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: 98
126
<< 95  96  97    99  100  101 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Thanks!

Huge difference!




posted on May, 2 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Whoops, wrong thread, sorry.

[edit on 2-5-2009 by dainoyfb]



posted on May, 2 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Scratch that, already got my answers.

2nd line.

~Keeper

[edit on 5/2/2009 by tothetenthpower]



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   
I'm not sure whether this has been posted before, but please excuse me for taking the liberty of not reading a 98-page thread


A small but nevertheless agitating problem on ATS is the fact that a known hoax can be repeatedly posted in different forms by members who do not know it's a hoax yet (maybe we need a tutorial for the search function, eh ;]]). The thread then typically lasts for 4 or 5 posts before a moderator closes it, so this wouldn't seem like a big problem. However, in case of hot topics like the A/H1N1 flu, a hoax like the mutation to a "Zombie-virus" can get posted dozens of times within the period of days. This seems like something that can be limited in a friendly way.

It could be as simple as matching a new post to a list of words: upon pressing the Submit button for a new thread, a warning is displayed: "ARE YOU SURE that this is not a hoax? Here is a previous thread with the same subject [tags]" with the link to the previous thread that turned out to be a hoax, with that subject. Maybe there's a more intelligent variation of this.. Anyway, I think it would save moderators some time from chasing naive duplicates of hoaxes, educate the members that didn't know it was a known hoax yet, and raise the overall quality of the forum for a bit.


[edit on 3-5-2009 by scraze]



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Dear ATS

I'm glad you're on the net. You let people voice their opinions, and that is a great thing this day and time. There is a lot of rocks to be turned and dirt to be dug, and you allow that to happen. Thank you for this website, and all the threads and thoughts that are voiced. Keep on keepin on ATS!



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   
I posted this here because the other thread was closed and I feel very strongly about the topic and want to help those in charge of its resolution.

Quote From Springer:



“When SkepticOverlord and I decided to put everything we have into the building of ATS it was with the vision that humanity could gather, investigate, research, collaborate and discuss the alternative topics that are either summarily ignored or ridiculed by the "mainstream media" in a civil and respectful manner.”


There is a greater phenomenon that is going on in our society at the moment that needs to be addressed here and realized. The “culture of negativity” is part of a larger cycle in society. It was correct of you to explain this as a larger reflection of society as a whole. Civilizations move in cycles. The first cycle is usually a religious adherence to social morality and norms. The 1950's can be relegated to this phase of our society. It is mostly a reflection of an overwhelming controlling social norm. Basically a large majority of the population believe in a certain moral code (IE Conservative Christianity).

However, as the racial, religious, and nationalistic makeup of the society changes then various separatist groups who are gaining in membership will fight for dominance within their society. This is where we are in the American melting pot phase. You are probably experiencing this more on line due to the larger global makeup of your posters.

It is the nature of our psychology that we as individuals often greatly desire strong leadership and guidance. We as a people, are stressed and largely unhappy when we cannot express ourselves within our society with a certain amount of freedom and acceptance. The phrase “misery loves company” is as true as the saying, “Avoid loud and aggressive people”. Each of these ideas are simply truisms that all people should follow in order to isolate themselves from the negative influence of others.

Essentially, it is good that people segregate themselves by a common moral code in normal times of peace in any society. It is only when external forces provide a new and overwhelming reality that forces us to better tolerate what we should normally avoid in other people. War is the perfect example. It is usually only when a nation is at war that this unity of the peoples is achieved. But even then, it is only because the society has created a greater division of peoples that lies outside the national society itself. The “Japs” or the “Dirty Germans” then become the outsiders. But the essential truth of groups of people segregating themselves based on common morality, religion, and purpose is still the same. It is just that the perceived segregation of society has now grown, due to war, beyond the national boarders.

My advice for this circumstance is to take decisive action. We are all unhappy to an extent when the places that we associate do not have clearly defined boundaries. As Christ said, “It is better to be hot or cold than lukewarm.” I think that the action that you take to stem the “culture of negativity” should be a hammer, and not an slap on the wrist. Will many people leave? Yes. But it is better that you take actions that are decisive enough to learn from, as a manager, than actions that only fail to achieve their goal and yet leave you with no lessons to learn from because the end is subtle and quiet and the diamonds of wisdom to be obtained from them are equally small and too easily missed among the ashes.

But let us not fail to understand also that with decisive and sweeping actions should also come decisive and sweeping debate. This “Research Phase” of the operations is in fact the most important. It is the gathering of facts and the isolation of essential points that is most important. The vague generalities of “Negativity” and “Trolling” must be re codified into specific actions and methods. A hammer is a valuable tool, but ineffective, if the target that you are striking is not very precise. You must hit the nail on the head, and that nail must be precisely defined to be smaller than the hammer itself.

You must use this method of debate even more so than you desire because it is debate itself that you are attempting to control. It is not thought that you are striking at. It is not a specific group of people that you are targeting. Instead it must be the very specific and well defined actions or whatever persons that you attack with overwhelming force. It should be widely debated. This debate and research is the most tiring and straining phase of operations, yes, but they are the most essential. It may even be that the debate itself, if widely circulated enough, and made enough of an essential topic in itself, may be enough to control the actions of others.

But at this moment, you should not close this post. At this moment you should more clearly define the “Negative” that you are targeting. At this moment you, and others, should endeavor to limit the usage of vague general titles and names like “troll” and “negative poster”. For any definition can be applied to such all encompassing titles. To define a thing accurately is to give it purpose. Only then, can it be attacked with success.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by Hot_Wings]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Help!

I received a couple of warnings for "political trolling." The only problem is I am not sure why, and would like some clarification, but the U2U states "DO NOT REPLY." I recall that during the election season I received some warnings but was always able to seek clarification, and once I was able to have the warning rescinded. But not now...did something change?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
But not now...did something change?

Nothing changed.

You were warned for over-the-top political baiting in the pointless Rush Limbaugh thread that I closed.

The thread had devolved into a counter-productive mud-slinging contest of low-brow divisive one-upsmanship. Several members were dinged with warns/removals.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


You aren't allowed to be negative anymore or sling metaphorical mud (which should actually never have made been legal to begin with, IMO).

Just pretend to be hopeful and positive when posting on ATS.

You don't want your posts removed do you - Don't be a Negative Nelly!




[edit on 6-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
You aren't allowed to be negative anymore

That's not the intent of our recent efforts and I'm certain you're intelligent enough to know that.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I’m sorry to Bill and the other owners and moderators of the site. My recommendation to keep the new rules post open was a disaster. People only used this to attack the admins, not to continue the post for the benefit of others and the furtherance of ideas that would make ATS a better place.

The failure of my recommendation was holding members in higher esteem than their actions deserve. Instead of reasoned argument, they have chosen to attack and rebel like children.

In response, I have now written and deleted over three times now the recommendation to create a new section of the site that is only postable by invitation only. But this would be fundamentally wrong in many ways.

“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Christ said this. Does it apply here? I don’t know. I know that I feel somewhat responsible for this latest round of attacks upon you because of my recommendation and I am sorry that others only used this to attack you. Perhaps an invitation only section is warranted? Perhaps not. However, in reflection of this latest incident I cannot help but feel that some form of separation among members is warranted. How this would take place I do not know.

I sincerely appologize for my naivety.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Hot_Wings
 


Uh, don't beat yourself up. Bill's been hosting forums since the Compuserve days; I'm sure he took your input into consideration and made his own decision. There's no naive admins around here.

Keep giving input! I think that everyone's opinion should be expressed, within the obvious bounds of decorum.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
Really?

Then why have I not been able to post in the forum/thread about the negativity forum?

I am a firm believer in long life for the site........

But don' t cut me off.............



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hot_Wings
I’m sorry to Bill and the other owners and moderators of the site. My recommendation to keep the new rules post open was a disaster. People only used this to attack the admins, not to continue the post for the benefit of others and the furtherance of ideas that would make ATS a better place.

...um...

...er...

No worries (...uh...) as I never actually noticed/saw any such recommendation from you before I re-opened the thread with the update on what was accomplished.



And yes... it seems there will always be a category of people who are exactly as I described in the opening post of the thread... those who derive a twisted level of personal entertainment from attempting to insult and knock-down the creative efforts of others, rather than be creative themselves (or perhaps, creativity is a talent that is lacking in the first place).


edit to add... I closed it not log ago.

[edit on 7-5-2009 by SkepticOverlord]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   





Ouch!



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Come on guys,.............

We are all in this together.....

On some level............Aren't we???



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

And yes... it seems there will always be a category of people who are exactly as I described in the opening post of the thread... those who derive a twisted level of personal entertainment from attempting to insult and knock-down the creative efforts of others, rather than be creative themselves (or perhaps, creativity is a talent that is lacking in the first place).


I think this new policy is fantastic... great work...


One poster in the other thread mentioned a fear that this would mean new members are treated with less respect. I disagree. If a person takes the time to go through the probation period he/she is more likely to have something worth listening to than the person who joins just to pop a one liner or smart ass reply.

But on this point I quoted... just today I found this article...

It Takes a Village Idiot: The Jerks of Online Forums



Who ARE these people?

Online comment forums create ample opportunity for behavior of such extreme jerkitude that it can drive even the most patient Netizens batty. You know what I'm talking about: the know-it-alls, fight-starters and doctrinaire zealots who seem to frequent every message board on the entire "Interwebs," using any and every topic as a springboard for their sociopathic gratification. We've sifted through pages of forum messages to find the most absolutely asinine tactics. So get ready to cringe: On the pages that follow you'll meet our nominees for the 12 biggest jerks of the Web's online forums.


FULL ARTICLED HERE


I may be wrong but I think it is this type of negativity that is a major part of what we want to stop here...



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Thanks zorgon.

I'm #10 and there's no denying it:


"This edgy fellow detects conspiracies (or the shadows of conspiracies) in everything he reads, and he has no compunction about publicly sharing his off-kilter suspicions....

The Conspiracy Theorist is often convinced that he's under constant surveillance by the government -- for some reason they've singled him out (and even more mysteriously, they haven't bothered to terminate him yet, despite his constant blabbing) -- and he sees signs of schemes in the strangest places."

[edit on 7-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I respectfully request to be an official “Forum Whore”?

I would like permission to sell my avatar space and public profile information to a corporate sponsor. I would like my name, avatar picture, and signature to be changed to reflect whatever corporate sponsor I can get, preferable “Hooters” because I love hot wings.

So, what do you say...Can I be a “Forum Whore” for the big corporations?



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hot_Wings
So, what do you say...Can I be a “Forum Whore” for the big corporations?



Only if your personal sponsor is The Anchor Bar.



new topics

top topics



 
126
<< 95  96  97    99  100  101 >>

log in

join