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.


protection of information sources.

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 03:29 AM

Originally posted by Qwenn
well perhaps it is time for us to question the motivations of certain Mods and report it in the open, I have had cause to complain before and it has either been ignored or brushed under the carpet. I think the time has come for us all to whistleblow on any Mods which we either suspect, or know have an alternative agenda.

We all need to be very careful with accusations, etc. However, I understand your point.

I know, for a fact, that some Moderators make some mistakes and probably wish they could take things back. I've had cause for concern over one very senior Moderator and I know I had a right (if I have rights here??) to take it further. There's no point, as it would only cause bad blood, despite the fact I have evidence to prove my claim. It's easier to let it slide and get on with reading and posting!

But, when you consider the vast majority of the Moderators are efficient, pleasant and sensible and that they are all HUMANS who are offering their services, we've got just about the best staff monitoring the boards that we could hope for. No, I'm not a suck. If I didn't like it here, I wouldn't be here.

If you really have a complaint, then make sure you can back it up, otherwise you'll be wasting a lot of time with needless friction. That's my advice.

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 03:35 AM
The main points that I was trying to make in this thread were:

If you have a trusted source, is it acceptable to reveal who they are, where they work, how they got the information, basically enough details to have them arrested for passing things on to you. I was asked for details in the first thread by a Moderator and passed on enough information to verify that certain things were true, this information was not acknowledged to other members, who thought that I had not supplied this information.

In the second thread a Moderator asked me to send the military details for the source, which were asked for in a way which would be tracable to the source, I refused to be that specific, but gave as many details as possible.

Is it right to out the whistleblowers, when all they are doing, is passing things to us, sometimes just to be able to leave a papertrail that can be followed up after the event.

All of the personal remarks and name calling that goes on, just muddies the water and derails a thread from the actual purpose, before long no one is addressing the issue, just fighting.

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 04:10 AM

Originally posted by Qwenn

If you have a trusted source, is it acceptable to reveal who they are, where they work, how they got the information, basically enough details to have them arrested for passing things on to you.

You should never reveal any information that could bring harm upon another person or person's. I am sure this person trusted you with the information and is relying on you to keep him/her confidential if his/her job, life, freedom, and or anything of the like are at stake.It is your responsibility and yours alone to keep your source safe if you wish it so.

To answer your question, no it is not acceptable, as far as I am concerned, to betray the trust of your friend. People probably shouldn't be asking you to divulge such info but its not any of their concern what happens to you and your friend. Be responsible with your knowledge and if anybody tries to push you for such information tell them to shove off or ignore them.

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 05:27 AM
[edit on 4/5/08 by riotact1]

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 06:14 AM
I concur that you should not allow yourself to be pressured into revealing information of a personal nature that could expose a friend or even a stranger for that matter. It would be akin to a journalist exposing a source.

I'm still very curious though as to what this was all about. Is there any way you can give a general outline or indication as to what it is that you were trying to unravel, what if anything you discovered, etc.? Can you walk us through your story, in other words? I'm still a bit lost as to what happened, and what you were trying to figure out with the help of those mods.

In one of the threads, Byrd said that he believed you were the victim of a prank. Is that your conclusion as well, or do you feel that you had some legitimate information that was suppressed or that you have not been able to successfully share with others?

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 06:52 AM
reply to post by Qwenn

You would probably have saved yourself a whole load of trouble if you just gave brief details of your source to the whole forum and not just the mods - no need to give details that could identify, and place in danger, the source.

Why give it to a mod in the first place?

Mods have their place but they are a tiny team that do a difficult job representing and supporting literally tens of thousands of ATS members.

They are selected for their skills and knowledge - but that is not to say that because we are not a mods, we do not possess any skills or knowledge!

Trust and share with the whole forum.

And please do not leave.

ATS is a collective and would be nothing without it's members like you Qwenn.

[edit on 5/4/2008 by skibtz]

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 07:35 AM
reply to post by skibtz

Perhaps Byrd believed that I had been hoaxed, or perhaps she was trying to offer me a way out with lesser blame than some may place on me otherwise. Saving face has never been a priority with me, when I am wrong, I say so. I believe my source of information is trustworthy and risked a lot to contact me in difficult circumstances. I will know by 9th of April if it was so and if it is, hopefully then I expect the Moderators in question to acknowledge the fact publically. It would then be an obvious fact that I could not after that even hint at the source, suffice to say that I would find a way to release details in a different and safer way. As I said before it was never a gloom and doom thread and I asked for u2u`s from anyone who had information on the numbers and letters which I had, I also had a basic outline of events, which I kept to myself. In my opinion I have asked little from other members and have shared information back by u2u`s to anyone who has kindly sent in any backup information which has helped to veryfy any details. None of those members are heading for the hills or panicking, just watching out for any odd events on the 9th April.

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 09:14 AM

Originally posted by jimmyx
i'm fairly new here, but what i don't understand, is there really a post that requires proof and sources before it can be shown and discussed by the members here?

Yes! If a guy comes wafting in claiming he's been to the Kuiper belt with a bunch of aliens in a mother ship or that he's been working with aliens in a top secret project on Mars, then he's got to provide some evidence. As the saying goes, extra ordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But where this OP is concerned, he's provided nix.

Needless to say, these posts do not add to the quality of ATS forums. More stuff like this would make it into a riffraff site of which there are a dime a dozen on the net. We need to maintain minimum standards here. And that's where the mods come in, who are doing a fantastic job of filtering the wheat from the chaff from the hundreds of posts that appear every day. And I can assure you, that isn't an easy task.

Get my drift?

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 09:15 AM
reply to post by Qwenn

It seems that not divulging any details of the possible events on or around the 9th April is to your own detriment.

Why do you believe that it is right to hold on to this information?

If there is a valid/logical/honest reason for holding back this information then your fellow members should respect that reasoning. Likewise you should also respect the fact that by omitting this information without providing such reasoning you are leaving yourself open to be prejudged.

That said, please do not feel that I am judging you in any way: I just want to understand why we are at the point where you feel you should/must leave the forum.

[edit on 5/4/2008 by skibtz]

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 09:38 AM
Hello Qwenn,

From what I see many mistakes were made here on both/all sides.

I think with you being excited about maybe having something important/ information you wrote URGENT blah, blah, blah and it seems that sometimes titles get people riled up in one way or another. I think Cahill was right by giving you the time after all you only asked for 24 hours. Intrepid shouldn't have jumped in and with his/her remark using the word possible suggesting you being banned either as far as I see it, Cahill was taking care of things first I believe.

I think Byrd is okay and was doing what Byrd does, which he/she does well but I also think Byrd could have handled closing the thread differently instead every member in the thread was sitting at home scratching there heads.

All in all the members in the thread should have had some type of clue to what was going on.

I think now you have the duty to share with us what you think is to happen on the 9th and whatever happens, happens or it doesn't happen........ at least we know the situation and can prepare or help watch out for whatever you think might be.

We all have to remember we are all human and we make mistakes. I don't think you should leave the site and I think the Mod's need to also be a little more careful in how they handle stuff too!

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 09:43 AM
reply to post by mikesingh

Unfortunately there would be no evidence whatsoever that could be placed on this, or any other site, that would be beyond doubt.

For example, there is not one single piece of evidence referenced on ATS which every single member agrees is the real deal.

There is only one thing that will make people believers and that is a mass landing covered by all MSM and delivered live to every corner of the world.

With that in mind all that ATS and it's members can do is to make up their own mind about what is put before them.

Is it right for a thread to be labelled as a :HOAX: and closed from further development when it doesn't quite meet the scrutiny of some, and not most, members?

I am not too sure.

Surely the OP has the right to defend the thread, provide more evidence and possibly reverse opinion without fear of having it closed.

A better solution could be to add a HOAX button on the thread title (just as there is a Flag button) and let the members decide for themselves instead of being told what threads they can and can not see develop.

By using this system you wouldn't need to close the thread - the thread would have a Potential Hoax Rating which would show the percentage of members who believe the thread to be a hoax.

Members could then decide for themselves whether they want to view it.

Some members maybe too frightened to post in future for fear of being tazed by the ATS Police

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 09:53 AM

Is there and if yes, what is the "official" stand on source protection on the ATS community?
I know that in several countries, source protection for journalism and/or intell community are regulated by law.
But it varies alot, in some countries a reporter can be forced to reveal his source whereas in other's he can rightfully refuse to disclose information on them. Same goes for intell communities, source protection is the PRIME concern for them all.
So what if a source is revealed to the administration here and the gov would come up asking info on them, would ATS do source protection and with what legal basis?

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 10:34 AM

Originally posted by Qwenn
when Moderators ask for their names, ranks and serial numbers, when you start a thread?

When did this happen?
Can you provide me an example?

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 10:36 AM
reply to post by skibtz

You make some good points, unfortunatly in the world as it is today, we cannot believe anything which we see or hear. Technology has gone so far that it is easier and cheaper to use CGI to show that we have landed on XYZ planet, even a mass landing could not be seen as proof. They have the ability to pull massive computer networks down at the push of a button and distract the world whilst they are pulling off the next act of mass deception. They can do it because they are in charge and guess what, we go along with it because they tell us to. Soon we will all be demanding to be allowed to be V-Chipped for some reason or the other, just because they lead us that way, we have become sheep in wolves clothing. Perhaps they have a nice Digital T.V. Special ready loaded and waiting for us on the 9th April, perhaps we will have to watch the BIGGER PICTURE, who knows!

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 10:55 AM
reply to post by mikesingh

The problem is, he was not doing any of that, PERIOD. People here where treating him like he was, and members where over reacting to the little bit of dialog that he had with us, so much so, that most people did not even know what was going on.

You see it was not him creating all of the hype and drama, it was the members of ATS that where. Get it.

But also, you need to realize that we are going to be getting a whole lot more people coming here soon that will want to share information with the biggest community. The fact is, no matter how you look at, stuff is going to be hitting the fan soon and our future is not looking so pretty, conspiracy's aside. At least here in the states. I mean you would have to be absolutely bind to not see that things are getting pretty ugly pretty quickly.

So in saying that, there will be a whole lot more people coming here to share very important information. There is no reason at all for them to provide proof of any kind, all they ask is to share some information and have a little dialog with the community. We are all adults here, we should be able to do this, to have civil dialog. We don't need mods to step in and control things and put tight restrictions on people that want to share very important information.

You see things have changed, drastically in the past year or so. As we get closer to approaching all out chaos in our current society there will be less hoaxers coming here and more legit people coming here wanting to share important information. Do you really want to deny not just ATS but a community as a whole this very important communication???

Think about it.

EDIT: Just as I was typing this up this thread poped up - FBI Prepares Businesses for Martial Law

No conspiracy there, THIS STUFF IS REAL.

Do you really want to deny ATS important dialog and communication during these times???

[edit on 4/5/08 by housegroove23]

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 11:03 AM
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

I have sent a u2u, with some details, I hope that it helps, but I will only name the Moderators responsible, if you think that it is that serious. Im sure that you can acces my u2u account and check this out anyway.
Thank-you for the interest!

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 12:00 PM

Originally posted by housegroove23
So in saying that, there will be a whole lot more people coming here to share very important information.

And I say, bring it on....I love seeing very important information. However, in the case of this thread and the thread being referenced....the OP has offered zero information about a specific topic, other than gripes about how he/she is treated by the members and moderators.

I challenge you to look over the OP's last two threads and formulate a clear description of what the "topic" is supposed to be. All I see is attention getting drama and no useful content.

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 12:35 PM
What a joke
This has turned into another nothing thread, and we have all played into it. I have read many post on this sight that made no sence, or had any evidence. They would start with, this is my theory or could this be true and so on. I never saw there post pulled. So again I say what a joke. Maybe you need some extra points for something, so here's a few more for my responding to this nothing post

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 12:55 PM

Originally posted by Qwenn
Im sure that you can acces my u2u account and check this out anyway.

We only do that in the most extreme of suspected Terms & Conditions violations.

To reiterate our policy here on ATS...

There has been several occasions where new or existing members have posted provocative material of questionable authenticity. Our policy is that, when the topic reaches a point where some degree of corroboration is required, only one of the three Amigos (Me, SimonGray, Springer) will engage the member in private to determine discuss any evidence that might be helpful.

I'm certain the moderator in this case was doing their best to be helpful, and had good intentions. But our policy is to handle things like this "at the top."

posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 01:36 PM
It is definetly ethical to ask for corroborating evidence and details, however there are obvious limits on thisto do with privacy and protection. Asking for some detailsis fine, asking for personally identiable evidence in a situation where they could be detrimental or dangerous to said source, is not.

I don't think you should up and leave Qwenn, but I do think you need to rethink your position on providing evidence to back up claims. As SO said, at somepoint it does actually become neccesary to give some evidence otherwise it's just a story, and the members of this board have to right to see the evidence at hand in oder to discuss the topic of the thread and to not effectively end up wasting their time reading page after page of somebodies flight of fancy...

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in