From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Two or more people who share any characteristic.
Here is the complete acceptance record of Group (Overgaard-2017):
|Community||Accepted From||Acceptance Indicators||Still Accepted||Accepted Until||Rejection Indicators|
|Scientonomy||2 February 2018||The definition became accepted as a result of the acceptance of the respective suggested modification.||Yes|
Suggestions To Accept
Here are all the modifications where the acceptance of this theory has been suggested:
|Modification||Community||Date Suggested||Summary||Verdict||Verdict Rationale||Date Assessed|
|Sciento-2017-0012||Scientonomy||19 May 2017||Accept a new taxonomy for group and its two sub-types - accidental group, and community.||Accepted||A consensus has emerged after a long discussion that the distinction and the respective definitions should be accepted. It was noted that "these formulations tend to be the starting point for so many of our discussions"c1 and that "despite all disagreements that this taxonomy causes, it is actually accepted by the community".c2 Yet, it was also indicated that whereas the definition of group as "two or more people that share a characteristic" is the best we have at the moment, it may be potentially necessary to pursue the idea of redefining it as "one or more people..." to allow for one-scientist communities.c3 Finally, while a question was raised whether there is any "value in defining accidental groups as something separate from groups",c4 it was eventually agreed that it is important to draw "a clear distinction between the two kinds of groups as accidental groups and communities".c5||2 February 2018|
Group (Overgaard-2017) is an attempt to answer the following question: What is group? How should it be defined?
See Group for more details.
TODO: Nick add description
- Overgaard, Nicholas. (2017) A Taxonomy for the Social Agents of Scientific Change. Scientonomy 1, 55-62. Retrieved from http://www.scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/28234.
Hakob Barseghyan (100.0%)