Suggestions, Comments and Support

Here (http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?p=528868#post528868) I was responding (with quote being employed) to 2 different people and my post was merged. This was confusing to me, and maybe to the posters themselves. Can you discontinue this practice? Thanks in advance.

Would someone like to explain it to me?

I'm seeing all kinds of leptons, quarks, organisms, primates, experts, etc. on this site....I guess I'm wondering; whats the full hierarchical scale, and how does one advance?

Hi Friends. I rarely found such site related to such amazing science discussion.I must say I am really pleased to see such site which sharing good knowledge. The science and of topics are simply amazing and so informative. Keep the site as it is because it is simply the best. Color combination of background and font I like most. Speed of response also the best. No need to any changes. Thanks.

UPDATE: Nevermind. I have found this: "If you do not want to receive visitor messages, you may disable the visitor messaging system." Before update: When I delete a visitor message, I would really its existence and what it was and who made it to disappear. That didn't happen when I recently removed a visitor message. Personally, I don't like the idea of visitor messages. We have a PM system. I would like to either be able to remove all traces of deleted visitor messages and/or the ability to simply turn off the visitor messaging system on my profile. Thanks, Genecks.

Just wanted to say really nice site - looks like a lot of members of whom are smart and nice, nice format, great answers. I'll definitely be back. Hopefully I can educate and be educated.

Where do you think post on mathematical physics should be placed, in the physics or mathematics sections? My initial feeling is in the modern and theoretical physics section within physics. In response to my suggestion of examining papers and preprints (see here) I was thinking of inviting a critique of a preprint of mine. I would say that the work is closer to mathematics than physics, but uses lots of physical language and is highly motivated by physics. For example, papers of a similar nature have been published in Journal of Physics A. (Not that I have submitted it for publication there.) Any thoughts?

Hi, I have tried to determine where to put superstring/M-Theory posts. They seem all over the place right now. At this point I'm surprised they don't have their own forum or, are at least mentioned under a forum. LOL! This is probably because they fit into any one of 4 out of the 5 Science categories and, according to many, even Pseudoscience and Speculations. Suggestions? If the answer is already posted somewhere, sorry I missed it. Thanks! Rusty

The thread titled: The Technological Singularity: all but inevitable ? now has all postings from all people responding to the different people posting all merged together so that no one is sure of who they are even responding to anymore. This is not the usual practice here in this forum. Will someone please correct this. Thank You, Dr.Syntax

http://wave.google.com/help/wave/about.html#video I was just thinking that if you admins were ever bored, and this interests you, then it might be cool to try and implement into Science Forums. I haven't actually used Google Wave yet, because I need an invite still , but the video about it looks interesting, especially the part about implementing it's APIs in other websites to make use of it's functionality if you have it. If you don't have it, I assume it wouldn't make much difference to the actual forums themselves. Just an idea, hopefully you like it. If google wave takes off in popularity once it's fully released, I would ideally like all my favourite …

I don't see many critiques of published papers or preprints on this forum. I was wondering if a separate category (maybe several as subcategories of physics, chemistry, mathematics etc) would be of interest to the users of this forum? My thought being it could potentially up the quality and level of the posts. Though, reading and analysing papers is hard work. It may not get much further than listing the papers and presenting the abstracts. What to others think about this? Are such threads inline with the forums aims and objectives? Cheers

I agree with the system where you cannot give rep to the same person twice... But I recently gave negative rep to someone (for a stupid post which was scientifically wrong, and also off topic), but then I found that the same guy had posted a very decent post somewhere else... but I wasn't allowed to give positive rep (I had to spread it a bit first). It turned out that the person wasn't a stupid spammer/troll, but I just had just found his/her worst post first. I wanted to encourage him/her to stay because of the other post... but now I gave only a negative message. Therefore I propose to change the system a bit so that you can only give positive rep to the same …

well, why?

Embedding videos isn't available? Or am I doing it wrong? Thanks.

what happened to it? It was the ultimate resolution to threads such as the current 'Are there any relevant secular reasons to oppose gay marriage?'. Bring it back!

Can someone please tell me what the requirements are to be allowed to post in the politics forum? A subject near and dear to my lil heart is being discussed and I'd like to know if there's any hope of being able to participate before it peters out.

When did we start getting the ability to give negative reputation? I just noticed that we can now select "I disapprove" in the reputation box.

because they feel like it for some reason such as: it`s useless, or they decide it is off subject ? I have never been accused of breaking any rule or being offensive. This person just informed me he is going to start deleting my messages if they don`t measure up in his opinion. Is this allowed ? Dr.Syntax

So, one of the hot button topics on these forums is global warming. I'd say it's definitely in the top 10 most discussed topics. I mean seriously, there are 85 threads with "global warming" in the title: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/search.php?searchid=843042 But where to discuss global warming? It seems to be spread out between General Discussion, Other Sciences, and Biology (Ecology and the Environment). How about a separate subforum for Earth Sciences? This would include things like Geology, Geophysics, Oceanography, and the Atmospheric Sciences/Climatology. Then finally these global warming discussions could have a real home!

everytime i try to use the 'new posts' function the forum returns an out of memory error. i've seen this happen with carnac before but not the search function.

Just a thought. It looks like you just went through an upgrade. How many people actually use pda's? I think I'm getting tunnel vision.

Have I told you all how dazzling you all are? You know how your intelligence seem to have no bounds.... Could such outstanding gentlemens (and ladies) delete or tell me how to get rid of the advert of my blog. I really had no intention of doing it it. I apologize, I am a bad boy, and I have reflected and I carry my shame. I have issues with having things there that don't need to be there...it's beyond bugging me at this point. Any help is appreciated. I'll give fake sincerity to anyone who does. XD

Hello, I just joined SFN and I think it is great!. I wanted to ask if it is cool to include the URL to my blog "Science Lifestyle Blog" in my signature? On my blog, I write mini-essays on various science topics. It would be great to discuss some of the topics here on SFN, but I don't want to offend anyone if I post a link to a particular essay, so we could discuss it here. For example, the most recent essay is regarding Richard Feynman. It could be great to discuss Feynman here on SFN. Anyway, I just wanted to make sure I know the rules before I do anything. Thanks!!

When you click "sciences", the entire list of sciences shows up. There is something inconsistent there: Let's take chemistry as an example. We have 4 subforums: 1. Chemistry 2. Inorganic Chemistry 3. Organic Chemistry 4. Applied Chemistry In the "sciences" list, they all seem equal. However, when you click "Chemistry", it turns out that the other 3 chemistry forums are sub-forums of the main chemistry forum. This is supported by the main index page. The fact that sciences and the main index treat the "chemistry" forum different seems inconsistent to me. The inconsistency however is supported by the "new posts" (which are mentioned in slightly darker blue …

I think indexing the forums sections the new way doesn't improve or help all of them. The "last post" feature on right usually lets one know if a new post were made under Classical, Quantum Theory, Relativity, Modern, etc. But the new setup eliminates that convenience. Under the Physics heading, for example, it's less clear which section the "last post" belongs to. So in my opinion, at the very least you might want to revert Physics back to its original format, while possibly leaving the other changes intact. Just some points to consider.