Timeline for Cognitive Science Reboot 2017: Changing the Name
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2017 at 22:26 | history | edited | Adam LearStaffMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Nov 22, 2017 at 23:03 | vote | accept | Seanny123 | ||
| Nov 22, 2017 at 23:01 | answer | added | AliceDMod | timeline score: 7 | |
| Nov 11, 2017 at 0:01 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
|
|
| Oct 24, 2017 at 12:24 | comment | added | Artem Kaznatcheev Mod | @Steven thanks for the update. I am happy to support whatever name the community thinks is best. | |
| Oct 24, 2017 at 11:13 | comment | added | Steven Jeuris Mod | @Artem this suggestion (of which I was also originally a big proponent) and subsequent (negative) vote is listed in the review above. The majority has since settled on the name(s) brought forward in this post. | |
| Oct 24, 2017 at 11:09 | comment | added | AliceD Mod | @StevenJeuris - I am sending a proposed email shortly via email for you guys to check. I think we should be very explicit to the SE team. I think they get a lot of emails, requests, tips, issues, complaints and what not. Don't you think? Personally, as a busy SE employee I would not know where to start. We should tell them what to do, not ask them what we should do. | |
| Oct 24, 2017 at 11:06 | comment | added | Steven Jeuris Mod | @AliceD I believe it is fine as is, as it simply refers to this post which was intentional. There is more to the discussion than two simple choices which are presented. The alternative would have been including this entire post and taking the discussion off meta. I'm certain the community team will read through these posts with due diligence allowing them to understand the two options. | |
| Oct 24, 2017 at 9:17 | comment | added | AliceD Mod | @StevenJeuris - apologies for the delay. It's kind of hectic here. Thanks for your efforts. However, would it be wise to send another email explicitly stating our two choices? It's not all too clear what our list of options is. Would it be best to delete my answer below? | |
| Oct 24, 2017 at 8:46 | comment | added | Artem Kaznatcheev Mod | In the past, I've expressed support for "Mind and Brain" (or some variant like "Mind and Brain Research") as a title, since it intersects both the reductive focuses of neuro (in brain) and the more holistic view of psych (in mind). It also matches a wikipedia top-level portal. Since it is hard to use that in a url, we could use psychology.SE or mind.SE or brain.SE as the url (or even the current cogsci.SE, although that is less desirable). This is done by other sites like stats.SE for Cross Validated. | |
| Oct 24, 2017 at 8:22 | comment | added | Steven Jeuris Mod | FYI: Community team has been notified. | |
| Oct 9, 2017 at 7:36 | history | edited | Steven JeurisMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 8 characters in body
|
| Oct 9, 2017 at 7:14 | history | edited | Steven JeurisMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added link to recent 'Psychology' proposal.
|
| Oct 6, 2017 at 8:53 | history | edited | Steven JeurisMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added research 'cluster' argumentation.
|
| Oct 5, 2017 at 23:41 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackCogSci/status/916086015353344001 | ||
| Oct 5, 2017 at 21:01 | answer | added | noumenal | timeline score: -3 | |
| Oct 5, 2017 at 17:48 | history | edited | Steven JeurisMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Sep 28, 2017 at 14:53 | history | edited | Steven JeurisMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Included much more detail on prior discussions. We need to show a lot of thought has been put into this!
|
| Sep 27, 2017 at 21:52 | history | edited | AliceDMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 7 characters in body
|
| Sep 27, 2017 at 21:52 | answer | added | AliceDMod | timeline score: 6 | |
| Sep 27, 2017 at 17:49 | history | asked | Seanny123 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |