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.

 

Inaccurate Voting System

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Recently i have written many articles for ATSNN only to find they are voted down for sources or that they are not right. These articles usally are about what is going on in the WOT or the continued infringement on US citizens rights because of this war. That is news that i think every citizen can agree is right for a conspiracy news site. Also, to talk about sources: I was told through this voting system that the US House of Representative's transcripts are not a valiable source. REALLY? Damn, I must be using Dan Rather's source book or something...Really folks, read the entire article and think before you click.




posted on Jun, 30 2005 @ 10:18 PM
link   
I have heard and observed the same thing a few times.

There is nothing preventing someone voting "NO" on an ATSNN article for reasons that are irrelevant to the information presented, the source of the information or the quality of presentation.

ATS registered members can be obstructive, bloody minded, random or childish in their voting practice as they please. There are no consequences.



posted on Jun, 30 2005 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar


ATS registered members can be obstructive, bloody minded, random or childish in their voting practice as they please. There are no consequences.


As there are no consequences when they are not. Odds (and probability) are that it all evens out...unless you're too paranoid to accept that.



posted on Jun, 30 2005 @ 10:30 PM
link   
I would prefer to see well presented relevant articles with verified linked sources become News, as they happen.

The "evening out" process can be too long and the types of votes being discussed above don't contribute to a quality process.



posted on Jun, 30 2005 @ 11:52 PM
link   
I hate to repeat myself (I really do honestly) but this is an example of people picking any No vote becasue there isn't a plain No vote. CAConrad0825 I'm not saying that your articles weren't great -- I haven't seen them because I haven't been on much this past week -- I'm just saying that people have to pick a reason out of the ones presented in the No's even if it isn't exactly why they are saying no.

I still say that we should have a plain No vote. I honestly either vote Yes or I don't vote at all because if the No reason doesn't fit why I want to vote no I just don't vote. I know I can't be the only person feeling like this as there are old submissions that never get voted up or down.



posted on Jul, 1 2005 @ 05:57 AM
link   
It is possible that your submissions were not upgraded to ATSNN because the story itself was more suitable for an ATS forum rather than a news article.

I have recently moved ATSNN submissions to ATS forums as the topics are user commentary on a news item, but not an actual news item.

An example recently was that of the current ATSNN news item AP Photo shows Iran's new President as 1979 US hostage-taker. At the same time of this, there was another ATSNN submission by a user writing that the photograph was a fake. As this was one person's take on the photo, it was not a news item, but more suitable as a discussion topic in the ATS forums.



posted on Jul, 1 2005 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by justme1640
I hate to repeat myself (I really do honestly) but this is an example of people picking any No vote becasue there isn't a plain No vote.


Sure there is a plain NO, The NO that has story beside it is a plain No.

Or it can be no because you dont like to STORY. It has nothing to do with where it came from or where its going, just " I dont like the story."




top topics



 
0

log in

join