It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The ATS Issues Thread

page: 93
126
<< 90  91  92    94  95  96 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:11 PM
link   
starting to lose hope with ATS.... for some reason it seems the mods back up the debunkers on chemtrails .. i just received this u2u message from someone that received an extreme t&c violation for posting a youtube video...... on a chemtrail threat

*U2U REMOVED FROM POST*

I received a message from a member by the name of Zeph that told me he was banned for posting a youtube video showing a weatherman talking about chemtrails.. and that he was leaving ats for good...

I also was banned for several hours... even though my 3rd post was ON TOPIC the moderator decided to ban me... this moderator is the same moderator that banned Zeph which is neformore... my question to the site owner is this... are you truly a site that encourages free speech on all sides of an issue... or are you working for someone or are people working for you that prefer to stifle any opposition to particular issues? I find it very interesting that I had a run in with neformore as well.. and if you look at my long history with ATS I have never been banned by anyone... I always keep it polite and follow any moderator warnings which I did with neformore... as a matter of fact another member decided to repost my banned post because it did make a very good point and it was NOT off topic.... nevertheless neformore removed it.... perhaps mr. Lears rumblings regarding ATS involment with the goverment isn't that far from the truth..........


*Mod Edit: It is not, and never has been, considered kosher here on ATS - and generally not on the multitude of other Forums I'm part of - to post peoples U2Us into threads for public view. U2U therefore removed from the post.

Cheers -alien



[edit on 21-4-2009 by alien]

[edit on 21-4-2009 by thefreepatriot]




posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
WOW all i have to say is wow.. besides it not being "kosher" is it in the rules where we are not allowed to post u2u??????? i



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link   
let me get something straight... a site where we can post multitudes of documentation and information from other sources... even documents that are considered"top secret" you are telling me that we can't even post a u2u because its not "kosher" I need to see this in the rules if not I am saying goodbye to ATS for good... not being kosher just isn't good enough I need to see in the rules that members are not allowed to repost U2Us ... if not I will repost the U2U message I received... and if REMOVED after posting i will forever leave ATS ..



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
WOW all i have to say is wow.. besides it not being "kosher" is it in the rules where we are not allowed to post u2u??????? i


Its from the Terms and Conditons that everybody agrees to when the join (bolding is mine)



2f.) Private Messages: You will not use the private messaging system (U2U) to send mass messages to multiple member accounts. All private messages are subject to these terms and conditions, violations will result in immediate account termination. You also agree that "U2Us" (Private Messages) are confidential. You will not post or publically display U2Us received from ATS staff or any other members, in any way, without the written permission of the author.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 4/21/09 by FredT]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
I have an issue...

Is it against ATS policy to call someone a disinfo agent or to state they are spreading disinfo?

If not then why was I warned for using the word four times???

If it is against policy then why is it that a number of ATS members, one that is located in this thread is allowed to use the word in almost each post that is made and that even after numerous ALERTs being sent to the mods about this, it appears that nothing has taken place against the offender?

I was actually warned for using this term within a chemtrail thread... I was also told that I shouldn't ask for peoples credentials or try to find their identity... yet within that thread I was challenged by a couple and even slighted and told that my data was not reliable because I fail to provide an identity to my stories, thereby revealing people who've asked for security.... This all while those that challenge me hide behind their ATS anonymity and also complain when I ask for THEIR identities when challenged by them?


Rgds



there seems to be a repeating pattern with the chemtrail threads... I am seriously starting to wonder what is going on.... I never had an issue with any other thread... not even 911 threads... whats with people having issues with these threads?? Debunkers seem immune to attacks... and we easily get violations in these threads... especially when you bring up a valid point it seems...what is going on?



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
we can't even post a u2u because its not "kosher" I need to see this in the rules if not I am saying goodbye to ATS for good.

Please review the Terms & Conditions that were presented to you, for your approval, at the time you created your account.


2f.) Private Messages: You will not use the private messaging system (U2U) to send mass messages to multiple member accounts. All private messages are subject to these terms and conditions, violations will result in immediate account termination. You also agree that "U2Us" (Private Messages) are confidential. You will not post or publically display U2Us received from ATS staff or any other members, in any way, without the written permission of the author.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
Debunkers seem immune to attacks.

Do you have any examples to back that up?

From my vantage point, give what I've seen in the Chemtrail threads, it's a highly-charged near-religious topic... where those who "believe" there are harmful particles in chemtrails become easily offended toward those who do not believe as well as exceptionally quick to anger. We don't favor one side of a valid debate over the other, however, we do insist on decorum. And so far here, on this page of this thread, decorum and civility appear to be concepts which are foreign to you.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Why Do We Allow Trolls On The Boards?

I am creating this thread in the hopes of getting some answers to a question which I am beginning to as myself on a daily basis.

Why are the trolls aloud to post as they please?

In my opinion the ammount of trolling on ATS is getting worse, because of a few members in particular which I won't name out of simply being nice.

Can the mods weight in on this and perhaps provide me with some sort of criteria that is required in order to be considered a "troller" and how certain members are aloud to create ridiculous threads without any ounce of sources other than a few pictures and some suggestions of what is being seen?

I know I havent' been a member here long but it seems that you've been able to uphold the standards that makes ATS the great website that it is. Lately i've been seing the website become a place for wild theories and discussions that simply turn into a "Whose stick is bigger than the others" type scenario.

It would be greatly appreciated.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


What is allowed and prohibited is identified in the Terms and Conditions. If it violates the T&C we'll address it. We don't micromanage the content. Overall, the membership primarily is left to make a determination about what is worthy of comment and what isn't. If it's a T&C violation, alert on it. If it's not but you find it unworthy, ignore it.

A troll can't troll without attention.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


That's my whole point, the member i question feeds off the fact that his threads are completely baseless and alot of members are attempting to get more information or actually just tell him to stop acting the way this member does.

It's a bit frustrating when you attempt to be part of community that's suppose to be at a higher standard, yet we have substandard members who pollute the boards with garbage threads.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


One man's trash is another man's treasure. Don't frustrate yourself. It's a large site with many active forums and threads. Ignore the ones you find valueless and concentrate on something you find interesting.

Worrying about what other people are doing is a road to nowhere but frustration and aggravation, because you have absolutely no control over it.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
That's my whole point, the member i question feeds off the fact that his threads are completely baseless and alot of members are attempting to get more information or actually just tell him to stop acting the way this member does.


I've been active in online discussion communities since the days when you needed to use a dial-up modem and access a BBS system directly. In other words, a long damn time. Since then, "trolls" have been a common problem of these venues. Over time, there have been three tried-and-true tules-of-thumb that are successful in dealing with trolls, and sending them away. They are...

1 - Do not feed the trolls

2 - Please do not feed the trolls

3 - Whatever you do, do not feed the damn trolls!


Responding to a troll only validates the troll. Ignore them, and they go away.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 12:19 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


S.O. is right mate, I too have inhabited forums for many years, I too remember the old BBS boards. Trolls will always be a fact of life in these types of communities. Just remember the old adage: Rule Number 1 - do not feed the trolls. Rule Number 2 - if all else fails refer to Rule Number 1 (that was actually in the T&C of a few of the older forums I used to frequent).



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 06:15 AM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 



Just as an example..my thread was removed "OK..Tell it like it is" by semperfortis (military background) because is has been posted before. I was just ask for anyone with hidden gov. info on UFO's. When the thread is removed..it makes you wonder?? Can you see my point..thanks



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by booky
Just as an example..my thread was removed "OK..Tell it like it is" by semperfortis (military background) because is has been posted before. I was just ask for anyone with hidden gov. info on UFO's. When the thread is removed..it makes you wonder?? Can you see my point..thanks


Duplicate threads are removed...not only by staff with military background, but by any staff.

Hope that answers your question.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Semperfortis replied to me and said the post was antoganostic...and of poor quaility..



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
reply to post by Indigo_Child
 



There are PLENTY of existing threads (I see you found one of them) to discuss the Meier HOAX on ATS.


The difference is, this thread was a specific and in depth response to IIG's report on Meier. The thread was unique. It was not simply a "promotion" of the Meier case, nor was it a claim that all the Meier material and evidence was legit. It was presenting arguments - pretty good arguments, I might add - that some of the evidence in the Meier case may well have been legit and more specifically, that IIG's investigation had huge holes in it.

Interestingly, Derek of IIG had just admitted that he had failed to investigate evidence that IIG had already passed comment on when the thread was deleted, so no evidence of this now remains. How convenient. Thus, the thread was getting into interesting territory and covering some new ground when ATS pulled the plug. Is this an attempt to protect IIG from exposure? It certainly looks that way. Why else wait until that exact moment - not just to close the thread - but to delete it completely and erase all evidence of Derek's admission? And I can assure you that I'm not the only one at ATS who has noticed this. This certainly gives fodder to those who claim ATS is may be a disinfo site.

Now, as I've made clear, I'm not a Meier supporter. But I like to keep an open mind and was enjoying the thread and the arguments presented. I was disappointed and quite shocked to see all that hard work into new areas deleted - especially the scrutiny of IIG's claims and their admission they had not examined all the evidence that they clearly should have.

The Admin's attitude to the Meier case is stifling free discussion IMO - and I say that as someone very much "on the fence" with regard to Meier case - and I'm disturbed to see Admin's responses to the query about this deletion consisting of little more than repeated proclamation that is is all a "HOAX", and the word hoax written is in capitals or bold, as if that somehow established their opinion as "fact" or justifies foisting it on the members and stifling free speech and discussion.

Of course, Admin can do anything they like on their website, but if they do as they please, based on enforcing their own opinions and shutting down conflicting ones, as in this case, then they can't also claim to be an objective forum for free discussion.

Personally, I'm left with the distinct impression that there is heavy bias against objective discussion of the Meier case and that there was an effort to protect IIG from scrutiny and to coverup their admission of faliure to carry out proper research.

Now, I noticed the thinly veiled threat regarding banning of those who continue to speak of the Meier case as if it may not be a hoax in S.O's reply to Indigo (who was also docked 1000 points apparently, for daring to differ with ATS Admin regarding a case. It can't be for rudeness, as the anti-Meier posters were infinitely more abusive to him. So this too seems grossly unfair) and so I realize this excuse may be used to delete this post and kick me out, despite me not even being a Meier supporter (I was warned by another member, who took no part in the Meier thread but was also disturbed by it's deletion and so told me about this "issues" thread and suggested I take this matter here, that this thread was the "most dangerous thread at ATS". I can only presume he meant that to question the Admin here was to risk banning) Well, so be it. If I can't freely express my opinion here in a civil manner or discuss prominent cases without having to kowtow to Admin's enforced opinion about it, then ATS is not the place for me.


[edit on 22-4-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
Now, I noticed the thinly veiled threat regarding banning of those who continue to speak of the Meier case as if it may not be a hoax...

Firstly, the Meier case is broadly accepted as a hoax by a majority of researchers who take UFO subjects seriously. "ATS admin" is far from alone in this regard.

Second, the threat did not apply as a blanket statement to proponents of the Meier case being factual, only as a caution that tempers have flared in the past regarding this subject, and that if discussion is to be allowed, civility must rule.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Malcram
 



There is only so many ways to say the same thing,

THERE ARE PLENTY OF MEIER HOAX THREADS ON ATS ALREADY, USE ONE OF THOSE.

Now then, I've shouted it, does that make it more clear?

Enough, this issue is dealt with, carry on in one of the ongoing threads.


Springer...


Springer...



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Today I got an issue with ATS. And I really don’t understand it anymore.

As you guys know the debate forum got the tournament on going.
We are now in round 3 – the quarterfinal!

Unfortunately a fighter had to give up for several reasons.
He announced it in the ATS Debate Information.

Two fighters wished him well and one of them even shook hands with the remaining participants of the quarterfinal. These fellow fighters have been really good sportsmen!

Apparently this doesn’t seem to be appropriate to the community of ATS, which really puzzles me, but the Debate Information thread was closed “for a bit” due to these reactions.

Now it happens that the fighters have no thread to create debates!
How do you expect fighters to set up debates? Do you expect fighters to set up debates?

Before I became a fighter I heard lots of rumors about the credit fighters have had on ATS.
Seems as if ATS is no longer proud on the fine brains among its membership.

During the last weeks I developed my own thoughts according to the way the board changes.
Maybe it has been always this way and me hasn’t realized it before.
Anyway – I guess all changes serve a certain purpose.

People will say: their house, their rule – but actually I don’t feel very welcome in this house anymore.


edit to fix tag



[edit on Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:32:21 -0500 by orange-light]




top topics



 
126
<< 90  91  92    94  95  96 >>

log in

join