It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Replying to a thread with an 'anti-thread', cool or uncool?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Do you know what I mean?

For example, I start a thread titled:

'I think Oranges are Orange'

The next thing you know there's a new thread :

'I think Oranges are Red'


OR

'We could live happily without guns'

Followded by:

'We couldn't live without guns'

I think, if someone has an argument against the original thread, the first place to do it is in the actual thread. The person who made the first thread has the right to debate his point IN his/her original thread, that's where the issue belongs, not in a thread arguing the opposite viewpoint.

It's a little childish, rude and just not good debating tactics to make an 'anti- thread'.

Does anyone else have any opinions on this at all?




posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Personally i think it's childish if it's just a re-active thread.

But if that re-active thread can provide great evidence or strong opinion that is based upon knowledge and thought, then go for it...



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   
A thread on any subject should present both sides of the argument so that the discussion stays within one place.

To me there is no point in having two bias threads on one subject that specifically push on idea or it's opposite.

We should keep things simple, one topic, on thread, and all the details included.

~Keeper



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


I agree with you...BUT we all know that people out there place too much value in getting starred and flagged...so, I understand why they do it...can't get your message flagged if you post in someone else thread.

Just my 2-cents



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Well, you can think of it this way.....

Isn't it better to make another thread, if someone wants to go in a different direction than you, rather than deraill your thread???

that said, yes, creating a directly opsoing thread just to be unpleasent, isn't exactly the nicest thing in the world.

That said, everyone is intitled to their opinion, so long as the use T.A.C. in doing so.

Final word, if you can back with fact/links/references, what you say, it's yours to say (politly).

My two cents.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

This is one of my personal pet peeves to be honest and I was just mentioning this earlier in another thread.

To me, it's an ego issue. Someone thinks their opinion is too important to be 'just a post' in an existing thread so they have to start a new thread so their opinion is now the focal point. Not saying that's true in all cases but from what I've seen, that is the usual impression I receive from spin-off threads.

It clutters up the boards, IMO, because the topics could easily be consolidated in one thread. Not to mention, all that really happens is the same arguments are repeated in the spin off thread that were given in the original thread.

On that note, they are often closed when staff sees them and are highly discouraged.

It's also a cheap imitation, IMHO. As if they couldn't come up with the concept for a thread until they saw it in another thread. Or they see the popularity of the original thread and think it will be easy flagging for their spin off thread.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
They're closed because it's against T&C.


Terms & Conditions


1h.) Spamming: You will not post identical content, or snippets of identical content, to multiple threads in the discussion forums. You will also not create more than one thread for your topic, or create multiple "slightly different" threads for a single topic.


-Dev

Edit: I realized this may not apply directly to your question, however, I've seen it mentioned by the Amigos before: These slightly different, response/mock threads will be closed.

[edit on 3-8-2009 by DevolutionEvolvd]



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Some people are just doing threads like that to troll. I've
seen it in many threads . The first will have valid points and the next will just be hearsay to contradict the other thread.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Uncool and against TAC.


It should be put into the original thread IMHO. Not made into a new spin off. UNLESS...........The said thread is real old and a post in it would not be seen anyways. Of course this IMHO.


[edit on 8/3/2009 by jkrog08]

[edit on 8/3/2009 by jkrog08]



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd

1h.) Spamming: You will not post identical content, or snippets of identical content, to multiple threads in the discussion forums. You will also not create more than one thread for your topic, or create multiple "slightly different" threads for a single topic.


Lovely. There are a bunch going on right now ... anti-threads.

Hit the delete button! Clean up the boards!



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


apparently you and i share the exact same opinion on the matter,

if it were available in this thread i would have given your reply a star.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 04:36 PM
link   
We don't do that here... Please report these vis the "ALERT BUTTON" found at the bottom of every post.

Just make sure you check the posting date/time stamp for both so that you "alert" the correct (later) one.


Springer...



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Just make sure you check the posting date/time stamp for both so that you "alert" the correct (later) one.




Oh yeah, that could go very wrong!

Thanks mate.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
We don't do that here... Please report these vis the "ALERT BUTTON" found at the bottom of every post.

Just make sure you check the posting date/time stamp for both so that you "alert" the correct (later) one.


Springer...


Apparently you DO do that here.

Sham thread

Thread with SO's response

Care to restate that?



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 11:32 PM
link   
I think the whole idea behind creating a new thread to trash the idea of another is ridiculous. It would be ideal to have all debate take place within the original thread in my opinion.

I have one personal example that I really didn't mind as much as other examples I've seen, however I did prefer the author of the anti-thread had actually attempted a cicvilized confrontation within my own thread. Instead I found the thread by chance while perusing the 2012 section.

My thread: Timewave Zero - Countdown to Transition

Anti-thread: timewave zero / 2012 : the falacy

Like I said I obviously don't oppose other viewpoints on the topic, and given the popularity of the subject it was bound to draw substantial criticism, however no one, not even that OP contacted me about my topic or let me know there was ongoing discussion elsewhere.

Once I did discover it, I took the opportunity to explain things a little better, but I find it odd that the OP never directly entered into discussion with me even after I responded to their thread.

[edit on 4/8/09 by Evasius]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Excuse the lack of journalisim and resources...


But last I was here on A.T.S, there was a thread titled tired of these ""call to action"" threads... it was a response to gun-ho threads where discussion about revolution and uprising seem to be strategic.


In any case? That is, effectivly, an "anti-thread" and belongs in another section on BTS. (IE: Rants) I dont like them, and agree that they should be alerted.


Of course, now, I can make and anti-anti thread!



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 





It's a little childish, rude and just not good debating tactics to make an 'anti- thread'.


I agree with you. Rarely, I find it appropriate to have a thread dedicated to the other side of the coin but usually it is just a snarky way of getting attention.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 07:23 AM
link   
All nice and dandy but what if the OP of a thread refuses to respond to questions which might undermine the thread itself....


That is correct, I do not comment on attacks - I don't go down to that level.
Threads would turn into "tit for tats" and I don't do that. Also information is provided and then people can make up their own minds. Also, you will find, I don't attack others for their opinions either. I try to give what ever information is available to show my side, but I would never attack someone else, as many others do on ATS.
.....

What exactly is an attack when it concerns discussions..???

Now i plea guilty to creating two threads last month in respons to a certain members thread who never seems to care to much for argumentation opposing her/his topic..
example:

Three Gorges Dam in China–Largest in World


This is a companion thread to the Solar Eclipse thread


All About the Solar Eclipse July 22nd

Now all through out this thread from page 1 it was pointed out that the information she provided was inaccurate......no respons because it was clearly an attack???

So the only thing i could think of was to create a simular kind of setting to prove how easy it is to create "such" a thread and suggest something might happen...

Cumbre Vieja on La Palma


This is a companion thread to the crop circle thread


OMG...latest cropcircle deciphered!!!!

So, as you can see, completly different threads with completly different subjects but to most it was clear why these threads were created. I even pointed it out in both those threads.


Originally posted by operation mindcrime
Okay, enough is enough......

Both this thread and this thread OMG...latest cropcircle deciphered!!!! are obviously not about cropcircles or an island in the atlantic which one day MIGHT collapse...

If everybody is so eager to hand out stars and flags do me a favour and visit both these threads:

The Dark Side of "Conspiracy Theory"

Prophecy is neither scientific nor spiritual

Read them well and star + flag the sh*t out of them because Skyfloating is adressing this exact issue with way better scientific facts than i ever could....

Please read them!!!

Peace.

MOD's : You can close this thread is you see it fit


Was this really such a bad thing i did?? I mearly tried to create awareness for the fact that some people are creating sensational threads but don't allow the option to react with critsism because than it's called "attack".

Peace



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by hotrodturbo7
 


Obviously you don't understand the content of what you call the "sham" thread...


Our policy is quite clear in S.O.'s post, the one you linked to no less...


New Discoveries
If your contribution focuses on a new, previously unnoticed discovery related to the birth certificate issues, please post your new thread in the Political Conspiracies Forum.



It's fairly easy to see that the "forged document" thread is most certainly full of NEW DISCOVERIES.


No need for me to restate anything.

S...

[edit on 8-5-2009 by Springer]



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Anti threads are pointless, i agree fully. but I am a big fan of comedy spin off threads/play on words threads. Don't get many round these 'ere parts, but on another foum i use, sundays are full of silly, jibberish filled nonesense threads. And then threads that look like them. And they make me smile , but I'm a bit daft at heart.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join



 
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread488045/pg1
www.abovetopsecret.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-04
68282
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:7RPFSXUHHHKUQPBRACUE3FTI7YVTW7TF
<urn:uuid:1ac68004-4e66-453d-85c8-9eb9a6ff2e5a>
2016-12-10T12:46:44Z
198.15.108.202
sha1:4ZS5JT7RPV7DWWYUI4A437U4J4HUSJNX
<urn:uuid:1cd6bc14-1bee-44fc-b36c-3bc5c51a6ff8>
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread488045/pg1
length
response
<urn:uuid:34297d7f-6974-4bc2-b815-d5304793d335>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-31-129-80.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-50
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for November 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf