New Rule on ATS UFO Forum, response thread.

I just read the new rule for the UFO forum concerning posting compilation videos of UFO's, CGI and such things. I couldn't respond to what was stated so I made this response thread. Please feel free to make responses. Mine is below.


Some hoaxes are extremely good and it's almost impossible for some who are not well familiar with how CGI works to tell the difference. I think some room should be given for some who make that mistake. As for cramming videos full of UFO's, I agree it doesn't help much to the research cause and people should try not to do that. But as I said above, some cannot tell the difference between CGI and reality, and it takes a trained eye sometimes to tell when something has been altered or faked. So give it some room so that those wishing to participate in the forum are not scared away for fear of the trash bin.

Thanks

a reply to: Fromabove

Fromabove...I am almost immediately scared away from anything posted in UFO or alien forums regarding UFOs because of how much garbage is put in there!

If ATS wants stricter rules to throw stuff in the trash bin, I am perfectly fine with that honestly! I would rather have 5 quality videos rather than 5 million with 5 mixed in there! It is getting out of hand with the CGI and obvious fake videos posted and it gets annoying sifting through them...

a reply to: Fromabove

Someone posted a crapfull compilation video just this morning. It was obvious garbage. I absolutely support the decision to crack down on garbage compilation videos. I am fairly certain that most of the time the people that post them here are affiliated with the YouTube channel the yvid comes from.

The one from earlier was such blatant trash. It is just infuriating.

Yeah!....and no Chinese lanterns!

a reply to: Fromabove

I hear you, mate. I actually just came out of a thread on which this video has been posted:



I posted a reply exposing the major discrepancy in the vid, and said that I smelled CGI. But I got flamed by all those who "want to believe" (in aliens).

Well, I too would love "to believe" but unlike some, I don't let my personal desires get into the way of my investigation. CGI is as major problem and too much hoaxers takes advantage of the people's gullibility.

Problem we have with this new rule is newbies, of which we all were once.

Most of us at one point looked at a CGI/compilation of hoaxes thought it was real and had to pick pieces of our brain up from the living room carpet. We then eagerly post it on here and the obvious becomes obvious. I just hope newbies aren't scared away from the UFO forum due to them posting what they think is a legit video (as they are inexperienced) and being greeted with a 'thread closed' sticker.

What I think we need are manners and a soft approach. We need to learn how to explain to newbies that what they are posting is not credible, then educate them. In a nice way. Not the typical way we do at the moment.

I can see why we have the 'new rule' but I think it will be used as an excuse to fire bullets at newbies and thus turn them away from an already hard to please arena.

a reply to: and14263

You make a very good point indeed.

Great rule. It keeps the redundancy down with new excited thread-starters with “Look at what I found on….These UFOS are….”
Stuff we’ve seen, disproved, discussed and dismissed already…way before they even thought about a thread-compilation.
And too…it’ll keep from having to tell them over and over…”Uh…that one is fake, and those others were from a…and proved to be only a…”.
Additionally, it will keep the replies like..:”Oh gee. I didn’t know it was discussed already…I looked for it and thought it was cool so I put these into a compil--”down to a minimum.

I also agree! I started browsing this site back in like 2008 and the UFO forum is what brought me here. I lurked for a good while then joined. Since joining most of the UFO forums are garbage at best. As you can see in my posting history, I rarely even participate or even look at the UFO forum anymore. I don't have any great ideas on how to fix this problem, so I'm hoping some of the great minds here at ATS can figure it out.

a reply to: amicktd
I appreciate what you're saying here, garbage is bad news fr a forum.

But unless you're educated in UFOlogy then you don't know what the garbage is.

Can't we be a forum that has the ability to praise the good and educate the garbage?

I just worry the UFO forum is becoming elitest.

I propose that the entire 'Aliens and UFOs' be dismantled,
place 'UFOS' in 'Gray Area' (because of unidentified flying objects)
and 'Aliens' in 'Skunk Works'.
These two things being automatically associated together makes
it hard to take ufology seriously.

originally posted by: LionOfGOD
I propose that the entire 'Aliens and UFOs' be dismantled,
place 'UFOS' in 'Gray Area' (because of unidentified flying objects)
and 'Aliens' in 'Skunk Works'.
These two things being automatically associated together makes
it hard to take ufology seriously.

You've got a very fair point there. A very valid statement.

Aliens should almost certainly be in with Gray Area or Skunk Works. I think the nature of the site and its origins give weight to a UFO forum.. but yeah I'm liking what you say here.

Site owners won't though... I bet clicks would go down if these things were hidden in Gray/Skunk.

I think this new rule is redundant. There exists already a process for placing hoax videos in the hoax bin. Do not other forums contain hoax videos, such as the bigfoot forum, ghost forum, ebola (pandemic) forum, political forum........I have seen hoax and trash videos in every forum! Are we going to ban compilation videos from other forums?

Most compilation videos I have seen are a mix of good and bad, and a few don't have ANY hoax videos! Why should those be punished for the others? It's like banning ATS because of the "Before It's News'" of the internet.

I would rather watch 100 hoax videos to catch the one, credible video, than be "protected" from watching any hoax videos and miss the one significant credible video.

What about discernment? Aren't ATS members/lurkers supposed to use discernment on most topics? Is ATS saying the members here lack discernment? If that is the case we might as well shut the site down.

I think the mods should rethink this decision.

Discussed here, and Springer's reply link:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thread Closed.