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.


ATS' Image and Respectability

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 05:39 AM
I have been here at ATS a while now and this is the first thread I have made concerning board business. I greatly commend the recent action taken to ban any more Oct 14th threads, and would like to propose doing so on a continual basis as a matter of policy.

ATS is a unique collection of seekers of knowledge in all its forms. The members are not afriad of any conclusion, even if it is beyond the realms of "normality". This is not only commendable, it is laudable. This attitude of seeking knowledge places ATS in unique company. It allows ATS the chance of becoming a knowledge hub where theories and points of view can be formulated and harnessed.

But of course as with everthing in life, there is a limit. There is a fine line between seeking unconventional knowledge and outright idiocy. Sadly the mainstream refuse to seek unconventional knowledge because it has been tarred with the same brush as lunacy. Valid theories such as the NWO and global cabal have been lumped into the same category as reptilians.
This does our cause (knowledge exchange) a great deal of harm.

So what I am proposing is that ATS switches gear from the hands-off position that they are currently in to a more direct interventionist approach. While this may entail a curtailment of members' freedom of speech, I believe that in the end it will lead to the creation of a much more efficient and respectable board.

Conversely, I believe we also need a better system of identifying threads which are above and beyond the normal quality of ATS. This time, Im talking about great threads... the diamonds amongst the dirt that make ATS worthwhile.

In short, ATS needs to promote fantastic threads while crushing any ones which are plainly ridiculous.

While some may suggest that this is heavy handed, and that bad threads are easily ignored by not clicking on them, I think this is more to do with the image of ATS. Does ATS really want to be associated with baseless threads that are not only to the detriment of its image, but also give the alternative community a bad name?

Thanks for listening

Mod Edit - Edited out links to Threads. Please check your U2U's

[edit on 14/1008/08 by neformore]

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 06:09 AM
Who Decides?


posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 06:11 AM

Originally posted by ATS4dummies
Who Decides?



Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 14-10-2008 by sanctum]

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 06:14 AM
Moderators and ATS management.

This was just a prompt for them to think about their reputation and standing being eroded by stupid threads.

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 06:16 AM
The simple rule is - One topic, One thread (with one or two exceptions in certain forums).

The problem is that sometimes a theory finds some sub-theories, and the sub-theories spawn some sub-sub-theories and so on. And each theorist/author feels that their idea should be an entity on its own. Take the 9/11 theory for example. The first theory was simply that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by the US Government. Today it is one of the most complex conspiracy theories.

As with the "14 October" theories/threads, some threads were "off-topic" enough to justify a new thread. But alas it snowballed into a monster where the average thread starter wanted to put "14 October" in their thread title. This is bound to happen with topics that are "hot".

As for thread titles, and identifying them - at the moment it's up to the thread starter to give a proper title or at least a proper tag. This will make Searching for a topic/thread much easier, but some like to use the "Shocking title look inside!" naming convention, which doesn't always work. Hopefully in the near future we'll see the in-thread word/phrase search return.

Finally, members of ATS are generally speaking open-minded. That's why we allow threads like "OMG! Prince William ate a Shape shifting Reptilian for breakfast" on ATS. To give members the opportunity to either tell the poster that it can't be because of fact 1, 2 and 3, or alternatively find that the poster actually has something to talk about.

As it is ATS owners and the staff iare accused of censoring some members. Should we push the standards up even higher, I can only imagine the influx of bitter accusations. That's why we leave the so-called "ridiculous threads" open and leave it up to the members to teach - or learn.

Keep in mind, that sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction.

[edit on 14-10-2008 by Gemwolf]

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 06:30 AM
The topics don't matter, there's always entertainment to be found in the "green alien baby seen coming out of obama's butt, eats 14 supporters. the vote must go on!" threads.

However, the duplicity of thread topics is another bag of peas altogether.
Maybe a live search function, where as you type in your subject, a query searches the recent topics of the past x amount of days ad lists them live as you type in a drop down box like some search engines now do.

Also, when you post an item on ebay, it searches for matching items & categories to suggest for your listing.

If your new topic matches an existing one, you are forced to post on the existing one, if it has been created in the past x amount of days. Removal of points for duplicate threads might be an incentive to keep order.

Another way is to allow the ability to negatively flag a topic. Maybe people with 2500 points or higher can shut down a thread by negatively flagging it. It then goes to a moderator for review and subsequent deletion.

Just a couple thoughts.

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 06:40 AM
reply to post by Gemwolf

Thats a fair and balanced post Gem, however I think there is a fundamental difference between open mindedness and lunacy. I know that this line is hard to demarkate and patrol, but it is a suggestion worth exploring.

Does anyone really gain any knowledge from threads such as "I am married to a reptilian"? Do any of the serious ATS stalwarts really care for these threads?
In my experience, no. We almost never see moderators and FSMEs posting in ridiculous threads because in essence, they are worthless. They add nothing to the board and in some cases even lower the reputation of the board.

Starting a conspiracy theory that the government is covering up alien existance (even reptilian existance) or some other such "out there" topic is fine, but shouldn't we really draw the line in the sand somewhere?

When do we start thinking about the quality of content rather than the quantity? If some members are angry that "omg im a reptilian" threads are gone, then perhaps ATS should not bother catering to such members. Should we not let them depart for stranger shores?

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 06:53 AM
the point is not to gain reputation but to gather and examine evidence, either to prove or disprove, every theory, regardless of personal bias or preconceptions.

if this is done with due diligence the reputation will follow.

limiting the number of similar threads in pursuit of concise examination is one thing, and this is how i understand the limiting of Oct 14th threads, but limiting threads on the basis of believability seems counter productive to ATSs' stated aim.

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:04 AM
reply to post by pieman

Ah thats a great way of thinking pieman. Thanks for making me understand the difference.

Perhaps the reason why I've gotten sick of these threads is their number not only en-masse at one point, but throughout history.

Maybe if there was only one reptilian thread which we could ignore, that could allow free speech for those interested in the subject, which not innundating the recent posts tab with that subject matter.

You metioned that each and every theory must be either proven or disproven. Yes, but how many times must we try and refute the reptilian threads? After a certain point, the serious members begin ignoring the threads because they cant be bothered to refute the claims any more. What Im asking is would ATS' image not benefit if these threads would cease to exist?

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:10 AM
One man's idiocy is another man's genius. Well, something like that.....

This is a board for alternative issues. Whereas you and I may not like the reptillian shape-shifting rulers of the world theories, others believe them with all their heart. ATS provides them a place to discuss the topics they believe in. Topic wise, there is very little that is off limits and people can speculate and theorize to their hearts content.

This is a great place for "out there" issues and topics. Why would anyone want to muzzle that or limit it? I've found that if you don't like something or don't believe in it, don't go there. Or if you do, be prepared to not convert the believers.

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:23 AM
uasually the mods jump in on page one and encourage people toward either a particularly good thread on the topic or the search function. this is being policed pretty thoroughly as it is.

the reason for this is that your "ATSs' reputation is being ruined" sentiment is a repeat topic in itself, it's come up in other guises at other times. all invested posters feel it at one time or another, usually after a rather fringe hot topic. serpo and that messiah guy are two good examples i can think of, but there are probably others for other members.

really though, the reputation that ATS has at the moment was built up despite, or because of, the crazy threads. if it reassures you at all, it hasn't had a negative effect to date.

new topics

top topics


log in