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: 61
<< 58  59  60    62  63  64 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:14 PM

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by TKainZero
In the past, when a mod would remove some of a post, it would show up that the post was edited by that Mod.

(bolding mine)

Moderators STILL edit posts wherever needed. Censor circumvention, ALL CAPS in titles, botched quotes, copy/paste text without 'ex' tags, etc., are edited when moderators happen to see them.

When moderators edit posts that are not Off Topic, for example, their name still appears at the bottom of the post.

Thats correct.

But, when the entire post is stricken, and the 'Political Baiting' or 'Off topic' .JPG are inserted, it does not show up.

Whats what i am talking about.

I am sorry if there was confusion, and hope that this clarifies that point.

Just a personal view. For the publics sake.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:40 PM
reply to post by TKainZero

However, the individual's post who was removed... they receive an automated u2u indicating who was responsible for the removal of the post.

Thus, no anonymity on behalf of the staff on these issues.

If someone really wanted to know who did what on every issue, than I'm sure they could go and contact every member who was ever warned and asked who did it. However, short of that... it would not be public knowledge who is responsible for each post removal. Only the staff and the member in question would be informed.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:43 PM

Originally posted by TKainZero

For the publics sake.

When posts are removed for one reason or another, the poster automatically receives a u2u from the moderator who removed it. Why should the public know which moderator removed some other members post? The other moderators will know, and the poster will know. I'm sure the public will be more interested in reading the topic of the thread.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 09:23 PM
I was a regular poster to the "Trucker driver UFO footage" thread, I was replying to a member of the this particular thread and went to save my return reply as a "Save as Draft" and it posted it anyway and now won't let me back into the thread saying I am not permitted to post in this thread.

Can a mod fix this for me, I was really getting into the topic pretty deep, it is quite a fascinating find and story.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:26 PM
Ok, I'm having an issue with communicating via the text here on ATS. I feel like some words that I say are getting lost to other users through translation and their interpretation of what I say.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:37 PM
reply to post by Allred5923

I don't know why you would not be permitted to post there..

The Thread Truck driver report of UFO near Empire, OH is an active thread...

Are you having any problems in any other threads?


posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 06:04 PM
reply to post by semperfortis

Hi Semperfortis,
When I got back on today, it allowed me access to the thread in question. There is a type banner across the top of that particular post that reads something like "This is a Drafted post request" or something like that.

For all other reason's, I don't know why this had happened, but it has yet to act up that way again.

TY Sfortis!!

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 06:08 PM
reply to post by Allred5923

If you have any draft posts, you can manage them from here:
Manage Your Draft Posts

I personally never use the draft function. Just saying.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 06:13 PM
reply to post by Hellmutt

Was not so much I didn't know how to manage the drafted post, it just wouldn't let me back into the thread I was posting on.

Thanks for the"Drafting" info none the less...

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 06:54 PM
Now I have another issue that has come up, I can not get into the chat area of the ATS..
I don't understand why, "Any help?"

posted on Nov, 9 2008 @ 06:14 AM
I know when you have YOUR OWN post replaced with a JPG you get a message what mod did it.

But, in the past, (IE, before the cool little JPG) a mod would still remove the post, and it would show.

Now, when a mod removes a word or 2, this is what happens, it shows the mod, and who did it.

BUT, and this is what im talking about, when the mod inserts the JPG image, no public notification is there on who did it.

Having that would be nice.

Thats all...

So would having the Views back too...

I would like to know what mod removes what, esspecialy after i have read something, and then it is removed.

In the past, you could follow it.
Now, its just a bunch on information that disapears, and is replaced with a JPG, and no information...

I like having information...
But i understand if the information has now been deemed only mod-worthy...

posted on Nov, 9 2008 @ 06:22 AM
reply to post by TKainZero

Why would you concern yourself with the interactions of other members and staff? There is no anonymity and this information is not deemed "staff only" because the offending member is made perfectly aware of what happened. What it is deemed is that it is on a need to know basis and those that need to know what happened, they do. Those that don't, they don't.

It is a system that works and it minimizes drama.

posted on Nov, 9 2008 @ 02:46 PM
reply to post by TKainZero

Why? So others can ramble to the mod, asking about the post removed? Sounds like snooping the information to me.

Mods, I made a thread a while ago, accidentally lol. It's an ATS issue, so it should've been posted in this thread, someone wanna close it and I'll just put a referral link here?

Profile Glitches - Not a major issue, but Bill will have to tweak it.

posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 09:17 AM
I think what TK is asking for isn't a bad idea.
It may reduce the drama just to have a jpeg and no mod name but it would be nice to know who is doing what.

For instance say i had post that i feel was removed and was quoted some reason for it by a mod (e.g. it was too simple), i would recieve the u2u (although i know of people who havent) and i could enter into discourse with the mod over the post removal.
But if a mods name was displayed when a post is removed and replaced with the jpeg then i could look and see if this particular mod has removed others posts with a dodgy reason.
In other words what if a mod was removing posts that they personally didn't agree with regardless of wether the broke the terms and conditions or not.
For example what if a mod who was religious happened to read a post in thread regarding religion that said god doesn't exist or that religion is bull, then that mod decided to remove that post because it says something against their own view or beliefs.

if we had some way of publicly knowing which mod has removed which post then we would be able to see if this mod doing the same to other posts they don't like or to people they don't like, giving some public acountability.

I have read a few posts where people say mods are only human well the hypothetical situation i have described is possible due to the fact that like everybody the mods have human predjudices and faults.

So if there was a way of publicly knowing who had removed what then the mods actions would be on full public display and no 'funny business' would be possible.

Put simply i think we just want some public acountability thats all.

posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 02:04 PM
reply to post by full997

But it isn't any of the public's business. What you're asking for is only just asking for users to start more crap flinging when it comes to how ATS is dealt with. Even now, there are tons of members who seem to think it's necessary to shoot crap on the public forums about how ATS "censors" them, imagine the explosion in these threads (not just bogus censorship remarks, but others as well), if those were made public.

That's not fair. That's not appropriate. It's bad practice, and one would be wise not to support it.

posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 03:55 PM
reply to post by Allred5923

Just saw this...

Were you able to log into Chat?

A little tip, you need to be on ATS, not BTS, when logging into Chat..

Let me know OK??


posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 07:18 PM
reply to post by semperfortis

I am on Ats when attempting, don't know what is going on, but it PI@#'s me Off. Gets frustrating when you can't chat with The multitudes of intelligence!! lOL

Could be a java problem, not sure?

posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 09:45 PM
reply to post by Allred5923

I just logged on with no problem at all...

Try updating your Java, Clearing your Cache and Temp Files

I'm not really a techy, but it sounds like maybe an update will help


posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 11:05 PM

One day I could suddenly not get into chat without that error message ("unknown error") coming up over and over. I'm using Firefox. The previous night, it worked fine with firefox. After trying dozens of times without luck, I gave it a shot with IE (instead of Firefox). It worked right away, on first attempt. I believe if I'd cleared the cache on Firefox, it could've solved the problem with FF, I'm not sure. So my advice would be:

1. Try again
2: Try again one more time (or several times)
3: Try with a different browser
4: Clear the browsers cache
5: Kill cookies (I only kill cookies when everything else fails)

edit to add:
I'm now at location B, and I entered chat with Firefox, without seeing the "unknown error" message even once. No problem at all.

[edit on 2008/11/10 by Hellmutt]

posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 10:46 AM
Can i just say first i respect the MODs and the owners of this site and what they do here and i thank them for their hard work and dedication but i do have a slight issue with one of the forums called RATS forum and about a certain subject which isnt allowed to have its own thread here called Marijuana

I dont really understand how we can talk about subjects like who the Anti - Christ is or Government projects but we cant talk about a plant an illegal lant yes but still its a plant all the same.

I really am greateful that this site is here because it has helped me alot through the months that ive been aware of it but i dont really see how the motto of the site can be deny ignorance when you cannot see all the threads but have to pay to do so

if the threads were against rules shouldnt they be deleted all together instead of being moved so you have to pay to see it and others like it shouldnt all threads be for all to see

thank you.

top topics

<< 58  59  60    62  63  64 >>

log in