NEW: Civility and Decorum are Required, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 35 times


reply posted on 18-12-2007 @ 01:41 PM by rockets red glare
reply to post by intrepid



His silly acusations like for example "the U.S. is the only industrialized nation to reject Kyoto" is nonsense. The acusation that "we don't consider smaller vehicles as an option". of course we consider it! But, the safty of our families the size of our families and many other things, are also a consideration when making a decision to purchase a vehicle. What was really happening was propaganda against Americans and their way of life. It was also an attempt to paint Americans as ruthless pulluters who don't give a witt about anyone else! It was debasing and dehumanizing the American people.


reply posted on 18-12-2007 @ 01:45 PM by rockets red glare
reply to post by SkepticOverlord



Sir, with all due respect, what do you mean "It might be". Sir, it is!!!! and his accuzations were false! Clearly false!


reply posted on 18-12-2007 @ 01:46 PM by JSR
reply to post by SkepticOverlord



i did participate and and provide data.

however, point taken. sorry to distract this thread.


reply posted on 18-12-2007 @ 01:58 PM by AccessDenied
reply to post by Rockpuck



I agree with Rockpuck here, applauses should be seen more so than warnings..
It boosts the esteem of the members and keeps them participating in the proper way.We should be encouraging members to aim for an appause rather than always warning about red flags and ban hammers.
Great Idea Rockpuck!!!



reply posted on 18-12-2007 @ 02:00 PM by rockets red glare
reply to post by SkepticOverlord



If it was proven that china and india, both industrialized nations have not signed kyoto, would it make any difference? Somehow I think you know this. If the goal was to keep it civil and respectfull then ATS failed on that particular thread! It is neither civil or respectfull. Not just of an individual but, of whole nation.


reply posted on 18-12-2007 @ 02:09 PM by Gools
Originally posted by AccessDenied
reply to
post by Rockpuck



Great Idea Rockpuck!!!


There are several problems with this.

We (at least I) don't always applaud a specific post because of the content of that post. If I see a member making solid contributions in a thread I will pick a post in that thread to click on the applause button but it may be for "all of the posts in a thread" adding up to that applause.

Moderators use the applause button in many ways. To encourage good participation, reward good development in a member who started out on the wrong foot or because they want to let a foe know that they can appreciate a good well thought out argument.

Secondly, it is a way for moderators to give points to a member that may have been deducted in error (it happens).

Thirdly, imagine a flag that links to an applauded post. Now imaging a BBQ thread starting out with "Why did member X get applauded for this post when I said the same thing over here and didn't get an applause?" or "why did this post get applauded? It shows moderator bias toward this point of view" etc.

Letting members see who is applauded without giving detailed explanations each time would be a constant source of drama and since we applaud much more often than we have to discipline this would end up being a very heavy burden on the staff.
.

[edit on 12/18/2007 by Gools]


reply posted on 18-12-2007 @ 02:37 PM by interestedalways
reply to post by Beachcoma




That is a good illustration you made.



reply posted on 18-12-2007 @ 02:39 PM by TheDuckster
reply to post by GradyPhilpott



Grady...I wholeheartedly agree!

The 'Art of Conversation' has gone done the tubes.

What has befeld us? (Shaking my head now...)

~Ducky~
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^