It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by questioningall
That is not my point with this whole new rule set, just as I started with responding to you, I needed 163 characters to respond. MY point is there is NO consistency with posting and characters needed. I would not be so frustrated with this new rule if it was a consistent characters needed to post.
Originally posted by Vector J
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.
Completely agree, I'm with you 100%. Tell them how it is.
Originally posted by Goathief
Originally posted by The time lord
I think Isreal has asked for peace many times, its only so much one can do.
If you believe that, why did Israel break the cease fire that led to the latest offensive on the strip earlier this year?
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
edit to add:
Any member who inserts arbitrary characters or pointless thoughts simply to satisfy the minimum character count will be subject to warnings, post-removal, or worse.
[edit on 12-4-2009 by SkepticOverlord]
Originally posted by Unit541
I really fail to understand how a three line minimum equates to long-winded, overly verbose, pointless posts. It just means that you have to consider your posts for more than half a second. Yes, certain points can be made in a single line. Usually, if a point is made in a single line though, it requires the context of a quote, or "reply to" link to be a complete response.