So what do you think would happen if....

What do you think would happen on ATS if something something was really exposed?Real ET exposure, WikiLeaks type leaks, an admission of guilt in a high level or something to the magnitude of the 9/11 attacks. With evidence would we troll them away, would mods cover it, ATS ownership be forced by government to 404 it, or could we actually be able to deny ignorance and bring a truth to the public?

Just a question I'd like answered by members and if you have a question ask it and let's see if people can answer.

To answer my own, we wouldn't deny ignorance, we wouldn't expose a truth. We have proof of Hillary bs and members still rush to her defense. ATS will always be gossip and hope. Nothing true will come from it. Don't get me wrong, serious debate and discussion will come of things, but when truth and proof is looking us in the face members still turn away.

So your thoughts or maybe a question of your own. Hmm, maybe this turned in to a rant....

a reply to: StolidPanda

I would think if there were evidence to be had it would be copied and backed up as fast as you can say zip drive!

I don't feel that something would be taken down unless lives were in danger, even then, IDK.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: StolidPanda

I would think if there were evidence to be had it would be copied and backed up as fast as you can say zip drive!

I don't feel that something would be taken down unless lives were in danger, even then, IDK.

Wouldn't matter. Look at the proof with Hillary emails. Metric *u** ton of supporters on this site and around the globe. Evidence isn't anything anymore as long as the culprit fits your ideaology.

a reply to: StolidPanda

If you feel it wouldn't matter then why make a thread?

Evidence isn't anything? What does that mean.

a reply to: JinMI

I made a thread to ask a question on members thoughts. My answer isn't the ultimate answer. As for evidence isn't anything.. look at all the evidence against Hillary and people still vote and support her. Evidence obviously doesn't mean anything to the indoctrinated. It's amazing she's even still eligible to run.

a reply to: StolidPanda

Oh, I see. The simple answer is perspective. Personal bias, experiences, preferences etc etc all play a role in that perspective.

This thread reminds me of something I saw Our Overlord write in an Ask Me Anything earlier this year...

I'm not going to copy and paste the whole thing, but read for yourself - You may or may not find it interesting *shrug*.

Skeptic Overlord's response in the Stuff They Don't Want You to Know AMA

a reply to: kaelci
Cool find Kaelci

a reply to: JinMI

I'm sorr, but your answer isn't as witty as you believe. You ignored the main question of thread and answered one about people voting for Hillary. In turn you kind of answered my question. People will derail a topic about simple things.

I pose question. You made a statement. I disagreed. You asked point of thread. Derailed already. I gave a suggestion of point of my thread. You said why people vote for whom. Which has nothing to do with topic.

Strawman, ad hominems, diversons, and senseless arguments is what would happen in a true disclosure thread.

originally posted by: kaelci
This thread reminds me of something I saw Our Overlord write in an Ask Me Anything earlier this year...

I'm not going to copy and paste the whole thing, but read for yourself - You may or may not find it interesting *shrug*.

Skeptic Overlord's response in the Stuff They Don't Want You to Know AMA

Thanks I'll defiantly give it a once over. ATS being a business though, they say what they have to say and do what they have to do. Was asking members opinions and not the people that profit from the site.

Theabovenetwork.com

a reply to: StolidPanda

I answered your question related to my question. I also gave you my opinion based upon your OP.

Good luck with your thread.

a reply to: StolidPanda

I don't see many members defending HRC. I see a lot of members saying a lot of members defend her and that's a different thing. Anti-Trump is nearly always re-framed as 'pro-HRC' when it's not the case.

What do you think would happen on ATS if something something was really exposed?

Have you ever seen so much before? I have never seen so much dirt against prominent politicians before. We've had UK politicians getting busted for having their hands in the cookie jar. We've had a couple of perjurors too. What's going on in the US right now is like we'd expect from a Third World country. It's a level not seen since Nixon and he got sacked for it.

Leaks upon leaks. Whistleblowers.

It's like anarchy. So much that it's hard to see how either candidate is even 'allowed' to stand. There should be a trigger, some mechanism, that amounts to a "Whoah there!! Absolutely no way can you continue!!"

Instead it's 'game on' and crowds of supporters flag-waving and whooping it up whilst the MSM attacks the 'other side' and the nation's divided.

With evidence would we troll them away, would mods cover it, ATS ownership be forced by government to 404 it, or could we actually be able to deny ignorance and bring a truth to the public?

ATS is blowing up lately with pretty much every allegation, fact and opinion getting threads and scores of posts. I don't think any thread has ever been 404d for being too close to the truth or because TPTB ordered it.

a reply to: StolidPanda

Was asking members opinions and not the people that profit from the site.

In that case I will direct a someone who is a member to your topic and see if they wish to comment on it

From experience ? Some would instantly debunk it , while others upheld it. Thus leading to infuriating debates . Just like the current political ones
My answer , and I am stickin to it

a reply to: Kandinsky

I don't really agree with the not many behind HRC staement. I see many threads with many stars and flags defending her, just not as many members posting defense in words to keep their names off the board in her defense. So they do it through sandf.(Eta: Didn't see your underline of saying till just now)

No, I have never seen so many leaks at one time. It's just astounding people can stand behind someone with such corruption.

Your third point I see where you are coming from, but I have to disagree. Those leaks and topics are everywhere. ATS would be forgotten if it wasn't up to date on these subjects. What if WE were the only site, the source? Like WikiLeaks is the source. What would happen then?

a reply to: StolidPanda

I don't really agree with the not many behind HRC staement.

Nah, if you look more carefully there are different battles going on and HRC isn't the hill or the flag being defended. Dem members are defending their politics not Clinton. Or Liberals are defending their beliefs and not Clinton. You can probably list the Top 5 busiest liberal/dem members and I'd wager 3-4 of them haven't a good word to say about her.

It's like people are blind in one eye. The 'other side' are always the worst!!

Your third point I see where you are coming from, but I have to disagree.

Well I couldn't help notice the negative comments about the owners up there. From a business point of view, a major news item on ATS right now would make the owners very, very happy. It's what every media outlet dreams of. Look at the WSJ and Guardian when they handled the Snowdon leaks. Man, that's the kind of thing that blows up in the world media. The owners would be PROUD of the member with the news. What wouldn't make any real, or business, sense would be having a major news story and turning it down.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Wasn't a negative comment. A business is a buissness and so it's ran like one. I'm not insulating they wouldn't want to keep it up. This is a conspiracy site and in light of recent events would they be leaned on to take it down and would they?

So you're suggesting SO and his ilk would seek asalym from other countries to keep government secrets on their site? This isn't the MSM or that well funded for what they would have us believe with all the panhandling they do.

a reply to: StolidPanda

would mods cover it

Mods are just members. I doubt they are secret agents.

ATS ownership be forced by government to 404 it

It's entirely possible there would be government intervention depending on how big 'it' was, yeah. They would have to catch it real quick though, as once solid evidence was demonstrated on ATS it would blow up and spread to every other social media outlet.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Only reason I mentioned mods is because they have guidelines. In hindsight I shouldn't of because they have not much say in site operations.

As for anything big happening would anyone even think it be worthy enough to take it to social media. I mean I can see a few replies saying..MSM didn't report and you have no source except yourself so fake. In turn being derailed and swept away.

a reply to: StolidPanda

I'm getting 'that feeling' you and I have met before, right?

You seem to have the view that ATS would suppress or censor a major news expose and I'm trying to explain that it wouldn't. It wouldn't make any sense. I get that you have a low opinion of the owners. They're decent guys in my experience and, no, mods aren't paid anything so I don't have to say anything.

So you're suggesting SO and his ilk would seek asalym from other countries to keep government secrets on their site?

Huh? Wha?? Eh? No.

I was clearly, obviously and blatantly saying ATS would enjoy the profile from a major news story and Snowdon was an example of one of the biggest in recent years.

No need for the hostility