Why so tolerant of infantile submissions?

I think a lot of the (so-called) bad threads is "bad" because it lacks presentation. Consider two threads/first posts:

Holy crap dudez, I just saws a blue hippopotamus!!!!!!!!!!! Me thinks it were send by the CIA or govz people to spy on me and my girlfriendz.

Discuss.

Compared to:

I just had the opportunity to witness what appeared to be a blue hippopotamus. This happened whilst I was trimming my roses with some of my female friends in the back garden. It was approximately 14:25 on 37 July 2012. I live in the South Pole area.

The events happened as follows:

Blablablabla.

After the events I took these photographs of the tracks and asked around the neighbourhood to hear if someone else spotted it. I also reported it to the local SPCA.

Does anyone have any suggestions as to what this animal was? I suspect that there may be some involvement from the government seeing that I snapped this picture of an unmarked van just after the animal disappeared.

See? If people put some effort into posting their theories and ideas that alone will put the quality back in any thread. Take the SERPO circus for example. Even though it was a completely ridiculous claim, it was presented in such a way that it had people talking, speculating and doing some constructive investigation in claims. No one complained that it "lowered the quality on ATS". In fact it showed us exactly what our members are capable off.

As my English teacher always said: "Garbage in. Garbage out."

And as said above: If the thread is a waste of time, don't waste extra time by replying to it.

Perhaps if we all learn to use the search function it'll save us all some time? Like so:
Similar Thread 1
Similar Thread 2
Similar Thread 3
Similar Thread 4
(And that's only in the past 2 weeks.)

Important read: Neformore's thread

reply to post by Gemwolf


Well, then I'd like to ask you a very serious question as a mod. Lets say I post something in the late breaking news and I've neglected to realize that it is already a discussion on the forum.

Perhaps I add my own little editorial (which I often do) to the article? Perhaps the other poster used the short-type that bains my internet existance, and I have presented my thread in a very professional way.

Do you...
A. Remove mine, because the other person got their first?
B. Remove theirs because it does not necessarily allow for a good discussion on the topic?
C. Let them both coexist and hope that mine ends up the popular one?

I often wonder this because it seems that while the news section of the site is rather heavily moderated so that no old subjects are brought out, old viewpoints in a much less savory manner are brought up and allowed to exist in other forums.

I mean, I need to agree with the mods on this particular "dragonfly" case, as we need to self-moderate. However, I wonder if maybe some of these threads SHOULD be deleted or closed based on the T&C. This is only my interpretation of the T&C though....

Maybe I am thinking too deeply into the matter, but old speculation has been reintroduced many times without moderation.

Besides the fact that I believe people should be docked points based on their ability to form cogent words and sentences, but that is just my prejudice.

Thoughts?

I took an interest in the Dragonfly thread. It just appealed to me, I was looking for some light relief after spending days on the Dan Tanna Alien Attack thread.

One post was so screamingly funny I gave it a star and I had a good giggle at a few others.

I was going to post a reply to slightly take the mickey out of the OP, but I was a bit 'late to the party'.

By the time I got to the last post, things had got a little more serious. It turned out that at one time the CIA had actually had a go at making tiny dragonfly bugs, and a catfish one. They were in the CIA museum.

I didn't know about any of that, so I learned something. Unless the photos were fake and I'm being gullible.

I had a look at the dinosaur thread too. Funny idea, but the posts were nowhere near so amusing. Not to me, anyway.

I don't see the harm in letting people have some fun. It's been said many times, if you don't like a thread don't read it or contribute to it.

And how would you feel if members started threads complaining about serious content? They'd have a right to, but maybe they're too busy amusing themselves to want to pee on anyone else's firework.

Originally posted by SantaClaus


Do you...
A. Remove mine, because the other person got their first?
B. Remove theirs because it does not necessarily allow for a good discussion on the topic?
C. Let them both coexist and hope that mine ends up the popular one?

There´s many different ways to go about this. Things arent as written in stone as some may think. First option would be to close yours because theirs was first. Second option would be to U2U them asking them if they would kindly allow yours to persist instead of theirs. Third option would be to U2U you to kindly ask you to contribute your brilliant piece to theirs. Which option is chosen? That depends on a multitude of factors and discussion among moderators.

The main thing being that most actions are discussed before done. Its called democracy. It takes longer, its more work, it leads to differences in opinion...but its fair and feels right.

Originally posted by SteveR
"Are dragon flies real?" etc ad nauseum.

Is there a legitimate sensible answer for this?

I am baffled as to why ATS sees fit not to protect its integrity.

Dude. I got here by clicking AbovePolitics. Kinda says it all.

All I'm allowed to say about the most important election of a generation is "Butterflies are free" (and Goldie Hahn has tiny boobs).

Thus ends your political debate for 2008. Have a nice day. I think an Alien is at my door.