Both of them

Or should we just use questions to increase our score?

Do not miss this RG conversation which corresponds to my previous message https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_The_Secrets_to_a_Successful_Marriage

Jesus Garcia Laborda , questions for the sake of questions are equally bad. As I said in my explanation, culture of communities evolve. Norms do emerge according to sticks and carrots. My basic reaction was to an individual who added 10 replies in a row and they all were irrelevant quotes from the Brainy Quotes website, burrying all other relies into “previous replies.”

Well Prof Shah ,

I try to answer with the best of my understanding ANY field , not that I am an expert anywhere :)

I believe in good discussion rather than recommendations , my score goes up iff (if and only if) I write technical answers else it reduces !!! So at least I answer a couple of tech questions :)

I am spending my precisou time in providing meaningul tips and information to the questions and discussions. The reason is that I also had a hard time in getting those answers when I was a researcg beginner. I also saw such a meaningless answer or discussion in RG, which might make readers uncomfortable with them... Such a manner should be discouraged, I believe. Here, we all are very busy scholars. Time is an irreplaceable asset for all of us.

Thank you so much Aparna Sathya Murthy for an excellent tip. I did not know that RG differentiates between technical and other questions. Good to know.

Good debate about recommendations.

I agree, with you Claire Su-Yeon Park one hundred percent. I am primarily motivated by learning from colleagues in my disciplines but also from other disciplines. I have leaned a great deal. I am also charged to discuss topics that will general good in generating useful answers. I also love light, social questions in addition to purely researchy topics.

Dear Gulzar Shah,

According to the situation of last few months, this is a serious issue for the users and for the future of Researchgate Net. I also questioned this today morning for the same.

Piyal Aravinna

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/A_G_Aravinna2/questions

I have responded to your question dear A. G. Piyal Aravinna . Good points.

By the way, why RG score is deleted?

What happened?

i think some of them care

Honestly, all are encouraging recommendations (either relevant or irrelevant) instead of good debate. Hah.!

I agree with you dr Gulzar Shah and I only support good discussions - this must be the main goal of the RG platform.

I encourage good and critical debate between scientists...

I think the problem is numbers guide essentially all our work, so people are trying to inflate numbers to the determinant of good discussions in the expectation that good numbers = good academic engagement.

There is just so much commodification within academia from what I can see, so much sincere discussions get lost in the hope of a few recommendations that will drive us up the ranks (to what end I'm not entirely sure - as the link between RG scores to anything tangible in the real world is not exactly well understood).

But this is just a broader issue in digital engagement, we're all brands, and our scores, friends, like, followers, retweets etc, say something about us so we drive to increase these numbers, and that's why we see such hollow engagement - folks trying to work around the system.

I'd love to see better engagement, but sometimes the discussions get so toxic and hostile it's better to just remove yourself from them.

Nabil Eid , Abdelhakim Bouyahya , Nihada Ahmetovic , Maham Muzamil @Jason D. Thank you for your excellent perspectives.

'Objectivity' may be with discussion on RG plateform & 'Hate' message is avoided

'Autonomy' under ideology guaranteed by UNESCO implicitly means protect basic rights of others & 'Integrity' of 'Freedom of Expression' via 'Dignity' during discussion

It seems we do not care about debates here.

Good debate indeed. As it ensures acceptance by the readers wholeheartedly. All the positive points including the negatives (that's why ......A debate) are discussed creating definite and far-reaching impact to the individuals and even to the society.

But, who else don't love to get recommendations?........ So, the ideal one is undoubtedly a good debate with more recommendations for any issue to prove it's worth in the RG community.

Pankaj Tomar , Amit Baran Sharangi , Ammar Oglat, thank you for extremely fair and useful points.

I think personal vanity is more latent than the scientific debate. This score could be abolished and the portal encourages more discussions and helps among the participants of this portal. I have noticed that some colleagues lose even the scientific focus in search of increase of their score. Nothing against, but I find this behavior somewhat self-centered. I think the portal is very good at bringing research together for the sake of humanity. Too bad that many articles are still hostage due to "exclusivity" of groups of publications. The system open acess is the most democratic and should be stimulated always.

Excellent insights, thanks for sharing Francisco Sávio Gomes Pereira

My concern is with discussions. Sure, some times highly recommended part makes an attention.

'Information' via scientific networking not only protect 'Social Justice' but also induce 'Consciousness'

'Scientific Innovation' is just update of means for betterment of global requirement & 'Information' is a key parameter in real human development.

'Vasudeva Kutubkum' quoted in 'Veda' explicitly state 'Globe is a Family' & 'Constitution of India' via Preamble & Part-III guaranteed inherent rights to citizens via Freedoms of Speech, Expression, Liberty, Equality, Protection, Dignity, Integrity and prohibited all possible discrimination

People love being recommended, but a good discussion surely has a heavy side.

I want to share my views or ideas of mine about the discussion or question my RG colleagues have started. Although it feels good if someone recommended my view.

Dear All,

As human being, if anybody accepts our answer or argument, we are happy for that.

This platform is used to enhance correct and cretive research ideas.

If you recomend incorrect answers, It is not good for your future carrier.

Further, as researchers we shoud encourage correct argument without bias.

Also, for this type of discussion, sometime, you have to add several answers to defend yourself from the comments comming aginst you. But It should do in scientific and ethical manner.

However, Researchgate Net should not used as a voting center for the friends.

Other important thing is, if any body hope to answer or to contribut to discussion, that person should read other comment proir to your answer, and It would help to avoid repetition.

Piyal Aravinna.

I think both.

Good debate is more of its objectives!

There are those who care about the recommendations very much and do not care about the debate often and there is on the contrary

@ Dr. Gulzar Shah

I don't know about others, but I always try my best to make the discussion healthy on this platform. Sometimes, I take even hours to answer a question. I always support my answers with useful links and attachments. I never care about recommendations.

Both of them

To have recommendations has never been the goal of the discussions on this scientific network.

@Marwah Abdullah Al Rawe, Arvind Singh ; thank you colleagues for your contribution to this discussion.

Thanks Dr Shah, for starting this discussion. I also feel bad about some discussions (unscientific and almost "click-bait") and some very low quality answers. It is embarrassing really. RG is not Facebook/Instagram/Twitter, lets not decrease the level. Please think first before writing something.

Best

Thank you Dr. /Meltem Idig-Camuroglu, I greatly appreciate your perspective. The absolute hidden agenda for me to raise this issue is precisely to raise a red flag. With an increasing tendency to post irrelevant responses simply to game the system, some serious scientist may stop participating in these debates.

Absolutely Dr. Shah,

I am with you to raise the red flag.

Best

Dear Gulzar Shah,

Could you summarized the discussion

so far with statistics ?

Piyal Aravinna

Dear Colleague Gulzar Shah,

What is your definition of a "good debate?" Does RG reward this more than "less good debates?"

Do you think the incentives and metrics at RG foster good debates?

How could people be encouraged to stick with one thing longer and be a little less short attention span here?

To whom at RG should you tel this suggestion?

For me, Getting recommended, for high quality and witty answers is a good thing. Moreover, whenever, there is a human factor, present, it will always be there, you scratch my back, I will scratch yours, and it is not difficult to do so, if scratching back involves really good answer, but I feel terrible, when I have to recommend, (I am generous person, and give a lot recommendations) following. More over, When people copy same answer from other person and paste on the same thread, it is horrible form of plagarism, please, don't do this.

both will be useful

Dear colleagues, I greatly appreciate Dr. A. G. Piyal Aravinna , for recommending to make a summary. Wearing my statistician hat, I was thrilled to have this interest. Now the results (based on my interpretation):

Good discussion: 14/26 =54%

No: 8/26 =31%

Vague/no clear side: 4/26=15%

Note: irrelevant answers were not counted.

Dear Gloria Lee Mcmillan ,

You have raised excellent questions. I am not suggesting that we be the "judges" of others' discussion posts. My concern is with those posts where a participant is obvious that the response is not connected with discussion. For instance, there is a participant who posts 4 to 10 replies constantly, saying two-word generic phrase.

RG, has a way of receiving feedback. If a post or series of posts are extremely appropriate, you can click on the down arrow on the top right of the post and click on "report".

I fully agree with Meltem Idig-Camuroglu

Regards

Yes, I agree...