Paid shills?, how it really works

I don't really care if someone is paid to mis or disinform the public by spouting crap. Debunk the crap so others get the comparison. At least here (unlike the mainstream) there are two sides to the "story".

People can make up their own mind based on the logic or evidence, not on who is presenting it.

Eye on the ball, not the poster.

Shill away. As others have noted, they're usually easily identified and disregarded; however they do manage to suck me in from time to time, to my dismay.

But I would like to think that their presence here is actually a good thing. It gives us an opportunity to expose them to alternative viewpoints they may have never considered otherwise, and it may even provide a chance to turn them from the dark side altogether.

Wishful thinking?

Haha - I have been accused of being a Russian shill many a time. I fecking WISH that Moscow were paying me for my opinions - but alas they are not.


I definitely believe these paid disinfo agents are indeed out there. But I certainly think the term gets thrown around more than necessary.

ATS has increasingly been targeted by shills from all over the place...

IE Russian shills..Israeli shills..Zionists etc etc

I can spot them as easily as spotting a new thread by Bernard !

and like the op says . they stay with the thread and descend on the thread in droves and then backup each other up.

I am thinking of leaving here for this very reason. I am totally sick of it.

It's so obvious too. but the shills must be attracting hits to the website , so ultimately they are good for business.

originally posted by: rigel4
ATS has increasingly been targeted by shills from all over the place...

IE Russian shills..Israeli shills..Zionists etc etc

What is wrong with promoting something on web sites, as long as governments and corporations aren't paying you to do so?

However, the paid ones like to use tactics ATS has a low tolerance for, like going off-topic and attacking individuals.

I think they like to categorized people into different type of groups.

Example: Group one would be the extreme people , they are identified that way because of the nature of their extreme post.

Who gives a crap if they're here...

I mean, if the average Joe six pack poster believes strongly in what they do then shills don't have a snow balls chance in hell of swaying their opinion.

It does get so bad here sometimes it's like a bad lice infestation. So, I take a well deserved sabbatical from ATS.

Sometimes I wish someone would pay me to be a shill, but I would do it for myself for free and enjoy it if I felt I had a cause that needed me to do so. However, there are enough strong opinions out there that could drown out the shill comments, but that tends to be the problem as it becomes a pissing match.

Like any damage control or propaganda, shill comments are meant to overwhelm the other opinions by shear number and so appear near the top of internet searches. A fog or smoke screen more or less to hide the other comments. A more proactive approach is making the dissenting points disappear altogether.

originally posted by: ketsuko
They do exist, but usually they're fairly easy to spot. They're shallow. They either do drive-bys and make a single post or their arguments have little depth to them because they're making the arguments off a fact sheet with no real substance to them.

With such shallow and substanceles contributions ...Other than being just an irritation for the forum they post on, how can "they" ever expect to swing a public opinion ?

a reply to: BSndsMPBlk47
you never heard of FOX news? Rush Limbaugh? Sean Hannity? They all get the morning talking points from GOP headquarters! Rush is 99.7% right,as he claims,because he only gives you his half of an issue.

Interesting... a few hours ago an admin removed my post when I mentioned an ats member might be a paid shill... I was civilized and I didn't use harsh language...


but anyway, make your own conclusions

a reply to: donhuangenaro

That's because it is against the TOS to make specific allegations of shillary against any poster.

a reply to: 0zzymand0s

well, ok... I will make my posts less free speachlie

it's a trend anyway

a reply to: donhuangenaro

*shrug*

I don't see it as a free-speech issue, even if this was a public forum, and its not.

We simply don't make allegations against others without proof or evidence. It is fundamental to our entire concept of western civil justice.

a reply to: 0zzymand0s

I suppose it also depends on the definition of shill.


No doubt they are out there. I've noticed my local newspaper in the user comments has those obviously pushing an agenda. Being from a small town where everybody knows each other, it is difficult to pretend to have lived in our town and myself and others are not scared to call someone out. It has however recently led to a lifetime from another small surfing community forum where I was baited into 'threatening' another member. Once again it is a forum that everyone knows each other and asking to meet someone face to face in my opinion not a threat.

That said, next time I see the owner of the surfing forum in the water, I will let him know how I feel.

a reply to: 0zzymand0s

well, ok... I have a very low opinion about the western civil justice (read: hypocrisy)... western fundamentals are not what they use to be

thanks

originally posted by: intrptr
I don't really care if someone is paid to mis or disinform the public by spouting crap. Debunk the crap so others get the comparison. At least here (unlike the mainstream) there are two sides to the "story".

People can make up their own mind based on the logic or evidence, not on who is presenting it.

Eye on the ball, not the poster.

Nope. You cannot do that or you will be labeled a shill. When on a conspiracy site, you MUST believe every conspiracy full stop. And if you bring facts and proof, you will fall into the category of the OP. You MUST be a paid shill.

a reply to: network dude

They do that, they use circular faulty to logic to 'prove' their point and 'disprove' your point. If you accuse them of being a paid shill, they will spin it back on you.

ATS is good practice. Currently my hometown is trying to make some changes that most longtime residents strongly oppose. The biggest is rabble rousing issue is drinking on the beach, there is a strong agenda/propaganda campaign to ban drinking on the beach. Last week there was a city hall meeting and the days leading up to it had several local TV news stories making it sound like drinking was out of control at our beach. This is not true and many good residents were quick to point this out. My argument, and the argument that many locals are pushing is enforcement of laws already on the books, like disorderly intox, incident exposure, disturbing the peace, public uriniation...

Some of the commissioners and even the city managing are trying to sell this to our residents by saying that the drinking ban will only be forced on the rowdy 'undesirables' and us locals will still be able to drink on our beach.

How stupid do they think we are?

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
I wonder how many have already posted in this very thread.

Several.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
And a question for you, in your experience, do they ever work in tandem?

Yes they certainly do.