Question

Psychology major?
Philosophy major?
Organic Chemistry major?

need these groups

Answer 1

Organic Chemistry is a subset of Chemistry, for which there is an official group.

The others are worth considering for sure, though philosophy groups/forums are usually a grand place to have some massive flamewars.

Answer 2

Organic Chemistry is a whole other world, my friend.

Answer 3

I agree with your Philosophy statement.

Answer 4

Organic Chemistry is a whole other world from inorganic, yes. However, they are both grouped under Chemistry for our purposes (just like Calculus, Differential Equations, and Linear Algebra are both under Mathematics, despite being very disparate subject matters).

Once we start seeing enough activity to justify it, we will probably split out the Chemistry group into Organic and Inorganic to alleviate some of that.

Answer 5

'Organic chemistry' is to 'chemistry'
as
'physics' is to 'electronics'

Answer 6

I'm… Sorry. By definition, you are incorrect. OChem is a subdiscipline of Chemistry. Thus the naming. The Chemistry group is not for what is often called “General Chemistry”, but for *all* Chemistry, including Physical, Organic, and Inorganic Chemistry. Thermodynamics probably distributes equally to the Chemistry and Physics groups for now.

Answer 7

If I can make a suggestion, I have thought for some time that instead of making entirely new groups for specialisations of existing subjects, it would be possible to make filters like "organic chemistry" or "ecology" or "calculus" which could be applied to existing groups and display only questions consistent with those filter queries.

It would involve a mechanism for tagging questions, but it would neatly circumvent problems of both the plethora of off shoot groups and the lack of specialisation in existant groups.

Perhaps it would also enable people to filter questions by asker and answerer (although we can already get lists of that through the profile, for which I am grateful) and encourage the emergence of study circles of friends.

Answer 8

Brilliant, @blues

Answer 9

I only make that analogy because I spent 6 years independently studying organic chemistry, and have only a vague idea of what most of the people in the Chemistry group are talking about here.

Furthermore, OChem takes on an entirely different scholastic path, the only common ground with Chemistry being the carbon bond formulae.

Those formulae are like the trig formulae and fourrier series math in relation to electronic engineering, which I've been in college for for 3 yrs now.

Answer 10

We definitely have an eye out on that, no question. It's been on our radar for a while. Mostly it's a matter of balancing the benefits of filtering with the disadvantages of exposing content to fewer people. And balancing all of that with a more complicated user experience, which is the real problem. We still haven't figured out a way we're satisfied with to apply tags/filters in questions.

But we're interested in all of those things, and are working on it slowly but surely. I hope you can see how it could be a pretty complicated a tough nut to crack :)

Answer 11

It's like electronic engineering vs. electrical engineering.
They are two different worlds, with but a common star.

Answer 12

Oh the added complexity in sorting questions is the limiting factor (from the user end) beyond any question - and the question is whether the pay offs in organisation are worth the implementational pain. Which is why I didn't mention it until it came up in context as one possible fix to this and all the other recent questions about groups.

Users could get a tag/sort option; viewers of questions could be allowed to tag/sort; or an automatic filter could look for words like "derivative" and automatically sort to calculus in that case. Or people could have the option of not tagging if they chose and of viewing all questions regardless of tagged. Or any weighted combination of the above.

Just for the radar screen. :D

Answer 13

http://openstudy.com/study?login#/groups/The%20Most%20Awesomness%20Criminals!%20%5E.%5E

Who created this group?

Answer 14

Ashlee0001 is the user who provided the link.

Answer 15

Hi @Dyiliq - that was a user created group. Also, an example of why these groups don't typically add value.

Answer 16

Well that one definitely won't. No way it could. Unless you make it the "Official Spam/Abuse Group" lol

Answer 17

Hehe