It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Question Regarding Sandy Hook Threads

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 9 2014 @ 02:09 AM
I've been a member of ATS for several months now, which in the grand scheme of ever fickle 'internet time' is both eons and the blink of an eye. During this time I have seen threads relating to Obama being an alien (both literally and figuratively), Nibiru's imminent collision with Earth and nearly every other conceivable topic.

But only one seems to be on the receiving end of mod scorn; Sandy Hook (SH).

I've read an untold number of threads, but it seems that no matter how outlandish the claims an OP makes regarding a topic it is allowed to stand. Unless it is related to SH. This leads me to but two theories:

1. SH played out exactly as the media explained and one of the ranking personnel in charge of ATS was affected. In order to try and put the incident behind him/her SH posts are dumped in the Skunk/Hoax bin.

2. SH is the mother of all conspiracies and ATS ranking personnel are complicit in this coverup. The mere existence of Sasquatch and UFO threads are to act as a diversion (the least likely of the two)

I guess what I am asking is that we have a sort of 'Coming to Jesus' moment. SH threads have slowed down, but the ones that do appear are quickly negatively spammed by a few members and a litany of mods. If anything all this does is stoke the fires of the SH conspiracy theorists. From what reading I've done no other mass causality event has been on the receiving end of Skunk/Hoax binning as SH and doing so runs counter to everything that ATS is supposedly against; suppression.

What I am suggesting is the creation of one stand-alone thread (heavily modded to prevent drift) related to SH and it's many facets), to not only allow discourse, but to also be a place to chronicle the happenings and also act as the official outlet for related information (such as the heavily redacted SH reports that were released earlier this week I believe)

posted on May, 9 2014 @ 02:28 AM
If I am not mistaken they moderate the SH threads heavily because they get out of control QUICK . I believe some members went to the extrem of using threats and contacting SH victims... But reguardles of the OS ON SH we have to keep in mind that this site does not belong to us and we agree to the T&C that can be changed at any time ... Not everything in life is perfect I suppose ...just saying

posted on May, 9 2014 @ 02:33 AM
Not exactly accurate. No staff member or even owner has an issue with anyone discussing Sandy Hook and the tragic events.

To put it in its simplest form: It only becomes a problem when innocent victims are portrayed as the bad guys.


I and our staff have witnessed the most incredible shameless self-absorbed credulous nonsense from our members following one of the worst horrors ever to hit a small community -- much less any community.

And this thread is the absolute worst display of your ludicrous narcissistic conjecture -- outing personal details of a private citizen and mocking him on the pages of our precious ATS for the world to see.

You should be ashamed -- but clearly, you're not capable of that.

Please read this post for details information

And in addition, from Springer:

...Going forward anyone who posts a thread that seeks to implicate the innocent victims of the Sandy Hook Tragedy, for any reason, and/or posts any personal information or links to personal information on those people will have their posting privileges restricted and their thread removed without further discussion or warning.

Discussing the utter mishandling of the breaking story by the MSM is one thing, questions about what happened are fine, but, defaming, libeling, or otherwise exposing innocent people, especially those who are still suffering from this tragedy, to further insult or pain is below the base level of compassion we can tolerate...

A detailed explanation of ATS' stance on the matter

Hope that clears it up.

Thread closed.

new topics

log in