The alternate list however would not kill the current Vortex, Ok I'd go since I don't care for 99% but no one will miss me as I have tended to lurk 99% of the time.
THIS vortex will stay the same as it is essentially free of such content anyway and this content will get a chance to perhaps grow, at any rate it won't be necessarily swamped by the current excess of political and more conventional energy schemes. And I think that though Grok was the catalyst for Bill's banning of politics he has made it very clear that he has the current ban in place as an attempt to reset this Vortex back to what it was originally meant to be, a Vort that he cares for. The alternative is not changing nothing rather the alternative is changing THIS Vort back to something like it's old era style Vort. Also the fact that freenrgy died out doesn't mean that Vortex-classic would, furthermore Vortex-Classic would not be suggestively limited to just free energy. I don't see a down side, what harm is there in giving such subjects some light, some breathing room? I feel tempted donate and it was Bill's suggestion so I don't thing money is an argument against it either. On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Horace Heffner <[email protected]>wrote: > > On Jun 16, 2009, at 9:25 PM, William Beaty wrote: > > > Sometimes on-topic threads die, while off-topic threads attract >> participants and go for days. But then, the meaning of "on topic" is >> largely decided by the group. If alt-science experiments attract low >> interest, it suggests that such experiments are actually "off topic" in >> the present community. >> > > [snip] > > Someone mentioned that Vortex discusses all sorts of things between >> "Mylow" episodes. But in my experience, the "Mylow" threads don't attract >> interest. They usually only catch fire if the original poster pushes them >> with numerous messages, competing against other threads, until slowly the >> science thread steals participants away from all the others. If this >> isn't done, then experimental science threads stand little chance. The >> other stuff is more interesting. >> >> So why not give PBS its own separate science channel? >> >> Rather than VortexB, maybe we should keep the main community exactly as it >> was, but add a "Classic Vortex:" an experiment-centered list similar to >> the way vortex once was, back in the Chris Tinsley era, a place for >> alt-science people to discuss their current work. Build stuff. Run tests >> on odd claims and weird devices. It might remain pretty dead except when >> a "Mylow" event occurs ...or we'll find that plenty of experiment threads >> have always been there, but just couldn't attract a viewership. >> > > > There was once a list dedicated to experimentalism (freenrg). Didn't that > die off? > > Despite the fact some science threads have had little interest or comment, > they certainly haven't generated complaints. Personally, I've had interest > in many science or science history or science politics threads to which I > have not commented. I especially have enjoyed Jed's CF politics and science > history/philosophy posts. I think a lack of discussion is not necessarily a > lack of interest. > > We already have a vortex group that works to the satisfaction of many. The > off topic, vitriol, non-science politics, and religion can simply be routed > to the non-archived vortexB-l where it is dumped into the bit bin. > > It seems to me vortex-l is a valuable thing. It was working OK enough > before Grok. Why throw out the baby with the bath water? > > It is true a lot of off topic stuff has crept in. That is probably because > it is so easy to write stuff that is purely a matter of opinion. Writing > scientific stuff, especially backed up with calculations, references etc., > is a lot of hard work. Also, there apparently is a number of new people who > unfortunately joined during periods of many scientific-content-free posts. > > I have had over 1000 unread vortex-l messages in the past, and have over > 600 now. If a thread title is off topic or goes off topic I just stop > reading it unless I have nothing else to do. I periodically mark all such > unread emails as "read" without reading them. This is a small price to pay. > I think the vortex-l archives are valuable, and wish there were better > search functions for them. > > It seems to me we have a good group with good rules. All we have to do is > observe them. We also need to read what we write before posting to see if > it has any scientific content at all. > > It appears to me that all we need is a little basic courtesy and awareness. > > Best regards, > > Horace Heffner > http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/<http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/> > > > > >
