I'm open to anything.
If it weren't for the origins forum, a lot of that would be in the general science forum. It would be the first thing most people would see when they came here - and that would definitely turn off most people really interested in science. So my vote would be to keep the origins forum.
Same reason for the "not quite science" forum - partly keeps some of the crazier stuff out of the main view, and also there are topics that are relevant to, say, the philosophy and culture of science, or to the ethics and social responsibility angle that might get diluted in the main fora, or might themselves dilute the purpose or concentration of them.
My own interest is in complex adaptive systems (real and artificial), which is the umbrella under which I do most of my reading. I've actually started a CAS lunchtime group where I work that includes about 50 people, about 2/3rds of whom are PhDs. OTOH, I don't know most people would find it all that interesting, and for now there seems to be a bit of the golly-gee-whiz sort of aura about the thing. Also, I don't know if my thoughts are mature enough to contribute regularly. OTOOH, it might be interesting to hear even shoddy ideas.
One benefit of the, ahem, 'discussion' with Trilobyte over on origin is that it's got me thinking a lot about what are called neutral mutations and their importance to diversity and what Stuart Kauffman calls "preadaptation." So even a completely inane post might spur the development of legitimate ideas. OTOOOH, I might have become interested in this aspect anyway.
