Actually how do you define the low-number-of-posters syndrome and what's the cause?

I've thought (to myself) that if there are too many annoying posters they will simply cause this syndrome. Or then that people haven't simply found the place.

I'm not so well informed about the sociology of the social media myself.

And lately? I thought this was a rather new site.

I haven't been around lately, but is this forum afflicted bylow-number-of-posters syndrome? — Mongrel

So do something about it, start a thread worth while posting on. X-)

There are about 100 members. We are about 3 months old. Rather than a syndrome, we're still in the pro dromo stage. We are past the beginning; we have gotten under way. We're doing fine - for a new group.

Can we stay this size and be a healthy internet group? Hmmm, probably not. We need to add new members as old members slink off into the shadows. And we need to add more members so that there are more, and more active, discussions.

Keep thinking about ways of making ourselves noticeable. (I have been thinking about it, but nothing has happened so far.)

I have been a member quite early but haven't posted anything significant yet. This is in part because I have been busy but also in part because it is a bit intimidating for me to post here. I'll explain why.

I had wanted to post in the thread discussing the paper The Extended Mind by Clark and Chalmers since I had already read it twice. I tried to find my copy of the book by Clark in which it is reprinted, since I annotate rather heavily all my philosophical readings. I couldn't find it, was quite annoyed (...felt a little bit like Otto without his notebook), and thus I printed another copy and read it a third time. In the thread, some comments by Jamalrob and others already were expressing quite acute criticisms that I was agreeing with (and were often sharper than some of my own reservations). I wanted to add a few remarks (regarding what seemed to me like a tacit and troublesome commitment to representationalism by the authors) but never got round to doing it.

In the old forum, at least until about a year ago, I was often appalled by the level of discussion, and the fact that most posters wouldn't seem to know that one can actually read some philosophical books or papers before expounding ex cathedra on a topic. When I posted, I didn't need to make much of an effort merely to raise the level of the discussion or buttress my claims with arguments and references. But here, the proportion of posters who are acquainted with the philosophical literature is much higher. I am am thus less inclined to simply bring up my own views without taking care to indicate precisely how they align with or differ from the views of the thinkers being discussed, or the views of the other posters. So, in short, I may find it more intimidating to discuss with smart and knowledgeable people, though, no doubt, it ought to prove more rewarding in the long run.

I read the Quine paper on the prompting of the recent thread. I hadn't read any other complete paper by Quine appart from his celebrated Two Dogmas. Before I could even comment, I was also motivated by Moliere to read again Davidson's On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme, which I hadn't read since 2004. I have now finished re-reading that, so it would be time for me to make a few comments in the thread (On What There Is) while it's still somewhat active.

So, the point of this post just was to express my worry that increasing the popularity of this site might bring the level of the discussion down. The level is remarkable as is it is right now (judging from reading just a few threads). But this worry is mitigated by the fact that, in my case at least, an increase in attendance, and a wider range of level of expertise, might make it less intimidating to post here. I hope some balance will be achieved, more (but not too many) posters will be inclined to join, or post more often, and the very smart people already here will persevere.

We won't be getting significant numbers of new posters until we get permanently on to the first page of Google. And then, yes, the quality of posts may go down somewhat though that will be mitigated by more moderation. We do need to grow of course, particularly because the more posters we have the more likely we are to garner enough subscriptions to cover the costs of maintaining the site.

So, the point of this post just was to express my worry that increasing the popularity of this site might bring the level of the discussion down. — Pierre-Normand

the quality of posts may go down somewhat — Baden

In a pinch, I could probably lower the average quality of posts all by myself. Then the dreaded drop in quality would be over.

I hope some balance will be achieved, more (but not too many) posters will be inclined to join, or post more often, and the very smart people already here will persevere. — Pierre-Normand

I understand. I would appeal to you to post more stuff here, though. My conception of things may be at variance with the goals of the forum administrators. I'm partially convinced that this is true.

But my thoughts about it stray back to moments I've spent wandering through the woods with friends and falling into philosophical discussions... academic stuff falls away because people are talking about stuff that's really important to them. There's something they're trying to understand.

As it happens, academic stuff enters into it. Grounding in real concerns... that's what I see as the fire that drives the whole thing. Know what I mean?

Not that this is a major factor, but I've been away from the computer (for the most part) for the past 4 weeks. Now that I'm back, there could be a slight increase in the number of posts... but that says nothing about an increase in the quality of posts.

It might take a bit of time, as my jet lag is a bit harder this time.

Meow!

GREG

So do something about it, start a thread worth while posting on. X-) — Sir2u

Don't worry, Sir2u... I'll be gone again soon enough. And you won't have to be soiled with the likes of me.

Don't worry, Sir2u... I'll be gone again soon enough. And you won't have to be soiled with the likes of me. — Mongrel

Kind of touchy are we. I was not being nasty, just making a suggestion. X-)

If the concern is that the level of discussion is too high and that makes some uncomfortable, I would be willing to bring the level of discussion to a lower level. I'll help out as best I can.

I do think some bad posts are helpful to morale. They create a feeding frenzy and some bonding. Maybe Baden can pretend to be a 17 year old girl whose hotness keeps causing her moral dilemmas. I'd like that. If he'll accept the challenge, I'll pretend to be an equally hot, yet eyeless young woman. I mean how unfair is that? You're hot as all get out, but you can't even see yourself. This should work well.

What's the story on the murdering of the cat? I heard tale of it, but it was never explained to me.

Marketing usually takes some work. It involves building mutually beneficial relationships. Sometimes it involves advertising.

So.... why don't we all just go back to the other forum?

My objection to doing that is that I'm still suspicious of the reasons the new owners bought it.

Thoughts?

Didn't Mao say, "Let a thousand flowers bloom"? Meaning, let there be many new approaches. He doesn't seem to have followed that idea real closely, but it's a good idea anyway.

There are institutions that I want to see endure for millennia. Just a few. But there are many organizations on their way to becoming institutions which should, I think, be terminated early. Not because they are bad, but just because they have been around long enough to accomplish whatever it is they are going to accomplish. Paul, over at PF, has seen enormous success over the years. He will never see that same success twice over.

I've worked for a number of non-profits which, after 20 or so years of functioning, had run out of ideas. Like some AIDS prevention or AIDS service organizations. They did what they were capable of doing, it either did or didn't work, and now they are just duplicating the same efforts over and over again without making much difference. This isn't because they are bad. It's just because a given bunch of people in a given kind of organization are going to exhaust their ideas.

What should happen is that they should figuratively run up a white flag, surrender, and dissolve the organization -- totally. If there are unmet needs, let some other bunch of bright guys figure out a fresh new approach. Let them have a 20 year whack at it.

If we are not doing something useful, we will go under. The market, referencing neoliberalism, will either preserve or destroy us, like the Goddess Fortuna.

I wasn't around when PF first began, but I must assume it began with less than what we have here. We at least have a base of good posters. These things take time, and I'm in no real hurry. Someone was talking about some sort of Google crawler that creeps around websites and moves them up or down the search page. We need to bait that thing over here.

My concern with PF really wasn't the ads. Every site I go to has ads, and if that were my concern, I'd be back to reading newspapers, which also have ads. My concern with PF is that I think I'm morally and intellectually superior to the folks running it. I also think I'm more reasonable and exercise better judgment than they do. For those reasons, I don't want my posts scrutinized by them, and I can't stomach someone inferior to me telling me how I ought to be doing things. Only Baden can tell me what to do.

I have thought of a way to market and it includes soliciting the 100s of philosophy departments across the English speaking world. The emails of every professor are available online as are the graduate students in some departments. That would require hours of work, but it could be completed in a few days. A catchy email topic might get opened by maybe a few percent of the people who get it, a smaller number will click on our link, and then we'll get a few dozen new people right off the bat. They'll then bring their friends over, and we'll be huge I tell you.

The other way is to join other sites and to include our link there for people to check out. That idea worked fairly well at bringing folks over from PF.

I'd also suggest putting fliers on mailboxes. I'll do my cul de sac and see what happens.

So, get to work guys. I'm the idea man, not the do it man.

BC

Didn't Mao say, "Let a thousand flowers bloom"?

No. He said in 1957:

"Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts and the sciences and a flourishing socialist culture in our land."

And when they came forward with new ideas they were executed.

My concern with PF is that I think I'm morally and intellectually superior to the folks running it. — Hanover

I'm so glad your self-esteem issues have subsided. I was worried you'd show up to a high-school with a shot-gun for a while there...

Temerity is my humblest virtue.

I haven't been around lately, but is this forum afflicted bylow-number-of-posters syndrome? — Mongrel

There are about 100 members. We are about 3 months old. Rather than a syndrome, we're still in the pro dromo stage. We are past the beginning; we have gotten under way. We're doing fine - for a new group.

Can we stay this size and be a healthy internet group? Hmmm, probably not. We need to add new members as old members slink off into the shadows. And we need to add more members so that there are more, and more active, discussions.

Keep thinking about ways of making ourselves noticeable. (I have been thinking about it, but nothing has happened so far.) — Bitter Crank

So how is it now after nearly four years? Joined members here are over 4000 (many not active, of course). At least we are still up and the old wasted PF isn't. Nice to see that Paul has been still active here. (Next October this site will be four years old.)

What do the admins and the moderators and other old timers think?

What do the admins and the moderators and other old timers think? — ssu

I think we are doing pretty well. What do you think?

What do the admins and the moderators and other old timers think? — ssu

:cheer:

What do the admins and the moderators and other old timers think? — ssu

I'm really happy we rose to the top so quickly, but I do worry about the quality sometimes. We didn't fulfill all of the hopes we had in the beginning, like the thriving articles site and the monthly readings--which went on for a few months but died out--but generally I think it's great.

Meh.

Says he 10,000 posts later. :lol:

I think platforms like reddit are where many people go now. This is an old fashioned and perhaps a less daunting medium given that there are 13+ million members on reddit philosophy it doesn’t stand as great a chance of creating a sense of community like these kind of places.

It serves a purpose for me at least. My experience is that sites like this have been dwindling and many old-timers tell me the hay-day of online forums was i the mid/late 90’s. Since then other social media platforms (such as reddit) have syphoned off most interest.

Says he 10,000 posts later. :lol: — Baden

Yes, lol. But bear in mind that you're speaking to a philosophy forum addict.

Never got the attraction of Reddit. Always thought it was shit.

This forum began prior to the old PF fully unraveling, out of a sense of concern for its direction after it changed ownership. Had there not been a group of dedicated organizers and members willing to come over here and getting things started right away (including frantically collecting names and emails to be sure no one was lost), it's likely we'd have all disbanded and gone our separate ways long ago, looking for conversation on Reddit or whatever else might be out there. I'm told Reddit is shit, but I can't recall where I heard that.

So, I see this Forum as not only a general success (as we're currently #1 on search engines and have over 4000 members), but also a testament to what people can do when they have a common cause and a sense of higher purpose.

So many deserve special thanks. I'd like to begin by thanking myself for all my hard work, but I'll stop there for fear I'll forget someone and hurt someone's feelings. I'm always thinking of others. I'm just that way.

:cheer: No wait. Ah, whatever. :cheer:

If we set the bar higher, we wouldn't attract as many good members. But we've got the bar set high enough that we keep people who make high quality posts, even if we end up posting in cliques.