Is the flag system wonky!?

I've been noticing an odd trend or maybe even a glitch. Anyone who watches ATS over a period of time can easily spot the ebb and flow of certain threads. The good ones, with interaction and back and fourth data, will jump up to the top of the new topics fairly regularly and slowly, over days decline. The flags a thread like this might acquire rarely tops 50+.

Breaking news events generate a ton of traffic for it's duration, sometimes topping 100+ flags quickly and easily. New information comes out and people are actively participating.

Political threads mostly don't top over 50 due to the nature of partisan politics. The more evidence brought fourth in the Original Post tend to generate the most views, conversations and flags.

Now lately, I've noticed a severe lack in OP quality compounded with little to no evidence and these threads skyrocket with flag numbers. Given the nature from my perspective in little under a year here on ATS, I would gather something is amiss.

Thoughts?

a reply to: JinMI

My guess is , if its a pro Clinton / anti Trump post the Clinton supporters automatically flag .The same would be true of the opposite .

a reply to: JinMI

My theory

It only happens in political forums

A poster will start a thread that doesn't contain much substance then a poster from the opposing political ideology will typically post some a fancy one liner gaining many stars in an attempt to quickly de-rail the thread

Then people will start to back track and flag the thread just because said poster is "on their side", even if they don't agree with said content.

Let us just say that we have had a huge jump in membership leading up to this election.

Instead of being annoyed, it may be that we should look on it as a huge compliment.

Yes folks, ATS is so damn important to THEM that they send their screaming banshees in hordes to convince us that Hilliary is all fluffy ducks and Donald is just a big noisy teddy bear.

Same thing happened last election and many accounts were dusted off and taken out of hibernation for this one.

It is entertaining if one can sit back and watch the ride. Fascinating really

How to dupe an entire culture.

P

a reply to: pheonix358

Let us just say that we have had a huge jump in membership leading up to this election.

That would explain quite a lot. I was not aware.

a reply to: JinMI

ATS has had alot of traffic over the last 4 weeks.

a reply to: JinMI

As is mentioned, the political superbowl tends to ramp things up on both sides. There probably has been an increase in membership numbers going on beginning last year some time and increasing as we get closer to the actual election.

I'm sure site admins look at that kind of thing.

The current front page is this:



Not too long ago, every thread 'above the fold' was a mud pit thread and they wer all anti Trump.

Of them, three are definitely anti Trump one pro Hillary and another could be considered neutral.

The three anti-trump threads have OPs which are somewhat plain and limited in substance.

The O'keefe thread and the one about the CTR 'playbook' have extensive excerpts and commentary by the OPs and seem to have had much more thought and effort put in to them.

I have several threads which OPs I have placed a good amount of effort at presentation as well as inclusion of information and though they have received a good number of flags to each, have had very little participation outside a few individuals and myself.

Not including the Wikileaks announcement threads I have made, here are a few for which I had hoped would have more traffic:

"Follow the Foundation," the legacy of FBIanon

MetroCare Home Services and T&M Protection Service, what do they have in common?

Cheryl Mills, BlackIvy, & BlackStone

One of those is close to 60 flags, the other two are close to 50 flags each, so I know a lot of people have seen and read at least the OPs, but participation has been somewhat limited.

Granted the daily drip, drip, drip, tends to enforce it's own rhythm in which and what types of threads make it to the front page, thus increasing the number of flags/views of an OP of a particular thread.

Sometimes I see people lamenting "the old ATS," where posters collaborated and threads covered a wide range of topics.

The badselfeater thread is a recent example of a thread that brought out a lot of lurkers and long time members who don't post that often and then it turned out to be a troll of 'conspiracy theorists' under the guise of an abortion rights campaign; see what I did there?

Point is, there are a variety of posters here, some put more thought and effort into their posts (Slayer is a great example of phenomenal OPs) than others, who tend to treat this as an extension of whatever social media they are more comfortable with.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: JinMI

As is mentioned, the political superbowl tends to ramp things up on both sides. There probably has been an increase in membership numbers going on beginning last year some time and increasing as we get closer to the actual election.

I'm sure site admins look at that kind of thing.

The current front page is this:

Not too long ago, every thread 'above the fold' was a mud pit thread and they wer all anti Trump.

Of them, three are definitely anti Trump one pro Hillary and another could be considered neutral.

The three anti-trump threads have OPs which are somewhat plain and limited in substance.

The O'keefe thread and the one about the CTR 'playbook' have extensive excerpts and commentary by the OPs and seem to have had much more thought and effort put in to them.

Thanks for your unbiased thoughts.

Of course you thought only the anti-Clinton threads had thought and effort.
Despite one being just screengrabs of a faked PDF document pretending to be from CTR and the other OP being just a YouTube video and its caption. Well thought out!



My advice would be to ignore the Flag system. Maybe ATS will get back to normal after the election and the supporters of the losing party migrate back off the site.

a reply to: JinMI

Hundreds of new accounts the last few months, most of them have never posted. I would wager if these accounts were suspended the flag and star count for political threads would drop off hard.

a reply to: SudoNim

One can still put thought and effort into an OP even if the basis of that OP is less than legitimate.

If you had read the thread in question, you would have seen my post in it indicating that I am leaning toward the documents being faked.

If I had made that OP, I would have alerted it to the mods. I have done so with my own threads several times. Sometimes they get nuked, sometimes they are left where they are but I do make the attempt if I learn the premise of an OP of mine is faulty.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

The top flagged threads definitely do not seem to coincide with the trend of discussions.
But, look at it this way:
If the tops stories posted draw anti-Trump people here to read more, maybe they will get an education.
This forum is one of the few places where people can hear the truth and not the MSM view of reality.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Oh, I have no argument with that.

This and a few other places are the only places that are actually discussing the content of the leaks not the method by which the leaks were made public.

True believers (of both sides) are not likely to have their minds changed regardless of what is made public.

It is those who are still yet undecided who are questioning what they are being told who may make a difference in this race.

If enough people are woken up to the fact that we are being fed constant lies and that there is a grand illusion being perpetrated by our government, then eventually we might be able to make some meaningful change in how things are done.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: SudoNim

One can still put thought and effort into an OP even if the basis of that OP is less than legitimate.

If you had read the thread in question, you would have seen my post in it indicating that I am leaning toward the documents being faked.

If I had made that OP, I would have alerted it to the mods. I have done so with my own threads several times. Sometimes they get nuked, sometimes they are left where they are but I do make the attempt if I learn the premise of an OP of mine is faulty.

Tons of thought and effort into reposting a YouTube video... gotcha.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Indeed.
It is sometimes hard to pull the fog away from people's eyes.
The agenda machine works very hard to keep people in the dark.

a reply to: JinMI

yeah i've noticed this too.

I can't as of now, yet post in the political forum. Im not sure if you need points or flags or what not to do this, but very good questions you've brought up.

a reply to: Encryptor

I'm not the only one who has noticed it. If it is indeed not a glitch and that is highly likely, then we have an influx of folks who like here say and allegations without proof !

originally posted by: SudoNim
Maybe ATS will get back to normal after the election and the supporters of the losing party migrate back off the site.

Actually, supporters of the losing party tend to favor sites like ATS, regardless of which party it is. The Obama Years have been effectively a mirror image of the Bush Years, and aside from the partisan specifics, surprisingly similar overall (especially in terms of vitriol).

Whoever wins becomes the new establishment, and ATSers don't tend to be pro-establishment -- although there's nothing wrong with being pro-establishment if people so choose.

One thing every U.S. election season has in common is that it's always the absolute worst in history, until the next absolute worst election in history.



"Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."

-- Charles Mackay