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.


We must end the rising "culture of negativity" (SOLUTION POSTED)

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2009 @ 01:57 PM

Originally posted by Ben Niceknowinya

Originally posted by sliceNodice
I think trying to police negativity would only result in making people feel oppressed... When you try to control one's feelings, you essentially control who they are and what they say. I could see how this would result in a 'fake' vibe from people.

While policing negativity may provide some short term relief for people who can't stand negativity. In the long term it would result in a good number of people leaving this site and in addition; make people more unhappy than they already are.

Just my 2 cents...

Your 2 cents hu?
I think you need to respect T&C of ATS and RESPECT OTHERS according to the site owners (AND members) request, period!

Exucse me if I'm coarse and raw, but this is tiring.
And wadddya' mean "fake vibe.?"
Get a grip playa!! Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound?

There is nothing greater here on ATS than rolling up your sleeves and getting into it on a good discussion or debate. True dat. It's why we have friends and foes buttons......and i'm not going to aim all this towards you, I apologize......but....
However, offending another person with bigotry and *especially racially natured comments "really" doesn't contribute anything positive OR negative towards the discussion, and imo, might fall under your category of 'fake vibe' towards other people. No????
I've been here a short time so maybe my fuse isn't as short as some members (and staff members) who have been here long b4 me.
But pretty short.

Lately there has been alot more anti-semitic, and racially diverted comments on this site, and it makes me sick. WTF?

This is where I draw the line.
People like this just sidetrack discussions and literally ruin threads that others are trying to enjoy, and participate in.
You see, at some point in your life, you're gonna realize and say to yourself: That was wrong...... And I'll be certain it will come at the expense of another person's feelings anyway; But my point is, if you have no feelings and you have no grounds for a decent discussion if you just wanna HATE and pick on others, then I suggest you pack your sh*t and
join a message board where they will accept behavior, negativity, racism, profanity (I shouldn't talk on that 1) and whatever "expresses your true feelings."

Catch my drift there swifties?

[edit on 5-5-2009 by Ben Niceknowinya]

This post caught my eye as I was reading ALL posts in this thread before replying.....Though opinions were asked for by the OP why, pray tell, do some have to resort to name calling and make statements about another's character and motives??

Discussions, debates - backed up with appropriate material & sources - I am all for. It is the posters that do nothing but insult what someone else has posted that will cause me to hit the "ALERT" button quicker than ever!!

You are intitled to your feelings........but doing nothing to add to any topic other than insisting someone is the type of BS we do not need. Voice your feelings without attacking someone - mand back it up with sources to support your beliefs.

Is this asking too much?? Not from responsible, mature, intelligent people!

Now back to finish really reading ALL posts before I response again...........

[edit on 5/5/2009 by Champagne]

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 01:58 PM
Maybe the solution is to tighten the reigns a bit. A bully pulpit had to be started, necessarily, during the electoral season due to this same type of conduct. Maybe the moderators should apply some, but not all, of the same guidelines used in that forum to the whole of ATS.

There are times that I see threads that go on and on for days and everyone is just going back and forth and reiterating done-to-death arguments for or against the topic.

Other times I see someone post a "what do you think this is" thread and after many people have rationally explained it away, it still seems to go on and on and on.

Sometimes the whole point of the thread has been missed and turns into a right vs. left/believer vs. skeptic free-for-all.

Topics being posted over and over and over again. I believe int his case it should be shut down and redirected to the thread that was the first to be posted on the topic.

But, these are just my own opinions. You guys are the ones who run the show and I still can't help but come here almost ever day

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 01:59 PM

Originally posted by WarmthofSunlight
reply to post by Parallex

One very telling thing about this whole issue is that people can't rank the posts on this thread, and others in the past like it, so the whole token economy thing seems to get trashed when the site owners want to make doctrine.

Devil's in the details. The absence of the Digg icon on certain threads is also indicative of bias on several topics.

All of the above is normal human behaviour... but that dosen't mean it's right.

An interesting point sir, and well made. Would the skeptic overlord care to comment on this interesting tidbit?

The Para.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:00 PM
There is a simple solution. It is in your site logo.

Confront it with facts, wit and civility, deny it none the less.

Realize that we are all ignorant in some ways, about some things. It's a genuine weakness and is part of our human condition.

No one can possibly know it all, and those who think they do are perhaps the most ignorant of all.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:00 PM
I got an idea

instead of authorities policing posts why not complete anarchy?

where instead ats members with a minimum of a year's worth of a "member since" status are able to achieve different cool sounding rank names.

So there would be achievement points for some of us to moderate each other.

And also if enough of some members vote negatively on a post, that user can get an uncool sounding rank name like "very sad man" or "mr. big mouth" or "Foul Mouthed Man".

But names with more thought put into it.

some members could even loose ranking merely by making an unfair vote, like voting negatively on a member not because the other person was rude but just because the voter did not agree with the defendant's opinion. That line MUST be drawn, and it's very possible to be able to do so.

In companies they call this a 360 Review System, here it could just be a cooler implementation on it to encourage civility.

Try it out!

[edit on 5-5-2009 by ModernAcademia]

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:01 PM
reply to post by sliceNodice

What's odd is the amount of debunkers that are here. My understanding is that ATS is about black op and conspiracy theories. Yet, when posting such subjects it's guaranteed to get these kind of negative comments (paraphrasing):

1. "It's already been discussed on ATS. Look it up."
2. "Whoever believes that is a moron."
3. "Your source has already been 'torn apart' on ATS. See point #1 and #2."

The biggest problem is the insulting way these criticisms are made. It's almost as if done deliberately in an effort to incite flame wars and derail the discussion. Which makes me wonder if there's a systematic disinformation campaign going on here by "you-know-who." (That could be a discussion in itself.)

What's the remedy? Create "no-debunking-allowed" forums where a subject can be discussed and information shared without ridicule.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:01 PM
I think the opposite. I think that ranking and points are a huge problem, and I've been saying that from the beginning. Half the time I think people just post the most ridiculous thing that they know will get starred and replied to, just for those little perks.

But, I mean, I could be wrong and if I was right, I don't think anyone would outright agree with me.

But this shouldn't be a hierarchy and people shouldn't be competing for the most threads or posts or stars or points.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:02 PM
I agree with Parallex. I absolutely love the idea of "Tribes". And there is no reason to narrow a member down to picking just one tribe, or any tribe for that matter. It would certainly give each of us a more basic understanding of where each of us is coming from. And we don't even have to depend on the Owners or Mods to define each tribe, the members of each can define it as it goes. The details would have to be worked out, but you get the point.

Some would scream you cant judge a book and stereotypes and all that, but if we all consciously CHOOSE a tribe and its corresponding definition and stance, then it is safe to assume that others will be informed of our stance rather than creating an opinion of their own based on some long-held prejudice.

(takes breath)

Anyway, at the very least we could have something like Youtube has, wherein we have an approval Icon that can show the average approval rating along with how many clicks it has received. This could help weed out individuals that post overly-negative (irrationally so) posts or even those that argue for the sake of arguing. This Icon would of course be next to or under the Star in each post I imagine.

I will search and see if this sort of thing has been discussed before. If not, I will start a thread to gauge the interest of the community and maybe it might help SO and others move in a positive direction.

My 2c

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:03 PM
reply to post by Matrix1111

Well the more people that post the millionth threads about whether "x" is real with a clearly edited Youtube video as a source, the more you're going to hear that.

It's true that ATS doesn't want repeat threads that are exactly the same, and it's true that many members want a certain quality of source.

That is how, I think, we strive to deny ignorance.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:03 PM
oh I disagree with that
I think if you focused to much on stars you would end up getting less.

stars are a good system in my opinion, good educated posts should be thanked somehow in a small way

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:06 PM
reply to post by ModernAcademia

Educated posts with lots of effort are often "applauded" by mods, supermods, and administrators.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:08 PM

Originally posted by nunya13
Topics being posted over and over and over again. I believe int his case it should be shut down and redirected to the thread that was the first to be posted on the topic.

Threads have a character of themselves, depending on the OP and participants. Some threads on the same topic are better than others because of this. To me closing down threads or re-directing is just another way of censoring. Then my question is: Who benefits from that?

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:09 PM
reply to post by ravenshadow13

Here's what I think about the star and flag system: At it's best it's a way for the group to prioritize and validate topics and arguments, at it's worse it's a way for individuals with lack of scruples to manipulate masses.

The logical question people have to answer here is "do you trust the system to be unbiased and neutral?". Because if it is not instead of a tally you have a manipulation and we, again, get into the very subjects this site is dedicated to discussing.

Managing ATS must be like sticking one's head into a beehive...

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:09 PM
Here's a radical idea, why not go back to the original terms and conditions of the site and quit nit-picking and tweaking things to suit the needs and moods of the few? Snip the personal remarks out, warn the ones that can't post without them, and carry on with being ATS.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:10 PM
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

The more I think about it, the more I see the problem is that ATS has lost the community feel. People aren't connecting any more. All the new ATS content is too detached from the message board- No offense but I don't care to listen to the podcasts or visit the media area too often.

If we want to get rid of the negative energy, let's create some positive energy. Let's have ATS projects everyone can contribute to. Here's an example-

"ATS What-if":

Every (month, other month, 6 months), ATS asks a question. For example, "What If Aliens Landed Tomorrow." Then have a description of the event.

ATS members would then proceed to write fictional blog entries, newspaper clippings, or government transcripts describing world events at that time. There would be strict formatting guidelines to keep entries serious and well-thought. Next, there would be a voting process, possibly by pre-selected editors, of the best of the best. Then, these articles would be published on the website into a sort of future narrative (think World War Z).

At the end (of the whole thing or each article), link to specific ATS topics that are relevent to the fictional story. For example, after a blog entry about a police cruiser running into a scout ship, then link to the Lonnie Zamora case.

I think ATS needs to have organized constructive behavior. A negative response will only create more negativity. More rules will hurt, not help.

Even if it doesn't fix the problem, it might be fun

EDIT: I like the idea of tribes. Maybe refine it a bit. It'll definitely help people identify other posters like them, leading to more community feel.

[edit on 5-5-2009 by Esoterica]

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:10 PM
This would not be any kind of problem if people would simply conduct themselves with a bit of class. Generally the nature of debate around here is healthy. People who take it too far and act inappropriately know who they are. If they are too intellectually inferior to realize when they are acting poorly, then perhaps they shouldn't be here to begin with. So perhaps an IQ test should be administered at the time of registration???

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:11 PM
reply to post by Esoterica

That is a really cool idea! Star for you!

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:12 PM

Originally posted by jackieps1975
This would not be any kind of problem if people would simply conduct themselves with a bit of class. Generally the nature of debate around here is healthy. People who take it too far and act inappropriately know who they are. If they are too intellectually inferior to realize when they are acting poorly, then perhaps they shouldn't be here to begin with. So perhaps an IQ test should be administered at the time of registration???

So you'll be in the 'GLOBAL ELITIST' tribe then?

Everyone has their angle - let's just make it public, for all to behold in wonder.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:12 PM
reply to post by ravenshadow13

I agree with you that points are superfluous and even lead to the sorts of server-wasting trash that you speak of. A better way is just to have a system, not one that rewards for a person for posting, but one that helps others see what is being read most and what topics are garnering the most attention. Oh wait, we do have that. So then lets just kill the point system and let everyone have a picture in their ID side header and be able to go to R.A.T.S. and all the other little perks that are seemingly unnecessarily point-based rewards...and some of the stuff I already posted referencing Parallex's ideas.

'Course, I am always open to better ideas than the ones I think are good.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:13 PM
Policing ? Police = Control. (We don't need no more stinking badges !)

Just kidding. But, you've created something wonderful here. Don't destroy
it. A couple of weeks ago it was about how little vs. how much we "should"
say when responding. Saying something in one sentence wasn't good
enough anymore, we should be more wordy !

Now it's this.

But really, do you want to know what it boils down to ? THE PASSION !

Take away the passionate posters and you've taken a little of the
excitement with them.

The Mods appear to be doing a great job. Let's just . . ."be".

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in