It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Feature idea: 'Read the thread' flag (for unambiguous cases)

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 24 2011 @ 04:19 PM
It occurred to me that it might slow down confusion and reduce thread clutter if there were some way people could vote for a post to be marked as showing clear signs of not reading the thread.

I'm not talking about:

--cases where an answer is a question of interpretation
--where some small post has been overlooked,
--or where an alternative to the official explanation is being discussed

But I am talking about:

---ones where many posters seem to be unaware an official explanation even exists, despite it being posted many times. For example, someone might post "What on earth could this picture be, it's totally impossible to explain" in a thread where several people have posted cites where the person who took the picture said it was a giraffe, and included other pictures of giraffes for comparison.

--ones where the thread title and the OP are related in a non-obvious way, but the poster has answered the title. For example, a thread might be called "Why are giraffes so weird?" and someone might answer with information on the evolution of giraffe necks, without realizing that the content of the OP was actually about the poster having visions of giraffes singing opera over her bed on a nightly basis.

Right now, what happens is that someone else who didn't read the thread sees the "impossible to explain" post, replies to it, and begins a whole new chain of conversation predicated on the idea that nobody has any idea what the picture is. Or they also skip the OP, read the evolutionary explanation post, and they think the thread is about that debate, and we're off to the races.

If there was some way for a certain threshold of votes -- not just one or two, but some number that represents a significant consensus -- to cause a flag to appear on a post indicating that it appears to be missing very significant amounts of content like that, it might really cut the confusion that arises in those cases, without creating more work for the mods.

posted on Apr, 24 2011 @ 06:57 PM
reply to post by sepermeru

I don't know if we're supposed to comment on these threads or not, but I have to say you have written the most hysterical analogies as examples that I believe I have ever read.

I applaud your creativity in remaining 'vague'.

posted on Apr, 24 2011 @ 08:23 PM
Along the same lines, there are quite a few threads out there of interest that are 50+ pages and a few well into the 600s. There are those that do a wonderful job in some of the larger threads that post all of the previous links within the thread. In some cases its amazing. So heres a thought to go along with what the OP has posted. I believe it would be of great help if each thread have three dedicated link pages that auto collect links, videos, and Pictures that are posted within that thread. when someone wants to post one of these they can go to the page specifically for what they want to post and verify it hasn't been posted already. This will help people navigate the thread much easier and at their leisure as some people only follow a thread without posting, and for quick reference purposes.

Just a thought.

new topics

log in