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.

 

Vote subz (previous ATSNN staff) For ATSNN Councilor!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Again do not take any offence by this, but you always keep saying how corrupt politicians are and the process needs to be fixed, yet in your case it is sort of like lets throw the book out the window because I now want to run.

Shots, how can I best explain this situation?


Originally posted by Springer
8. Senior Staff retain the right to alter these rules as needed to assure a smooth and enjoyable election process

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Regardless, I got my candidacy into Springer in time and he has explicitly informed me I am a candidate. But even if I did miss the deadline it is Springer's decision to permit me to enter the race any way. Is there anything more that needs to be said?

If you want my personal opinion on the matter, if you feel so strongly against me being councillor for 3 months I would support you if you asked Springer to change the rules to allow a primary for ATSNN with myself, yourself, Mayet and DJ on the ballot. You sort it out with Springer and I'll be peachy with it, ok?




posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   


I am fine with this idea

also if Phixion has dropped out of the race, which I am not sure of, It leaves an empty spot on the ballot for someone to fill.... ie subz.

He did state his candicacy and intention to Nerdling and myself together in a ATSNN panel meeting. I later asked Nerdling what happened to Subz when Springers thread existed and it was explained to me that he was mid air to Australia.

And Shots, when I threw my hat in the ring, I didn't have a clue who was going to run. I was not a candidate to defeat or spite another particular member. I was a candidate for my love of ATSNN ...as was Subz.....



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by subz


Originally posted by soficrow
And, finally, and perhaps most importantly, what do you think needs to be done about the drift that has occurred within ATSNN from it's original goal?"

You'll have to forgive my ignorance of the true original goal of ATSNN since I haven't been here as long as yourself. But if the tag line "Deny bias" has anything to do with it I would have a few things to say


To deny bias in the original stories we base our threads on is achievable but to deny bias as a personal goal is not. Any one who says they are not biased is either kidding themselves, or has not looked into the issue hard enough. Everyone is biased, period. ..... If you want a more detailed answer you will have to inform me of the original goal of ATSNN im afraid.






Great response. Thanks.

But no - I was not talking "Deny Bias." I am referring to SkepticOverlord's statement:


"When ATSNN was first launched, it was intended as the current events news portal for a very large conspiracy theory community. As such, the intent was that we have a primary focus on analysis of major media news as it relates to ATS topics."

Post Number: 1736770 (post id: 1758663)


...So, how do you interpret that statement? Do you think it's valid to have a news portal that analyzes major media news as it relates to conspiracy topics? Short of dictating such a policy by facist order, do you see that even being possible? Can it happen? Should it happen?


.
.ed to copy url


[edit on 11-10-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
"When ATSNN was first launched, it was intended as the current events news portal for a very large conspiracy theory community. As such, the intent was that we have a primary focus on analysis of major media news as it relates to ATS topics."

Post Number: 1736770 (post id: 1758663)


...So, how do you interpret that statement? Do you think it's valid to have a news portal that analyzes major media news as it relates to conspiracy topics? Short of dictating such a policy by facist order, do you see that even being possible? Can it happen? Should it happen?

Ahhh


I interpret SO's statement to mean that ATSNN will discuss any news story that can have a conspiratorial spin placed upon it. Surely "as it relates to ATS topics" means as it relates to a conspiratorial topic. That is how I have always viewed ATSNN and its how I treat my news stories.

I would say SO's aims are very valid and completely achievable with respect to ATSNN. Basically if you can post a news item about a current event and have a conspiracy angle to it then its a valid ATSNN story.

I can see where you are pushing though, such events as Katrina and the Tsunami received major ATSNN coverage and discussion. They originally contained no conspiratorial angle but later developed their own due to how those events panned out.

Should we be more dictatorial and demand that the contributor must include a conspiratorial angle in their concluding paragraph? I would say yes, that would be holding true to the original goal of ATSNN. It wouldn't be hard to come up with some cockamamie conspiracy theory though which would obviously result from enforcing that specific rule. But then again, the same rules of public voting apply, if it is a cockamamie theory purely devised to enable the stories posting it will be duly shot down.

Some times I do actually feel intimidated into suppressing the true extent of my conspiratorial thoughts on submissions. I do this purely to avoid receiving the inevitable "no:bias" votes that would surely scupper my submission. I suppose now I can shed those shackles since I'm entitled to instant upgrades. It would be good for ATSNN to pull back from being "Johnny on the spot" with regards to "breaking coverage" and maybe aim for a "wait and see" attitude to at least formulate a conspiracy aspect before hand.

So to answer you question: yes ATSNN is straying from its intended path, yes I would support enforcing a conspiratorial angle for all submissions, yes I think it is completely possible to do so and retain ATSNN's quality and standing.

[edit on 11/10/05 by subz]



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
And Shots, when I threw my hat in the ring, I didn't have a clue who was going to run. I was not a candidate to defeat or spite another particular member. I was a candidate for my love of ATSNN ...as was Subz.....



I never had any doubt as to why you put your hat in the ring. To be honest I thought if I had entered the race it would have taken votes away from either you or DJ who I think are very well qualified and I thought the race between the two of you would have been a very close one as it should be. Which is the reason I did not enter as a spoiler if you will. Now that does not appear to be the case, I am sad to say.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
I never had any doubt as to why you put your hat in the ring. To be honest I thought if I had entered the race it would have taken votes away from either you or DJ who I think are very well qualified and I thought the race between the two of you would have been a very close one as it should be. Which is the reason I did not enter as a spoiler if you will. Now that does not appear to be the case, I am sad to say.

Any specific reason? Or you just dont like me?

You have an opportunity to question me to explore my merits as a candidate but you have focused on trying to disqualify me on a technicality. Please shots, if you have an issue with my candidacy, here is your chance to explore it, dont just try to dismiss my candidacy based on nothing.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by subz

Originally posted by soficrow
(SkepticOverlord said: ) "When ATSNN was first launched, it was intended as the current events news portal for a very large conspiracy theory community. As such, the intent was that we have a primary focus on analysis of major media news as it relates to ATS topics."

Post Number: 1736770 (post id: 1758663)


...So, how do you interpret that statement? Do you think it's valid to have a news portal that analyzes major media news as it relates to conspiracy topics? Short of dictating such a policy by facist order, do you see that even being possible? Can it happen? Should it happen?

Ahhh


...Surely "as it relates to ATS topics" means as it relates to a conspiratorial topic. That is how I have always viewed ATSNN and its how I treat my news stories.

I would say SO's aims are very valid and completely achievable with respect to ATSNN. Basically if you can post a news item about a current event and have a conspiracy angle to it then its a valid ATSNN story.





Great response. Thank you.




I can see where you are pushing though, ...

Should we be more dictatorial and demand that the contributor must include a conspiratorial angle in their concluding paragraph? I would say yes, that would be holding true to the original goal of ATSNN.



YIPES! I feel like I just set you up - not my intent at all. And no - I am NOT pushing for dictatorial control!

...I am looking for a problem-solving approach. Given that ATSNN is member driven, and functions as a democracy; then how can you see steering the site back to its original, worthy, and not to mention very marketable, goal?

...While working within the parameters of a democracy?

...And without being heavy-handed or manipulative?


FYI - I don't expect you to solve the problem - just to see it, and provide some indication that you are prepared to deal with it responsibly, and with integrity.







Some times I do actually feel intimidated into suppressing the true extent of my conspiratorial thoughts on submissions. I do this purely to avoid receiving the inevitable "no:bias" votes that would surely scupper my submission.




Yes. This is a constraint many feel, I suspect.



It would be good for ATSNN to pull back from being "Johnny on the spot" with regards to "breaking coverage" and maybe aim for a "wait and see" attitude to at least formulate a conspiracy aspect before hand.


Hmmm. I wonder.
Your statement goes against all current measures of being fastest, biggest, first - but you do have a point.




So to answer you question: yes ATSNN is straying from its intended path, yes I would support enforcing a conspiratorial angle for all submissions, yes I think it is completely possible to do so and retain ATSNN's quality and standing.




My problem with that position is that to do so would dissolve ATSNN democracy.

What are the chances that you answered in haste? ...and might reconsider your thinking here?




I posted this earlier in another thread:

Like other industries, the media cuts costs to up profit. Now, there's no money for research and analysis - so the "news" has become a venue for corporations and other special interests to distribute their press releases.

...The news media does NOT report news - it's just a press release distribution system.

This is what makes ATS so special IMO - we are picking up the slack, and doing what the news media used to do. We are thinking, analyzing, researching - and going beyond the press releases.


Point being: We are doing it. My question is: How can we do it better, and still preserve our democracy here?



.

[edit on 11-10-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by subz

Any specific reason? Or you just dont like me?



I do not dislike you. Yes we disagree but that does not mean I dislike you at all.



You have an opportunity to question me to explore my merits as a candidate but you have focused on trying to disqualify me on a technicality. Please shots, if you have an issue with my candidacy, here is your chance to explore it, dont just try to dismiss my candidacy based on nothing.


Based on nothing! surely you jest. You clearly worked outside the normal box in this case and your refusal not to bow out will speak volumes to others. I will now let them judge you....................

You have made it very clear to me you say one thing yet speak another, I just hope others like me will see that. With that I will end this discussion and hit the campaign trail for your opponent hoping people will see him as the best man for the job and not you. I only say that because Mayet has more or less already given in to your whims.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
YIPES! I feel like I just set you up - not my intent at all. And no - I am NOT pushing for dictatorial control!

Sofi, the only thing I meant by dictatorial control was over enforcing the inclusion of a conspiratorial angle. That by no means implies that stories and content will be dictated from upon high. That is completely contrary to ATSNN's member driven ethos. Do you view the necessity of following the submission format of intro paragraph, no more than 3 paragraphs from the source and a concluding paragraph of your opinion as being dictatorial? In a way it is, you are being told how you will submit a submission and what it must contain. BUT, and its a huge but, you are free to submit any story so long as it adheres to the specified criteria. All I would like to see enforced (dictated) is that another criteria be added to submissions i.e. it must have a conspiratorial slant in the concluding paragraph. Do you see that as a major blow to ATSNN? I surely do not.


Originally posted by soficrow
...I am looking for a problem-solving approach. Given that ATSNN is member driven, and functions as a democracy; then how can you see steering the site back to its original, worthy, and not to mention very marketable, goal?

Like I said, regrettably with a nasty buzz word, I would steer the site back to its conspiratorial roots. There are news stories being submitted with absolutely ZERO conspiratorial components to them. Where is the conspiracy in the recent earthquakes? I haven't seen any mentioned. Are these stories truly ATSNN material as described by the SO quote? I would say they are not.

Enforcing another criteria would not compromise the democracy of ATSNN any more than already is by the existing criteria.


Originally posted by soficrow
...While working within the parameters of a democracy?

...And without being heavy-handed or manipulative?

I really do think you misinterpreted my previous post. Im not advocating a true dictatorship where stories are rubber stamped by staff or an editor. That is ludicrous. What I am saying is that I am in favour of including another criteria in the submission process.


Originally posted by soficrow
FYI - I don't expect you to solve the problem - just to see it, and provide some indication that you are prepared to deal with it responsibly, and with integrity.

No designs of editing or suppressing stories at all here
Merely wanting to steer ATSNN back to its conspiratorial roots.


Originally posted by soficrow
Hmmm. I wonder.
Your statement goes against all current measures of being fastest, biggest, first - but you do have a point.

What's the point of trying to be first? We do not have the resources to compete with the likes of Reuters, AP and the BBC so why try? What we bring into the mix is our slant on the story. Our slant is the conspiratorial aspect of our members thoughts. If that is missing from a submission purely to have a thread up and running whilst the other wires are typing up their stories then what the heck are we here for?


Originally posted by soficrow
My problem with that position is that to do so would dissolve ATSNN democracy.

Not from where I am standing it wouldn't. Surely you don't believe adding a new conspiracy content requirement to news items would dissolve ATSNN's democracy do you?


Originally posted by soficrow
What are the chances that you answered in haste? ...and might reconsider your thinking here?

Whilst I am usually guilty of shooting from the hip, I assure you I am spending a far greater amount of time digesting, and creating my response, to these questions.


Originally posted by soficrow
I posted this earlier in another thread:

Like other industries, the media cuts costs to up profit. Now, there's no money for research and analysis - so the "news" has become a venue for corporations and other special interests to distribute their press releases.

...The news media does NOT report news - it's just a press release distribution system.

This is what makes ATS so special IMO - we are picking up the slack, and doing what the news media used to do. We are thinking, analysing, researching - and going beyond the press releases.

I believe that 100%. My point is that we are not all thinking, analysing and researching if the current goal is to compete with the other news outlets in being first to get a news story out.


Originally posted by soficrow
Point being: We are doing it. My question is: How can we do it better, and still preserve our democracy here?

We can do it better by returning to the conspiratorial aspect of ATSNN. It, after all, is the news network FOR a conspiracy website. If there is no conspiracy in the news articles then why are they residing on ATS servers?

We can still retain ATSNN's member driven ethos by allowing members to post what ever submission they choose so long as its got a conspiracy angle to it. Those submission would still be voted on, by the members, and they would be upgraded or voted down based on the same principles as they currently do. With one big exception, the focus is on conspiracies in current events. Not just the events alone.

[edit on 11/10/05 by subz]



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Best of luck Subz, ATSNN no matter who wins will be in amazing hands.

This will be an interesting race and I bet it'll be so close. I'll have the lawyers on stand-by.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Great response subs.
Thank you.

I am inviting you, and your competitors, to respond to my podcast on the ATS election. Called "Who Cares?" the post intro states "Experimental democracy founders at ATS, the InterNet's premiere conspiracy site."

Podcast: Who Cares?

Who Cares: The Thread.


Thanks, sofi



posted on Oct, 12 2005 @ 06:30 AM
link   
I'll check them out Sofi



posted on Oct, 12 2005 @ 10:56 PM
link   
TextYA! VOTE SUBZ!






posted on Oct, 12 2005 @ 11:51 PM
link   
.
.
.
VOTE subz for ATSNN


Yeah subz. You go guy.



posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 03:42 AM
link   
Thanks for the show of support TRG and Sofi!


Is anyone else going to ask me some hard hitting, thought provoking questions? I feel like im all gussied up with no place to go


[edit on 13/10/05 by subz]



posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 04:35 PM
link   
To quote Noam Chomsky;
In order for democracy to be "democratic," the media has to fulfill two functions:
  • The Media must report the news fairly, completely, and without bias.
  • The Media must function as a watchdog for the public against abuse of power.
How do you plan to make sure the ATSNN is kept at both of those levels? What are the challenges to keeping those functions alive and well on ATSNN?

How do you plan to get ATSNN out to a wider audiance? Do you wish to see ATSNN stick as it is now, with people reporting stories they see on Yahoo!, MSN, etc or move to ATSNN having its own journalism team? [Not just Op/Ed's] If the second what ideas do you have to help boost this effort?



posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   
So if a story, that affects millions of people - let's hypothesize sustained bird flu transmission in any given country - were to break - and let's say that a member broke that story by a connection they had made, but had little details - and no conspiratorial slant - are you saying they would not be allowed to post that story?

And to set the record straight - soficrow wasn't here when ATSNN was started. She wasn't here by almost a full year. So if you want to find out the conversations and intentions of why ATSNN was started you would be well advised to speak with SO, nerdling, or myself and anyone who is recorded as a contributor to ATSNN in January 2004. And the best would be to speak to all three. And the reason I emphasize this is that you don't need to be misled by some one with an agenda - a person that doesn't mind re-writing history whether it's American politics or the historical background of ATSNN. Seek the truth - just like we try to do here on ATS on all subjects. And you won't let yourself get misled into a situation where you become a stumbling block instead of a catalyst for growth.

Good luck, subz. And I hope you serve this position well.



posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
So if a story, that affects millions of people - let's hypothesize sustained bird flu transmission in any given country - were to break - and let's say that a member broke that story by a connection they had made, but had little details - and no conspiratorial slant - are you saying they would not be allowed to post that story?

Well, I really should'nt go down the hypothetical road but since its you Val
, there is obviously going to be times when stories of importance should be broken in ATSNN. However, in your hypothetical the submission would be an Op/Ed any way since there is no existing news item to piggyback off. Maybe have no conspiracy angle requirement on Op/Eds? I dont know, I wouldnt be the sole implementer of change so these are my own opinions. My own opinions would just be one viewpoint in a sea of many, they would not become implemented simply because I was voted in to the Council.


Originally posted by Valhall
And to set the record straight - soficrow wasn't here when ATSNN was started. She wasn't here by almost a full year. So if you want to find out the conversations and intentions of why ATSNN was started you would be well advised to speak with SO, nerdling, or myself and anyone who is recorded as a contributor to ATSNN in January 2004. And the best would be to speak to all three.

Another reason why I think the council is great and a position I would like to take. I may form an opinion but that is ever evolving and I wouldnt dream of pushing for something without seeing both sides. I am happy to debate a single viewpoint but that doesnt necessarily mean I would choose that viewpoint as my own, much less implement it. Thats the members domain to suggest change and its the staff's final decision, im just wanting to be the facilitator.


Originally posted by Valhall
And the reason I emphasize this is that you don't need to be misled by some one with an agenda - a person that doesn't mind re-writing history whether it's American politics or the historical background of ATSNN. Seek the truth - just like we try to do here on ATS on all subjects. And you won't let yourself get misled into a situation where you become a stumbling block instead of a catalyst for growth.

I understand you have your differences with Soficrow, it tears me up to see it because I do respect both of you. I wouldnt dream of taking sides and I beseech you both to not try and make me.

I hope I would never become a stumbling block for ATSNN and I am pretty adamant I wouldnt become that. As councilor my job would be to listen to the members and pass on their concerns/suggestions to staff. I would hold true to that mission, and as such, I could never be a stumbling block. Being the staff's ears for ATSNN is about as passive as a position to take. Last time I checked my ears were incapable of stopping any thing



Originally posted by Valhall
Good luck, subz. And I hope you serve this position well.

Thank you Val, and I definately will try my hardest



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
To quote Noam Chomsky;
In order for democracy to be "democratic," the media has to fulfil two functions:
  • The Media must report the news fairly, completely, and without bias.
  • The Media must function as a watchdog for the public against abuse of power.
How do you plan to make sure the ATSNN is kept at both of those levels?

That's a highly precarious situation to apply to ATSNN. ATSNN fulfils its news coverage by way of a democratic process i.e. people vote on the stories. So I find it mind boggling to comprehend how a democratic news outlet could keep a democracy democratic. People voting on news items will allow their own bias to shine through as they can vote no to suppress what they do not want known. It also lends itself to abuse from those in power who could easily afford to get 15 unique computers to vote a story down in an instant if they so wished.

ATSNN wouldn't really hold up to a sustained attack on its democratic ways if some powerful entity wanted a story suppressed. Noam would not approve



Originally posted by Odium
What are the challenges to keeping those functions alive and well on ATSNN?

I think a clear and concise outline of what exactly ATSNN is aiming to achieve, a mission statement if you will, would help alleviate the misunderstandings that abound about the staff's intent. I myself was not fully attuned to the true purpose of ATSNN, which is to seek out the truth. Period.

Unless SO has some magic weapon I cannot see how its possible to fend off any attack on ATSNN's democratic voting system. That's not to say that its impossible though! If a member finds a way then they should let their councillor know immediately and we go from there!


Originally posted by Odium
How do you plan to get ATSNN out to a wider audience?

That's a good question. All I can offer is my own opinion but you have to bare in mind that its just one opinion in a sea of many. All I can think of is to increase the amount of individual contributors to ATSNN. There is also the upcoming ATSTV which will inevitably lead to an influx. But this really is the staff's purview, not the councillors



Originally posted by Odium
Do you wish to see ATSNN stick as it is now, with people reporting stories they see on Yahoo!, MSN, etc or move to ATSNN having its own journalism team? [Not just Op/Ed's]

No the status quo is paramount really. ATSNN couldn't have its own journalism team because that would require prohibitive amounts of resources. ATSNN is unique in this regard as it fills a niche. It has coherent and learned discourse as a major benefit of membership and readership. I really don't think competing with the big boys is feasible (yet).

I love Op/Eds though
I think they are my favourite component of ATSNN. I really really enjoy writing them and I enjoy reading them more than standard submissions. They truly give an insight into how the contributors mind works. It is fascinating



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Wow subz. You really are smart, aware, astute, and oh so capable.

Thank you so much for sharing your time and yourself.


Vote subz for ATSNN councilor




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join