Showcase Forum Issues and Requests

what i mean is, will there be very little overlap in membership? ie: people allowed in showcase forum that are not allowed elsewhere, and only a very small percentage of the "main" board allowed in showcase (by invitation)? might be interesting.

---

yes buz, your threads would certainly run a lot more smoothly if you could just get rid of all those people who disagree with you and intend to show why your claim is wrong.

---

The official "Showcase" description includes: Your statement... ... essentially says the same thing, only in clearer, more straight forward wording.(In my opinion of course) The "Showcase" is a hybrid of the "Bootcamp" (currently called "Limbo") and the "Great Debate" forums. It is essentially "Limbo" with admin + software defined limits on who can participate. Actually, the software capability was/is (sort of) there for "Limbo". The difference is, for the "Showcase" you have to be specifically designated "in", while at "Limbo" you had to be specifically designated "out". I did designate "out" SLPx at a John S. Davison topic in "Limbo".Or it can be looked upon as "Great Debate" for "Limbo" type personalities, but with participation limits via using the forum software controls rather than being on the honor system.Ultimately, as I understand it, someday the forum software controls will be such that a forum can be set up where specific topics can be designated for specific participants. IMO, the "Columnist Corner" is a repository forum for well written but exceptionally long and technical opening messages. Such would tend to attract only people interested and fairly knowledgeable in the specific area of the topic. Those with short attention spans (Moose raises hand) would not be attracted.Per not getting much in responses - I think the "columnists" are preaching to the choir, writing with great precision and accuracy. Would the reader response be such as - "Interesting; No arguing with that; Nothing more need be said"?Adminnemooseus

My subjective view is that it did better than poorly, maybe around average.I think the concept needed tweaking, and neither of us had time to do that. Perhaps technical columns of the type we were trying to do may not work well as thread starters. How many of Gould's columns in the Smithsonians magazine would have generated much discussion had a discussion board been available for them? Probably not very many.It's not that columns shouldn't be thread starters. It's that expectations that a significant portion of them would generate much discussion were probably unrealistic.Columns that generated significant discussion would probably have to be either timely (about recent events), topical (about happenings at EvC Forum) or opinionated (i.e., controversial), or some combination.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

I do have other authors lined up to write columns on varying topics. Now if I can just get them to actually do it

Ahh, time...that thing that is highly compressed for me right now as I prepare to take up my new professorship in a few weeks and my 5 month old decided to get sick for a couple of days and make me worry about her day and night.In all fairness, my posts in general did not elicit particularly big responses...ever i.e. if I started threads they tended to die out or get short replies..with the only exceptions being Peter Borger, Wordswordman and another creationist Tokyo Jim. That is fine, because of time constraints I prefer to be an occassional lurker.But I do think the columnist corner has merit. One of the benefits of the internet is that writings can be updated rapidly. If the columnist corner were to produce topical columns on EvC, any new findings could be rapidly incorporated into existing articles...for example, I wrote on neandertal genetics...now there is a report that Svante Paabo and co are sequencing the entire neandertal genome using the methods developed to sequence (1% currently) of the woolly mammoth genome. That could easily be incorporated into the existing column. Likewise for any other column. It would make a nice resource perhaps away from the general debate and so the "debate" could be to improve the columns like a real-time peer review...I am thinking of something like a continuously updated Talk Origins Archive with current members or invited guests participating...you might end up with a nice EvC-pedia...

Once again, I request to talk with herepton in his thread.Added by edit.What do you want me to do, convert?Edited by rgb, : No reason given.

OK as a reader, it seems to me that there are a number of issues emerging with showcase from the two threads I have read - (I haven't read JAD's thread).The problem with both threads is that there seems to be no debate at all. Instead both threads start with statements, then the rest of the posts seem to consist of the original poster either not answering questions or just insulting the people who are trying to engage in debate. Anything approaching a difficult question is hand waved away with either "atheist bias" or "you are uneducated". The nearest we get to a constructive dialogue is other creationists turning up and saying "rah rah you are sooooo right! preach on!!".Who are they going to debate once the limited number of people who has some interested in joining a debate with those people get bored of the total non-response? Hell it's not even interesting to read!Edited by CK, : No reason given.

And just why is this an issue?It is showcasing different ideas and ways of presenting and defending them. The difference in the nature of the "debate" is informative.

Not only what you said, but also some of those of us who are actually interested in conversing in the showcase aren't allowed in there for reasons of insanity (or whatever).

I agree with everything you pointed out. It was one of the concerns I had when Percy announced this new experiment. In fact, given the nature and past history of the folks invited to participate, I was morally certain that's what the result would be. I don't know about that. I think it's fascinating in a kind of black-humor, filme-noire kind of way.

That seems to be pretty much the form on JAD's thread as well. Except of course for the brief participation of Dave Scot where it just seemed to get personal.TTFN,WK

Showcase access is restricted:

• You have to request it, and...
  ​
• In the eyes of the moderators you must exhibit potential for bringing out the best in one or more of the showcased members.

Anyone who thinks they can do better than those in there now should request access. What's the matter, afraid of not making the grade?

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Actually, my friend, I think one of the reasons more "regulars" aren't participating (and certainly the reason I'm not) is because we really don't think we can do any better. The folks who've attempted participation (WK, nwr, sidelined, EzScience, etc) are generally some of the best that EvC has to offer (well, I don't know DaveScott - this is the first time he's been on, and quite obviously he and JAD have a "history"). If they can't get more than insults and hand waving, I sure as hell don't see what any of the rest of us mere mortals can accomplish.On the other hand, to end on a more positive note Boss, the Showcase is certainly entertaining to me at least. Please don't terminate the experiment just yet.

Hi Brad,Access is granted to the [forum=-37] for purposes of participating in the A Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis thread.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director