What should we do with this forum?

[Phil McKerracher]

The Skeptic Forum was started following a request from attendees at Skeptics in the Pub meetings for a place to continue discussions after the meetings. We've had some great meetings and attendance has been growing, but discussions here have now almost died out completely.

Maybe it's just one of those things, which is fine - everyone has congregated at LabLit.com or somewhere else. Maybe I allowed too much noise here from spammers and nutters. Maybe making the Guestbook members-only to reduce spam has actually killed all inspiration for new discussions. Maybe people found it too hard to use for some reason.

Anyway, I'd appreciate your feedback on the future of the forum. Would you prefer to see it spiced up, or should we let it die? Please vote in this poll, and add comments or send me a private message if you like.

[Trinoc]

The Skeptic Forum was started following a request from attendees at Skeptics in the Pub meetings for a place to continue discussions after the meetings. We've had some great meetings and attendance has been growing, but discussions here have now almost died out completely.

I think this is rather a pessimistic outlook. I notice the votes are split 50-50 between publicise it more and spice it up, with no votes for anything else - out of a massive sample of 2! It's not just a multiple choice, though - I would have voted for both of these options since they are not mutually exclusive.

By the way, it looks like the forum clock is still running on BST, or maybe we are catering for the European audience.

[Credo Veritas]

One of the reasons that persuaded me to join this site and take out a subscription to the magazine was the fact that there was a forum where like-minded individuals could contribute their own material and exchange ideas.

I value the forum greatly and visit it regularly, without necessarily logging-on every time. Not all of us can attended the meetings in London, so the forum allows us to keep in touch and contribute.

Owing to a particularly busy period that I've been going through recently, I, personally, have not had the opportunity to contribute anything like as much as I would like to, but that has been the same for me across all the groups that I subscribe to.

I can think up many topics that we can all have a go at thrashing out and, I hope, enjoy each other's viewpoint, however it may vary from our own.

So, Phil, a massive 'yes' vote from me for the continued provision of this forum.

Perhaps you could seed it with a 'Discussion of the Week', where you pull out some nonsense from the news and let us all loose on tearing it to bits. Don't neglect 'holy cow' subjects like Global Warming, the value of space exploration, and the right of religious expression. Select a few links to BBC sites to give background and context, and let everyone get their teeth into it.

As skeptics, we should all be able to argue both sides of an argument, because we should also be skeptical about our personal skepticism.

The claims of the paranormal and other charlatans are broad and varied. There's plenty of material that rational examination can tackle, each of us rising the mental challenge and appreciating the idiosyncratic views of others.

Don't kill: re-vitalise!

[Phil McKerracher]

Thanks for the feedback.

It's not just a multiple choice, though - I would have voted for both of these options since they are not mutually exclusive.

I know - I thought of other options, but in a way forcing people to choose the preferred option is better, and it might promote more discussion.

By the way, it looks like the forum clock is still running on BST, or maybe we are catering for the European audience.

That's a personal preference that you have to change by clicking "Profile" above. Unfortunately, there's no DST option so you have to do it twice a year, but there may be a modification available to do it automatically, I'll have a look.

[DaveLeonard]

I have enjoyed reading these forums, and the regular mailings too.

I'd like to see a more regular discussion type activity on the forums, as I can't get to London much, and the one time I did attend a meet, it was pretty poor IMO.

[Janet W]

The debates often end when everyone is still in mid-flow. If they were encouraged to continue the discussion via the forum, it ought to work.

Surely such a concentration of scarily clever people should produce an amazing online discussion.

I don't think the forum itself needs any work.. it is easy to read and easy to use, and it gives the option of sending individual messages if we want to.

It would also help if a summary of each talk was posted on to forum shortly after the evening session... would make it easier for the people outside London to join the debate.

[Phil McKerracher]

It would also help if a summary of each talk was posted on to forum shortly after the evening session... would make it easier for the people outside London to join the debate.

I agree, but someone has to write it. Any volunteers?

Thought: If someone videos it I could post it here quickly. (Or a link to YouTube or whatever.)

[Trinoc]

It would also help if a summary of each talk was posted on to forum shortly after the evening session... would make it easier for the people outside London to join the debate.

I agree, but someone has to write it. Any volunteers?

Simply encourage anyone at the meeting who wants to write a review (or even a brief comment) to do so. The more opinions the better. Put up a banner at the front of the meeting with the forum url. Fix the link near the bottom of the pub page which says "forum" where it should say "forums" and/or make "forum" a valid alias, then draw more attention to the forum near the top of the page (I know it's up there at the top right, but maybe it should be below the main paragraph as well, and bigger).

I thought about writing a mildly critical review of the Dick Taverne talk, but I see someone else made most of the points I wanted to make. As it happens I'd already written it up on the http://www.sciencefile.org forum, so the word gets around. I've been mentioning Skeptics in the Sciencefile calendar, so hopefully some of them have or will come along.

[Phil McKerracher]

Simply encourage anyone at the meeting who wants to write a review (or even a brief comment) to do so. The more opinions the better. Put up a banner at the front of the meeting with the forum url. Fix the link near the bottom of the pub page which says "forum" where it should say "forums" and/or make "forum" a valid alias, then draw more attention to the forum near the top of the page...

Excellent suggestions, all implemented or noted.

[Phil McKerracher]

I suggest that a topic thread for each meeting as it is announced, with a link for it on the main Pub webpage, and this link can then be moved to the archive.

Excellent suggestion, consider it done.

[Trinoc]

Phil

Could we adapt the index of discussions so the most recent discussion with a contribution rises to the top? They do this at http://www.fabletown.com (the other site I post a lot on) and it allows you to see what's new more quickly.

David

Also some forums (see http://www.sciencefile.org) can display a column of latest posts to all threads down the side of the screen - can we do this here?

[Phil McKerracher]

Could we adapt the index of discussions so the most recent discussion with a contribution rises to the top?

Also some forums (see http://www.sciencefile.org) can display a column of latest posts to all threads down the side of the screen - can we do this here?

Not easily, it seems. I'll see what I can do though.

The easiest way to see what's new is probably an RSS reader (e.g. from http://www.feedreader.com) pointed to http://skeptic.org.uk/forums/rss.php

[Killer Blob]

The format of this forum is one of the easiest and most common on the interweb so leave it as it is.

I have previously suggested to both you and Nick that there should be a link from his emails to the Forum, preferably to a specific thread to discuss the month's talk.

I have sympathy for the "fake name" point. I used to always use my full real name, until a loony identified my home address and phone number and sent both me and my wife threatening letters just because I made a few comments about him on a forum like this one. I have sympathy and am prepared to use a realistic fake name but I'll not be using my real name. Trinoc and others here know who I am and I know who they are so it isn't exactly complete anonymity.

You can tell what's new by clicking on the "view posts since previous visit" on the index page.

If we implement the suggestions in this thread and the forum is still very quiet in a couple of months time then I would vote for killing it off.

[Peter Jones]

The trouble with this forum is we are all preaching to the converted and from my experiences here the “splitting hairsâ€

[Trinoc]

This is what I propose to create greater discussion in this forum. We target one of these nutty believers’ sites as a group of Skeptics (what’s the collective noun for us?) we blitz the discussion as a group, with logic and insults while not revealing ourselves. To make it more interesting forget the political correctness with these charlatans they do not deserve it and we should have more free speech here as they do on http://www.freethoughtradio.com/ .

I think deliberately invading someone else's group is a very bad idea, particularly if the aim is to show no respect for the existing members. Not only is it bad practice in principle, but it only takes one person to find out where we come from and this forum will instantly be overrun with their garbage - and we will hardly be in any position to complain since we started the fight.

If any individuals want to take on the credulous groups they are welcome to try, but don't do it in the name of this forum.