[GWRIeEQp]

+1

[Patabeamn]

I actually find the post count depressing. I'd like to see mine permanently be zero.

[sniskelsowwef]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I glanced at the list of "top 20 posters" as organized by post count and I suddenly realized that I find it objectionable that each post by somebody like Ming or Asher counts as much as each of my posts, when both their post quality and importance are obviously far inferior to my own.

Some people are just soooooooooo full of themselves.

[payloansday]

I propose that posts should give, instead of +1, +IQ, of course we'll have to determine the IQ of every poster. The only problem with the approach is, some people's post counts will be dramatically decreasing as they post then.

[Aleenkagirlla]

Honestly, I'm not entirely sure that is even true... maybe biology is worse than the physical or mathematical sciences in that sense, but sometimes I wonder whether the current system actually net harms science ...

[ClaudeMarkus]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
It amazes me to think that anyone who actually is involved in publishing academic works would believe that said system is in any way beneficial ...

While there are obviously deficiencies with this system, it is nonetheless an improvement over a raw number of published works (especially given that there is no peer review prior to a post appearing on this forum). Actually, I nominate the following system:

- By default, everyone has full posting access.
- Once determined by an elected official (eg, the OT President) that a person is stupid, all of their future posts will be subject to peer review by the President and his Cabinet before they are posted to the site.

[career-builder]

Originally posted by snoopy369
maybe biology is worse than the physical or mathematical sciences in that sense Any statement comparing the importance, intelligence levels, etc., of science levels and starting with "biology is worse than" is automatically true.

[JasminBerkova]

Originally posted by Asher


Actually, I nominate the following system:

- By default, everyone has full posting access.
- Once determined by an elected official (eg, the OT President) that a person is stupid, all of their future posts will be subject to peer review by the President and his Cabinet before they are posted to the site. Aside from Vice President Wiglaf, who's in your cabinet?

[gundos]

Originally posted by Felch


Aside from Vice President Wiglaf, who's in your cabinet? Everyone I've promised positions to in the election threads. Actually I don't even remember.

I think you're part of it.

[ChrisGoldstein]

Originally posted by Felch
These posters also have the word "Diety" next to their names After studying this issue in depth we demonstrate that to p < 0.000001 we reject the hypothesis that the poster title corresponding to a post count of >= 10000 is spelled "Diety" in favour of the hypothesis that it is spelled "Deity".

Previous work on this subject is available in the form of KH et al (2007) as well as in the review article by Feynman & Weinstein (1982)

[g4YthYXx]

Originally posted by snoopy369


It's more that people start focusing on the cites as a goal rather than a benefit of good work, and stop doing good work that might not be cited. What could possibly make somebody cite a work other than quality or importance, you son of a mongrel?

[dyestymum]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
After studying this issue in depth we demonstrate that to p < 0.000001 we reject the hypothesis that the poster title corresponding to a post count of >= 10000 is spelled "Diety" in favour of the hypothesis that it is spelled "Deity".

Previous work on this subject is available in the form of KH et al (2007) as well as in the review article by Feynman & Weinstein (1982) Too true. I forgot my Latin cognates, (2nd decl. m. Deus, Dei)

[evennyNiz]

Originally posted by Felch
Who would be trusted to prevent cartels of like-minded spammers from ruining the system? One factor we could introduce would be a "diminishing returns" term. Basically, the more an individual is cited by another individual the less each further citation by this same individual is worth.

[avaissema]

Originally posted by Asher


Do you not know who Ron Jeremy is? He's a comedian who has done a parody of John Malkovich.


Next question!

[Maymayfor]

posting in an obvious troll thread by an obviously bored wanker.

[gIWnXYkw]

Seriously, can we ban AAHZ? I don't think he's ever posted something relevant in a thread.

[Carol]

(throws a couple shoes at Imran)

[Cerilopasei]

oh ill always be here to throw the wrench in obvious faggotry such as threads like this

hell id hate my ass with a passion too

[mralabama]

Originally posted by AAHZ
oh ill always be here to throw the wrench in obvious faggotry such as threads like this

hell id hate my ass with a passion too
Stop acting like a stupid homophobe.

[smokeberly]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Thank you for demonstrating fully how inappropriate the current system is, rah. Such succinct and on-point arguments are sorely lacking right now.

Glad to help. It was easier to type them "bite me". (serious on-point arguement)