Re: Interested in a moderated theory forum?

"Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message news:buh7h2$rsm$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com...
> "Costin Cozianu" <c_cozianu_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bubqf5$g41vu$1_at_ID-152540.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > Marshall Spight wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I have in the past had excellent experiences with moderated forums.
> [snip]
> > If you'd like to discuss theory in a moderated forum, you might
> > > want to check out:
> > >
> > > http://www.galahtech.com/forums/index.php?showforum=97
> [snip]
> > Email forums are bad. Collaborative forums are better, for obvious
> > reasons. Ward Cunningham wiki, has had its ups and downs, but still is
> > not beyond redeemable.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > It's widely known, it has a dedicated community that has dealt with many
> > abusers (by simply deleting the abuse), and it already has a base of
> > contributions.
> >
> > So http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki
> >
> > Costin
> >
> > P.S. That forum you mention already kind of sucks.
>
> Agreed
>
> > Make sure you
> > calibrate your expectations, no forum is gonna have the desired
> > qualities to give you more than a social club, and eventually a few
> > hints and points to alternative views. Real knowledge is only produced
> > in academic (peer reviewed) settings, in having to deliver software,
etc.
>
> Ohh, go on, what's the full list?
>
> Would you say that say this "social club" never produced any knowledge
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0374528888/
> ?

Peer review can have even greater damage by demanding even greater orthodoxy. Does anyone really want Won Kim deciding what is novel or good in data management? Received on Tue Jan 20 2004 - 01:37:58 CET