhile to speak up where you are, than to go somewhere else.
If nothing else. I am being treated by many of the posters here as a Trouble-maker, dramaqueen or fussing over nothing, as a response to my speaking up.

Fear of not being a part of that in crowd is enough to hold people back, to be tolerant or complacent with the analogy.

In other words - If BAUT could use improvement, people may not be quick to support the notion for fear of not being part of the in crowd. It is not enough to make them "Take a Hike" perhaps, but enough to bother them.

Anyone seen Bogie lately?

What about Dragon Star?

Those are just a couple names, the tip of the iceberg, of folks that DID take a hike.

So people are taking hikes as well. But the tightly knit crowd prefers to stay and in so doing, are becoming increasingly more tolerant of disagreeable things or things that could stand improvement.


Fraser, telling people that if they don't like it, they can leave, does not strike me as an appropriate response to the question of "Could BAUT Improve?"

ETA: There are a lot of things in my neighborhood that could improve too. There are a lot of states in the United States where I could move to. There are a lot of countries around the world where I could move.
But eventually, I will run out of places to move to and where need to settle down somewhere and make a stand.

[mugaliens]

Originally Posted by Fazor

And you're right about change; a lot of people resist it just because it takes away something familiar, which is our comfort zone.

Yes. And it's often the appearance of change is greater than the change itself.

As noted above, I've always been a little hazy on the exact pupose to the Small Media section (space only? any media that would be of interest to this community at large? any media period?).

That's a good question for some of the (ahem) older members of the board, perhaps the admins.

[hhEb09'1]

Originally Posted by mugaliens

The part after the * is Mugs's comment, as he mentions.

And I agree. I think the Small Media at Large was intended for Bad Astronomy in the Media, not for a discussion of the various media. So, IMHO, discussion of the various media goes into Off Topic Babbling (and I will defend this title to the death, "Babbling" is a small nod to the time when some of us participated in the BABB, Bad Astronomy Bulletin Board. It's original name was "Off Topic Blabbing" and it was changed to incorporate the acronym (initialism).)

Originally Posted by mugaliens

That's a good question for some of the (ahem) older members of the board, perhaps the admins.

And this comment came in while I was composing the above post!

We prefer to think of ourselves as seasoned veterans. Some of us started posting when we were two.

[Veeger]

It's been a while since I looked at this thread, and I don't really want to review four pages in detail to see if its been discussed, but I was wondering - why not have a "Homework Questions" section somewhere in Space and Astronomy?

It could isolate such questions from the others and allow those who do not like to answer such questions the ability to completely skip it.

[Jim]

Originally Posted by NEOWatcher

- the oil use changing? - and change it to a different type?
- the tires be properly inflated? - With a flammable material?
- the windshield cleaned? - with acid?

Yeah, you're probably one of those who has never poured antifreeze into the washer bottle or washer fluid into the radiator reservoir.

[man on the moon]

Originally Posted by hhEb09'1

..."Babbling" is a small nod to the time when some of us participated in the BABB, Bad Astronomy Bulletin Board. It's original name was "Off Topic Blabbing" and it was changed to incorporate the acronym (initialism).)And this comment came in while I was composing the above post!

We prefer to think of ourselves as seasoned veterans. Some of us started posting when we were two.

Not two...

But I do remember being rather fond of the switch from BlABBing to BABBling.

Change don't bother me none, at least of the sort discussed. Nor will sameness. It will take some getting used to, but in a fwe months (should any changes happen--not saying they will) we'll all have forgotten it and when it is mentioned we'll say "oh yeah, what a riot we put up...how young we all were...". Ok, so not a riot, but you know what I mean. Or I hope you do anyway!

And Nev? While you can be a...whatever it is that gets you in trouble sometimes, I like you. Your one of those guys I think I could have a good drink and discussion with if I were ever out your way. Reminds me of a guy I lived with a year or two ago--we'd have all sorts of debates, usually both of us agreeing but both taking opposing views just to hash the idea out. Devil's advocate and all that. Heck've a smart guy and a smart-you-know-what too. Also a good drinker!

Just do us a favor and keep the scrappier bits under wraps when you're in here, should you stay.

[Neverfly]

Originally Posted by man on the moon

And Nev? While you can be a...whatever it is that gets you in trouble sometimes, I like you. Your one of those guys I think I could have a good drink and discussion with if I were ever out your way. Also a good drinker!

Well.. I don't drink...

I went with a friend to the store the other day. I picked up a 24 pack of Dr pepper.
Said, "I'm gettin' drunk tonight!"

At least I can't be accused of posting altered.

[PetersCreek]

Neverfly,

As often as I agree with you, I haven't always. In fact, I seem to remember strenuously disagreeing with you a time or two, although I can't remember when, why, or what now. But from my corner of the Net, I value your participation here. That's why I want to share a concern with you in the form of something I heard or read or imagined sometime, somewhere...

Sorry, I couldn't hear the message for all the shouting the messenger was doing.

In my opinion, I don't think what you have to say on this matter will get you banned, but rather, it could be how you say it. You obviously hold to your principles and passionately, at that. I can be the same way. But we don't do ourselves any favors when our method of delivery overshadows the message we're trying to send. For my part, I really hope you can stick to your guns without shooting yourself in the foot.

Oh...and Dr. Pepper? Perhaps I should reassess my opinion of you. Awful stuff, that!

[Neverfly]

Originally Posted by PetersCreek

Neverfly,

As often as I agree with you, I haven't always. In fact, I seem to remember strenuously disagreeing with you a time or two, although I can't remember when, why, or what now. But from my corner of the Net, I value your participation here. That's why I want to share a concern with you in the form of something I heard or read or imagined sometime, somewhere...

Sorry, I couldn't hear the message for all the shouting the messenger was doing.

In my opinion, I don't think what you have to say on this matter will get you banned, but rather, it could be how you say it. You obviously hold to your principles and passionately, at that. I can be the same way. But we don't do ourselves any favors when our method of delivery overshadows the message we're trying to send. For my part, I really hope you can stick to your guns without shooting yourself in the foot.

Yeah, I've been trying to back off and stay quiet the last day. I respond directly to a direct point, but that's about it.

But a point- What happens when you need to point something out to someone who does not necessarily want to listen?
Sometimes, you gotta give them a shake.

I'm well aware of the outside appearance of it all. I'm also well aware that a forum setting etc, with busy people can lead to impressions and misunderstandings. It's ineffiecient and can be hard to follow when you have to rely on "he said." instead of seeing it directly for yourself.
But silence will not resolve an issue either.

So now, I can sit back and trust the Moderators to discuss- but trust isn't somethin' I'm just feelin' right now.

It's just a net forum, and one that is a good one.

It fills gaps between my doing all the other things I do.

But it's also something I cannot deny I place value in as well.

Originally Posted by PetersCreek

Oh...and Dr. Pepper? Perhaps I should reassess my opinion of you. Awful stuff, that!

In my experience, Dr pepper is something a person either hates it or loves it.

[cran]

Jim, mugaliens ...

I still see the same problems arising in cross-over or multi-disciplinary topics -
the examples I am most familiar with are those which impinge on various Earth and planetary sciences, though I can imagine similar situations with questions on engineering and technology arising ...

as it is, some of these turn up in Q&A, some in General Science, and the occasional one in Astronomy ... and of course, some find their way into ATM ... there may even be the odd one in Life in Space (I haven't looked there) ...

and while Science&Tech might well be "general interest", I'm not sure it should be viewed in the same light as the more social (fun) fora ...

would it not be better to have it as an extra limb appended to the body of science&tech-based fora?

[davidlpf]

Neverfly, JayUtah has said acouple of times that discusses things not to win over the opponent but so people on the fence can have both sides of the issues. I totally agree with this approach. There are many lurkers who just come here to do research for themselves and having someone other then the ATMer or conspiracy theorists. If this is a party it is a party with cameras and mics.

Some people here have not posting since two and some this is the first board they are on, the ones that are experts have been extremely helpful and in general the community here is probably the best anywhere.(They even tolerate me)