What happened to ATS?

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
While this is not a long rant it is going to be very short and to the point. I know there have been many who have said ATS is going down hill and blah blah. I figured that after the elections, things on the site would get back to normal. Members would stop posting things that are partial to a particular party, and start posting things about what this site was originally about, which is FINDING THE TRUTH, not post your opinion. There are still good posts from time to time. But you have to dig. And for someone who doesn't have much time to do such things, this fact has detracted from ATS. I used to be able to find 10+ articles that I would like to read on the home page alone (EVEN IN THAT STRETCH OF ABOUT A YEAR OR SO THAT THE HOMEPAGE WAS LITTERED WITH CHEMTRAIL ARTICLES
). Now I realize that this is a matter of personal preference, but frankly this was originally a conspiracy theory forum. I'd like to read some actual conspiracy findings.

Sincerely,
cardicorona




posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by cardicorona
 


With ATS being the largest conspiracy-theory website on the internet, at over 276,000 members, you're going to have to expect unattractive threads and opinions. It will just have to come down to you filtering those things out and only pursuing things that interest you.




posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I try to add people I respect to my friends/rivals list on here, so I can go in and see a list of all the threads they authored. That way you can always check to see if there's content you know is going to be good, or well thought out, despite whether or not you agree with the conclusions. It's a helpful feature, just be careful not to filter too much of what you'll see, it's a big website.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by cardicorona
 


Two words. Government infiltration! It is on the increase in a big way and it is getting more and more impossible to get to truth.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Two words, Facebook infiltration.

Seriously, make threads you want to see and skip the ones you don't. Some days I look at New Topics and Firehose, and leave, simply nothing to see. Usually just lots of rants on what happened to ATS lately.

edit on 31-12-2012 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I've gotten into the habit of reading only replys only on the first page.. If you could "hide" replys, making it easier to ignore the nonsense, it'd be a way to have a personalized first page for a meaningful reading.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I always find it funny when people complain about thread quality.

Its a FREE user generated content site!!!!!!
If you feel its not good enough do some research and post an awesome thread


Complaining about the quality of posts is completely different and if the rant had of been on that I woulda been behind you 100% LOL



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   
There has been, is, and continues to be a general decline in the quality of material selected for new threads - not to mention the quality of individual posts. ATS is "still" a good place to hear about current news events before (or if) those events become reported by the MSM.

Making an OP and beginning a thread here isn't something I've felt the need to indulge in - there have been so many members more on top of events than myself, I've felt that posting a comment or three is the best contribution I can make to the community. Besides, most of the time, somebody else "beat me to it" and there's little sense in my mind of covering a topic ad nauseum. Unfortunately, we don't see that kind of restraint these days.

I'll not comment on the consistency(?) of thread moderation - that would lead to punitive repercussions - but I will state for the record I've noticed much more active interference in the direction of content from management.

ganjoa



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Another day, another "what happened to ATS" thread...

ATS is the sum of posts by its members, all 276,049 of them - so why do people persist in trying to have a pop at their fellow posters on here?

If you don't like what you read, write better threads. Don't rely on others to do it for you and then come on and moan about it because they haven't.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
The importance and size of ATS has been greatly exaggerated. Only 15% of the membership has stopped by in the last year, about 41,000 members. In the last quarter: Oct 1 - Dec 31, about 19,000 or so have stopped by, about 7% of the membership. When you look at contributions, it's still pretty dismal:

Total member accounts: 275,447
Members who have posted: 152,026
Percentage of members who have posted: 55 %

Number of members with 20 or fewer posts: 42% 115,739
Number of members with 20 to 100 posts: 7% 19,392
Number of members with 100 to 500 posts: 3.9% 10,766
Number of members with 500 to 1,000 posts: .9% 2,570
Number of members with 1,000 to 5,000 posts: .9% 2,514
Number of members with 5,000 to 10,000 posts: .08% 231
Number of members with more than 10,000 posts:.04% 118
Quantity of posts by members with more than 10,000 posts: 13% 2,023,599

(Stats from a few days ago)

You can see that 45% of registered users have never posted anything. 42% have fewer than 20 posts, which means they can't even start threads and have contributed very little. So only 13% of the users can be called anywhere near active, and more than half of those have posted less than 100 times.

So what you have here is about 3,000 people who have posted 99% of the content. So ATS is kind of like a puffer fish. It looks a lot bigger than it really is.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
(Stats from a few days ago)


How about stats from the front page, right now?



And new content, new ideas, new speculation, and new theories are being generating at an astounding pace with 3,541 members creating 37,698 new posts during the past seven days. Also, in that same time span, we welcomed 449 new members and enjoyed visits from 9,100 registered members as well as 1,055,600 guests.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm interested in why you thought that was relevant though ~ looks fairly healthy to me. Whats your point, exactly?



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by schuyler
(Stats from a few days ago)


How about stats from the front page, right now?



And new content, new ideas, new speculation, and new theories are being generating at an astounding pace with 3,541 members creating 37,698 new posts during the past seven days. Also, in that same time span, we welcomed 449 new members and enjoyed visits from 9,100 registered members as well as 1,055,600 guests.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm interested in why you thought that was relevant though ~ looks fairly healthy to me. Whats your point, exactly?



So basically the front page corroborates what I said. And the POINT is that we are told ATS has 275,000 members: 275 THOUSAND!!!!!! Wow!

But

99% of the posts are done by 3,000 members. 45% of this astounding 275 THOUSAND have never ever posted. The rest of it you can re-read or compile for yourself. ATS is in the academy of the overrated. The front page stats here are advertising hype. Try to see through that.
edit on 12/31/2012 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Those stats are from the past 7 days.

And ATS has 275 thousand members....but they don't post all at once... but any permutation of that number of people may choose to post.

And if the site is as you describe it, why are you here? Surely you can find another carpet to piss on?



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Those stats are from the past 7 days.


Oh, for Christ's sakes! My statistics come from the bottom of the page, where it says "Site Statistics." Here's what they were a few days ago. It took me a couple of hours to compile these:

At first they look impressive. 275,447 members? Wow! Of this number 55% (152,026) have bothered to post at all, 123,121 members have NEVER posted, and 115,739 members have posted fewer than 20 times, meaning they have never started a thread and cannot participate fully with the site. They are basically members who have showed up, made a few posts, and moved on.

Now we get into members who have obviously made more of a commitment to the site, which is not quite 13% of the total membership who have made more than 20 posts. 7% of the membership has posted from 20-100 posts. 3.9% of the membership has posted 100-500 posts, so at least they are showing some activity, but from here on out it diminishes rapidly. .9% (that’s less than 1%) have posted between 500-1000 posts, and the same percentage has posted between 1,000 and 5,000 posts. From 5,000 to 10,000 posts is .08% (not quite a hundredth of a percent) and over 10,000 is .04% (not quite a half of a hundredth of a percent) Interestingly, members with over 10,000 posts have created over 13% of all posts on the site.

Of course these statistics do not show everything. A new member may be extremely active, but by virtue of not having been here long has less than 500 posts. That should rectify itself fairly quickly. Also, we do not have an easy “How many members have posted within X days” statistic, which would give you an idea of the drop out rate. We CAN tell you how many members have bothered to swing by this month of December, about 13,000 or so. Who knows what they did while here? We can’t tell that. You can tell the number by sorting members by date of last visit.

And as we go back through the months this also diminishes rapidly. How many have shown up since November 1st? About 16,000. October 1st? About 19,000. Are these all active posting members hotly interested in the Mayan calendar debate, or are they drive-bys who did nothing? We can’t tell, but we CAN tell that during the last quarter of the year about 19,000 members have stopped by, not quite 7% of the total membership. If the overall statistics remain true, a little over half have bothered to post at all. 256,000 members haven’t even been on the site in the last three months.

And it gets worse. Since July 1 about 27,000 members, roughly 10%, have stopped by. Is it fair to say the other 90% won’t be back? No? Surely you are not going to claim they are “active users participating in debate” are you? 41,000 have been on the site in the last year, 15%

Now does this demean or diminish those people who have posted, or have only posted a bit? Of course not. THAT’S not the point, so those of you who have taken instant umbrage need to fall back and get a grip here. The point is that people are over-stating the case and using raw statistics to try to justify it. You want to show a misuse of statistics? That’s a misuse of statistics. When you actually look at the numbers, 6% of the membership have posted over 100 posts, and a relatively small number of people participated in this 12-21-12 debate. It certainly does not represent a vast number of people “working together.”

Total member accounts: 275,447
Members who have posted: 152,026
Percentage of members who have posted: 55 %

Number of members with 20 or fewer posts: 42% 115,739
Number of members with 20 to 100 posts: 7% 19,392
Number of members with 100 to 500 posts: 3.9% 10,766
Number of members with 500 to 1,000 posts: .9% 2,570
Number of members with 1,000 to 5,000 posts: .9% 2,514
Number of members with 5,000 to 10,000 posts: .08% 231
Number of members with more than 10,000 posts:.04% 118
Quantity of posts by members with more than 10,000 posts: 13% 2,023,599

Number of members have created extended profiles: 49,146
Number of members who are podcasting: 282
Number of members who have tagged threads: 8,165
Number of members who have flagged threads: 52,735
Total Posts 15,459,865

continued next post



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   
So what do we have here? Hype and exaggeration. The site claims to have 275,000 members. Not quite half have NEVER POSTED. Doesn’t that tell you something? Doesn’t that give you pause? Do they just want to see the avatars and avoid some ads? Not only that, when you analyze the statistics, it turns out the vast majority of members haven’t been on ATS in over a year. In fact, only 15% have been. You can tell this by paging through the member stats by last visit. That takes a lot more work than glancing at the front page. In fact, it’s tedious, but it tells you a lot. It’s called “research.”

That means 85% of the membership hasn’t been here in a year. Why, then, does ATS still claim them as members? What ATS has done is not culled the membership, it appears, ever in its entire history. Basically 1% of the membership is doing 99% of the work. It sounds like they are claiming all the dead voters in Chicago.

On the surface there’s nothing wrong with that. So a few thousand people are providing most of the content. What’s wrong with that? Nothing, really. It’s just that the site, along with a few members who don’t scrutinize what is happening, exaggerates itself into absurdity. It hypes itself up to the point that it claims it’s 99% larger than it really is.

That’s deceptive. I object to it, and I am astounded that you don’t. if ATS were being realistic about this, they would say, “ATS has an active user base of approximately 40,000 members.” That counts anyone who has been here within a total year. You can say that’s an exaggeration, too, if you want, but I think most people would consider it reasonable to count anyone who has been here within the year. And 40,000 members is impressive. There’s really no need to pad the counts.

Now I don’t think these statistics are INTENTIONALLY deceptive. I've been a sysadmin on Linux-based sites and I know for fact that the statistics can be way off. What I suspect has happened is that they put on a few automatic counters and let them run, not really analyzing what those counters were counting. It’s like web site counters that count page hits and say that’s how many visitors they had. If you count every time someone shows up during the day as a ‘discrete visit’ you’ve just inflated your statistics exponentially. If you count a web bot as a visitor, you just exaggerated your statistics. And if you actually believe you had a million lurkers on here in the last few days, you’re delusional.

What I am suggesting here is that ATS be reasonable in its assessment and that users don’t get all starry-eyed when they look at the stats. I think that is a reasonable stance to take. Here you are, a super moderator, who has decided to attack me personally for presenting these statistics. I thought moderators were supposed to be “above the fray” unless they specifically want to contribute. I’ve been here a year less than you have and quite frankly I resent you suggesting I leave given my near daily contributions to this site.


Added: This posted after S.O.'s post. I stand by my analysis. You can check it out by doing your own research and duplicating it.
edit on 12/31/2012 by schuyler because: (no reason given)
edit on 12/31/2012 by schuyler because: (no reason given)


+10 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   
I posted this in response to a similar thread in 2009... so four years later, I may as well repost in entirety here. (references to "you" do not ally to anyone in this thread)


 

originally posted here


And the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round...

ATS is not what it used to be - 2003
On ATS, Ignorance Is Winning - 2004, before he was a mod
Get rid of points system on ATS. - 2004
content going downhill??? - 2004
ATS selling out: Membership quantity over quality - 2005
"Deny Ignorance" and the ATS Conspiracy... - 2005
is ats being hached/subverted from within or ? - 2005

Some quick examples (from hundreds) of how "everyone complains about the weather, but no one ever does anything about it."


Mike...

As you can see, the phenomenon you point out has been a part of our community for years. Not to diminish from some valid concerns, but I call much of this a phenomenon for a reason... I've seen it before, I'll see it again, and I fully expect never to stop seeing it.

Forum Fatigue

For the most part, I suspect what you are (mostly) experiencing is a valid phenomenon of the digital age, "forum fatigue." While you may not be aware of such a thing, and there's precious little written about it, it does exist. I've been managing online forums and groups since it was possible to do so... beginning with BBS groups in the slow dial-up days, moving to the largest CompuServe forum in the faster dial-up days, and onward to ATS. It's real. It happens every day. It will never not happen. It's human nature.

When you (or anyone) first join a new digital community, there tends to be four phases of involvement:

1) Exuberant participation due to an overwhelming amount of content on subjects that interest you.

2) Fitting into the flow as you have a solid comfort level with the community and its members.

3) Frustration as the lack of new interesting content that led to #1 begins to be hard to find.

4) Ongoing contribution to compensate for the perceived lack of interesting content.

Think about it... you come to ATS... are excited to find all this interesting content from so many different people... spend time soaking it all in... spend more time figuring out how to fit in... start to become comfortable in providing contributions... then, as you get your fill of topics, become frustrated over repeat topics... and more frustration as new users don't exemplify your own level of advanced "ATS sophistication"... and even more frustrated as your personal investment in time is subverted by what you perceive to be poor topics... brining us solidly into the third item above. The same happens on any forum/board/community of focused topics.

About 53% of members post anything... but less than 1% of those members (0.5% of all members) ever move past #3 and make an effort with #4.


Now, to be clear, I'm not attributing all of your concerns to "forum fatigue," only that it's a common phenomenon for users of our type of venue. There's always room for improvement, and we've been proactive in figuring out what needs to happen, but we also temper that with our collective experience (more than myself) in running big online communities.


I've just retied for the evening from a nasty stint of code-wrangling related to the new media portal, and am enjoying the warm glow of some fine bourbon, and don't have the wits to rely to Isaac's posts. But I think Isaac is misunderstanding the intent of "Skunk Works"


+1 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Found another one from 2010


 


originally posted here





Also... there's a well-documented phenomena (we have at least three or four threads on the subject somewhere in here) about forum fatigue that has something to do with what you think you're seeing. The short version is something like:

(1) When you first encountered ATS, you were floored at all the content.

(2) You joined with excitement.

(3) You devoured threads and marveled at some of the topics and replies.

(4) You jumped in, excited to be a part of it.

(5) Over time, you've come to be very familiar with the topics.

(6) Over more time, you're seeing fewer "new" topics (because you've nearly seen it all)

(7) You post less because you're not seeing as much new information as when you first joined (when it was all new)

(8) You make a thread on how there's not so many good new threads any more, rather than make a good thread.




posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 06:57 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





top topics
 
2

log in

join