Talk:Main Page

From ResearchID.org

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit]

Intralinks

Any thoughts on the bar of intralinks at the top of the main page? -- JosephCCampana 11:36, 26 February 2006 (CST)

I moved the intralinks to the bottom, because the search engine previews simply said, "ResearchID.org FAQ Sandbox ...". -- JosephCCampana 22:48, 26 February 2006 (CST)
[edit]

Possible future content

--Tobstar78 14:36, 9 January 2007 (CST)


[edit]

Main Page Archives

  • /Archive1 - external link of the week archive
[edit]

Any thoughts

Any thoughts on improving the look and feel of the Main Page? -- JosephCCampana 11:41, 26 February 2006 (CST)

Now that I have added the RSS feeds, the Main Page is way too crowded. I'm going to somehow give the whole thing a more consistent look and feel. -- JosephCCampana 15:21, 26 February 2006 (CST)
Would it be possible to squeeze the top part of the main page? Right now there's a lot of white space there. --SierraEcho 22:12, 26 February 2006 (CST)
Done! I put them as close as possible, if I remove any more space between the tables they are basically touching. I think what we have now is clear and understandable, and although there is a lot of information, it seems to be digestable. Great suggestion, Sierra! Let me know if anymore ideas come up! -- JosephCCampana 22:57, 26 February 2006 (CST)
Nice! --SierraEcho 12:02, 27 February 2006 (CST)

I like most of your future content ideas, but I got a bad impression from Flock of Dodos when it was screened in my vicinity. Have you seen it? If you want to put it on as something from the anti-ID side I don't have any objection, but you should know it isn't evenhanded or unbiased. --Arctura 21:16, 6 March 2006 (CST)

I appreciate the warning, I wasn't sure whether or not to put it up, I will be sure to look into it more before I consider putting it on the Main Page. And if it does end up there, I will put some type of disclaimer for sure. Thanks again Arctura. -- JosephCCampana 22:17, 6 March 2006 (CST)
He,he. I also watched Flock of Dodos. It's billed as unbiased but it's very much a propaganda piece (and quite a clever piece of propaganda, I should say). --SierraEcho 23:32, 7 March 2006 (CST)
Now that's interesting, cos I know that it rather annoys a number of evolutionary biologists too - they think that it portrays them as being clueless about PR. Is this an example of a good compromise leaving everyone mad? -- Corkscrew 09:09, 3 April 2006 (CDT)
Seems to be that way. :) I'm not going to do anything with it on the site until I'm able to watch it. -- JosephCCampana 10:43, 3 April 2006 (CDT)
There's some stuff on Flock of Dodos here.--SierraEcho 16:46, 6 May 2006 (CDT)
[edit]

IDEA Center

I noticed the box on the front page saying we're sponsored by the IDEA center seems to be missing. Are we still associated with them?--SierraEcho 16:44, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

see here -- JosephCCampana 13:17, 7 May 2006 (CDT)
[edit]

Statesmen for ID

Link to person's main site and to sites where their stand is stated. Use higher ranking links.DLH 09:08, 23 September 2006 (CDT)

[edit]

Presidents for ID

[edit]

Senators for ID

[edit]

Discussion Forum Request

Please, to build membership, the site needs a Forum w/ moderator. Let's get an interactive discussion going. -- Orion27, 10:03, February 1, 2007

Orion, welcome to ResearchID.org, and I appreciate your suggestion. All discussion here happens at the talk page of each. This has a two-fold purpose: 1) Promotes streamlined discussion. 2) Hinders the trolls.
On #1, Many very good sites like ARN.org and ISCID.org offer discussion boards, but ResearchID.org is unique among ID-related websites. Discussion threads can become long strings of replies and repeats that sometimes result in a hodge-podge of multiple conversations and ideas. Explicit direction is often lacking. Since our site is a wiki, there are talk pages on every article where collaboration and discussion happen. This is different from discussion boards because the talk pages exist not solely for the sake of discussion, but to generate a final product (article) that is clear, specific in details, compact, and, ultimately, an understandable page.
On #2, a streamlined discussion hinders would-be trolls because the only people who will hear what the troll has to say is a very limited audience of people who have an accute interest in what the page is about. Legitimate criticism will be addressed with great interest, but I would hope that our users could care less how many silly arguments someone can bring against intelligent design.
I realize that the effect this policy has on our site is a huge drag on activity, but I think this is a necessary "filter system" because I, nor anyone I know, has time to moderate a discussion forum. If you want a free-for-all discussion on intelligent design research, I recommend going to http://www.arn.org or http://www.iscid.org and take advantage of their excellent resources. What do you think about the points I bring up here? --Joseph "Joey" C. Campana 09:32, 1 February 2007 (CST)

Valid points, all. True, unless there is a moderator to mod the trolls, it would get messy. This is my first experience with this format. I will adjust. Thanks for great site! --Orion27

You are welcome, Orion. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have as you adjust. I will personally assist you in any way I can. --Joseph "Joey" C. Campana 11:32, 2 February 2007 (CST)
[edit]

Corrections

Fix link:

Fixed, thank you! --Joseph "Joey" C. Campana 10:38, 15 November 2006 (CST)
[edit]

Page Update

Awesome, it looks very nice! :-) SierraEcho 16:41, 10 February 2007 (CST)

Thank you. :) --Joseph "Joey" C. Campana 16:52, 10 February 2007 (CST)
Retrieved from "http://www.researchintelligentdesign.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page"
Personal tools

Add to Google

Add to My Yahoo!