i am asking that we consider a peer based rating system.

there is a system in place as to earn the right to post. giving

the new member a chance to see how the forum works and how to post

appropriately. we i think there needs to be a peer bast rating system to help weed out disinformation

if a member gets tagged to many time for spreading dis info, they show loose the right to post for a " x " amount of

time. i think this would discourage all the childish and bickering post that people add to a valid a topic.

i thank you for your time and consideration into this matter.

Originally posted by omegacorps
i am asking that we consider a peer based rating system.

there is a system in place as to earn the right to post. giving

the new member a chance to see how the forum works and how to post

appropriately. we i think there needs to be a peer bast rating system to help weed out disinformation

if a member gets tagged to many time for spreading dis info, they show loose the right to post for a " x " amount of

time. i think this would discourage all the childish and bickering post that people add to a valid a topic.

i thank you for your time and consideration into this matter.

I have to disagree with this proposal, all I can see it doing is pitting camp A against camp B. It would turn into a post ban war.
To the OP I am not being critical of your post it is just that I can see a ban war rising.
Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by omegacorps
appropriately. we i think there needs to be a peer bast rating system to help weed out disinformation

if a member gets tagged to many time for spreading dis info, they show loose the right to post for a " x " amount of

time.

The only problem with that is that many members actually believe what they are saying, even in the face of logic/facts. How do you action that? Secondly it would set up a system of "us vs you" which we pretty much have now and sucks imo.

i thank you for your time and consideration into this matter.

Thank you for your time and concern.

moderators would have the option to review the " tagged " person and there post in question to make the call as to weather there posting right be revoked for " x " amount of time.

as a peer i deem this post inadequate....As it does not meet the needs of the people of ATS....I believe as a peer....and because i have not been educated.....that i feel that i should further waste my worthless time engaging in voting tactics to decide whether this thread is worthy.....'i am not worthy.....i am not worthy'

ok all joking aside.....nothing against my fellow peers....but as you see the bickering in threads....what would make a person judge and jury over whether something is disinfo....I mean this is a conspiracy site...so is not everything here kinda on the verge of being considered disinfo as the conspiracy itself would almost always be about disinfo.....disinfo from the presenter...or disinfo from the source.

Also because of the over use of the word disinfo.....i think this post should fall under that and be removed as spreading disinfo.

I agree that something should be done. I don't know if this would be the best way to go about it though for reasons stated above.

First step I think should be taken is to get rid of stars. As I have already said elsewhere it's sort of a juvenile reward system, like giving a dog a treat when he does something you want him to do. It serves to reinforce negative behavior.

For example, someone makes a completely absurd topic, and they get 90 stars from people who are incapable of critically thinking, this will only reinforce the ignorance of said topic because "look at all the stars" they got. Must have done something right, right?

I think if stars are taken away, a lot of certain topic trends will disappear, because I know a lot of people create threads just for the reward, no matter how silly a reward it is. Then something can be done from there if that doesn't work. I think that would work though.

there is the ATS Point system attached to the persons profile. maybe we can make that apart of the members post.
so it is clear to see how valid there post have been ie: a person with 1000 post but a point score of 1000 would show that a majority of there post have been void of valid information and more along the lines of a ( facebook ) type of post.

I have been party to instances of this on other forums.

It has ALWAYS resulted in a gong show. It's simply too easy to abuse a system like this. Plain and simple.

Surely, many of us would like to make some changes.. for instance I'd love it if I had the ability to moderate MY OWN THREADS. After all, it's a discussion I initiated and I have a personal point of view I'd like to explore with others who may see an issue the same way, without having to put up with trolls whose only purpose in the discussion are to disrupt, derail, argue against, etc.

It's not going to happen though.

Curious here......what are the rewards of the stars anyways.....I mean i could care less about if i have stars or points or if the butter side of the toast always lands down......you get known as a contributor no matter if you have valid points or not....also...I think it would make the board unfair...because then you would have a worse scenario where someone or a group of someones is deciding what is deemed valid.....NOT GOOD.

also ....are we not also deciding whether there is a certain level of intellect put into the thread then....i mean it is great that anyone of any background can post....if the members rank them by stars....then they must be saying what others are liking or they would not receive the stars or flags in the first place.

anyhow.

i star very seldom...and rarely flag.....and why would i care if someone gets more or less stars than i.....good for them.....someone could get a million stars for a thread...but if it is something i disagree with....it does not bother me if they are starred....i mean just look at prediction threads.....it is all dis info.....as it is a prediction.

So what would happen is you would have the very many random-lights-in-the-sky-are-aliens posts as usual. When you get the logical posts that cast doubt upon the "alien" origin of these random lights (often with verifyable proof), all of the alien visitation religious believers would quickly descend upon the logical poster and label him/her as a "debunker" or a "disinfo agent" and have that post deleted or have the member post banned - simply for casting doubt upon a random light video.

Just because some of us don't see aliens or government conspiracy in every single thread of this website doesn't mean we are "debunkers" or "disinfo agents". We just long for some actual proof.

Originally posted by omegacorps
i am asking that we consider a peer based rating system.

there is a system in place as to earn the right to post. giving

the new member a chance to see how the forum works and how to post

appropriately. we i think there needs to be a peer bast rating system to help weed out disinformation

if a member gets tagged to many time for spreading dis info, they show loose the right to post for a " x " amount of

time. i think this would discourage all the childish and bickering post that people add to a valid a topic.

i thank you for your time and consideration into this matter.

There are very clear T&C that everyone must follow.

"Dis-info" certainly is in the eye of the beholder, but that doesnt make it truth It makes it just an opinion....

Further , it is up to staff to decide who posts and not.....


ETA....
and Intrepid covered the rest

ok sounds good.

thank you

one thing is there a way to add the Points to the members profile stats next to there post?

Is peer based on content? This is the best site I've come across that lets' the members rank posts and threads.
I just figure, most double posts and the like will get flushed on there own. For ranking individuals...No
We are all the same with varying opinions.

A problem with this concept is that those who are trying to discredit your post because it interferes with their dishonest business or venture can target those who challenge their deceitful practices. Using deceitful tactics under the veil of animosity is what this site should try to discourage. Posts could be removed for not being civil and people could be restricted for uncivil tendencies for a while, that would be acceptable. If someone pushes a blatant lie it's different. If the person states his perception is a perception it is different. Facts can be interpreted many ways so facts can be just as corrupted as fiction. What we have been led to believe is true is not always true either. Things that were in common practice ten years ago are no longer in use, silently removed from our view and excluded from textbooks.

Peer review system = agree with the majority/mainstream or we take away your right to have a voice. Mainstream in this case meaning "mainstream for ATS". Report anyone who has a different viewpoint than you and have their posting privileges revoked. How dare they disagree!

Great idea.

As an interesting aside, did you know that in some circles, "peer review" is referred to as "homogenising the stupidity"? Considering how thin skinned and delicate a significant proportion of this board is, tightening the screws any further on this kind of system would basically drive out any independent or challenging thought.

Deny robust discussion, etc etc.