reply to post by AccessDenied
Just a idea, but how about closing the threads that are obviously "game" theads but give a little lee-way to threads that fall into the category of
"getting to know you.....getting to know all about you"? Both are fun, but in my mind, the latter has more substance than the former.
IMO....
The ATS Issues Thread, page 58
privacy
reply posted on 23-10-2008 @ 04:47 PM by xpert11
I have just read that the CM forums will be closing . Now I cant think of one good reason why the CM forums should be closed in fact some of the
highest quality discussions I have taken part on ATS have taken place in Justin Oldham CM forum . If anybody is wondering where I read this then they
can look here . I had to raise this matter in this thread because the link in
the post linked to above just brings up an era page .
Rush, Springer, AccessDenied, skeptic1, anyone else throwing in their 2 cents on the BTS issue. reply posted on 23-10-2008 @ 06:50 PM by AccessDenied
reply to post by americandingbat
The thing is, I wasn't really trying to make a big issue out of it, just point it out.
It was made pretty clear that the game threads causing a problem were pretty much the ones with just a one word or one line answer.
They really don't add much to the board, admittedly, and I'm sure cause stress on the already bogged down servers.
When it happened earlier this year, that certain threads were closed, some of us didn't really understand why either, and were quite annoyed.
But, I get the "WHY" now. I just want to see it enforced.
I'm sure we can all find better ways to create interesting threads without there being a game involved.
Trust me, I was reluctant to even post it here in the issues thread.
Makes me look like the real party pooper. Well so be it. Iam a stickler for the rules, and try my best to abide them. Just want to see everyone do the same.
The thing is, I wasn't really trying to make a big issue out of it, just point it out.
It was made pretty clear that the game threads causing a problem were pretty much the ones with just a one word or one line answer.
They really don't add much to the board, admittedly, and I'm sure cause stress on the already bogged down servers.
When it happened earlier this year, that certain threads were closed, some of us didn't really understand why either, and were quite annoyed.
But, I get the "WHY" now. I just want to see it enforced.
I'm sure we can all find better ways to create interesting threads without there being a game involved.
Trust me, I was reluctant to even post it here in the issues thread.
Makes me look like the real party pooper. Well so be it. Iam a stickler for the rules, and try my best to abide them. Just want to see everyone do the same.
reply posted on 23-10-2008 @ 07:03 PM by enjoies05
reply to post by Majorion
That's just the maximum amount of posts it will show you, not the maximum you can post in that timeframe.
That's just the maximum amount of posts it will show you, not the maximum you can post in that timeframe.
reply posted on 23-10-2008 @ 08:27 PM by Majorion
reply to post by enjoies05
Yes, a mod has informed of that in my U2U inbox. Thanks for your time anyhow.
Yes, a mod has informed of that in my U2U inbox. Thanks for your time anyhow.
reply posted on 27-10-2008 @ 06:50 PM by Allred5923
reply to post by Agit8dChop
I, too have had the same situation, and I really thought that the thread that I had posted was legit. It too was about Barack, and there were some posters that were getting, let's say, "Frustrated", but nothing that was a deliberate attack or out right profanity.
What gives with that ?
You should at least give the true cause of the retraction of such threads with a direct cause of it being closed.
I know you MOD's send the acknowledgement of it being taken off of the forum's but without any exact reason, just the guide lines and infractions rules.
What do you say "The Vagabond?"
I, too have had the same situation, and I really thought that the thread that I had posted was legit. It too was about Barack, and there were some posters that were getting, let's say, "Frustrated", but nothing that was a deliberate attack or out right profanity.
What gives with that ?
You should at least give the true cause of the retraction of such threads with a direct cause of it being closed.
I know you MOD's send the acknowledgement of it being taken off of the forum's but without any exact reason, just the guide lines and infractions rules.
What do you say "The Vagabond?"
reply posted on 27-10-2008 @ 07:38 PM by Springer
reply to post by Agit8dChop
Which is it? Did you get a response or not? If you didn't it's something we need to improve on and we will, if you did I need to know that too please.
to everyone else with questions about political posts:
We (the admins) have made it ABUNDANTLY CLEAR in MANY THREADS. It is the members' responsibility to learn the guidelines and abide by them, the staff is outnumbered 140,000+ to 60, they simply don't have time to explain each and every removal. Especially when it's unnecessary since the new guidelines have been made very obvious to those who will do a minimum of research and be responsible enough to keep up with the guidelines.
Springer...
Which is it? Did you get a response or not? If you didn't it's something we need to improve on and we will, if you did I need to know that too please.
to everyone else with questions about political posts:
We (the admins) have made it ABUNDANTLY CLEAR in MANY THREADS. It is the members' responsibility to learn the guidelines and abide by them, the staff is outnumbered 140,000+ to 60, they simply don't have time to explain each and every removal. Especially when it's unnecessary since the new guidelines have been made very obvious to those who will do a minimum of research and be responsible enough to keep up with the guidelines.
Springer...
reply posted on 27-10-2008 @ 08:11 PM by clay2 baraka
Originally posted by Allred5923
reply to post by Agit8dChop
I, too have had the same situation, and I really thought that the thread that I had posted was legit. It too was about Barack, and there were some posters that were getting, let's say, "Frustrated", but nothing that was a deliberate attack or out right profanity.
What gives with that ?
You should at least give the true cause of the retraction of such threads with a direct cause of it being closed.
I know you MOD's send the acknowledgement of it being taken off of the forum's but without any exact reason, just the guide lines and infractions rules.
What do you say "The Vagabond?"
To be honest I was a bit surprised that your thread was not removed earlier. This is why:
You posted under the breaking political news forum. The breaking news was a YouTube video referred to in a blog that had been posted on YouTube some time ago.
New Political News Threads intended for the Breaking Political News forum cannot be based on blogs, YouTube videos, or any other content considered "user-generated" from any source.
No Innuendo or Rumor Threads regarding the candidates for the 2008 election will be allowed from this point forward in any of the ATS forums.
New Political Threads Must Be Fact-Based and initiated with an examination, analysis, or sober coverage of a candidate's or party's stated platform issue, either via official platform statements or recent interviews.
I think you were done a disservice by the inconsistency of the enforcement of this policy.
[edit on 27-10-2008 by clay2 baraka]
reply posted on 27-10-2008 @ 08:20 PM by Allred5923
reply to post by clay2 baraka
I can understand your point of view of it being a rather old topic, but I had received and it was dated Oct. 25th 2008, and for that reason, after trying to research it through the archives and finding nothing to compare it to, I went forward with posting it thinking it had not been discussed. "Which is all I was doing to see if it were fact or fiction."
Before that, I didn't even know the video existed.
Sorry for my lack of knowledge over this event, but it was to basically satisfy my own thoughts of it's existence.
I can understand your point of view of it being a rather old topic, but I had received and it was dated Oct. 25th 2008, and for that reason, after trying to research it through the archives and finding nothing to compare it to, I went forward with posting it thinking it had not been discussed. "Which is all I was doing to see if it were fact or fiction."
Before that, I didn't even know the video existed.
Sorry for my lack of knowledge over this event, but it was to basically satisfy my own thoughts of it's existence.
reply posted on 27-10-2008 @ 08:43 PM by clay2 baraka
reply to post by Allred5923
I think you are missing the point.
Your post was based on innuendo from a YouTube video posted on a blog. Both of which are prohibited source material as is Wikipedia I believe.
I think you are missing the point.
Your post was based on innuendo from a YouTube video posted on a blog. Both of which are prohibited source material as is Wikipedia I believe.
