I have seen this so many times dealing with some members. A member gets a 1 line warn then they say, "Hey, what about the mods?" To start with a 1 line warn is given for something that doesn't add to the topic, like, "" What does that add? A mod note might be, "Please, let's stay on topic." A 1 liner? Yes but it's for community management.

Next, a warn may be given out and the member says, "Hey, what about what member X said?" Well member X's posts aren't your concern. YOU are responsible for your own posts. Let the staff deal with the other members posts. How do you know that we aren't dealing with this? Because it isn't on the board doesn't mean we aren't dealing with this. We deal with a lot of stuff via u2u. That is between the staff and the other member.

That being said, EVERYONE, myself included, agreed to the Terms and Conditions of Use when registering. It didn't say, "I agree to this unless I see something I don't agree with". THAT is our job. You can help via the Complaints/Suggestions button but if you see something that sets you off it doesn't indemnify you from the agreement you have with ATS. You are still bound by the T&C, which you agreed upon.

Let us do our job(for you), post as you will, within the T&C and everything is OK. If we miss something, I don't mean immediately but let's be reasonable, give us at least 30 minutes to see something, then alert us to what is not right. PLEASE, make sure it's against the T&C and not just partisan political BS. Some may not like what one says but just because it's a different political point doesn't make it an infraction on the T&C. That's a different thread though.

Happy posting. I hope.

Edit: Title, to make it friendlier.

[edit on 17-10-2007 by intrepid]

i must say i was being a smart a$$ the other day with one line posts and a mod cleared that up for me. the mod told me that posting a link to another topic was an example of a reasonable one line post. im glad yall are passing on the info. sucks for me though cause i love being a pain. its the only thing im good at...

Wow. I don't know what went down around here lately but I am feeling a major disturbance in the force. Glad I started my new job Monday. This too shall pass.
Peace.

Some feel that if others break the T&C they are also allowed to do the same. It doesn't work that way.

Btw, good luck on the new job. Change is good.

[edit on 16-10-2007 by intrepid]

reply to post by intrepid

---

Nevertheless, I think there should be more uniform enforcement. It really bugs me how that pharoah guy was chucked off the forum for what appeared to be hoaxing and yet Lear does the same thing every day and has his own forum.

Got to say, just started, and I've been learning concepts like de-individuation, and get leary, and having a laugh. I've probably not been your ideal customer. But then I've never pressed any ad-clicks either, so that goes in my favour....... But the one thing I notice is that your board ends up structured like a debating board, not a discussion (how can we have that with de-individuation) board. I think when people get lost in the debate, T & C's come into it, and maybe a recognition of the debating side of this would help calm some ruffled feathers.

Glad you bring up this topic, intrepid, because often I'm bewildred as how to interpret T&C.

Especially I'm thinking about hate speech, clearly it should get the hammer immediately. But often it is disguised as irony, humour, sarcasm, whatever, and it might be so intended from the poster. Here the cultural divide comes in, cause what is humour in America can be an insult in Europe and vice versa.

So I think to keep the board 'clean' in a global sense, sarcasm should be, if not dealt with, subject to scrutiny.

At two instances I have alerted staff over such and no visible action was taken. The one instance was clearly sarcasm, but in such a bad taste it IMO should not have been allowed. The other was clear hate speech, but as the post stands and no warning attached I have to presume it in the judgement of the staff is within T&C.

The judgement of conduct is very cultural related, so what can be a joke or a statement on one side of the pond is an offense or attack on the other.

To me it creates confussion, though I think I know Americans better than most, I have never lived there, so I can't be 100% sure, as the intention for what is put into those always harsh wordings.

Post like "I hate..." shouldn't be allowed. A different wordning could express excactly the same. No matter how much I hate certain public figures I would never put it in writing.

Certain phrases beside hate, like "kill'm", "nuke'm" and the like, as well as the degatory nouns often connected to those, should be dealt with.

IMHO.

Yes, I see this and it isn't conducive to discussion. It's a throwback to the meaningless American(sorry guys but it's a fact) mindset. "With me or against me." That REALLY limits discussion. I REALLY wish we could get past this and discuss topics again. I miss that. Inside the T&C that is.

Excuse me? John Lear may post far-out theories, but they are not hoaxes.

He clearly states that these are his opinions.

Are you unable to distinguish between a hoax and a fringe theory?

Look its really that simple. Stay on topic and within the T&C of the board. Its really not that hard.

The 'My sister does it too" excuse did not get me any points when I tried to explain why I broke curfew to my Dad, Its the same way here.

I'm glad you brought this up. There has been posts that we, as staff, discuss that when taken from the context of the culture isn't offensive, coming from the said culture. It's not like it was even a different language. UK vs US, or even Canadian English. In the UK the statement would be like, "What, is there a problem?" In the US or Canada we're going, "BAN HIM!!!"

Fortunately we have a multicultural staff and we discuss these things as we discuss all things. People think we move autonomously, we don't. That's why it looks like we move slowly at times. We CAN'T move immediately on seeing something. Better to be slow than wrong.

If you really want to get past this, you must first not generalize and represent as fact A meaningless American mindset.

I understand and appreciate the efforts and the work the staff does in moderating this site, but this kind of statement coming from a Super Moderator is not postive reinforcement of your intended message in your OP.

I am an American, and I never have had the feeling you describe as fact "With me or against me."

I come to this board to hear everyone's ideas and thoughts on a variety of subjects, and have learned quite a bit from these discussions.

To make that kind of general opinion, and state it as fact is an insult.

reply to post by Badge01

---

Not always he doesn't.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

That look like an "opinion" to you? Shall I find more?

You should see it from this side. It's not an insult but you might still want to open a vein. And I'm talking about YOU guys, Rep's and Dem's. You're the first to defend them both. Your country needs you dude. It's in deep trouble.

reply to post by intrepid

---

Ha! I wish you would have made it that clear originally

If I had known you were talking politics in America I might have been able to save that crystal ashtray I just smashed against the fireplace...

Carry on,

As you guessed, I am neither a Rep nor Dem...

reply to post by uberarcanist

---

You -are- confused.

In that note he's expressing a conspiracy theory related to NSA and NASA and the astronauts. It's not even that far out, imo.

Later he says 'I think...' and comments on 9/11.

Where do you find 'hoax' in that? A hoax is usually defined as deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage. In fact I'd say that NASA, if anyone, is the one more likely to have employed deliberate trickery to gain an advantage wrt to that event. As Grissom's son or widow if you have doubts.





[edit on 16-10-2007 by Badge01]

reply to post by Badge01

---

OK...let's review. That pharoah guy was thrown out by stating as fact things he couldn't (or didn't) prove. That sort of thing is routine for Lear. He must go!

Let's not lose sight of the Op:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by intrepid

---

Oh, I see how it is. I bring up the pro-Lear hypocrisy by the mods and one of them immediately initiates evasive action. The mods must deal with this problem, it is not going away.

Thanks intrepid. Issues like this really seem to be "on the rise" lately.

I do have a bit of a question/comment regarding:



I'll admit that I've hit the alert a few times regarding this one. I've really tried to "take a step back", in each case, before doing so. I do agree that the alert shouldn't be used for differences of political opinion; however, in each case I felt that the post in question crossed the line, from mere opinion, to actual political baiting.

As Springer mentions:


Would you advise members to use the alert in these cases, or to just let the posts stand?

[edit on 10/16/07 by redmage]