Jump to content


Photo

Science Forums Etiquette


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
52 replies to this topic

#21 ewmon

ewmon

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 1,291 posts

Posted 11 March 2011 - 10:55 PM

We've heard of Robert's Rules of Order, so maybe this'll be "Captain's Rules of Threadiquette". :lol:

Using Quotes

I'm advocating being space/time/scroll conscious.

First replier. I'm not sure if I see it in this forum, but people who are the first to reply in a thread obviously do not need to quote the OP en masse. Yet, I commonly see this wholly unnecessary repetition.

Wall of text. The first replier quoting en masse is particularly annoying when the OP is a wall-of-text --- actually, quoting any wall-of-text en masse is particularly annoying and almost always unnecessary. You'll find that I try to quote *only* the precise text in question. I think it inconvenient to make others plow through several paragraphs when a few sentences or even phrases or words will suffice.

Attributing quotes. Quoting by use of buttons is an excellent way of attributing quotes (instead of typing the text (sometimes inaccurately) and using quotes tags), but then trim, trim, trim as needed!

Thanks.

"Virtual threads within a thread"

What do I mean? Threads can be like parties where several conversations occur at once, and where people respond in random order. So, how to keep track and make order of such things? Maybe we can borrow from courtroom procedure.

In trials (in America, at least), each side presents witnesses. The presenting side conducts a "direct examination". The opposing side then conducts a "cross examination", but only on the points raised in the direct. Then the presenting side conducts a "redirect examination", but only on the points that the cross examination probed. Finally, the opposing side conducts a "recross" examination", but only on the points that the redirect examination probed. I think you get the idea, although it requires a civil, concerted effort by all.

If people wants to raise new point(s) to discuss, they should use a fresh post, quote the OP and, thus, begin a new "virtual thread" within the thread.

Yeah, I know, I'm picky.

Edited by ewmon, 11 March 2011 - 10:57 PM.

  • 1

If only there were evil people somewhere, insidiously committing evil deeds,
and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them;
however, the line between good and evil runs through every human heart.

— Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn


Consider clicking on if I made you think, or on if I made you wince —————————————————————————————————————————►


#22 ydoaPs

ydoaPs

    The Oncoming Storm

  • Moderators
  • 10,501 posts
  • LocationLocal Group

Posted 12 March 2011 - 04:31 AM

First replier. I'm not sure if I see it in this forum, but people who are the first to reply in a thread obviously do not need to quote the OP en masse. Yet, I commonly see this wholly unnecessary repetition.

Unless one deactivates it, the forum will notify you if a post of yours is quoted. Thus quoting an OP will alert the OP to the fact that a conversation has begun in his or her thread.
  • 0
"Our integrity sells for so little, but it is all we really have. It is the very last inch of us. But within that inch we are free."-Valerie(V for Vendetta)

"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love and whiskey."-Carl Sagan[revised]
 
"The universe is under no obligation to us not to be absurd."

#23 Spyman

Spyman

    Prowler

  • Senior Members
  • 1,955 posts
  • LocationHidden

Posted 14 March 2011 - 08:46 AM

It seems that the negative voters outnumber those of us who can cast positive votes.

I hardly think this is true, more likely people are to lazy to vote or don't notice.

This is an old thread and people are not notified of reputation changes inside every thread, so threads like this is right now easy targets for people without sound ethic and moral values. Concealed sockpuppets with no other purpouse than to take a tiny and ridiculous revenge with negative reputation votes, is hard to discover and counter.


The whole idea of "reputation points" strikes me as silly. One ought to be able to judge the value of a post on the basis of its content, not just the gold stars of the poster.

I like the idea with reputation points, to some extent it can be an easy way for a less knowledged member to make a fast evaluation, if a for them unknown member are considered trusted by other members or known to spout rubbish, when they lack the knowledge to judge the content.

Sometimes when I don't feel up to the task to explain when a poster is wrong, I can choose to vote a negative reputation on that post, so that other readers later will at least get a small varning that someone thought this post to be wrong.

For me the reputation points also gives a small indication whether I should put extra effort in a reply or if it would be a waste of time to make any reply at all.

Reputation points might not be an ideal way to measure peoples knowledge or reliability but on average someone with high reputation is likely a polite and credible person, while someone with negative reputation is often found to be a troublemaker.


[EDIT]
Read through my reply again and found out I didn't mention positive votes, maybe I am myself to restrictive with my use of them as I have so far not found out what the limit of positive votes for one day is, but they should be more important than the negative ones and used more often.

When I found some post to be extra good in a explanation or with a "tasty" comment then I usually vote.
(But I certainly think I need to improve and use the positive vote option more often.)

Posts with positive reputation are much more likely to be true, important and helpful than posts with negative reputation.

Edited by Spyman, 14 March 2011 - 09:24 AM.

  • 0
A shadow hiding in the dark.

#24 Tres Juicy

Tres Juicy

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 733 posts
  • LocationSwindon, UK

Posted 12 January 2012 - 12:59 PM

This is intended to be a thread that is a guide for folks on how to act and post on SFN.

Contents
i. General Information
ii. Replying to Threads
iii. Posting New Threads


I. General Information


Know the Rules
Read the rules before you post.

Grammar and Punctuation
Please try to use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation when you post. It is much easier to understand a post when it is not full of run-on sentences and such. Sure, this may add a few seconds to the time it takes to post, but are you in that much of a hurry?
If English is not your native language, and you don't have good grammar, that's fine; we don't bite. Just try to do your best.

Spell Check
Eloquence can be severely hampered by words that don't exist. If you are on the Internet, use spell-checkers or reread your posts to make sure you don't have errors. You can also use the Preview Post function to see what your post will look like, before you submit it.

Emphasis Features
The different fonts, sizes, colors, bold, italic, underline and CAPITALIZATION features are there for EMPHASIS. Please avoid using them for entire posts. Let your ideas make you stand out instead of these features. Whole posts using different fonts and colors are very annoying and may decrease the likelihood of it being read. The Emphasis Features can also imply emotions you may not want, such as angry shouting from ALL CAPS. Remember that emphasis is best when used sparingly.

Don't know how to use the features? There's a tutorial.

Contact Information
Need to talk to a moderator? Private message them if it is something important. If you want to report a post that is against the forum rules, use the Report This Post function, which is visible as "Report" with a small warning icon in the bottom left of each post.


II. Replying to Threads


Don't Flame
Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean you need to insult them. They may be ignorant, but try not to flame them out of the forum. If they're intentionally insulting people, don't reply--just use the Report Post function to let the moderators know about it. They can deal with insult wars and rule-breakers more efficiently than regular users.

Be Coherent
When you reply, try to make as much sense as possible. Organize your post into paragraphs or sections as to make it easier to understand. If nobody knows what you're saying, they aren't going to learn anything from it, or try to reply to it.
If you are going to say "it" or "one" or "they" then make sure we know what you are talking about. "It" is not a very descriptive word and people may get confused as to what you are trying to say.

Don't Spam
Make your replies relevant to the topic. If there is a side conversation going on that is not related to the original post, don't reply to it. Keep everything spam-free.
If you see someone spamming, don't try to deal with it yourself: you can't. Instead, click the "Report This Post" icon (an exclamation mark in a triangle) in the bottom left of their post and let the moderators know what the problem is.

Give Sources
If you're telling us about a study or a theory that you've heard of, try to give links to a web site about it. If you're the only person saying it, not many people are going to believe you (many scientists are skeptics). Try to provide good links which support your point, and remember, dictionary.com is not a technical resource.

Linking
When you link to another website, don't do the "Click Here" gimmick. It gives people no idea what you're linking to. Rather, you should make the link text descriptive of what the link actually is about.

Use Quotes
If you want to reply to a specific post, press the "Quote" button on that post. This will make your reply include the quoted text, so users will know who you are replying to.

Don't Strawman
Don't strawman. It is quite annoying and you will lose your credibility, and seriously undermines any argument.

Read Links
If a user provides a link for more information, and you don't believe them, read the link. It may provide better information for you; if you ignore it, you may be missing vital information that supports their point. Purposefully ignoring it is strawmanning, and nobody likes that.

Don't be Mean
If you don't agree with someone, don't attack them. Tell them politely why you think they're wrong, and give them evidence. Insulting people won't get you anywhere but suspended.

I Hate You
Not everyone will agree with you, no matter how supergreat you are. Understand this, plus the difficulties involved in altering someone's deep-felt views over a text-only forum, and accept it. Don't try to force them into other beliefs.

One Source Arguments
If you can't provide more than one source, don't try to argue that position. Substantiating an event/opinion/theory requires more than just one source, even if the source happens to be the President/Prime Minister.

Me So Great
You may be intending to become a moderator by impressing the forum staff your superb skills, impressive vocabulary, witty sense of humor and ability to make derogatory comments to newbies. That's all fine and good, but do it quietly and don't annoy the rest of the forum members.

Hijacking
Try not to hijack a thread and bend the topic to your will. Nobody likes a megalomaniac. Try to stay on topic and keep to what the original poster said.

Converting the Heathens
Don't try to convert people to your religion. Leave them alone. If you try, you'll find yourself banned.

Pointing Out the Obvious
If you don't think anyone will care, why not keep it to yourself? Posting just for the postcount and not for actual content annoys people.

Acronyms
Try not to use too many acronyms in your posts. Not all of us know what they mean, so be sure to provide the full text the first time, to avoid confusing people.
Also, you can use BBCode tags such as the following
[acr=Laughing Out Loud]LOL[/acr]
to get
[acr=Laughing Out Loud]LOL[/acr]
Hover your mouse over it to see the effect.
There is also a list of common acronyms pinned in the general discussion forum.


III. Posting New Threads


Use the Search Function
Before you post a thread, use the search function to see if anyone else has posted the same topic. It's better to post in an existing thread than to start a new one.

Give Sources
If you are asking a question or making a point, give references and links so users can see what you are talking about. If they have context, they can better understand you.

Give Details
When you're asking a question, give plenty of details. Don't just say "my computer crashed, what do I do?" Give use details about what you're asking that will help us answer the question well.

Use a Descriptive Title
When you title your thread, give it a good title that will catch users' eyes and give them an idea of what it is about.
Bad title:
"Help!"
Good title:
"Computer virus. Help!"

Allow Comment
If you're posting an idea, be receptive to comments. If someone criticizes you, don't get mad at them. Take the comment well and, if necessary, reply to them to defend yourself (without being mean or nasty).

Homework
We will not do it for you. If you have someone else do it for you, you're not learning anything, and it's not fair that a lazy person with an Internet connection gets a better mark than someone who put the effort in himself.
Disguising your homework as a curiosity-based question doesn't work. We will probably figure it out, and we don't like people trying to fool us into doing their work.
Of course, we'd be glad to help you to finish your homework. Just not do it entirely.

Einstein is Wrong!
If you're going to try to disprove a major theory, or at least propose something that most people would never believe (there are a lot of sceptics on this forum), try to provide large amounts of evidence. Just because it "makes sense" doesn't mean it has to be right--much of science doesn't "make sense" to some people, but it has proved accurate.


I'm welcome to suggestions as to what else to add.


I've just read this and noticed that people had given negative rep 10 times! Why? There's nothing in this post that warrants negative rep

I have given positive rep in order to try to address the balance

maybe users under a certain threshold of posts should not be able to give rep?
  • 0
A fencing instructor named Fisk
In duels was terribly brisk
So much that in action
The Fitzgerald contraction
Reduced his foil to a disk

Like all good science, I pose more questions than I answer

Spoiler

#25 imatfaal

imatfaal

    lazy do-nothing mudslinger

  • Moderators
  • 7,584 posts
  • LocationSt James's Park

Posted 12 January 2012 - 04:33 PM

I've just read this and noticed that people had given negative rep 10 times! Why? There's nothing in this post that warrants negative rep

I have given positive rep in order to try to address the balance

maybe users under a certain threshold of posts should not be able to give rep?


And more than 10 times - cos I have plus rep´d it as i could not believe how many neg reps it had
  • 0

A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.

- Alexander Pope

 

feel free to click the green arrow  ---->

 


#26 Tres Juicy

Tres Juicy

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 733 posts
  • LocationSwindon, UK

Posted 12 January 2012 - 04:41 PM

And more than 10 times - cos I have plus rep´d it as i could not believe how many neg reps it had



Crazy.....

If people don't like the rules, why are they here?

Edited by Tres Juicy, 12 January 2012 - 04:41 PM.

  • 1
A fencing instructor named Fisk
In duels was terribly brisk
So much that in action
The Fitzgerald contraction
Reduced his foil to a disk

Like all good science, I pose more questions than I answer

Spoiler

#27 imatfaal

imatfaal

    lazy do-nothing mudslinger

  • Moderators
  • 7,584 posts
  • LocationSt James's Park

Posted 12 January 2012 - 05:14 PM

Crazy.....

If people don't like the rules, why are they here?


Agree entirely. But...

I reckon you could use that to eliminate most of the participants in all of the forums; have you read the crackpots in Physics who cannot even start to do maths, the Climate Change ¨Sceptics" for whom any excuse is a good excuse to wax lyrical about the conspiracy, the wackos in Maths who think Calculus is fundamentally flawed, the zealots in Religion who say we are all gonna burn, the monomaniacs in Philosophy with an interpretation of the philosophy of science previously unknown to man, the ranting yahoos in politics that you wouldnt want to next to in a bar, and the desperately sincere Speculators with a pet theory that doesnt so much fly as plummet? But I keep on coming back - which means that I think I am one of them...
  • 1

A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.

- Alexander Pope

 

feel free to click the green arrow  ---->

 


#28 Tres Juicy

Tres Juicy

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 733 posts
  • LocationSwindon, UK

Posted 13 January 2012 - 09:44 AM

Agree entirely. But...

I reckon you could use that to eliminate most of the participants in all of the forums; have you read the crackpots in Physics who cannot even start to do maths, the Climate Change ¨Sceptics" for whom any excuse is a good excuse to wax lyrical about the conspiracy, the wackos in Maths who think Calculus is fundamentally flawed, the zealots in Religion who say we are all gonna burn, the monomaniacs in Philosophy with an interpretation of the philosophy of science previously unknown to man, the ranting yahoos in politics that you wouldnt want to next to in a bar, and the desperately sincere Speculators with a pet theory that doesnt so much fly as plummet? But I keep on coming back - which means that I think I am one of them...



Me too!

I have my fair share of crackpot idea's but at least I'm willing to listen and learn and I discuss my points fairly and not in a ridiculous way. If you prove me wrong, then I'm wrong (then I'll neg rep you!:lol: )

I enjoy talking to those people (I have often been the one who's putting forward some highly speculative material), I like to discuss idea's - Thats why we're here right?
  • 0
A fencing instructor named Fisk
In duels was terribly brisk
So much that in action
The Fitzgerald contraction
Reduced his foil to a disk

Like all good science, I pose more questions than I answer

Spoiler

#29 imatfaal

imatfaal

    lazy do-nothing mudslinger

  • Moderators
  • 7,584 posts
  • LocationSt James's Park

Posted 15 November 2013 - 09:54 AM

For those that are curious the acronym feature now seems to need differnt code

 

[acr=Laughing Out Loud]LOL[/acr]

 

is replaced with

 

LOL

 

Now I am going to press post and hope the noparse code works

 

edit - it doesnt.

 

so you now need to type

[_acronym='Its not a bug its a feature']INABIAF[_/acronym]

 

to get (mouseover to view)

 

INABIAF

 

of course removing the underscores that I had to place in there to stop the software just interpreting it cos the noparse code is STILL broken


  • 2

A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.

- Alexander Pope

 

feel free to click the green arrow  ---->

 


#30 barfbag

barfbag

    Atom

  • Senior Members
  • 289 posts

Posted 3 August 2014 - 10:58 PM

@ OP,

 

Me So Great
You may be intending to become a moderator by impressing the forum staff your superb skills, impressive vocabulary, witty sense of humor and ability to make derogatory comments to newbies. That's all fine and good,

 

 

"You may be intending to become a moderator by... ability to make derogatory comments to newbies. That's all fine and good"

 

So it is fine and good to make derogatory comments to newbies.   This explains much of the moderation I've seen.

 

Example:  I received 4.... warning points for a thread where I suggested believing in telepathy could aid in the belief of a god if one existed.  I think the idea of mass consciousness which would be what is occurring if we are all psychic and god is a similar concept. 

 

Then I see threads that discuss gay parenting go way off topic and turn into a political debate and no warning points are given.

 

In fact I see "Thread Hijacking" as a common occurrence here yet only a few get infraction points.

 

Heck!  I probably risk a ban simply by pointing this out, but at least I'm calling a spade a spade.

http://en.wikipedia....a_spade_a_spade

 

Now I see such behavior seems to be encouraged.

 

It should NOT BE FINE to make derogatory remarks to newbies no matter what position they hope to achieve (or already have) here.

 

At least you should recognize this about yourselves.


Edited by barfbag, 3 August 2014 - 11:09 PM.

  • -3

#31 StringJunky

StringJunky

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 6,268 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 3 August 2014 - 11:29 PM

@ OP,

 

 

"You may be intending to become a moderator by... ability to make derogatory comments to newbies. That's all fine and good"

 

So it is fine and good to make derogatory comments to newbies.   This explains much of the moderation I've seen.

 

Example:  I received 4.... warning points for a thread where I suggested believing in telepathy could aid in the belief of a god if one existed.  I think the idea of mass consciousness which would be what is occurring if we are all psychic and god is a similar concept. 

 

Then I see threads that discuss gay parenting go way off topic and turn into a political debate and no warning points are given.

 

In fact I see "Thread Hijacking" as a common occurrence here yet only a few get infraction points.

 

Heck!  I probably risk a ban simply by pointing this out, but at least I'm calling a spade a spade.

http://en.wikipedia....a_spade_a_spade

 

Now I see such behavior seems to be encouraged.

 

It should NOT BE FINE to make derogatory remarks to newbies no matter what position they hope to achieve (or already have) here.

 

At least you should recognize this about yourselves.

If you interpret it correctly, he was telling people how not to become a moderator.


Edited by StringJunky, 3 August 2014 - 11:29 PM.

  • 0

 Education, like life, is a journey not a destination


#32 ydoaPs

ydoaPs

    The Oncoming Storm

  • Moderators
  • 10,501 posts
  • LocationLocal Group

Posted 3 August 2014 - 11:38 PM

@ OP,
 
 
"You may be intending to become a moderator by... ability to make derogatory comments to newbies. That's all fine and good"
 
So it is fine and good to make derogatory comments to newbies.   This explains much of the moderation I've seen.
 
Example:  I received 4.... warning points for a thread where I suggested believing in telepathy could aid in the belief of a god if one existed.  I think the idea of mass consciousness which would be what is occurring if we are all psychic and god is a similar concept. 
 
Then I see threads that discuss gay parenting go way off topic and turn into a political debate and no warning points are given.
 
In fact I see "Thread Hijacking" as a common occurrence here yet only a few get infraction points.
 
Heck!  I probably risk a ban simply by pointing this out, but at least I'm calling a spade a spade.
http://en.wikipedia....a_spade_a_spade
 
Now I see such behavior seems to be encouraged.
 
It should NOT BE FINE to make derogatory remarks to newbies no matter what position they hope to achieve (or already have) here.
 
At least you should recognize this about yourselves.


!

Moderator Note

And now you're getting a warning point for thread hijacking again. If you want to stop getting warning points for thread hijacking, there's a simple solution: stop hijacking threads.


  • 0
"Our integrity sells for so little, but it is all we really have. It is the very last inch of us. But within that inch we are free."-Valerie(V for Vendetta)

"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love and whiskey."-Carl Sagan[revised]
 
"The universe is under no obligation to us not to be absurd."

#33 CaptainPanic

CaptainPanic

    Usually himself

  • Moderators
  • 4,778 posts
  • LocationThe little swamp at the end of the river Rhine

Posted 4 August 2014 - 07:29 AM

!

Moderator Note

Everyone,

If you see other people taking threads off-topic which the mods did not see yet, report it and we will look into it.

It is best if everyone just focuses on him/herself, and make sure that you don't break the rules anymore. Let the mods deal with the rest by reporting it.


  • 0
Veni, vidi, modeli - I came, I saw, and I modeled it

#34 BrainTrainer

BrainTrainer

    Quark

  • New Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 19 October 2014 - 12:22 PM

What I find annoying is that when I post a comment and then a couple of hours later I have extra info and I go there to comment again on the same thread but the two posts are shown as combined, which doesn't make much sense. 


  • 0

BrainTrainingApp.com


#35 Tim the plumber

Tim the plumber

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 159 posts

Posted 26 October 2014 - 10:32 AM

Could an explanation of the Logical fallacy thing be listed please.


  • 0

#36 For Prose

For Prose

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 123 posts
  • LocationColumbus GA

Posted 26 October 2014 - 12:54 PM

Could an explanation of the Logical fallacy thing be listed please.

 

You should read this and study it well. Very very well.

 

https://yourlogicalf...Poster24x36.pdf


  • 0
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love (1973)

#37 iNow

iNow

    SuperNerd

  • Senior Members
  • 17,251 posts
  • LocationAustin, Texas

Posted 26 October 2014 - 01:51 PM

More here: http://rationalwiki....Logical_fallacy
  • 0

#38 CaptainPanic

CaptainPanic

    Usually himself

  • Moderators
  • 4,778 posts
  • LocationThe little swamp at the end of the river Rhine

Posted 27 October 2014 - 09:34 AM

Could an explanation of the Logical fallacy thing be listed please.

 

Please read our rules, and then click on the "logical fallacies" link that is provided.


  • 0
Veni, vidi, modeli - I came, I saw, and I modeled it

#39 Tim the plumber

Tim the plumber

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 159 posts

Posted 27 October 2014 - 10:20 PM

Can I suggest that any claim that a logical fallacy has taken place needs to have it explained.

 

Just disagreeing with somebody should not constitute such a thing.


  • 0

#40 For Prose

For Prose

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 123 posts
  • LocationColumbus GA

Posted 27 October 2014 - 10:30 PM

Can I suggest that any claim that a logical fallacy has taken place needs to have it explained.

 

Just disagreeing with somebody should not constitute such a thing.

 

You would learn it more concretely if you tried deciphering it yourself.


Also, you are right. Simply stating "I disagree" does not constitute a logical fallacy. It's usually your reasons that follow that do.


  • 0
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love (1973)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users