It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com 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: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 08:04 AM
link   
I did NOT intend to respond solely to your post. My mistake for not pointing it out clearly...

My point was for the 30 or so people who responded in this thread along with you.

S.O. made pretty short work out of the "problems" other than "board burn" so I did not deal with them.

It's all in the numbers, it's always in the numbers. The number take a sharp spike and the less attractive elements of ATS spike right along with them.

The beauty of this community is the negative aspects never last long because our astute members usually shoot the trolls at the gate and "disarm" them with logic.

The REALLY nice part is even after the initial "clean-up" is complete we always end up with several more excellent members out of the spike.

It's a natural process.

Considering your years of experience on the UUnet and the WWW I find it peculiar you would on the one hand indicate you have seen all of this before yet on the other you seem to think my intent was to say there is no problem it's all in your head, not so.

My point was two-fold:

1. These issues do exist, my point was they are not the problem some feel them to be and the best way to deal with them is to counteract them with logic.

2. SOMETIMES when people think they are a big problem it is due to "board burn" obvisouly not the case with you however, my appologies if you surmised I was only speaking to you.

m...




posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Great post and yes I fully agree, however your solutions would not really offer a lasting improvement I think.
I think this problem can be solved by adding a system similar to the way above system, but then in a negative way.

Way below awards maybe?

Anyways, I think the members on these forums should be able to (in a democratic way) out their frustration towards the ignorant and mindless trolls that creep around on these boards.

What does this mean?

When a member gets more than X way below awards in timeframe Y, he/she will not be able to post again for a week/month/year/century.

To prevent misuse of this system, only members with more than Z points would be able to vote, and the X value mentioned earlyer would be rather high.

This would be a rather interesting and creative way to let a problem solve itself in my humble opinion.
;+)

Over and out.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by JakkoAnyways, I think the members on these forums should be able to (in a democratic way) out their frustration towards the ignorant and mindless trolls that creep around on these boards.


A form of this was tried, in fact, about two years ago. It wasn't terribly successful and created a LOT of yelling and screaming about "unfairness." One group (fairly small numbers) can bias the whole process.

And when the trolls vote....



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

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...

The quality-v-quantity debate has been heard far too often here on ATS. And frankly, these posts irritate and infuriate me...

(to be continued)



As a member who has sometimes participated in defining what quality is, I express the following not with disdain or umbrage or 'entitlement', but as simple facts.

You can manage that which you can measure. Quality is not some subjective thing. If it was, there would be no such thing as quality management programs or quality organizations - but there are, and they deliver, and they take accountability for what they do. Because they start with a belief that quality is important and it can be measured and it can be maintained and improved. This is rather indisputable is it not?

If anything that is said that is reasonable causes a senior staff member infuriation then is that an indication of a problem?

This topic is interesting. I think it is appropriate to keep all its discussion elements on the table.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 01:25 PM
link   
This is more my observation rather than a criticism, so I hope that the following is not interpreted as representing my own disgruntlement. Ultimately it is an individual decision to visit this board, and we must never lose site of the fact that those that visit the board come here because they enjoy their overall experience.

The points system is a double-edged sword. On one hand it is very functional for members who make meaningful contributions to ATS, as it allows members to access certain features-- it rewards them for posting. However, the points system also encourages trolls to post garbage threads to increase their point tally. Correct me if I am wrong-- there is no difference in reward for posting 3 lines of opinion vs. 30 well-researched lines of text, unless a moderator awards the individual via "applause".

I know that making adjustments to the token economy would be controversial and probably time consuming. However, I think it is important to consider the standards used for rewarding online behaviors (particularly on such a mass scale, given the membership size of ATS).

MK

[edit on 28-11-2004 by MKULTRA]



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar Quality is not some subjective thing. If it was, there would be no such thing as quality management programs or quality organizations - but there are, and they deliver, and they take accountability for what they do. Because they start with a belief that quality is important and it can be measured and it can be maintained and improved.
You're wrong. A TQM process is very different than the subjective nature of the content this board/community. While attributes of the principles of TQM have been applied (when possible) to the management of this board, it's impossible to apply the same thinking to the content of posts... content and management are two very different things. One person may think a post about Nordic aliens invading the south pole authored with IM-shorthand is of excellent quality, another (many others) would think not. Yet that thread's follow-up discussion can be managed with measurable quality, regardless of the subjective quality of the content. Perhaps you have other metrics beyond breadth, depth, and length of measurable traffic for the overall performance and quality of a website? If so, I'm all ears. In short, quality of content is subjective and relies on our members to create. Quality of management is measurable and relies on all staff (with some help from senior community members). In both cases, all available metrics point to a long-term trend where both content and management quality are above average.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 04:36 PM
link   
OK!

I will design a TQM program for ATS, to show how it can operate.

There will be no subjective ranking requirements on individual contributions, but what makes up the attributes of quality will need to be reasoned and pre-agreed as part of a program.

I may need someone to access the posts that I made on quality from the DISC forum circa this time last year.

I will assign to myself a target date of 31 January 2005 for completion.





"Benson & Hedges... when only the best will do."



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
OK!

I will design a TQM program for ATS, to show how it can operate.


I will assign to myself a target date of 31 January 2005 for completion.




I guess you are adding the above to your long list of priorities.

I'm sure you'll receive some positive recognition from your fellow ATSer's for what you've volunteered yourself for. All the best!



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Pffffft. It's easy, and I would do it for the love of it.

Besides, I would rather have the recognition of my wife for consistent achievement in household TQM programs, any day.

The early
catches the .




posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 05:51 PM
link   
Hello people.

A heated discussion is better than no discussion.

Deny ignorance, thats true but how about, the illusion of knowlege is what we should all deny, not ignorance!

Anyway-LOL.


A wonderful job that all the moderators and all the other staff are doing on the ats website, to all the trolls and other nonsense that presisst to keep damaging or trying to make websites like this non exsistent.

You guys get a great big COUGH! FROM ME PERSONALLY!

People who actually read these websites,THEY TAKE IT WITH A PINCH SALT!
Most of the information on this website SHOULD BE READ BY ALL!,

BEACUSE YOU WONT FIND IT ANYWHERE ELSE!

As for me, I got no argument with anyone on this website, just the fact that we are all going through enlightment and learning things every single day, so to all that dont take care of of what they already have in possesion, then more fool them!-





posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar I will design a TQM program for ATS, to show how it can operate.
Huh... that sounds like a lot more work than simply creating quality posts on interesting topics.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
I will design a TQM program for ATS, to show how it can operate.


quality posts on interesting topics.



I'll try to make it measure up to that too then! And the K.I.S.S. principle too of course.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 06:09 PM
link   
Well Sceptic, I do not fully agree.
Some opinions and posts (I remember a guy that said Americans are worse than nazis, they defeated hitler but brought us Britney Spears and Coca Cola) are really too absurd/retarded to take serious.

I sometimes feel as if trolls are protected, when I see trolls mess up a thread and "normal" members receiving warnings for yelling at the trolls. It makes me suspect the intention of those trolls was to get people warned in the first place.

I know such moderation would turn out to be fairly subjective, but no action at all against trolls and rather insulting "opinions" is the other far end.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 06:43 PM
link   


I sometimes feel as if trolls are protected, when I see trolls mess up a thread and "normal" members receiving warnings for yelling at the trolls. It makes me suspect the intention of those trolls was to get people warned in the first place.


Jakko, you make a very good point, but here's the deal: determining a "troll" comes from monitoring post and comment trends. When a "troll" makes a post that is not in keeping with the topic thread, "normal" members erupting and "yelling" at the "trolls," may cause more work (hinderance) and confusion for the mod(s) seeking to weed out the alledged "trolls". Besides, labeling a member (new) as a "troll" is often thrown out quite hastily. I believe that a mod mentioned in this topic thread that if there is a problem that needs addressing, then send a suggestion/complaint identifying the problem. This works better than "yelling" and labeling someone a "troll". Suggestion/complaints are viewed by all mods and action is determined based on evidences of the complaint/suggestion, among other possible 'evidences' that we as the staff can find.




seekerof

[edit on 28-11-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Check out this quote from Thomas Crowne a "super" moderator directed at a member.

"Really, you piece of lying human excrement; civilian neighborhoods were the primary target of the U.S. Airforce? You'd better back that up with a source as that is a very serious charge, being they are animals and all. I'll wait for you to round up the source of that charge, as there are consequences to such an unsubstantiated charge.

Moku, I am aware that you are mentally challenged and very depraved, understanding little of truth and lie, and I am quite sure you beleve that words are nothing more than something for you to twist and wrp for your own need, but here's something for you to chew on: People aren't as dumb as you, and most aren't as vile as you. My knowledge of the atrocities commited by Turkey didn't come recently, I've known about it since I started at Sikorsky and talked to people who did aircraft work over there. Shoving people out of helicopters on a daily basis sounds a bit sick to me. That is only part of the insane acts, but that particular one strikes me as very offensive. However, you, being what you are, tried to twist what I said, and that was that one should be discerning when it comes to what information is given by what source. Elsewise one will either be fooled, or worse, one will intentionally prefer a lie over the truth - like you. You have them - lies, that is. For example, calling me a war-monger. I've served in the military, you little prick, and I have had the taste of a few bullets launched my way, you little evil coward, and I can tell you, I am no war monger. I don't want anyone to have to experience war, you stupid little puke. However, you spineless smelly turd, I don't like the thoughts of several thousand of my citizenfry getting blown up again, you frightfully odiferous cretin, so I realize that when someone declares war on you, you must kill or die. "


Nice. Still haven't seen any action from the staff on this one though. No U2U telling me the problem is being looked into...no warnings...no other moderators moving in to keep the thread on track...

Which is strange...considering I sent a member complaint. Must have fallen through the cracks. Maybe I'll send it again today...and maybe tommorow...and maybe the day after that too....


Pathetic.




There is no friend anywhere - Lao Tse

and spare me the "love it or leave" ATS rhetoric....



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Just to point out...

Most bannings DO occur after the member has been warned multiple times, and as SO mentioned, usually can log in, but not post before perma banned.

However, there are some instances that warrant an insta-ban.

Some quick examples off the top of my head....

Posting porn... This is a VERY quick road to being banned, and is usually not even warnable first, but a simple shot to the head. (i.e. permaban, no warns, etc.)

Posting personal info about other members. If not removed quickly...bye bye....

Constantly showing complete disrespect for the TOS and the staff as they are trying to help alleviate the problem....usually there is a warn or two first, but not always....(this is usually through U2U and/or chat).

Remember too, that much can often occur through U2U and chat. I personally prefer to warn someone first through a U2U, and then only later with a public warn (unless it's pretty bad, or repetitive). The reason for this is one thing we DON'T need is MORE board drama....



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom Check out this quote from Thomas Crowne a "super" moderator directed at a member.and spare me the "love it or leave" ATS rhetoric....
Never saw a drama episode you didn't like to jump in on? If you review the actual post, and not a snippet selected for maximum drama-effect, you'll notice the very next paragraph reads:

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne Now, Moku, did you enjoy the insults? Do you think that it is the same as light hearted fun with a person's screen name that indicates mental disease? Personally, I don't, but the above string of names is an illustration of the difference, and the reason why you shouldn't do it, either.
www.abovetopsecret.com... Since we don't have a complaint from Mokuhadzushi, and Thomas's post was an obvious attempt to contain flames (maybe poorly done, but clearly an attempt to handle an issue without using the warn feature), I'm not sure there's an issue here.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
inject off-topic noise, sloganeering, hatred, bigotry and propaganda into almost every thread and frankly, I have finally had enough.


but how can any of it be stopped? None of that violates any terms of service or standards. In fact, I have been warned on serveral occasions for refering to someone who calls for the extermination of a people, or implies that an entire race is inferior, a bigot and a pig. Now, I understand why ATS has to warn me or anyone in that situation, because one is making it an issue of the poster, rather than a greater issue that exists 'outside' the board. I don't feel comfortable with it, and I think that, if someone cannot back up their claims of racial/social/moral superiority, then they should be informed that they are not allowed to post it because 'one is not allowed to post information knowing it is false'.

That would be a huge jump for the board. For example, one can come to the board and say 'all muslims are inherently murderous, why, because of this section of the koran, yada yada yada' and then someone else can come along and point out that that person is either lying because of this section or because there is nothing that bounds a muslim to behave in such and such a way or because this section of the koran forbids that, or whatever. And then the poster doesn't get to walk around saying 'screw you, me hates muslims because muslims is bad'. IOW if you can't at least make a rational attempt at supporting your claims, you don't get to repeatedly harp on them.

You can of course try again. So, for example, you can't claim that 'red states' in the US are statisically stupider than blue states, at least not after that position has been refuted as its widely been done. But you could say, 'this new study demonstrates that reds are dumb' or some such.

And of course there are some positions that aren't open to refutation in the first place. For example one can post 'there is a civil war brewing in the US, over such and such issues, and I've generally gotten this impression from my overall take on the various news reports comming in from all over the place, because of this and that' and not necessarily be open to 'refutation'. Therefore you can still talk about it openly in other threads and whatnot. But one can't jump into a thread on islamic history and start yelling about 'muslims are required to kill all non muslims unless they convert' since its already been established that this isn't true.


it wouldn't be censorship per say, it'd just be a requirement to not 'abandon' threads that you don't like because you can't back up your statements, and then go somewhere else to start it all over again.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 02:26 PM
link   
If I understand this correctly Thomas was semi-flaming someone who deserved to be (not only semi) flamed.

Some peoples "opinions" just go too far.

I mean sharing your sexual experiences with aliens on these boards is allready bad enough, but some "opinions" seem designed to piss people off.
Calling all americans nazis, claiming that America enjoys killing citizens in Iraq, some posts really cross a few lines, and what else can you do but tell them they are more (or less) than ignorant and wrong.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 03:13 PM
link   
unfortunately the internet is a tool of expression with im sure more than 6 billion users. there is no way to stop the ignorance from taking over because for all we know it might be a planned takeover of a truly well developed site. I have unfortunatly posted a couple threads of stupidity and one that was a slam on somebody maybe even a little self contradiction but i shall do my best from now on to sensor my ignorance.

After all Stupidity is forever, Ignorance is curable. quoted from a t-shirt lol

You have voted Majic for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

[edit on 29-11-2004 by Magickesists]




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join