I don’t think there should be a space for people to rail against big energy or have conspiracy theories without concrete attempts to replicate it.
You mean the conspiracy theory that Andrea Rossi frauds his investors?
So a researcher in bacterial biofuels could pick a high level forum for summaries but keep an eye on mid-level water management strategies (as biofuels require significant water sources) and be actively involved in the “bacterial bio fuels as the most likely source of clean energy” forum.
I see no reason why he should spend more time in the “bacterial bio fuels as the most likely source of clean energy” then in the “bacterial bio fuels as an addition to solar for the times when the sun doesn’t shine” group.
Managing that without partitioning it in some fashion seems hard.
You argue for more than just “partitioning it in some fashion”. Reddit has partition with subreddits. StackExchange has partition with subsites and then tags. Arbital’s forum is also supposed to have partition by tag.
You mean the conspiracy theory that Andrea Rossi frauds his investors?
What?… no Where did that come from? I meant the more typical stuff you might find in a LENR forums about big oil companies not wanting you to find out the truth.
Having a subforum for debunking rossi might be interesting if significant amounts of money was going to him or significant attention.
You argue for more than just “partitioning it in some fashion”. Reddit has partition with subreddits. StackExchange has partition with subsites and then tags. Arbital’s forum is also supposed to have partition by tag.
True. I think complete partitioning is bad. You split the commons. My suggestion was a way of making partial partitioning work by splitting around un-productive questions but still keeping some dialog possible.
The idea of a conspiracy theory is that people secretly plot. The perspective I got through online discussions was that Rossi plots together with other people to fake results and thus got his investors money.
In practice I am exposed to discussion of LENR by LW + the surrounding community.
Metaculus for example has the threads: http://www.metaculus.com/questions/65/will-radical-new-low-energy-nuclear-reaction-technologies-prove-effective-before-2019/ http://www.metaculus.com/questions/18/will-rossis-1mw-e-cat-tests-lead-to-continued-significant-financial-investment/
You mean the conspiracy theory that Andrea Rossi frauds his investors?
I see no reason why he should spend more time in the “bacterial bio fuels as the most likely source of clean energy” then in the “bacterial bio fuels as an addition to solar for the times when the sun doesn’t shine” group.
You argue for more than just “partitioning it in some fashion”. Reddit has partition with subreddits. StackExchange has partition with subsites and then tags. Arbital’s forum is also supposed to have partition by tag.
What?… no Where did that come from? I meant the more typical stuff you might find in a LENR forums about big oil companies not wanting you to find out the truth.
Having a subforum for debunking rossi might be interesting if significant amounts of money was going to him or significant attention.
True. I think complete partitioning is bad. You split the commons. My suggestion was a way of making partial partitioning work by splitting around un-productive questions but still keeping some dialog possible.
The idea of a conspiracy theory is that people secretly plot. The perspective I got through online discussions was that Rossi plots together with other people to fake results and thus got his investors money.
I was using a broader meaning of the words
In general you have forums that engage in that kind of reasoning but they are mostly not forum where anything productive comes out.
Which is why I said: