Deny Ignorance?

ATS began as a site to discuss conspiracies and secrets. Clearly, it's grown into much more and there are a huge number of users with little or no interest in those subjects who tend to take the "popular / mainstream" point of view.

For those of us more involved in the subjects, perhaps as researchers, authors or just educated interested parties it is becoming more and more frustrating to have threads completely derailed by posters making pseudo-skeptical comments, people who post without even reading the thread or comprehending it, treating subjects as humorous, etc. As I see more and more people responding, "I can go anywhere and get this kind of discussion about (UFOs, conspiracies, etc), I expect a bit more on a site dedicated to these types of subjects".

I'm not just here to bitch about it though, I'd like to propose a possible solution.

What if, as an experiment, ATS offered the option for a poster to flag a thread for "moderated discussion". This would mean that certain moderators / volunteers would review each post and flag / guide them for things such as:

- poster did not read / understand the thread
- poster is responding w/ unfounded / un-sourced information presented as fact
And so on, basically applying the rules of debate to hopefully truly deny ignorance and educate ATS users about the proper way to debate / discuss issues.

Maybe it could be something as simple as an up or down thumb by the mods and another for the thread members? Posts w/ scores below a certain limit would be hidden w/ the option to show them if the user wants.

I know it would take some effort to do this - from the additional site coding to the moderator time and effort. I think it would be a good start towards recapturing the goal of the ATS motto and would keep those subject areas alive here.

I'm also sure this would be something that would need to evolve over time, be adjusted, etc. I can foresee all the same issues arising at some point to be dealt with - thread gaming, rule of the masses, etc.(Thinking of the evolution and eventual demise of Digg.com as an example) but starting off w/ the participation and guidance of unbiased, educated moderators able to apply the rules of debate would prevent most of the problems. (Also why I would have a moderator grade and a public grade system on posts).

It would be nice to tie this into a reputation system for users, also w/ the ability for each ATS user to set a limit on user reputation which would determine posts that show up by default in threads vs. being hidden.

I also think this would give ATS a way to implement some of the various moderation methods and rules which have evolved over time. Things like removing politics from non political subjects, flaming, trolling, etc.

reply to post by ecoparity


that is a truly original thread title,

i had the opportunity of coming into ats when it was a thread bashing, arguing, star and flag whoring dysfunctional family,

i got trolled with in my first 25 posts(yellow cartoon chicken), you know who you are.

but i do get some interesting info and get to practice the art of wordsmithing, so i come back every day. either we complain about the past or we move forward with what we have.

The problem is the rehasing of several already posted theories and or conspiracies that have a.) no supporting evidence, b.) are just flat out stupid, or c.) already been posted, no new information, over and over and OVER again. I've seen more Sandy Hook/Gun Control threads with the same exact ideas, theories, debunked information and so on than I have anything that peeks my interest. I've also seen several threads not related to conspiracy at all. "Look at these "mindblowing" photos!"....click....bunch of nonsense I could have found on google if I wanted to see what my cat would look like with photoshop edits added....it's just tiresome anymore.

i got trolled with in my first 25 posts(yellow cartoon chicken), you know who you are.

lol...

On topic.. we have to bear in mind, this site represents society on a whole.. not everyone will conform with your views and opinions. We have members from all over the world with different cultural views, we have members who are rich and poor, those will affect someones view of the world. All we can do is look at those opinions and whether we agree or not either reply to that or move on to the next one.. ATS is a mainstream site now and will be forever more..

Originally posted by mademyself1984
The problem is the rehasing of several already posted theories and or conspiracies that have a.) no supporting evidence, b.) are just flat out stupid, or c.) already been posted, no new information, over and over and OVER again. I've seen more Sandy Hook/Gun Control threads with the same exact ideas, theories, debunked information and so on than I have anything that peeks my interest. I've also seen several threads not related to conspiracy at all. "Look at these "mindblowing" photos!"....click....bunch of nonsense I could have found on google if I wanted to see what my cat would look like with photoshop edits added....it's just tiresome anymore.

I actually agree w/ you, I've personally had all I can take w/ gun debates on ATS, especially when it involves people from other countries who just want to argue w/ Americans apparently.

ATS already has an effective system for dealing w/ that though via the flag and star system. When enough of us get bored w/ the subject the threads will stop coming up in the summaries as much. Of course that requires a lot of users to feel the same way and start ignoring the threads. Regardless, I don't expect ATS to step in, the constant threads and ongoing discussions are what the site owners want and my frustration and yours don't matter much.

reply to post by mademyself1984


I'd love to see a similar "quality of post" grading system applied to the OP in new threads. Aside from the star and flag whoring going on there is a growing number of threads with nothing more than a link to some blog and absolutely zero information included, just the bare minimum OP brief opinion about his or her external link to get around the new thread requirements.

I would show two "up" and "down" icon sets on each post - one for the mods and one for the public. Link the star system so giving a thread a star automatically gives it an up vote. No up or down votes = neutral standing and even 1 mod vote over rides the public vote.

Further, the mods would be able to flag a post w/ either positive or negative feedback w/ debate rules.

That way, a good default show / hide post setting would be to hide 0 vote posts or less automatically which would clean up the threads considerably. Ideally people would not feel so required to respond to flaming / trolling posts if they are hidden anyway.

Yes, ATS is mainstream but w/ this kind of application in place I think we could maintain the goal of denying ignorance and encouraging intelligent discussion of non mainstream subjects.

As long as a new thread offers something worth discussing I really don't care if it's a previously posted subject or not. The mods can always redirect the thread though a merge thread function would be better, IMO. There's nothing wrong with reviving pre-existing discussions as long as the users find it worth doing.