So who wants to cover some NEWS in ATSNN?

Hey there! I decided to plunge right in, and have already gotten a couple of stories submitted and approved. That first one feels awesome =)

I keep getting NO's for my source, though =(

This only bothers me, because I prefer to use my local newspaper's site as my source. It's just straight off the AP wire like any other news source! You see, they use some AP hosting service, so I know that the stories won't be taken offline, and it doesn't eat the bandwidth of the Commercial Appeal if I hotlink to the photos.

If people can use the Washington Post or the L.A. Times, why can't I use the Commercial Appeal?

Ahh well, the world is full of people who could stand to be taught a thing or two about this or that. I guess maybe I just need to make it my personal little campaign to educate people on the beauty of the Commercial Appeal!

Seriously though, the challenge of composing an original opening paragraph that doesn't just repeat the bit that I've posted in from the story is tickling my brain a little. I haven't had to work this hard on other forums.

I'm workin hard! It's hard work!

The real challenge to this is forming a cojent opinion piece for the end that is true to my own ideals, true to the cause that I support, and true to the story which won't draw the dreaded "NO: Biased" vote.

I'm really looking forward to helping provide quality content to ATSNN. Thanks for having this!

No LA Times. (I've gotten two NO:Source votes for them)

No CBS. (More than two)

No Fox. (At least five at this point)

No CNN. (okay, so it was an isolated occurence, 1 vote)

No NBC. (2 votes)

I think people are silly. I mean, if we can't use the above list without fear of attracting source votes, and we can't use the underground sources, who can we use?

Just thought I'd let you know, you're not alone RoadScholar.

And if you wanna talk about bias..woohoo, I am the master of collecting bias votes. I was actually keeping them for a while, so I could start a bias meter in my sig, showing the current tally, but they were taking up too much space!

Fear not. Good news almost always gets upgraded.

I have stopped posting news submissions for a couple of reasons. The main one though is that the no votes for source or (not conspiracy related) just became too much. I end up watching and surfing news stories as part of my job (security related) so I come across stories fairly quickly. Unfortunately, if the story does not come from such sources as Al-Jazeer it is voted down (or even better yet deleted by a Mod) (that was on a breaking news story that the Mod thought was "cluttering up the forum).
So yeah, I will most likely not post news anymore. I would like to see the powers that be look into the situation though.

I don't think giving up is the better part of valour.

I just don't take it seriously. So what if a story doesn't get voted up? As long as people read it, and are stimulated to think because of it, the ends have been accomplished.

Bottom line, are you doing it for the goal of education, or entertainment, or personal satisfaction?

Any of those three can be served by a slightly altered mindset regarding the value of a submission versus the value of a news story.

Submissions still get read, remember that. Even if it remains a submission until the sun blinks out, it has served a purpose.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I don't think giving up is the better part of valour.

Bottom line, are you doing it for the goal of education, or entertainment, or personal satisfaction?

Any of those three can be served by a slightly altered mindset regarding the value of a submission versus the value of a news story.

Submissions still get read, remember that. Even if it remains a submission until the sun blinks out, it has served a purpose.

Well said WyrdeOne... very well said

I have been away and now I am back.. and the offer stands to any and all who read through this thread.. If I can help you in any way to make a submission.. Please contact me.. send a u2u... ATSNN is there for you. it is as any here just another forum.. a place to discuss news and current events.. some will make it to upgrade and some wont.. Believe me.. in the beginning I had more submissions rejected than actually made it.

A key is to do as much research on the topic as you can.. and to get involved in the discussion phase of the news item you have posted.

So what are you waiting for?

ATSNN is always there.. put in a submission today.. and if it fails to upgrade.. Put in another and another... Your work is still in ATS and there are thousands here who will see it.

Your voice is as important in ATSNN as any forum here.. though the posting must make it through to upgrade... don't let that hold you back.. just look at the submissions that have made it for clues on how to do it.

Be original.. be involved.. contribute.. and enjoy the points!!


Gazz

Thanks Um_Gazz.

I was conflicted for a while about this, because I couldn't understand people's decisions on my stories. I was like "WTF! This isn't biased!" and "WTH! It's CNN for cryin' out loud!" but, over time, I got to thinking...

Doesn't matter, really. Worst case scenario, it gets dumped in the forums, which is where the story would have ended up anyway had you not submitted it to ATSNN in the first place. Best case scenario, it gets upgraded and graces the front page of ATS. Pretty cool. I mean, it's not like stories that don't pass muster get deleted, so where's the harm in taking a shot?

Anyway, I've heard some people talk about giving up because they don't understand the way folks are voting. I tried to understand, but I can't figure it out. So I'm just goin' with it.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Worst case scenario, it gets dumped in the forums, which is where the story would have ended up anyway had you not submitted it to ATSNN in the first place. Best case scenario, it gets upgraded and graces the front page of ATS. Pretty cool. I mean, it's not like stories that don't pass muster get deleted, so where's the harm in taking a shot?

Werd. Or, put more famously,

"Nothing ventured, nothing gained."

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I'm collecting NO:Bias votes like easter eggs.

I have to second this. The last time I put up a story, My box was flooded with NO: Bias u2u's. Despite the fact that there was no bias in the intro etc.

I like the system however as it stands except for one small thing, If tabbing a NO: Bias or the like, it should not be anonymous. Whenever I evaluate someone at work, I go over what I say about them with them and I am am upfront even If I point out negative stuff and give them an explanation as to why.

If someone feels that the intro is biased, then why should he or she be afraid to explain why?

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I'm collecting NO:Bias votes like easter eggs.

I have to second this. The last time I put up a story, My box was flooded with NO: Bias u2u's. Despite the fact that there was no bias in the intro etc.

I like the system however as it stands except for one small thing, If tabbing a NO: Bias or the like, it should not be anonymous. Whenever I evaluate someone at work, I go over what I say about them with them and I am am upfront even If I point out negative stuff and give them an explanation as to why.

If someone feels that the intro is biased, then why should he or she be afraid to explain why?

I'll actually take it a step further. I don't think any no u2u should be anonymous. That would fix a lot of things.

Good points FredT...and very nice to see you!

Originally posted by FredT
If someone feels that the intro is biased, then why should he or she be afraid to explain why?

Well, any good voting system is anonymous. It preserves a lot of the science and verity of the "poll" and helps to ensure a much less Biased vote. (no pun intended, I swear!) Also prevents any backlash, such as angry u2u's saying "WTF this isn't biased go soak your head."

Also, there's absolutely no reason to get the name, it shouldn't matter to the writer.

Personally, when I vote NO for one reason or another, I usually send either a FIX message or a u2u explaining a bit. It's helpful.

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer




Also, there's absolutely no reason to get the name, it shouldn't matter to the writer.

Actually, I'll argue just the opposite. The person who wrote the story should have every opportunity to defend their piece. On the other hand, if a voter is voting without malice or agenda, there is absolutely no reason their identity should be concealed.

[edit on 5-4-2005 by Valhall]

[edit on 5-4-2005 by Valhall]

Originally posted by Valhall
Actually, I'll argue just the opposite. The person who wrote the story should have every opportunity to defend their piece. On the other hand, if a voter is voting without malice or agenda, there is absolutely no reason their identity should be concealed.

If you want to defend your piece, what better way than to write it more amazing than possibly comprehendable? If they're voting without malice or agenda, then there's bias in your post, and you should check it out.

I really miss being able to keep track of total votes. It was such a roller coaster ride sometimes, up and down, up and down. ..but in a fun way.

I once had a story go from 0 to -7 in a matter of minutes, then back up to +7, then down to -3, then back up to 7, all tolled I think less than half an hour passed, then it sat for some time before being upgraded. It was actually really gratifying, because I knew it meant lots of people were seeing, and voting for my story. Regardless of how they voted, at least they were interested enough in the topic to cast a vote.

I don't see any organized NO voting, and that's heartening. And I don't see any concerted effort to downgrade all stories of a certain nature, which is also good. What I do see: a lot of inexplicable votes. This might be a problem that can only be solved by a true desire for fairness on the part of the voters. I don't think any sort of rules change, or modification to the current system will change what's in the hearts and heads of the voters.

Dare I say, we might just have to live with the problem, and be thankful that most all the good stories get voted up eventually regardless?

Good to see you FredT! I might have to start pulling 24 hour shifts again, if I'm ever going to get another story submitted again. (He always beat me to the punch by a few minutes)

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer


If you want to defend your piece, what better way than to write it more amazing than possibly comprehendable? If they're voting without malice or agenda, then there's bias in your post, and you should check it out.

LOL...apparently we have assumed two opposing things.

I have no problem with my name being attached to a no vote. Since the new system went in I think I've voted no twice. And I have voted on almost every article. We have members writing awesome articles. If there is something so egregious as to vote no on a member's article, then the member voting no should have the gonads to put their name to it. No one here is perfect....we have members who are submitting stories that are 15 years old. If your name is attached to your no vote, it gives them the ability to ask "What do I need to do?" If you were adamant about your no vote, you ought to be able to respond to that question....the writer may really not know what to do.

There really is no good reason for anonymous no votes.

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I'm collecting NO:Bias votes like easter eggs.

If someone feels that the intro is biased, then why should he or she be afraid to explain why?

I am the same but I think the people voting have not read the how to vote thread. For the first time in my last paragraph I stated my opinion and was bounced with a bias vote straight away. It needs to be explained a bit better to voters that the intro paragraph is the only one concerned with bias.

Good to see you here again FredT!

Valhall you and Fred have some good points.. However... If we are going to have no "anonymous" no votes... why have anonymous submissions?

There is no doubt that some will vote no just because they can.. Hell I'll bet you good money that some who voted for Bush did so just because they could as well.. Not for any other good reason.

I see many submissions voted to upgrade that are and were worthy of upgrade.. which to me shows a system of voting.. though not perfect.. that is working!

When I get settled back in here at home.. I will be posting some of my own submissions.. and yes I expect NO Bias votes too!!

Really don't let the whole voting aspect hold you back from contributing with ATSNN news submissions.. and if you must be biased.. select OP/ED.

It is all good.. really


Gazz

[edit on 4-5-2005 by UM_Gazz]

You want reporters or you mean you want people to snatch stories from other news sites and give their lil infobit summary and slap up a few links eh?

I mean I really don't know much about the whole ATSNN thing, more points for that stuff or wha?


and has it always been voting? I go awol too often.

[edit on 4-5-2005 by Lysergic]

Originally posted by Lysergic
You want reporters or you mean you want people to snatch stories from other news sites and give their lil infobit summary and slap up a few links eh?

You can look at it anyway you want.. It is not just the news or links that matter here at ATS and ATSNN.. if you really look you will see that what sets us apart is the discussion of the news item that follows the original post, or submission.

Anyone can post a news item with links.. there are a few who can take that to a new level.. and ATSNN has shown how that can work.

You really can Deny Ignorance while Denying Bias!


Gazz

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Hell I'll bet you good money that some who voted for Bush did so just because they could as well.. Not for any other good reason.

NO: Bias


Valhall: If someone votes NO: Bias, and they're serious, you should be able to find it. If you can't, I suggest reconsidering a lot of what you're writing, and doing some examination on what you say. If they're not serious and just don't like it or are beeing asses, then there isn't much you can do about that - adding a name would only cause a (verbal) brawl to break out.

If you get a rash of them, you should check yourself. If you get one or two, then it's possible there's a bad apple, or someone misclicked. No, I don't think slight of hand is the problem, but if you get very little of em, don't sweat it. There's people like Val and myself who like to vote YES.

Originally posted by Valhall
If there is something so egregious as to vote no on a member's article, then the member voting no should have the gonads to put their name to it.

I could not have said it better. It actually works both ways. The people voting "no" will analyze thier vote and truly poor stories will suffer, and the people who are getting a barage of no votes will get the critical feedback they need to improve thier stories.