reply to post by Acharya
You know, without further researching the thread you linked, when someone puts a link with items for sale, as a near 4 year ATS member, I would
consider that suspect.
As a member, I would hope that Mods, would target and remove anyone members attempt at commercialize this site for their own personal benefit.
The site itself has proven to me it maintains a general code of ethics and a a standard of responsibility and disclosure which is acceptable. I will
continue to support that as long as that is their standard.
Lets move on.
Peace
[edit on 14-10-2008 by HIFIGUY]
The ATS Issues Thread, page 53
privacy
reply posted on 14-10-2008 @ 11:54 PM by Springer
reply to post by HIFIGUY
I will personally GUARANTEE you that anyone who attempts to sell our members a product will be booted swiftly, just as soon as the staff discovers it. I highly recommend "alerting" any and ALL threads/posts of that nature.
Springer...
I will personally GUARANTEE you that anyone who attempts to sell our members a product will be booted swiftly, just as soon as the staff discovers it. I highly recommend "alerting" any and ALL threads/posts of that nature.
Springer...
) . Its pretty obvious that I am a fraud, and its also obvious that I will fool
lots of members on this forum as they wait for Desember 25th; but you say that the forum admins have NO responsibility? reply posted on 15-10-2008 @ 09:54 AM by budski
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
And there's the rub, and the confusion.
It comes down to editorial input - and here there is little or none.
My understanding of it is that what you have described is exactly what is meant by "user generated content ecosystems."
It's not a blog site or an op-ed site, it's member generated, and pretty much anything that abides by the T&C can be and IS discussed.
Which IMO can only be a good thing - if I don't like a thread or a post, I always have the option NOT to discuss, the same as all members.
And there's the rub, and the confusion.
It comes down to editorial input - and here there is little or none.
My understanding of it is that what you have described is exactly what is meant by "user generated content ecosystems."
It's not a blog site or an op-ed site, it's member generated, and pretty much anything that abides by the T&C can be and IS discussed.
Which IMO can only be a good thing - if I don't like a thread or a post, I always have the option NOT to discuss, the same as all members.
reply posted on 15-10-2008 @ 10:06 AM by Cedik
ok, i was warned for speaking my opinion about false prophets within a thread so i started my own, now that has been closed. I have been directed
here.
this is the thread www.abovetopsecret.com...
this is what I wrote:
'I come to ATS to read educated opinion on subjects which I am interested in but find no development of, whilst talking to people outside of cyberspace.
Recently, as many people have mentioned there have been many topics discussed -at great length- which are based on nothing more than false prophecy. This, considering the fear prevalent in society at the moment, does nothing to further the members of ATS and could be seen as a real negative force. Posts of this type waste huge amounts of time and detract from more important threads.
If people are proved right on their prophecy, they should be respected. On the other hand, if someone is proved to be deliberately misleading members I believe they should be banned.
What do you think? '
so i suppose i am directing this query directly at you now? what do you think?
[edit on 15-10-2008 by Cedik]
this is the thread www.abovetopsecret.com...
this is what I wrote:
'I come to ATS to read educated opinion on subjects which I am interested in but find no development of, whilst talking to people outside of cyberspace.
Recently, as many people have mentioned there have been many topics discussed -at great length- which are based on nothing more than false prophecy. This, considering the fear prevalent in society at the moment, does nothing to further the members of ATS and could be seen as a real negative force. Posts of this type waste huge amounts of time and detract from more important threads.
If people are proved right on their prophecy, they should be respected. On the other hand, if someone is proved to be deliberately misleading members I believe they should be banned.
What do you think? '
so i suppose i am directing this query directly at you now? what do you think?
[edit on 15-10-2008 by Cedik]
reply posted on 15-10-2008 @ 10:18 AM by Cedik
reply to post by budski
what i mean is that people are drawn here for a reason and people's opinions count, the more that people's attention is directed towards false information the more of them we waste
i think that we as a people need to progress, letting people like this continually misdirect people's interest helps no-one but the false prophets ego
what i mean is that people are drawn here for a reason and people's opinions count, the more that people's attention is directed towards false information the more of them we waste
i think that we as a people need to progress, letting people like this continually misdirect people's interest helps no-one but the false prophets ego
reply posted on 15-10-2008 @ 10:26 AM by logicalview
reply to post by budski
I could'nt agree more. If your not interested or have no belief in a particular thread, then you have no need to input your opinion.
All that happens is unessecary and often insulting remarks posted to other members trying to have a constructive debate.
Not everyone agrees on topics otherwise what would be the point of the disccussion in the first place.
At least have a valid point and some sort of evidence/link/photo wherepossible if requested.
My personal opinion.
Also i agree that members should not post misleading or knowingly false information. (Sorry Cedik)
[edit on 15/10/08 by logicalview]
[edit on 15/10/08 by logicalview]
I could'nt agree more. If your not interested or have no belief in a particular thread, then you have no need to input your opinion.
All that happens is unessecary and often insulting remarks posted to other members trying to have a constructive debate.
Not everyone agrees on topics otherwise what would be the point of the disccussion in the first place.
At least have a valid point and some sort of evidence/link/photo wherepossible if requested.
My personal opinion.
Also i agree that members should not post misleading or knowingly false information. (Sorry Cedik)
[edit on 15/10/08 by logicalview]
[edit on 15/10/08 by logicalview]
reply posted on 15-10-2008 @ 10:34 AM by Cedik
reply to post by logicalview
i think you should have read the thread. what i said was that people who have been proven to have been DELIBERATELY misleading readers through false testimony should be banned from ATS.
this would have to be proven using scientific means
not for one minute do i suggest that speculative threads or their proponents be banned
i think you should have read the thread. what i said was that people who have been proven to have been DELIBERATELY misleading readers through false testimony should be banned from ATS.
this would have to be proven using scientific means
not for one minute do i suggest that speculative threads or their proponents be banned
reply posted on 15-10-2008 @ 10:43 AM by Heike
reply to post by Cedik
And who decides what is "false information?" You? It sounds as though you are implying that people here are too ignorant to decide for themselves what is false and what isn't, or what is worthy of discussion and what isn't, and we need to "help them out" by not allowing topics that might distract them from "more important" issues.
Does this remind anyone other than me of something called "censorship?"
If you don't like a topic, don't read it! How simple is that? Your concern reminds me of someone saying that romance novels or science fiction should be taken off the market because they distract people from reading "important" books.
ATSers are going to discuss whatever they want to discuss (within the T&C) and luckily for us the policy of the site owners and admin is to allow us that freedom.
"Take what you like and leave the rest."
And who decides what is "false information?" You? It sounds as though you are implying that people here are too ignorant to decide for themselves what is false and what isn't, or what is worthy of discussion and what isn't, and we need to "help them out" by not allowing topics that might distract them from "more important" issues.
Does this remind anyone other than me of something called "censorship?"
If you don't like a topic, don't read it! How simple is that? Your concern reminds me of someone saying that romance novels or science fiction should be taken off the market because they distract people from reading "important" books.
ATSers are going to discuss whatever they want to discuss (within the T&C) and luckily for us the policy of the site owners and admin is to allow us that freedom.
"Take what you like and leave the rest."
reply posted on 15-10-2008 @ 10:50 AM by Cedik
reply to post by Heike
i see your point and I agree with you in part.
I do not wish to argue as we will get nowhere.
I will shut up and move on.
I looked yesterday for an ATS mission statement, I could not find one. I think you have helped me to better understand what is going on with this site. (added as it was bugging me)
[edit on 15-10-2008 by Cedik]
i see your point and I agree with you in part.
I do not wish to argue as we will get nowhere.
I will shut up and move on.
I looked yesterday for an ATS mission statement, I could not find one. I think you have helped me to better understand what is going on with this site. (added as it was bugging me)
[edit on 15-10-2008 by Cedik]
reply posted on 16-10-2008 @ 09:20 AM by hsur2112
Ok, I am not one to complain, in fact I do very little of it...especially when it comes to the decisions of staff and owners, I have only the highest
respect for them. But I'm really curious about this and need some clarity.
There are two (reallly fun) BTS threads that were just closed:
Guilty or Not Guilty???...
and
Kiss or Kill.....
I'm having a hard time understanding why they were closed. The closing post had a link to this...
The End of "Post in My Thread" threads...
...and I think I'm missing the point on how this is related to those threads. IMO these were fun little games that contributed to the whole point of BTS....to deny boredom. And if they didn't belong in chit-chat then maybe they could have been moved to games or jokes.
I can somewhat understand the need for no 'post in my thread' threads, but I don't think that these two in particular were doing that. I could understand closing them if they were say..."post in my thread what color shirt you chose today", or something along those lines, but I whole-heartedly disagree that these two threads fell under those guidelines.
We love to get to know each other in BTS, and we do it in fun and creative ways. Heck, the BTS Mix just mentioned one of these threads. So, I'm confused as I'm sure both OP's are being that they are new members, a little explanation might help them understand why they were closed and not just a one line link, I've been here almost a year and I'm not understanding it.
Much love and respect....but really, help me understand this.
Rush
There are two (reallly fun) BTS threads that were just closed:
Guilty or Not Guilty???...
and
Kiss or Kill.....
I'm having a hard time understanding why they were closed. The closing post had a link to this...
The End of "Post in My Thread" threads...
...and I think I'm missing the point on how this is related to those threads. IMO these were fun little games that contributed to the whole point of BTS....to deny boredom. And if they didn't belong in chit-chat then maybe they could have been moved to games or jokes.
I can somewhat understand the need for no 'post in my thread' threads, but I don't think that these two in particular were doing that. I could understand closing them if they were say..."post in my thread what color shirt you chose today", or something along those lines, but I whole-heartedly disagree that these two threads fell under those guidelines.
We love to get to know each other in BTS, and we do it in fun and creative ways. Heck, the BTS Mix just mentioned one of these threads. So, I'm confused as I'm sure both OP's are being that they are new members, a little explanation might help them understand why they were closed and not just a one line link, I've been here almost a year and I'm not understanding it.
Much love and respect....but really, help me understand this.
Rush
reply posted on 16-10-2008 @ 09:23 AM by Cedik
reply to post by HIFIGUY
I have personally witnessed a number of people deliberately misleading members of ATS with false testimony. I am sure you have to. Sometimes I think that people do not understand the implications of their statements and make them to improve their rating or simply get some attention.
Maybe banning people for their first incursion is too harsh. Maybe a warning and then banned. I have mellowed a bit after the passing of the 14th and the board returning to some semblance of normality.
Around page 199 of the Oct 14th Hoax megathread there is a post by someone called Born2 (squared). Over the next few pages he claims that the craft is passing over his house. He is warned by a mod but continues to make wild claims about being scared etc. of course people ask him to prove his point. In the end he sends a ridiculous picture to the mod and I am unsure of the outcome.
I am not going to go over my point again.
also. What does annoy me is that any thread which takes into account ATS actions is dumped into this megathread (or whatever). Many specific points get lost in this scenario. I mean if you were to continue with this thinking you could dump all of the NWO, UFO, 9/11 threads into a single thread to make modding easier etc. This does not work and actually makes the problem worse, rather than letting people air their concerns and deal with them in a more constructive way.
[edit on 16-10-2008 by Cedik]
I have personally witnessed a number of people deliberately misleading members of ATS with false testimony. I am sure you have to. Sometimes I think that people do not understand the implications of their statements and make them to improve their rating or simply get some attention.
Maybe banning people for their first incursion is too harsh. Maybe a warning and then banned. I have mellowed a bit after the passing of the 14th and the board returning to some semblance of normality.
Around page 199 of the Oct 14th Hoax megathread there is a post by someone called Born2 (squared). Over the next few pages he claims that the craft is passing over his house. He is warned by a mod but continues to make wild claims about being scared etc. of course people ask him to prove his point. In the end he sends a ridiculous picture to the mod and I am unsure of the outcome.
I am not going to go over my point again.
also. What does annoy me is that any thread which takes into account ATS actions is dumped into this megathread (or whatever). Many specific points get lost in this scenario. I mean if you were to continue with this thinking you could dump all of the NWO, UFO, 9/11 threads into a single thread to make modding easier etc. This does not work and actually makes the problem worse, rather than letting people air their concerns and deal with them in a more constructive way.
[edit on 16-10-2008 by Cedik]
reply posted on 16-10-2008 @ 02:53 PM by Heike
reply to post by Cedik
Okay, Cedik, I agree with you. People who (can be PROVEN to have) deliberately, purposefully, and knowingly hoaxed, lied, misrepresented, and misinformed on ATS should be warned and/or banned.
However, I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and I've seen the cry of "HOAX!!" or "FAKE!!" go up way too easily just because someone doesn't have "proof." Come on now, who's really gonna have PROOF anyway?
I had my own encounter, it happened way back when I was a kid, more than 30 years ago. Umm .. no I don't have a picture, or the police report, or any other proof. Should I be "dealt with" for telling my (true) story just because I don't have the evidence that people want?
Many of the Goodchild believers were probably real believers who were fooled, and if anything they are now embarrassed, hurt, and disappointed already - why heap more criticism on them? Goodchild herself has a video out now claiming that it wasn't a deliberate hoax, she really thought they were coming and she doesnt' know why they didn't .. Do I really, really believe her? I don't know... But I'm not ready to condemn her because there's a chance she might be telling the truth, especially since she had the guts to post an apology video on youtube.
Do some hoaxers and liars get away with it because of giving the "benefit of the doubt?" Yeah, I'm sure they do. But I'd rather see a few bored teenagers "get away with" hoaxing the boards than have one genuine person be harassed and warned or banned for sharing an incredible experience without "evidence."
Just my opinion.
Okay, Cedik, I agree with you. People who (can be PROVEN to have) deliberately, purposefully, and knowingly hoaxed, lied, misrepresented, and misinformed on ATS should be warned and/or banned.
However, I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and I've seen the cry of "HOAX!!" or "FAKE!!" go up way too easily just because someone doesn't have "proof." Come on now, who's really gonna have PROOF anyway?
I had my own encounter, it happened way back when I was a kid, more than 30 years ago. Umm .. no I don't have a picture, or the police report, or any other proof. Should I be "dealt with" for telling my (true) story just because I don't have the evidence that people want?
Many of the Goodchild believers were probably real believers who were fooled, and if anything they are now embarrassed, hurt, and disappointed already - why heap more criticism on them? Goodchild herself has a video out now claiming that it wasn't a deliberate hoax, she really thought they were coming and she doesnt' know why they didn't .. Do I really, really believe her? I don't know... But I'm not ready to condemn her because there's a chance she might be telling the truth, especially since she had the guts to post an apology video on youtube.
Do some hoaxers and liars get away with it because of giving the "benefit of the doubt?" Yeah, I'm sure they do. But I'd rather see a few bored teenagers "get away with" hoaxing the boards than have one genuine person be harassed and warned or banned for sharing an incredible experience without "evidence."
Just my opinion.
