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.

 

How many threads can one subject have...

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2014 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Phage42


42, Isnt that the meaning of life...




posted on Mar, 19 2014 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1972
 


Relax with calling people names if they don't agree with you. That's kind of a habit of yours. If you can make a good argument, do so, but the fact that people have issues with your stance just shows that your argument has flaws.

Going through a thread with several hundred pages is not a good way to keep up with the events as they unfold. Every new thing gets buried in the thread to the point that you don't know whether it has come up or not. Insofar as thread starters are capable of summarizing the intent of their thread coherently, rather than with vague words that don't tell anyone anything relevant, having multiple threads works pretty well.

The poor threads will die on their own pretty easily. Threads that maintain the plane was stolen by a tractor beam from a UFO will slip below the fold. Threads that have a reasonable theory will be maintained by the ATS eco system. It's evolution in action. Just let it work. Unless you are some sort of OCD "completionist"* you really don't have to follow all the threads. Surely you are intelligent enough to readily discern and skip those that bring nothing new to the discussion.

And that's what this is--a discussion. It's a big room with lots of people having lots of discussions, and as it happens, this popular topic is being actively discussed by more than one group, just like at a party after a basketball game there is probably more than one discussion about those silly brackets. You wouldn't expect to participate in every discussion in a situation like that, and it's the same here, though if you are sufficiently anal you probably could.

It's a lot easier to let it flow than get your panties in a twist because some other people may be having a discussion without inviting you.


* "completionist" is a term frequently used in gaming for a player who MUST, at all costs, earn every title, capture every piece of loot, complete every task, and participate in every event. It can get expensive in time and money. SWTOR, for example, was rather taken aback when so many people finished the game so quickly and began to complain. They really didn't account for that many moms' basements and the amount of time people would spend. As a result, they never have really caught up to the demands of the more active players and their subscriptions have dropped.



posted on Mar, 19 2014 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I prefer a bunch of little 'missing airplane' threads ... each discussing a certain aspect,
rather than one 250 page thread discussing everything. Its easier to read the shorter
threads. But that's just my preference ... others may like the one longer one.



posted on Mar, 19 2014 @ 03:15 PM
link   
i think i know what happenned



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Relax with calling people names if they don't agree with you. That's kind of a habit of yours. If you can make a good argument, do so, but the fact that people have issues with your stance just shows that your argument has flaws.


No name calling here..where exactly?? A habit..again..where? I have no problem if people have 'issues' with my stance, thats why were here right? to discuss..however..when people start calling me dictator because i suggest it would be better having fewer threads..well, the flaws are aparant in their argument..right?


Going through a thread with several hundred pages is not a good way to keep up with the events as they unfold. Every new thing gets buried in the thread to the point that you don't know whether it has come up or not. Insofar as thread starters are capable of summarizing the intent of their thread coherently, rather than with vague words that don't tell anyone anything relevant, having multiple threads works pretty well.


Having multiple, multiple threads leads only to confusion..we all know there are those that are the 'flag and star' brigade, they are only bothered about winning points.
People post the same thing in multiple threads so you never know whats new.


The poor threads will die on their own pretty easily. Threads that maintain the plane was stolen by a tractor beam from a UFO will slip below the fold. Threads that have a reasonable theory will be maintained by the ATS eco system. It's evolution in action. Just let it work. Unless you are some sort of OCD "completionist"* you really don't have to follow all the threads. Surely you are intelligent enough to readily discern and skip those that bring nothing new to the discussion.


The point is, everytime there is an update..is it REALLY necessary to start another thread where after 15 posts the context of the OP is lost..


And that's what this is--a discussion. It's a big room with lots of people having lots of discussions, and as it happens, this popular topic is being actively discussed by more than one group, just like at a party after a basketball game there is probably more than one discussion about those silly brackets. You wouldn't expect to participate in every discussion in a situation like that, and it's the same here, though if you are sufficiently anal you probably could.


Yeah, but the original discussion has now turned into so many other topics, its hard to keep track. Which is why it would be better if people posted only what is relevant to the OP.


It's a lot easier to let it flow than get your panties in a twist because some other people may be having a discussion without inviting you.


I'd rather be part of a conversation with substance than be a part of discusion thats pure drivel...most of the threads in relation to the subject are exactly that...and it just detracts from the original subject.


edit on AM4Thu20141972 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)

edit on AM4Thu20141972 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Caver78

bbracken677
reply to post by andy1972
 



by all means,,,lets exercise censorship and control over the content of ATS!!!!!

Funny how many little dictators are running around.


it's not censorship to keep topics in forum categories...LOL
Unless it's OK with you to make searching for topics even more scrambled than it is now?
ROFL!!!


I read the OP to mean that instead of people starting their own threads there should be but one thread. IE: choice is eliminated.

Personally, I do not start threads (I have one to my name, I believe) but I respectfully expect to be able to start one if I so choose rather than have a "thread nazi" telling me I have to post to the "superthread".

If you don't want to read all the smaller threads then don't. You have choice, but yet it appears that someone wants to remove choice from those who would choose to start their own thread.

If a 370 thread is about the possibility of some conspiracy then that belongs in the conspiracy forum, no? And if another thread is about stupid theories then the LOL forum might be best, no? If another is about the politics involved then that would belong in the political BS forum (lol) no?

But then I guess we could just eliminate the forums and just have a single forum called SUPERFORUM. No?



new topics

top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join