HOT, TOP... New AI for **EDITORS PICKS***

G'day ATS

Just had a thought today... it seems like the HOT and TOP categories have a tendency lately to be filled with flame bait threads more so than truly conspiracy minded threads.

I, like many long time ATS'ers, am here for the stuff deep down the rabbit hole; hidden conspiratorial truth, with links to external content of merit.

ie today's top thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
The REAL reason Homosexuality is wrong!!

Is this really a "conspiracy" or a political rant of personal opinions and cultural differences? Where are the sources, the articles, the "content", the conspiracy??? Gay adoption is an attack on democracy? IMHO, just junk blogging for an argument:

In the UK over the past few months there has been lots of talk about the acceptance of Gay Adoption. Should it be allowed..blah...blah...blah. the simple answer is NO!

I think it tarnishes ATS's image a bit to have our supposed hottest and top threads often pan out to be troll or flame bait threads that just get a lot of "negative" attention. It might improve this image to have the primary "HOT" and "TOP" page only reflect the opinions of a more selected set of senior members; a senate.

As an ATS writer/scholar, 5-year member, and "solid contributor" I can think of at least 20 pertinent ongoing CONSPIRACY subjects with greater global significance than gay adoption in the UK and I'm sure many of the other senior members here at ATS could as well:

Genetically Modified Food
Depleted Uranium Proliferation
Military Outsourcing
Electronic Voting
Insider Oil Spill Trading
G8/G20/Bilderberg
Pharmaceuticals
Banking
Isreal/Gaza
Korea
Globalization/EU/NAU
Environmental distruction

etc. etc.

And any one of those I could provide 5 links to merit worthy content.

All in all, I do think that ATS represents a marvel of AI with regard to its star and flag, and thread promotion system; however I think with a few small changes in code, without much addition bandwidth or hardware capacity the "AI moderation" of this board and promotion of pertinent conspiracy threads could become much more robust.

--------------------------------

perhaps perhaps perhaps...

Perhaps we could add some new search criteria to the top menu in the forum; so alongside "HOT" and "TOP" would be respective "HOT" and "TOP" as selected by moderation's stars, flags, and attention. Perhaps when on the "HOT" page one could select a pull down menue and sort by: "moderators picks, scholars picks, fighters picks, etc. Perhaps we could also have such "HOT" and "TOP" as viewed by "all members", "moderators", "super moderators", and "ATS admin" respectively. Then we could send out a mass mailing asking our scholars/writers/fighter/moderators/super moderators/etc. to help make our site better by refraining from flagging threads that do not truly reflect ATS's mission and which lack substantial content or links.

Perhaps our "main" "HOT" and "TOP" pages should NOT be the picks of "all members" but rather the picks of "select members"; those with a long term VESTED interest in the site.


Does it "water down" ATS's "HOT" and "TOP" conspiracy categories to include the input of new members, who are not well aquainted with ATS's culture and history?

Are ATS's current HOT and TOP threads as chosen by "all members" really the most pertinent conspiracy subjects a the moment?

Does the current system promote flame bait, if so what should we do about it?

What do you think of using AI source code to promote "editors picks"?


Every time I post here at ats I am reminded:

You are an experienced contributor to ATS. Please be an example for our newer members and make every new thread matter.

Your thoughts?

warm regards,

Sri Oracle

[edit on 25-6-2010 by Sri Oracle]

I think it is a actually a good idea.

Let the players decide what are the best games at play...
But... as this is probably not going to happen. Make it a separate list.

I don't agree that the Hot/Top picks should be from the aggregate of writer/scholar/fighter pool or from the "senior" users. I'm a fairly new member here and I think it would be a bit discriminatory towards new users based upon the amount of time here. I DO agree that some of the Hot/Top threads have no business being on ATS much less in the Hot/Top forums. But to only have the Hot/Top forums be based on length of time a user has been here is a tad ridiculous. I've come across threads started by users that have been registered since 2007 and thought really? That's pretty lame. I've also read threads by users who have been here just a few days or weeks and thought, wow that's a good thread!
This is where sacrificing things like this to an automated system kinda fails in some aspects. Perhaps its time for mods, etc. to use a more hands on approach for the picking of Hot/Top threads...
Just my .02 worth. But either way ATS is still a great place!
Oh, I'm a "solid contributor" as well!!! WOOOHOOO!!! Sorry, I just noticed it

Originally posted by azrael36
I don't agree that the Hot/Top picks should be from the aggregate of writer/scholar/fighter pool or from the "senior" users. I'm a fairly new member here and I think it would be a bit discriminatory towards new users based upon the amount of time here.

Ok... so lets say we maintained that the PRIMARY "HOT" and "TOP" message board was to be the opinions of "all members".


Would you use a pull down menu on those pages to sort the opinions of select member groups? Ie. only "TOP" as contributed to by "solid contributors or better" or view only "HOT" articles as flagged by "scholars".




I'm speaking to springer about this via U2U; I've asked if I can quote him here... brb

Sri



[edit on 25-6-2010 by Sri Oracle]

reply to post by Sri Oracle


Interesting suggestion. I agree the thread you referred to comes across as flame-based, and as such doesn't provide a good model for discussion. Yet although I wouldn't flag a flame-type thread (as a matter of principle), there have been occasions where I've flagged a discussion not because I agreed with the OP, but because I thought the rebuttals were worth flagging! So the prominence of a second-rate OP isn't always as negative as it may appear.

Perhaps a simpler solution would be for the mods to request the poster to rewrite/rename their piece. Without the gratuitous flaming the thread would then only get as much response as the quality of arguments deserve.

I think this is a great, well thought out idea. I would certainly use the feature you have described.

It would make it easier to find topics that are based on fact and are not just based in opinion.

I would also love a “disagree” button for threads.... Sort of like an unflag button. Just seeing how many people agree sometimes doesn’t tell the whole story. Especially for opinion based threads.

Originally posted by worlds_away
I would also love a “disagree” button for threads.... Sort of like an unflag button. Just seeing how many people agree sometimes doesn’t tell the whole story. Especially for opinion based threads.

I like that too.

Originally posted by Sri Oracle
Ok... so lets say we maintained that the PRIMARY "HOT" and "TOP" message board was to be the opinions of "all members".

Would you use a pull down menu on those pages to sort the opinions of select member groups? Ie. only "TOP" as contributed to by "solid contributors or better" or view only "HOT" articles as flagged by "scholars".

I'm speaking to springer about this via U2U; I've asked if I can quote him here... brb

Sri
[edit on 25-6-2010 by Sri Oracle]

Hmm i wouldn't really mind if there were drop down menus such as that. But then again I'm always on here through my blackberry. It doesn't handle all _javascript very well sometimes. For instance, when I look at the menu bar I see "all" of the items, for instance every image that comprises a drop down menu is totally visbile at all times for me. So it would really make much difference either way, though I would probably click them to see what was offered by all the sub-groups. I try not to leave any stone unturned

Originally posted by azrael36
I would probably click them to see what was offered by all the sub-groups. I try not to leave any stone unturned

ditto...

...which would encourage users to spend more time at the site and ultimately find more pertinent content.

So maybe we keep the "HOT" page and keep the "TOP" page but then build an interactive "EDITORS PICKS" page with pull down menus to select from

all members
scholars
fighters
writers
ats admin
moderators and super mods
solid, bronze, silver, gold, platinum content contributors

I have to believe the database for this information is there, creating an interactive AI experience would only require modifications in query language.

Sri Oracle

[edit on 25-6-2010 by Sri Oracle]

Originally posted by Sri Oracle

Originally posted by worlds_away
I would also love a “disagree” button for threads.... Sort of like an unflag button. Just seeing how many people agree sometimes doesn’t tell the whole story. Especially for opinion based threads.

I like that too.

Agree here as well.
Black flag for unflag. That may take a bit of code writing though.

The only alternative now is the alert button, when it really gets nasty.

73's,
Tom

i think some of the topics like the gay marriage and the other thread about the true god and the books of moses were condescending and judgemental.

lots of info here, find it out first on ats.

love the idea of flag it good or bad

not sure about editiors choice............

having been a lurker for a couple of years it is a shame that people are leaving. it really pisses me off when its a good thread and them somebody comes in to debunk it.

anyway

thats my view

thanks to all those that contribute in a positive manner

ats is not as good as same time last year to much politics , especially ppople stomping all over peoples efforts to post stuff, ufo or what ever cg as well screwed up the posting of vids of ufos,
na ats is doomed

Wow you know I have the same idea in my thread. Happy to see this.
This is much more elaborate though I like it . I like it alot.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by randyvs]

reply to post by Sri Oracle


I have a very similar idea to yours

Why don’t we just have a forum that moderators can move worthy threads into. It would be very simple

We could call it the ATS super forum. In this forum only the most deserving (not highest flagged) theories go. I also think it should only be genuine conspiracies not “look at this pretty picture”, “my abduction story”, “Why Obama is a D£(@Ik predict” and so on. It’s not i don’t think these are very good threads but sometimes genuine conspiracies that allot of work has gone into go unnoticed.

Just give me a big thumbs down button and I will be happy. It might go some way towards cutting the wheat from the chaff.

Originally posted by LarryLove
Just give me a big thumbs down button and I will be happy. It might go some way towards cutting the wheat from the chaff.

I would agree, I've studied adaptive systems/chaos theory/emergence for a while. With some simple levers available to our members such as a "thumbs down" button we would create a much more robust AI environment for promotion of pertinent material to the forefront.

It is all about creating more robust feedback loops and sorting mechanisms.

Sri Oracle