The conundrum of why some sites fail

[Leigha]

Visiting sciforums yesterday, I noticed a thread about why traffic there is waning. The admin stepped up to share his thoughts to it all, and while I think there is a certain amount of ebb and flow on any forum, I didn't really know what else could be ''wrong'' with that site. I find the topics interesting, and the moderation seems to be balanced. I haven't visited in a few years, so I could be missing something.

My take on why some forums fail to attract newbies? They become too clique-focused, and it becomes just another extension of social media. Forums shouldn't become mirrors of IG and FB, they should stick to the original beauty of what made them robust and rich, in the first place. And that is, elaborate thought content, mixed with intellectual debate. Even controversial topics are fun, as long as there is healthy debate. 

I visited another science forum recently, and it looks like the same clique of people, pontificating about whatever. That's what perhaps, kills sites. We like to blame the owners and mods, but truth be told...when sites start resembling FB, they won't attract newbies. Don't ask what a science forum can do for you, ask what you can do for your science forum.

Thoughts to this?

[Syne]

Moderation there is not balanced. As someone who's been a mod over there, I know there is no real ideological diversity and major mod actions are pretty much decided by a popularity contest among the mods. If enough mods just don't like you, or your views, the facts of what you may have posted go right out the window in favor of their own slanted straw men of your posts. It's like a witch burning behind the scenes. And if they like you, you can almost do no wrong, which includes some mods behaving in ways that would get almost any other member banned.

But aside from that, all the dog piling and circling the wagons by many of the most vocal members is really tiresome. They don't really have to refute anyone's point if enough of them just pretend they already have or appeal to ridicule.

At least here, the ultimate arbiter is the reader. It's up to each to decide for themselves if someone has gone too far or made a good point. I trust the intelligence of people more than the biases of moderators. And I prefer posting where people don't have the option to make threats of reporting you to the mods.

[Leigha]

I don't think it's a moderator issue as to why sciforums is losing new members. If people follow the general forum rules, it shouldn't be that difficult to keep from being banned. Not saying it doesn't play a role, just not as large of a role as people may think.

From an outsider's view (I haven't really frequented these sites as of late), it would seem like the ''woo'' factor has gone up. But, that was always present, but the members now, seem to be very offended by the onset of ''woo'' threads.

Not so much sciforums, but there is another science forum I have in mind, that is just out of control clique-like. I left that site a few years ago, because of that very thing, and now, it's even worse. lol And it's struggling to survive, so make of that what you will.

Human nature dictates much of what we gravitate towards, but most people dislike feeling excluded, and scivillage at least, doesn't have that negative aspect to it.

[Syne]

What's off-putting about the members on any forum is often exacerbated by a similar bent in any moderators. There can be no moderating influence if there is no diversity of thought.

[Leigha]

I've seen the ''bent'' that you speak of, on sciforums. But, it's tamed down, it seems. Again, they deal with so many assholes that sign up for the sheer enjoyment of being an asshole, it's no wonder they have a bit of a shorter fuse.

I find that scivillage has a genuine interest in keeping the forum as clique-free, as possible. We may argue here and disagree, but I just can't stand that FB feel of some forums. It's like FB and IG isn't enough for these people, they have to derail every thread they're in and make it all about them, on a SCIENCE forum. 

I posted on a forum a few years ago that wasn't science-related, more philosophy focused, and the owner eventually shut it down, because it stopped drawing new members and became other members' pseudo-social media outlet. Little does he know, I think he's a god for doing that.

[Syne]

Depending on how much you argue unpopular views, you're mileage may vary.

[RainbowUnicorn]

Visiting sciforums yesterday, I noticed a thread about why traffic there is waning. The admin stepped up to share his thoughts to it all, and while I think there is a certain amount of ebb and flow on any forum, I didn't really know what else could be ''wrong'' with that site. I find the topics interesting, and the moderation seems to be balanced. I haven't visited in a few years, so I could be missing something.

My take on why some forums fail to attract newbies? They become too clique-focused, and it becomes just another extension of social media. Forums shouldn't become mirrors of IG and FB, they should stick to the original beauty of what made them robust and rich, in the first place. And that is, elaborate thought content, mixed with intellectual debate. Even controversial topics are fun, as long as there is healthy debate. 

I visited another science forum recently, and it looks like the same clique of people, pontificating about whatever. That's what perhaps, kills sites. We like to blame the owners and mods, but truth be told...when sites start resembling FB, they won't attract newbies. Don't ask what a science forum can do for you, ask what you can do for your science forum.

Thoughts to this?

lol
generally i agree with you.

[Zinjanthropos]

Didn’t know Sciforums was in trouble. Years since I was on there. I think science forums operate on the pretext that they will attract scientists. Nothing could be further from the truth in my estimation. Armchair scientists barely tolerated by those who claim to be scientists. Whatever happened to anonymity? It’s the friggin’ internet, nothing is as it seems.

[confused2]

I almost asked "What happened to repenner? - He was brilliant and sparkled and you lost him." - but that would have been an insult to those remaining - so I didn't.

[Leigha]

I remember him.

On sciforums, a comment was made relating to why the site is losing ''good'' members, and not attracting new ones, that they ban too often. That there shouldn't be a ''banned list'' of members at the top of the page. I don't know, I think it sort of serves as a virtual stockade.

But joking aside, that is a notable point. Banning people swiftly and often might lend to people feeling that ''free speech'' isn't accepted.