Stop closing threads

page: 3
33
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   
(test post)

Thread now bugged..


edit...sorted now

Sorry remove post if poss. thread kept adding three pages when refreshed yet no content.



edit on 25-2-2011 by JonoEnglish because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
reply to post by Lateralus51
 


and for one of my very rare oneline posts.....t/c dude, bet u didnt read them.






275 posts, yeah thats VERY rare.... ok



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lateralus51

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
reply to post by Lateralus51
 


and for one of my very rare oneline posts.....t/c dude, bet u didnt read them.






275 posts, yeah thats VERY rare.... ok


If you actually read it, it said "and for one of my very rare one line posts"



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Griffo
 


yeah ok. oneline....nice job.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lateralus51
reply to post by Griffo
 


yeah ok. oneline....nice job.


Yeah, screw him for making a typo /sarcasm



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 

Is that a picture of you because that's not what I imaged a SkepticOverlord would look like...looks more like a con man

post removed off topic



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by G.A.G.
I will vote with my feet if I am forced to.

There are countless times where we've said, "ATS is not for everyone," or something very similar.

Angry 9/11 Truthers have problems here... as do wild-eyed UFO true-believers... and much more in-between.

We'll not alter our long-standing policies and management strategies for a micro-percentage of unhappy members.


Also I would have thought the site owners would be a little nicer you basically said your a ufo nutter "as do wild-eyed UFO true-believers" if you don't like the way I run things f off "There are countless times where we've said, "ATS is not for everyone," then we don't care about the little people "We'll not alter our long-standing policies and management strategies for a micro-percentage of unhappy members"

Springer brushed it off and kept is short and sweet, you may have taken it to heart a little.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   
I think the site owners are quite "nice". But they're human, and they have opinions just like anyone else. They aren't here to baby sit our ego's. And in case you haven't noticed, this site is run by an oligarchy, not a democracy.
edit on 25-2-2011 by Klassified because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-2-2011 by Klassified because: Correction.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   
THREAD CLOSED!








edit on 25-2-2011 by majestic3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by beholdblight
reply to post by Lateralus51
 


"Were"

That's where I stopped reading, or maybe I should say "were I stopped reading". Just kidding I'm always curious why some normal threads get the can while the more ludicrous ones stay
edit on 25-2-2011 by beholdblight because: (no reason given)


At least he said "should have" instead of "should of". Gah, that drives me batty!
But seriously, OP - where do YOU get off telling the moderators of a privately owned website what to do? You agreed to the terms when you signed on, man. Most websites operate the same way - with rules and regulations.
Don't like it? Bugger off.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by RANDOMguess
 



Imagine you opened up an internet forum for discussing fine toilet paper and a bunch of members complained about having their threads about sandpaper removed. what would YOU tell them?



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Rational discussion is what I look for in here. Thoughts and ideas exchanged about a widely diverse number of subjects without too much rancor or offense. INTELLIGENT discussion, not "if you don't believe, you: A. will burn in hell B. must be brainwashed C. must be a Reptillian D. must be a government stooge" and so on and so on. In order to keep order, there are rules, chosen by the owners of their own site. Obey, and stay. Disobey and Disembark. Maybe stretch the limits now and then, as we can all use a shaking up now and then, to get a better look at our own limitations at times from a different perspective, but as far as say Anything you want at Any time... hell no. Create Chaos somewhere else! If the best defense is a strong offense, then ending some threads early helps prevent the decay into disorder.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
I've had what I thought (naturally) were good threads (in recent elections in Utah, only ONE dollar out of TWENTY in campaign contributions came from actual constituents vs. outside sources and corporations, for example) and deserved discussion, only to be replaced by what I thought were pretty far out there threads (Hi, I'm a real vampire... any more like me in here?), maybe for humor's sake, but at least the mods are open minded enough to let some fairly kooky ones (in my opinion) in here for discussion. I don't think they are as closed minded as you seem to suggest. There are thousands upon thousands of posts of all sorts in here.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by laterallateral
reply to post by RANDOMguess
 



Imagine you opened up an internet forum for discussing fine toilet paper and a bunch of members complained about having their threads about sandpaper removed. what would YOU tell them?


I understand it must be hard keeping this ever popular site running smoothly, but in answer to you question I would have handeled it similar to what Springer said. Even though I know it's true I didn't like the way he said "We'll not alter our long-standing policies and management strategies for a micro-percentage of unhappy members " I thought was he around in the beginning when all this site had was a micro group, I was.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
In other words,

"Trolls, LAND HOE!"



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
The problem here is respect, or the lack there of.

A perfect example of the degradation of our societal moral system. With some respect, all points to this argument would be non issue.

For the ones that do not understand what I mean, then someone has failed you earlier in life.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 








I completely agree with your reply.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and keep up the great work.
edit on 26-2-2011 by FoxfilesMulder because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 02:36 AM
link   
"Where do you get off telling the mods of a site they LET YOU join and participate in...where to go?"


He gets off at the same place I do. He and I, at least, are two that are not cowed or bullied or messed with. So run home to momma and ask her how to respond to this response. Run along now.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 04:48 AM
link   
.........was waiting for the momma jokes to start lol
freedom of speech = 1 big joke!
everything is moderated ;-)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skewed
The problem here is respect, or the lack there of.

A perfect example of the degradation of our societal moral system. With some respect, all points to this argument would be non issue.

For the ones that do not understand what I mean, then someone has failed you earlier in life.


I don't understand what you mean....but I believe it's because you talk in riddles when your not really sure what to say but would like to say something impressive.

Don't you find it rediculos saying people are dumb and raised badly if they don't get your meaning.....when your opening post was about lack of respect
well I laughed.





new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join