Request for Discussion - New Scope and Look
I was thinking of possibly updating the forum, both in it's scope and it's look.
Specifically, I was thinking of dropping the "Prediction Forum" in the logo in favor of something like "Earth Sciences Discussion". The idea being that we are open to more discussion on Earth sciences in general than just earthquakes and prediction of them.
And since that would entail me editing the logo graphic, that lead me to the thought of maybe updating/replacing the logo as well. Which then led to the thought of changing the board colors.
Prediction discussion would still be very much welcome. However, I was thinking of merging the three prediction related forums into one "Earthquake Prediction" board (no messages would be lost) and eliminating the prediction forms on "Formal Predictions" (they've pretty much been ignored).
My reason for asking is the realization that we don't do much prediction discussion anymore but we do talk a lot of other Earth science subjects. I can create new forums for more specific areas of discussion - volcanology, climate, etc.... I'm even open to other topics of discussion but I would like to keep to things of a scientific nature. (quantum mechanics, anyone? j/k
)
Opening up to more topics of discussion may encourage visitors to join in.
I would like to solicit ideas, suggestions, comments, opinions, etc....
Brian
(09-13-2015, 03:52 AM)Skywise Wrote: [ -> ]Request for Discussion - New Scope and Look
I was thinking of possibly updating the forum, both in it's scope and it's look.
Specifically, I was thinking of dropping the "Prediction Forum" in the logo in favor of something like "Earth Sciences Discussion". The idea being that we are open to more discussion on Earth sciences in general than just earthquakes and prediction of them.
And since that would entail me editing the logo graphic, that lead me to the thought of maybe updating/replacing the logo as well. Which then led to the thought of changing the board colors.
Prediction discussion would still be very much welcome. However, I was thinking of merging the three prediction related forums into one "Earthquake Prediction" board (no messages would be lost) and eliminatingignored). the prediction forms on "Formal Predictions" (they've pretty much been
My reason for asking is the realization that we don't do much prediction discussion anymore but we do talk a lot of other Earth science subjects. I can create new forums for more specific areas of discussion - volcanology, climate, etc.... I'm even open to other topics of discussion but I would like to keep to things of a scientific nature. (quantum mechanics, anyone? j/k )
Opening up to more topics of discussion may encourage visitors to join in.
I would like to solicit ideas, suggestions, comments, opinions, etc....
Brian
Sounds good to me especially color change. Never did like yellow.
Roger
(09-14-2015, 03:32 AM)Roger Hunter Wrote: [ -> ]Sounds good to me especially color change. Never did like yellow.
Thanks, Roger. Yeah, kinda like looking at manilla folder.
And it's not just the colors that can change, but the layout as well. The MyBB software can be very customized and there are tons of themes out there. I can pick one that's pretty nice and tweak it. Heck, I can pick a few and try them out and solicit votes.
But specific to colors, something I'm thinking of is a 'dark' theme. These are generally dark grays of varying warmth/coolness with a splash of a single highlight color. I like them for being easier on the eyes. Staring at a white monitor is like staring at a light bulb.
Lastly, I see there is a new version of the software, so I'm going to look into upgrading before making any changes.
Brian
Hi Brian,
The suggestions you put forward sounds fine by me, particularly prediction merger. I'm not familiar with the past history of the prediction forums, but 2014 seemed quite active compared to this year, I mention this because I hope I haven't caused any discouragement to anyone by bringing something different to the table. I can appreciate the work involved in statistical and mathematical prediction, and admire anyone prepared to put that to the test. Seems to have been mostly me lately though, and would be nice to have some company, especially in a revised version!!.
A suggestion I have that might be worth considering is some kind of questions forum. One thing I've learn't since joining is, you may be interested in a posted subject, and know there are members here that could answer any query you may have, but your own self-esteem, or putting it simply, "feeling silly" prevents you from doing so.
I remember Roger asking about batteries, I know about batteries, you know about batteries, and once you responded, he and everyone else knew about batteries. Not the best of examples really, but the point being he thought it was a silly question yet everyone got something out of it. I would have liked to ask Chris more about Goa, but I'd only seen it in a Jason Bourne movie, and feared it might bring my level of intellect into question instead!!.
I've gain a greater respect for science this year, due to the work I've been doing, so look forward to different Earth science topics being posted, might add a little astronomy myself now and then if there's no objections.
As for quantum mechanics....you lead, I'll follow
.
Duffy,
(09-14-2015, 10:55 PM)Duffy Wrote: [ -> ]A suggestion I have that might be worth considering is some kind of questions forum.
Of course questions can be asked in any forum, relevant to the forum topic. But a general Q&A forum might be doable, open to all topics. I'll have to think of some guidelines on how it could work. I like the idea.
(09-14-2015, 10:55 PM)Duffy Wrote: [ -> ]...might add a little astronomy myself now and then if there's no objections.
I'm also an amateur (mostly armchair) astronomer. And I know Roger has some interest as well as it relates to his analysis of predictions. Although astronomy isn't an "Earth" science, I'll give it some thought on how to incorporate it.
(09-14-2015, 10:55 PM)Duffy Wrote: [ -> ]As for quantum mechanics....you lead, I'll follow .
I think QM appeals to me because it's such an abstract concept. It's real, but it's very unintuitive. So many people don't understand it or get confused by it because it doesn't readily have many effects which you can observe without instruments. Although, the Young two-slit experiment is pretty tangible. Here's a page on my website where I demonstrate how to do it with simple materials:
Two Slit Diffraction & Interference Demonstration - A photo essay.
Yes, I have lasers!!! No sharks to attach them to, though.
Brian