to bad you seem to be one of the only who liked it
The ATS Issues Thread, page 64
privacy
reply posted on 19-11-2008 @ 06:15 PM by Skyfloating
reply to post by RuneSpider
The story behind this is that an abusive post of his was removed (by me, I might add), and ever since them he thinks I am the perpetrator of an evil masonic conspiracy.
How dare I remove a post of his?
The story behind this is that an abusive post of his was removed (by me, I might add), and ever since them he thinks I am the perpetrator of an evil masonic conspiracy.
How dare I remove a post of his?
reply posted on 19-11-2008 @ 06:28 PM by RuneSpider
reply to post by Skyfloating
Oh, believe me, I know his history here, and am not surprised he's had another post removed. My main concern is the number of people he's sent htis U2U to, and the debate that sprang up about his post being removed.
Oh, believe me, I know his history here, and am not surprised he's had another post removed. My main concern is the number of people he's sent htis U2U to, and the debate that sprang up about his post being removed.
reply posted on 20-11-2008 @ 08:12 AM by Crakeur
reply to post by RichardPrice
your thread wasn't locked, it was moved to the complaints forum so the staff could see it. The issue with the anonymous posts has come up time and again. You've added a new wrinkle so let me clear up the issue that is most frequently raised.
Anonymous posts bumping threads without going live.
If you listen to last week's ATS Mix you will hear a sampling of some of the anonymous posts that didn't go live. In there you will hear gibberish, mockery and hatred. We get pages and pages of anymous posts each day and the staff does their best to read them all and either show them or kill them. Many times the anonymous posts are in old threads. Why? I have no clue. From what I've seen, these posts are usually not of any quality. So we get a lot of old threads being bumped up to the top of the page for what seems like no reason at all.
Now, as to the staff making posts viewable that you feel aren't worthy, well, that's an issue that needs to worked on. I won't profess to know a thing about aviation and military machinery so, when I come across an anonymous post in that arena, I am not the best person to make it live. I'm not sure if we have any staffers that are as informed in that arena as some of our posters. Having a keen interest in a subject doesn't make someone a better moderator in that forum. The way I see it, someone who has more knowledge and interest in, say secret societies, is going to moderate with a bit of unintentional bias. It is unavoidable.
Perhaps, what is needed in a situation such as the one you mentioned, is a forums subject matter expert to aid us in our monitoring of the anon posts in that section. Truth is, those posts are more technical and not as opinion based as some of the other forums and this might actually be of some benefit.
I'll check with the staff and see who's up to the task for that forum.
your thread wasn't locked, it was moved to the complaints forum so the staff could see it. The issue with the anonymous posts has come up time and again. You've added a new wrinkle so let me clear up the issue that is most frequently raised.
Anonymous posts bumping threads without going live.
If you listen to last week's ATS Mix you will hear a sampling of some of the anonymous posts that didn't go live. In there you will hear gibberish, mockery and hatred. We get pages and pages of anymous posts each day and the staff does their best to read them all and either show them or kill them. Many times the anonymous posts are in old threads. Why? I have no clue. From what I've seen, these posts are usually not of any quality. So we get a lot of old threads being bumped up to the top of the page for what seems like no reason at all.
Now, as to the staff making posts viewable that you feel aren't worthy, well, that's an issue that needs to worked on. I won't profess to know a thing about aviation and military machinery so, when I come across an anonymous post in that arena, I am not the best person to make it live. I'm not sure if we have any staffers that are as informed in that arena as some of our posters. Having a keen interest in a subject doesn't make someone a better moderator in that forum. The way I see it, someone who has more knowledge and interest in, say secret societies, is going to moderate with a bit of unintentional bias. It is unavoidable.
Perhaps, what is needed in a situation such as the one you mentioned, is a forums subject matter expert to aid us in our monitoring of the anon posts in that section. Truth is, those posts are more technical and not as opinion based as some of the other forums and this might actually be of some benefit.
I'll check with the staff and see who's up to the task for that forum.
reply posted on 20-11-2008 @ 09:09 AM by RichardPrice
Firstly, thankyou for the reply - it is muchly appreciated.
Actually it was locked - www.abovetopsecret.com...
The problem is, those threads *are* being bumped for no reason - the forum software should not be bumping threads until there is content to see, IE after the post has been moderated, and not before. Is anything being looked into in this regard?
From what I have heard here and in other posts by mods and admins, it sounds like you are being overwhelmed by unmoderated posts, but for all the wrong reasons.
My general understanding, from what has been mentioned by mods and admins, is that unmoderated posts from across the entire forum all go into one moshpit, and are not removed from there after moderation. This, according to what has been said, makes it hard to actually moderate older stuff.
If this is correct, and again this is only my understanding from what has been said elsewhere, then the situation is understandable, but still not excusable. It would seem that your data management procedures were not thought through for this.
It is quite avoidable, which is why you have more than one person moderating a topic - a 'no' moderation is not final, and can be overridden by another moderator. This eliminates bias in the moderation if done well.
However, the problem becomes one of 'where do you draw the line'. The Aviation forum does indeed heavily discuss black projects, 'what ifs', advanced technologies etc, but a lot of what is going through at the moment is nothing more than pure fantasy (as per the example in my prior post). Its a fine line to walk, but in a lot of cases its quite obvious.
Perhaps the solution is to widen the net - there are many regulars to the Aviation forum that would happily lend a hand to moderating posts.
[edit on 20/11/2008 by RichardPrice]
Originally posted by Crakeur
reply to post by RichardPrice
your thread wasn't locked, it was moved to the complaints forum so the staff could see it.
Actually it was locked - www.abovetopsecret.com...
The issue with the anonymous posts has come up time and again. You've added a new wrinkle so let me clear up the issue that is most frequently raised.
Anonymous posts bumping threads without going live.
If you listen to last week's ATS Mix you will hear a sampling of some of the anonymous posts that didn't go live. In there you will hear gibberish, mockery and hatred. We get pages and pages of anymous posts each day and the staff does their best to read them all and either show them or kill them. Many times the anonymous posts are in old threads. Why? I have no clue. From what I've seen, these posts are usually not of any quality. So we get a lot of old threads being bumped up to the top of the page for what seems like no reason at all.
The problem is, those threads *are* being bumped for no reason - the forum software should not be bumping threads until there is content to see, IE after the post has been moderated, and not before. Is anything being looked into in this regard?
From what I have heard here and in other posts by mods and admins, it sounds like you are being overwhelmed by unmoderated posts, but for all the wrong reasons.
My general understanding, from what has been mentioned by mods and admins, is that unmoderated posts from across the entire forum all go into one moshpit, and are not removed from there after moderation. This, according to what has been said, makes it hard to actually moderate older stuff.
If this is correct, and again this is only my understanding from what has been said elsewhere, then the situation is understandable, but still not excusable. It would seem that your data management procedures were not thought through for this.
Now, as to the staff making posts viewable that you feel aren't worthy, well, that's an issue that needs to worked on. I won't profess to know a thing about aviation and military machinery so, when I come across an anonymous post in that arena, I am not the best person to make it live. I'm not sure if we have any staffers that are as informed in that arena as some of our posters. Having a keen interest in a subject doesn't make someone a better moderator in that forum. The way I see it, someone who has more knowledge and interest in, say secret societies, is going to moderate with a bit of unintentional bias. It is unavoidable.
It is quite avoidable, which is why you have more than one person moderating a topic - a 'no' moderation is not final, and can be overridden by another moderator. This eliminates bias in the moderation if done well.
However, the problem becomes one of 'where do you draw the line'. The Aviation forum does indeed heavily discuss black projects, 'what ifs', advanced technologies etc, but a lot of what is going through at the moment is nothing more than pure fantasy (as per the example in my prior post). Its a fine line to walk, but in a lot of cases its quite obvious.
Perhaps, what is needed in a situation such as the one you mentioned, is a forums subject matter expert to aid us in our monitoring of the anon posts in that section. Truth is, those posts are more technical and not as opinion based as some of the other forums and this might actually be of some benefit.
I'll check with the staff and see who's up to the task for that forum.
Perhaps the solution is to widen the net - there are many regulars to the Aviation forum that would happily lend a hand to moderating posts.
[edit on 20/11/2008 by RichardPrice]
reply posted on 20-11-2008 @ 11:01 AM by Mdv2
It really pisses me off that some moderators on ATS feel it is necessary to move important content constantly to sub-forums of the site which they
feel are more appropriate than the forum it was posted in.
People do a lot of work digging up good content to continuously improve the quality of ATS, if moderators then decide to move quality immediately to sections of the site where barely anyone will read it, it's not worth it to continue to contribute to ATS.
Don't get me wrong, sometimes it might really be necessary to move a certain thread to another forum, but perhaps you should question yourself whether ATS does not have too many sub-forums.
Take the following thread for example:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I reviewed the documentary myself and wanted to share it with my fellow ATS members, as I feel it is an important topic that people need to be educated on. The topic is relevant to 'current events', in my opinion since it is about the current conflict between Palestine and Israel. Hours after posting my thread was moved to 'resources and uploads'. Really nice, but how many people actually visit that section with so much content and so many sub-forums available? Not many...
Personally, I only read content in the sub-forums of 'current events', 'war on terrorism', 'alternative breaking news' and 'global meltdown' on a daily basis, but many sub-forums such as 'resources and contents' for instance, I never visit.
I've addressed the moderator who moved my thread about my issue, but until know havent received an answer.
People do a lot of work digging up good content to continuously improve the quality of ATS, if moderators then decide to move quality immediately to sections of the site where barely anyone will read it, it's not worth it to continue to contribute to ATS.
Don't get me wrong, sometimes it might really be necessary to move a certain thread to another forum, but perhaps you should question yourself whether ATS does not have too many sub-forums.
Take the following thread for example:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I reviewed the documentary myself and wanted to share it with my fellow ATS members, as I feel it is an important topic that people need to be educated on. The topic is relevant to 'current events', in my opinion since it is about the current conflict between Palestine and Israel. Hours after posting my thread was moved to 'resources and uploads'. Really nice, but how many people actually visit that section with so much content and so many sub-forums available? Not many...
Personally, I only read content in the sub-forums of 'current events', 'war on terrorism', 'alternative breaking news' and 'global meltdown' on a daily basis, but many sub-forums such as 'resources and contents' for instance, I never visit.
I've addressed the moderator who moved my thread about my issue, but until know havent received an answer.
reply posted on 20-11-2008 @ 11:15 AM by NGC2736
reply to post by RichardPrice
Let me understand this correctly. You feel that you, and a few hand picked friends, ought to decide the value of contributions to that particular forum? And you want to be able to base your judgment on your own set of standards, not on the idea of open discussion? You and these few others can then decide what "black ops" projects are worthy, and which are not? In other words you feel that an elitist club is the way to go?
What about the Medical Issues Forum? Should we limit it to posts by doctors?
What about the Aliens and UFO Forum? Should we limit it to Air Force Generals?
What about the Above Politics Forum? Should it only be for MSM pundits?
Try this idea; educate instead of intimidate.
Let me understand this correctly. You feel that you, and a few hand picked friends, ought to decide the value of contributions to that particular forum? And you want to be able to base your judgment on your own set of standards, not on the idea of open discussion? You and these few others can then decide what "black ops" projects are worthy, and which are not? In other words you feel that an elitist club is the way to go?
What about the Medical Issues Forum? Should we limit it to posts by doctors?
What about the Aliens and UFO Forum? Should we limit it to Air Force Generals?
What about the Above Politics Forum? Should it only be for MSM pundits?
Try this idea; educate instead of intimidate.
reply posted on 20-11-2008 @ 12:00 PM by Crakeur
reply to post by RichardPrice
my apologies, I should have checked first with regards to the thread but, the result is the same, that any issues should be posted here. The reason for this is simple. It keeps any issues from falling in the cracks.
With regards to the coding of the site to accomodate your suggestion, I will leave that answer to the Overlord himself as, when it comes to computer things, I'm a neanderthal.
As I mentioned, the FSME assistance for the anonymous posts is something we will look into. Those FSME's are given that title as a result of their expanded knowledge on the subject they are involved in. That should provide enough knowledge to know if a post is filled with gibberish or actual, valuable content.
my apologies, I should have checked first with regards to the thread but, the result is the same, that any issues should be posted here. The reason for this is simple. It keeps any issues from falling in the cracks.
With regards to the coding of the site to accomodate your suggestion, I will leave that answer to the Overlord himself as, when it comes to computer things, I'm a neanderthal.
As I mentioned, the FSME assistance for the anonymous posts is something we will look into. Those FSME's are given that title as a result of their expanded knowledge on the subject they are involved in. That should provide enough knowledge to know if a post is filled with gibberish or actual, valuable content.
reply posted on 20-11-2008 @ 12:54 PM by RichardPrice
Originally posted by NGC2736
reply to post by RichardPrice
Let me understand this correctly. You feel that you, and a few hand picked friends, ought to decide the value of contributions to that particular forum? And you want to be able to base your judgment on your own set of standards, not on the idea of open discussion? You and these few others can then decide what "black ops" projects are worthy, and which are not? In other words you feel that an elitist club is the way to go?
No, I don't feel an elitest club is the way to go, but something needs to be done to reverse the current trend of the forum doing a swan dive into a sewer.
Its getting that bad - the regulars are regulars because we like the discussion, we like informed constructive discussion on the topic.
Since anonymous posting became available, the quality of the forum has decreased significantly - you wouldn't believe the number of anonymous posters we have had posting claiming that they have flown aurora, or are involved in the aurora project, or that the SR-71 can go Mach 15 according to someone they know who worked on it. In most of these cases, the poster cannot string a proper sentence together without filling it with spelling mistakes, misusing punctuation (if they even use punctuation) and otherwise generally coming across as 10 years old.
In short, read the example post I put in my original comment - can you *seriously* tell me that that is worthy of inclusion in any constructive, informed discussion? If you are saying it is, and that we should live with it, then sorry but this site will lose a heck of a lot of regulars.
If the mods don't have time, effort or the care to actually think about moderating posts, or there aren't enough people who are actually involved in the subject matter to decide if a post saying the TR-3B is actually an interstellar ship designed to save humanity in the event of global disaster, while also policing the world and travelling at Mach 50, then what is the problem with suggesting that the people who are actively involved in the forum could do it for them?
If what you actually want is these forums to be open to everything a 13 year old fantasist wants to post and discuss, regardless of the posters that want constructive, informed discussion, then again you are going to lose a lot of the more mature, intelligent posters because thats not what they want.
What about the Medical Issues Forum? Should we limit it to posts by doctors?
What about the Aliens and UFO Forum? Should we limit it to Air Force Generals?
What about the Above Politics Forum? Should it only be for MSM pundits?
As I said before, are you after informed, constructive discussion or are you after 13 year olds pulling bullsh*t out of their arses just to look good?
Its entirely up to you.
But I do wonder, how would the Medical Issues forum react to an anonymous poster claiming that he and his science team found the cure to cancer, old age and impotence all in one single hit, and that cure was actually found to be a common household item. Oh, and they couldn't release their findings because they were being surpressed by the new world order.
Is that the sort of discussion you are wanting to protect?
Try this idea; educate instead of intimidate.
And how do you propose we do that? Waste our time answering every single infantile post regardless of how stupid it is? I'm sorry, I have better things to do.
Try this idea: go someplace where we are actually valued as long standing regulars.
reply posted on 20-11-2008 @ 03:53 PM by Shugo
reply to post by NGC2736
Let me see if I can reword the issue a bit better.
I for one agreed. But, I think the post that was in question was...hmm...what would be a good word. Far to the left?
I don't mind educating someone, but trying to deal with someone that pretty much says "this is what this is, and everything else is wrong", doesn't that seem a bit...well...closed minded to the point? Don't we have enough issues of that on ATS without anony's doing it too?
Then again, that might just be me. Gotta remember, I'm one of those "back in the day" fruitloops that you only HEAR about existing, I am my own mythological creature.
[edit on 20.11.2008 by Shugo]
Let me see if I can reword the issue a bit better.
I for one agreed. But, I think the post that was in question was...hmm...what would be a good word. Far to the left?
I don't mind educating someone, but trying to deal with someone that pretty much says "this is what this is, and everything else is wrong", doesn't that seem a bit...well...closed minded to the point? Don't we have enough issues of that on ATS without anony's doing it too?
Then again, that might just be me. Gotta remember, I'm one of those "back in the day" fruitloops that you only HEAR about existing, I am my own mythological creature.
[edit on 20.11.2008 by Shugo]
reply posted on 20-11-2008 @ 08:51 PM by Springer
reply to post by RichardPrice
While I certainly appreciate what you are saying and what you are concerned about, may I suggest you try ignoring the posts that are inane, ridiculous, infantile and or completely incorrect?
We are bound by our TAC (Terms And Conditions), period. If a post, anonymous or otherwise, doesn't violate the TAC it gets to be seen.
That being said, if there is evidence the poster presented "Knowingly False Information" then that is a violation of the TAC and the post will be removed. Also, if the information can be proven false in fairly certain terms it should be removed whether it is likely that it was "known to be false" by the author or not.
We have the "alert" button, that all members can use, for just such things.
When it comes to anonymous posts we have a somewhat more difficult time managing these, BUT, (believe it or not) they have proven to be most definitely worth the effort in several of the fora.
While we are still tweaking the system all suggestions are welcome and please remember, nothing is set in stone at ATS. We are pretty flexible and open to new ideas and or alterations to how we do things.
I still think that a single (or even a few) "ridiculous post(s)" in a thread of otherwise excellent information/discussion just isn't that hard to ignore.
WRT to "bad spelling and or grammar", ATS is an international site with thousands of excellent contributors whose first language is not English. Also, this is the internet, it's a wild, untamed, sometimes unrefined and free flowing communication medium, which means the emphasis is on the content not the presentation so much.
As Jim Marrs writes in our new book, "Above Top Secret, Uncover The Mysteries Of The Digital Age", "the upside of the internet is anyone and everyone has access, and the downside of the Internet is that everyone and anyone has access".
We've done about all we can with our various pleas asking folks NOT to use "text" or "leet" slang here, and for the most part, we are pretty clean in that regard, but expecting excellent or even "better than average" spelling and grammar is, in my many years experience online, an unrealistic expectation.
As we grow and adjust we try our best to meet the needs of our members, ALL of our members. We surely aren't perfect and never will be. We definitely screw up. We most certainly need to improve on many fronts and we sincerely appreciate constructive criticism that can help us do just that.
I am pretty sure "ignore them" is not the answer you were looking for. But I have to stand by it as the most realistic way to deal with the issue unless you and the other members who are bothered by these posts are willing to use the "alert button". If you will notify staff of the inane, misleading or outright false posts as they appear (via the alert button) and politely show the staff (remember the staff are ALL volunteers serving you because of a genuine love for the community) why they should not have "cleared" that particular anonymous post it will be a grand step toward rectifying this issue in a meaningful way...
Further, I would ask for patience after the "alert" has been initiated. There are times when staff numbers are few (mostly only in the "wee hours") or the site is so busy it's a matter of triage.
Springer...
While I certainly appreciate what you are saying and what you are concerned about, may I suggest you try ignoring the posts that are inane, ridiculous, infantile and or completely incorrect?
We are bound by our TAC (Terms And Conditions), period. If a post, anonymous or otherwise, doesn't violate the TAC it gets to be seen.
That being said, if there is evidence the poster presented "Knowingly False Information" then that is a violation of the TAC and the post will be removed. Also, if the information can be proven false in fairly certain terms it should be removed whether it is likely that it was "known to be false" by the author or not.
We have the "alert" button, that all members can use, for just such things.
When it comes to anonymous posts we have a somewhat more difficult time managing these, BUT, (believe it or not) they have proven to be most definitely worth the effort in several of the fora.
While we are still tweaking the system all suggestions are welcome and please remember, nothing is set in stone at ATS. We are pretty flexible and open to new ideas and or alterations to how we do things.
I still think that a single (or even a few) "ridiculous post(s)" in a thread of otherwise excellent information/discussion just isn't that hard to ignore.
WRT to "bad spelling and or grammar", ATS is an international site with thousands of excellent contributors whose first language is not English. Also, this is the internet, it's a wild, untamed, sometimes unrefined and free flowing communication medium, which means the emphasis is on the content not the presentation so much.
As Jim Marrs writes in our new book, "Above Top Secret, Uncover The Mysteries Of The Digital Age", "the upside of the internet is anyone and everyone has access, and the downside of the Internet is that everyone and anyone has access".
We've done about all we can with our various pleas asking folks NOT to use "text" or "leet" slang here, and for the most part, we are pretty clean in that regard, but expecting excellent or even "better than average" spelling and grammar is, in my many years experience online, an unrealistic expectation.
As we grow and adjust we try our best to meet the needs of our members, ALL of our members. We surely aren't perfect and never will be. We definitely screw up. We most certainly need to improve on many fronts and we sincerely appreciate constructive criticism that can help us do just that.
I am pretty sure "ignore them" is not the answer you were looking for. But I have to stand by it as the most realistic way to deal with the issue unless you and the other members who are bothered by these posts are willing to use the "alert button". If you will notify staff of the inane, misleading or outright false posts as they appear (via the alert button) and politely show the staff (remember the staff are ALL volunteers serving you because of a genuine love for the community) why they should not have "cleared" that particular anonymous post it will be a grand step toward rectifying this issue in a meaningful way...
Further, I would ask for patience after the "alert" has been initiated. There are times when staff numbers are few (mostly only in the "wee hours") or the site is so busy it's a matter of triage.
Springer...
