The Failure of ATS

originally posted by: berenike
a reply to: LotToTell2

I've got something to say on the shills versus disinfo agents versus regular members but it's a bit hard to get out.

Anyhow, I wouldn't know one from the other - I read threads that interest me and follow links. If the topic really captures my imagination I can go off and do further research and I don't have to be swayed by anyone's opinion unless it actually makes sense to me.

What I do notice is that a lot of threads descend into the usual ATS peeing contest - and I don't think it's necessarily because of trolls or anyone trying to deliberately derail a thread.

I think the majority of members here just don't know anything much more than anyone else, on some subjects. They only have access to MSM and argue according to what information they can gather there. Then it's just a matter of interpretation and whether or not the bad guy in the news ought to be lynched or if there were extenuating circumstances.

If a shill or disinfo agent can put together a decent post and defend their position then they are earning their pay cheque. If they are encouraging or forcing regular members to up their game in order to refute the disinfo or challenge the official line, then they have a purpose. It could be argued that the site would be the poorer without them - if such exist here.

Reading an interesting debate, regardless of who the combatants are, is time well spent - in my opinion. I get fed up of giving up on a thread after the first three of four pages because it has sunk to the level of members trying to score points off of each other.

It's been said many times that we ought to make this site what we want it to be and, within the T&C, there's no reason that we can't.

Disinfo agents are usually easy to spot, the first clue is they will try to engage you emotionally or engage your ego (technically the same thing) and skip having a rational discussion, their goal is to maybe get you banned if you respond with anger, scare off newbies with the threat of social shaming and ostracism, and generally confuse people and derail the topic. There may be a few who are more subtle who don't use most of these tactics, and are hard to distinguish from people who just disagree with you, regardless these latter types are more enjoyable to debate.

My problem with disinfo agents is this. I may have read or seen something that I truly believe or am interested in, will post a thread, and posters with more knowledge on the subject might convince me that my opinion may not be based on all available facts; and I might change my mind. So you are right in that it is good to debate with people to get at the truth or facts, but we do not need disinfo agents for that. Disinfo agents will either discount the truth, admit to half truths, or make up falsehoods that lead away from the truth (and many other things I'm sure). Either way they are being paid for their work, their opinions are not their own, and I think it goes against the openness and transparency eschewed by the Constitution and against the ideals and expectations of all who live in a Western "Democracy". Such actions should be considered traitorous, treasonable, and jail time warranted.

BTW, when I type in the infinity chan website in my browser nothing comes up, far from being an IT expert any suggestions?

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

My problem with disinfo agents is this. I may have read or seen something that I truly believe or am interested in, will post a thread, and posters with more knowledge on the subject might convince me that my opinion may not be based on all available facts; and I might change my mind.

Might, but I've never seen it happen.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

My problem with disinfo agents is this. I may have read or seen something that I truly believe or am interested in, will post a thread, and posters with more knowledge on the subject might convince me that my opinion may not be based on all available facts; and I might change my mind.

Might, but I've never seen it happen.

Are you trying to emotionally engage me or engage my ego with such an unsubstantiated opinion?

originally posted by: TrueBrit
originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
originally posted by: Ultralight

Yes, I know 150k€("almost") is just a figure the OP mentioned.
It´s not greed or anything that´s speaking.
Maybe I should have written that it´s logical that hardware, traffic and maintanace does cost a little bit.
That´s totally clear of course. But I figure 12.5k$ per month, lets even say 10k$ per month would be enough.
I wonder if some of our tracking info is sold. Why else the need for 5 trackers? I do not say it is the way, I just wonder.
Mods work for free.

I figure Springer, SO and deserve to earn some money too. Thats all out of question.
So I was just wondering, is there really a need for contribution in terms of keeping ATS alive or does the money simply stack on top like a 13th payment. Is it a donation or a contribution? Is this the same in english terms?

Maybe someone with more linguistic skills then me could start a mannered thread asking the ATS team for information on that. -Without the humble mistakes and spelling errors I would produce. It could be in ATS interest to say something about that issue. Since nearly all content is generated by members for free and the ATS teams skimms advertisement money in every process of the step.

I´m not saying we´re entitled to that information, however.

I got onto the infinity chan site and it is a crazy hodge podge of mostly weird and some disgusting topics. There may be some gems buried in the haystack, but you have to wade through much s##t to get to them. Kind of like another "conspiracy" website where even though the odd gem is posted, it is not worth your time to wade through the mountain of crap. I'll take ATS anyday, where there is a tiny amount of censorship, but they eliminate the hateful and/or garbage posts/threads, it is a small and worthwhile price to pay.

And of course $150,000 a year is a decent amount for one person or a very small business with extremely low overhead, but once you have to split that with more than one person or more and cover some decent operating expenses it doesn't add it much; if that is all ATS is making it is my opinion the principals are more doing it because they care about the cause, being the truth, than the money.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

abovetopsecret.com.hypestat.com...
Reads: 144,xxx page views per day

ATS.com -> about ATS -> ads
Reads: Our traffic and statistics page provides an overview of monthly traffic numbers and unique users. We regularly encounter over 2.5 million monthly absolute uniques and more than 25 million monthly page views.

All just estimates and the ATS team is not just one (three amigos, maybe more now)
to be fair!

a reply to: opethPA
To make something clear.
In case it´s directed at my first post:
I never said what you are writing about.
Never said ATS persuades to donate.
Never said ATS does not deserve financial help.
In case this was directed at my first post.

There's an old saying somewhere, something like "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all" and I think it fits here.

I mostly lurk, but if I was unhappy with a site, or became disillusioned, I would simply logoff and not return.

Most people do not want to know the truth if it could possibly interfere with their way of life and their ability to provide for themselves and their family.

There is no problem with the owners of ATS wanting to make a little money off of their site, after all they did a lot of work to get this going and have to organize things. It is not a good business venture if you lose money even for a year unless you are using it as something to shelter your income from taxes. If that loss is the case, the money spent should create jobs for the people you care for. This is all about doing business in America.

originally posted by: Slayer
All of these topics can be blown completely out of the water with the application of Occam's Razor. The only purpose they serve is to distract people from The Big One.

What does that mean? What is "The Big One"?

originally posted by: Slayer
I never would have gone down the rabbit hole and I never would have learned the truth.

Why don't you give us a synopsis of what "the truth" is?

originally posted by: Nikita
There's an old saying somewhere, something like "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."

Yes, but sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind.

That being said, an apple a day keeps the doctor away.

originally posted by: Slayer
In business terms, ATS is actually succeeding quite well. A quick duckduckgo search reveals that ATS generates close to $150,000 a year.

And your beef is ... you didn't come up with a great idea yourself?

ATS always has some scheme going on.

You're just sorry you didn't come up with a method of making money yourself?

To the general readership: Sorry for being so direct. This is a place my opinion is heard whether I happen to be posting left or right ATM. I say, "To Hell with the Haters!!"

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

My problem with disinfo agents is this. I may have read or seen something that I truly believe or am interested in, will post a thread, and posters with more knowledge on the subject might convince me that my opinion may not be based on all available facts; and I might change my mind. So you are right in that it is good to debate with people to get at the truth or facts, but we do not need disinfo agents for that. Disinfo agents will either discount the truth, admit to half truths, or make up falsehoods that lead away from the truth (and many other things I'm sure). Either way they are being paid for their work, their opinions are not their own, and I think it goes against the openness and transparency eschewed by the Constitution and against the ideals and expectations of all who live in a Western "Democracy". Such actions should be considered traitorous, treasonable, and jail time warranted.

This is an interesting thing to consider. Why would a disinfo agent disseminate disinfo? He might well be working for his government and not consider himself traitorous or treasonable at all.

Let say that some secret flying machine had been seen in the skies and a few UFO spotters were hot on the trail, suspecting it came from Area 51 or wherever. Now the government aren't keen for the rest of the word to know that they have some super-duper, high tech, saucer-shaped object capable of turning on a sixpence in mid-air. How are they going to counter all the speculation on the internet?

Wouldn't they rather a few geeks and nerds got left with red faces than allow their pet project to be exposed?

I've chosen a fairly innocuous example and not pondered on corrupt governments employing disinfo agents to cover up for them because I think that goes way too far simply to illustrate my point.

The other thing, and this is something I give some thought to - how much right do any of us have to information that we didn't pay for?

As tax-payers we might well feel entitled to know the results of research that our money has funded, but some things really do need to be kept quiet in the interest of national security.

Other things, that can and will be used to our detriment, absolutely need to be exposed. And, I suppose it is a matter of choosing our battles - what can we research and understand? What ought to be exposed for the common good? What ought we to leave alone if we don't want to find ourselves murdered in our beds by foreign marauders?

If we haven't funded researchers such as Dr Frankenstein then, fascinating as his monster might be, are we entitled to know how he dunnit so that we might make ourselves a domestic variety?

I'd rather read honest information, of course I would, but I'm not sure that I'd go so far as to call all disinfo agents treasonous. And it probably isn't nerdy little us that the disinfo is aimed at anyway. It may be that it's there to deter other, more sinister researchers and all that is required of us is to shut up and drop the subject. It wouldn't hurt to make the agent's job more difficult, though

originally posted by: verschickter
If the number in the OP is correct...

I ask myself the following: Why is it that there is a need to set a contribution panel on the top of the page.
Don´t get me wrong, the team of ATS has every right to make money with their site.
I just find it a little bit strange that they ask for contributions while earning 150k$ per year.
Am I the only one wondering?

Is 150k per year considered a big chunk of money to you?

With the cost of what it takes to do what they do I would say this is more of a hobby than an income.

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: Slayer
All of these topics can be blown completely out of the water with the application of Occam's Razor. The only purpose they serve is to distract people from The Big One.

What does that mean? What is "The Big One"?

The big one is whether or not Slayer is the only real person on the site.....The rest being computer generated...

a reply to: berenike

I like to make a distinction between legitimate and non-legitimate forms of disinformation.

The government has the right to keep some secrets and no one is none the worse for not knowing them, such as high-tech weaponry (sad though that we need it at all), op agents and the people they run, I can't think of much else.

However, I would hardly equate classified secret high-tech weaponry with the knowledge of an ongoing alien interaction with earth. Most people would hardly be affected by knowledge of the first, whereas knowledge of the latter would change most people's view of the world and life; they would profoundly be affected.

Also, as I mentioned in another thread, we all should be helping or have a voice to shape the relationship humans have with the ongoing alien interaction, the ones that are making the decisions cannot be trusted, those are the same ones who have made huge mistakes and completely unethical decisions over the years, just think about MK-Ultra, Kennedy assassination, involvement in Viet Nam, Agent Orange, injecting people with radiation, thousands of nuclear weapons, the list is endless.

It is rumored that in the 1950's Majic 12 made a deal with one group of aliens, technology for the right to abduct people in the US. Am I absolutely certain that is true? Of course not. Does is seem possible? Definitely. And it would be just one more example of the terrible and immoral choices made by those in the shadow government.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

Disinfo agents are usually easy to spot, the first clue is they will try to engage you emotionally or engage your ego (technically the same thing) and skip having a rational discussion, their goal is to maybe get you banned if you respond with anger, scare off newbies with the threat of social shaming and ostracism, and generally confuse people and derail the topic. There may be a few who are more subtle who don't use most of these tactics, and are hard to distinguish from people who just disagree with you, regardless these latter types are more enjoyable to debate.

I'm curious...Do you find more of these on the liberal or conservative side of things, and/or a long those lines, do you see more of them from the rational/Occam razor groups or the believer/spiritual groups?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

Disinfo agents are usually easy to spot, the first clue is they will try to engage you emotionally or engage your ego (technically the same thing) and skip having a rational discussion, their goal is to maybe get you banned if you respond with anger, scare off newbies with the threat of social shaming and ostracism, and generally confuse people and derail the topic. There may be a few who are more subtle who don't use most of these tactics, and are hard to distinguish from people who just disagree with you, regardless these latter types are more enjoyable to debate.

I'm curious...Do you find more of these on the liberal or conservative side of things, and/or a long those lines, do you see more of them from the rational/Occam razor groups or the believer/spiritual groups?

Well, it is my personal opinion that the whole liberal/conservative dichotomy is just a false paradigm, and I know strong identification with such groups and terms is just ego, so honestly I don't even pay attention to that.

How can one argue with true rationality or Occam's razor type arguments? Wouldn't to do so be illogical? I may question assumptions in such discussions though....

As for believer groups, I don't know if you are referring to believers in God, bigfoot........by definition everyone on this site believes in something, you at least believe in your computer if you are typing posts......the term believer is just a pejorative and my opinion is that people who use it are slightly ignorant or could be disinfo agents, no offense or slander intended to you though.

As for spirituality, many people differ on a definition of this, from that respect it may be pointless to talk about. If you can agree on a definition then it might be easier to have a conversation about it. Mine would be spirituality is about raising one's consciousness and awakening to your true essence and feeling the connection with all life - so I doubt any truly spiritual people are disinfo agents as the two are mutually exclusive.

I have read that many disinfo agents are just ex-military or government and just attempting to get a paycheck. I think some disinfo is harmless, but some is truly harmful to mankind and they do not understand the karmic consequences of what they are deliberately and knowingly engaged in.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

It is unfortunate that the people we have in charge just now (and for the last few decades) are in charge - absolutely no argument from me on that one.

The things you listed - those are the sorts of things the truth of which needs to be exposed.

The right of aliens to abduct people - here's the question for me: How much would it suit certain persons if we all believed that a deal was made to do that 50 odd years ago? What sounds more plausible to me is that, under the cover of aliens and UFOs, the government or shadow government are doing the abducting and experimenting themselves. If these events do actually happen.

How do I feel about being able to entertain such an idea? Not good, at all. It's horrible to think that our leaders would be capable of such a thing. But, if there were a group of technologically advanced aliens who wanted to abduct people, why would they ask permission?

So - what's worse? A government that would sell out its people to aliens or a government that would abduct and experiment on its citizens?

Since our governments are capable of allowing the entire planet to be completely polluted and destroyed it's a small leap to imagine that individuals count for nothing. Well, it would be naive to think otherwise

If I were in charge, I'd be ashamed for aliens to see the state of Earth as we've made it - I even tidy my living room if I'm expecting visitors.