See who stars a post.

a reply to: crazyewok

I never said I wanted to censor anyone I just think that your op was answered and no need for further explanation.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: BerenstEiner
5th page.

8 flags.

Makes no sence.

Right, I'm surprised it got 1 I demand to know who would flag this!

I flagged. Not because I agree with the OP, but because I feel it was worth discussing.

Exactly.

The point was discussion on the pros and cons.


It seems its not me that started the witch hunt as I have taken on board and acknowledged constructive criticism from those how have given well though out cons.

Instead of giving a star, they can actually articulate themselves with actual words on why one agrees with another members post.

Isn't that what a reply in the thread can accomplish. Just post the reason.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
It is certainly rather ironic that certain members on a CT site are all for curbing free speech and asking for more moderation.

In this world of privacy invasions, surely it is imperative that we uphold the right to freedom of speech and opinion, there are already T&C for regulating content and behaviour.

Need I reference Aldous Huxley and Hunger Games?

Well I was thinking transparency.

No were have I said about censoring content.

a reply to: Nyiah

Take a freaking chill pill.

It was just a idea.

For #s sake anyone would think I was going hack ATS and implement this!

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Nyiah

Take a freaking chill pill.

It was just a idea.

For #s sake anyone would think I was going hack ATS and implement this!

You heard it here first! Our resident ewok is planning an ATS hack attack! [/sarc]

originally posted by: berenike
People have many reasons to star a post, but why ever they do it, the stars are there to be given as they see fit.

I don't want to be held accountable for starring a post. There are enough things I am dissuaded from doing nowadays, I'd like to keep my freedom to star posts anonymously.

Sometimes I might star a post just to give some support to some beleagured member who is just about holding their own in a thread full of people who are trying to shout them down - I don't need to derail a thread any further by speaking up for that member or complaining about the antics of the others. A star is just a small encouragement for someone who is doing their best to fight their corner.

Why should I be deterred from starring a post because someone else on here might disapprove? I don't know any other members personally and I don't care what they think about the stars I give out - if they are given to the worthy or not. I'll make my own decision on who is worthy and star away.

Reply to crazyewok "you can see who encourages star baiters and people who star controversial things but are too cowardly to back it up with a comment."

Maybe someone doesn't have a comment to add. I star posts all the time for the same reasons as berenike and I often agree with controversial "things". Sometimes a particular post says it all and it's frowned upon to post "I agree" so a simple star is all that's needed. Seriously, your desire to delve into who stars and who doesn't is nit-picky and petty and a little weird. Who gives a flying flock!

a reply to: crazyewok

Why would people want transparency on a anonymous site?

originally posted by: roadgravel

Instead of giving a star, they can actually articulate themselves with actual words on why one agrees with another members post.

Isn't that what a reply in the thread can accomplish. Just post the reason.

Yes. Yes yes!

More participation and less ass kissing.

a reply to: Nyiah

Same here. I'll star someone who's new and being overlooked or a quirky post that raises a smile. Sometimes I'll star every post on a page when the OP can't be bothered to acknowledge that members have stopped by to add a thought. I'll star anyone who posts in a thread I write for the same reason - plain manners.

Some people go the extra mile with links, graphics and they deserve a star even when it's still just a rock.

Another angle is when a member gets piled on by a group - I star their posts so they don't feel alone.

If each star cost money, things might be different and we'd all be more frugal. If a star made >< this much difference to the stability of the planet and it's future...maybe we'd be more strategic? As long as they cost nothing whatsoever we should feel free to scatter them wherever and hope the recipient feels like someone out there is listening.

FFS ATS really has a stick up its arse today.


It was just a idea and I was looking for pro and cons not personal attacks and knee jerk reaction crap.


People need to calm down here.

Great debate.

But no one is gonna see it.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

I see where you are coming from,lol,I just have a problem with being a little TOO direct from upbringing/personal experiences.

For example-someone like me-that has almost been killed on more than one occasion (for no reason other than my color or for what is is my pockets) by groups of minorities in Memphis has a different outlook on post topics about race.

I have to keep myself in check.

My friends on facebook are locals that grew up seeing/experiencing the same thing and know a thing or two about reality.

ATS is composed of people from around the world-and many of them don't have the problems that we do,so I try to not come off like a lunatic.(as much).

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: crazyewok

Why would people want transparency on a anonymous site?

Well unless it posts your real name and email your still anonymous


Next suggestions everyone should have there IP address attached





by the way that was a joke.....

a reply to: BerenstEiner

I like the star system, honestly. It lets me give someone a little nudge of support with a simple mouse click rather than clogging up the thread with "I agree with (insert username here)" without having anything else to add to the discussion.

I think the system as it stands is elegant and beautiful.

a reply to: Kandinsky

I like the idea of alerting mods to give an applause...

Never would have thought of that.

a reply to: crazyewok

It seems you are the one with a stick up there.
You getting all mad because a majority of people think it's a dumb idea is funny.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Nyiah

Same here. I'll star someone who's new and being overlooked or a quirky post that raises a smile. Sometimes I'll star every post on a page when the OP can't be bothered to acknowledge that members have stopped by to add a thought. I'll star anyone who posts in a thread I write for the same reason - plain manners.

Some people go the extra mile with links, graphics and they deserve a star even when it's still just a rock.

Another angle is when a member gets piled on by a group - I star their posts so they don't feel alone.

If each star cost money, things might be different and we'd all be more frugal. If a star made >< this much difference to the stability of the planet and it's future...maybe we'd be more strategic? As long as they cost nothing whatsoever we should feel free to scatter them wherever and hope the recipient feels like someone out there is listening.

I would star this explanation.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Nyiah

Take a freaking chill pill.

It was just a idea.

For #s sake anyone would think I was going hack ATS and implement this!

Chill out for what? I said exactly what came to mind about the invasive ideas as of late -- they're not beneficial to the functionality of the site, and do little more than either ego-stroke or divide further. That serves us no good as a community, and you know it.

Accountability for your post's content is one thing. Asking people to be accountable for starring posts is asinine at best, that is the internet equivalent of asking people who smile, laugh or nod their head at a real-life conversation to be accountable for that as well. Not everyone who stars posts, like not everyone who smiles, laughs or nods in real life at a conversation, is actually an active participant in one. That's putting people under a microscope for no particularly good reason.

a reply to: crazyewok

IP address attached

I bet quite a few posters would start posting in a different way or leave.