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: 181
126
<< 178  179  180    182  183  184 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beauty_HairyBeast
Ok, so I log out of all area's in ATS but it says Im still logged in when I check the Board tab and look at the bottom of the page?

I changed my password just as a precaution in case someone knows it but I still appear to be logged in when im clearly not?

Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks.



It will show you as "logged on" at the bottom of the board home - for about 30min or so, after you log out
No worries, your account is safe!




posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Great, thanks Greeneyedleo I was getting worried there for a minute


A change of password is always good every now and then anyway!

[edit on 17-10-2009 by Beauty_HairyBeast]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:06 AM
link   
This is my first go at an avatar.
I didn't know where to test it.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 05:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 

It's working, but it's a little to wide, 221 pixels instead of the 160 that it should have as its maximum width, according to the Avatar and Signature Guidelines and the available space.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   
You should also include more code for embedding video apart form Google and YT.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I've seen quite a few threads here in BB&Q raising the question of somehow "evening out" the star system with a contrary mechanism; some way to express a dislike or disinterest. Here's my suggestion.

Instead of starring/flagging those posts that you only agree with.....start starring/flagging posts that you find to be utter twaddle and not worth the bits needed to store them on the server. Pretty soon....the perception will flip-flop and threads with multiple flags, and posts with multiple stars will be easily identified as content not worth getting involved with.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by cranberrydork
I've seen quite a few threads here in BB&Q raising the question of somehow "evening out" the star system with a contrary mechanism; some way to express a dislike or disinterest. Here's my suggestion.

Instead of starring/flagging those posts that you only agree with.....start starring/flagging posts that you find to be utter twaddle and not worth the bits needed to store them on the server. Pretty soon....the perception will flip-flop and threads with multiple flags, and posts with multiple stars will be easily identified as content not worth getting involved with.


I have to agree with the basic idea this guy has. I know I haven't been onthis site long, but I have been an avid visitor for 5 years or so.

I, like many others I'm sure agree with alot of things people may say and in turn give them a star for it. In the same breath though there are TONS of idiotic posts with the poster receiving a load of stars (can you star your own posts?) I would like the ability to say I disagree and "de-star" or atleast give a thumbs down to the comment without having to make a post saying "i disagree".

I actually think a thumbs down to go along with a star system is a decent idea.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by cranberrydork
 


I don't think that the people that have already received many stars and flags would like that system, it would mean that from someone that made interesting threads they would be transformed into someone that makes worthless threads.

It would also confuse many people, because some people would say something and some people would say the opposite.

Also, all the systems that could represent a "thumbs down" were abused by groups of members that would "attack" a thread from someone with a different point of view and, even before that thread had three or four posts it was already marked as a bad thread by the OP's enemies.

It's easier to create a false bad reputation than create a good one that is real.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by cranberrydork
 


Umm what you describe is already in effect .
Haven't you noticed how anti establishment drivel and the Ron Paul gospel gets tons of stars and Flags and any opposing views usually get way less ?
I know that because I am an objective and logical thinker that I won't get as many Stars and Flags as others . I am not denied a voice its just that I won't win any popularity contests .



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Re posted in correct thread

[edit on 19-10-2009 by Sundancer]

[edit on 19-10-2009 by Sundancer]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   
This way of negatively indicating a thread comes up quite often, and I personally don't care for the idea of it.

I come accross threads almost every day that are just wildly starred and flagged, and while I may find them of no interest whatsoever to me personally they are to somebody.

So, I'm just kinda "I came, I saw, I left", and move on to something that does interest me. I have no desire to leave a bad message. Let them have their amusements. I'll move onto something that amuses me.

Oh, and while I'm there, I don't star/flag/or post. They never even know I was there, unless I do choose to make a rebuttal comment. So, if you don't like the thread, there are ways to make that known other than simply clicking on a thumbs down. I would see that as a "hit and run".



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by cranberrydork
 


Also, all the systems that could represent a "thumbs down" were abused by groups of members that would "attack" a thread from someone with a different point of view and, even before that thread had three or four posts it was already marked as a bad thread by the OP's enemies.

It's easier to create a false bad reputation than create a good one that is real.


Either system can be equally abused. It's just that abuse that indicates positive feed back looks better for the site than a negative one.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by roadgravel
Either system can be equally abused. It's just that abuse that indicates positive feed back looks better for the site than a negative one.


Interesting statement. How did you come to conclusion that if a given member doesn't like a thread/post/topic that it would reflect negatively on ATS?



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
So is this where I request/suggest a "go to latest post in thread" option?

Not sure if thats the correct wording. But a number of forums I'm on have this feature. So when you click a thread you've previously read, you go to the first unread (by you) post in said thread.

Many of these threads go on for quite a few pages, and also contain a slew of links and other information. Sometime while following links I forget where I was at on a thread, and have to scan 3 pages to remember where I was at.

Might be a useful feature.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ThaLoccster
 

And how can the forum know what was the last post you read?



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
lol!

I guess I wasn't clear, or maybe my wording was wrong.

I'm guessing its something in the code, or maybe cookies.

I don't know if it would work on say an existing 400 page thread that I've only read to post 4 on page 35 of.

I'll ask my friend who runs a site this feature is used on, and see how it works and what it is. Maybe that will help clarify what I'm trying to say.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThaLoccster
So is this where I request/suggest a "go to latest post in thread" option?


Do you mean this icon in subscribed thread list?




posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by roadgravel
Either system can be equally abused. It's just that abuse that indicates positive feed back looks better for the site than a negative one.


Interesting statement. How did you come to conclusion that if a given member doesn't like a thread/post/topic that it would reflect negatively on ATS?


I believe that ATS believes it will reflect negatively.

The idea of a negative star/rating system in conjunction with the present system has been discussed numerous times. IIRC, it has been stated that it is not something that would be implemented.

I suspect the site feels that many posts loaded with negative stars would give the impression of poor material or membership posting and therefore reflect negatively.

If this were not the case, why would the site be against the 2 sided system. Most sites that allow rating allow for +/- ratings.

If there is another explanation, other than 'negative star ganging' I'm sure some one will shed more light on the issue. In the long run the members would balance out any minor flooding of plus or negative if ratings were indeed meaningful to the membership.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


That icon takes you to the last post in the thread. What I'm referring to would take you to the first post in a thread you had yet to read. I talked to my friend and he said the site I'm referring to uses vbulletin and its just a CSS script he found for that.



new topics

top topics



 
126
<< 178  179  180    182  183  184 >>

log in

join