-- snip -- "" you may not be approached in an "official" manner, but maybe simply approached indirectly by possibly some NEW FINANCIAL
BACKERS, some celeb PR agencies, some good sounding business ventures, and the money will do the rest of the talking.""
"" - This is a business. Truth is not good for business, because the real truth would kill the market dead. Status quo is key to maintaining steady
Indeed, status quo.
The smart investor does not invest in business to change them, he invests in businesses that show promise. ATS grew to the point where there was
significant promise in our plan to extend the core website via the Content Ecosystem concept. Any change in the formula that brought us this far would
be considered a risk, since it was that formula (free and open expression) that got us this far.
"Deny Ignorance" is to be respectful and not to (key root word here) IGNORE any info or word or personality or opinion.
The lofty ideal of "deny ignorance" implies many things, but among the more important concepts is the idea of being able to reject ignorance... give
it no say. It's ignorant to believe the lies about ATS that have been fabricated out of an old April-Fools post... so in the true sense of "deny
ignorance," such notions should be rejected and not given credence.
I find that hard to maintain in any environment that is based on capital gain and seemingly continuing the status quo. Because the very fact
that you have financial backers [LT: could) means that you have collars with leashes on.
The vision portrayed here
cannot be attained simply through good deeds or kind thoughts. It
requires not just capital, but a plan to create a profitable model whereby the profits can be channeled into the growth represented by the
But let's lay it on the table... can you point to one management decision, tactic, or style that has changed significantly (or even moderately)
between now and eighteen months ago (a time at which we were not focused on the Ecosystem idea). Just one. If you can find one, we might have
something to discuss. If you can't, then it would stand to reason there is no collar and no leash.
The fact that you are so adamant about keeping this obvious illusion that "America is so free and great and look how beautiful our
unadulterated speech is" is glaringly apparent when you so obviously treat this whole deal like this is some game that you can also line your pockets
with on the side, and you basically laugh and snuff away at the fact that you would be a prime target for alphabet agencies and people with money and
connections who wish to influence and/or stifle this sector of the population's opinions... it's suspicious. ""
I have no idea where that comes from. That surely does not represent how I think about the current situation in America, nor does it represent how we
manage ATS. Elaboration please?
Are you restricted by contract, in telling your own membership, who your new investors are?
As I understand it, they simply do not want to be publicized at this point. It's not an uncommon situation for any start-up venture, no matter what
type of business.
Why would a genuine positive contributer to this particular site want to keep his contribution a secret, especially when the site name is "
ABOVE top-secret" !
The money source would qualify as a small group of "Angel Investors" who are primarily individuals who have the same goal we do. These types of
investors often prefer to remain private to avoid a plethora of queries related to other "investment opportunities" from a variety of sources... as
is very typical once the "angles" become publicly apparent in one way or another.
are they in your opinion not connected in anyway to the so despised (by the overall ATS membership) military-industrial complex?
No, not even remotely.
In fact, very few are aware that we rejected a rather profitable and aggressive buy-out offer from a corporation that owned several media outlets,
about a year ago. While the money and employment contracts would have been excellent, their plans and intentions for ATS were not appropriate. So...
in essence, we rejected a lot of easy money in favor of a lot less money, but complete control.
Would you lie about it if true, to protect your interests and their investment?
Moot point, since it's not true. And as pointed out above, no need to lie as we rejected at least one offer we knew would not sit well with
Why are you maintaining this site as if it was a mainly US site, while a great deal of your members are not from the US? It used to be a
British site in the early days. A bit more global attitude would improve traffic.
We get 1 million unique visitors a month, slightly more than 300,000 of which are not from the U.S. To us, we do maintain a global site... what is it
that you see makes ATS not global?
Are you not registered in Delaware, so we can access your annually published business reports?
We're a "Limited Liability Company," which is a version of a partnership, and as such our financials are only available to members.
Do you realize, that you created this site, now loaded with investigative minds, who will be able to find out things you would perhaps like to
hide about this site? So basically, it would be unwise to hide essential facts about your site. Openness will be your eternal friend, if your
intentions are truly as you advertised.
Can you point out where we have not been completely open, or our overt actions have been in contradiction to our expressed intention?
[edit on 12-5-2008 by SkepticOverlord]