|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 01:10 AM by CosmicEgg
|
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
Possible to have a "thumbs up" button for at least showing the OP some sort of support in their statements even though you may not have anything in
particular to add to their thread? I think it's nice not to be left out in left field with the crickets, don't you?
I don't, however, feel it would be good to have a "thumbs down" button for that purpose. It would be abused just for the sake of it.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 01:13 AM by Retseh
|
Originally posted by TheOracle
Bandwith?
(to prove my point: I now need to add more stuff to the conversation when a simple word can answer or ask a question to contribute to the topic...ah
there is is i can now hit SUBMIT REPLY)
I always worked on the basis that post count equals revenue stream for this website - i.e. they like a high posting volume, more makes them happy.
The only valid reason I could ever come up with was a desire to maintain quality of submissions, but the risk associated with that, especially with a
focus on "out there" conspiracy postings, has to be negligible.
I can still post bilge in 50 characters (or whatever the limit is).
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 01:17 AM by yizzel
|
I think this is a positive move, though time will tell.
The 100 character minimum limit isn't such a big deal.
The above paragraph is over 100 chrs, not exactly a wall of text (like someone mentioned earlier). No complains from my end.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 01:47 AM by pstrron
|
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
We have always desired posts of substance, and often remind our members of this and bring it up again when it becomes a problem and have even included
this text about the reply form: "Please do not create minimal posts or simple "I agree" posts when replying to threads."
This in fact is the crux of the matter. The vast majority do desire this and I for one get tired of the "one line drivel" that adds nothing to the
discussion. So once again Admin finds themselves between the proverbial rock and a hard place. To limit or not to limit that is the question and the
answer is....both and neither. My point being is that I see the need and yet the need is not exactly being met buy having a min 'character Count'.
SO's avatar sums it up nicely without saying a word.
ATS is a one of a kind and can be quite refreshing. However, let us not over tax the quality posters at the excuse of policing the trivial.
Several have suggested "Self policing by members", this unfortunately will only lead to abuse by some the same way the black spaces are abused for
one liners. In a similar way minimum character Count promotes bloated postings. Both defeat the intent and purpose.
Frankly, I see this measure as an interim gap until a better system of filtering can be put in place. Instead of being offended by it, let us rather
work together with SO to try and find a "true" working solution that we and the ATS community can benefit from.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 02:30 AM by RogerT
|
Originally posted by defcon5
Its funny that I logged in today to find this going on, because it just so happens that I noticed I am spending much less time on ATS. The reason
dawned on me when I read this thread. ATS is just not fun like it was in the old days. Too many rules, too many restrictions, too much coddling of any
nutty theory that comes down the pike, are just a few of the problems I can think of off the top of my head.
ATS is falling victim to its own success, and just like other companies it is going to end up losing that success because it's enforcing rules which
remove the very things that made ATS a success to begin with. I will never understand why companies who become successful immediately start changing
things after they achieve that success? To me it makes more sense that if you have something that works, leave it alone!
In the old days we handled poor posting by jumping all over the guy who posted it until they either straightened up or quit. Now, we cannot do that
because its not politically correct to personally attack another poster. This of course made the moderators jobs harder, so we implement new rules
that punish the other 99% of the good posters and make their lives miserable with broken code that has all kinds of flaws in it.
In the old days the posters took care of the flow of most threads, making them fun and pertinent to the readers/posters. The moderators only had to
jump in if there was a serious troublemaker. The threads used to ebb and flow with the interests of the people reading and posting in them. Sometimes
they went mildly off topic, but what difference does that really make, we are not writing the Encyclopedia Britannica here after all. Now we have the
thread Gestapo, and by the time I get into any thread over half the posts are replaced with warning flags of one type or another. Uhm... Guess what
guys... Often those off topic posts are a nice break from the rest of the thread, even if they only added levity to the discussion. I used to laugh at
stuff on ATS all the time, but not too much anymore.
People here used to be thicker skinned, and they took heat with a degree dignity and stuck up for themselves. Now we have a bunch of kiddies running
to the moderators to tattle every time someone calls them a “debunker” or “agent”. I personally have been dinged for a personal attack simply
for stating that someone misquoted me, and including the actual misquote in the post...  (I have never figured that one out to this day).
The problem can be tracked back to almost the minute that ATS became a corporation. As soon as that happened the fun factor began to decline as they
started trying to turn this into some sort of serious news source, conspiracy forum, with Disney values. In short, ATS started taking itself too
seriously IMHO.
Too many rules = Not enough fun.
If you doubt me, look how many old ATS'ers now will only post in BTS...
Wanna guess why that is?
MORE FUN, FEWER RULES!
I have quoted this in its entirety several pages later, as the post seems to sum up my own feelings, although I am fairly new to ATS, and that of many
other 'old timers' who have already commented.
Brilliant expose. ATS management should read, re-read and thoroughly digest this very valuable feedback before it is too late. IMHO
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 02:56 AM by Rockpuck
|
reply to post by Retseh
Most sites operate on number of unique hits a day/month/hr whatever.. I would imagine (though I cannot say for certain at all) that ATS makes most of
it's revenue from non-members sifting through the site. Clicking on Addsense whatnot.. number of members + unique visitors I am sure drives the cost
of advertising up as well though, but I doubt posts.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 04:18 AM by Concept X
|
Interesting change, however im not so sure on the amount in question and how it could be changed.
I know you want to promote detailed discussion but it just gets annoying and you will see things like
"fillerfillerfiller"
At the end's of peoples posts.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 04:42 AM by Flighty
|
I've often wipe my replies before posting because, although I would like to reply, it's a new subject that I don't know much about and can't
contribute to in a wordy enough way.
On those subjects I need to ask QUESTIONS.
It's easier to ask a question in 2 lines, but 3 would be pushing it.
This new system will probably discourage relative short questions unfortunately.
I hope this new rule doesn't stop the inquisitive from asking those questions that others read and learn from.
That's the only small issue I have this....
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 05:10 AM by Comatose
|
I made suggestions on page 8 and 9. No mod commented, which was kinda required for some feedback on what I had said. As in, why can't we do -this-
or -this-.
I mean... I wasn't complaining. I wasn't whining. I was trying to provide and discuss a valid solution. RubberBaron was the only one that gave
me some decent feedback.
Don't tell me to go to the "make a suggestion" thread either, nothing ever happens there. Even U2Us seem to have fallen on 'deaf ears' in the
past.
You're all just whining and moaning. How about putting in the effort to offer real solutions?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 05:57 AM by Whisper67
|
All of my concerns have been addressed (not personally but, along the way) and appears a lot of the bugs were worked out. 
I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think the owners picked a Sunday and a holiday, for some, to implement so they could work out the kinks.
My final comment on this thread will be one of gratitude. My time, like everyone elses, is important. I also feel like it is only respectful to all
ATS members to read through an entire thread before posting my comments.
Having to read through pages of 'atta boys/girls' will probably cut interesting threads in half. ::sigh of relief:: Lately, if I read a thread I
really enjoy but don't have anything to contribute - I give a star and will send 'virtual applause' via u2u to the OP. Nothing wrong with a pat on
the back but, no need to expand the length of the thread just to say so. And seriously guys, this adjustment is not really *that* much of a change.
I've done a lil posting overnight with no problems at all. No need for fluff, just stated my comments - none of them that I had to pad at all.
That said, Whisper gives an 'atta boy' to SO and Springer 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 06:07 AM by PuterMan
|
Originally posted by hikix
Yeah I don't really like this idea. Some of my friends here can get their point across without writing an essay... so we'll be seeing even fewer
posts from the older members now.
I have not gone further to see if this has already had a reply as I was so incensed by this I had to get it off my chest.
"so we'll be seeing even fewer posts from the older members now. "
I see this as an ageist attack which infers that older people do not have the mental capacity to get their point across, unless it is brief, as it
suggests an incapability to to make lengthy reasoned arguments. I accept that 'older' may in this instance refer to length of membership, how I
cannot see a correlation on that point either unless you are suggesting that members with longer service are bored.
I will be 61 in a few days time and I resent the suggestion that my faculties are incapable of allowing me to write an essay about anything.
I respectfully request Sir/Madam that you retract the statement.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 06:30 AM by chissler
|
reply to post by PuterMan
The reference to "older" members was likely one of tenure and not physical age. Someone who has been here for many years as opposed to someone who
has been here for months would be labeled an "older" member.
But I'd also disagree with the statement that members who have been here for a longer period of time are likely going to be put off by this. If
anything, I would have thought that this group of members would be the ones to not even blink an eye at this.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 06:36 AM by machinegun_go_go
|
Whilst I see how this a clear attempt to stop pointless posting it brings to mind a thought that I often have myself - that being why use 50 words to
make a point when you can use 5. I've got slightly frustrated when making a post in the past only to be told by the software that my post is
'mimimal.' In terms of words or characters - yes it may have been. In terms of getting a poing across or asking a pertinent question - certainly not.
I can see why this step has been taken and I support management in taking a stand but I have to express a concern that it may result in some rather
waffling statements.
My old geography teacher once wrote all over two sides of A4 of my work 'MEANINGLESS WAFFLE!!!' This has always stuck with me though life. It is so
easy to write lots and say nothing. I see it on ATS every day.
I tend to respect the more concise members if I'm being honest.
Hope it works in helping some of the members who live under a bridge move towards finding a new home.
Peace,
MGGG
-
Posted Via ATSmobile (BETA v0.3)
-
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 06:37 AM by The Lass
|
reply to post by PuterMan
Doesn't Hikix mean those who have been registered on ATS for a while rather than the crinklies ? Or "coffin dodgers" as my nephew so elegantly put
it.
I'm 72 y/o and could give some of you a run for your money
This new change doesn't fuss me too much. In some ways it's an advantage. As you get older you realise that things can seldom be seen in entirely
black & white terms. The shades of grey require discussion, debate. If anything this change helps me, although I still consider that it's not a
change necessarily required on BTS.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 06:44 AM by Goathief
|
The 100 character limit seems like a reasonable compromise, one can still post relatively short, concise replies. Thank-you for listening to your
members.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 07:05 AM by Esoterica
|
Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
Possible to have a "thumbs up" button for at least showing the OP some sort of support in their statements even though you may not have anything in
particular to add to their thread? I think it's nice not to be left out in left field with the crickets, don't you?
I don't, however, feel it would be good to have a "thumbs down" button for that purpose. It would be abused just for the sake of it.
That's what Star and Flag are for. Although I tend to use flags for topics I think are important, even if the OP isn't anything special.
It'll hopefully attract someone more knowledgeable. But telling someone that they made a good post is exactly what stars are for. Sure they're
anonymous, but this is the internet. You can always send a u2u if you think somebody did a truly excellent job.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 07:33 AM by PuterMan
|
reply to post by The Lass
You, and the mods, are probably correct that it refers to tenure and not physical age - a point that I had considered and stated in my original reply.
In a way it illustrates the exact point, that there should indeed be a minimum as it encourages people to state clearly their point and avoid
ambiguity. Brevity does not necessarily equate to succinctness, despite the meaning of the word succinct, any more than verbosity equates to
relevance.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 08:29 AM by Bombeni
|
I see few one-liners, but sometimes one line is all that's necessary. I don't see it as abusing the system or whatever. The new system will keep
people from posting at all, if that's what you want. Or it will cause people to write a bunch on nonsense just to make their post.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-4-2009 @ 08:30 AM by Seany
|
reply to post by Bombeni
I see a lot of filler being used , after the point is made, filler filler , wow, still new more filler,,
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-4-2009 @ 05:20 PM by SkepticOverlord
|
There have been at least four browser/OS combinations in reasonably high usage by members where we've encountered problems with the rather simple
JavaScript used to track the characters.
Until a solution is implemented, the minimum-script has been removed.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
