[HOAX] Haiti UFO Video - YouTube - [HOAX]

SAD but TRUE... At the end of day, it's ALL ABOUT the TAC of this site and the ultra-high esteem we hold this August Membership within.

Springer...

Y'know, I've been checking in throughout the past few days intending to write a stirring argument for not banning ummofriend, but I just couldn't get it to work. If not for his first two posts in this thread, where he didn't identify himself as the UFO Haiti animator, I may have been able to do it.

But, the fact is that he misrepresented himself (not merely underrepresented himself -- I re- and re-read the posts), and that's the bottom line. I'd hoped that a man of his skills would be valuable to ATS as an expert in state-of-art cgi. But, sadly, the only way to have that happen would be to make an exception in the T&C for him.

I disagree with the banning, if only to have got an answer to this.

Obviously it is the perogative of the moderators but I would be interested to know if it was based on the fact of the two posts prior to the admission or whether the ban would still have occurred if the first post contained an admission ?

The author did nothing to claim the footage as real or otherwise on YT (his first post on ATS called it fake, without admitting to be the author). What the individual chooses to believe is therefore a matter for them. It would be hoped that additional information would be required before anyone takes it as real footage.

As deception can be just the intent to deceive and considering the authors subsequent admission of motive I'll accept it as deception with the following caveat.

No harm is caused until someone has been deceived.

More worrying than the fact that someone created some video which looked "real" and posted it on YT with the labels above, is the fact that it was accepted as such.

If you are the person losing money to the hawkster with a ball and three hats you have been deceived. If you were in the audience watching it's pure entertaintment. As a law enforcer present at the circus what would you do if someone complained they had been conned.

It's a thin line but I'll accept that in the context of this thread on ATS I was wrong.

[edit on 30-8-2007 by chunder]

I would be interested to know if it was based on the fact of the two posts prior to the admission or whether the ban would still have occurred if the first post contained an admission ?


Very good question, chunder.

That question being, as of yet, unanswered, I think it's important to restate that new members oughta peruse the T&C before posting.

[edit on 30-8-2007 by Tuning Spork]

reply to post by chunder

---

Q: How many ATS'ers does it take to change a light bulb?
A: 10

One to change the light bulb, and 9 to complain about how much they miss the old light bulb.

In other words, it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.

While the decision may be a disappointment for some, I personally feel it was the right thing to do. The Great and Powerful Oz has spoken.

I commend the owners / staff for addressing this and making a tough decision. It maintains the high standards of ATS. Justice was served.

Luckily this thread will soon be over. I have run out of stupid things to say. Uh, just one more. We all got "Barzolffed".

regards.....kk

[edit on 30-8-2007 by kinda kurious]

If ummofriend had come into this thread and announced he was "Barz", proved it, and gone on to explain his reasons for the video, etc... there would be no reason to ban him and he would still be a member here.

That didn't happen.

One of his posts is a pure deception/deflection and utterly violates the TAC of this site.

No one is above the TAC.

Springer...

I had confidence in you guys to do the right thing on this, although it gives me no pleasure in seeing anyone banned, you were left with no choice. I feel in some ways this thread provided some positives though.

Namely that finally the old 'CG can't look photoreal' argument doesn't hold water. (In fact I can point out a still image someone on a cg site put out a few days ago that not just is photoreal it increases the whole thing by a carpet mile.) Everyone in this thread had to face both their own belief systems and the facts in front of them and make a decision.

Some were right, some were wrong and that doesn't make either side any less of a person. My hunch is that after this, we will see a 'backlash' of sorts from some young CG guys flexing the same muscles. Its up to those of us with knowlege of whole world of 3d and CG to help where we can and educate ATS users in a polite and informative way so as to best cut down the hoaxes and hopefully prevent them from turning into 100 page mega threads.

I still hope one day we come across the 'missing piece' of the puzzle, be it video or anything else that makes us all sit up and change our views in some way.

Wayne...

KK, you're right about the fact that the concentrical rings aren't visible
by a bottom-view perspective, whereas they do are by a top-view.
It looks too that they are visible even here, at least in Naughty grannies
it's so.

Maybe i'm wrong, but: is it possible that after importing it in Vue 6 it happens that a part of the ship becomes visible/unvisible randomly?
Is there any expert, apart ummofiriend, that can clearly explane this phenomena, please?
Does it makes sense to say "the software lost them?"


[edit on 30/8/2007 by internos]

Baffles me how anyone could have thought this was real in the first place, to be honest. I like the effects, though. The ship design needs some serious work.

reply to post by Sytima

---

Nothing like saying :" I told you the baby is ugly" right after it was born.

Instead of trying to ridicule the community, try to add something significant please.

Like how you came to your conclusions for example.

reply to post by Bunch

---

I sincerely apologize. I didn't mean to insult anyone, that was really just my comment directed toward the video.

I did, however, contribute my thoughts. I thought it was nice 3d graphic work.

Again, I apologize if I came off as condescending.

On another note, I saw this video before-hand on youtube not too long back. I thought the same thing then, especially after seeing the other similar videos.

[edit on 30-8-2007 by Sytima]

Ummofriend hasn't been a great lost for us.
He betrayed, he lied, he has been useless and moreover he attempted to influence the analysis over his HOAX.
IMHO, there's still something to clear about what's happened ...with or without him.

[edit on 30/8/2007 by internos]

???Exactly where did he ridicule the community??? He simply gave his opinion on the video. Lighten up for pete's sake.

reply to post by Valhall

---

Much appreciated.

Again, I do apologize for any insult taken.

[edit on 30-8-2007 by Sytima]

Sytima, Valhall

My apologies, I think I misunderstood the post, and it was not your intention so please excuse me.

No need to be all rowdy, I think I'm bringing the bad day that I'm having in real life to here.

Loging out!


[edit on 30-8-2007 by Bunch]

Ther's another one of those cartoons from barzollf there:
Peter the astronaut

And Barzolff814 continues to lie and mislead. On his YouTube page he lists his age as 34 and location as United States. We all now know that is not true. I mean, why lie about such insignificant minutia?

Just a minor thought for those who continue to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Personally, seeing all of the other amazing animation he has done leaves no doubt in my mind that he is extremely talented. Had the animation work preceeded the fake UFO videos, we might have had a clue to begin with. IMHO, he is presenting the other work to deflate the magnitude of the original hoax.

regards...kk

"34" probably refers to his younger brother's age. He and his brother work together as a team at a Paris cgi company.

As for the United States locale, ummofriend did say that he was in Bed Stuy when he made the Brooklyn video, and that his girlfriend "Sam" is bilingual. The three of them may travel frequently between New York and Paris.

Pierre Le Cosmonaut was a short film he made a while back. Why is that even an issue here?

As to his age, spork is probably correct. He works as a team with his brother so, perhaps, they mixed their own info together in the bio on tube.

Just speculating but it does make sense, non?