Despite the abundance of knowledge on the web, however, I have found that they tend to be ignored intentionally or unintentionally by some forums users. Here are five recent examples, with downsides to different extents including unnecessary low-value posts/threads, necroposting and information scattering (I hate it). The second one was formerly a new thread, which made me reflect my own attitude and consequently led to this post.In the past, Life patterns have been scattered around the internet on the home pages of various mathematicians, but surprisingly no single resource has been provided to consolidate all of this information – LifeWiki hopes [to] fill this gap.
Actually this is not a new issue on the management side, though. The official Forum Rules #4 writes,
Regarding current situation, it needs these expansions:This is an academic forum, not a chat or microblogging platform. Please spend some time doing some research to familiarize yourself with what is and isn't already known about the Game of Life before posting your discoveries. ...
- Asking questions is fine, but for future improvements there should be indications that the asker has searched for relevant sources but cannot acquire or understand the answer.
- Sometimes people feel like writing a summary/review for collecting data, such as this early thread for non-totalistic rules. In this case appropriate references/citations/acknowledgements as in every other academic field is undoubtedly a must.
·Think twice as to whether a new post/thread is intended to record a single point or include a number of related findings.
- All the same principles apply to exercise in other cellular automata.
In essence, this is one of my wishful thinkings to ensure a productive, high-quality/standard/value environment. Even if the writing styles look similar to you, I am not M&C