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.

 

Should not the Mods consider the time to edit?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   
There may be some information on this some where. If so I couldn't find it.
There is a time limit I've noticed for a post to be edited by its author. Now when
you consider the Mods ( I applaued the job they do by the way.) who must decide when a
member is becoming abusive, ill mannered, or hateful in a reply. If they decide to take
down a post and slap the member around a lil bit, take away some points, or however you want to say it.
When they feel they need to," Johnny on the spot " take some action against a member?
Of course this never happens to me !


I was wondering if the Mods ever give any consideration to the time the post has been up.
Do they give the poster some of the edit time, all of the edit time? Or is the post subject to
removal and points penalties immediatly. The members excommunication to be reviewed.

Say a member posts a reply? A nasty lil retort then after a few moments he cools a bit and
returns to retify his mistake but the police were already there?


I was really just kind of curious what goes in a situation. What others think should go on here.
As I said none of this ever pertains to me of course. I have never been one to get overly passionate
about a subject, completely forget where I'm at and make an ass out of myself, resorting to backhanded
insults and straightout name calling.. No Sir, never lost my integrity like I've seen so many others have.
That's right never! Of course that's because I'm always right. About everything.


Also I've seeen a few times the person who had his post taken down and replaced by a crimescene sign.
Took down the sign to post a new reply of apology.
Is this kosher?
I thought this was a violation? Or was I, Hello?




posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


The way I see it...rules are rules. Sure if you get to change your post before a mod sees it then I guess no harm no foul....

But if you walk out of a store with stolen merch, go home, think it over and decide you should just go put it back. You get stopped on the way in because an employee noticed you, are you any less guilty of theft?

I wouldn't think so.

We are to be treated as adults here. Adults are responsible for their actions, even if they regret them later.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by iamsupermanv2
 


Roger that...


But, since this a place that brings out the best in all of us, maybe there should be a 30 second rule before a MOD takes action...I've edited a post in far less time than that - but 30 seconds seems fair. And with the 'recent posts' now showing when the post took place in seconds, it could work.





posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Given that it takes rational thought to be able to turn on a computer, hook it up to the internet, load up a web browser, type in a URL, put in a password, pick a forum, start a thread and type something, why should allowances suddenly be made for the fact that someone loses that rationality when typing out a post?

In other words, its about personal responsibility.

People are responsible for what they type, when they type it. The act of typing out a post is, in itself, a combination of thought, dexterity in typing and proof reading as you go along. Its not down to the board staff to proof read and edit out peoples rash thoughts, its down to the individual to respond in a rational and civil manner.




edit on 9/9/10 by neformore because: spelling!



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Given that it takes rational thought to be able to turn on a computer, hook it up to the internet, load up a web browser, type in a URL, put in a password, pick a forum, start a thread and type something, why should allowances suddenly be made for the fact that someone loses that rationality when typing out a post?


That's learned behavior...


But semantics aside, you're right...an alternative was brought forward and you shot it down like a champ!





So there Randy - NO time to edit! You do it right the first time or pay the piper..!



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by facelift
 





So there Randy - NO time to edit! You do it right the first time or pay the piper..!


Remember now, I was only curious.



What about the other part of the thread tho guys? If a member reposts over a caution sign?


edit on 9-9-2010 by randyvs because: that's what I do?



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
I was wondering if the Mods ever give any consideration to the time the post has been up.
Do they give the poster some of the edit time, all of the edit time? Or is the post subject to
removal and points penalties immediatly. The members excommunication to be reviewed.


No we do not wait the entire edit time if a member has become abusive or violates the terms and conditions of the site.


Say a member posts a reply? A nasty lil retort then after a few moments he cools a bit and
returns to retify his mistake but the police were already there?


As said above its about personal responsability. Ive always maintained that once you have to go all Ad Hominum in a post you have surrendered and your esteemed opponent has won. If a mod sees a violation of the terms and condtions there really is no amnesty.

[quore]
What others think should go on here.

The one reason I came to ATS was the fact that the petty sniping and off topic bickering and otherwise unproductive debate has a pretty short life here. I for one want no change in how we members (Mods are members first and foremost) post. Without civil discussion, its just a mob............



Also I've seeen a few times the person who had his post taken down and replaced by a crimescene sign.
Took down the sign to post a new reply of apology.
Is this kosher?
I thought this was a violation? Or was I, Hello?


Yes if you edit over staff action is a violation.

We are all human and from time to time get carried away. If you happen to be in that situation, and have gotten warned etc. Take a bit to cool off and come back with a fresh persepctive.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:05 PM
link   
The only time editing a staff edit won't get you a post ban is if we don't see it. Post bans are sometimes reversed fairly quickly. Sometimes not. And by the way, there's no way to tell who's on post ban unless you're on staff.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Given that it takes rational thought to be able to turn on a computer, hook it up to the internet, load up a web browser, type in a URL, put in a password, pick a forum, start a thread and type something, why should allowances suddenly be made for the fact that someone loses that rationality when typing out a post?

In other words, its about personal responsibility.

People are responsible for what they type, when they type it. The act of typing out a post is, in itself, a combination of thought, dexterity in typing and proof reading as you go along. Its not down to the board staff to proof read and edit out peoples rash thoughts, its down to the individual to respond in a rational and civil manner.




edit on 9/9/10 by neformore because: spelling!



ATS is proof that a person can perform all of those rational tasks and yet be completely and utterly irrational.

From someone wanting to retort back to someone who offended them all the way to people believing in aliens.

And humans, as rational as we should be, are capable of making rationality and civility mistakes that do occur in the real world as well as in the cyber world.

It's just a matter of which buttons are pushed...

Just be careful about making yourself seem elevated when all humans have chosen the irrational path before.

Oh nefermore, did you edit for a spelling error? Forget to proofread?


How rational do you have to be to allow someone to point out your mistakes and not retort when you are an unforgiving person?



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 





How rational do you have to be to allow someone to point out your mistakes and not retort when you are an unforgiving person?


Is it to late to completely wash my hands of this thread?



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Ha...I'll forgive you.

I do hope you got an answer that satisfies you.

Some people... lulz



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I don't know why you would want to.

You made a decent suggestion and, of course, it is not viable because the boards must look clean for the purposes of the attracting and keeping the company here.

But if it was possible that people were so rational that they could do all the things listed earlier, and therefore the boards should be clean and perfect, then why are the mods here again? It doesn't fall on the mods to clean those things up?... because I'm pretty sure that's one of their jobs.

Maybe my rationality is cutting down a bit because one of my weaknesses is in the face of 100% pure unadulterated hypocrisy.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 





don't know why you would want to.


I don't really. Just trying to maintain a light tone shall we say?



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Sorta off topic but,

do we loose points for ALL Mod actions??

Like if they remove an off topic post??

Is there a thread where I can see set penalties?



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalM
 


I don't think you lose points just for off topic. Or maybe it's up to the Mods?



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I hope thats right...

I think Mods use "fuzzy logic" when deciding whats off topic.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 

NVM...I'm staying out of this one...


edit on 9/9/2010 by iamsupermanv2 because: 's




edit on 9/9/2010 by iamsupermanv2 because: to stay out of it



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
Oh nefermore, did you edit for a spelling error? Forget to proofread?


How rational do you have to be to allow someone to point out your mistakes and not retort when you are an unforgiving person?


Would it be that I were perfect...

A simple spelling error doesn't break the Terms and Conditions of the site, does it?

You are comparing apples to coal in an attempt to be petty.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 05:36 AM
link   
In regards to an edit, I found the major thing that needs to be fixed is when the post wont edit, you go to edit it pretty much straight away and the little "edited on, by" part comes up but the post wont change no matter how many times you try the only change is another eddition of "edited on"

This has happened to me at least half a dozen times, not yet with the new version though, hoping it has been fixed, if that is its not some sort of problem on my end.


testing edit, 2


edit on 10-9-2010 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)




edit on 10-9-2010 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join