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.


IMPORTANT: New (old) Standards Are Being Enforced (again) For New Threads

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 09:08 PM

originally posted by: proob4
Will this be enforced with Jesse Ventura also? He post's video's without any description. And he never responds to threads either. That's thread abandonment right?


I don't even bother clicking on his threads any more. I know he has lots to say but it's never to us.

Perhaps he cannot deal with opinions that aren't his.


posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 09:28 PM
nope, ur relaxing, not goin hitler

posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 09:43 PM
Never knew the standard stopped,
just thought people stopped caring about the threads they make.

Thanks for bringing it back

posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 10:02 PM
a reply to: EvilBat

Exactly, it's like if you are only going to post one liners for your OP then what's the point of starting a new thread. I would rather take the time and read a long OP than read an OP that is one line and a link. I mean the OP doesn't have to be an essay, it just needs to be long enough so people will know how you feel about the topic and what the topic is about.

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 02:47 AM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Star und flag.

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 02:56 AM
This is obviously a great idea, but it's become nearly impossible to construct decent post on ats with an iPad, the quote and copy and paste into the appropriate boxes to paste from alternative sources just crashes my iPad. There's been serveral updates of iOS and none of them improve the situation. I know Im not the only one having this issue. I wonder if anyone has found a solution? Any iPad users have this problem or is it just me doing something wrong?

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 04:54 AM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Thanks Bill and co - I believe this is a very good move for a multitude of reasons, the most important being, imo, that of continuous improvement with the site.

I really appreciate you reinforcing this policy because this is not FB or twitter - what exists here is so much more than that, that quite frankly it seems disrespectful to even compare them.

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 05:27 AM
Sounds good to me. I promise to make my best effort in any new threads I post !

I believe when I first started on ATS my threads were smaller and without content as I was just learning what the expectation and generally accepted format was around these parts.

Also it is kinda hard to converse back and forth with an OP in their thread when they have only posted a one liner, it kind of gives free range to the repliers to carry the thread for them, which of course I am certain many here could and would with no problem

So anyways... as stated above I promise to put in my due diligence and effort on any new thread i may contribute.


posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 05:38 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 06:16 AM
I'm sorry to be the one dissenting voice here, but an OP does not a thread make - respondents do.

Personally, I'm put off if there is too much "meat"; if i encounter a novella, then I just quickly move on. I'm sure others are the same?

I just need to know roughly what the thread is about so I know what it is I'm being asked to consider. There's no reason, from my point of view, why an OP can't be a simple sentence followed by "Discuss" - or a question.

I will of course comply with the new rules.

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 06:27 AM
a reply to: CJCrawley

The expectation is only 110 words and you've just written 101 in your own post.

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 06:29 AM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

sometimes I think it's just people trying to get their post on the forum first before the next guy, when an event breaks. How disheartening it is when you finally find a topic of interest or popularity, and post it...only to have it removed because someone else beat you to the punch just a minute earlier because you were "too verbose". Guess it's the luck of the draw, as many of us work so much overtime that we rarely have the time to read, let alone sit down and assemble a "full meal" of data for others to snack on. I usually just read and respond for this reason as it is. Pretty rare for me to actually be an OP because of all of this. I digress however, rules are rules and they don't work for everyone, just just have to be accepted.
edit on 20-8-2015 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 06:34 AM
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

A few simple lines of explanation as to your own thoughts on the topic being presented is what is being asked for.

Like what was described by the OP in this thread: "Don't post a YouTube video without explaining your thoughts and observations."

It need not be a 10,000 character wall of text (which most will not even read). That would be counter productive.

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 07:23 AM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Understood, Master of all that is ATS.

Your site, your rules.

posting rules are flexible for some and strict for others. I am new here and caught on real fast.

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 07:27 AM
a reply to: masqua

Today, a new thread was started about 64 peer review on studies being falsified. The OP has no clue what the subject of the studies and reviews are.

Shouldn't that be an important part of the thread?

Is this an example of a good new thread?

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 09:00 AM
a reply to: NewzNose

If you are talking about Arbitrageur's thread that was one heck of an OP, and a good discussion to be had in general. An OP cannot know information that was never released to the public - and neither can anyone expect that from him or anyone else.

You can discuss what is public knowledge on premise - quite easily.

In that particular case, it can be discussed why an auto-mechanic cannot and should not "peer" review an article on neurology - for example. You do not need to know the topic of the specific papers with falsified peer reviews (which is not public knowledge) to discuss the topic of peer review and its falsification.

The OP only needs to give source material(s) as well as his opinion to open the discussion of the topic - not present a unicorn.

edit on 20-8-2015 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 20 2015 @ 07:26 PM
a reply to: CJCrawley

this post is not all directed at you .....

If the post is to long for you to read then maybe ...don't read it? Maybe you really didn't need to get into the discussion of what the topic was.


I for one was tired of seeing video links no thought of theirs behind the video link. I say video link because not all people can view the videos.

I am also tired of the threads with the title completely different from the news link they are linking to.

Also people saying this is going on, yet there is no link to follow through. ( OP of thread incomplete )

We people are not asking for a complete essay on a video just a brief this is what it's about and this is my thought what's yours. That is asking for less then the local DMV for state ID ( Laugh darn it, it was funny ).

Same with news clips and such from news sites. Some people have forgot that we love our site here and want to keep it the best for reading and being involved in discussions. You don't need to quote the entire post just to have a one line agree , you don't have to quote / externaltext the whole news article and then just to give up on making the thread by posting with no thought. If I wanted to read a news article from cnn/fox/nbc/whatever with no thought I would have just read it on their site.

We come here to enjoy each others thoughts.
Make us want to read your thread not pass it by for lack of thought.
edit on 8/20/2015 by EvilBat because: bbcode was messed up took out bbcode

posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 06:21 AM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Question on this. We have a thread on Bernie Sanders worse than ISIS. Made a few comments. One pulled for trolling one pulled for serious violation and sent warning by mod Erik no big deal it happens. I wake up this morning have two more warnings from mod don't tread on me same topic with no addtional posts and nothing else removed.

How does that work? A few posts one pulled for violations from this one pull I get three warnings? Houston we have a math problem. Amazing.

So where or I am going wrong or why is there a math issue?

posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 12:11 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:59 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in