Originally posted by mystiq
reply to post by Kandinsky
When someone is sharing an abduction experience, repeatedly asking for proof and pictures and telling them they should promptly go and submit to medical and often psychiatric examinations, never just once, but usually a litany of these posts by the same people, is undue negativity.
Originally posted by 44soulslayer
I believe this fundamentally stems from the overexpansion of your user base. Just recently, you chaps posted a triumphant ... declaring ATS' user base to be at its highest point ever.
Is it possible for all these users to be of the same level of understanding or indeed intellect as those who would have sought out a more arcane site? I don't think so.
I belive that as you have propagated ATS wider than ever before, the inherent control over those who register as users has diminished.
For example take a look at facebook. 3 years ago facebook was reserved only for university students, and had an air of intellectualism about it. Over the next 3 years, as they expanded their user base, infantilism creeped in all over the site. Glittery applications appeared, language used in groups became base and crude etc.
There is a basic tradeoff between user volumes and user quality. In order for ATS to become big, the attitude of mutual respect between users diminished (in part through less familiarity). At the risk of being banned... could I reiterate that in recent times the last bastion of mutual respect has been dismantled by the management.
You, the ATS management, have to decide between user quantity and quality. I wish you the best of luck and admire your intentions, but I doubt you will ever have both.
Originally posted by jkrog08
BTW, what is a 'troll', lol.
Donath provides a concise overview of identity deception games which trade on the confusion between physical and epistemic community:
“ Trolling is a game about identity deception, albeit one that is played without the consent of most of the players. The troll attempts to pass as a legitimate participant, sharing the group's common interests and concerns; the newsgroups members, if they are cognizant of trolls and other identity deceptions, attempt to both distinguish real from trolling postings, and upon judging a poster a troll, make the offending poster leave the group. Their success at the former depends on how well they — and the troll — understand identity cues; their success at the latter depends on whether the troll's enjoyment is sufficiently diminished or outweighed by the costs imposed by the group.
Trolls can be costly in several ways. A troll can disrupt the discussion on a newsgroup, disseminate bad advice, and damage the feeling of trust in the newsgroup community. Furthermore, in a group that has become sensitized to trolling — where the rate of deception is high — many honestly naïve questions may be quickly rejected as trollings. This can be quite off-putting to the new user who upon venturing a first posting is immediately bombarded with angry accusations. Even if the accusation is unfounded, being branded a troll is quite damaging to one's online reputation.
Originally posted by rufusdrak
Originally posted by tallcool1
As for the "karma" suggested by rufusdrak, in theory it may seem like a good idea, but in practice...
For example, I am one of the "closed minded skeptics" of alien visitation. I have thick enough skin and have been around long enough to answer the same old criticisms, but with this "karma" button, there would be the whole "church" of alien visitation giving me negative "karma" simply because I don't believe the same as them. And to be honest, I would likely be tempted to do the same. So it would just end up being a "point war" between believers and skeptics.
No offense, and I could be wrong on this (let me know if you disagree) but shouldn't you DESERVE negative 'karma' if you are a professed skeptic that admittedly refuses to even acknowledge the possibility (seemingly at least) of alien visitation and yet you deliberately enter into alien visitation threads? If you don't believe in the topic why would you even go into the thread to start trouble and accuse people of lying and/or hoaxing. That is the definition of a troll and as such in this system the trolls will justifiably be punished with red karma.
If you absolutely HATE Reptilian "garbage" and Reptilian threads, not a SINGLE Pro-Reptilian David Icke idolizing poster would EVER have the need to give you red karma so long as you don't DELIBERATELY and wantonly enter their threads to bait, start trouble, and troll. Do you see what I'm saying here?
Originally posted by Esoterica
reply to post by rufusdrak
That's ridiculous. Why would I not be allowed to comment on your story, question your evidence, and have a frank discussion of why I think I'm correct and you're wrong? Maybe you'll change my mind, maybe I'll change yours. But that's discussion and debate. If you don't want to be questioned, then don't post on ATS.
Under your system, people should be punished for having an opinion different from your own. That's a horrible state of affairs. Might as well shut down the message board and go back to having the articles, since we're not allowed to talk about them any more.
Originally posted by rufusdrak
reply to post by blupblup
You're right he has every right to enter a thread but if he acts and behaves civilly as you say then I can't imagine why anyone would ever flag him with red karma.
Originally posted by Frankidealist35
That's what makes ATS so great... I love these outlandish topics.
It's part of what makes conspiracy theories. It's all about what is possible... if the world wasn't so negative or such a bad place people would be less negative.
There is nothing we can do about it... lying about it won't make things better.