It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


On ATS, Ignorance Is Winning

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 02:52 PM

Originally posted by CazMedia
Heres an example, rant says,

Others most would probably like to ban, give us no reason to do so. Stupid rules.

You mean people like ME perhaps, ones that buck the trend and say something you dont like to hear, yet someone that doesnt cross the EXISTING line? (as well as it can be known)

Well no I didn't mean you, but I do now.

Actually, I thought we were discussing trolls of the borderline variety. People that cause multiple posters to constantly complain, but technically aren't breaking rules. Not a mod biased decision. In those cases we're often forced to defend the rogue poster, as no rules have been broken.

Hmm so what criteria would you be using to determine what form of speech, or expression of what, would qualify for THIS type of ban if its not spelled out in the rules?

Nobody gets banned without breaking the rules. I'm kind of at a loss following your post. Is there a question that can be boiled down to it's fundamental components? That would be helpful for anyone responding. No posturing needed. Just ask.

If a certain history with your own penalties is being alluded to that isn't common knowledge don't expect everyone to understand. I don't.

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 05:33 PM
For those staff members making the point, I'm not knocking your discretion or abilities. My honest opinion is that ATS has a rather exceptional staff that handles things admirably under the circumstances.

My point is that the staff shouldn't need to be so talented, because that doesn't scale well. At some point, you can and will be overwhelmed, because the Internet is growing, and a large percentage of new users have no clue what "Netiquette" is or why it is so important.

All those kids getting a new computer for their 10th birthday are just out to have fun. For many of them, being on an equal footing with adults gives them a feeling of power they don't have offline, and abusive behavior results. A whole generation of beggar-kings is joining our ranks. Without some decisive measures to address the issue -- and of abusive behavior by people of all ages, they will take over.

While it may seem like I'm calling for a more cumbersome method of administrating the ATS user community, the truth is that I am confident it would be more efficient. If you actually have to do some "hand-wringing" or spend more than a minute or two determining if a post merits disciplinary action, the work will pile up on you.

Ideally, the T&C and operating procedures you have will be clear enough that you don't have to anguish over a user's history or motives, but rather just respond to posts which violate the T&C, and be able to quote chapter and verse when you do so.

The ATS staff is not responsible for the influx of flamers and trolls, they are growing in number all over the Internet, and ATS has an open membership policy. However, the ATS staff is responsible for dealing with flamers and trolls on ATS, and my feedback to you is that the percentage of them among the membership seems to be growing.

Do I even need to mention why we have a "Political Ideology" forum, or why "Conspiracies in Religions" has more to do with religious opinions than conspiracies? We can try to ghettoize flamers and trolls by corraling them into the "romper room" forums, but they will and do spill out into the other forums, bringing the quality of the site's content down in the process.

I know things go on behind the scenes that I am not aware of. When it comes to matters involving the discipline of ATS members, however, I think that is a mistake. Members who understand the disciplinary process and where they stand in it are far more likely to comply with it.

Members who are truly clueless will constantly accuse the staff of arbitrary conduct, favoritism and vendettas -- all the while wasting staff time as they deal with the charges. The best way to undermine preclude such backdoor attacks on the staff is to have transparency in the process.

A consistent, well-defined and universal system for enforcing an updated T&C on ATS is not the only tool needed to combat what I see as a growing problem, but it is indispensable -- in my humble opinion.

I don't expect the staff to necessarily agree with my recommendations or suggestions for dealing with what I see as a growing problem with the ATS culture -- that's up to the staff. However, I must have hope that my warnings and advice will be considered in the spirit they are given, and effective steps for dealing with these issues will be taken.

There is a problem, and it is getting worse.

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 05:44 PM
... I spent four years at NYTIMES/Abuzz being hammered by thugs, drones and shills.

... This place is Heaven by comparison.

... I have --YET-- to see a comment I couldn't summarily deal with.

... People >here< may think I'm looney, dumb or ignorant; but at least they're not telling me to get on drugs as a solution to what eggs me on! And I KNOW >that< wouldn't cut it with these Mods IN ANY CASE.

... I have the feeling, nothing I write escapes "NOTICE."

... Relax. Life is good--as long as it LASTS.

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 05:50 PM
I would like to add an "Abuse Button" to the wish list. Many sites have them. The ATS version would ideally be a simple implementation.

Rather than rely solely on U2U's or "thread cop" posts, having a link to click that brings up a menu of abuse types to choose from -- all based on specific sections of the T&C -- would simply flag that post as abusive.

The post would then display a small message, perhaps at the bottom, that "X number of ATS members found this post abusive", possibly with a breakdown of what T&C provisions members thought it violated.

This system of members "voting" on specific posts would allow the community to provide instant feedback to other members. If 100 fellow ATS members gave your post the thumbs down for containing racist bigotry, and it was displayed there for all the world to see, maybe you would think twice about doing it again.

Posts marked as abusive should be locked from editing unless unlocked by a staff member. However, "abuse" votes would have no disciplinary standing other than locking the post. A staff member would have to decide if the post merits action -- and ideally would do so by using a similar process, selecting an action from a menu.

Moderators scanning a thread will of course want to check all posts, but having posts pre-marked as possibly abusive would certainly help call attention to posts that need it.

If a moderator determines that a post does not violate the T&C specified, the flag will be removed, and, having been reviewed and found okay by a mod, the abuse feature will be disabled for that post -- members would see a message explaining that it had already been reviewed.

If the mod determines that the post has violated the T&C, it will remain locked and uneditable, and the message flag will show that the staff found the post in violation. In conjunction with that, the appropriate disciplinary action will be taken automatically, whether a warning, "strike", point deduction or whatever.

Of course, adding features like this is not just a matter of "adding a button". I know, I have been on the other end of this kind of thing. The justification for adding such overhead to the system, however, is reducing overhead for the (mostly) human beings that comprise the staff.

Just a thought.

[edit on 11/26/2004 by Majic]

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 06:06 PM
OK, my lone rant, not RANT, on this topic. I can speak freely on this, I've recieved my share of warns, etc, earned every one of them. I think a lot of the problem arises because ATS strives to be above the average internet site. When signing up you are presented with the T&C which you agree with for access. Did you read it when signing up? I didn't. Maybe more people should, it will let you know what's expected of you. A lot of warns comes from people learning the ropes, conduct that is on most other sites are NOT acceptable here. Most get the point and the warns go away anyway. Now moot.

With the explosion of membership has come a need for new staff, myself included. Let's look at the numbers, 25,000 registered members, daily traffic on the average of 150 members on at any given time, to as many as 200 plus. New staff learning the ropes. Have mistakes been made? I can't, or rather won't, speak for the other new mods, but I have. It's part of the learning proccess in a VERY large community.

For some reason people need to have the "dirty laundry" aired. A simple u2u or use of the "comments" button would clear up a lot of what people see as wrong with the site. Instead they see their honour besmirched and need to scream on the board that they had been hard done by. Why not ask a question before taking action? Makes sense to me. Might save bandwidth as well. I had an issue with a member this week and he was seriously upset with the warn I gave him. He reviewed his post and u2u'd me back to "never mind", he saw why he was warned. We don't go around the board seeking to warn people, that's a last resort.

Is Ignorance winning? I don't think so. We are growing rapidly, tollerance and understanding is what we need now. From members and staff. Let's keep this site head and shoulders above the rest of the Net. We've gained 70 spots on the Big Boards in the last few months for a reason, we have what people want, let's keep it that way.

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 06:15 PM

as posted by Majic
...and a large percentage of new users have no clue what "Netiquette" is or why it is so important.

Let's give a refresher then, maybe?

ATS/BTS Board Etiquette/NETiquette


posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 06:48 PM

Originally posted by Seekerof
Let's give a refresher then, maybe?

ATS/BTS Board Etiquette/NETiquette

There are very few things I can be certain of in life, but this is one of them: that the people who most need to read that thread will be the same people who will never read it.

I also want to remind those citing the growth in ATS membership and post volume that it is not an indication that the problem I am calling attention to doesn't exist. In fact, the problem can be directly attributed to the rapid growth of the board and the kind of people who are being attracted.

If hard statistics were available to illustrate the kinds of members ATS is currently attracting based on what they post and their general conduct, I am confident that such statistics would make my point far more eloquently than I can.

Being one of the biggest boards in the Internet is meaningless -- in my opinion, anyway -- if that volume comes from flames, trollery and threads full of worthless garbage instead of meaningful information.

Ignoring the problem will not make it go away, and that's the point of this thread.

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 06:53 PM
Majic, what is your point? Everything you just said I have addressed. The only thing I'm getting out of this is that you have a low tollerance for Newbies. Please tell me if I'm wrong about this. Or at least be less cryptic.

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 07:04 PM

as posted by Majic
Ignoring the problem will not make it go away, and that's the point of this thread

Majic, your points are valid and worthy of scrutiny, but please be assured that ATS is and has been continually under review in and on how to make ATS a better online experience for all new and existing members. This is and has been a daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly ongoing process. ATS has a "Deny Ignorance Committee" (as noted by its forum) where selected members of this committee review the board and future issues, etc. Nothing is 'perfect', per se', but one thing is for sure, ATS staff, past and present and undoubtedly, future staff members will still be struggling with this concern on a daily basis. In no uncertain terms is the situation (problem's) being ignored, and your mentioned concerns are not the first to be mentioned, and again, undoubtedly, will they be the last.

ATS goes through what has been deemed "growing pains/spurts" on a regular basis. As of late, these "pains" have been happening on a much quicker timeline than in the past. Why? One reason would simply be that we are and have been experiencing unprecedented growth. A deep and extensive search in the ATS archives will reveal multitudes of like topic threads concerning much of what you express. We know that you and many upon many here enjoy and care about ATS, and as such, once in awhile, present like topic threads dealing with what you speak of. Its an admirable trait and we all thank you, as we thank many upon many in the ATS community, for your concerns and expressive opinions.


[edit on 26-11-2004 by Seekerof]

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 07:12 PM

Originally posted by MajicIgnoring the problem will not make it go away, and that's the point of this thread.
The Overlord has several comments on the points of this thread, some you may not like, some you may... but, alas, life intrudes and for this moment, the Overlord is a bit too busy.
more to follow shortly...

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 07:13 PM

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by MajicIgnoring the problem will not make it go away, and that's the point of this thread.

The Overlord has several comments on the points of this thread, some you may not like, some you may... but, alas, life intrudes and for this moment, the Overlord is a bit too busy.

more to follow shortly...

Awaiting this with much anticipation.

posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 03:12 AM
There is so much to be said and inferred by the nature of an Avatar. It is an expression of self a projection of attitude and self opinion. A justification of intent. Look at yourselves and wonder in idle curiosity, who am I?


posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 03:46 AM
Ok although I'm new I hope no one has any prejudices. I lurked for a long time on ATS (*ashamed*) and this is not the first conspiracy board I've been. I was a moderator on several other boards. I hereby volunteer to be a Moderator, if needed. I can help to make this board even better (and believe me it is already the best one you can find)

posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 04:50 AM
Thanks for the offer. We'll call you if we need you.

I'm sure you know to keep it fresh and look for recent posts that might contain thoughts of yours that you are posting, considering you are a seasoned conspiracy moderator and all, right? You also are surely aware that popping in and offering your valuable services as a super-duper-supremo moderator will also move you to the top of the line, right?

Glad to have you on board. Keep up the great work.

posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 07:44 AM
First of all, kudos to Majic for the overall best TBIGD thread (this board is going downhill) I've seen in 15 years of such threads/posts. A very well-thought, reasoned, rational, and caring effort for which a great deal of intelligent effort was obviously put. Really, an excellent job with several good points. First, let me point out that we (ATS) have no illusion that we are now or ever will corner the market on the best conspiracy theory material anyone can find online... in fact, we may never achieve such a goal. However, through hard work and with the help of our members, we hope to become a large collection of pretty good material that becomes popular and introduces a large number of people to the important topics our members discuss. If those people then grow beyond what we can offer through ATS and make their way to smaller more-specialized sites or offline groups with an intensity gained through a single-minded approach... so be it... actually, that'd be awesome and I'd consider something like that to be a victory for ATS and our members. --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- But now the Overlord is going to get cranky... because, if everyone who created TBIGD posts instead focused on generating quality topics, there'd be no need for TBIGD posts in the first place! So, before I get to the three most important issues, I'd like to review and respond to some of the more important points. I don't normally yank out the big egotistical frat-paddle of experience, but my responses below will be tempered by 15+ years of involvement in digital communities (yes, there were such things way back in 1989), most of those years involved in community management. Signal-To-Noise Ratio It is not the fault of the ATS staff that the board is being flooded with fools, ideologues, mindless drones, children being raised on the Internet, people who can write but apparently can�t read and paid provocateurs. This has been an issue even back when people paid a per minute fee to have access to CompuServe discussion forums. The issue is occasionally actual new users of limited experience causing frustration for aged-users. But, in my experience, the issue is much more often related to board-burn, where members get over the initial period of discovery and cycle through to a level of boredom because of repeat topics. In these cases, the members have pretty much run through the possibilities of topics that interest them, and grow tired of seeing repeat posts from the new users. Harsher terms and conditions enforcement We're already near, or at, the high-end of fast and firm enforcement. The T&C is shown for every new-registration, and users must scroll to the bottom to confirm acceptance. Post-bannings automatically occur after 5 warnings. In this phase of banning, members can log-in and review content, but cannot post. We're no longer allowed the return of banned members. Banned is banned. We've experienced far too many occurrences of banned members returning to cause trouble. Overall, there has always been, and will always be a fine balance between allowing a free-flowing exchange of ideas, and enforcing policies that attempt to dictate a level of decorum. Some will take advantage of the idea of free-flowing exchanges and cross the line, then claim their "freedom of speech" is being violated. We have little patience for them. On the other hand, there is often valid positions within impassioned fits of posting. The balance we attempt to maintain isn't always perfect, but the attempt is important. Traffic, posts, members versus quality Quality is subjective, traffic is quantitative. In this medium, the only sure measure of potential success is the number of people voting with their mouse to spend some time on our domain. Given that we continue to grow in post-count, membership, and especially in visits by guests, this is a clear message that many things are working correctly here. Websites without some degree of interesting content simply do not grow. Discussion boards with too many flames and poor posts simply do not get new members. We are among the few boards (if not only) where the ratio of guests to members is double-digit (11:1). If anything, this is an overwhelming indication that there is indeed content here that compel many people to spend time with us. The quality-v-quantity debate has been heard far too often here on ATS. And frankly, these posts irritate and infuriate me. Far too many members adopt a near entitlement attitude whereby there appears to be an expectation that board management must take daily action to ensure supreme quality of content. While this example of the attitude may be extreme, it highlights the point that there is only one way to improve the subjective quality of content... create it. And that goes back to my first point... if everyone who create posts lamenting the "decreased post quality" of ATS simple created quality posts instead, there would be no need to lament the decreased post quality. This is not "my board". It's not "Simon's board". It's not the "moderator's board". The discussion board community has not been created as a sounding board for the opinions and ideas of those who created it. It has been created as a means for members to exchange ideas, debate opinion, learn new points of view, and most importantly collaborate on an effort that helps all who visit here learn a little more about the mysteries lurking behind the information received through mainstream sources. All we (staff) can do is attempt to police the forums of riff-raff. Creating quality material is primarily up to members. (to be continued) [edit on 28-11-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 08:26 AM
Skeptic has covered this with aplomb but I think the "board burn" issue deserves more illumination.

I have watched otherwise "Uber-members" go on a near rampage of "The quality is going to heck and the site is going to die" usually after they've been here about 3 or 4 months and have lost that "discovery feeling" you get when you first find ATS.

This phenom has been happening throughout history, not just the history of the WWW. It's human nature to become a bit disgruntled and discombobulated when the euphoric feeling of being on the brink of great discovery is replaced with the realization that you have to WORK for it.

Like S.O., I too, have been online for many many years (1990 for me) and have seen it since then as well.

The paradox of writing a post about poor quality being a poor quality post itself is a sure sign of this TEMPORARY condition. Everyone goes through this it seems, it's known as "hitting the wall" among other names.

The people who realize it's temporary and understand it's time for them to become a PRODUCER and not just a CONSUMER usually go on to become very well respected and highly contributory members...

The business end of this, and any large site requires new membership, guests and the like to survive financially. That is NOT the point in reality however. It's putting the cart before the horse.

Financial survival will ONLY come with quality content and a community based on mutual respect and common decency.

Any one of the thousands of visitors/new members could be the next (put your favorite member's name here)...

I am pretty sure everyone of our "senior members" has posted something that was covered before.


posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 07:38 PM
Board Burn?

Thanks to all for the feedback, for which I am grateful. I am familiar with some of the responses along the lines of “if you want a better board, do something about it”, and have preached that message many times in many different places myself. It was, in fact, with that principle in mind that I started this thread.

Of course, it has been brought up that maybe the real problem lies not with ATS, but with me. At least, it’s hard not to gather that impression from Springer’s post, and some of the other responses in the thread. Certainly, it would be unwise for me to assume that my perspective on the situation here isn’t strongly influenced by my own peculiarities.

Maybe it is “board burn”, and the problems I am pointing out either don’t exist or aren’t as bad as I am suggesting. I have been cruising various sorts of online discussion forums since the dial-up BBS days of the ‘80s (I still reflexively allow for a 300-baud echo delay when I type) and the Golden Age of USENET in the ‘90s (I spent many a long night sifting through alt.conspiracy -- those were the days), so I am familiar with the phenomenon.

I did give that possibility some thought before posting my “TBIGD” post (you should know that I rarely make such posts formally, by the way -- this is a rather unique case), and agree that “board burn” may be a factor. How much of a factor I must leave to others to decide, and recuse myself from that assessment.

However, having experienced “board burn” several times before, my experience with it is that it has more to do with a saturation of a given range of topics and the “interest level” I have felt than with such basics as Netiquette and SNR -- although they are always factors to some extent or another.

I left alt.flame, for example -- where flaming is always on topic -- because I grew tired of flaming. Ironically, my disinterest came from a lack of decent flamage in that case, paradoxically both a parallel and mirror image of my complaint here.

For me, if not for others, “board burn” occurs when I have exhausted what I see as the potential of the board. As far as I know, I haven’t hit that wall with ATS yet, but maybe I am blind to what others can plainly see.

Restating The Problem

My problem with ATS isn’t its charter or topics -- they are excellent and of keen interest to me. What is degrading my experience and driving me away are the ubiquitous posts by trolls and flamers that poison every forum on ATS.

If someone posts an article that is “iffy”, as so many of them are, we discuss that and see what shakes out. But when a thread is hijacked in the first few posts by yet another flame featuring ad hominem attacks, mindless cut-and-pastes lifted off of activist/propagandist websites and yet another dose of hateful bigotry, it poisons the discussion.

The worst part is seeing that first nasty post drag otherwise positive members into the muck and derail the thread -- again and again and again and again. I have been there myself more times than I wish to say, and it is a miserable thing to witness, let alone be a part of. When entire forums are consumed by this sort of disruption, there is no discussion.

This sort of thing will happen, of course, and is difficult if not impossible to prevent on a public forum. At some point, however, such posts become so predictable that contributors come to expect them. I know for a fact that I didn’t use to flinch before posting on ATS, wondering how quickly a thread of sincere interest would be derailed by roaming bands of trolls. Maybe the passage of time has dulled my memory.

At some point, the flamers and trolls become an accepted part of the culture and community. Once that happens, the rest is history repeating itself yet again as that which legitimate users seek becomes harder and harder to find.

Am I The Problem?

As for whether my own posts contribute positively to ATS or not, I can say only that they must speak for themselves -- good or ill -- and are the sole public record of my participation in the forums. Probably more to the point, however, I don’t see my post quality as being particularly germane to the topic at hand -- unless I am a habitual flamer indulging in some public hypocrisy, so I’ll leave it at that.

I suppose I must clarify that my criticisms of the situation here on ATS are not as much that general post quality is down, per se, but rather that the effects and poisonous nature of those posts which violate the T&C contribute a chill to what I see as the kinds of discussion ATS exists to accommodate, and that there are too many of such posts.

To try to clear up one apparent misperception, some responses in this thread seem to suggest that I am holding the ATS staff unfairly responsible for the quality of the content of the site while absolving the members of their responsibilities. This is not true -- I know who is writing what, because their names appear with their posts. I know the staff does not write all the posts and is not responsible for their content.

If someone writes an abusive post, it’s obviously not the fault of the ATS staff. But when someone repeatedly posts in violation of the ATS T&C, I expect the staff to do something about it. More importantly, I expect the staff to take effective steps to discourage abuse from occurring in the first place.

So at an individual level, of course I don’t hold ATS staff accountable for post quality. But at an aggregate level, I most certainly do hold ATS staff accountable. My sense is that the staff is currently behind the curve in this area, and that it is hopefully a temporary condition resulting from a bitter U.S. election cycle.

However, not all the trolls have left, and more seem to be piling on, encouraged by the trollery they see that is already on the boards, and which persists in the database long after a given troll is banned (years, in fact).

A single troll can leave a foul and permanent stench on every polluted thread and plant the seeds for the nascence of new trolls. That is just one of the long list of things that are bad about trolls.

If I am right about this phenomenon, then it will get worse unless stern measures are implemented to stop it.

Much Ado About Nothing

Is the problem temporary? I hope so! If I thought it was not, I would never have bothered to post this thread in the first place, and would have simply stopped posting as I have on other boards that I deemed hopeless. I consider ATS temporarily troubled, but not hopeless, or I wouldn’t bother posting here at all.

However, like all temporary problems, they will never be solved unless effective steps are taken to solve them. With my criticism, I have offered suggestions. I don’t expect all or even any of them to necessarily be implemented, but by offering them, I can at least hope that they may inspire positive changes.

I say there’s a growing problem, others may disagree, and that’s how discussions take place. I have no problem with that. I could be tragically mistaken about all this. Perhaps I’m just being a drama queen, and maybe the only problem here lies with me. I can accept that possibility and try working with it.

I have already adjusted how I approach ATS, and can make further adjustments as needed. There’s always a way. Don’t worry about me, I’ll be fine. My concern in this case is with ATS and its future, not how I spend my free time, for which I have limitless options.

Taking Aim

I advise caution when sizing up messengers for target practice, however, because doing so both indicates and exacerbates a wide range of problems of its own.

If I am wrong in believing that there is a problem, then there is no harm in dismissing my warnings as misguided and irrelevant. If I am right, however, doing so has consequences beyond rebuffing a single member.

[edit on 11/27/2004 by Majic]

posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 08:40 PM
So (in summary), there's an increasing band of trolls on ATS influenced by a bitter election cycle that continually break T&C, but nothing is done?

Is that it?

Could anyone observing specific instances of each event please use the suggestion/complain feature, including a link to the offense?

If there is indeed an offense it will be resolved. If not, the complainer will be told why.

posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 10:47 PM
No cut and paste. No links. No Googled “sources” … just people reading, thinking and responding in a reflective manner with their own thoughts.

Imagine that.

No cries of where are your sources, your sources are biased, you’re an idiot, your country sucks etc… attacks and counter attacks from across whatever divide we choose to perceive.

This is one of those good threads…

You know, the ones that suck you into hours long reading sessions make you think or make you sit up straight ready to contribute.

I agree that quality must be produced before it is to be consumed but there is a problem.

After taking the time to research and write up a post it is very frustrating for the first few replies to be some unreflective knee jerk ideological opinions from people who clearly did not read carefully enough or have an agenda. Then come the inevitable posts from those with opposing agendas pointing out these things and the thread degenerates into another disappointment.

And then there are the great posts with little or no responses.

The phrase “nobody reads long posts” has become as well known as the board’s motto. I guess reading a dozen small inane posts is easier that reading one longer post. Thinking is hard work.

So is fine-tuning the signal to noise ratio.

Like other members, I don’t know how others view my participation. The occasional applause from staff is the only indication that sometimes I do something that’s appreciated. Other than that, only one member a month gets to find out how their contribution is appreciated by the entire community (the WATS award).

In addition to voting for WATS perhaps we can project our collective judgment on the content as well. I’m not a programmer but I’m pretty sure one could put these ideas into practice.

Community Quality Control

Why not vote for threads? The quality of a thread could be expressed as an approval percentage. Say 70 people out of 100 “approve” of the thread then it gets a 70% “Quality Rating”. The recent posts page could have the option of sorting by quality rating (as well as other “top” pages). Each member could get one vote per thread (even if just reading) and if they post then they get an extra vote every time they post in that thread. That way quality participation is encouraged for higher ratings and visibility.

And why not vote to keep or ignore individual posts within the thread.

Many threads have quality posts interspersed within a flame war or inane posts. If these could be removed or supressed somehow the thread would read a lot better. Perhaps placing two vote buttons (keep/ignore) just above the signature or in the post header. After a certain threshold is reached it goes into ignore. Or we could each have a global setting in our profile set at a certain ignore level (a sort of personal filter). For example: set your ignore level at 30 and any post that received over 30% ignore votes would not be visible (like those of someone on global ignore).

Slashdot has had an interesting meta-moderation system in place for years and it seems to work well for them. Why not one for ATS?

Maybe it's not a matter of more cops or more rules but of policing ourselves.

posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 11:11 PM

Originally posted by Gools
Community Quality Control

Why not vote for threads? The quality of a thread could be expressed as an approval percentage. Say 70 people out of 100 “approve” of the thread then it gets a 70% “Quality Rating”. The recent posts page could have the option of sorting by quality rating (as well as other “top” pages). Each member could get one vote per thread (even if just reading) and if they post then they get an extra vote every time they post in that thread. That way quality participation is encouraged for higher ratings and visibility.

We sort of had that for a while. We also had tons of threads complaining about it.

How come I got a "1" rating from someone? Who was it? Is there a way to tell? It's not fair. People that don't agree with me are throwing off my ratings. Everyone either gives "10s" or "1s" and that's just ignorance...

Basically it became an anonymous tool for trolling down threads.

It may sound like we're approaching a point where everything that can be done has been done, everything that can be tried has been tried, and everyone is doing the absolute best they can even if it's not enough for everyone's tastes.

new topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in