posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 09:48 AM
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
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
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.