Philosophy | University of Northern Colorado
Philosophy | University of Northern Colorado
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Class Forums - Spring 2013
 PHIL 200-002 - Friedrich Nietzsche
 Questions
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin

1423 Posts

Posted - Jan 14 2013 :  09:12:41 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
If you've got any questions about the course, this is the place to post them.

John Edelmon
Fledgling

16 Posts

Posted - Jan 14 2013 :  10:22:25 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I know you wrote "Arguments and Their Evaluation", which I have yet to read, but did you also write the information on the wiki?
Go to Top of Page

Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin

1423 Posts

Posted - Jan 15 2013 :  06:37:31 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The information on the wiki? There are things on the wiki I didn't write—all the pages accessible via the links under the heading "PmWiki" at the bottom of the main menu, for example—but most of what's there right now I confess to having authored. In particular, what you'll be reading when you work your way through the "Very First Lecture" in the Reading Room—which is also accessible via the links in the outline at the bottom of the main page (what I also have called the "Orientation to PHIL 200 and...Quick Tour of the Wiki")—yup, I wrote all of that...except, of course, where I'm clearly quoting things from other sources.

But as you know, I hope that in short order there'll be all sorts of things on the wiki that have been written by you and your classmates too. If things work out as I hope they do, then the wiki will be, in the end, something in which all of you have had a hand as well—a real conversation, not just a monologue.
Go to Top of Page

David Berger
Journeyman

78 Posts

Posted - Apr 09 2013 :  11:59:46 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Professor Trelogan! I think it would be just so great if you could somehow organize a system that ranks us based on how many posts we've made. And then you can come up with the ranks! The ranks would be arbitrary and silly.

Perhaps: Iron Scholar, Heroic Scholar, Bronze scholar, Silver Scholar, Gold Scholar, Demigod, God.

Or, Peon, Novice, Apprentice, Adept, Word-Weaver, Master, Sage
-Something like this one would be cool because then everyone who doesn't post would be a "Peon" .

But really, it could be like, Squid, Monkey, Goose, Moose, Doggy, Froggy, DINOSAUR.

The post progression would be like: 5, 10, 20, 40, 60, 100, etc.

This is wishful thinking. I do not know if such functionality exists on the forums.
Go to Top of Page

Nickolaus Lavery
Fledgling

8 Posts

Posted - Apr 10 2013 :  01:20:17 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
David, has RuneScape diminished in its ability to give you the 'fix' you need for arbitrary ratings?!
Go to Top of Page

Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin

1423 Posts

Posted - Apr 10 2013 :  5:13:43 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Such functionality exists!

Something like your second batch of ranks is already built into the forum software (0-4 Posts: Newcomer - no stars; 5-19 Posts: Fledgling - one star; 20-49 Posts: Apprentice - two stars; 50-99 Posts: Journeyman - three stars; 100-499 Posts: Adept - four stars; 500 or more posts: Old Hand - five stars) and I've just reset the software to make it reveal those rankings. You, sir, are right now an apprentice! I'm an old hand.

Some of this is fixed and some can be adjusted. We're stuck with six ranks altogether (0-5 stars), but can call them anything we'd like to call them. The post progression can be altered; the color of the stars can be altered (within certain limits). And by the way, my stars are purple not because I'm an old hand, but because I'm the an Administrator. If I were a plain old garden variety old hand, my stars would be merely gold. That the things you get from 0 to 5 of are stars -- that cannot be altered. Also, unhappily, the ranks cannot vary from one forum to the next, so whatever we came up with for the Nietzsche class would also be visited on the Sokrates and Plato forum and, for that matter, every other forum.

By the way, I had no idea that frogs were higher animals than dogs. My Katie would be deeply offended. Or were you thinking specifically of Kermit?
Go to Top of Page

David Berger
Journeyman

78 Posts

Posted - Apr 12 2013 :  10:35:08 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Excellent. Now my forum experience shall be even better!

Well, I was just being so random, think of it not like the animals dog, or frog, but the rankings "Dog", and "Frog", which can really bear any significance, even if that is just a placeholder for ranks. But the real reason to do it would be so people like you ask such questions, getting yourself worked up over really nothing of consequence!

But I am very pleased with your current system. Thank you for revealing it.
Go to Top of Page

David Berger
Journeyman

78 Posts

Posted - Apr 12 2013 :  11:11:31 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hah, I suppose my choice of large print for textual emphasis implies a higher opinion of dinosaurs, but really I only speak to their largeness and powerful crushing force. So that system would be extremely random, some words bearing relative significance to something outside of the ranking system, some bearing none at all besides their rank. But how much time have I wasted just thinking about this nonsense?
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Philosophy | University of Northern Colorado © 2004 tkt Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.09 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000