It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 168
<< 165  166  167    169  170  171 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 03:09 AM

Originally posted by breakingdradles
If you agree that threads are bashed by the opposition throughout many topics, why are those threads locked and threads that have the word israel in it deleted, never to be found on ATS servers again?

That is simply not true. We can both do a search on words like "Israel", "Jew", "Nazi", "Black" and we'll find thousands of examples.

We delete several threads each day. You just don't notice them being deleted because you don't participate in the discussions. You just see "Israel" threads being deleted because you typically participate in them.

Surely there has been much more harsh and nasty insults between members in liberal vs conservative debates as of late and also a much larger quantity, I've seen it myself.

Those threads rarely get stopped, and if they do they are locked, not deleted and 404'd never to be read again.

Again. Not true. I can quote hundreds, if not thousands of threads from the Trash Bin with words like "Republic", "Obama", "Bush", "Conservative" and what not in the title.

You would typically notice an ebb and flow on ATS. Certain topics become a high point of discussion. And it's not only limited to ATS. People do searches on a certain phrase and they end up on ATS. But they come and go much like the hotness of the topic come and go.

So you see every side demands that we take action for their side. The one side is screaming out that we are deleting all threads with the word "Israel" in it. The other side are crying in their hands that ATS is Anti-Semitic. And then there are those that blatantly call us Nazis. Don't forget that we're Zionist Jews as well.

And we're in the middle of all of it, trying to make sure everyone is happy?

We are in fact neutral. That is why we simply enforce the T&Cs, which everyone agreed to.

1g.) Political Baiting: You will not engage in politically-charged rhetoric, politically-inspired name-calling, and related right-versus-left political bickering while posting in any topical forum or discussion thread on You will not alter political candidate names or party affiliations in order to insult or deride the opposition.
2) Behavior: You will not behave in an abusive, hateful and/or racist manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack anyone.

If a thread turns into a mud-throwing contest, where blatant racism, hate-speech, personal insults and sniping the thread will be closed. If there are too many of these types of posts in a thread, the thread will get deleted, instead of removing each individual post.

During the ebb and flow of issues admin will typically make an official announcement to remind members to cool it.

The END of hate speech on ATS
Reaffirming our desire for productive political debate.
A call to action: Ending the political game on ATS

And so on.

So, you see our desire to have clean, civilised discussions on ATS is not limited to one topic, be it Politics, Jews, Israel, Iraq, Muslims, Bigfoot, Indigo Children or Chem Trails. (Feel free to add your favourite topic to this list.)

People get passionate about issues that matter to them. This is a good thing. People go out of their way to hurt other people when emotions run high. This is a bad thing. And we will stop it, because we hold a very high standard for discussion on ATS. We're here to deny ignorance, not simply lash out at a group of people.

People are starting to notice.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by breakingdradles]

Yes. People notice. But some people only notice some things. There is always a bigger picture. Nothing is black and white. Everyone isn't right all of the time.

When you "notice" something, try and see both sides of the story. Without prejudice. Without your own subjective perception...

Edit: Word order.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by Gemwolf]

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 03:44 AM

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by FredT

I think that he means that the banned member had added HIM as a foe. Those foes cannot be removed, unfortunately. To my knowledge. I have a few people who added me as a foe who are banned, as well. Or at least one person.

Yes thats it they made me a Foe not the other way around. So now everytime I check my profile they are there. I know I shouldnt get angry and Im not, its just they were banned for good reason, not your everyday situation, yet STILL they are there!!!

Oh well if nothing can be done about it I will have to put up with their presence whont I.

Thanks anyway. Maybe something the MODS can look into some time as an issue?

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 08:50 AM
reply to post by breakingdradles

Ohh, the delicious irony. You come in with a username like that and have the effrontery to accuse anyone of intolerance? You actually "live with a Jew" though, so kudos for your humanity.

No shoes, no shirt, no sense, no service.

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:37 AM
So that I am clear. I utilized the ALERT function to the post below and it was left to stand.

Originally posted by dooper
Thank God that old bastard finally died. If only he could have had the courtesy to do so twenty or thirty years ago.......

Is it allowed within T&C to use the "b-word" on ATS?

Is it acceptable to incorporate that unit of language within the boards regarding another poster or only if it is cast upon a recently deceased person on the day of their passing?

Thanks for the clarification. Regards....Kurious

[edit on 27-8-2009 by kinda kurious]

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:44 AM
reply to post by kinda kurious

I think bastard is fine... even bollocks.

The thing is, if you called a fellow member a "stupid bastard" then there would be an issue.

Someone commenting on someone else, dead or alive, who is not a member of ATS is fine i think?

Perhaps not in the best taste, but the person is entitled to their opinion.

It's all about context i think...

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:30 AM
reply to post by alien

Absolutely correct.

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:13 PM
reply to post by kinda kurious

Blupblup has it right. If a member called another member a bastard, that would be a personal attack. If one were to discuss religious morals regarding the social standings of bastards, then that too would also be fine. There have been multitudes of fine bastards in the world.

Bastard is not a censored word, nor are many popular curses.

One might denounce Hitler as a 'bastard' without any repercussion, so, if it is the opinion of the poster that Ted was one, then it would be a political bias to remove the slur.

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:24 PM
reply to post by masqua

Thanks for the clarification.

I appreciate the reply. I'd like to incorporate it into my lexicon.


[edit on 27-8-2009 by kinda kurious]

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 02:34 PM
If I may comment here...

Originally posted by Telos
reply to post by alien

...What I meant is that certain subjects are very sensitive at the point to disappear from the board (deleted or locked) and members who ask why did that happen, often are left unanswered, ignored or treated (and I'm talking about threads that were really an example of civil behavior and mature discussions) in the way we're debating for.

Frankly, a lot of times the questions "fall through the cracks." I usually put a message in the U2U to the person who started the thread explaining things a bit further.

Sometimes we get really nasty messages from that person in spite of our trying to be polite and explain why it was removed (it may have been the 500th topic on that same story... we no longer have "message merge" capabilities (the database is too large) so we have to nuke duplicate threads.) I've gotten the occasional rude response though some people are quite understanding.

We all have outside lives and don't monitor every section of the board at all times, so we miss stuff. The best way to handle something is to U2U one of the mods or supermods and ask. Remember that all of us have jobs and families and although we don't talk about it, we've had illnesses and deaths in our own families that we have to deal with on top of board issues. We may not get back to you.

Sometimes we feel the issue IS appropriate to discuss with the person but NOT with others. We don't talk about (for instance) why people get banned -- that's too close to a public shaming and invites others to attack them or their friends. We'll tell the person why we are banning them, but not anyone else (as a rule.)

And we wouldn't share that information with others if they asked in a U2U -- I've seen moderator posts used as "weapons" before. So not everything will be answered.

As always, if you think a question needs to be addressed but isn't, use the "complaints" (brings it to a thread that is monitored by all moderators) and ask politely if someone would U2U you about it.

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 02:42 PM
Is it my imagination or are TPTB here at ATS playing with the page width?

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 02:45 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

I'm no expert on ATS but I believe the page width was due to the ThisIsPropagandaThisIsPropagandaThisIsPropaganda thread which has since been fixed.

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 03:25 PM
reply to post by Hazelnut

That's what it was. It happens if people use a very long link as the subject of a thread, or a long unbroken word. The best solution of course is to create a title rather than use a link, and to insert a space somewhere (anywhere!) in that title.

If you spot that kind of thing just drop us an alert and a moderator can edit the thread title.

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:22 PM
Just wondered if there was any plans to switch the layout/aspect to a 16:9 ratio?

I just got a new laptop and it's a widescreen... with 16:9 ratio, i have big gaps either side now

[edit on 27/8/09 by blupblup]

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 06:26 PM
reply to post by breakingdradles

Perception is in the eye of the beholder. You are seeing what you want. I'm a long term member and I don't think there is anyone that is more critical of the Knesset than me.

posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 09:14 PM
reply to post by blupblup

Hold down "Ctrl" and use your scroll wheel (or +/-) to change the resolution of the web page you're viewing.

A great function when viewing small print on a page or for filling those lost spaces on the sides.

Cheers mate.
Enjoy your nice new laptop.

[edit on 28/8/2009 by nerbot]

posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:41 AM
I just got a "Warning!!! Your system required immediate virus scan. Personal Virus Scan can perform..." redirect.

URL of page:

Link to thread it was from (almost makes it tingle my brain, heh)
Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

Just thought I'd give a heads up.

*Added (xs) so the link went dead... didn't want anyone clicking.

[edit on 29-8-2009 by shanerz]

posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 07:51 PM
I hope this is the right place for this...

In my opinion there is a blatant astroturfer active on this site, not wanting to cause a scene or make any waves, I ignored this user.

However, I was not pleased when I saw that their thread is still appearing in the important topics on the main page for me.

Is there any way to ignore a user so that not only are their posts removed from view, but threads started by them are also removed?

posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 07:56 PM
reply to post by DeepCoverUK

I don't believe there is any way to have thread titles on ignore.

On astroturfers, here's the definition, in case some are wondering:

Astroturfing is a word in English describing formal political, advertising, or public relations campaigns seeking to create the impression of being spontaneous "grassroots" behavior, hence the reference to the artificial grass, AstroTurf.

posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 10:08 PM
That is a real shame, it seems that everywhere I go these days the same dirt is being thrown around and it is really starting to grind.

Is there any chance of getting this onto a wish list for future improvements?

posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 05:01 AM
reply to post by DeepCoverUK

I guess it's possible, but I don't think it would be a good idea.

Not being able to see other threads, even if the title annoys or offends is a sure way of missing some good discussions.

Suppose you see one of those threads, but this time you take a peek to see if there was something new or if it's the same old routine, and you see that the first answer is an excellent post in which that member completely turns the Opening Poster's game around and proves the OP's intentions to everyone else. That would be something you would never know if you were not able to see the threads.

But this is just my opinion, I never had anyone on my ignore list.

new topics

top topics

<< 165  166  167    169  170  171 >>

log in