I would be willing to pay a Membership Fee to ATS if...

I would pay, but a lot of ATS users wouldnt, meaning we would lose alot of content and if that happend it would mean i would cancel my membership as would others, which would ultimately lead to the site being 'dead' and 'useless'

What your suggesting, boils down to more censorship. While I agree that personal attacks and plain trolling are a major issue, effecting the quality of these forums and indeed driving ATS's top contributors to leave, this wouldn't be the right way to combat it.
Personally I would pay a subscription to be able to start a thread on any topic I wish. There are some very important events happening on ATS with zero tolerance for debate.

reply to post by TheOneElectric


Ok, good points.

So as I look at some other similar sites to ATS and I don't see the threads getting abused ( keep in my mind that I'm not talking about the 'Other Site' in particular as that's not a good example) do you have a suggestion for a way to keep things on track, even just a little?

Thanks for the input.

maybe some users could donate for upgraded features for evryone, i would donate.

or maybe donations could go to ATS member meetings in major citys ??

Originally posted by HanoverFat
What your suggesting, boils down to more censorship. While I agree that personal attacks and plain trolling are a major issue, effecting the quality of these forums and indeed driving ATS's top contributors to leave, this wouldn't be the right way to combat it.
Personally I would pay a subscription to be able to start a thread on any topic I wish. There are some very important events happening on ATS with zero tolerance for debate.

Understood but isn't it more of a censorship issue if we have NO control whatsoever?

Interesting.

Originally posted by jude11

1. Members had some control over our own threads such as being able to delete the posts of trolls and rude/ignorant people in general. Many other forums on the net give members that option. It would also help in keeping threads on track instead of de-railing the OP.

If a Member wants to discuss ABC and another Member decides it's not worth his/her time and posts something like "This is a waste of Time" or "This is not important", why even post? And why should the OP have that in their thread if they simply want to have a discussion on ABC that is not against the site T&C? They could simply delete the rudeness.

So what your saying is that you want it to be your way or the highway?

I'm willing to bet alot of members signed up so that they can have civil discussions, Not to read a one sided thread where the op gets to pick and choose what information is contained in that thread.

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by jude11

 

1. Members had some control over our own threads such as being able to delete the posts of trolls and rude/ignorant people in general. Many other forums on the net give members that option. It would also help in keeping threads on track instead of de-railing the OP.

If this was allowed, I would no longer come here at all. Not one thread on the site would be worth reading. Because they would all be unbalanced and lopsided. This is what the alert button is for. I know it doesn't always work perfect, but I think the staff does a good job as a whole.

2. Members had control of being able to block a member from his/her future threads. I have seen cases of people actually posting rude comments in the threads of people they just dislike, time and time again. Bullying so to speak.

It will be the same problem, just in reverse. Everyone will be blocking everyone else that isn't in their fan club or clique.

I can tell you right now, if you give the membership that much control of this site, SO may as well close it. It will be utter chaos.

We have a T&C that is followed by both membership and staff. Maybe it could stand a little tweaking, but it will never be to the satisfaction of everyone. It just doesn't work that way.

Not a dig on you OP. Just some thoughts that came to mind after reading your post.

I don't see it as a dig at all. I was asking for opinions and this the way we get it right?

I do see some of your points as valid except the unbalanced part. If a thread is kept on track, how can it be unbalanced? Maybe I didn't catch your meaning?

Thanks.

Originally posted by Esotericizm

Originally posted by jude11

1. Members had some control over our own threads such as being able to delete the posts of trolls and rude/ignorant people in general. Many other forums on the net give members that option. It would also help in keeping threads on track instead of de-railing the OP.

If a Member wants to discuss ABC and another Member decides it's not worth his/her time and posts something like "This is a waste of Time" or "This is not important", why even post? And why should the OP have that in their thread if they simply want to have a discussion on ABC that is not against the site T&C? They could simply delete the rudeness.

So what your saying is that you want it to be your way or the highway?

I'm willing to bet alot of members signed up so that they can have civil discussions, Not to read a one sided thread where the op gets to pick and choose what information is contained in that thread.

Not that way at all. Just a thought on how to keep threads on track. Maybe it's not the best way, I don't know and that's why I'm asking for input.

Is there another way you could see working?

Thanks

reply to post by jude11

Unbalanced because you might do your best to be fair and impartial. But you can bet that won't be the norm. Too many OP's will delete posts just because they can. Hence, one sided threads.

However, I do see your point. I'm just not sure what the answer is. Increasing the number of mods would help, considering they are understaffed anyway. But this is a business, and SO does have to watch his bottom line.

I cannot think of a better way off the top of my head no. But that being said this is the closest medium to free speech we have left and giving someone the power to essentially censor their own threads simply because they pay for the privilege just doesn't seem right to me.

We talk about protests and revolutions on ATS all the time.

Maybe with the option of donating an amount you choose to the site, the mods could set up protests, meetings etc.

This would also bring ATS into a more public eye, and hopefully get some MSM attention to wake the 'zombified' population up !!

Originally posted by BenWoodsYcc
We talk about protests and revolutions on ATS all the time.

Maybe with the option of donating an amount you choose to the site, the mods could set up protests, meetings etc.

This would also bring ATS into a more public eye, and hopefully get some MSM attention to wake the 'zombified' population up !!

Not a bad idea. Hope it's something the MODS will see and consider with the site owners.

I would not pay a monthly fee in any case or situation. That makes it a bill. Bills mean debt. Debt = slavery.

Originally posted by Esotericizm
I cannot think of a better way off the top of my head no. But that being said this is the closest medium to free speech we have left and giving someone the power to essentially censor their own threads simply because they pay for the privilege just doesn't seem right to me.

Ok, so maybe when a member has reached a certain level of credibility with points, stars, flags etc would work better?

I don't know but I'm reaching!

Originally posted by jude11
reply to post by TheOneElectric

 

Ok, good points.

So as I look at some other similar sites to ATS and I don't see the threads getting abused ( keep in my mind that I'm not talking about the 'Other Site' in particular as that's not a good example) do you have a suggestion for a way to keep things on track, even just a little?

Thanks for the input.

To be completely honest with you, I wouldn't change a thing member wise. I would like the administrators to maybe document repeat offenders and repeat (valid) complaints made by members against other members. Also, I know there are administrators, super moderators, and moderators that handle the breach of rules on this site, however, there needs to be a stealth force with limited abilities that allow them to:
1) Post in a moderator/administrator area
2) Tag posts (where only mods and admins can see) as needing to be checked
3) Have the ability to to cut certain posts that are clearly in violation of the rules

This stealth force should not be allowed to reveal their identities to other members, and their should be strict scrutiny when choosing the individuals. I believe they should come from differing belief sets, should have posts that demonstrate basic writing and comprehension skills, and should be composed of some of the more 'civil' members.

We can even name the stealth force something funny and conspiracy related: The AIB (ATS intelligence bureau , The MIB, The Zetas, the tinfoil brigade....whatever.

This is just one suggestion. The site needs to stay as is, but the staff needs more assistance. No, this shouldn't be a position you can pay $5 a month for.

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by jude11

 

Unbalanced because you might do your best to be fair and impartial. But you can bet that won't be the norm. Too many OP's will delete posts just because they can. Hence, one sided threads.

However, I do see your point. I'm just not sure what the answer is. Increasing the number of mods would help, considering they are understaffed anyway. But this is a business, and SO does have to watch his bottom line.

Yeah, the poll a few weeks before clearly stated a need for a membership fee and yes it's a business.

This just came up:

Ok, so maybe when a member has reached a certain level of credibility with points, stars, flags etc would work better?

I don't know but I'm reaching!

What do you think?

Originally posted by jude11
1. Members had some control over our own threads such as being able to delete the posts of trolls and rude/ignorant people in general.

That's actually what happens to MSM, people pay to have what they don't want deleted and then controls the information. If you want to do this post on youtube, that we're smart people go no? jk :p

It ultimately comes down to the moderators.

Paying a fee,will change the whole dynamics of the site,for worse.

Apart from the odd mod bias in threads,and the troll posts left up...I think the sites works just fine.

Originally posted by TheOneElectric

Originally posted by jude11
reply to post by TheOneElectric

 

Ok, good points.

So as I look at some other similar sites to ATS and I don't see the threads getting abused ( keep in my mind that I'm not talking about the 'Other Site' in particular as that's not a good example) do you have a suggestion for a way to keep things on track, even just a little?

Thanks for the input.

To be completely honest with you, I wouldn't change a thing member wise. I would like the administrators to maybe document repeat offenders and repeat (valid) complaints made by members against other members. Also, I know there are administrators, super moderators, and moderators that handle the breach of rules on this site, however, there needs to be a stealth force with limited abilities that allow them to:
1) Post in a moderator/administrator area
2) Tag posts (where only mods and admins can see) as needing to be checked
3) Have the ability to to cut certain posts that are clearly in violation of the rules

This stealth force should not be allowed to reveal their identities to other members, and their should be strict scrutiny when choosing the individuals. I believe they should come from differing belief sets, should have posts that demonstrate basic writing and comprehension skills, and should be composed of some of the more 'civil' members.

We can even name the stealth force something funny and conspiracy related: The AIB (ATS intelligence bureau , The MIB, The Zetas, the tinfoil brigade....whatever.

This is just one suggestion. The site needs to stay as is, but the staff needs more assistance. No, this shouldn't be a position you can pay $5 a month for.

This is why I asked for input! Thanks!

Great ideas and I can see the value here. I also suggested bringing in members after reaching a level of credibility:

Ok, so maybe when a member has reached a certain level of credibility with points, stars, flags etc would work better?

Would this work? Bring in the members themselves?

Originally posted by jude11

Originally posted by Esotericizm
I cannot think of a better way off the top of my head no. But that being said this is the closest medium to free speech we have left and giving someone the power to essentially censor their own threads simply because they pay for the privilege just doesn't seem right to me.

Ok, so maybe when a member has reached a certain level of credibility with points, stars, flags etc would work better?

I don't know but I'm reaching!

I suppose thats a bit better, but just because the member base gives one person credibility does not mean that they are always credible,

I think the current system works well, And i only just signed up here 10 minutes ago so im not sure if there is a feature like this but what if, You could report the mods for making decisions you think are incorrect, and after a certain amount of "Bad Reports" that mod is then subjected to a review process. Although i can see this system being abused by members that have their posts deleted for violations against the T&C and just want some revenge.

I'm thinking but i just cant come up with a better solution than what we have currently.