On What Basis Does "Skeptics" Appear in the Forum Name?

The Atheist · 18th December 2015, 10:34 AM

I realise there's no trademarking involved, so the forum can call itself whatever it likes, but it seems to me that if you self-label as skeptics - especially internationally so - you should accept some personal responsibility for acting as you describe yourself.

In what way does ISF aid or support skepticism, or even act skeptically?

Yes, there are skeptical sections to the forum, but since they're the least popular non-member-only section, it's not an obvious connection.

On other boards with skeptic or skepticism in their name, at least lip-service is paid to skepticism, but I'm not seeing a lot of evidence in action here.

Given that this is named International Skeptics Forum, is there a responsibility that the forum is seen to act skeptically itself?

Is it harming or aiding skepticism in the process by not being visibly skeptical in style?

(Keep in mind I do not self-identify as a skeptic.)

Beerina · 18th December 2015, 10:55 AM

Prove it isn't!

Oh, wait.

Gawdzilla Sama · 18th December 2015, 11:03 AM

It's mainly to irritate you, OP. How we doin'?

Dr. Keith · 18th December 2015, 11:35 AM

We were founded by The History Channel?

tuco · 18th December 2015, 11:43 AM

I came here because I like to believe I am sceptical to find similar kind. Cant answer your questions beyond this.

madurobob · 18th December 2015, 11:43 AM

On what basis? IIRC, there was a vote and this was the one selected out of many. I don't believe all contained the word "skeptic".

So, I guess we'd have to ask everyone who voted?

ETA: it was only 52 folks who voted for it - we could ask them all!
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=281477

Dave Rogers · 18th December 2015, 12:18 PM

On the basis that "International forum for people who are allowed to be doubtful about things that are the majority opinion of all the relevant experts but have to uncritically swallow any crazy idea that some random nutter dreams up as long as it isn't mainstream" would have been too long for a URL?

Dave

Whip · 18th December 2015, 12:21 PM

'dubious' would have sounded funny?

Kid Eager · 18th December 2015, 12:50 PM

so, 52/145 people liked the name, or at least didn't dislike it enough to vote for an alternative.

Mystery solved.

I still like "Cat Herding" though....

JJM 777 · 18th December 2015, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

On other boards with skeptic or skepticism in their name, at least lip-service is paid to skepticism, but I'm not seeing a lot of evidence in action here.

Given that this is named International Skeptics Forum, is there a responsibility that the forum is seen to act skeptically itself?

How should the forum act then, compared to how it is acting now? You obviously have at least some tangible suggestions in mind.

The Atheist · 18th December 2015, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla Sama

It's mainly to irritate you, OP. How we doin'?

Badly. Why on earth would it irritate me?

If it irritated me, I wouldn't bother posting.

Originally Posted by madurobob

On what basis? IIRC, there was a vote and this was the one selected out of many. I don't believe all contained the word "skeptic".

The vote was the guide, but the owner decided on the name.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

On the basis that "International forum for people who are allowed to be doubtful about things that are the majority opinion of all the relevant experts but have to uncritically swallow any crazy idea that some random nutter dreams up as long as it isn't mainstream" would have been too long for a URL?

Dave

Very good.

That wouldn't fit descriptively, either, because the premise would still be false.

Originally Posted by JJM 777

How should the forum act then, compared to how it is acting now? You obviously have at least some tangible suggestions in mind.

I did say I'm not a skeptic, so I'm not the best person to ask, but things like transparency & maybe preference given to skeptical subjects spring to mind.

On the flip side, politics shows no signs of skepticism whatsoever.

Kid Eager · 18th December 2015, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by JJM 777

How should the forum act then, compared to how it is acting now? You obviously have at least some tangible suggestions in mind.

Hmmmm...

Why should I care that a forum member believes that the forum is not conforming to some unevidenced ideal for behavior of skeptical forums?

Does failure to self-identify as a skeptic mean that the person isn't a skeptic?

Does the above stance invalidate the setting of that person as an observer or arbiter of forum style?

Asking how the forum should act assumes that the OP is in a position to provide an answer. I'm yet to see evidence that he/she has standing.

ETA - I've just seen OP's response that crossed my questions above and answered them in part, but I leave them there for posterity.

BTW - you expect a rational discussion of *politics*? Agree wholeheartedly that there's not much skepticism in those threads - and there never will be for as long as humans post in any forum where that's a topic...

The Atheist · 18th December 2015, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Kid Eager

Why should I care that a forum member believes that the forum is not conforming to some unevidenced ideal for behavior of skeptical forums?

I don't see ideal or caring having anything to do with it - the concept is a bit wider than that. I'm just interested to see what it's supposed to mean. That applies equally to members and the owner. I don't know Icerat well enough to know if he even identifies as a skeptic, but I do know lots of the members do. Or used to when it was JREF. That may not be the case any longer, in which case it might be counter-productive.

I am a member at a literature forum. Almost all of the activity is about literature.

I am a member at a car forum. Almost all of the activity is about cars.

That trend continues across all forums I have looked into, except in the skeptical world. I think there is only one of the smaller ones that actually looks like a skeptics' forum from its content.

Originally Posted by Kid Eager

Asking how the forum should act assumes that the OP is in a position to provide an answer.

How odd.

I always ask questions when I don't have the answer. If I had the answer already, I wouldn't bother asking.

Originally Posted by Kid Eager

BTW - you expect a rational discussion of *politics*? Agree wholeheartedly that there's not much skepticism in those threads - and there never will be for as long as humans post in any forum where that's a topic...

Ok, then. Maybe the question is whether politics is compatible with skepticism, but that would no doubt require a thread elsewhere.

JJM 777 · 19th December 2015, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

things like transparency & maybe preference given to skeptical subjects spring to mind.

To clarify this, does the forum now have too much or too little transparency (in what: management / moderation / other)? And is preference now given too much or too little to skeptical subjects?

Originally Posted by The Atheist

On the flip side, politics shows no signs of skepticism whatsoever.

Every thread is as skeptical as its participants.

tuco · 19th December 2015, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by JJM 777

To clarify this, does the forum now have too much or too little transparency (in what: management / moderation / other)? And is preference now given too much or too little to skeptical subjects?

Every thread is as skeptical as its participants.

I tend to agree. Every community is collection of participants, participants are responsible for the state of community.

From my experience, what sets "skeptical" communities apart from chess or literature that there is good chance of "cranks" and "ideology" hanging around. The reasons are obvious I think.

madurobob · 19th December 2015, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

The vote was the guide, but the owner decided on the name.

Not as I understood it. That decision was delegated to the folks running the poll. Sure, he could have overridden that decision, but he didn't (and it would have been a huge mistake to do so). So, its inappropriate to suggest he had any meaningful input into why the word "skeptic" was included. He simply went with the name chosen by forumites vote. There were options without "skeptic" in them, and there were folks against any name with "skeptic" in it - you can read all about it in the poll threads.

Elagabalus · 19th December 2015, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

I realise there's no trademarking involved, so the forum can call itself whatever it likes, but it seems to me that if you self-label as skeptics - especially internationally so - you should accept some personal responsibility for acting as you describe yourself.

In what way does ISF aid or support skepticism, or even act skeptically?

Yes, there are skeptical sections to the forum, but since they're the least popular non-member-only section, it's not an obvious connection.

On other boards with skeptic or skepticism in their name, at least lip-service is paid to skepticism, but I'm not seeing a lot of evidence in action here.

Given that this is named International Skeptics Forum, is there a responsibility that the forum is seen to act skeptically itself?

Is it harming or aiding skepticism in the process by not being visibly skeptical in style?

(Keep in mind I do not self-identify as a skeptic.)

Agreed.

Sadly, I failed to submit my favorite idea for a name Ineffectual Milquetoasts Forum.

What can I say? I like a little self-deprecation in a forum name.

On the plus side, the acronym would be ImilF. It works on so many levels. And I dare say would be getting a greater number of hits than we are now!

tuco · 19th December 2015, 01:23 PM

Some double-hits too.

applecorped · 19th December 2015, 01:26 PM

I thought this was the International Septic Forum!

fuelair · 19th December 2015, 01:28 PM

Cause some of us is!!!!! And we try to play with those who isn't. As nicely as we can live with!!!!

The Atheist · 20th December 2015, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by Elagabalus

On the plus side, the acronym would be ImilF. It works on so many levels. And I dare say would be getting a greater number of hits than we are now!

That would've been a smart move. I believe the acronym you describe is close to one often Googled.

John Jones · 20th December 2015, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Badly. Why on earth would it irritate me?

If it irritated me, I wouldn't bother posting.

You come across as one who is irritated.

Foolmewunz · 20th December 2015, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

(Keep in mind I do not self-identify as a skeptic.)

I self-identify as skeptical,... the adjective. When we were discussing the new forum name, my only real push was to have "International" or "Global" in there; thinking ahead that it might be of worth to link together some of the disparate Skeptical (with an upper case S) and Critical Thinking sites. (You know, ... growing the forums rather than watching them shrink.)

I went with ISF figuring skeptical has, to many, become synonymous with "critical thinking" and Int'l Critical Thinking Forums has problems to me, in that it sounds a tad arrogant.

Besides, International Hidebound Opinionated Jerks Forum wouldn't have fit on the masthead.

Gord_in_Toronto · 20th December 2015, 07:47 PM

"Skeptics" is a placeholder between the the words "International" and "Forum". Eventually, as dictated by the owners or this forum, the Illuminati, the Roman Catholic Church and the Lemurian Deros, and confirmed by a universal vote of active members of the forum (all six of us) it will be replaced by an actual, permanent word that is fully descriptive of the intent of the forum. This is expected to happen sometime in 2054.

Carry on.

Smoke if you've got 'em.

The Atheist · 20th December 2015, 10:37 PM

Originally Posted by John Jones

You come across as one who is irritated.

Mate, if things on the internet irritate me, I find it extraordinarily easy to avoid them.

You can put that one away now.

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

Besides, International Hidebound Opinionated Jerks Forum wouldn't have fit on the masthead.

But much more honest!

As you say, forums are a dying breed, so it's not going to matter much.

JihadJane · 20th December 2015, 10:48 PM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

On the basis that "International forum for people who are allowed to be doubtful about things that are the majority opinion of all the relevant experts but have to uncritically swallow any crazy idea that some random nutter dreams up as long as it isn't mainstream" would have been too long for a URL?

Dave

There is a strong, irrational trust in mainstream authority evident in these pages.

Doubt · 21st December 2015, 06:12 AM

On what basis do we call this a forum? I don't see any of you wearing togas and speaking Latin!

Lothian · 21st December 2015, 06:18 AM

Like Atheism, everyone is skeptical about some things.

"Skeptics" just refers to the inclusion of 'special interest' sub forums:- General Skepticism and the paranormal, conspiracy theories etc to go along with the more general community ones such as sport and politics.

JJM 777 · 21st December 2015, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by Doubt

On what basis do we call this a forum? I don't see any of you wearing togas and speaking Latin!

Because you don't see us, at all.

Doubt · 21st December 2015, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by JJM 777

Because you don't see us, at all.

Okay. What are you w.........Never mind.

psionl0 · 21st December 2015, 06:25 PM

Most people are skeptical about one thing or another (so you could call this the International Peoples Forum if you like

). Some of the more common things that members here are skeptical about include:

All forms of religion
Hidden conspiracies
The GOP
Libertarianism (the no government kind)
The unfettered right to free speech

Originally Posted by JihadJane

There is a strong, irrational trust in mainstream authority evident in these pages.

Nope, that is definitely a minority view point here (GOP excepted).

bluesjnr · 22nd December 2015, 12:47 AM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Mate, if things on the internet irritate me, I find it extraordinarily easy to avoid them.

You need to let your short fuse know this.

The Atheist · 22nd December 2015, 02:02 AM

Originally Posted by psionl0

Most people are skeptical about one thing or another (so you could call this the International Peoples Forum if you like

).

Probably a bit more inclusive, too.

Lothian · 22nd December 2015, 03:12 AM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Probably a bit more inclusive, too.

Why limit it to people or nations? The Galactic Interspecies Forum? Added bonus is that GIF is easier to pronounce than ISF.

Steve · 23rd December 2015, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by psionl0

Most people are skeptical about one thing or another (so you could call this the International Peoples Forum if you like

). Some of the more common things that members here are skeptical about include:

All forms of religion
Hidden conspiracies
The GOP
Libertarianism (the no government kind)
The unfettered right to free speech

Nope, that is definitely a minority view point here (GOP excepted).

Ok comrade! (sounds vaguely communist

)

bluesjnr · 23rd December 2015, 10:29 AM

We could call it Sceptical Thinkers Forum United, or STFU for short. I hear that is quite a popular acronym so it should catch on. I believe there I even a thread discussing it.

Theist annoying you? Just direct him here by yelling STFU!

Conspiracy theorist getting under your skin? Tell him STFU!

Big Footer? STFU!

Anybody you disagree with. STFU!

I'm convinced it'll work so you should all support me and STFU!

tuco · 23rd December 2015, 11:00 AM

Nah not STFU as motto. Much less traffic here. Exercises in scepticism tend to be as good as subjects of such exercises are. How many variations of Big Foot can one play? In theory infinite but ..

fagin · 23rd December 2015, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by bluesjnr

We could call it Sceptical Thinkers Forum United, or STFU for short. I hear that is quite a popular acronym so it should catch on. I believe there I even a thread discussing it.

Theist annoying you? Just direct him here by yelling STFU!

Conspiracy theorist getting under your skin? Tell him STFU!

Big Footer? STFU!

Anybody you disagree with. STFU!

I'm convinced it'll work so you should all support me and STFU!

And sceptical is even spelt correctly.

JJM 777 · 23rd December 2015, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by Steve

> International Peoples Forum

Ok comrade! (sounds vaguely communist

)

Doesn't sound Communist enough.

Democratic People's Forum would be more convincing. Then keep the current top-down hierarchy. The trick is that you don't really need to _have_ democracy, you just put that word in the name of your organization or country.

caveman1917 · 26th December 2015, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by fagin

And sceptical is even spelt correctly.

You mean you're not skeptical of your dictionary?

18th December 2015, 10:34 AM	#1
The Atheist The Grammar Tyrant Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 31,887	On What Basis Does "Skeptics" Appear in the Forum Name? I realise there's no trademarking involved, so the forum can call itself whatever it likes, but it seems to me that if you self-label as skeptics - especially internationally so - you should accept some personal responsibility for acting as you describe yourself. In what way does ISF aid or support skepticism, or even act skeptically? Yes, there are skeptical sections to the forum, but since they're the least popular non-member-only section, it's not an obvious connection. On other boards with skeptic or skepticism in their name, at least lip-service is paid to skepticism, but I'm not seeing a lot of evidence in action here. Given that this is named International Skeptics Forum, is there a responsibility that the forum is seen to act skeptically itself? Is it harming or aiding skepticism in the process by not being visibly skeptical in style? (Keep in mind I do not self-identify as a skeptic.)
	__________________ The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.

18th December 2015, 10:55 AM	#2
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 31,267	Prove it isn't! Oh, wait.
	__________________ "Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

18th December 2015, 11:03 AM	#3
Gawdzilla Sama 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 42,180	It's mainly to irritate you, OP. How we doin'?
	__________________ Guns that are instantly available for use are instantly available for misuse. World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Buying conspiracy books is a voluntary tax on stupid.

18th December 2015, 11:35 AM	#4
Dr. Keith Not a doctor. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 25,050	We were founded by The History Channel?
	__________________ Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

18th December 2015, 11:43 AM	#5
tuco Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565	I came here because I like to believe I am sceptical to find similar kind. Cant answer your questions beyond this.
tuco Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565

18th December 2015, 11:43 AM	#6
madurobob Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Blue Heaven Posts: 7,401	On what basis? IIRC, there was a vote and this was the one selected out of many. I don't believe all contained the word "skeptic". So, I guess we'd have to ask everyone who voted? ETA: it was only 52 folks who voted for it - we could ask them all! http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=281477
	__________________ I love you and I vote. Last edited by madurobob; 18th December 2015 at 12:29 PM.

18th December 2015, 12:18 PM	#7
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 33,342	On the basis that "International forum for people who are allowed to be doubtful about things that are the majority opinion of all the relevant experts but have to uncritically swallow any crazy idea that some random nutter dreams up as long as it isn't mainstream" would have been too long for a URL? Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

18th December 2015, 12:21 PM	#8
Whip Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 1,474	'dubious' would have sounded funny?
Whip Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 1,474

18th December 2015, 12:50 PM	#9
Kid Eager Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 7,296	so, 52/145 people liked the name, or at least didn't dislike it enough to vote for an alternative. Mystery solved. I still like "Cat Herding" though....
Kid Eager Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 7,296	__________________ What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....

18th December 2015, 02:57 PM	#10
JJM 777 Suspended Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 4,060	Originally Posted by The Atheist On other boards with skeptic or skepticism in their name, at least lip-service is paid to skepticism, but I'm not seeing a lot of evidence in action here. Given that this is named International Skeptics Forum, is there a responsibility that the forum is seen to act skeptically itself? How should the forum act then, compared to how it is acting now? You obviously have at least some tangible suggestions in mind.
JJM 777 Suspended Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 4,060

18th December 2015, 03:08 PM	#11
The Atheist The Grammar Tyrant Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 31,887	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla Sama It's mainly to irritate you, OP. How we doin'? Badly. Why on earth would it irritate me? If it irritated me, I wouldn't bother posting. Originally Posted by madurobob On what basis? IIRC, there was a vote and this was the one selected out of many. I don't believe all contained the word "skeptic". The vote was the guide, but the owner decided on the name. Originally Posted by Dave Rogers On the basis that "International forum for people who are allowed to be doubtful about things that are the majority opinion of all the relevant experts but have to uncritically swallow any crazy idea that some random nutter dreams up as long as it isn't mainstream" would have been too long for a URL? Dave Very good. That wouldn't fit descriptively, either, because the premise would still be false. Originally Posted by JJM 777 How should the forum act then, compared to how it is acting now? You obviously have at least some tangible suggestions in mind. I did say I'm not a skeptic, so I'm not the best person to ask, but things like transparency & maybe preference given to skeptical subjects spring to mind. On the flip side, politics shows no signs of skepticism whatsoever.
	__________________ The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.

18th December 2015, 03:09 PM	#12
Kid Eager Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 7,296	Originally Posted by JJM 777 How should the forum act then, compared to how it is acting now? You obviously have at least some tangible suggestions in mind. Hmmmm... Why should I care that a forum member believes that the forum is not conforming to some unevidenced ideal for behavior of skeptical forums? Does failure to self-identify as a skeptic mean that the person isn't a skeptic? Does the above stance invalidate the setting of that person as an observer or arbiter of forum style? Asking how the forum should act assumes that the OP is in a position to provide an answer. I'm yet to see evidence that he/she has standing. ETA - I've just seen OP's response that crossed my questions above and answered them in part, but I leave them there for posterity. BTW - you expect a rational discussion of politics? Agree wholeheartedly that there's not much skepticism in those threads - and there never will be for as long as humans post in any forum where that's a topic...
Kid Eager Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 7,296	__________________ What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it.... Last edited by Kid Eager; 18th December 2015 at 04:57 PM.

18th December 2015, 05:59 PM	#13
The Atheist The Grammar Tyrant Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 31,887	Originally Posted by Kid Eager Why should I care that a forum member believes that the forum is not conforming to some unevidenced ideal for behavior of skeptical forums? I don't see ideal or caring having anything to do with it - the concept is a bit wider than that. I'm just interested to see what it's supposed to mean. That applies equally to members and the owner. I don't know Icerat well enough to know if he even identifies as a skeptic, but I do know lots of the members do. Or used to when it was JREF. That may not be the case any longer, in which case it might be counter-productive. I am a member at a literature forum. Almost all of the activity is about literature. I am a member at a car forum. Almost all of the activity is about cars. That trend continues across all forums I have looked into, except in the skeptical world. I think there is only one of the smaller ones that actually looks like a skeptics' forum from its content. Originally Posted by Kid Eager Asking how the forum should act assumes that the OP is in a position to provide an answer. How odd. I always ask questions when I don't have the answer. If I had the answer already, I wouldn't bother asking. Originally Posted by Kid Eager BTW - you expect a rational discussion of politics? Agree wholeheartedly that there's not much skepticism in those threads - and there never will be for as long as humans post in any forum where that's a topic... Ok, then. Maybe the question is whether politics is compatible with skepticism, but that would no doubt require a thread elsewhere.
	__________________ The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.

19th December 2015, 09:28 AM	#14
JJM 777 Suspended Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 4,060	Originally Posted by The Atheist things like transparency & maybe preference given to skeptical subjects spring to mind. To clarify this, does the forum now have too much or too little transparency (in what: management / moderation / other)? And is preference now given too much or too little to skeptical subjects? Originally Posted by The Atheist On the flip side, politics shows no signs of skepticism whatsoever. Every thread is as skeptical as its participants.
JJM 777 Suspended Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 4,060

19th December 2015, 09:35 AM	#15
tuco Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565	Originally Posted by JJM 777 To clarify this, does the forum now have too much or too little transparency (in what: management / moderation / other)? And is preference now given too much or too little to skeptical subjects? Every thread is as skeptical as its participants. I tend to agree. Every community is collection of participants, participants are responsible for the state of community. From my experience, what sets "skeptical" communities apart from chess or literature that there is good chance of "cranks" and "ideology" hanging around. The reasons are obvious I think.
tuco Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565

19th December 2015, 12:23 PM	#16
madurobob Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Blue Heaven Posts: 7,401	Originally Posted by The Atheist The vote was the guide, but the owner decided on the name. Not as I understood it. That decision was delegated to the folks running the poll. Sure, he could have overridden that decision, but he didn't (and it would have been a huge mistake to do so). So, its inappropriate to suggest he had any meaningful input into why the word "skeptic" was included. He simply went with the name chosen by forumites vote. There were options without "skeptic" in them, and there were folks against any name with "skeptic" in it - you can read all about it in the poll threads.
	__________________ I love you and I vote.

19th December 2015, 01:13 PM	#17
Elagabalus Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 7,051	Originally Posted by The Atheist I realise there's no trademarking involved, so the forum can call itself whatever it likes, but it seems to me that if you self-label as skeptics - especially internationally so - you should accept some personal responsibility for acting as you describe yourself. In what way does ISF aid or support skepticism, or even act skeptically? Yes, there are skeptical sections to the forum, but since they're the least popular non-member-only section, it's not an obvious connection. On other boards with skeptic or skepticism in their name, at least lip-service is paid to skepticism, but I'm not seeing a lot of evidence in action here. Given that this is named International Skeptics Forum, is there a responsibility that the forum is seen to act skeptically itself? Is it harming or aiding skepticism in the process by not being visibly skeptical in style? (Keep in mind I do not self-identify as a skeptic.) Agreed. Sadly, I failed to submit my favorite idea for a name Ineffectual Milquetoasts Forum. What can I say? I like a little self-deprecation in a forum name. On the plus side, the acronym would be ImilF. It works on so many levels. And I dare say would be getting a greater number of hits than we are now!
Elagabalus Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 7,051

19th December 2015, 01:23 PM	#18
tuco Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565	Some double-hits too.
tuco Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565

19th December 2015, 01:26 PM	#19
applecorped Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 20,145	I thought this was the International Septic Forum!
applecorped Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 20,145

19th December 2015, 01:28 PM	#20
fuelair Banned Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 58,581	Cause some of us is!!!!! And we try to play with those who isn't. As nicely as we can live with!!!!
fuelair Banned Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 58,581

20th December 2015, 04:45 PM	#21
The Atheist The Grammar Tyrant Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 31,887	Originally Posted by Elagabalus On the plus side, the acronym would be ImilF. It works on so many levels. And I dare say would be getting a greater number of hits than we are now! That would've been a smart move. I believe the acronym you describe is close to one often Googled.
	__________________ The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.

20th December 2015, 05:01 PM	#22
John Jones Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Iowa USA Posts: 12,131	Originally Posted by The Atheist Badly. Why on earth would it irritate me? If it irritated me, I wouldn't bother posting. You come across as one who is irritated.
	__________________ "Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave

20th December 2015, 05:16 PM	#23
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader TLA Dictator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 41,468	Originally Posted by The Atheist (Keep in mind I do not self-identify as a skeptic.) I self-identify as skeptical,... the adjective. When we were discussing the new forum name, my only real push was to have "International" or "Global" in there; thinking ahead that it might be of worth to link together some of the disparate Skeptical (with an upper case S) and Critical Thinking sites. (You know, ... growing the forums rather than watching them shrink.) I went with ISF figuring skeptical has, to many, become synonymous with "critical thinking" and Int'l Critical Thinking Forums has problems to me, in that it sounds a tad arrogant. Besides, International Hidebound Opinionated Jerks Forum wouldn't have fit on the masthead.
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

20th December 2015, 07:47 PM	#24
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,513	"Skeptics" is a placeholder between the the words "International" and "Forum". Eventually, as dictated by the owners or this forum, the Illuminati, the Roman Catholic Church and the Lemurian Deros, and confirmed by a universal vote of active members of the forum (all six of us) it will be replaced by an actual, permanent word that is fully descriptive of the intent of the forum. This is expected to happen sometime in 2054. Carry on. Smoke if you've got 'em.
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

20th December 2015, 10:37 PM	#25
The Atheist The Grammar Tyrant Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 31,887	Originally Posted by John Jones You come across as one who is irritated. Mate, if things on the internet irritate me, I find it extraordinarily easy to avoid them. You can put that one away now. Originally Posted by Foolmewunz Besides, International Hidebound Opinionated Jerks Forum wouldn't have fit on the masthead. But much more honest! As you say, forums are a dying breed, so it's not going to matter much.
	__________________ The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.

20th December 2015, 10:48 PM	#26
JihadJane not a camel Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 81,035	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers On the basis that "International forum for people who are allowed to be doubtful about things that are the majority opinion of all the relevant experts but have to uncritically swallow any crazy idea that some random nutter dreams up as long as it isn't mainstream" would have been too long for a URL? Dave There is a strong, irrational trust in mainstream authority evident in these pages.
JihadJane not a camel Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 81,035	__________________ empty void in space epic wasteland so dark you have no direction and die in sensory deprivation madness all your fault anyway jerk ~ Hlafordlaes Last edited by JihadJane; 20th December 2015 at 10:50 PM.

21st December 2015, 06:12 AM	#27
Doubt Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 7,432	On what basis do we call this a forum? I don't see any of you wearing togas and speaking Latin!
Doubt Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 7,432	__________________ 45 es un titere

21st December 2015, 06:18 AM	#28
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 17,511	Like Atheism, everyone is skeptical about some things. "Skeptics" just refers to the inclusion of 'special interest' sub forums:- General Skepticism and the paranormal, conspiracy theories etc to go along with the more general community ones such as sport and politics.

21st December 2015, 09:08 AM	#29
JJM 777 Suspended Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 4,060	Originally Posted by Doubt On what basis do we call this a forum? I don't see any of you wearing togas and speaking Latin! Because you don't see us, at all.
JJM 777 Suspended Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 4,060

21st December 2015, 10:44 AM	#30
Doubt Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 7,432	Originally Posted by JJM 777 Because you don't see us, at all. Okay. What are you w.........Never mind.
Doubt Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 7,432	__________________ 45 es un titere

21st December 2015, 06:25 PM	#31
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,051	Most people are skeptical about one thing or another (so you could call this the International Peoples Forum if you like ). Some of the more common things that members here are skeptical about include: All forms of religion Hidden conspiracies The GOP Libertarianism (the no government kind) The unfettered right to free speech Originally Posted by JihadJane There is a strong, irrational trust in mainstream authority evident in these pages. Nope, that is definitely a minority view point here (GOP excepted).
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

22nd December 2015, 12:47 AM	#32
bluesjnr Professional Nemesis for Hire Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Home. Posts: 9,753	Originally Posted by The Atheist Mate, if things on the internet irritate me, I find it extraordinarily easy to avoid them. You need to let your short fuse know this.
	__________________

22nd December 2015, 02:02 AM	#33
The Atheist The Grammar Tyrant Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 31,887	Originally Posted by psionl0 Most people are skeptical about one thing or another (so you could call this the International Peoples Forum if you like ). Probably a bit more inclusive, too.
	__________________ The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.

22nd December 2015, 03:12 AM	#34
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 17,511	Originally Posted by The Atheist Probably a bit more inclusive, too. Why limit it to people or nations? The Galactic Interspecies Forum? Added bonus is that GIF is easier to pronounce than ISF.

23rd December 2015, 10:08 AM	#35
Steve Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney Nova Scotia Posts: 11,247	Originally Posted by psionl0 Most people are skeptical about one thing or another (so you could call this the International Peoples Forum if you like ). Some of the more common things that members here are skeptical about include: All forms of religion Hidden conspiracies The GOP Libertarianism (the no government kind) The unfettered right to free speech Nope, that is definitely a minority view point here (GOP excepted). Ok comrade! (sounds vaguely communist )
	__________________ Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"