How Not To Be Banned From ATS..., page 5

Originally posted by Sri Oracle
But it seemed to me that Intrepid wanted the thread to follow the narrow focus...

Fascinating.
I missed the drama on this one, but it seems all too familiar...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by twitchy
Fascinating.
I missed the drama on this one, but it seems all too familiar...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thank you for pointing that out twitchy. I would recommend that anyone that thinks disagreeing with staff will lead to a ban read that thread. We've disagreed for years twitchy. You're still here. That is NOT a reason for banning as is apparent by these posts.

Secondly, that thread was closed after 21 pages. Nothing was concealed, it had run it's course and would have only led to actioned posts and possible bannings. That's something that we try to prevent. Not always possible but you've got to try.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Actually they did that, I stumbled across it last week:

Simplified Terms and Conditions of Membership for the AboveTopSecret.com Message Board(s)

It's simplified and a lot easier to read.

About half the rules are translated to: "Don't be a jerk" and equally simple language.

Wooow now if there was a thread that should be plastered everywhere, its that one. I tried to post on that thread with a big thumbs up, but I’m not allowed to post on it.

I know we don't do sticky threads at ATS but that one surely should be.

Actually that might be one of the answers as to how to stop the occasional infringement of terms. Make a link at the top of the forums to the terms and conditions.

The ATS Handbook is very useful but not easy to find, I think it should have its own link icon in the member’s tools.

So say we all??

Korg.


[edit on 16-6-2010 by Korg Trinity]

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

---

So, my question is perhaps off topic here but still relates to the operation of ATS, and while this thread is about its operational workings, and I do not feel my question warrantees an OP, please pardon for posting here.

When you flag a thread, are you flagging the poster for putting the info on ATS or are you flagging the actual topic?

Eg: the postal topic about 'children being branded gangsters at the age of 3' is in my opinion so bazaar that it should occur only in nightmares, yet it is good that the poster brought this to our attention. How do readers interpret flagging?

The Cunning Use of Flags

reply to post by UnlimitedSky

---

Well, it is a bit afield of the whole "how not to be banned" topic (which I bumped to remind members about), but I think the best way to think of flags is as a way for members to say "hey, you should read this".

Flagging a thread can also be thought of as a vote for a given subject, and as a general rule, when members see a given thread receive a lot of flags, the implication is that such topics are of interest to other members and that they would like to see more of them.

Stars are similar, but apply to specific posts.

So if you would rather not see more of something, be sure not to star or flag it.

And of course, to be able to award stars or flags, one must be a member, and that requires not being banned, which is, of course, what this thread is all about.




(How's that for a clumsy segue?)

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

---

FWIW . . .

I come from the 'wild west' . . . the American Southwest.

We tend to 'tell it like it is' and 'let the chips fall where they may.'

We tend to think that folks who get all fussed up about petty things are wusses . . . pansies . . . wimps.

And, a good many of us sort of look down our noses at 'British civility' as a kind of cultural ethos.

And, I come from spending most of my time on a website that pretends to avoid personal attacks yet is rife with them--usually moderated with horrific, hypocritical, disingenuous, petty yet harsh double standards.


HOWEVER, I've come to highly respect, even love the civility on ATS.

Much of me still can enjoy a robust town-hall free-for-all sort of discourse more characteristic of some college dorms or verbal bar-room brawls.

Yet, I find that the civility standards of ATS force me to be more true to what are actually my own better standards. I really do typically love most everyone I meet and I really do prefer to do unto others as I'd prefer done unto me.

Though even the latter one can still allow quite fierce fiestiness. LOL.

And, ATS forces me to work harder at being more clever and witty in socially friendly ways . . . if not gracious ways. I see that as wisdom and a plus instead of a drawback.

So, THANKS, y'all. I appreciate y'all helping me to be a better me.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

---

I think ATS is a fantastic site and I am glad it is here. I understand why most of the rules are in place. It keeps it all civil. One thing I dont get about ATS, is it seems a certain level of racism is allowed. Racism towards certain countires is tolerated and it might be funny to some people, but you might find it demeaning if you lived there.
I have on occasions reported and nothing seems to come of it. Racism against a country as opposed to an individual is still racism..
Maybe it is a cultural thing and I am missing something..

Policy And Polity

Originally posted by Resinveins
Politeness was not the driving issue there.

Actually, even in the case of the recent big drug dramafest, politeness was the ultimate deciding factor, at least with the bans I was involved in. Calling us Nazis or otherwise insulting us doesn't go over well, drugs or not, and bashing us for enforcing ATS policy despite our repeated warnings not to isn't exactly courteous, or particularly bright, for that matter.

Traditionally, we've been fairly tolerant of that, tried to be understanding when members send us nasty U2Us after being dinged for something, appreciate that all of us have bad days and understand that members of a conspiracy site will naturally tend to be antagonistic toward any sort of authority. We are, after all, members ourselves and came here for the same reasons other members do.

What we've learned over the years, however, is the more we tolerate obnoxious, abusive behavior, the more of it we see, and the more it discourages good people from posting. And people who have no problem cussing out a mod also (surprise!) tend to have no problem cussing out other members. So ultimately, people who behave that way really don't belong here, keeping them around only hurts the community as a whole, and that's the way we've decided to approach it.

And let's look at the community as a whole. We are constantly accused of pushing various agendas and playing favorites, but all the different opinions you can find in any thread in any forum say otherwise. They are their own proof.

ATSers have different points of view on just about everything imaginable, and sharing them is only possible in an atmosphere of mutual respect. That's all it really boils down to in the end: mutual respect.

As Bill pointed out, there are a lot of rules, and it's totally understandable that members won't read them all or know them all. Most don't.

Yet most members don't run into any trouble on ATS. I know some members worry about being banned for making an honest mistake, but we try very hard not to do that, and when problems do occur, members who deal with us politely get -- and deserve -- the best we can give them.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is getting a lot of press these days, and one of their central themes is the 99% versus 1%. We see a similar ratio on ATS, in which 99% of the problems us mods have to deal with are caused by 1% of the membership. If that estimate is off, it's off in that it's probably closer to 99.9% versus 0.1 percent. I see the warnings and complaints that come through. It's not an exaggeration.

But even for that 1% or so, we do try to give them every opportunity to come around and "get it". And what "it" is amounts to nothing more than realizing that, barring some notable exceptions spelled out in the terms & conditions, we are all free to express our honest opinions on just about everything imaginable, provided we do so without insulting, mischaracterizing or ridiculing other members.

Even in the case of drugs, now and then members will mention personal use in a thread, or start a thread about drugs or a drug-related subject that we will remove. Opinions vary about how policies should be applied, we may see things differently, and as long as they're cool about it, aren't doing it deliberately and don't make a career out of it, it's really not a big deal.

Self-styled "activists", however, who choose to make a point of violating the rules, fighting us by reposting things we remove and giving us grief about it are, like any other brand of troll, late for the door, and our tolerance for that has gone way down.

The bottom line is that, on a practical level, the Golden Rule is the only rule ATSers really need to follow. If a member does break some technical rule we try to be cool about it, and if they're cool about it back, no worries.

It's not hard. Honest.