who is in charge of the banners?

i ask this because they have obviously not bothered to read the threads before coming up with the catchy little titles.

" Air Traffic Controller, "9/11 An Inside Job!" "

WTF?!?!?!?

had this individual even bothered to read the thread, he or she would have discovered that i have long since proven (a month and nine pages ago), that the person claiming to be an air traffic expert has not sat on a position in over 25 years. this title is misleading to say the least.

it would be more appropriate for it to read something like

"disgruntled former air traffic controller fired 25 years ago claims 9/11 an inside job."

i have no problem with 9/11 conspiracy theories, but i have a BIG problem with adds for threads that misrepresent the truth.

sorry if i stepped on anyone's toes with this, but as others here will tell you, i call it like i see it.

A Banner Day

SkepticOverlord (aka "SO") used to do all the banners, but I think ZeddicusZulZorander (aka "Zedd") may be helping or doing them now.

My understanding of banners is that:

1. They need to be kept reasonably short

2. They may reflect the claims made in a thread but not necessarily the conclusions

3. They can but may not necessarily reflect changes or breaking news in a thread

If you look at some of the other headlines and banners, you may see what I mean.

As an example, consider that ATS has had banners that have said, in effect:

- A 757 Did Strike The Pentagon

- A 757 Did Not Strike The Pentagon

I think it is presumptuous to assume that someone didn't read a thread simply because a banner doesn't agree with your own conclusions, then launch into an insulting public tirade about it.

That's me calling it like I see it.

For the record, if I feature a thread on the PTS home page, it's not because I agree or disagree with the thesis of the thread.

I'm simply calling attention to the discussion, and ask that members try to bear that in mind.

okay, that makes a fair amount of sense. i still disagree with misleading banners, but i think i understand the reason behind them. thanks for the response majic.

Editorial Discretion

I know these sorts of things can make it seem otherwise, but it's always good to remember that ATS takes no official position on any subject other than the Terms And Conditions, which are noteworthy for their own neutrality on most issues (except porn, spam, ads, trollery, etc.),

The fact that members express so many different opinions in so many threads bears that out.

That said, we are human and if you think our personal opinions (which differ widely from one staff member to another) are interfering with the discussion of any topic, we are always open to complaints.

Although we do reserve the right to rebuttal in public threads.

In some ways it is probably a good thing Snafu. If the alternate banner title you suggested was used, a proportion of members here would have missed your good work in exposing the guy, as well as the educational discussion that has followed since on ATC procedures. Imagine if the title was "ATS member talks air traffic control procedures and capabilities." Whoa boy!

And again, great work in that particular thread. While some will consistently ignore what you say, there are those who appreciate the time and effort you take to respond and educate.

well thanks for that willard. man, you guys sure know how to address a guys complaint in such a manner as to leave him walking away with a smile on his face.

Service With A Smile

Originally posted by snafu7700
man, you guys sure know how to address a guys complaint in such a manner as to leave him walking away with a smile on his face.

If we could do that every time, I would be in hog heaven.

Originally posted by snafu7700
well thanks for that willard. man, you guys sure know how to address a guys complaint in such a manner as to leave him walking away with a smile on his face.

While I thank you for the compliment, and we DO TRY, you'd be amazed how much said smile requires the complainer to actually want the "fix" and is capable of understanding it.

Springer...