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.

 

New ATSNN a success?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Expect some additional changes and refinements soon.


Looking forward to them.
ATSNN is a work in progress I guess.

...and I see you found purple Jesus! That guy was hillarious!

.




posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 03:37 AM
link   
There's a easy change that will make ATSNN better.

Make people who vote no on a story say "why".

If the reasons are obvious such as less then 3 sentence intro, then good. This is will reduce alot of the recent discussion and rumors of "voting blocks" etc.

Simple.

Make people that vote no say "why".



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
There's a easy change that will make ATSNN better.

Make people who vote no on a story say "why".

If the reasons are obvious such as less then 3 sentence intro, then good. This is will reduce alot of the recent discussion and rumors of "voting blocks" etc.

Simple.

Make people that vote no say "why".


I agree totally. I have had news articles in the past that will receive 8 votes, then suddenly drop to 4. There was no real reason to why because they were legit news articles which hadn't been covered on ATSNN.

An idea may be that you can only vote for ATSNN when you have over a certain amout of posts, points or ATSNN articles.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 07:47 AM
link   
One thing I would like to add is that if the voting system is to be kept, all staff and member articles should be voted on also.

I am not to sure how one gets the privilige to get a post onto ATSNN without the need for a vote, I do not know if Mods or certain staff can just add a post or not, but it seems that way.

The reason I say this is that I have noticed that some posts from staff have not met guidelines. For instance sentence structure and or spelling have in some cases been bad, bad enough that a correction request would be made to the average member. Also some of the topics posted have been news already posted in some form on ATSNN and really do not deserver another thread, certainly would not get a vote in my opinion anywya.

Just a thought.

[edit on 21-3-2005 by Kriz_4]



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   
I find the one language on spelling way of doing things damaging to the contribution factor. I think that ATSNN should be presented with high standards but should hold to the multi cultured tolerance that the world begs for every day.

There are many people in many places who are put off , by an abusive appearance of the Babylonian standard that is enforced, one language , one view, one mind, it was wrong in God's eyes and should be wrong here as well.



One language one context censorship dilutes the purity of the ATS cause....



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   
You should have a daily max on how many articles you can put forward to ATS cause some grab headlines first.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
You should have a daily max on how many articles you can put forward to ATS cause some grab headlines first.


Try to put FredT out of business?


It's a shame, but there's no reason to be punished for your success. ATS Anti-Monopoly laws? I vote "Nay."



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
You should have a daily max on how many articles you can put forward to ATS cause some grab headlines first.


And one should also be required to heed proper grammer, no matter what their status is or how many posts they slam up. All news articles should also be voted in, including moderator's posts. It is biased to constantly read errors in grammer by those who are allowed to just sling it up, while others have to reedit because of an honest, simple mistake.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join