ATS has been infiltrated and infested with western establishment-paid shills...?

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: Meee32

I'm talking about the slides themselves..

I don't know about you, but wouldn't leave the red line under "etc" on a final, properly and professionally made power point presentation.

Plausible deniability maybe?

a reply to: Meee32

Maybe.

But I'd be embarrassed to show that to a crowd of my peers.

Could just be me though...but not likely.

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32
www.zerohedge.com...

originally posted by: Leonidas
The biggest problems I see from the membership on ATS come from the newly minted accounts. (That is an unfair generalization, I know. But it is the quickest way to make a point sometimes. LAzy, I know)

The people that have only been here for a couple of months or years usually seem to be the ones that disappoint me the most, are the most aggressive about their opinions and more likely to use jargon like "sheeple" or "false flag" way too often.

Paid shills doesn't make any sense because you couldnt pay anyone enough to make an impact as one person, or a group. And why would you? This is a large message-board, not the EU Parliament.

So wait, you are saying there are no paid shills? Even though they have admitted to doing just that... Imagine 20 people posting all day, they can and do make an impact... Hasn't the play book for these shills been discovered?

EDIT: Ahhh yes here we go... Link up top... You were saying?

What is the maximum that these shills could hope to accomplish? Maximum. With everything going their way. What goal could they accomplish in your opinion?

It would be pure speculation as to why they do it and what their goals are... Obviously it is to disrupt certain topics but why? I have no idea. But the fact remians they DO do it, they must get something out of it.

Can you name a single topic where "paid Shills" have targeted a thread and changed the opinions of anyone?

Pick any topic you like. Gun control, Global Warming, 9/11, Vaccination, Ukraine. Or any other topic you like.

Have you seen any evidence that any thread has been targeted? Let alone having an impact. In case you haven't noticed, people at ATS these days have tendency to enter threads with their minds made up and never waiver.

I am serious. If some people are so certain it is happening, there must be some evidence of it.

Typical strawman argument, you are asking me to prove something which can not be proved! How would I know ones mindset before and aftet a thread? Lmao... You said it doesn't happen, I provided proof it does indeed happen and then you ask for more proof, something which I can't prove... Carry on thinking whatever you like, paid shills have been known about for a longtime. But of course there is plausible deniability when you can rely on strawmen... eh...

Let me ask you... What didn't you like about my previous link to proof that it happens?

No I am not.

Your position is that there is proof there are paid shills on the site.

I am asking for an example.

Nope please show me where I stated there is proof it happens here? I'm saying there is proof it happens! You stated it doesn't happen at all... I will also say ATS is the largest and most well known conspiracy site, they would not ignore it! No chance...

Please correct me if I am wrong on this:

1. You believe there is evidence of "paid shills" who's job it is to infiltrate internet forums.

2. You presume that those Shills would most certainly select Conspiracy related sites to target.

3. Because ATS is a large Conspiracy related site, it would be logical to assume they have signed up to sway opinion in their favour.


Have I fairly stated your hypothesis?

Yep that's about it in a nutshell but of course there are other things to add weight such as how the government influences media such as news stations, did you know they write a lot of the news lol... If you would like I can get proof of that too?

So why is it so rediculous to think they want to use this media too?

Without any actual proof, what you have is circumstantial evidence supported by Confirmation Bias.

Let me help.

Evidence - not proof - but evidence could take the form of a thread that is expressing a particular point of view on a specific thread. The thread is then subject to a number of posts from a number of people who all joined recently, and are all expressing a contrary view to prevailing opinion. They use the same language and jargon and discount the facts and opinions expressed by the people who's opinion they are trying to sway.

If you could find a thread that followed something similar you would have some evidence.

But we come back to: Why?

The easiest way to discount a point of view expressed on a conspiracy website is to use the statement, "That is a site for Conspiracy Theorists". For the public at large and main stream media, that is all you need to do to kill the credibility of the information. The dreaded term "Conspiracy Theorist" is all you have to say to discredit a person or opinion expressed here in the minds of the general public.

No that is not proof of anything and is actually against terms and conditions to point such things out. But man that happens all the time... I'm curious as to why you and the other chap want to pin this on new members... Why are older members immune? Lmao... What a joke... Chaps, carry on I won't be wasting anymore of my time with you.

For it to be older existing members, you would have to presume they are sleeper agents who joined years ago in anticipation of their subject coming up in the future.

There is evidence of groups trying to sway opinion on comment sections of websites in the past, and corporate infiltration to try and stop negative opinion of a product.

It requires people to join in sufficient numbers to try and appear as genuine public opinion.

m.washingtonpost.com...

orig inally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: Meee32

Maybe.

But I'd be embarrassed to show that to a crowd of my peers.

Could just be me though...but not likely.

Tell me, have newspapers ever made spelling or grammer errors? But it is their job right? I myself have had government issues papers with gramatical errors... Also couldn't the same be said for the faker, you are saying edward snowdon is a faker right? That he made this but left those errors, why would he do that? Would he not be embarrassed?

Here is another linky up top...

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32
www.zerohedge.com...

originally posted by: Leonidas
The biggest problems I see from the membership on ATS come from the newly minted accounts. (That is an unfair generalization, I know. But it is the quickest way to make a point sometimes. LAzy, I know)

The people that have only been here for a couple of months or years usually seem to be the ones that disappoint me the most, are the most aggressive about their opinions and more likely to use jargon like "sheeple" or "false flag" way too often.

Paid shills doesn't make any sense because you couldnt pay anyone enough to make an impact as one person, or a group. And why would you? This is a large message-board, not the EU Parliament.

So wait, you are saying there are no paid shills? Even though they have admitted to doing just that... Imagine 20 people posting all day, they can and do make an impact... Hasn't the play book for these shills been discovered?

EDIT: Ahhh yes here we go... Link up top... You were saying?

What is the maximum that these shills could hope to accomplish? Maximum. With everything going their way. What goal could they accomplish in your opinion?

It would be pure speculation as to why they do it and what their goals are... Obviously it is to disrupt certain topics but why? I have no idea. But the fact remians they DO do it, they must get something out of it.

Can you name a single topic where "paid Shills" have targeted a thread and changed the opinions of anyone?

Pick any topic you like. Gun control, Global Warming, 9/11, Vaccination, Ukraine. Or any other topic you like.

Have you seen any evidence that any thread has been targeted? Let alone having an impact. In case you haven't noticed, people at ATS these days have tendency to enter threads with their minds made up and never waiver.

I am serious. If some people are so certain it is happening, there must be some evidence of it.

Typical strawman argument, you are asking me to prove something which can not be proved! How would I know ones mindset before and aftet a thread? Lmao... You said it doesn't happen, I provided proof it does indeed happen and then you ask for more proof, something which I can't prove... Carry on thinking whatever you like, paid shills have been known about for a longtime. But of course there is plausible deniability when you can rely on strawmen... eh...

Let me ask you... What didn't you like about my previous link to proof that it happens?

No I am not.

Your position is that there is proof there are paid shills on the site.

I am asking for an example.

Nope please show me where I stated there is proof it happens here? I'm saying there is proof it happens! You stated it doesn't happen at all... I will also say ATS is the largest and most well known conspiracy site, they would not ignore it! No chance...

Please correct me if I am wrong on this:

1. You believe there is evidence of "paid shills" who's job it is to infiltrate internet forums.

2. You presume that those Shills would most certainly select Conspiracy related sites to target.

3. Because ATS is a large Conspiracy related site, it would be logical to assume they have signed up to sway opinion in their favour.


Have I fairly stated your hypothesis?

Yep that's about it in a nutshell but of course there are other things to add weight such as how the government influences media such as news stations, did you know they write a lot of the news lol... If you would like I can get proof of that too?

So why is it so rediculous to think they want to use this media too?

Without any actual proof, what you have is circumstantial evidence supported by Confirmation Bias.

Let me help.

Evidence - not proof - but evidence could take the form of a thread that is expressing a particular point of view on a specific thread. The thread is then subject to a number of posts from a number of people who all joined recently, and are all expressing a contrary view to prevailing opinion. They use the same language and jargon and discount the facts and opinions expressed by the people who's opinion they are trying to sway.

If you could find a thread that followed something similar you would have some evidence.

But we come back to: Why?

The easiest way to discount a point of view expressed on a conspiracy website is to use the statement, "That is a site for Conspiracy Theorists". For the public at large and main stream media, that is all you need to do to kill the credibility of the information. The dreaded term "Conspiracy Theorist" is all you have to say to discredit a person or opinion expressed here in the minds of the general public.

No that is not proof of anything and is actually against terms and conditions to point such things out. But man that happens all the time... I'm curious as to why you and the other chap want to pin this on new members... Why are older members immune? Lmao... What a joke... Chaps, carry on I won't be wasting anymore of my time with you.

For it to be older existing members, you would have to presume they are sleeper agents who joined years ago in anticipation of their subject coming up in the future.

There is evidence of groups trying to sway opinion on comment sections of websites in the past, and corporate infiltration to try and stop negative opinion of a product.

It requires people to join in sufficient numbers to try and appear as genuine public opinion.

No you are using the false assumption they are laying in wait for a particular subject... They are there to sway any discord... Maybe it is a bit of an experiment for them too? Who knows...

I see it happen a lot, but that is not to say some genuine posters don't get mixed up in it. Of course it is a really hard thing to prove. How can you prove if someone really believes what they are saying or not? It is the perfect crime...

Listen not too long ago you were a weirdo for thinking gov collects data on you from the net and listens to all your phonecalls and reads all your e-mails... What happened with that?

Why wouldn't they do this?

"Stop Deals" ??
"Ruin Relationships" ??

That is just painful. The amount of due diligence that goes into a transaction of any significant size relies on the facts confirmed or dis-proven during that due diligence process and is not swayed by rumour or negative comments based on nothing. By the same token any relationship in business is based on a significant track-record over time and is unlikely to be unhooked by an unsubstantiated rumour posted on a website. Business relationships are valuable investments.

Whoever wrote that hasn't been anywhere near either.

originally posted by: Meee32

...I see it happen a lot...

One, just show us one that has occurred here. That is all I am asking.

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Meee32

...I see it happen a lot...

One, just show us one that has occurred here. That is all I am asking.

And I am telling you for 1 it is against terms and conditions and 2 it is subjective. There is no way to prove what people think or feel... You are telling me there are no derailments of threads on ATS. Just rediculous lol...

This is a strawman argument...

a reply to: Meee32

Of course they do, I see them all the time, that's half the problem with the MSM!

Still, it's lazy.

Your link, same as the PowerPoint slides suggests nothing to do with conspiracy websites.

originally posted by: Leonidas
"Stop Deals" ??
"Ruin Relationships" ??

That is just painful. The amount of due diligence that goes into a transaction of any significant size relies on the facts confirmed or dis-proven during that due diligence process and is not swayed by rumour or negative comments based on nothing. By the same token any relationship in business is based on a significant track-record over time and is unlikely to be unhooked by an unsubstantiated rumour posted on a website. Business relationships are valuable investments.

Whoever wrote that hasn't been anywhere near either.

This is just your opinion and means very little though...

You speak as though you know every business relationship lol... Dude, this happens! China does it a lot too

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: Meee32

Of course they do, I see them all the time, that's half the problem with the MSM!

Still, it's lazy.

Your link, same as the PowerPoint slides suggests nothing to do with conspiracy websites.

Just look at what they are looking for! Are they looking for joe blogs talking about eastenders? No...

Oh btw do you remember when obamas campaign asked for people to report certain comments? Yeah they ain't interested in online comments at all are they lol

a reply to: RadiationAndCancer

Because they may disagree with the group think on what ever topic is being discussed?

I disagree with people on a fairly regular basis... This post as a prime example. Many times my opinion is the minority one. I sure wish I was a paid shill...I'd be able to go on a really cool vacation next year.

Shill. shill. Shill. Whatevah...

Name calling because you, and others, happen to disagree with someone isn't the way to "win" the debate.

Do you call friends who may have differing opinions from yours shills, too?

That's like way rude...

a reply to: Meee32

I'd have them in places where such an opinion would have some sway, ATS and the like are places full of people with fixed opinions.

Anyway, we will have to agree to disagree, since you can't prove they're here on ATS, and I can't not prove it.

I think I can prove that there are shills for the other side though, check my earlier posts in here for that.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: RadiationAndCancer

Because they may disagree with the group think on what ever topic is being discussed?

I disagree with people on a fairly regular basis... This post as a prime example. Many times my opinion is the minority one. I sure wish I was a paid shill...I'd be able to go on a really cool vacation next year.

Shill. shill. Shill. Whatevah...

Name calling because you, and others, happen to disagree with someone isn't the way to "win" the debate.

Do you call friends who may have differing opinions from yours shills, too?

That's like way rude...

Come on now... Of course people disagree just because they do, but there are paid shills as well, tell me, why can't there be both? Why do you think gov wouldn't be interested in doing it? With everything else they do in mind...

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: Meee32

I'd have them in places where such an opinion would have some sway, ATS and the like are places full of people with fixed opinions.

Anyway, we will have to agree to disagree, since you can't prove they're here on ATS, and I can't not prove it.

I think I can prove that there are shills for the other side though, check my earlier posts in here for that.

Lol there are all types of people here and you realise that a LOT of people never even post. You see it time and again " been lurking for years and just decided to join" there are many times more people who never join... There are opinions here that the government would like to sway, would you agree with that?

And look it isn't even to say they are winning, but to deny they do it is short sighted.

If I could be bothered I could show you loads of threads that get disrupted and the usual posting occurs but really I just can't be bothered and the fact you seem to think there are non just strikes me as silly...

You want me to waste my time looking for threads you will just deny anyway lmao... Not gonna happen...

I agree that there are shill agents on ATS and I have seen the derailing->closed thread method a couple of times. I watch the manipulation with interest to see how it is done. I would of course not put anything really important on this site since it is to open. I use this site as a place to see the current state of the members of the ATS. If I do this as a private person then it is pretty clear that NSA is monitoring and data mining this site to measure psyops.

Not all who disagree with you on the threads are shills but they are around. That is the hide and seek game to play on ATS. Find the shills.

a reply to: Meee32

You just want the last say, don't you?

You want me to waste my time looking for threads you will just deny anyway lmao... Not gonna happen...

No, I just said, we'll have to agree to disagree.

In other words, it's late and I'm going to bed.

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
I agree that there are shill agents on ATS and I have seen the derailing->closed thread method a couple of times. I watch the manipulation with interest to see how it is done. I would of course not put anything really important on this site since it is to open. I use this site as a place to see the current state of the members of the ATS. If I do this as a private person then it is pretty clear that NSA is monitoring and data mining this site to measure psyops.

Not all who disagree with you on the threads are shills but they are around. That is the hide and seek game to play on ATS. Find the shills.

Really it is the next logical step... Mine data and then extrude information from it, trends etc... Then your next step will be to try and sway those trends. Another poster mentioned reddit, I have seen it there myself too.

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: Meee32

You just want the last say, don't you?

You want me to waste my time looking for threads you will just deny anyway lmao... Not gonna happen...

No, I just said, we'll have to agree to disagree.

In other words, it's late and I'm going to bed.

Well goodnight sweetheart and sweet dreams. :p

Of course, i see shrill constantly protect the feds on here.