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.

 

Why do the dumbest threads get the most replies?

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by boaby_phet
personaly, i think its because stupid things draw stupid people..



THANK YOU.
I 100% agree, and reading that made me feel completely SMART.




posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


you know, ive never ever stopped once to concider im on an ignore list?

i know its off topic, but are people really that short sighted / shallow to actualy ignore people as they dont see things the same way??

i really never though, i always though that if you didnt like a topic then dont reply, and if you dont like someones thoughts on a discussion, join in the discussion, but dont go out to make someone look stupid...and deffinitelly not ignore ..

i must be ignored by a few people now i actualy think about it, i know one person ignored me as they thought my avatar was offensive, but thats another story (i now use an ats supplied alternative
)



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


To answer your question appropriately.

Not all people are well educated or educated at all in main topics of these.

Say someone starts a thread for discussion on quantum mechanics, 2-3 post tops.

Say someone jumps up with a ridiculous claim "Nothing Exists at all!" well it's easier to stick your 2 cents in there, then the quantum mechanics which begs that you have a valid point, and have done previous research enough to hold a bearable opinion.

If I made a thread saying "Obama is a homosexual" anyone can participate and throw in silly things, serious things.

If I made a thread 'Obama's foreign policies are lacking" With and indepth OP about why I feel this way 2-3 post max.

People just don't know enough, we have had a huge increase in ATSers so hopefully they'll start learning and catching on, and we'll be back to regular!



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Ok the S&F is from me.
I don't watch video's online, at work I can't and at home my computer is to weird and old. So that would be the reason I might not have participated in that thread.

Edited to add:

I am not an atheist but that would be my next step.
I would rather have a discussion with an atheist than a religious zealot.

[edit on 12-6-2009 by cindymars]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by boaby_phet
 


Yep, I know a ton of people have me as ignored for my radical views on relationship cough cough... Funny.

Although I do back up 99% of my claims with pertinent info.

Ignore button I think was intended for people who troll, or someone that post hate constantly, so you can just side swipe them, but of course it's used for Embracing ones own opinion.

I call it holding the pendulum in place, dare it not be swung in another direction momentarily!

Most ATSers though, well veteran wise make this place that much better.

AccessDenied, JKrog, Tentickles, just to name a few, theres many more out there!

reply to post by cindymars
 


Yeah I saw that, I was refreshing for a post! Never came....
. It did bring a short discussion, and I tried U2Uing people for input. Only one guy came along. But hey one mores opinion then I had previously!

[edit on 12-6-2009 by Republican08]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Maybe it's like what others have said, flies get attracted to manure.

My general feeling is that if you make a ridiculous claim, then people will jump in to either try and find out more as it sounds so amazing, or others will jump in to attack it. This gives an instant buzz to a thread, and will mean it gets displayed more on the recent posts page, hot page, etc, causing a cascade of more people jumping in.

Other issues to me seem more about polarization or fanaticism. Certain topics will usually go far, like religion, gun control, abortion and so on, as people are so split on them, so an argument is bound to occur. Others may feature certain people, something about Ron Paul will often get busy, as his supporters are very vocal, the same with Obama, as his detractors are very vocal too.

On the topic of posts, I've thought about that quite a bit. Too short, and you won't usually get any stars, unless it's a particularly witty remark or the like. Too long, and many people will just skim or skip it. I try and make my points in about four paragraphs, as this feels a good length that people will read, and you can hit a lot of points in.

I think the point about videos/graphics is important too. If I can find a relevant video, I will post it, as I know that many people easily tire from too much dull text, and if the video covers the information just as well, you will get more response. Just on a human level, I think people will respond to this better, the phrases "video killed the radio star", and "a picture is worth a thousand words" aren't in our vocabularies for no reason.



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 06:56 PM
link   
While I think it's unfair to criticize or impinge upon peoples interest in sensational story telling and controversial flame-fests. I don't think it's asking so much for the site owners to consider creating a third filtering mechanism to help identify posts from historically in-depth authors.

A month or so back I proposed a way to do this, but sadly it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. I'll repost here with the hope that SO reads it
.

 


(Per Dr Love I'm reposting from this thread ...)

Front page - Top stories, hot topics, and BEST RATED?



Awhile back MarrsAttax put together a thread, jokingly, pointing out how to accrue massive ATS points and keep the post at the top of the ATS front-page (ie/ say something unintelligent - the less research the better so people have to point out your ignorance; state your case as fact - enraging skeptics; use video - text is boring; make a near-term outrageous / apocalyptic future prediction; be controversial - libeling a minority group is good). Though humorous, the underlying point of MarrsAttax's critique was never addressed.

I ask in earnest. Shouldn't we all be concerned about sensational stories pushing posts with real merit off the front page?

Yes, people prefer entertainment to in-depth research. Yes, people are easily goaded in to flame wars. And, yes, conspiracy theorists are especially prone to sensational story telling. Since we all succumb to these human failings why not add a third filtering mechanism? Currently ATS filters on two concepts.

  1. "Flags" (other posters find the thread important / fun / interesting / insightful) which translates to "top stories"

    and,

  2. "post volume" (other posters have strong opinions or are trying to solve / debate some element of the thread) which equals "hot topics."

I propose another filter "best rated."

If ATS added a concept like respect points or, perhaps, based respect points off the number of people that have declared the thread-author as a friend (coupled with the Log of applause?), these respect points could be added to (flags + Floor[Log(replies+1)]) to create a composite score for the thread. This composite score would then translate to the "best rated" filter. Meaning a threads "best rated" value could depreciate if a person removed respect points. I feel comments should be somewhat insignificant in the tabulation because usually in popular threads they boil down to "me too," "disagree," "you're stupid," "where's the pictures," etc.

So, for example, let's say a person comes to the site, creates a new account (respect=0), and authors a thread titled, "PHYSICAL PROOF gods of the Pantheon exist! BEHOLD ZEUS'S LIGHTNING ROD!" It accumulates 50 flags and 40 replies. An older member (respect = 55), who's hugely endeared by the community, posts a topic titled "University of Arizona study concludes quantum manifestations provably explain all UAPs", it gets 10 flags and 10 posts.

The new user would have a total composite score of 54 (0+50+Log[40+1]) and the old user would rate 67 (55+10+Log[10+1]).

Now I'm not suggesting that all of the older-users threads get a base 55 advantage. I'd say the base 55 should activate after about 5-10 user flags. At that point there's evidence people have a genuine interest in the thread; or scale the base points in at a rate of (CEILING[.10*respect points]) per flag up to a max of 10 flags.

One of the reasons I like the concept of "respect points" is it encourages people to behave. If someone removes a respect point it affects all of the persons posts. Somewhat similar to real life. For instance, say you hood-wink 50 billion dollars in an epic ponzi scheme and get caught with your hand in the cookie jar. No matter how respectable your past deeds it casts doubt on everything you've ever done.

I'd also argue that people should have the option to unflag or vote down a post for finer granularity all the way back to 0 (rather than penalizing all posts the person's ever submitted), but enough people here have already voiced that complaint.


That's my two pence anyways!

[edit on 12-6-2009 by Xtraeme]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Wouldn't it be funny if this thread got tons of replies?



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Every Kid in this Classes thread received a Blue Star for Trying their hardest and doing the best that they could today!

I would add smiley faces also but there is no smiley face option on ATS.

Keep up the good work and all I ask is for you to try and do the best job that you can



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TurkeyBurgers
 


i love it !

motivational message of the day... have a star


i have to say, aside from wrestling, this post has made my evening
its brilliant in so many levels! alot of them ironic now the post is a few hours old


[edit on 12-6-2009 by boaby_phet]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   
I honestly think its just the annonimity of the interwebs, i mean people cant walk around sprouting half of the stuff they do here to family, friends and strangers without getting a few strange looks or worse. Wether or not they actually believe entirely in what they are saying or just linking an inner feeling to something someone else proposes or even its just for plain entertainment value i dont know, but i do know it wouldnt happen if it wasnt annonymous.



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by pazcat
I honestly think its just the annonimity of the interwebs, i mean people cant walk around sprouting half of the stuff they do here to family, friends and strangers without getting a few strange looks or worse. Wether or not they actually believe entirely in what they are saying or just linking an inner feeling to something someone else proposes or even its just for plain entertainment value i dont know, but i do know it wouldnt happen if it wasnt annonymous.


I would say this behavior is a combination of release (venting) and entertainment.

Perhaps due to repression?

Though you're right. If it weren't for anonymity people wouldn't behave this way. I'd go one step further and say it's also a component of the physical distance separating people. Imagine posting anonymously, for example the way people post on Youtube, but on a forum of 10 people who all happen to live together. It wouldn't happen. The combination of close proximity coupled with the small subset of people for whatever reason inherently promotes individual conformance to social etiquette.

I'm sure it ties in to, at some level or another, fight or flight.



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


haha, that thing you said, about a small forum where everyone stays close and they start flaming ... well, i used to be on a forum before and it was a smallish group (maybe 30 ppl) all in the same town.... man that got messy ... no violence but it was real funny to watch ...people started posting with fake names, trying to trace ip addressess the lot (it was way before the days of phpbb or similar php based forums)


[edit on 12-6-2009 by boaby_phet]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
9/10ths of perception is what you see, the other 10th must be felt.

90% of the visitors here are no doubt looking for entertainment.
The few % that are looking for truth, in some way find it, but are abhorred by the rampant nonsense sometimes so prevalent.
Perhaps the pertinent reality here, is that even though one can find a truth, you may not see it.

Entertainment seekers, will do what they will for their entertainment, no doubt.
This includes, trash talking, subterfuge, deception, and outright ignorance.
Will a truth seeker, though, be able to wade through the nonsense, after being berated to the point of madness?

As stated before, the answer to the OP's question is obvious.

The burden of proof is on you.





[edit on 12/6/2009 by reticledc]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by boaby_phet
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


haha, that thing you said, about a small forum where everyone stays close and they start flaming ... well, i used to be on a forum before and it was a smallish group (maybe 30 ppl) all in the same town.... man that got messy ... no violence but it was real funny to watch ...people started posting with fake names, trying to trace ip addressess the lot (it was way before the days of phpbb or similar php based forums)


Heh, so much for that theory
. Would you say that that the people in the group were close? I'd be interested to know the ratio of acquaintances to close friends.

[edit on 12-6-2009 by Xtraeme]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 09:03 PM
link   
I think that we basically have 3 kinds of threads on this site:

1. Source Threads. These are threads that reference hard news sources. These threads are generally assumed to be fact on some level. Now if we could always assume that the entire story was fact, we wouldn't need this site, now would we?

2. Soft Source Threads. These threads consist of "soft" sources. Some examples include, videos of individual's experiences links from questionable sources and the like.

3. Opinion Posts. These are an individuals experiences, expressions, and sometimes blatantly fiction.

I suppose that it is up to us to discern the differences. I would posit that #2 and #3 are more popular here because we are somewhat interested in the stories not covered by the sources of the #1 stories.

As an example my only news source is ATS at the moment. As an insight into how I use ATS - I will read a #1 type post and go to the source and many times forward the original story to a friend or relative, but not likely comment or flag. Why? Because the story is MS. It is accepted. And often, I cannot forward the ATS post because some people are not comfortable coming here and some workplaces may ban the site. Overall, my point is that all 3 of (my categories of posts) are beneficial, but you must understand that you may not be rewarded for "news" items because, hey, they / we already know.

My 2 cents (reduced in value by the obsessive printing of "dollars" and bail outs of course)



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Hey all, did I miss much?

Anyway, heres a story I found and I thought
it was perfect for ATS.
It would prolly either get about 4 replies or 400!
And to tell you the truth I dont know how seriously
I should care about it and I'm only a state away
with its own history of radioactivity problems.

Radioactive wasps bug out nuclear cleanup workers


Today, the nests, which could number in the thousands, are "fairly highly contaminated" with radioactive isotopes, such as cesium and cobalt, but don't pose a significant threat to workers digging them up.

www.seattlepi.com...

I debated about posting this or not because of the OP's question.
What constitutes a stupid thread? What if someone needs the info?
Then you have to try to figure out which forum to post under. Geez

Mostly I agree with others, they are here strictly for entertainment value.
Its a timewaster. One person's honest question is apparently anothers
complete waste of time, for instance.
Thus you get the all one line snarky quips.
I also agree, if you dont want to read it,
no one is forcing you....

Cheers to the stupid threads! Everyone needs a laugh sometimes!
Don't they?

[edit on 12-6-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chemley
I think that we basically have 3 kinds of threads on this site:

1. Source Threads. These are threads that reference hard news sources. These threads are generally assumed to be fact on some level. Now if we could always assume that the entire story was fact, we wouldn't need this site, now would we?


While this is a good way to differentiate I'd go a bit further and say source threads usually represent "breaking news" already reported by other MSM outlets. There's a category much more valuable than source threads -- original research threads.

They're rare, but they exist.

Objective research into "paranormal" topics is gold. That's what I look for on ATS. I almost exclusively friend people based on this criteria. It's a good reminder to check their profiles to read their threads and I reliably find I get higher quality information even from their day-to-day posts because they research the topics they're discussing rather than speculating based on their bias-supposition.

This is one of the reasons I desperately want a "best rated" filtering mechanism. It took me a few months to identify people I consider high quality posters. What I've noticed is these people consistently have large friend lists because "friend" typically implies some form of "respect." If this information had been tied to the sorting / filtering mechanism and displayed on the front page I would have noticed these individuals much more quickly. It shocks me when I find an old poster like IsaacKoi who consistently writes very thorough, well thought out posts and gets almost no flags.

I do think however that the concept of "friend" should be separated from a persons "respectability." There are people I wholly disagree with who I still seek out because I respect them and want intelligent articulation of their opposing viewpoints. Likewise I will occasionally friend people not so much because I respect them, but because I simply agree with them.

[edit on 12-6-2009 by Xtraeme]



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Geladinhu
 


That sounds about right. Most people can't resist a chance to look "smart". You'll notice in just about any thread, on just about any forum, in just about any post(stupid or otherwise) the same type of generic replies. People can't help but chime in with their own opinions even when they aren't necessary, particularly if they feel they're making some sort of "intelligent" point.



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Nope., look. People aren't stupid, they are gullible. They are gullible for change, they are gullible to fit in, they are gullible to look normal, they are gullible to NOT look normal, they are gullible for different reasons, but I don't think any of them TRULY, TRULY 100% I swear on my mother's heart and joy that they believe in some of the complete crap that gets thrown around this site, and im not talking about disinformation. AT least disinfo still HAS some info, some of the **** on this site is just plain retarded.

And [snip] like "You may be an alien!!!!" and "What super powers u have?" are popular because they pull in the kids and older(I dunno, im guessing middle life people? poor college kids wanting a fantasy? weird high school kid felt left out from school?) people that believe such things because they truly want to be different, but in reality all they want to do is fit in.


Mod Edit- removed profanity.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 12-6-2009 by elevatedone]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join