Philosophy Now Forum Suggestions Box

[Bill Wiltrack]

.






We MUST have a way to gauge or rate fellow member's comments.


Right now we are a plane without a rudder control.

We are all over the place and PLACING ONE OR TWO INDIVIDUALS; THE MODERATORS to determine value or even context or evidence of philosophy in a post IS COMPLETELY WRONG.


If this forum is going to survive, and I don't think it will, you will have to leave the php BB forum structure.







.

[Ginkgo]

.






We MUST have a way to gauge or rate fellow member's comments.

That bit is easy.

a. No high impact coarse language or high impact graphical images.

If they fail this then their comments are inappropriate.

b. No intimidating or bullying other members.

There is absolutely no reason why any philosophical discussion needs to rise above a PG classification. None whatsoever.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.


You totally missed the mark and what you are saying would never work.




That is where we are at now.



.

[Gee]

Bill;

Are you talking about the "thumbs up or down" or the "like or dislike" features on some forums?

If so, then I would agree that the "like" feature is a good idea as it encourages people to write better posts, but the "dislike" part of that feature is often abused.

The "dislike" part encourages "group think" and a pack mentality that discourages unique thinking and alternate ideas, so I would not want to find it in a philosophy forum.

Gee

[Wyman]

I think if someone feels strongly enough about your post, they will comment. If they lack the spine to express their view, they don't deserve an anonymous 'dislike' button. I always get a chuckle out of Hexhammer's insults, which on their face are very offensive, but after you get used to his manners, he is sometimes right in his criticisms. I have been on the receiving end and have sometimes admitted to 'nonsense and babble' or 'cozy chat.'

I get more offended by racism and anti-semitism than by obscenity, but I am willing to let my and others' responses serve as deterrents - marketplace of ideas, etc.. - rather than censorship.

[HexHammer]

It would be very devastating if we had a like/dislike button, it's always the "feel good" comments that wins, even on science sites the strict intellectual posts often gets dislikes and the smart ass remarks will gets lots of likes.

Besides it would be even more devastating when a bunch of clueless idiots would have the power of voting, specially in the light of truth, when I post an answer that is directly copied from an article no one cares, because it doesn't "sound" philosophical, thus the answer is ignored, because these cozy chatters simply can't comprehend it.

[Ginkgo]

.


You totally missed the mark and what you are saying would never work.




That is where we are at now.



.

If you are saying it will never work because this is where we are at the moment then I would agree with that.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Bill;

Are you talking about the "thumbs up or down" or the "like or dislike" features on some forums?

If so, then I would agree that the "like" feature is a good idea as it encourages people to write better posts, but the "dislike" part of that feature is often abused.

The "dislike" part encourages "group think" and a pack mentality that discourages unique thinking and alternate ideas, so I would not want to find it in a philosophy forum.

Gee

Agreed, there are many immature people in all age groups!

[Arising_uk]

...
If this forum is going to survive, and I don't think it will, you will have to leave the php BB forum structure.[/size]
.

Since it's been around for a couple of decades now I think your prediction will prove to be false.

[Arising_uk]

.We MUST have a way to gauge or rate fellow member's comments.

We do, it's called writing a reply.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Where it says 'view your posts' you can't actually view your posts. All you get is pretty much the same as the 'active topics' page.

[Metazoan]

Where it says 'view your posts' you can't actually view your posts. All you get is pretty much the same as the 'active topics' page.

Hi vegetariantaxidermy,

It looks like it displays all the threads that you have posted in.

If you want just your posts try a search: Like this.


______________
I like the fact that searching for your own posts is called an 'egosearch'

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Where it says 'view your posts' you can't actually view your posts. All you get is pretty much the same as the 'active topics' page.

Hi vegetariantaxidermy,

It looks like it displays all the threads that you have posted in.

If you want just your posts try a search: Like this.


______________
I like the fact that searching for your own posts is called an 'egosearch'

'Egosearch'. That's not bad lol. You can only do that with other posters, not your own posts. Occasionally I want to see if there's been a response to a comment I've made but I've forgotten which thread it's on. It's a bit tedious going through the threads.
Also, that link you gave shows other posters comments as well. Many of the ones showing up aren't even my comments.
It's a pretty weird system, typical of philosophers lacking in practical skills.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

Seems like this forum consists of mostly a bunch of annoying beta-males running around with their jock-like tomfoolery, just running around picking apart little typos and starting wars rather than providing anything of worth. Though they may act mind-fumblingly juvenile, most of these beta-males are rather senile, in truth.

The timid, yet open-minded accountant type beta-male would indeed be preferable the jock-beta male, who has obtained a sense of pride through his jock-like endeavours, yet he is nevertheless, unarguably beta.

In my younger days, I went to a school for intellectuals, and it was filled with these types. They are without a doubt, undeniably beta. Though they participate in jockular activities, they are screaming that they are beta and wish for the alpha to rule over them. Though they have similarities to the woman, in that the woman is obnoxious in her own way and too lusts for the alpha, they lack her style, charm, witty sense of humor, and grace. Unfortunately, the modern misogynist only fears the chaos of a woman, and all too easily forgets the dangers of allowing deluded betamales to freely roam in his midst, a far greater threat to civilization, I think.

[Systematic]

Seems like this forum consists of mostly a bunch of annoying beta-males running around with their jock-like tomfoolery, just running around picking apart little typos and starting wars rather than providing anything of worth. Though they may act mind-fumblingly juvenile, most of these beta-males are rather senile, in truth.

The timid, yet open-minded accountant type beta-male would indeed be preferable the jock-beta male, who has obtained a sense of pride through his jock-like endeavours, yet he is nevertheless, unarguably beta.

In my younger days, I went to a school for intellectuals, and it was filled with these types. They are without a doubt, undeniably beta. Though they participate in jockular activities, they are screaming that they are beta and wish for the alpha to rule over them. Though they have similarities to the woman, in that the woman is obnoxious in her own way and too lusts for the alpha, they lack her style, charm, witty sense of humor, and grace. Unfortunately, the modern misogynist only fears the chaos of a woman, and all too easily forgets the dangers of allowing deluded betamales to freely roam in his midst, a far greater threat to civilization, I think.

So how do we become alpha males?