posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 06:43 PM
Red Flag Waiver
Originally posted by horusthechorus
For what it's worth, it seems many of the major players and groups (real activists) within the alt media movement actually avoid ATS.
Again, a red flag.
Speaking of red flags, calling for orthodoxy in a “movement” and making vague, unsubstantiated claims are also Big Red
The credibility of ATS is being challenged. In the same post you hand-wave about ATS “censorship” then go on to criticize ATS for not
“censoring” this very discussion.
How does that make sense?
Your post is at least appropriately titled, because it is indeed fishy.
If you are willing to back up your sweeping generalizations with some facts that can be examined, I'm interested. I'm sure others would be too.
I've also started a podthread for those who want to sound off on this issue vocally in any manner they please:
ATS.C: Class In Session
. You can even cuss if you want to if you make a podcast and
use the “explicit” tag. Written posts to that thread are also welcome.
As a member of ATS you are free to express any opinion you want and present any facts you want within the reasonable limitations of the
. You are free to criticize those too, but bear in mind that you've agreed
to them by being here.
I know for a fact that many of our fellow members are keenly interested in reasonable criticism of ATS. The staff ain't perfect, the members ain't
perfect and the site ain't perfect.
But the key word there is reasonable
criticism. That means it has to make sense and have a basis in reality.
Please share your reasons. Cite facts. Show us the truth.
I'm waiting, and I'm listening.
Don't be shy.
OPSECSTAT: OMSoM to STN-9D. CR: King in yellow, queen in red.