New ATS Owner Wants Input

I won the lottery and decided to purchase ATS. [Note: The USA is NOT the only country in the world with a lottery.] This has been my online community for about 10 years - it's the place I feel most at home and the only one I care about. So when I got the chance to take over, I took it.

Be forewarned - I plan to be a benevolent dictator - but change is in the wind.

For myself, I tend to be a bit of a philosopher with a taste for hard information. I'm also an artist - but my professional background is in business. I cut my corporate teeth with Bill Galt's Good Earth Restaurant franchise, and studied at the Burklyn School of Business with Buckminster Fuller. No, I don't get the math but I do understand respect and synergy - which is what I see as ATS' true foundation: respect and synergy.

The quality of discussion on ATS has always ebbed and flowed. Some say it's a pulse on the larger world; others bemoan the loss of excellence, and say the site sacrificed quality for quantity. There's no doubt that when the membership skyrocketed, the quality of topics and discourse plummeted.

I suspect that if we leave things alone, the pendulum will swing back, ATS' vaunted quality will re-emerge, and all will be right in our virtual world. But I'm sorely tempted to tinker.

What do you think? Can ATS remain popular, successful and financially viable - while demanding our historically higher quality of exchange?

Can we demand passion without idiocy? Can we command informed contributions and participation? Can we lose the marketing trolls and Facebook spillovers - without losing market share?

How do we do that?

…….Go at it ATS, I'll be back later.

With respect,
sofi

April Fools....?

I don't think this is the kind for website that someone just sells. Besides if You won the lottery yesterday you wouldn't have of a dime of it yet, nor would a transaction such as that be instantaneous. This wasn't even clever. Leaving out the lottery part might have made this sound a bit more believable.

Originally posted by OGOldGreg
April Fools....?

ya think?

reply to post by OGOldGreg

...if You won the lottery yesterday

I should have added US-centric. FYI - the USA is NOT the only country in the world with a lottery. ...and ATS used to have a huge international base.

GOOD ONE! My first April Fools of the day. FUN!

As the new site owner (*wink) let me make a few suggestions.
I've got a whole lotta' points and nothing to do with them.
How about you sell me a permanent 'ban hammer' to use for a day?
Once my ban hammer hits someone ... there is no second chances.
I'd pay 300,000 points for it to use for a day ...
Man ... I could clean up this place.

I'd start with those worshipping Timothy McVeigh and move on from there ...

reply to post by FlyersFan

How about you sell me a permanent 'ban hammer' to use for a day?
Once my ban hammer hits someone ... there is no second chances.
I'd pay 300,000 points for it to use for a day ...

Interesting proposition. Thanks.

...but what if one your detractors bought a ban hammer too? And banned you? ...You have a good mind - maybe you can think of something a bit more ...safe.

Happy April fools!

On a serious note I say this;

Originally posted by Leftist
S&F for the OP. The OP's message is important for ATS in particular.

Why?

Because in the public imagination (insofar as it can be said to apply, that is), places like ATS occupy an ambiguous place - for many, not too far from supermarket-tabloid-level. This is changing, however, as people realize the MSM is no longer trustworthy and that we really do live in an era of massaged and manipulated news. Given that, people are looking at ATS and other “conspiracy” sites in a new light. We have the potential to bring back a little of the dignity that the MSM has tossed over its shoulder like a rusty tin can. But the fate of places like ATS hangs in the balance – will it become a serious news source or will it remain the “lunatic fringe” ?

They used to say journalists had a responsibility to elevate the public discourse, or at least to keep it from sliding into the gutter. This was connected with the idea that journalism is more than a job, it was a profession, if not an out-and-out calling. That is no longer the case, sadly - journalists are now shills. But as "citizen journalists," we must pick up the mantle that the shills have dropped. Part of this means we, too, have that same responsibility.

It's up to us.

I agree with what you said, only wanting to make one addition. If sites such as ATS become the 'lunatic fringe' as you stated, it plays into the hands of the elite. When a person begins to question MSM sources and visits ATS, among other sites, hoping for intelligent discourse within the alternative viewpoint, only to find lunatics, they stop trusting alternative news sources, concluding it is only the crazies believing these sources, and deem themselves idiots for 'almost' being entrapped by falsehood.

It is for this reason we should fight against the 'lunatic fringe,' otherwise truth itself will be lost

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Nevertheless for market share and other such business considerations, the lunatic fringe would be the way to go. Therefore it becomes what the owners are most concerned with. I am sure some balance could be sought.

Ah, ya got me! I was wondering when they held this lottery!

Good question though. I've watched this place change, but I can say I still come here over regular news sources, so for now, it is still doing it's job. Actually, that is the change that occured, this place is the new true(er) MSM.

I think it would help to enforce posting rules, but otherwise, even the social issues threads that can get ridiculous in their repetitiveness, represent the current of public opinion.

reply to post by Jameela

...it becomes what the owners are most concerned with. I am sure some balance could be sought.

How? Specifically?

...The first thing I learned in business is that nobody wants to hear about problems - just the solutions. Do you have a solution? Any specific recommendations?


Thanks btw - S&

Originally posted by soficrow
reply to post by Jameela

 

...it becomes what the owners are most concerned with. I am sure some balance could be sought.

How? Specifically?

...The first thing I learned in business is that nobody wants to hear about problems - just the solutions. Do you have a solution? Any specific recommendations?


Thanks btw - S&

Your welcome.


One specific recommendation concerns some of these sensationalist stories posted by the lunatic fringe. Intelligent members debunk these claims, however the title remains unchanged. I think it would be a decent application to have Moderators or Admins who can add the word DEBUNKED to the title, and add a link(s) to the most comprehensive posts that debunked the claim(s) made either in the bottom of the OP or the top.

This is one specific thing that would add some measure of balance without affecting the membership, and shows new members that the site is serious in its "Deny Ignorance" claims. Then the site has the 'first impression' of being one of intelligent discourse.

As we all know it is the first impression that matters most.

Originally posted by soficrow
...but what if one your detractors bought a ban hammer too? And banned you? ...You have a good mind - maybe you can think of something a bit more ...safe.

We could have a ban-hammer-off. A total gladiator slug it out fest complete with the ban on cuss words lifted ... cyber blood splattering everywhere ... it would be primal. You could charge for admission .. points have to be paid to watch. And since I have so many points I could pay off the judges on the side and win the ban-off-slug-fest and still have enough points to use my ban-hammer at will. Oh the fun!

Doesnt time fly? I cant believe its been a year since we had the SkepticOverlord/Springer for president thing, now that was funny.

reply to post by Jameela

One specific recommendation concerns some of these sensationalist stories posted by the lunatic fringe. Intelligent members debunk the claims within the thread, but the title remains unchanged. I think it would be a decent application to have Moderators or Admins who can add the word DEBUNKED to the title...

Sounds good - but - speaking as someone who routinely has posted evidence and claims that are vigorously questioned, and apparently "debunked." ...Most of my work has proved to be valid, and ended up substantiated sooner or later. If we just go by the numbers and self-proclaimed "experts" - there's no room for questioning dogma and altering memes.

...We do tag [HOAX] - but "debunking" appears to be fairly subjective. What objective criteria do you see coming into play here, for deciding what's really debunked or not?

, and add a link(s) to the most comprehensive posts that debunked the claim(s) made either in the bottom of the OP or the top.

How 'bout we insert a modifiable 2nd post, after a period of time, that links to the best debunking and supporting posts? ...But it's a lot of work - who might do it? How do we guarantee objective balance?


btw

Originally posted by thedoctorswife
Doesnt time fly? I cant believe its been a year since we had the SkepticOverlord/Springer for president thing, now that was funny.

c'mon...everyone knows springer was crowned GRAND POOHBAH with the honorary solid gold chicken leg award. no, i'm not trying to suck up...ok, maybe a little. may the fools of april 1st forever call ATS their "strange little haven" of interesting ideas, balancing between pychosis and brillance.

reply to post by FlyersFan

We could have a ban-hammer-off. A total gladiator slug it out fest complete with the ban on cuss words lifted ... cyber blood splattering everywhere ... it would be primal. ...

Oh the fun!

Oh yeah! ...Maybe a gladiator forum in WayAbove where people could indulge their less-than-intellectual tendencies, work off their frustrations.

But what do we do about the main boards? We can't quarantine the whole membership - and speaking as an "expert" I can tell you absolutely, "Quarantine doesn't work!" Once a "disease" has escaped the barn or lab and made its way into the world, there is NO point cleaning the place or trying to kill the bugs. ...So - is adaptation and natural evolution the only solution?

when i saw the title .. i was wtf ?
Good one lol ... damn april fools day playing mind games

The best was the Skeptic and Springer running for POTUS
loved that one ahaha

No official ATS april fool ? .. yet
we should watch out .. they will anounced something like

Finaly ATS reveal working for the government

Originally posted by soficrow
reply to post by Jameela

 

One specific recommendation concerns some of these sensationalist stories posted by the lunatic fringe. Intelligent members debunk the claims within the thread, but the title remains unchanged. I think it would be a decent application to have Moderators or Admins who can add the word DEBUNKED to the title...

Sounds good - but - speaking as someone who routinely has posted evidence and claims that are vigorously questioned, and apparently "debunked." ...Most of my work has proved to be valid, and ended up substantiated sooner or later. If we just go by the numbers and self-proclaimed "experts" - there's no room for questioning dogma and altering memes.

...We do tag [HOAX] - but "debunking" appears to be fairly subjective. What objective criteria do you see coming into play here, for deciding what's really debunked or not?

, and add a link(s) to the most comprehensive posts that debunked the claim(s) made either in the bottom of the OP or the top.

How 'bout we insert a modifiable 2nd post, after a period of time, that links to the best debunking and supporting posts? ...But it's a lot of work - who might do it? How do we guarantee objective balance?

btw

You have good points in the first part of your response, but if as you say, sooner or later it becomes a verifiable fact, then you had ample evidence to support your own claims, and detractors had evidence supporting theirs which put it into the category of differing opinions placing more weight on one piece of evidence over another.

That is not in my opinion debunking, it is simply a differing opinion. And those are generally quite interesting threads to read, as it gives varying viewpoints based on fact.

Perhaps your hoax addition is not utilized enough, as I have not noticed it, although I am new to the forum.

I agree with your idea making a second post. As for the persons recruited for such a task, you have a pool from which to choose, moderating is on a volunteer basis on most forums, and I am sure this one is no different.

You choose whom you consider the most intelligent from your pool,(the membership), who visit the site regularly, placing them in charge of an area which they have no biases concerning, ie: forums they rarely post in, as personal bias colors ones opinions and is almost impossible to overcome. Thus ensuring a bias free moderation.

The only consideration would be ensuring whomever you chose has enough knowledge of science, politics, etc. to moderate that particular forum properly. But then, for example, we find doctors who post regularly in religion sections etc. therefore this might be an easier task than it appears at first glance.

reply to post by FlyersFan



Good idea but, instead of buying just the ban hammer, why not let members buy themselves mod status for a day?

Then you could not only use the ban hammer but, you could go in and edit other people's posts to make them say "look at me, I'm a big stupid-head" or insert misspellings and grammatical errors so the grammar Nazis would go after them.


The possibilities for mischief could be endless if you had mod powers for a day. This is gonna be so much fun.

Let's clarify this comment
Are you saying people that worship Timothy Mcveigh are the bottom of the barrel; or does it get worse?H

Or was it just the first thing you thought of?

I'd start with people that ban other people...just a thought.

Hope that helps,

Mr medinet

Originally posted by FlyersFan

GOOD ONE! My first April Fools of the day.

FUN!

As the new site owner (*wink) let me make a few suggestions.
I've got a whole lotta' points and nothing to do with them.
How about you sell me a permanent 'ban hammer' to use for a day?
Once my ban hammer hits someone ... there is no second chances.
I'd pay 300,000 points for it to use for a day ...
Man ... I could clean up this place.

I'd start with those worshipping Timothy McVeigh and move on from there ...

When you are surrounded by idiots your only choice is to walk away....

Have you ever watched a tv program and saw the audience and wondered why someone doesn't get up and walk out in protest?

This is how I feel sometimes.

Hope that helped,

Mr medinet

all I can do is walk away that's all it takes

Originally posted by Jameela

Originally posted by soficrow
reply to post by Jameela

 

One specific recommendation concerns some of these sensationalist stories posted by the lunatic fringe. Intelligent members debunk the claims within the thread, but the title remains unchanged. I think it would be a decent application to have Moderators or Admins who can add the word DEBUNKED to the title...

Sounds good - but - speaking as someone who routinely has posted evidence and claims that are vigorously questioned, and apparently "debunked." ...Most of my work has proved to be valid, and ended up substantiated sooner or later. If we just go by the numbers and self-proclaimed "experts" - there's no room for questioning dogma and altering memes.

...We do tag [HOAX] - but "debunking" appears to be fairly subjective. What objective criteria do you see coming into play here, for deciding what's really debunked or not?

, and add a link(s) to the most comprehensive posts that debunked the claim(s) made either in the bottom of the OP or the top.

How 'bout we insert a modifiable 2nd post, after a period of time, that links to the best debunking and supporting posts? ...But it's a lot of work - who might do it? How do we guarantee objective balance?

btw

You have good points in the first part of your response, but if as you say, sooner or later it becomes a verifiable fact, then you had ample evidence to support your own claims, and detractors had evidence supporting theirs which put it into the category of differing opinions placing more weight on one piece of evidence over another.

That is not in my opinion debunking, it is simply a differing opinion. And those are generally quite interesting threads to read, as it gives varying viewpoints based on fact.

Perhaps your hoax addition is not utilized enough, as I have not noticed it, although I am new to the forum.

I agree with your idea making a second post. As for the persons recruited for such a task, you have a pool from which to choose, moderating is on a volunteer basis on most forums, and I am sure this one is no different.

You choose whom you consider the most intelligent from your pool,(the membership), who visit the site regularly, placing them in charge of an area which they have no biases concerning, ie: forums they rarely post in, as personal bias colors ones opinions and is almost impossible to overcome. Thus ensuring a bias free moderation.

The only consideration would be ensuring whomever you chose has enough knowledge of science, politics, etc. to moderate that particular forum properly. But then, for example, we find doctors who post regularly in religion sections etc. therefore this might be an easier task than it appears at first glance.

edit on 1-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)