Thanks to everyone contributing their thoughts and to those who replied directly.
I am fairly new to ATS and overall have a positive view and am fully in support I think I represent a lot of people in that though they are
interested, the realities of their available time pervades.
There are threads on subjects that interest me, but it can take like half an hour to wade through them. Particularly off-putting when there's too
much sidetracking and some backbiting going on.
I just spoke to my friend who pointed me to here and will summarize his observations.
Some really cool stuff and so much you never knew about it. But unless you know how to read the signs for what is going to be thoughtful and what
isn't, a lot of time can be wasted on a discussion that degresses to nattering over trivial aspects or egos.
His evaluation is that ATS, despite some exceptional and knowlegeable people onboard, is geared more a first year college student world purview.
The less experienced but well read who with a little knowledge in some area think they know everything. The demographic is the somewhat angry,
reflexively rebellious, seeking simple explanations. That the big corporate world, the evil empire governments, the secret society, is behind
anything and everything.
I see his point. When I try to fathom the financial meltdown, I expect something more sophisticated than that it's all part of the master plan of
the New World Order.
Someone posting probably has a more fully thought out explanation and evidence, - but I can't spare the time it will take to find the thread and that
message.
Jumping into a daily new pile of ATS threads reminds me why I used to buy and read more newspapers and magazines.
Factoring in their biases and spin, at least the news was preselected and concise enough to give you the impression you were being made aware of the
more significant highlights of what was going on around the world.
ATS in not a newspaper. More like an anti-newspaper. What they leave out and don't want you to know.
Still, I wish there was some kind of daily digest so I'd know where to start or pointers to things of exceptional interest. The front page tries to
do that, but then I often find myself falling down a rabbit hole of 15 page threads looking for that elusive kernel of new information.
Mike F
ATS a "crackpot American website", page 7
privacy
reply posted on 11-2-2009 @ 06:29 PM by SkepticOverlord
reply to post by IsaacKoi
Getting back to the origins of this discussion...
First... no, after some effort I've not been able to locate the explicit opinions "attributed to ATS." But then, the source is well-known for exaggerations and outright fabrications as the source or back-up for its "stories."
The writer, however, makes a mistake we see all too often -- attributing the opinion of our members as "ATS says ____" or that "crackpot American site thinks _____." In reality, we know that the entity of ATS has no official opinion on any topics, we simply do our best to provide a venue in which any opinion may be put up for debate. Those in the "mainstream" fall into two camps, they either are unable to fathom the important of user-generated media, or they're afraid of it and seek to disparage as often as possible.
How Can ATS Improve Its Perception?
I believe we've come very far. Not that there's still a long way to go, but the path has been cleared.
We're solidly into our fourth year of doing our best to enforce strict rules of decorum. The hope was, is, and will always be that, within a civilized environment, people can feel confident bringing up any topic without concern as to the reaction from the members. Certainly, we're not perfect in this regard, but at least we're making a serious effort, and I believe we're further down this road that any other site with user-generated discussions.
If we can get even further down this road to a true environment of reliable and sustained civility, it will do a great deal for our perception.
But... the other important issue is that of topics. We've seen members leave in disgust because we're not making more of an effort to control the topics... and on the flip-side, we've seen the same from people that feel we impose too much control (usually those upset they can't swear, talk about drugs, or cast aspersions with reckless abandon).
Yes, there are a great deal of "crack pot" topics on ATS. Yes, those topics all-to-often are used as examples to detract from our perceived credibility. And yes, I'm often embarrassed by many thread-starters. However, as most know by now, I firmly believe there is immeasurable value in an open environment as opposed to one in which a select few have editorial dominion.
And... I also firmly believe that the dozens of other "conspiracy sites" or "conspiracy theory engines" where one person (or a few) has complete control, does more real harm for conspiracy theorists, than a site like ATS could ever do. These entities often build a cult of personality where extreme theories are needed to feed the engine -- even so far as to compete with other conspiracy theory entities in battles of theories, insults, or worse (just look at the wreckage that is "9/11 Truth").
Our goal is to embrace and enable civil dialog on an extremely diverse range of highly provocative topics, not push our narrow opinion down people's throats. Every day myself, the rest of our executive team, and our entire staff work hard to promote topics for which they disagree... or may even find themselves vehemently opposed. A very different goal and ideal than any other site that covers the topics discussed here.
So... in this regard, we may never properly improve the perception of those in the mainstream with respect to the topics we cover. The best we can do is cover these topics with a degree dignity and sober analysis such that our approach is what garners an improved perception.
The Two Strategies To Improve Perception
And there, in that long soliloquy above, are the two most important things any of us can do to improve the general perception of the topics that appear here on ATS:
1) Civilized Attitude: Remember the "black-shirt" people with "911 Is An Inside Job" emblazoned on their chest, shouting angrily all over Manhattan? They all too often spewed angry spittle in the general direction of anyone who slightly disagreed with their statements (I've seen it first hand). Passion is good, offensiveness is bad. We must hold ourselves to the highest of standards so that our cordial demeanor exudes inherent credibility.
2) Topical Agnosticism: We must be ready to embrace and examine all ideas related to conspiracies and cover-ups... even so far as to accept the notion that our theories may be wrong, or in need of significant adjustment. We can't have an agnostic mindset and at the same time, be invested in one particular theory over another. We must be able to examine all ideas presented, no matter how outlandish or mundane, so that we remain open to truths in all forms.
(This is one point I feel so strongly about, conspiracy theorists must be totally agnostic with respect to our theories.)
While civility and cordiality, to me, is a no-brainer, this second point of Topical Agnosticism is vitality important to all of us. The moment we present our theories with such certainty that we refuse alternatives, is the moment we have become no better than "mainstream media." Far too many popular "conspiracy theorists" fall into this trap in their effort to feed the engine of conspiracy/cover-up that drives their empire... and end up refusing to entertain valid ideas that may refute their theories for fear of slowing or halting their engine.
We won't improve our perception by picking better topics, we'll improve it by being better at presenting our topics.
If each one of us can do our best to embrace these two ideas, not just on ATS but whenever we discuss conspiracy theories, perception of our topics will improve. I guarantee it.
[edit on 11-2-2009 by SkepticOverlord]
Originally posted by IsaacKoi
Can someone post links to the threads discussed in the extract above so that we can see how members of ATS reacted to the theories advanced?
>>snip<<
If not, can ATS improve how it is perceived by main stream reporters?
Getting back to the origins of this discussion...
First... no, after some effort I've not been able to locate the explicit opinions "attributed to ATS." But then, the source is well-known for exaggerations and outright fabrications as the source or back-up for its "stories."
The writer, however, makes a mistake we see all too often -- attributing the opinion of our members as "ATS says ____" or that "crackpot American site thinks _____." In reality, we know that the entity of ATS has no official opinion on any topics, we simply do our best to provide a venue in which any opinion may be put up for debate. Those in the "mainstream" fall into two camps, they either are unable to fathom the important of user-generated media, or they're afraid of it and seek to disparage as often as possible.
How Can ATS Improve Its Perception?
I believe we've come very far. Not that there's still a long way to go, but the path has been cleared.
We're solidly into our fourth year of doing our best to enforce strict rules of decorum. The hope was, is, and will always be that, within a civilized environment, people can feel confident bringing up any topic without concern as to the reaction from the members. Certainly, we're not perfect in this regard, but at least we're making a serious effort, and I believe we're further down this road that any other site with user-generated discussions.
If we can get even further down this road to a true environment of reliable and sustained civility, it will do a great deal for our perception.
But... the other important issue is that of topics. We've seen members leave in disgust because we're not making more of an effort to control the topics... and on the flip-side, we've seen the same from people that feel we impose too much control (usually those upset they can't swear, talk about drugs, or cast aspersions with reckless abandon).
Yes, there are a great deal of "crack pot" topics on ATS. Yes, those topics all-to-often are used as examples to detract from our perceived credibility. And yes, I'm often embarrassed by many thread-starters. However, as most know by now, I firmly believe there is immeasurable value in an open environment as opposed to one in which a select few have editorial dominion.
And... I also firmly believe that the dozens of other "conspiracy sites" or "conspiracy theory engines" where one person (or a few) has complete control, does more real harm for conspiracy theorists, than a site like ATS could ever do. These entities often build a cult of personality where extreme theories are needed to feed the engine -- even so far as to compete with other conspiracy theory entities in battles of theories, insults, or worse (just look at the wreckage that is "9/11 Truth").
Our goal is to embrace and enable civil dialog on an extremely diverse range of highly provocative topics, not push our narrow opinion down people's throats. Every day myself, the rest of our executive team, and our entire staff work hard to promote topics for which they disagree... or may even find themselves vehemently opposed. A very different goal and ideal than any other site that covers the topics discussed here.
So... in this regard, we may never properly improve the perception of those in the mainstream with respect to the topics we cover. The best we can do is cover these topics with a degree dignity and sober analysis such that our approach is what garners an improved perception.
The Two Strategies To Improve Perception
And there, in that long soliloquy above, are the two most important things any of us can do to improve the general perception of the topics that appear here on ATS:
1) Civilized Attitude: Remember the "black-shirt" people with "911 Is An Inside Job" emblazoned on their chest, shouting angrily all over Manhattan? They all too often spewed angry spittle in the general direction of anyone who slightly disagreed with their statements (I've seen it first hand). Passion is good, offensiveness is bad. We must hold ourselves to the highest of standards so that our cordial demeanor exudes inherent credibility.
2) Topical Agnosticism: We must be ready to embrace and examine all ideas related to conspiracies and cover-ups... even so far as to accept the notion that our theories may be wrong, or in need of significant adjustment. We can't have an agnostic mindset and at the same time, be invested in one particular theory over another. We must be able to examine all ideas presented, no matter how outlandish or mundane, so that we remain open to truths in all forms.
(This is one point I feel so strongly about, conspiracy theorists must be totally agnostic with respect to our theories.)
While civility and cordiality, to me, is a no-brainer, this second point of Topical Agnosticism is vitality important to all of us. The moment we present our theories with such certainty that we refuse alternatives, is the moment we have become no better than "mainstream media." Far too many popular "conspiracy theorists" fall into this trap in their effort to feed the engine of conspiracy/cover-up that drives their empire... and end up refusing to entertain valid ideas that may refute their theories for fear of slowing or halting their engine.
We won't improve our perception by picking better topics, we'll improve it by being better at presenting our topics.
If each one of us can do our best to embrace these two ideas, not just on ATS but whenever we discuss conspiracy theories, perception of our topics will improve. I guarantee it.
[edit on 11-2-2009 by SkepticOverlord]
reply posted on 11-2-2009 @ 07:25 PM by americandingbat
reply to post by ugie1028
If only they had cited one of the Breaking News posts that use them as a source.
And then the crowd of ATS'ers responding "Come on now, you can't believe it just because it was in the Daily Mail! That's not a reputable source!"
If only they had cited one of the Breaking News posts that use them as a source.
And then the crowd of ATS'ers responding "Come on now, you can't believe it just because it was in the Daily Mail! That's not a reputable source!"
reply posted on 11-2-2009 @ 10:42 PM by ugie1028
Originally posted by americandingbat
reply to post by ugie1028
If only they had cited one of the Breaking News posts that use them as a source.
And then the crowd of ATS'ers responding "Come on now, you can't believe it just because it was in the Daily Mail! That's not a reputable source!"
its amazing sometimes... how narrow minded people can be. but, not everyone knows the truths we do.
Pft... DM, they made me wanna burn newspapers...
reply posted on 13-2-2009 @ 03:14 AM by Ownification
reply to post by IsaacKoi
If ATS starts giving a damn about what the mainstream thinks than the first thing to do is to ban all criticism of the main stream media as biased. ATS shouldn't even consider this move into taking the mainstream media in to consideration, it is not about how they portray the ATS members because without those ATS members ATS wouldn't be ATS. Without those consperacies ATS wouldn't be ATS. Without those wild and out of the box claims for example, "The Earth Is Flat", ATS wouldn't be ATS.
ATS is community where there is no impossibilities and that is exactly what makes ATS, ATS. If you take that away than it is just another lame Mainstream discussion board.
If ATS starts giving a damn about what the mainstream thinks than the first thing to do is to ban all criticism of the main stream media as biased. ATS shouldn't even consider this move into taking the mainstream media in to consideration, it is not about how they portray the ATS members because without those ATS members ATS wouldn't be ATS. Without those consperacies ATS wouldn't be ATS. Without those wild and out of the box claims for example, "The Earth Is Flat", ATS wouldn't be ATS.
ATS is community where there is no impossibilities and that is exactly what makes ATS, ATS. If you take that away than it is just another lame Mainstream discussion board.
reply posted on 13-2-2009 @ 03:20 AM by majestictwo
reply to post by Ownification
You are right, spot on, it is what makes ATS what it is good or bad crackpots or not it is the fun of it – thanks for bringing me back on track.
MJ2
You are right, spot on, it is what makes ATS what it is good or bad crackpots or not it is the fun of it – thanks for bringing me back on track.
MJ2
reply posted on 13-2-2009 @ 10:19 AM by mmiichael
Originally posted by Ownification
reply to post by IsaacKoi
If ATS starts giving a damn about what the mainstream thinks than the first thing to do is to ban all criticism of the main stream media as biased. ATS shouldn't even consider this move into taking the mainstream media in to consideration, it is not about how they portray the ATS members because without those ATS members ATS wouldn't be ATS. Without those consperacies ATS wouldn't be ATS. Without those wild and out of the box claims for example, "The Earth Is Flat", ATS wouldn't be ATS.
ATS is community where there is no impossibilities and that is exactly what makes ATS, ATS. If you take that away than it is just another lame Mainstream discussion board.
You should check out other Conspiracy sites and see what no attempt to filter out crap looks like.
Worrying about what the MSM thinks isn't as much an issue as worrying about what any reasonably intelligent person thinks when they come here.
There is such a thing as credibility. When the lunatic fringe, haters, delusional, dominate the system, who wants to spend time wading through to find some gems.
Image shouldn't be important - but it is.
MF
