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.

 

Conspiracy theorist begging for money

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I normally do not mention conspiracy theorists online because whether what I say is good or bad they will make money on it. But I feel that there has to be something which I personally think is immoral and I am pointing this out. Many people attack David Icke but it is not he which I attack but mention to show a contrast between him and Richard D Hall. Both of these people have websites and they both work around a newspaper media type structure and are not like most peoples personal sites. The David Icke site has lots more content but here he offers people more content and a subscription service which people can use to get extra content, however Richard D Hall has a donation button one of which is a one off donation the other is monthly. But whereas David Icke charges for more content Richard D Hall has a donation which is said not to be for the running of the site but to him personally. This means that he is taking a monthly fee off people for nothing. Yes people can choose not to press the button but how many people could press a button without thinking? I find this begging a bad thing and it is one thing to beg for money once but to try to get people to pay monthly is pretty low. With David Icke you are getting something for your money whereas with Richard D Hall you get nothing. Of course David Icke does sell advertising on his site which is fine. Richard D Hall is basically working on a live show model where he gets paid for lectures. Looking on amazon at his book his sales seem non existent.

But is this what the internet has came to people begging for money because they have a web site.




posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: simro

Ummmm.....ATS has a donation button. If you accidentally click it, money is not magically taken from you. You can close the page that opens up after and you have not given any personal details.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Conspiracy theorists acting like charities is not correct at all.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Its not about personal details if people pay money they should get something to not get something is wrong, websites are not charities and neither are conspiracy theorists.
Also monthly donations are you kidding you think this is right for an individual to get monthly donations from people?
edit on 27-11-2015 by simro because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: simro
a reply to: reldra

Its not about personal details if people pay money they should get something to not get something is wrong, websites are not charities and neither are conspiracy theorists.


Websites and conspiracy theorists with websites are businesses and have expenses. That is what the donation button is for. It does not say it is for a charity such as the Salvation Army, does it?

Do you not see the donation banner above your thread here?



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

No the donation button on Richard D Hall's website specifically says that it is for him personally and is not there to cover any expenses: so no it isn't for the website as a business it is for him.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:26 PM
link   
You're saying that this Richard Hall guy is immoral?

He is still giving away all of his information for free. The donation is there if you want to show your appreciation through paypal. David Icke is trying to sell you information.

Seems like Icke is the immoral one of the two by your standards, not Hall.

Now, I don't follow either of them (this is actually the first time I've ever heard of Hall) so I can't comment on their credibility... but it sounds like they are setting up shop in the alt-news business. Nothing new. They're just trying to make money.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Also businesses don't beg for money the salvation army is not a business it is a charity. Businesses have to be able to take care of their expenses and make a profit without donations because they are owned by people. Are you saying that we should give donations to Coca Cola, they are a business?



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: OhOkYeah

Selling is not immoral, selling writing, videos, films etc is not immoral. But begging as an individual or non charity is immoral.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: simro
a reply to: reldra

Also businesses don't beg for money the salvation army is not a business it is a charity. Businesses have to be able to take care of their expenses and make a profit without donations because they are owned by people. Are you saying that we should give donations to Coca Cola, they are a business?


Many, many businesses on the internet have donation buttons. In fact, if you are to build a website, one of the most common things in the template is a 'Payal donation button' and also a 'Paypal Payment button'.

If the man is spending time he could be at a regular job maintaining a website, he can say the donation is for him personally or to maintain the website. It is up to you if you want to click it or not. I am failing to see the problem.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Yes there also are fake charities on the internet, kiddie porn, and many other things and like it or not many tools exist on the internet for hacking does this mean that hacking is not immoral? You keep saying that businesses get to beg they don't and if a business needs donations then it is not a business and businesses which need to beg need to do what they have done from time immemorial: shut down: and then better businesses take their place. Are you really using above top secret as a defence because the advertisements alone should keep the site running and if it doesn't then why wasn't this considered at the start. I like the site but begging is still wrong even more so for individuals when it specifically says it is for them to do whatever they want with.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: simro

So.... I should get an 'I like Icke' button for Christmas, is that what I should take from this?

Donating for something you like is pretty common on free content sites. I'm not sure if you're just here to advertise for Icke or what, cause that's sure what it seems like.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: simro
a reply to: reldra

Its not about personal details if people pay money they should get something to not get something is wrong, websites are not charities and neither are conspiracy theorists.
Also monthly donations are you kidding you think this is right for an individual to get monthly donations from people?


I will take monthly donations from people if they want to give them to me, and i don't even have a website providing content. Even if someone were willing to give me $5,000/month "just 'cuz", I would have no shame in taking it. Who am I to stop someone from giving me money if that's what makes them happy?

How much in donations do you think he's getting?



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: simro
a reply to: reldra

Yes there also are fake charities on the internet, kiddie porn, and many other things and like it or not many tools exist on the internet for hacking does this mean that hacking is not immoral? You keep saying that businesses get to beg they don't and if a business needs donations then it is not a business and businesses which need to beg need to do what they have done from time immemorial: shut down: and then better businesses take their place. Are you really using above top secret as a defence because the advertisements alone should keep the site running and if it doesn't then why wasn't this considered at the start. I like the site but begging is still wrong even more so for individuals when it specifically says it is for them to do whatever they want with.


It is not up to you to decide if a business should shut down or not. Someone may like that business so much that they give a few bucks to help it out so it does not disappear.

I really doubt the costs ATS incurs nor unexpected events that drain it's resources- are known to you.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Seriously, both sites offer information for those interested and accept donations.

In Hall's case, he HAS to state this on his site because it's all about paying taxes:

"If you wish to donate a gift to Richard D. Hall please use buttons below. NOTE: The payment will be made purely as a gift and is not payment for any goods or services. It is not a payment to supplement trading or other business or to enable the recipient to carry on business or otherwise to preserve and maintain trading stability and solvency. It is a personal gift."

That's it, pure and simple. Icke's must be a business and his tax structure is different.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

If a site cannot think of a way of getting money from their content then its just tough because these are things that they should have thought about before they set up the website. I am not here to petition for David Icke but it does seem on this particular issue he has the moral high ground. Also any donation should state what it is for, even if it was an I like beer button at least it would be open about what it would be used for, but not saying what it is used for is a bit slimey its the sort of thing that conmen do. Think about it first they convince you that there is some great crusade which they need to fight against: via the content: and then they ask for donations. Its the same way fake charities operate. Is this what some conspiracy theorists have become televangelists/conmen. Its funny how Alex Jones doesn't have a donate button because he sells things from the website, and if his new channel doesn't work then as a company it is him who takes the loss because that's how businesses work.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: StoutBroux

David Icke doesn't ask for donations he gets subscribers and that is different after all people pay for television channels what is the difference. But asking for donations is not the same thing.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: simro

So, who is FORCING you to donate?

This is what you spend time worrying about? I don't mind having choices in life it is when they become directives that they are a problem.

You must be bored.
edit on 2015/11/27 by Metallicus because: sp



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I don't see Alex Jones asking for donations and when you send money it is to buy something. Donate buttons have become for the terminally stupid who thought that simply having lots of content on a website would put them in the money.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

No one forces people to give money to fake charities but its still wrong. After all a fake charity is a person or group without charitable status who ask for money based upon lies about things which are factually incorrect. If they asked for money for something which did not happen or for an orphanage which did not exist they would be a fake charity and many conspiracy theorists are asking for money because of information which is factually incorrect so it is exactly the same.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join