Stop closing threads

page: 4
33
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by RANDOMguess
[more


It made perfect sense to me

it just doesnt matter




posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
I had my attorney review the terms and conditions before I "accepted", and for hundred twenty-five bucks , he gave me the thumbs up and said just know that, within the language of the contract, you give them the right to call you a low-rent, buffalo fart breath, unworthy little minions AND, get away with it. (jk)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   


It is better to say nothing and be thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt


need I say more



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lateralus51
reply to post by RANDOMguess
[more


It made perfect sense to me

it just doesnt matter


Great thanks for the update



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by RANDOMguess
 


Just seemed to me he was using the very site to trash the very site....again...this is freedom, so what the hell....

Great. Join a site to bash the site. If he doesnt like like it...why join it?



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Lateralus51
 


Well...you do have that right. Your overall intent is obvious...go for it...as you are.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by trailertrash
 


Thank you so much for your insight T-R-A-I-L-E-R- T-R-A-S-H. For the most part, this is a site for conspiracy, news, communication and information. But, I do understand those who just insist on degradation, confrontation, anger and animosity, and even contradiction.

They should attempt to join the majority ...then again...perhaps not...we still need a few of you out there that we can set straight, and help you get outta the park...Maybe then you wouldnt be so angry...then again...

At least while we still have an Internet...its ok...move along.......



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Better yet...ask us WHY a thread may be pending staff review....

Odds are, it's because it either has numerous violations of the Terms & Conditions that we all agreed to before joining and/or the behavior during the thread may suggest new terms and conditions that should apply to maintain the forum as a place for civil discussion.

It isn't always obvious without reading every single post within the thread....why a thread may be temporarily locked for review....but if you ask the mod who closed it, I'm sure they could give you some information.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
WOW this thread as opened my eyes i thought ats was for the weird an wonderfull,
i wonder what the rules wus when ats started, wayback mach,, is it just another money machine ,same thing happens all over the world ,some other place will start up for believers the little people.we will c in the end hopefully soon. ,,,by the way i think ufos are bad news one way or another.small person speaking of course. op take your stuff to------ lunaticoutpost.com or glp ..
.glp have been reasonable of late with threads.plus they got the glp telescope comeing online.

so does robbie williams not believe in ufo ,like when you all went to that mountain ranch , years of people adding stuff to be sorted an trashed deny ignorance ,you can not say that, what was that about ,, never mind im gone,stuff to do



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Well I came here to considering the two threads we've had closed today that were initially allowed to run and then closed. But don't moderators usually do this, it seemed a little odd that an ordinary member closed up - or maybe I'm just not experinced enough to know hes not an ordinary member!

Looking at it from my perspective if there are people that are too immature to discuss a subject without violating T and C they should be subject to sanctions outlined in the T and C. It makes no sense to close down threads that the majority of people are discussing normally, plus if threads are closed down if subjected to trolling and violations of T and C then some members might deliberately troll to try and avoid a subject being discussed at all. Kind of like filibustering, but worse in my opinion. Those that behave the worst will have subjects they want discussed.

This is where what I want (a decent, high quality discussion) comes into conflict with what I guess S.O. and Springer want - as many visitors as possible. Thus those in charge of ATS rather than ban members, think its a safer option to suspend threads than to kick a number of members out.

So please S.O. and Springer or anybody from ATS correct me if I'm wrong I am making an assumption knowing that this is in the end a profit making enterprise.... But do bear this in mind, people will act accordingly if they understand that they can derail a thread and get it closed. I urge you not to hesitate in banning members if they repeatedly break T and C rules



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 10:49 AM
link   

The site owners are all reptiles.


Not all of them. Be fair.


I'm sure this was dug up due to a recent closing...but the staff's posts in this thread still apply. That thread was really skirting the borderline of containing quite a few hate statements, and is fuel for more of the same, so a group of mods are examining it, to see if it is reopened with warnings, or kept closed.



posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Since the members cannot maintain diplomacy among themselves, the moderators and owners must do it. If a thread proves that the members cannot play nice, it will be closed. Plain and simple.



posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   
This topic again? Geez, if I'm this tired of it, I can only imagine how annoying it is to the admin and staff.

The biggest issue here is that people arent reading the T&C of this site. It really is that simple. Read it. YOU AGREED TO IT. So read it.

If you disagree with it, or can't abide by it, don't let the door hit you.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


To be fair, sometimes it's a "gray" issue... It may not technically violate the T&C, but it may contain violations of the spirit of the rules...so, we have to make a judgement call. Closing a thread for review generally means it's "gray" enough to want to get the input of multiple mods and decide what is best for the membership...keeping it open, or closing it? This is based on our T&C and mission statement only.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


Fair enough, I get that, for sure. Since this thread is about this topic, I do think I'll pose a question (not as a complaint, just a question) and see if I can get a response.

Since when is it ATS policy to preemptively remove a thread because they ANTICIPATE T&C violations?

I just had this happen to me, had never heard of it happening before, and don't quite understand it.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 



Since when is it ATS policy to preemptively remove a thread because they ANTICIPATE T&C violations?


There are some threads that are simply deemed as "flamebait" threads...topics that will do nothing but sow discontent and hate, etc. It's rare, but not unheard of to remove such a thread. Without knowing the specifics, it's hard to state any kind of reason, because it is all on a case by case....however, if you feel wronged by it, use the Complaint feature, that's what it is for. You CAN question a staff action. Complaints are reviewed by other mods and then discussed, acted upon. If you get no response, be patient, if no response after 24 hrs, probably decided the action was just, but you could re-complain, just to be sure. To ensure you get an answer.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 05:00 PM
link   
I personally think that "thread closed for staff review" is a cop-out on the thread closer's part. It's never been reversed that I've seen, and it amounts to "this thread is closed, but we won't give an actual reason for doing so."



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadeWolf
It's never been reversed that I've seen, and it amounts to "this thread is closed, but we won't give an actual reason for doing so."


I have seen a couple reopened, usually with warnings saying that if the name calling (or whatever the reason it was closed) doesn't stop this time, it will be closed permanently.

I've also seen the same members that were arguing continue right after the reopening as if they hadn't been interrupted.





new topics
top topics
 
33
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join