Welcome back, Crakeur!!
I was going to just submit and promise never to link to NESARA or any other questionable content again, but I thought about it and can't think of a
legitimate reason why. I didn't see anything in the Terms and Conditions forbidding reference to material under discussion in the spirit of an
informed, intelligent exchange.
How can anyone posting here, engaging in a legitimate, intelligent discussion, allow ATS to censor the content of their posts? Isn't that sort of
censorship in direct conflict with the ideology promoted here at ATS?
I think I made it clear that neither TD nor I were a part of a group supporting NESARA, nor were we promoting that program. I was linking to the
content under discussion as reference material. My posts need to be read again if they are being perceived as promoting fraudulent activity.
Originally opined by Crakeur
OTD, your posting of any nonsense linking either Nidle or Dove of Oneness and NESARA is, in effect, promotion of a scam.
Emphasis mine. We're not allowed to link to "nonsense"? Is this in the ATS Terms and Conditions?
Referencing and advocating/promoting are two different things. I have a dictionary that says so. If you, or the admins/mods wish to blur this line in
order to build a case to ban me then please drop the pretext and ban me.
Neither TD nor I are promoting (re: TD's story) a scam or fraud here. TD is sharing, honestly, his experiences and I am finding material and
individuals with similar experiences that support TD's claims. No on has been able to disprove that TD had these experiences. I would submit that to
try to disprove a lifetime of experiences, many with witnesses, would be an exercise in futility.
Again, this material (TD's) seems to rub people the wrong way. It's something many people just wish gone. As you stated,
Originally posted by Crakeur
Folks, just remember this is in skunk works because there isn't one stitch of proof to this story and the few facts TD tried to give have failed
horribly.
Emphasis again mine. We failed so horribly that this thread is now the top third thread in the Skunk Works section at ATS (although I admit, being
king of the Skunk Works section won't look good on a resume') with over fifty-one thousand views and over a years' worth of posts, and new members
joining every day. We really have fallen flat on our faces.
I'm not bragging. I'm stating the facts. I'll submit that one of the reasons this thread has been going so long, and has long time readers and
posters is that we are being honest and sincere - as much as the lack of proof and outrageousness of what we're proposing seems to rub people the
wrong way. Some people won't even let themselves entertain the possibility...
This story was moved to the Skunk Works section because a moderator(s) at ATS felt there wasn't sufficient evidence to back up TD's claims. I won't
presume that I'm still here because there is at least one admin that isn't convinced this is a fraud, but I also don't think that whomever moved
this thread, and those that support him also speak for all of the mods and admins at ATS. There are moderators who have shown support, and who have
joined in the discussion. They understand the harmlessness in just talking.
TD didn't jump to proffer any evidence, but was only sharing his experiences and visions of the future for the public to make a judgment call on his
claims; maybe to his detriment. It hasn't hurt viewership though...
We have never complained about the location of this thread; everyone has equal access to it. In fact, we're happier that this information is shared
in a section that urges caution with regard to the material being shared.
If evidence is required in order to have an open, intelligent discussion on all subject matter, then where would ATS be? If this were strictly a
scientific website, 99% of the membership would vanish. These boards are all about sharing ideas and experiences and discussing them in an open,
"civil", uncensored, and equitable environment.
Originally posted by Crakeur
One of your sites linked in that rather long post links to the Dove's site. She's a scammer.
...but even mentioning it and those sites is still promoting it.
Emphasis mine; insult, Crakeur's. You can't keep the subject in focus, but have to add personal jabs? My posts are ponderous. I know. Oh, we have
fun...
I agree with the second underlined statement in your quoted post above. It should be crystal clear that a member is actively and deliberately posting
a scam before any such corrective action is brought against said member (If this is specifically indicated in the T&C).
However, you're now crossing the line and attempting to control and direct the specific content of our posts (not just mine and TD's, but all
members),
Originally posted by Crakeur
Please refrain from linking to known scammers or their scams. Feel free to talk about the totally dismissed 1990's proposed bill all you want.
What other topics would you rather we not discuss or provide links to? Would you prefer it if you gave us specific topics with specific guidelines for
discussing these topics? Would you like us to send you our posts before we post them; or would you just prefer writing our posts for us?
I'm sure there is a contingent at ATS that would like to create a "Member Relations" department to edit and control the content of posts...
I'm glad you don't speak for the individuals who created Above Top Secret to encourage discussion of controversial or taboo subject matter (I know
they're here to make money from ATS, but "failed" threads like this one have encouraged readers to $ign up and po$t).
We can't even "mention those sites"? What madness is this? I see a moderator playing Leibstandarte and interpreting the Terms and Conditions to
suit his own needs.
Does this mean we're not allowed to discuss certain controversial topics in an objective sense? Are there those "things of which we will not speak"
even within the framework of a conspiracy discussion site such as ATS? How can we have a discussion about controversial subject matter by only
abstractly hinting at its content?
The idea that ATS promotes civil, open, and intelligent (Deny Ignorance) discussion is in direct contradiction to the idea of terminating members'
accounts for simply mentioning and linking to the material under discussion, not in an attempt to promote said material, but to shed light on and
investigate the subject matter in question.
Does this mean we can't talk about Hitler's Nazi Germany? The local and national news talks about scams and provides specific information on the
folks perpetrating those scams. If it's good enough for the national media, why not here?
Banning people for discussing these things - who are clearly
not advocating for fraudulent behavior - is an exercise in idiocy,
Originally posted by Crakeur
I can't say if you are promoting it intentionally or not...
At least you admit that it doesn't appear we are outright promoting, advocating, or condoning fraudulent behavior. It should at least be determined
beyond a reasonable doubt before action is taken. Hopefully reason will factor into the equation here. I've said this before, but there is a
distinction between objectively discussing a subject and soliciting or advocating for it.
I've said my piece. I DO believe that, as you've stated, there are scams, and these scams make civil discussion difficult. I think NESARA and the
Galactic Federation, just to name a couple, are examples of controversies overshadowing what may be legitimate, credible source material.
In any event, I'm done talking about those two subjects, because I think they've been covered enough. I'd rather not focus too much on any one
subject, but allow everything an opportunity to be discussed.
I intend to continue to observe the Terms and Conditions that govern posting here. It's a lot of work. I'm not doing this for my health. I'm doing
it, as is TD, to offer encouragement to people, and to share information we feel is relevant.
I don't hold any personal grudge against you, Crakeur. Your entrances into this thread are a lively distraction. But I would like to keep the thread
on track and continue the discussion we started.
Hopefully you don't take any of my comments personally. They are definitely not intended that way.
Well met, my good man.
Keeping it real...
Why do you think i search for Spirituality
at a young age
