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.

 

The ATS Issues Thread

page: 120
126
<< 117  118  119    121  122  123 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


The Kernel would star that post if I could. Well said. The info is what's important. Not being a prolific thread starter the flags aren't there. I'll weep into my Mash over that. Right. Whatever. When everyone is finished whining over this nonissue please enjoy some www.scriptoriumdaily.com...

Kernel out.




posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


I used to go into the crypto forum a lot, I think I had some threads in there, maybe on the "Bloop Sound" or something, I might have to check it out again now thatyou mention it.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   
My earlier comments was in relation to the current point system, not taking into consideration the dynamics of the "individuals" active roll within this site.

Like, look at Phage for instance, he doesn't post threads a lot, or comments within many threads, but his input is excellent, with much research. Yes the 2000 post thing for bronze helped people to see people like Phage as a very real asset to this site.

The problem was others abused this, through being competitive to simply gain that same status, hence the quality of posts suffered in the lower classifications of rank.

To take people on their individual merits, taking into consideration their personal nature in their contributing within this community, for the right reasons. Quality is the key.

To achieve this individual recognition, based on the individual nature, I ask others if the following would not be something to think about.

Flags divided by threads, to give an average of a more realistic contribution in a specific area?

and

Stars divided by posts, for another area?

Or something like that.

Its just a suggestion off the top of my head, and I don't know whether it can be done or would work. I do believe people should be rewarded for their quality more than just a broad category of recognition.

This would, I believe, take into consideration individuals time, (maybe work commitments) to put into contributing quality.

2 cents




[edit on 31-5-2009 by DarksDeception]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


You are probably right but it wouldn't hurt to get back to the basics.
Too much distraction and ulterior motives (like starting 5-10 threads a day to get more flags) seem to be reducing quality more than anything else.

It's nice to be recognized for being a good contributor but ultimately it's about the information, ideas and discussion between members that count. Not the score.

If they threw out all of the extra stuff right now, I'd still be back.
Just my opinion.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Maybe we could just give everyone a medal.

Kind of like the special olympics. Everyone's a winner.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69



The simple fact is....

No matter what they come up with there will always be somebody in the crowd who thinks they have been cheated OR it's just not right OR it should be this way OR that way.... Yadda Yadda blah blah blah

Jeez it was just supposed to be a nice way to say thank you from the powers that be....


That is what I don't understand.

To me, the system that they just put in place with the 2 indicators was fairly well received and was a good indicator of the dedication a member had to the board.

If it isn't broken, why fix it?



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


At the end of the day there is NO way that Admin (SO) can please every single member. There will always be someone who feels that he is doing a crappy job and whatever he is doing is "just not fair". So while Member #1 hates how things are done, Member #2 will love it. When things are changed to cater to Member #1. Member #1 will now love it. Member #2 will hate. This is an absolute lose lose situation for Admin.

But to get upset over whatever little graphics are below our names, which were give based on the stats of said member, it takes away from one's ability to contribute to the site....because one becomes so consumed with whatever graphic is there.

None of these "labels" mean anything outside of ATS. We all still have our lives to live and whether one has 5 zillion points compared to someone having 100 points - will not negatively affect your life. I promise!

And none of the graphics below our name should ever affect the effort we put forth here. We all have a choice to be the best member we can be and contribute to the best of our ability. And if one truly is interested in quality and substance and contribution - then ignore what is there under your name and post away!



All, just my lil' opinion




As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


[edit on 5/31/2009 by greeneyedleo]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Starred and Flagged, GEL

I think that is a nice summary.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by fooffstarr
 


I have to disagree with you there; it's been my experience that Flags and Applause are the toughest to get.

If, as you suggested, you just post something controversial and divisive about Christians, or whatever, you may get a lot of Replies and/or Stars, but I disagree that you would get a lot of Flags. Or at least, you shouldn't.

People should be Flagging threads that have NEW and IMPORTANT subject matter - not just flagging argumentative stuff that they agree with. Ideally, a divisive and argumentative thread about Christians should get NO flags at all.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
reply to post by fooffstarr
 


People should be Flagging threads that have NEW and IMPORTANT subject matter - not just flagging argumentative stuff that they agree with.


Why don't they limit the number of flags that someone can hand out in a certain time frame. That should limit flagging abuse. Perhaps the more flags that you have received yourself earns you the right to give more flags or even semi-applause.

After all isn't it better to give than receive?

[edit on 31-5-2009 by In nothing we trust]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
reply to post by fooffstarr
 


I have to disagree with you there; it's been my experience that Flags and Applause are the toughest to get.

If, as you suggested, you just post something controversial and divisive about Christians, or whatever, you may get a lot of Replies and/or Stars, but I disagree that you would get a lot of Flags. Or at least, you shouldn't.

People should be Flagging threads that have NEW and IMPORTANT subject matter - not just flagging argumentative stuff that they agree with. Ideally, a divisive and argumentative thread about Christians should get NO flags at all.


You would hope so.

Remember that formula that was posted in BTS about how to get stars and flags by being outrageous? It seems that it works for many people.

I'm not saying there aren't members who completely 100% deserve their flag and star count. There are plenty. But there are many who simply make a scene to boost up the tally.

I agree that applause and stars are harder to get than flags. Thats why I liked the system that was just in place. You could see an indication of both right on people's mini profiles.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 


On the contrary people should star and flag whatever they choose as being worthy of such awards. Simply because one members doesn't like say... cryptozoology for example a post on that subject should not get stars and flags simply because some other member thinks the subject is lame?

Whose to decide whether a post is worthy then? I say post em and let the masses decide what they like and award it as they see fit.



[edit on 31-5-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:43 PM
link   
removed by IA
Off Topic

[edit on 31-5-2009 by interestedalways]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Whose to decide whether a post is worthy then? I say post em and let the masses decide what they like and award it as they see fit.
[edit on 31-5-2009 by SLAYER69]


That is kind of my point.


Flags are no indicator of quality.

Heaps of people flag things they like that are simply a paragraph of partisan vomit or anti-X grandstanding.

Does that make them a great contribution to ATS? No.

Post count and applause are far more indicative of the level of someones 'worth' to the board.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Wow.. I went from god like wisdom to a half filled red contribution bar...

Thanks for the slap in the face?



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by fooffstarr
Heaps of people flag things they like that are simply a paragraph of partisan vomit or anti-X grandstanding.



If somebody enjoys those topics who are you to decide if it's worthy or not?



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:58 PM
link   
My flag and star pattern is going to change. I feel sorry for those that don't have a little red showing on their bar so I'm going to give sympathy flags and stars. And give all my friends stars and flags just like everybody else.

I just noticed that my little red swatch is shrinking. lol

[edit on 31-5-2009 by whaaa]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
On the contrary people should star and flag whatever they choose as being worthy of such awards. Simply because one members doesn't like say... cryptozoology for example a post on that subject should not get stars and flags simply because some other member thinks the subject is lame?


What I mean is that people should be Flagging NEW and IMPORTANT subject matter, regardless of the topic area.

I don't know much about cryptozoology, but for example, a new thread about say chupacabras, which is just a rehash of the material already found in older threads about chupacabras, should receive few Flags - because it doesn't have any new content.

But a new thread about, say, the newly discovered "Hobbit" race, that has NEW evidence and material, should receive many Flags - because it has NEW content.

Make sense? I think this is intuitively obvious for most people, most members "get it" - but maybe some need a reminder?



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Oh, I just love this.... So the number of flags is now the indicator of how valuable a member is? That is a such GOOD idea! (Sarcasm.)

Here is s "great" threat from a very "valuable" (and also banned) contributer, just to show you how insane this idea is. I present to you this all time BS thread with impressive 128 flags:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by fooffstarr
Heaps of people flag things they like that are simply a paragraph of partisan vomit or anti-X grandstanding.



If somebody enjoys those topics who are you to decide if it's worthy or not?


I'm not deciding anything.

But I thought this whole drive for labels thing was about IMPROVING THE CONTENT OF THE WEBSITE.

Can you honestly say that you think the above mentioned types of topics actually add anything to the boards other than entertainment for trolls?

EDIT:


Originally posted by sebarud
Oh, I just love this.... So the number of flags is now the indicator of how valuable a member is? That is a such GOOD idea! (Sarcasm.)

Here is s "great" threat from a very "valuable" (and also banned) contributer, just to show you how insane this idea is. I present to you this all time BS thread with impressive 128 flags:

www.abovetopsecret.com...




Exactly what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about the highly researched, well presented topics that go under the radar because these other topics that are made to specifically trigger emotional responses in people push them off the front page.

That is why I think the previous system was an improvement. It actually managed to acknowledge quality over quantity.

Some random troll couldn't come in, make 3 or 4 controversial threads and reach a milestone. They had to have a high post count as well. Meaning a long term dedication to the forum.

The applause indicator also showed that some members that may not make many threads can contribute just as much to ATS by their insightful replies.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by fooffstarr]



new topics

top topics



 
126
<< 117  118  119    121  122  123 >>

log in

join