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.

 

Due to member demand, the 9/11 forum is now under close staff scrutiny.

page: 4
62
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Good Call,

At least now we can get on with discussions and express our points, without sabotage from what appears to be a group of people whose role is to provide negative impact on a subject that should be given the due respect and intelligent discussion it deserves.

Scrutinizing this and maybe even other discussions can only serve to demonstrate that the ATS staff are dedicated to allowing people to voice an opinion, and receive intelligent debate and discussion around it - by an entire community, not a group


[edit on 8/6/2007 by deaman88]




posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
something has to be done about the amount of bickering going on in the threads and people need to get back onto the subject at hand and act as adults.


This could not be said any better, in my opinion at least.

It is very disappointing that such conduct is occuring, many of those members should know better. It can not be expressed, how disappointed I am, in the offending members. Would have thought they knew better...


What a shame.


What little time I do get to spend online, will now be directed more so towards watching for repeat offenders. Wish it could be spent interacting in a more relaxed manner.

Thank you very much, every one who brought this on.

[edit on 8-6-2007 by ADVISOR]



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Well done guys, Id love it if this was extended to the other forums as well, especially anything with "smoking gun" or "proof" in the title because thats a guarantee the thread will be anything but proof of the subject in hand, hell theres never even the slightest bit of evidence.

Id love for any thread to be locked if there is no evidence or witnesses to support the new thread, ATS would be so much better without having to sift through all the crap to find the real threads.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 11:11 AM
link   
OH MY GOD THANK YOU NOW MAYBE I CAN ACTUALLY COME BACK TO THIS SITE. Seriously, people like the ones the original poster described made me leave this site for months (I still check it every few days). Hopefully this will be a turn around for the discussion on this website. There are MANY people here who are disinfo agents, and today I think we found a few.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 11:46 AM
link   
This is precisely why I rarely, if ever, post in the whole "9/11" forum. While I do suspect that there is more to it than meets the idea, some of the accusations are just ridiculous. When you try to correct an incorrect assumption, people devolve into name calling.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
Id love for any thread to be locked if there is no evidence or witnesses to support the new thread, ATS would be so much better without having to sift through all the crap to find the real threads.

Says you, personally I find that position affrontive to the very purpose of ATS. There's a reason we call it Conspiracy "Theory", and there's a reason it's called discussion. People who take this hardnose approach to CT's would do much better to frequent other sites rather than come here demanding proof of our discussion topics. The whole 'prove it' attitude from alot of these skeptics is really starting to get out of hand here, and I think this little problem is a direct result of it.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I am glad this has been looked into. Thank you!



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
Says you, personally I find that position affrontive to the very purpose of ATS. There's a reason we call it Conspiracy "Theory", and there's a reason it's called discussion. People who take this hardnose approach to CT's would do much better to frequent other sites rather than come here demanding proof of our discussion topics. The whole 'prove it' attitude from alot of these skeptics is really starting to get out of hand here, and I think this little problem is a direct result of it.

That doesnt make it any sense at all.

Its one thing to promote a theory, its another to have wild claims about yourself or something that happened to you and not have a single thing to back it up.

This is en extreme case of where someone has a wild claim and is proved 100% wrong, every other wild claim hasnt had a shred of evidence and a lot of them have been found to be hoaxes. None of them have been proven correct.

IF you want to be gullible, fine but leave the rest of us to find out what really happened, after all, that is the point, to get to the truth.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 01:49 PM
link   
While ATS tends to hold a higher standard of backing up what is said here, you need to remember that we are not journalists, we are not lawyers, this isn't a trial, and we aren't here to satisfy your own personal needs for concrete evidence of anything. If there were proof, it wouldn't be a conspiracy theory, in this case it would have been a much needed indictment. There hasn't been a single official criminal investigation of the events of 9-11, yeah there was a commission that selectively considered statements and the like and issued an edict, but no investigation at all... So, can you proove that some of the coverage of the events of 9-11 weren't faked? Where's YOUR evidence? You can no more prove it wasn't faked than others can prove it was. I saw dinosaurs eating people in Jurassic Park... Must be real if it were on tv eh? It was on tv.. that pretty much sums up your evidence to the contrary, eh? FYI, you can't debunk something by calling the OP a nut, unless skeptics here are somehow held to a different standard than the rest of us.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   
I quite enjoyed some of the offenders posts.
I feel they have a right to say what they believe and if they want to stretch it out into numerous posts,why not? You can ignore it.
But i do understand AT'S stance on this.
The whole 911 issue seems to be turning into a bit of a circus these days,ATS is acting as a responsible ringmaster.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by AboveTopSecret.com
Any inappropriate comments, insults, topic derailment, or trolling will result in immediate posting ban or account termination.

1) We've received an overwhelming number of member complaints since the topic of "TV Fakery" splashed on the ATS scene a few days ago. Most of the member complaints are dealing with the trollish nature of the new member(s) promoting these theories, and a handful of supporting characters.

2) When participating with the members of AboveTopSecret.com, there are certain standards of conduct and cooperation that are not simply expected, they are demanded.

3) We seem to be among several sites targeted by a recently formed "9/11 Research" group who espouses a particularly provocative theory of "no planes at the WTC" and "TV Fakery."

4) What we (staff and memebrs) have noticed about this group is that their individuals

5) engage in what they hope is an IMPENETRABLE approach in debating. They appear to have have no REAL interest in defending or discussing their theories.

6) Instead they use provocative ideas and inflammatory language ("shills" for example) to bait people into extended debates filled with intentionally frustrating diversions, insults and accusation. Their activity in ATS threads prove they are disinterested in fact, reason, logic, or evidence while attempting to portray themselves as passionately convinced of their own highly questionable positions.

While we have a long standing tradition of supporting passionate debate of nearly any topic, we insist that all participates do so with respect and decorum.

7) Spamming our forum with multiple topics and ignoring well-presented questions demonstrates no intent to show respect. And calling ATS members who disagree with their position "shills" lacks the required decorum.

8) From this point forward, ONE TV FAKERY THREAD WILL REMAIN OPEN.
This one: SEPTEMBER CLUES exposes 911 TV Fakery
The opening posts of all "TV Fakery" threads will be modified to direct users to this thread. And likewise, this remaining open thread's first post will contain links to important questions raised by our members.

9) For now, new "TV Fakery" or "No Planes" threads based on the work of this group will be deleted. Please use the existing thread indicated above to add any new material to the discussion. Repeated attempts to start new threads may result in account termination.

10) If we see an improvement in tone, and an effort for collaboration, this restriction will likely be lifted. It's up to them.

11) It's unfortunate that what seems to be aa habitually malicious group has seen fit to act this way over events that deserve thoughtful debate, open research, and most of all collaborative participation. We've added additional staff to the 9/11 forum, and we'll be watching closely. Members, please help us by using the new "post alert" button when you see issues you believe we should be aware of.


And before we hear potential complaints of an uneven approach to moderation, YES, long-standing members will indeed be favored over the new participants who have shown no respect.



Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
The staff of AboveTopSecret.com


[edit on 8-6-2007 by AboveTopSecret.com]

1) Ha! What about the "trollish nature" of all the, um, TROLLS responding to all the NPT/TV-fakery threads?

2) BS, ATS has let trolls/skeptics who insults and disrupt run rampant here for a long time.

3) More like NPT/TV-fakery proponents have been banned by such 9/11 "truth" forums as:

911blogger.com
Loose Change
Lets Roll
NineElevenUK

...that we are limited in where we can debate about our theories. Shall we add AboveTopSecret to the list of forum forbidden to talk about NPT?

4) Before you edited yourselves:


What we (staff and memebrs) have noticed about this group is that their individuals (namely, Rick Siegel, Jim Fetzer, Nico Haupt, Coffinman, bsregistration, Killtown , etc etc)


5) No, we have no real interest in putting up with the trolls who try to derail our threads.

6) Are you talking about us, or the trolls? I've been complaining to the admin here about the trolls who insult, ridicule, disrupt, and call me "shill", but seems like the admin didn't give a damn.

7) Then why do you let the anti-NPTers do that?

8) Which other subjects are you going to do this for?

9) Which other subjects are we forbidden to start new topics on?

10) Well then ban the loud-mouth trolls who are close-minded to different theories.

11) Laughable. The skeptics (namely JREFers) have been allowed to run amok here, and bsregistration started posting some TV-fakery threads here, the trolls attack him and his/our NPT threads and you guys blame everything on us. Rich.


In the meantime, I'll participate in such non-"controversial" and non-"outlandish" topics such as:

- Aliens & UFO's
- Secret Societies
- Area 51 And Other Facilities
- Katrina Conspiracy Speculation
- SETI
- Mythical Beasts
- Paranormal Studies



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
The whole 'prove it' attitude from alot of these skeptics is really starting to get out of hand here, and I think this little problem is a direct result of it.


I agree.
Its great members here really look into things and dig hard to find the truth.
But some things will never be found and has too many shapes to make sense of.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Oh and another thing, if the admin here are going to close most of the new pro-TV-fakery threads, why the double standard in not closing most of the new anti-TV-fakery thread?...

The logic of no planes "9/11 Didn't Happen!"

An open challenge to no planers

Questions for TV "Fakery"



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Killtown
why the double standard in not closing most of the new anti-TV-fakery thread?

It's not a double standard. Those threads are not all started by the same person. The "TV Fakery" threads were initiated by one person, all pointing back to the efforts of one group.

However, under the new rules, if a new "anti-fakery" thread is started, we'll likely close it and point to one of the other three (unless it begins with some fundamentally new material).



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Great SO, but that has always been the policy here regarding repeat topics, unless I'm mistaken. Why is it all of a sudden a big tadoo in regards to this topic?



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
Why is it all of a sudden a big tadoo in regards to this topic?

Unfortunately, because it needed to be.


However, the "tadoo" is about more than simply thread spamming. There were serious tonality issues that needed to be addressed before it got worse.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   
People need to remember this is just an online message board, where you should talk about things in a friendly manner, even when you disagree. No need to go all crazy on others.

Just calm down and be cool about it....no matter how crazy you think another person or idea is.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Killtown
1) Ha! What about the "trollish nature" of all the, um, TROLLS responding to all the NPT/TV-fakery threads?

2) BS, ATS has let trolls/skeptics who insults and disrupt run rampant here for a long time.


I have to agree with Killtown on this one.

Also, wasn't the OP actually against the terms and conditions of this site? What I mean is it named ATS members directly and was talking about them. I thought that was against ATS rules?

I have been complaining about the "trolls" for a while now along with Pootie and BsBray. The trolls were allowed to continue. This was way before any of this CGI stuff was even considered.

I have been staying away from the CGI threads, so I really can't comment on how they have been handled, but in pretty much every other thread I have been in, the trolls come out in full force.

Just my little pence.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
However, the "tadoo" is about more than simply thread spamming. There were serious tonality issues that needed to be addressed before it got worse.


I'm glad you guys are doing this actually. I just worry that it will be in a biased manner as it has been in the past. No offense ment.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 03:22 PM
link   
With all the disinfo on this site, why was scrutiny only applied to this topic?....Did Simon get a call from Arthur Jensen?



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join