Mass U2U's to correct submissions?

Plus I'd like to see a running total of the votes visible by the author.

Perhaps instead of the U2Us we could see a breakdown of the counts of all yes and no votes by reason.

[edit on 4/9/2005 by djohnsto77]

So the next step is for a 'quality button' adding.
Then a 'prove your point button'.

Sorry, but this has just got me laughing at the way it's working at the moment.

People are voting for 'bias' and 'grammar' when they haven't got a clue themselves.

But surely an 'expert' would be able to see that a topic has already been covered?

Well....I think in general, people can better access the overall quality of something better than they can the grammatical value....The average person knows very little of grammar, but they can say whether X is better than Y, again, in general sense....

Nobodies asking anybody them to prove their point….That’s up to the mods to decide whether or not it’s too weak to stand on it’s own legs…..

Point taken. I was only quoting what had been said about experts getting automatic submissions.
No problem now. Its solved, but i just wanted to air my point of view. No animosity was intended towards anyone, and I hope none was taken.

No problem Eddie. You've got a valid point, and I've got thick skin.

Thanks for the understanding

I suppose thick skin helps around here eh?

What We Could Use More Of Around Here




Cynics can call this a “Hallmark moment”, but they are important enough in my opinion to warrant a comment that is off-topic for the thread, but germane to ATS as a whole.

Valid points, thick skin, understanding. Wow, a concise laundry list of things every ATS member should bring to the table if ever I saw one.

While a “cheerleader” post like this one may ultimately not mean much, I did want to let both phreak_of_nature and Bikereddie know that being able to resolve any differences they may have as graciously as this not only sets a good example for other ATS members, but tends to make their own “stock” go up as well.

Certainly it does with me.

Disagreement is inherent to most ATS discussions, and that's fine. Often, the debate becomes heated and passionate, and that's fine too. After all, we're human beings, not robots, and emotion comes with the package.

Nonetheless, civility and courtesy benefit everyone who use them, as seen here.

More poignantly, the exchange illustrates the truth that just because you have thick skin doesn't mean you can't have a heart.

Wow

Ya got me blushing here

Thanks for the well thought out compliment

The very first thing one should do is to familiarize oneself with the standards for submission and to make sure that the structure is understood. The next is to run a spell check and then to proofread your work before posting. That way, you are less likely to get a bunch of requests for improvement.

The next thing is to remember that it is very easy to hit the wrong button and some posters just might do that, but if you are sure of your work and the standards for structure and grammar, you should be able to figure out what is valid criticism and what is not.

Yesterday, I posted an article that was similar, but not identical to a previously submitted and upgraded story. I got two U2Us telling me it was a repeat, so trusting the critics, I erased the submission. After doing so, I realized the error, but it was too late.

Every critique should be taken with a grain of salt.

Thanks Majic, but I wasn't doing anything I wouldn't noramlly do.

Ditto.
I think what was meant that more of the understanding we used to sort out the problem, could be used by more people to benefit all the members who they had arguments with. Maybe if they could swallow humble pie etc, then things wouldn't get so heated.

Still, its nice to be complimented.

Wait, ATSNN is suppose to be Conspiracy only? So pope is dead, Bush won 2004, we still wouldn't know because they weren't conspiracy related?

Fair point, but this thread was posted under the ''Board Questions & Business'' page. It was a question not related to conspiracy theories.

I don't suppose that everything discussed here has to be about conspiracy theories. Hence the different boards.