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.

 

Thread Closings

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I know I'll be accused of whining again, but I'd like to know how others feel about this. Does it seem that ATS is a little "thread close happy"? I mean, even if a thread does have a similar title, or similar info, it's not going to be the same thread as any previous one. It seems like you're not allowing the natural progression of threads. All threads tend to take on their own direction, if you let them go long enough. By closing them as soon as you feel they might be too similar to another, you may be suppressing new important points or perspectives. I can't tell you how many threads I've seen that I would've liked to have participated in, but they're already closed. Sure, there may be another thread with similar points of view, but it's not going to have all of the same posts by the same people, nor the same perspectives that might prompt anyone to post something insightful. Is there really a reason for being so adamant about this? IMO, if the thread doesn't have the EXACT same info and/or article/link, then it should be allowed to develop. It might be interesting to see what new points and perspectives are brought up. Each thread has its own life, does it not? Killing them before they mature doesn't allow anyone to see where it could have gone. Just my opinion....




posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Two things: Bandwith and repeated information.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jonna
Two things: Bandwith and repeated information.


three things actually;
Bandwith,repeated information and that repeated information being repeated again.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:21 PM
link   
what's wrong with using the search, before opening a new thread??



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Well, for instance, the last thread I started that was closed, I did use the search. It came up with nothing. That search still isn't very useful, unless you know exactly what you're searching for. I type in the title of the article, or some keywords pertaining to the article. If it's not there, I assume it hasn't been posted. Don't you? Text isn't a very big bandwidth hog, really. It's actual hits that take up bandwidth, not text. As for repeating, I agree. But a lot of these I see aren't repeating anything. They're merely touching mildly upon a different aspect of the subject. There is a difference. I mean, right now, there practically isn't a single thing you can post about 9/11 without it being closed, and someone pointing out that it's already been covered...even if the topic is just vaguely similar.

Let me give you an example:

Type two keywords into your boolean search; "closed" and "threads". See if you can find this thread.
The ONLY way I could get it to come up (and at the very bottom of the list), was if I entered the exact title and did a subject only search. You have less than a slight chance in hell of entering the exact title, unless you already know it. See what I mean? It don't work.


[Edited on 4-21-2004 by Satyr]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Well when you look at the list of discussions about 9/11 there isn't really a need for yet another discussion about it.

Obviously when you have found something new about a topic that is already covered numerous times on ATS, you should clearly point out that fact so your thread will not get closed.

To my opinion you're a little over reacting on this, only 9/11 topics get closed a lot. Other threads that get closed are clearly identical to recent threads about the subject.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Because a lot of people have put a lot of thought and research into those threads.

Why start again and completely ignore the efforts already put into the topic when you can simply add to a pre-existing thread?



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Yes, too many threads are getting closed prematurely.

911 threads get closed even if you titled them "BRAND NEW INFORMATION THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ON ATS BEFORE."

Somebody doesn't want the most significant event of this century talked about much...JMO.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Everyone's got their own spin on subjects. I think the moderators could be less quick to trash them.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mepatriot
Yes, too many threads are getting closed prematurely.

911 threads get closed even if you titled them "BRAND NEW INFORMATION THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ON ATS BEFORE."

Somebody doesn't want the most significant event of this century talked about much...JMO.


yes, but most of the new information is inaccurate and misleading. The problem is that theres too many theories being twisted and constructed which lack basic logic.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:49 PM
link   
I'm trying not to over-react, but I'm considering leaving ATS because of this. It's getting beyond annoying. Sorry if you don't think so. By claiming that there can never be any new discoveries, there sure as hell won't be...especially if you don't allow people to discuss things in the natural progression of a thread. You might be surprised how different a thread may become, even if it did start out vaguely similar to another. How many times do you think someone will actually post in the other thread, after you close the one they wanted to post in? Myself, I think that's been never. Threads tend to die for a reason. That's why new ones are born.


Originally posted by Kano
Because a lot of people have put a lot of thought and research into those threads.

Why start again and completely ignore the efforts already put into the topic when you can simply add to a pre-existing thread?

You know what I do in those cases? If I know they exist, I post a link to the pre-existing thread in the new thread, and continue the discussion. If I don't know they exist, someone here is bound to point it out. BUT, that's no reason to close the thread, IMO. Once it's been noted, the topic can resume, can't it? I mean, there's a chance that someone may bring something to light that others didn't, ya know?

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by Satyr]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by mepatriot
Yes, too many threads are getting closed prematurely.

911 threads get closed even if you titled them "BRAND NEW INFORMATION THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ON ATS BEFORE."

Somebody doesn't want the most significant event of this century talked about much...JMO.


Well, your original post was never deleted. So there was no reason for you spam the same thread over and over and over. That is why your threads were deleted. Stop trying to play the victim.

EDIT: Satyr, what exactly are you referring to?

[Edited on 21-4-2004 by Kano]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by mepatriot 911 threads get closed even if you titled them "BRAND NEW INFORMATION THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ON ATS BEFORE."
As I told you before, and you seem to ignore, you copied the entire page text and pasted it into the new thread form field. This is why your post was removed. Trash Bin Original 911 research material not posted elsewhere on ATS Your post contained gems like:

complain buddies members search faq tutorial recent posts MyATS blogs 2003 deny chat MemberCenter (u2u)

AboveTop:Board Based on XMB By Aventure Media & The XMB Group Header data processed in 0.038 seconds Page processed in 0.636 seconds 43 total database queries (7)
So of course, when you post trash, it ends up in the trash.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:53 PM
link   
i would like to see a cut down on the I LIKE TO PUT MY THREAD TITLE IN CAPS SO EVERYONE WILL SEE IT, there is really no need to do that.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kano
EDIT: Satyr, what exactly are you referring to?

I'm just speaking in general. It seems that the policy has gotten at least 25 times more strict, since I registered here. I could probably find multiple examples, but I'm not going to go searching.


Originally posted by infinite
i would like to see a cut down on the I LIKE TO PUT MY THREAD TITLE IN CAPS SO EVERYONE WILL SEE IT, there is really no need to do that.

I agree. Those people should be warned, and if they continue, their threads should be deleted.


Originally posted by Zion Mainframe
Well when you look at the list of discussions about 9/11 there isn't really a need for yet another discussion about it.

Obviously when you have found something new about a topic that is already covered numerous times on ATS, you should clearly point out that fact so your thread will not get closed.

To my opinion you're a little over reacting on this, only 9/11 topics get closed a lot. Other threads that get closed are clearly identical to recent threads about the subject.


Let's say I posted a topic about "guitars". Well, there's already been alot of topics on guitars. I couldn't possibly know anything that everyone else doesn't already know about this subject, right? Wrong! You see what I'm getting at? Even if it starts out similarly, all it takes is one person asking one question that hasn't been asked before, and BOOM!!! You have a totally new twist on the topic! Suddenly, the topic takes a left turn and people start researching things they'd never researched before.

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by Satyr]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Overall, given the nearly 500,000 posts in this community, it would greatly benefit the new user, or user from an in-bound Google search to experience the entire evolution of a topic within a small handful of threads, or even one thread. We have over 8,000 people coming to this discussion board every day from search engine searches. From a pure usability standpoint, it's much more effective to have a mega-thread focused on intense discussion of a singular topic, than dozens of short threads that skirt subordinate issues of that topic. I know it can be frustrating if you have a new idea and are eager to start a new thread. But think, for a moment, of a more selfless approach of making sure someone new is easily able to find the entire story. Yes, including links to old threads certainly helps, and I don't think a new thread like that has ever been moved to the trash. But not everyone will follow those links. I think as members of the Internet's largest conspiracy-related discussion board, we have somewhat of a responsibility to help new users discover our opinions in the most efficient and logical way possible... it's part of the path to denying ignorance.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kano
Because a lot of people have put a lot of thought and research into those threads.

Why start again and completely ignore the efforts already put into the topic when you can simply add to a pre-existing thread?


My thoughts exactly.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 02:25 PM
link   
I agree, but what I've been seeing lately, are mods just posting a link to a thread that may have similar discussions, and BAM!!! it's closed. You must also think about being friendly to not only new members, but new posters. That kind of thing discourages people from posting. I know it does me. I'm afraid to post a new thread, because it's sure to be closed.
All I am sayyyying......is give threads a chance.
(unless they're undoubtedly exactly the same....as in the same article or link)


Originally posted by Kano
Because a lot of people have put a lot of thought and research into those threads.

Why start again and completely ignore the efforts already put into the topic when you can simply add to a pre-existing thread?

Those threads or posts can be used to keep people from going into the same discussion, but they shouldn't stifle the entire thread. I mean, once a link to the significant research is pointed out, there's no reason to close the thread. It can continue in a somewhat different direction, or a new side discussion may be created that brings forth new, previously undisclosed, info. The hard work of others doesn't have to be ignored (if someone knows of it, I'm sure it'll be pointed out), and it also doesn't necessarily have to be reason to close the thread.

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by Satyr]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Man the board is 'bitchin' today. I think that there is a point of disgression that falls between both sides of these arguments. Topics must be rehashed, fresh light and new opinions put upon them, however I understand the annoyance with the 9/11 thing, it has gone to far. But mods, at least give people a chance to show there own perspective on a subject, and maybe more information will come about regarding a subject that may seem stale to others.

[Edited on 4/21/2004 by earthtone]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Perhaps, if the mods took a little time to give the poster a reason that the thread was moved or dumped, rather than just sending a form letter notifying them that the thread was dumped to trash bin. Only two mods have done this with me, Kano(thanks man,you know why!) and Asala who sent me the following before deleting to trash bin-

Hey Journey,

Im going to remove your thread named,
"Heads up-on now- live Bush Presidential News Conference

As there are many thread on this now, and are in discussion
On what Bush said,

So it looks as if people are kinda responding to the others and
not this one now,
Thanks for adding it, but i feel that as the others are up
and need to rid the ones that have not been responded to
I hope you feel this is ok,

please u2u back if you have a problem with this and we can talk about it further, i will lock it for now untill you let me know
if its ok,

Asala :@)

This was a very nice approach, even though the thread I submitted was just a heads up on the last Bush Presidential News Conference, as it was being televised.
Thanks again, Kano and Asala....
Even though my thread was taken over (by a mod, too- I might add). I was kinda let down, as another thread was started at the end of the conference. And, it was not deleted.
However, I did not feel as this was a correct decision made by the mod who started another thread, on my topic.
From my interpretation of the above u2u someone else also realized what I know.
Just some thoughts of mine- nothing personal, but I do feel good stating my opinion on this sour subject.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join