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

page: 5
56
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 04:17 PM
link   
But tone aside, with all due respect SO, why in the world would you, of all people, individually name these members in a post and then try to portray them as being some kind of subversive group out to besmirch ATS? Obviously it's your website and I am in no position to argue with you about policy, but I personally think that is going a little too far and it sure seems as though you are taking sides here rather than just handling the problem as it has always been handled.
I've seen you do it before, last time it was a subversive group of Nazis wasn't it? With my strongly anti-zionist viewpoints, it's a wonder my membership survived that witch hunt.




posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
... why in the world would you, ...


There is much going on behind the scenes that members are just not privy to and will likely never fully understand.

Life is full of mysteries.

.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   
(I did think better and remove specific names last evening.)

However, the more I look into this particular group, the more I learn that they employ dedicated trolls. This has happened before on other boards. It just happened to be our turn. That's why I singled out a specific group... just like we singled out and names trolls from "StormFront" and "F-ed Company" back when those groups put ATS in cross-hairs.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Well, if Gools is cool with it, then I'm cool with it.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by AboveTopSecret.com


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



Oh really? This is happening? Oh no!!! It is unconciounable!!! It's a travesty!!!

It sounds like it's starting to turn into a 'Greer thread'!

Please stop it before it's too late!!!



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Wow their seems to be more rhetoric on this post than in alot of the 9/11 boards!!

Still people (on this post) here saying such as "defenders of truth", and so on.

Your truth is different than mine, and that is the whole point here!!

And yet the "no planes" , "govt cover up", and such seem to have yet another platform on a post designed to rid this forum of just that!!

This problem wasnt fixed by this post it was made worse!



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by redseal
Your truth is different than mine, and that is the whole point here!!


Yes it is. Good point.


And yet the "no planes" , "govt cover up", and such seem to have yet another platform on a post designed to rid this forum of just that!!


You know, I haven't partaken in those threads. If that's what happened, I say use full force. I'd hate to see people I respect go, but if they were non-conducive to the thread, then kick them out. Edit: Now that I read that, it seams a little harse. If they weren't, then why are we even debating this?

Also an edit: Who am I to say how you guys run your site. As always, no disrespect.


This problem wasnt fixed by this post it was made worse!


Yes, I agree because I had no intention of checking those threads out. Now, I'm not so sure.



[edit on 6/8/2007 by Griff]



posted on Jun, 9 2007 @ 12:44 PM
link   
I would just like to say that anyone who thinks this has taken place because 'they' ( nwo, gov etc ) are censoring it, needs a reality check.

This is simply keeping order in a forum which respects itself and others, and struggles to keep a standard, which is difficult due to the nature of topics.
The quality of this forum I guarantee is higher than that of anything that the people who make such claims could make themselves.

Simple fact is that if people were civil this would not be needed. In this case the simple most obvious answer is right.



posted on Jun, 9 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   
TOby hit the nail on the head. As to the input in this thread I see that approx. 95% of the members not only see this as a necessary move but one long overdue.



posted on Jun, 9 2007 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by redseal
Your truth is different than mine, and that is the whole point here!!

And yet the "no planes" , "govt cover up", and such seem to have yet another platform on a post designed to rid this forum of just that!!

This problem wasnt fixed by this post it was made worse!

I think you might have missed the purpose of this thread. It isn't to silence/discredit/censor the no-plane theory, it's about the dubious tactics being employed by a group of posters.

The aim is to "rid this forum" of rudeness, trolls and repetitive spam threads, not to take a stance on any of the issues and theories of 9/11.

[edit on 9/6/07 by subz]



posted on Jun, 9 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
TOby hit the nail on the head. As to the input in this thread I see that approx. 95% of the members not only see this as a necessary move but one long overdue.


Yes, but long overdue in the Greer threads.



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Lol, it looks like ATS is being accused of being a "fake conspiracy site" elsewhere. Check out the June 7 announcement on this page

Seriously though, just because some threads get locked doesn't mean that this is a tool for disinformation. It just means there was a problem with your threads. If you want to be taken seriously, you can't lash out and insult your detractors.



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 03:25 PM
link   
This is rich. I just got warned for this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Killtown
This is rich. I just got warned for this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Who is this post directed at? Or is it just a plea for support?



posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 09:45 AM
link   
We've been noticing a great deal of "negative reaction" about this decision as various members have been sending me U2U's with links to "9/11 Boards" where various users are decrying this action as censorship.

First, regardless of the opinions of disgruntled topic activists, there is no censorship on ATS outside of topics specifically mentioned in the Terms & Conditions.

(I consider "topic activists" to be those who arrive at ATS from other sites, or groups of sites, specifically to promote certain subject matter.)

Second, if you're a topic activist, you must be prepared to accept that not all ATS members will immediately agree with you, and even those who may want to agree will first subject your topic to critical scrutiny. Harsh analysis of your topic is not an attack.

Third, if you're a topic activist and you're unable or have no desire to respond to reasonable questions from ATS members, you will raise the frustration factor of members. It is then reasonable to expect to receive even harsher questions and/or criticism.

Finally, if you're a topic activist and you become temporarily or permanently banned because of inflammatory rhetoric or insulting posts, our staff is banning you not your topic.



Unfortunately, the majority of trollish topic activists of late have been associated with rather extreme 9/11 conspiracy theories. And our experience over the past six years has shown us that 9/11 conspiracies tend to spawn more topic activists who are predisposed to deliver angry responses to valid questions than any other subject matter. Our one mistake in this matter is not not clamping down sooner, being concerned that such rapid action may be seen as "editorial involvement."


For Topic Activists

If you have a subject matter in which you have great passion and desire to disseminate, fewer places provide a more ideal platform than ATS. Your topic will receive immediate search engine attention and our members are notorious actively pursuing compelling ideas. The more you present a rational and respectful attitude, the more credible you will be perceived, and the more success your topic will enjoy. If your topic is truly important, then it is worth your efforts to engage us in a civil way.


And One Final Point of Clarity

I don't give a damn what these petty angry topic activists say about us on their safe haven discussion boards full of like-mind back-slappers. I care about ATS, ATS members, and our aspirational ideals of supporting debate and discussion of any topic as long as it's accomplished with reasonable decorum.



posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
We've been noticing a great deal of "negative reaction" about this decision as various members have been sending me U2U's with links to "9/11 Boards" where various users are decrying this action as censorship.



Thats funny, considering the fact that many 9/11 boards that I've been on seem to really enjoy censoring the opposite opinion.



posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

And One Final Point of Clarity

I don't give a damn what these petty angry topic activists say about us on their safe haven discussion boards full of like-mind back-slappers. I care about ATS, ATS members, and our aspirational ideals of supporting debate and discussion of any topic as long as it's accomplished with reasonable decorum.



Thats what I've been waiting for...


I've never seen anyone... ANYONE, treated badly here at ATS by the Staff unless they've deserved it and I shouldn't say treated badly...
break the rules, pay the price...



posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Killtown
This is rich. I just got warned for this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


And rightfully so. You used derogatory terms directect at another member, which is agains the Terms and Conditions of ATS. You can attack other's claims and ideas till the cows come home, but to attack another member personally because you don't agree with them is childish and immature.



posted on Jun, 13 2007 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Allegations Of Moderator Bias

We've been seeing quite a few claims that the moderators are selectively enforcing the AboveTopSecret.com Terms And Conditions Of Use.

If you think this is a real problem, here's how you can help:

1. If you believe any staff member has acted inappropriately, please report it by submitting a Complaint/Suggestion and we'll investigate.

2. Likewise, if you are concerned about a T&C violation by another member that may have been overlooked by the staff, a Complaint/Suggestion is the way to go.

Please do NOT attempt to derail threads with accusations, off-topic drama, libel, et al, because doing so is itself a violation of the T&C, one of the most common disruption tactics currently being used in the forums and may result in prompt removal.

There is now compelling evidence that our forums are the target of one or more organized campaigns aimed at disrupting discussion of 9/11-related topics.

Attempting to suppress the ability of any member to express any opinion on any subject in accordance with the T&C has, is and always shall be in direct conflict with the core values of our community.

Please help us to keep our forums open and available to everyone who has information to share by honoring the AboveTopSecret.com Terms And Conditions Of Use.

Again, to all members who have been doing so: thank you!


Yes, we do notice.



posted on Jun, 14 2007 @ 07:18 AM
link   
Majic and all moderators.

I am guilty of the accusation of biasness. For that I am truly sorry. After posting that, I had a night to cool off and I realized that it was mostly my own biasness and probably paranoia. Take care and I will try to be on my best behavior.

[edit on 6/14/2007 by Griff]





new topics
top topics
 
56
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join