General > General Technical Chat
Designated "Expert" Forum Users?
daqq:
--- Quote from: ataradov on February 15, 2022, 04:16:58 am ---I can see a lot of fighting on what constitutes "an expert".
--- End quote ---
If we had an expert on what an expert is we wouldn't be having this problem.
MK14:
If we are a free and open public electronics forum. Then everyone must be free to post, in all areas (with obvious exceptions, such as banned or spam posters).
You can't have it both ways. Either it is casual/free/open, for anyone to post, or it isn't.
Once we start having designated experts, or highlighted special/best posters and so on. We begin to lose our "Free and open" status.
There are half-way house solutions. But they still move away from being a free and open environment.
T3sl4co1l:
--- Quote from: daqq on February 16, 2022, 12:30:48 pm ---
--- Quote from: ataradov on February 15, 2022, 04:16:58 am ---I can see a lot of fighting on what constitutes "an expert".
--- End quote ---
If we had an expert on what an expert is we wouldn't be having this problem.
--- End quote ---
Seriously though, I suspect we have very few social engineers here -- who would be best suited to anticipate the concerns and issues aired above. Social and psychological behaviors are surprisingly unintuitive and difficult to predict; even if we had come up with seemingly workable ideas, it's really hard to say how well they would work out in practice.
Tim
Zero999:
--- Quote from: nctnico on February 15, 2022, 01:10:38 pm ---
--- Quote from: PKTKS on February 15, 2022, 12:09:20 pm ---
--- Quote from: RoGeorge on February 15, 2022, 11:14:54 am ---- The most important counter argument is that science does not work by voting. Science is not a democracy, and it is not about what people like or what people think. Science and its derivatives, like engineering, are independent of crowd's belief.
(..)
--- End quote ---
That would be funny if science would resolve itself by voting.... ::)
--- End quote ---
Actually it kind of is. Science is truth by consensus.
--- End quote ---
No it's not. A consensus on a theory doesn't always mean it's right. The astronomer Galileo was proof of that. In the last two years, there are plenty of things which were believed to be correct, by a large number of scientists, yet are now widely contested.
--- Quote ---Which circles back to my view that a system where people are labelled as expert on a forum leads to opinions getting more weight added to them. But who is going to guarantee that these opinions are 'right'? Also, some people are better (like politicians) at phrasing their opinions than others.
The way I see it, a forum is a place where you go looking for informed opinions on a subject and share information to have debates. If you look for information, find literature (Wikipedia is often a good place to start) and read that.
--- End quote ---
The only way to establish the truth is to look at the evidence available, but that's often subject to manipulation.
MK14:
--- Quote from: Zero999 on February 16, 2022, 12:46:40 pm ---
--- Quote from: nctnico on February 15, 2022, 01:10:38 pm ---
--- Quote from: PKTKS on February 15, 2022, 12:09:20 pm ---
--- Quote from: RoGeorge on February 15, 2022, 11:14:54 am ---- The most important counter argument is that science does not work by voting. Science is not a democracy, and it is not about what people like or what people think. Science and its derivatives, like engineering, are independent of crowd's belief.
(..)
--- End quote ---
That would be funny if science would resolve itself by voting.... ::)
--- End quote ---
Actually it kind of is. Science is truth by consensus.
--- End quote ---
No it's not. A consensus on a theory doesn't always mean it's right. The astronomer Galileo was proof of that. In the last two years, there are plenty of things which were believed to be correct, by a large number of scientists, yet are now widely contested.
--- Quote ---Which circles back to my view that a system where people are labelled as expert on a forum leads to opinions getting more weight added to them. But who is going to guarantee that these opinions are 'right'? Also, some people are better (like politicians) at phrasing their opinions than others.
The way I see it, a forum is a place where you go looking for informed opinions on a subject and share information to have debates. If you look for information, find literature (Wikipedia is often a good place to start) and read that.
--- End quote ---
The only way to establish the truth is to look at the evidence available, but that's often subject to manipulation.
--- End quote ---
I don't think expert is suppose to mean that every single statement they issue is going to be 100% right, all of the time. It is just that an expert is more likely to give the correct answer, and less likely to give the wrong answer, NOT that an expert is going to give the correct answer all the time.
If a company boss/owner, has made a successful company, that has grown and grown. It doesn't mean that every decision they have made was/is 100% perfect. Just that enough of them on average, were good enough to eventually make a good and successful company, and none of the mistakes were bad enough to prematurely end the company, so far.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version