SkepticOverlord:
The issue was not that you questioned the validity of statements by a mod, but in the highly confrontational way in which you did it.
The post PokeyJoe made to that was a reply that didn't even get edited because it wasn't that bad. It was just impolite. It's not like the things
other staff said to the OP in that thread weren't "full of crap" either.
Here are the post's by staff on that thread (just the first couple of pages):
Hellmut:
[snip]Btw, I wonder if I'm on anyone's list yet. Do you know, by any chance?
Sarcastic rolling eyes directed toward the OP.
Intrepid:
Agents? Well there's one staff member that I think could be an agent, just look at his avvy:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Tell tale sign.
A link to spacedout's profile. Vaguely on topic, but kind of poking fun at it.
Helmutt again:
Are these guys involved in any way?
Stratcom's Units in charge of cyber warfare for the Pentagon
Oops, who's banging on mah door...?
Another on-topicish, but snarky reply.
Okay...
Everyone take a deep breath, and remember that ATS is about civil discussion.
Thanks.
Mirthful me, just doing her job.
Advisor:
Thing is, I'm not doing it in the capacity your topic is about, my action of "monitoring" is more of an internal affairs type of deal. Being
a staff member of the site, that is what were supposed to do, but we don't report info any further than to each other, and the admin here if it is
serious enough.
I log into SPIRNET (or is it NIPRNET , I dont know the difference, except one word might mean "secure"), every day at work, will you tell me Jhill?
There is no clearence required, there are a more people able to log onto those systems with out a clearence than those who do.
Advisor's admittedly off-topic initial post in the thread (that also contains incorrect information that MANY subsequent replies are about).
Then the coup de grace:
Intrepid:
Your post is not only insulting to ADVISOR but to the entire staff, by inferring that we would allow a mod to post false information. ADVISOR does
indeed work for the government. The rest of the content in your post and it's tone leaves much to be desired. You may want to take that into account
in further posting.
According to this it's insulting to the entire staff to tell another staff member they've given incorrect information. I don't care if he was a
@&*% about it, that's absurd.
There's a lot member's whose unpopular opinions get their entire being called into question on a daily basis and there's no giant fuss.
Many people made bad judgment calls here. It would just be nice to see that it's admitted that staff did too. Especially since everybody's words are
on record.
On top of that there was a post bringing up another thread jhill76 had started that had absolutely nothing to do with the topic that was overlooked.
It wasn't until Advisor made an incorrect statement that the thread got "derailed".
I apologize for keeping this issue going, but when a topic I really find interesting get's stomped on by the proverbially "D-ego", I'm going to
take issue.
A couple weeks ago I reported a post because someone referred to Barak Obama's wife as a knuckle dragger, and that didn't even result in a staff
edit.
I realize ATS is huge, but when low-level staff and members are equally wrong and only the peons are punished it
is disenfranchising.
im not out to make drama 
