It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


So now that ATS has sponsored/advertised for an anti-war, pro-liberal movie...

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 05:31 PM
C'mon folks, play nicely please.

Edit to add: Discuss the topic, not each other.

[edit on 30-8-2006 by intrepid]

posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 05:47 PM

Originally posted by kuhl
That's a bit harsh cmdrkeenkid is only putting his point across

Yes it was a bit harsh. I was being sarcastic.

And I am also only putting my point across. It's unreasonable to expect to only see the "truth" without bias in this world. I mean, if a person expects to see only the truth without bias, even watching the news is going to be a disappointment. Everyone has thier bias.

That's my point.

posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 05:52 PM
I don't see much problem with it...yes, it seems ATS is becoming more commercialized, but I guess it's necessary to pay the bills as the site becomes more and more busy.

I would like to ask who approached whom in this deal though...have you guys considered approaching people selling things like Fahrenhype 9/11? Would you consider promoting such a DVD? What about Ann Coulter talking dolls?

The only really bad thing I think is the "The Movie About Vietnam That Is Rocking The Country" HUGE banner at the top, seems an overstatement to say the least, the only place I've ever heard of this thing is here.

posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:23 PM
Can anyone be truly neutral?

I'm yet to see an example anywhere in the world of true neutrality. We are all born into a world that will shape who we are, and what we believe. For the extremes of our belief systems, it is nearly impossible to understand how anyone can think in any other way. It is why 9/11 threads that suggest a conspiracy don't work for me. I cannot comprehend that this is the case. Does this make me ignorant? I don't believe so, I've read the evidence, and nothing has convinced me to change my mind. It is why one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. Perspective can be different, even if you are looking at the same picture. It makes us who we are. My advice is to embrace the differences. It is what in the end develops true neutrality by balancing things out. There are plenty of anti-conspiracy theory websites out there to balance this one. I prefer this one because I find it more entertaining, learn more, and feel part of the community, even though I'm not a big conspiracy theorist. I don't agree with a lot of what members like Niteboy and BSBray say, but they are part of the ATS family, and have their own view in the world. I would never want that to change.

To the topic on hand

The biggest problem I had with the advertisement was the fact that it was in a dedicated thread, rather than in the usual advertising position. SO and Springer have indicated that similar courtesies will be provided to any advertiser. And that's good enough for me. I just hope that when the USAF or NSA put ads on ATS (and let's face it, there are quite a few people on this website who would be interested in joining) that there are no similar threads to this one complaining that ATS would lower themselves (sell themselves?) to such advertisers.

Time alone will tell. Until then, I take the word of the Big Three at face value.

posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:57 PM

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid

EDIT TO ADD: After all, ATS has had support of both sides on its ads, even recently. The main example that comes to mind are the 757/Pentagon threads.

You're comparing apples and oranges. That's a topic, this is a product. I think you've been told if there is an opposing product on this particular issue, in which they (the 3 Amigos) feel it fits into the genre of the board and also helps to fund this community - they'll put it up.

I understand that sales of a DVD can spur a lot of revenue, but are the best interests of the ATS community as a whole in perspective here?

I'm sure you aren't the person to decide the best interest of the community. That I'm certain of. Aren't you the dude that when you were a moderator told me to shut up posting because my posts were too Anti-Bush? You sent me a whole series of u2us in which you jumped my # and told me to stop posting because I called him an idiot and you were getting sick of my anti-Bush comments.

Yeah - why don't you pick what's best for the community.

Here's a thought. Maybe what's best for the community is what keeps this community together without requiring cash out-lays of the members. There's a thought.

Would you feel better if they ran a few GOP ads? Or maybe you'd feel better if your good buddy came back and stomped the crap out of anybody that hinted at having an unbiased opinion on the Israeli/Palestinian issue...maybe that's what you think would be best for this community.

Honestly, this is the first time that I have doubted the leadership of the Three Amigos, and that's why I wanted to post this here, instead of submitting a complaint. I wanted to have this issue open for discussion for all who support, oppose, and are neutral on this. Also, this venue allows for the staff to interact directly with the board as a whole, versus on just a person-to-person manner.

But it's not the first time your judgment has been doubted. And I call BS on why you posted it here instead of the complaint forum. You keep repeating this drivel of your doubts about the 3 Amigos' judgment, but the majority of your posts so far have centered on the fact that this product being sold (just like date ads and Phoenix online university) is is contradiction to YOUR position. If it was "buy your own Bush chia-pet" ad, we wouldn't even know you were still a member.

I feel exactly the same way about political movies, as well.

And this is where you really show your ignorance. Being anti-Vietnam war versus pro-Vietnam war is not a political stance. Being anti-Iraq war versus pro-Iraq war is not a political stance. Being for a "policy" or against a "policy" is not a political stance. It is a stance on a policy - not politics. You want to paint every one who disagrees with you as a "liberal" or maybe "anti-American???" Bullcrap. No, not just bullcrap - stuff it! You are wrong, in too many ways to enumerate.

And now live with this post - it's my opinion. You had yours, now I have mine.

EDIT: Said "emails" meant "u2us"...corrected.

[edit on 8-30-2006 by Valhall]

posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 09:06 PM

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid

I already explained it once... seemingly, it needs explaining again. (And after reading the thread, again and again and again and again.)

Feel free to contact any producer of a product that supports the "pro-war/conservative view" and convince them to pay for an advertising program on ATS. (However, I'm sure you're aware the Vietnam was was brought to use by "liberals", right?)

Just because we offer unique advertising opportunities does not mean we "agree" with the advertisers. For example, I happen to think the advertiser that thinks Cyprus is Atlantis is full of bull. But it's an interesting item that many of our members my appreciate.... so the "sponsored forum" deal seemed to fit well.

This drama event is now closed.

new topics

top topics
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in