Originally posted by xpert11
Clearly the common sensible thing to do would have been to place the boards that cover political topics under closer examination like the 9-11 conspiracy forum is . The issue has nothing to do with what side of the political track you lean towards rather it has to do with the breath taking hypercritical nature of the nature measures .

Remember that it is drummed in to us that speculative discussions are at the heart of conspiracy theory's on ATS . Now political rumours cannot be discussed .

You would have to be a right fool not to see the hypocrisy at work here . I don't want to make any rash decisions so I am still weighing up if I will bother to post regularly any more .

When some one who has defended ATS from those who don't grasp the "freedom of speech " issue , from the accusations of ATS being a CIA front e.t.c and excluding warns for over quoting and one liners hasn't had a T&C violation is in danger of being alienated that should tell the people upstairs that there is something seriously wrong .

When discussing rumours, do you sense a difference between yellow press tabloids and conspiracy-theory?

Do you sense a difference between allowing paid propagandists to spam the board vs. keeping the board focussed on its main issues?

Do you want this website to be indiscernible from mainstream?

Do you want this website to be indiscernable from other forums where personal attacks and disrespect towards others is common?



Paid Campaigners can take their internet-warfare elsewhere.

[edit on 12-9-2008 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by Dock6
I don't understand

I'm receiving U2Us from Admin about political threads


Yet when I come to the forum I see that anti-Palin threads .. recently instigated ones ... are being permitted. These threads can't even justify their bandwidth and are simpy Palin-bashing on the flimsiest of pretexts

So what gives ?

Anti-Palin threads are oK are they ?

Will Admin be sending us U2Us stating this ?

I said I wouldn't be back (heads up, no one needs to tell me good riddance, thankfully I am not part of "the clique" here anyway), but I DID log in today just to see what had transpired over this action to start a police state at ATS. It's been said before, but I don't understand why others think they need to supervise the programming we have access to. That is something you buy when you have small children in the house, software to prevent them from watching certain channels, albeit channels the adults of the house want to watch after the kids go to bed. This is almost funny, when you really think about it.

I'd say someone painted themself into a corner.

Originally posted by Bombeni
I DID log in today just to see what had transpired over this action to start a police state at ATS. It's been said before, but I don't understand why others think they need to supervise the programming we have access to.

Hyperbole.....Isn't it the greatest!!!

A police state? On an Internet forum? Gadzooks!!!

Programming you have access to? You mean this totally free service/entertainment that you willingly signed up for? Heavens.....the owners of this software and hardware are daring to take action and show some responsibility? How dare they!!!! Get the pitchforks!!!! Light the torches!!!!! Burn the monster!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your argument has dropped off the edge and is now screaming towards the rocks at the bottom of the canyon. The entire Internet will hear it's "splat".

One thing I would really, really, REALLY appreciate having addressed and answered, though I can probably expect it to be ignored:

Why is politics the subject of these new rules? The very same thing goes on in religious threads/posts everyday. People start threads that blatantly mock/criticize/demean another person's religious/spiritual beliefs; even the titles themselves are obvious baits to draw people in to either defend their beliefs or join in with the op and offer up more criticism.

So, why isn't the same thing being done with religious threads?

Everyone has known for centuries that the two things that cause a fight is politics and religion.

Originally posted by nyk537
It's really funny how some people still don't get it.

The staff and I fully expected to see a vocal minority of people that don't like these temporary guidelines designed to focus on real issues instead of the online equivalent of political talk radio.

Those who are more concerned with entertaining themselves with unchecked innuendo, gossip, slurs, and lies in the political arena are really not well-suited for ATS in the first place.

Thanks for the enlightening research SO.

I think its an Extremely disturbing trend, but who is to say this isnt the first time its happened? Could there be dozens of organizations attempting to use ATS to further their agenda and spread misinformation? Its been suggested many times. But thats for an entirely different thread , in a sense lol.

I do agree strongly with your opinions on this matter. And your conclusions make perfect sense. I fully back you guys dropping a few bans if you think you need to. I think you guys have the best website on the internet; and over the years I have been here , I believe you have run this website with the HIGHEST possible standards (givin the subject matters).


I want to point something out to you SO, that you may find rather interesting.

Ok my wife has worked as a professional writer (writing blogs, video game guides, mothering guides etc) and thats what she gets paid to do, so I kinda consider her fairly talented at that job (her bosses Love her work).

And she started telling me just 2weeks ago, that she thinks there is a huge "wave of professional paid writers" writing on ATS. She has read tons of threads here with me, for years, and she has never said that.

But she has been pointing out threads and posts,that were written by professional writers. Were they paid to write it? Thats up for Debate. But they are definatly professionals as she walked me thru pointing out all the types of strategy and tactics they employ in their writing.

I suck at writing compared to these people, as I choose to ignore most grammer/structure rules. But my wife is a professional writer also, and knows the tricks of the trade. So I kinda trust her judgement on that, and I tell her "maybe your right , i dont know".

Is it merely a coincidence, that you have discovered evidence that points to a political operation to "spam" ATS? At the same time my wife was pointing out Political related posts that she claimed, in her opinion, were professionals?

Is it merely a coincidence, or is it something more meaningful? That my friends is up for you all to decide for yourselves. Personally, I am still on the fence with this, as I usually am until I see more information. But it would not surprise me, if it were true.

How can a website gracefully handle such a situation? I am not sure. Are there no laws agianst this type of behavior from Official Political Partys?

If indeed this childish behavior is Legal, I can only think of one alternative. To gather evidence Proving that they are involved, and then take it to the MSM. There will be at least a handful of people in the mainstream media who would go wild with such a thing, and if it ever became Public Knowledge this type of thing goes on, it would bring Great Shame to the Official Political Party - and it may ruin them for good.

As with any situation in politics, the tables can be turned very quickly.

Acting in haste, with resolve, you could decapitate them before they even have a chance to perform damage control.

Dont get me wrong , Im certain if the republicans are doing this , than it only follows that the democrats are doing it too.

Its a real shame tho. And it definately doesnt surprise me either.

I hope these new rules simply quell the party activists and not the political discussion by legitimate members here.

[edit on 12-9-2008 by grover]

hmm, it seems to me that probably the largest fight is not in that the (unfairly called in my opinion) policing of opinion, but what seems to be the counter-intuitive nature of what most of the memebers may hold dear to them; that being to Deny Ignorance.

Perhaps the most correct answer would not have been to ELIMINATE the post, but to identify the POSTER for a period of time as a potential paid political provacateur, and ensuring that from that time period until a management decided expiration time, EVERY one of their posts we're labeled as such. In my humble opinion, this would keep the "censorship, police state, fema camp" decryer's from getting too rowdy, and likewise let the readers see what that poster MAY have potential for doing as well as letting them see why the action was necessary.

By removing it and tagging it, there's nothing that screams referential for others to continue avoiding it. Semantics can sometimes be tricky especially by demography. Where a Texan may call baiting, a New Yorker may call love.


just my $.02,

AB1

Originally posted by Lyrian
I understand the whys and what for about this... but I hate being told to keep my opinion to myself.

Sad day for this forum when opinion no matter how they are brought forward are censured to a degree which reminds me of eastern communism newspapers.

This thread will be closed soon.

Talk about your unrealistic expectations.

Political debate on the national scene is childish, with diversionary tactics and innuendo commonplace, but you expect anonymous postings on an Internet conspiracy forum to be packed with well informed discourse and hard hitting facts.

Any attempt to try and filter out what you believe to be an organized attempt to bias the discussions is little more than agenda setting at best, and could be seen as deliberate manipulation at worst.

It's best to let these things play out, we're only chatting here after all.