Welcome to all new members who have joined this year.
We have over a quarter million members and a half million posts here.
Starting your journey from a harmless mad scientist to becoming a international hazard mad scientist.
We all make sciencemadness a great resource for amature chemistry and have helped make it grow and progress so much. It has also inspired many members
to pursue chemistry as a career.
There is so much to discover so let your curiousity flow.
Here are the stats
36531 topics / 500001 posts / 288052 members
[Edited on 3-11-2020 by symboom]
[Edited on 3-11-2020 by symboom]j_sum1 - 3-11-2020 at 14:50
I would not read too much into that quarter million members. More than 90% are spam-bot accounts that have never posted.
I don't know if there is an efficient way of cleaning them out (without destroying genuine lurkers who have registered – of whom there are a
considerable number). Provided all the spam accounts stay inactive I don't suppose that it is a problem.symboom - 3-11-2020 at 15:03
90% wow had no idea it was that much. Understandable I'm glad the spam problem has been fixed even if an extreme measure had to be done. I remember
how bad It was with so much spam.j_sum1 - 3-11-2020 at 15:11
Look here
96.6% of users are non-posters.
But, yes. This is off topic. Half a million posts on an amatuer chem board – I think represents actually quite a significant contribution to
Science.Ubya - 3-11-2020 at 16:01
Half a million posts on an amatuer chem board – I think represents actually quite a significant contribution to Science.
For Science i don't know, but surely this forum inspired and helped many strangers.
There aren't many big forums about chemistry anymore, and the ones left are just a place to post your homework and get it solved by someone else, but
sciencemadness is really a place of discussion, discovery and inspirationpaulll - 3-11-2020 at 17:15
" I think represents actually quite a significant contribution to Science."
That's a pretty big claim and yet I don't think it's even slightly overstated.Fyndium - 5-11-2020 at 15:38
Practical discussion is not comparable to scientific studies.
That's because chemistry is not just knowing what, but how.
Is there a (need for) fundraising for SM to help upkeep of costs and stuff?
[Edited on 5-11-2020 by Fyndium]j_sum1 - 5-11-2020 at 15:53
Maybe I should qualify my statement.
There have been a number of significant developments of procedures on this site. Particularly in the early days. I am thinking of Len1's work, Dan
Vizine's production of thorium and a few others.
There has also been adaptation of known procedures to amateur or low-tech scenarios. The thread on the chamber process would count for this.
Even where procedures have not been developed here, there has been a lot of fruitful discussion on many of them. Catalytic reduction of potassium and
Nurdrage's development of a sodium analogue would count among those.
There are some real gems of knowledge and good teaching here. blogfast25's work is notable. As is woelen's expertise in esoteric inorganic
compounds. There is a reason why SM comes up so often when you are looking for something on Google.
Finally, the community here has been good for enthusing a small but significant number of, particularly young, chemists and giving them guidance and
encouragement as well as practical knowledge. And let's face it, practical experimentation is not something emphasised in many chem courses
especially at high school level.
So, yes. "Quite a significant contribution" in my view. Maybe not enormous in terms of numbers, but nothing to be sneezed at. BromicAcid - 5-11-2020 at 17:27
Some people I work with consider SM results better than patent results when they're investigating something for the lab.Texium - 6-11-2020 at 10:32
I learned that a few of my fellow students during undergrad knew of and regularly used our wiki to find information for homework or research. It blew
my mind that something I helped start when I was in high school was assisting my peers in college!
