Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Are we limiting the information available to ATS? *Warning*

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 07:29 AM
link   
I am writing this thread partially in response to another thread I had created, but was closed due to references to ‘sites non gratis’.

*WARNING Please be advised that any reference to outside forums of a similar nature to ATS will be removed by staff, and direct links (via u2u included) will result in immediate banning, without warn*

I will not mention any site names, or suggest that others frequent specific sites, or in any way advertise their existence via u2u or otherwise, so please do not request it.


There is no question that there are sites in existence that are now home to several former ATS members who have either left ATS via banning, or of their own volition. These members are often quality contributors who still hold the inquisitive nature that led them to ATS in the first place. The denial of ignorance still holds strong with many, and they still produce quality posts about serious topics, such as the state of the economy, 9/11 conspiracies, UFOs and disclosure, and the other topics that make us love ATS so much.

At the same time though, there is a distinct effort by us to disavow any knowledge of these other resources, primarily due to either site to site, or personal grudges. Often, a thread is almost immediately closed if the question of these ‘others’ even arises. But at who’s loss? Certainly not site owners at either location. It seems that in the end it’s the members who end up missing out.

For example, if a quality post is produced at one of these ‘others’ that contains breaking underground information and a high quality post with relating information, should we just hope that an ATS user just happens to stumble across this same information somewhere else? Imagine if a thread as solid and well researched as Someone, operating under a special chain of command within the United States Air Force, just stole a nuclear weapon. were posted somewhere else? Wouldn’t we hope that someone would bring it to our attention?
Now I understand that above all else, ATS is a business, and it’s bad business to mention competitors (which is why that in those AllTel wireless commercials Sprint, At&T and the other carriers are represented by colored shirts). I might think that it would ultimately be beneficial for the board to openly acknowledge that there are other sources outside of ATS with a wealth of knowledge. And, if one should find a great bit of information, that we can bring it back here, with Admin approval, while at the same time, not allowing personal grudges to get between our members, and important information.

Please let me know what you think.




posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Rasobasi420
 


You keep making threads having a pop at ATS and the way its run / moderated / restricts information.

I for one say that if a thread has information in it from another site it should have to be linked and proper acknowledgement to the author given.

However, if its from a site that attacks ATS on a regular basis, then maybe if the information is so important then this poster should join ATS, and then post his / her information here direct.

Ras, I don't know what your beef is with ATS, but why not keep it between you and the mods / managers /owners in U2U's or email instead of making threads about how unfair life is at ATS and trying to drag members into your arguments ?



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Dan Tanna
 


Just looking for member opinions Dan, thanks for yours, it was very helpful.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 07:49 AM
link   
I thought ATS was for open minded people - if what you are saying is true then it sort of defeats what the site is about....!!!! just my 2 pence or cents if your from over the pond..!!!



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Rasobasi420
 


We allow our members to link to sites and we allow them to post information from other sites, provided they properly credit the site for the content. We do not allow our members to link to sites that contain content that is questionable in nature. The site you are referring to contains more discussion on illegal activity than we allow on this site. If we want to alert our readers on the best way to crush up our meds and snort them, then we will allow linking to that site, much like, if we wanted to allow our members to view child pornography, we'd allow linking to those sites.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
The site you are referring to contains more discussion on illegal activity than we allow on this site. If we want to alert our readers on the best way to crush up our meds and snort them, then we will allow linking to that site, much like, if we wanted to allow our members to view child pornography, we'd allow linking to those sites.


Obviously the child porn comment is a bit extreme don't you think? As for the drug aspect, it was my understanding that the reason for not mentioning drugs on this site was to prevent google drug searches from resulting in multiple ATS hits.

Hence the multiple items of just such a nature in R.A.T.S.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Let it be known what is thought?

These antics of a school-aged girl trying to create drama are growing tiresome. I don't post much but I read every day. And it doesn't seem to be a secret that you are either bored with way too much time on your hands, or you have decided to leave ATS for greener pastures.. but you would rather martyr yourself.

I guess this is typical for online message boards. If I leave "A" for "B", then I need to be cool in front of the guys at "B" and have something to bang elbows over.

If you don't like the site, don't let the door hit you in the ass. If you wish to stay, stay. As a daily reader, I actually enjoy some of the threads you author.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Now I understand that above all else, ATS is a business, and it’s bad business to mention competitors

As Crakeur mentioned, the site I believe you're referring is not competition in anyway. Instead, it contains a significant amount of material that would be in serious violation of our linking policies.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Obviously the child porn comment is a bit extreme don't you think? As for the drug aspect, it was my understanding that the reason for not mentioning drugs on this site was to prevent google drug searches from resulting in multiple ATS hits.

Hence the multiple items of just such a nature in R.A.T.S.


not just google but net nanny and all the other family rating programs or whatever they're called. A site that cotains content not suitable for these programs, being linked from our site, is going to cause us trouble with the net nanny type programs, thus, we don't allow it.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Dear Rasobasi420;

I think you have stopped looking for "good" topics to explore
You went from being the National inquirer
to being a propaganda leaflet being thrown around ATS
I think you just want to be a sensationalist that is focused on ATS
in a negative manner
I think you should take a holiday from ATS for a while.
I think this thread is a waste of bandwith
Thank you for ALLOWING me my opinion.

I think Rasobasi420 is wasting his talents with these type off threads

Thats what I think

I hope everyone has an awesome day


[edit on 1-7-2008 by The Utopian Penguin]



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
These members are often quality contributors who still hold the inquisitive nature that led them to ATS in the first place.

Please let me know what you think.


I think you've got an agenda and you're not willing to let go of it until you fulfill your twisted desires, actually.

Would you like to provide details as to the member information of the members you mentioned?

It would be greatly appreciated IF you could.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Dan Tanna
 


I wish I could have said it better, but I can't. Ras, you continuous stream of criticism has finally given away your game. And personally I take my hat off for the staff of ATS for putting up with it. They've given you more than enough patience to voice your opinion but it looks like you'll be your own demise in the end. You've lost my respect.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gaspode
reply to post by Dan Tanna
 


I wish I could have said it better, but I can't. Ras, you continuous stream of criticism has finally given away your game.


Agreed!


And personally I take my hat off for the staff of ATS for putting up with it. They've given you more than enough patience to voice your opinion but it looks like you'll be your own demise in the end. You've lost my respect.


I agree, personally I'm tired of defending you, which I have been for some time. Now it is clear to me that you are not the same member I knew back in the day. It is obvious to me that you are trying to get banned so you can run away and say "look what they did to me".

I say just leave if you don't like it here. I'm tired of defending you when you are obviously not you anymore. I know it sounds harsh but at this point I'm pretty frustrated with the attitude.

Just being honest.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   


There is no question that there are sites in existence that are now home to several former ATS members who have either left ATS via banning, or of their own volition. These members are often quality contributors who still hold the inquisitive nature that led them to ATS in the first place. The denial of ignorance still holds strong with many, and they still produce quality posts about serious topics, such as the state of the economy, 9/11 conspiracies, UFOs and disclosure, and the other topics that make us love ATS so much.


I know what sites you are talking about and those certain ex members. I am aware some of them, not all, have been banned from multiple sites - mainly the 9/11 crowd - so caution is granted when dealing with them.

And I have been a part of other forums that contained banned members from ATS and most of them maintained a grudge towards this place. One site planned an inflitration of this place. SkepticOverlord has given them second, third and even fourth chances at ATS.

One site in question hosts ex-ATS members who run there when being banned and start saying "oh look, you was right! look what they did!"


[edit on 1-7-2008 by infinite]



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
What if? Actually a fair question. What if some world shaking whizzbang new holeymoley info was available at a site we're not particularly interested in linking to?

Highly speculative question. I don't believe it's happened yet, but the answer would be to take it to an admin to see how to handle it. "Hey here's this info... blah blah disclosure etc dead alien bodies & photos yadda yadda with the grassy knoll shooter and here's the link [ ]".

If it's valid, good quality info and worthy of inclusion, I'm sure we could figure out a way to make it available.

Let's cross that bridge when we come to it, shall we?



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:27 AM
link   
I support Rasobasi420's point, to an extent. What can and can't be linked is certainly a question. Is there a list somewhere?

The reason this issue keeps popping up is that there seems to be inconsistency in bannings. There are some outrageous posts and threads which do not result in warns or bans and yet a valued and prolific contributing member can get banned for what seems to be minor or, at worst, a grudge.

Why is it wrong to question things that don't seem to make sense? After all, as another member once said, ATS is full of people who question authority and see conspiracy at every turn.

I think ATS should not be threatened by any other web site, but as it is the central and best website for alt topics and conspiracies, it should use it's power judiciously.

BTW, the porn crack was a low.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
The thread author has a completely legitimate point. Any other forum out in "forum world" has the potential to disclose information that may be of significant importance. What if it happens to be one of the forums currently "persona non grata"?

Do we plagiarize the source.....unable to attribute or link to the author? Or can there be some type of arbitration process that would allow specific instances to be posted?

And those of you with the comments about "putting up with it", "agenda", "lost respect", "twisted desires", "antics of a school-age girl", etc....directed at Rasobasi420.....personal attacks are a violation of the T&C, that are apparently being ignored by the moderators and owners. Address his question and scenario and drop the butt-kissing, or don't read it.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny
"agenda"[ b]personal attacks are a violation of the T&C, that are apparently being ignored by the moderators and owners. Address his question and scenario and drop the butt-kissing, or don't read it.




Okay then.

I think it's true that there is an agenda at work here, but that my perspective of all this has been tainted by my experiences with the "Forum world" you mentioned.

There is one truth to what he says, and i'll admit i'm letting my own agendas cloud my judgement.

The problem is that people are all too willing to look down on one another, to think "This website is better than that website", when ultimately that isn't what ATS is about.

I have a feeling that my fear is that Rasobasi is being driven by an agenda which is working to discredit ATS.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Rasobasi, I think you bring up a good point. In effect, what ATS is doing is censoring. There are certain sites we can't link to, what they are is anyone's guess, since admin/mods haven't told us what they are. Does this mean we could be banned if we unwittingly try to link a story from one of these "banned" sites? Why are we picking and choosing which sources we can get our news from? And wouldn't that limit the information we can get?

I think the warning in the OP says it all. Firstly, this was not a rule in effect several years ago. Now, suddenly, and without announcement (at least not one I have seen and I'm on here everyday) we will be banned immediately with no warning and no way of knowing what site sources will be banned. No warning, and in fact, I know that MANY members have been banned with no explanation - they had no way of knowing what they were banned for. And don't tell me to read the T&C's, I have already done so, several times, but it was before this new rule - what, I'm supposed to read the T&C's everyday to make sure nothing has changed? That is not reasonable.

I think this is an unfair rule and one that isn't good for ATS. ATS is starting to get a very bad reputation in other forums and that's not good for business.

It really makes me wonder what the agenda is when we have a rule that many don't know about and a person can get banned for something they do unwittingly and in perfect innocence. There have been many members who were here a long time, several years, with no warning or just one warning and yet they get banned for doing something they don't know is against T&C. And why, for heaven's sakes do you guys feel a need to give no warning? When someone is absolutely rude and violates T&C's often there's not even a warning, yet for doing somsething innocent, we don't get warned?

And the reference to child porn is just, well, in bad taste, Crakeur.

One more thing: I have heard the mods say many times that they don't read U2U's unless it's for a very good purpose. What reason would you have to read U2U's in the first place in order to think you should read someone's U2U's? And it also proves that our U2U's ARE indeed read by mods/admin, which IMHO, is a major breach of privacy.

I like the news and occasional commentary here, but I do think that this policy smacks of Nazi tactics somewhat.

OK, mods, I'm sure you'll ban me without warning for writing this, but so be it. We are supposed to be able to express our opinions freely here and if you ban me or even post ban me, we will know that that simply isn't true.



posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant
an agenda which is working to discredit ATS.


There's a conspiracy behind every tree, isn't there? How do you suppose the concluding sentence of the opening post supports your assertion?


Originally posted by Rasobasi420
And, if one should find a great bit of information, that we can bring it back here, with Admin approval, while at the same time, not allowing personal grudges to get between our members, and important information.

Please let me know what you think.


What may discredit ATS are knee-jerk reactions, responding with emotion, and failing to apply reason and contemplation.






top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join