**ALL MEMBERS** A REMINDER OF WHY WE ARE HERE AND HOW TO ACT.

Jbondo:

Let me put it this way, would you "crack a joke" during a serious conversation at someone you just met in real life? Obviously once you have established a "relationship" with someone "good natured ribbing" can be a wonderful ice breaker, mood lifter. I LOVE humor, it's one of the things this genre needs badly, but when a brand new member is trying to share their experience it's inappropriate.

Regarding "claiming hoax before page ten", do you not understand that is the exact same thing as calling someone a liar? Do you think it's polite to call someone a liar just because you believe you or someone else has the ability to "spot a hoax" before all the details are presented?

How ridiculous would that be if the next detail provided was irrefutable proof?

The bottom line is many of us can "spot a hoax" very easily, depending on the hoax, it simply doesn't matter.

This isn't the Jbondo Forum or the Springer Forum, there are thousands of OTHER MEMBERS and silent readers here who are interested and they don't want you, me or anyone else calling someone a liar before they get the chance to present their case in full and answer the questions asked by others.

This is how it's going to be and it's how it should be, the world is not going to fall into disarray because we let a hoaxer present his whole case before we called it. If you can't stand watching it, there is always something else to look at.

Springer...

[edit on 8-23-2007 by Springer]

Originally posted by Springer
If you can't stand watching it, there is always something else to look at.

I believe Springer is referring to the old What Would Skippy Do?

reply to post by Springer

As your last post seemed to address some of what I was saying, I'll reply.

Many members are fed up. Their patience wears thin. They may post things that are more harsh than you'd like them to be. Now, you're telling them to cool it, but you aren't addressing what is bothering them.

Again I ask that you, and the rest of the staff, address the core problem, which is why these members may be acting out. You cannot, in good faith, ask demand a course of action from them without addressing the root cause. You want a certain result, so create an environment where it can happen. Don't just give it a "band-aid" fix and lay it all on the members.

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
reply to post by Springer

 

As your last post seemed to address some of what I was saying, I'll reply.

Many members are fed up. Their patience wears thin. They may post things that are more harsh than you'd like them to be. Now, you're telling them to cool it, but you aren't addressing what is bothering them.

This may sound harsh, it's not meant to be but I can't think of any other way to put it. No one is forcing you to read these threads. The choice again is the INDIVIDUAL. If they bother you, read something else.

You want a certain result, so create an environment where it can happen. Don't just give it a "band-aid" fix and lay it all on the members.

This environment was created to accomodate everyone, within the T&C of course. And it's working but occasionally needs a tweak. This is one such time. "Lay it on the members?" Are you saying that what someone posts here is someone elses responsibility? Personally I feel that I'M responsible for the words I post here, no one else. Why should anyone be any different?

reply to post by intrepid

With all due respect, a "tweak" isn't going to do it. Plus, members should have the right to say, "You expect a certain things, well we expect the same from the staff", and have it listened too.

Intrepid, i like you. You don't BS and you don't play the diplomat. However, the "If you don't like it leave" attitude is unwarranted ("if you don't like it, read something else"). I don't have a right to address something? I am not attacking any staff here, I'm cutting to the root of a problem, addressing the core issue, and proposing a realistic solution. Is there a problem there?

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
However, the "If you don't like it leave" attitude is unwarranted ("if you don't like it, read something else"). I don't have a right to address something? I am not attacking any staff here, I'm cutting to the root of a problem, addressing the core issue, and proposing a realistic solution. Is there a problem there?

Whoa dude. I didn't say "If you don't like it leave." I said "read something else", there are plenty of other threads in A&UFO's and other forums as well. Trust me there are some forums I would LOVE to avoid but can't.

Very well, I appreciate the clarification.

Regardless however, I'd still like to see Springer address the core issue here. Which, as I have stated several times, requires a more proactive approach from the staff, and not just a "shush" to some fed up members.

ATS members deserve to be able to post without having to be subjected to an onslaught of insults. Conversely, the fed-up members that I've mentioned also deserve have their voices heard, and their gripes addressed.






[edit on 23-8-2007 by Reality Hurts]

Reality Hurts, under most other circumstances, I would probably agree with you somewhat. I have had some problems with the staff before (don't want to get into it), but it is up to the users to act maturely. For you to "demand" that the staff start policing more is just wrong.

America is a land created by the people and are (should be) governed by the people. ATS is different. You can't just "demand" moderators and administrators to do whatever you want. You can suggest it to them, but to treat them like you own them is wrong. We own our government through taxes (putting all conspiracies aside right now to make a point). We do not own ATS through anything. They don't HAVE to meet anything we say. They don't HAVE to act fair-and-balanced. They don't HAVE to provide a safe, free, respectful environment, yet they do all this anyway. I've been to sites that never listen to their users and do whatever they want, even when it hurts the site. I have been to sites where moderators will ban you for no reason at all. Make a post? Bam. You're banned. I have been to sites so full of garbage that a sane person would need to see a psychiatrist after being there for five minutes. We should be grateful for the volunteers that are this staff, whether we like them or not (I like most of them). ATS is probably the MOST mature message board site I have ever seen in respect to its population, and to let one incident turn this into a police message board would be foolish.

Reality Hurts, are you fed up with some of the members on the site? Well now, I hope you never go outside of this message board onto other popular ones, because there are not too many more out there as populated as this and still high in decorum. I hope the staff resolves the current problems of the site quickly and efficiently, although I am pretty sure it won't be too troublesome.

[edit on 8/23/2007 by SonicInfinity]

Originally posted by Springer
Let me put it this way, would you "crack a joke" during a serious conversation at someone you just met in real life? Obviously once you have established a "relationship" with someone "good natured ribbing" can be a wonderful ice breaker, mood lifter.

That's what I'm saying Springer. I'm not condoning posting jokes on page 1 and to tell you the truth most of my jokes have come after the 10 page point. I most certainly know where a joke is appropriate or not.

Regarding "claiming hoax before page ten", do you not understand that is the exact same thing as calling someone a liar? Do you think it's polite to call someone a liar just because you believe you or someone else has the ability to "spot a hoax" before all the details are presented?

I was using the word "hoax" as a metaphoric phrase and you know as well as I that the page 10 was also meant to be metaphoric. Furthermore many people use the word "hoax" to soften the blow. Psychologically speaking I would say that "liar" has 10 times the impact.

How ridiculous would that be if the next detail provided was irrefutable proof?

I guess there's a first time for everything. I can't argue that.

This isn't the Jbondo Forum or the Springer Forum, there are thousands of OTHER MEMBERS and silent readers here who are interested and they don't want you, me or anyone else calling someone a liar before they get the chance to present their case in full and answer the questions asked by others.

Again you use the word "liar". Listen, I never claimed any ownership to anything nor do I conduct myself in a manner that has been disrespectful over my membership here. Sure I've had my moments and yes I've used the word "hoax" before I'm "supposed" to but overall I think I've done pretty well. You are pushing my opinion way to one side here as I never supported nasty insulting. However, I do think I speak for quite a few people in what I say and somebody has to speak for them. I guess I'm just dumb enough to do it. Just don't lump me in with the type of poster you know I'm not.

This is how it's going to be and it's how it should be, the world is not going to fall into disarray because we let a hoaxer present his whole case before we called it. If you can't stand watching it, there is always something else to look at.

It's not going to fall into disarray because someone says hoax on page 3 either but that's fine, it's your site and you can do whatever you wish. If and when I post again I will do my utmost to abide by each and every rule.

"If I can't stand watching it"? I don't know, is that some kind of inside joke that I missed somewhere? I'll just assume that's the case and save my storming off in a huff for another time.

reply to post by SonicInfinity


This is a site that prides itself on being open, honest, and tolerant of ideas, so yes, I have come to expect ATS members to be treated fairly and address issues, not quash them. Personally, I don't think that is unreasonable.

And trust me, not only have i participated in some of "the larger boards", I have been responsible for maintaining decorum in one. ATS has always been a welcome change from that insanity, and I'd hate to see it compromised. Hence, my gripe in this thread.




I see Jbondo is back. I just hope that Springer doesn't pass over everything else and just respond to him...



[edit on 23-8-2007 by Reality Hurts]

Originally posted by Springer
Regarding "claiming hoax before page ten", do you not understand that is the exact same thing as calling someone a liar? Do you think it's polite to call someone a liar just because you believe you or someone else has the ability to "spot a hoax" before all the details are presented?

I would agree that calling HOAX is exactly the same as shouting LIAR. I think there's something worth clarifying here:

Calls of HOAX are rarely, if ever, heard simply because someone makes an outrageous claim. Calls of HOAX are heard when someone makes an outrageous claim then consistently fails to back that claim with any viable evidence.

ATS provides people anonymity, which inevitably will lead to people taking advantage of their "formlessness" to create a character. The thing is, if ATS is going to retain any credibility as something more than a fiction-writing oddity, then the rules of discussion must discourage the practice of "playing dress up."

If someone stepped on the basketball court with me and claimed they've never missed a jumpshot, I'd hand them the ball and say "let's see." If that person refused to shoot, they would get laughed out of the neighborhood.

Pick your setting, pick your outrageous claim...the consequence is always the same. For ATS to say that it will be more tolerant of unsupported claims than any other "news source" simply fertilizes the imaginations of anonymous storytellers and damages the credibility of truly legitimate stories springing from our pages.

I think the moderators here are great. I think the site is excellent. But I think the decision to err on the side of "Trust" when it comes to outrageous, anonymous stories will lead to huge site numbers...and poor overall content.

Originally posted by jbondo
"If I can't stand watching it"? I don't know, is that some kind of inside joke that I missed somewhere? I'll just assume that's the case and save my storming off in a huff for another time.

Not at all, I meant that literally, if you can't stand watching people present what you believe to be a hoax then don't, move onto anonther thread without dropping the bomb before the details have all been revealed.

I am swaying your argument to illustrate a point, no matter how you slice it, hoax = lie. I know you are a good poster and fine member..

Springer...

[edit on 8-23-2007 by Springer]

reply to post by Reality Hurts


Ah, so you have been to some others. If you have ever been to /b/, my condolences to your soul.

As far as more policing goes, the staff probably is not sure how much is necessary. Some users want this place to look like New York, and others want it to be like in the mountains. I seriously doubt the staff is going to let this place deteriorate, so you do not have to worry. I know that the staff will not tolerate the jokes for much longer.

What's sad is that if a certain conspiracy theory is right, the jokes may not be stopping soon. If the government knows about this site (which they do), then they might try to put in misinformationists and hoaxers that are outside of the dimension of ATS morality. They may create their accounts now, the day they make the topic, or even months ago. If these people truly exist on this site right now, no amount of policing will get rid of them. In fact, I would not be surprised if they come in groups and get the topic high replies through intelligent methods of making other users mad (not accusing anybody). If this turns out to be the case, there may be nothing that the staff can do.

Then again, that's nothing more than a wild conspiracy theory.

Originally posted by Springer
I am swaying your argument to illustrate a point, no matter how you slice it, hoax = lie.

Not necessarily. Hoax is only equal to lie when the hoaxer knows that he is hoaxing. If the topic creator is presenting a hoax, yet has no idea that it is a hoax and was just ill-informed, then he did not lie. Although all the recent cases on ATS have been hoax = lie, so I understand where you are coming from.

Also, to make more clearly to you, Reality Hurts, I do not disagree with you. I think that this site does need to be cleaned up a bit more, but you are not offering any practical solutions. Policing the site more isn't going to help, and neither is getting more moderators. If anything, that will make the community more mad.

[edit on 8/23/2007 by SonicInfinity]

Reality Hurts:

I've been doing this for a long, long time and your idea is absolutely NOT the way to handle this.

Sorry mate, but more cops on the beat isn't going change this, people demanding their fellow members act right and reporting those who don't, followed by enforcement of the TAC will change this.

Do you honestly think we could EVER get enough mods to cover 3,000+ posts a day?! Not a chance.

Your perception of "staff created this mess by not having enough staff" is just mind boggling.

There is exactly ONE person responsible for what someone writes on these boards, the person who wrote it.

Springer...

IgnoretheFacts

Really this is not a reply to you but to everyone here as I am still fairly new but well, after 30 years of UFOs starting back in the '70's reading some of what was going on back then and now again nowadays, since I am older now, and hopefully have learnt something else to help along the way, I still see the same replies. Some of these have even come from experts in the field and how they feel about what has been related as to an UFO event or Abduction or other various factors including about everything else especially in the early days of which you may read about.

You stated:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The reason why aliens and ufos are not taken seriously is some of the outlandish claims that have no supporting evidence, and the huge amount of gullible people willing to swallow anything because they want to believe. It harms us all.

remember, take what I say with a grain of salt, it may come across harsh in the cold environment of the internet.

Originally posted by Springer
Do you honestly think we could EVER get enough mods to cover 3,000+ posts a day?!

Yes. It is done elsewhere, plus its more about the "threads" than the "posts". That narrows it down.


reply to post by Springer

Whats "mindboggling" is you seem to dismiss my posts as merely "blame game" and a condemnation of staff. If you had read them carefully, you'd notice that I specifically stated the staff situation wasn't part of the problem, but could be part of the solution. I wasn't attacking staff, or even how the staff is managed or allocated, just suggesting a possible solution to a problem that is larger than it seems on the surface.

But okay, lets leave that to rest, deal? We'll call that one Problem Number #1, and lets move on and instead of going back and forth, lets look for the solution to Problem #2:

Problem #2-
There seems to be a growing number of ATS members who are dreadfully tired of the obviously (I cant emphasize that word enough) fraudulent posts made on your site. Many times, these posts are allowed to go on and on for pages and for days. The dissatisfied members are growing intolerant and and feel that the owners of ATS need to take a stand to ensure the dignity and integrity of the site. Therefore, how do you intend on addressing the issue that they have a problem with, i.e. obviously (I cant emphasize that word enough) fraudulent posts made on your site?



Edit to sound less snide and for clarity.

[edit on 23-8-2007 by Reality Hurts]

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
There seems to be a growing number of ATS members who are dreadfully tired of the obviously (I cant emphasize that word enough) fraudulent posts made on your site. Many times, these posts are allowed to go on and on for pages and for days. The dissatisfied members are growing intolerant and and feel that the owners of ATS need to take a stand to ensure the dignity and integrity of the site. Therefore, how do you intend on addressing the issue that they have a problem with, i.e. obviously (I cant emphasize that word enough) fraudulent posts made on your site?

First off, yes, you can emphasize it more. You could have capitalized it and put more angry smilies by it.

But anyway, you say obviously fraudulent posts that go on for pages and pages. Care to link me to a topic like this? I have yet to see a topic that was so incredibly obviously a hoax go on for hundreds of posts. And don't try to use that "UFO's over house, son scared to play in the backyard" topic either, because IIRC, that's yet to be proven either way.

RealityHurts,
I disagree. Policing by the staff isn't the answer in my mind. It's got to be self-policing. If a thread just doesn't add up, for goodness sake, DON'T ADD TO IT. 10 pages of crap posting following a junk O.P. is the result of people participating in a crap topic. If everyone who thought "This is crappulence" would show their dis-interest in it by NOT participating in it, it would thin out the threads and remove the cellulite that you complain of. Half the garbage in these garbage threads is the complaining that it is, indeed, garbage. Just don't post. Is your ATS point total so important that you would post just to say "This is crap?" I won't. I have under 200 posts in two years because I don't feel I have to tell everyone they're full of it. AND by doing that, I save myself the argument on why I think it's crap.


My point is this. Protesting a thread topic is just as effective with non-involvement than it is by derogatory involvement.
I think if you have a valid counter-point to the OPs post, it's a good thing to post and educate. But that's not the problem we're speaking of.
I think Springer's right by saying it's up to you and how you post that should be most important to you.

Peace out my friend, just my interpretation.
Cuhail

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
Problem #2-
There seems to be a growing number of ATS members who are dreadfully tired of the obviously (I cant emphasize that word enough) fraudulent posts made on your site. Many times, these posts are allowed to go on and on for pages and for days. The dissatisfied members are growing intolerant and and feel that the owners of ATS need to take a stand to ensure the dignity and integrity of the site.

This is a site to discuss conspiracy theory and alternate topics. Are you saying that the staff here needs to also play judge, jury and executioner on threads we believe are frauds on a personal level?

If someone believes they were abducted or saw pink flying elephants, they should be able to discuss that freely. That is what ATS is about. If such posts are PROVEN false, then we take action...not before. This isn't Minority Report.

Why is it the responsibility of the owners? ATS is about the members. Each and every person can do their homework and prove/disprove a topic.

I really don't see this problem as an actual problem. If there is something I don't like on television, radio, or in a bookstore...then I pick something else. There are thousands of threads and forums galore here to spend time in. I wouldn't sit an watch a television show that pissed me off constantly. That's just masochistic.