Moderators: PLEASE introduce a mandatory structure for "research articles" and request that info to be added to existing threads ( pizzagate )

submitted by micha_

I understand that not everyone interested in pizzagate has experience in publishing research articles. I also understand that there are lots of people with bad intentions out there.

To help those, who are trying to honestly write investigative posts, and to make it harder for those with bad intentions (for example using trigger words and sensationalism and hiding the missing causal logic for conclusions), I'd highly recommend that the moderators introduce a short mandatory introduction chapter for every "investigative" thread.

Suggestion (each paragraph maximum three sentences; the shorter and more to the point, the better):

SUMMARY [short description what the article is about]

WORK THESIS [what the author wants to prove/show/discuss]

FACTS THE ARTICLE CONTAINS [supporting THEORY]

Optional: ARGUMENTS contradicting the articles THEORY

CONCLUSION [of the article]

OPEN QUESTIONS

Example: SUMMARY [what the article is about] The juvenating effect of blood from young people for older people, is an almost unknown topic to the public. Because of the positive effects, blood from young people could be a huge (black) market.

WORK THESIS [what the article intends to prove/show/discuss] The article shows that blood plasma from young people is a precious resource.

FACTS THE ARTICLE CONTAINS [supporting THEORY]: Articles from big mainstream media describing the scientific research in this field.

CONCLUSION [of the article]: The proven rejuvenating effect of blood from young people makes blood harvesting a plausible motive to abduct children.

end of intro - begin of article

0101buckyballs0101

Can you create a template that we can clone ?

Consitency can be achived without having to educate after the fact. There are lots of newbies in this line of research (myself included) that are trying to "time share" with other platforms to get important info into VOAT. If we make it "easy" for them to get data in its more likley they will use VOAT and submissions are in a usable format/workflow.

Is there a way to "merge" threads ? (crop content and add to a new parent ?)

TIA !

micha_

Great you are interested in it, but this only works from top down, because at least it needs a STICKY post and the authority of the mods behind it.

KnowThyself

Something like this is a great suggestion for researchers to make their posts more digestible, but as @phobos_mothership mentioned, if we start deleting threads that don't follow the suggestion there will be pitchforks everywhere.

Phobos_Mothership

It sounds like a good idea in theory, but we do NOT need to be excluding people for any reason right now.

micha_

Exclude people? I wrote about to make it mandatory. That means, if it is made mandatory and everyone knows, someone starting a "research"-thread and does not follow it, he does so by intention. And therefore everyone can draw his conclusions, why a probably unstructured wall of text is thrown at the community.

Articles containing such a summary would automatically become easier to read and to understand and the community overall should benefit greatly from it.

Phobos_Mothership

No, the community will DIE if we start demanding formats for posts. Get out of here.