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.

 

A Conspiracy Against ATS?

page: 21
132
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by enigmania
reply to post by vcwxvwligen
 





What benefit would that have, besides rousing the anger of ignorant sheeple who do not understand what the word "censorship" even means ?


I didn't come in here with this point in mind.

I just made an observation, and suddenly I was mobbed by mods saying it wasn't censorship.

And then all of this happened.

It's their own fault.

That's what you get if you treat people like children, and refuse to admit to obvious situations.

I also will mind my one line responses and big qoutes, since my points are dropping harder than the DOW index after an Obama speech.




[edit on 1/3/09 by enigmania]



So then you misunderstood each other, simple as that.




posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by mister.old.school

Originally posted by DangerDeath
It is exactly in history, where the authority comes to play, when freedom of speech becomes "abstract".

Please elucidate on your intentions in that statement of yours. I'm not clear as to the intent of your meaning.


Only the authorities have this problem of freedom of speech, and so they introduce censorship. Otherwise, there is no such thing as censorship, nor are there dilemmas about freedom of speech.

The "history" marks the appearance and existence of authority.

[edit on 1-3-2009 by DangerDeath]



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by americandingbat
 





If that's what he/she is suggesting, my reading comprehension skills are shot all to hell. Maybe that was the implication of his/her first post. But pages of demands of an "official" ATS admission of censorship buried any such subtlety.


One more time.

You guys could've prevented that by just admitting. You guys said it wasn't censorship. Can't blame me for being persistent.

The fact that you all have such a hard time admitting it, tells me it is a big issue.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 


Are you referring to me as "you guys"?

Now I'm really confused. You mean we could have avoided the whole argument just by getting another member to agree with you, and then we could have talked about propaganda techniques and discussion board disruption on a theoretic level instead of watching it play out?

ATS censors some discussion insofar as it does not allow the discussion of every possible topic to continue on its website.

Happy?



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by neformore
 


All threads on all forums in the whole world are affected by all of these approaches.

There is no way anyone in this world can prevent it.


You say the above, and then you say



The theme of this topic is totally empty...


But if the first is true, then the latter makes no sense. If the approaches are happening everywhere, then the topic theme is not empty whatsoever.

You also said...



and the intent of the OP was to announce who is the boss and that rules don't apply to the boss.


Heads up - I'm not the boss. Look at SO's avatar and look at mine. One says "site owner" the other says "moderator". I don't get paid for being a mod, and I've never met the site owners in person - nor am I likley to any time soon. Besides, I'm posting here as a member of ATS, albeit looking at it from a moderator perspective as well.



I am very sorry, but my experience in discussions with members of ATS were much more enlightening that this one.


If the way you've approached other subhects - given the fact that you've not discussed the issue here, but instead chose to attack it and obfuscate away from it - you must have had some shallow conversations, and thats a shame because ATS offers much more than that.



I'm sure you wanted to bring this issue to such an end, you must have a good reason for that.


Yes. I did. I'm concerned that people are getting caught up in someone elses agenda. I don't want to see members of this forum get caught up in some spiteful attempt at revenge, or some government department/politco's attempts to discredit sites that question how they work. As agenda's go, I'd say that was fairly clear.



Debunked.

The boss is naked.


If you think that by using broken record technique to try and push a single agenda debunks a conspiracy that potentially covers a whole site, then you aren't much of a conspiracy theorist, researcher and debater, are you?

I gave you direct evidence from the server logs about the increase in visits from political parties during the election period. You completely ignored that.

Sorry, but its not me who's got no clothes on their argument here.

You are sitting completely naked right now.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by americandingbat
 





ATS censors some discussion insofar as it does not allow the discussion of every possible topic to continue on its website.


Nice to hear C word, finally



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by americandingbat
 


You don't get it.

It's not about agreeing with me.

The mods were just lying.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Bahhh.....

Let me know when the flamewar is over and people start discussing the possible conspirarcies in the OP.

Bye for now



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by enigmania
The mods were just lying.

That's false and insulting. No one from this site lied to you.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Here check this post by Zepharian.



I'm sorry, but to me your post seems like debate moulding. You're taking a few choice examples and framing them as a conspiracy against ATS, when in reality it is ATS, scared of the atention those subjects would cause, that is trying to hide them away.


There are at least 50 people that starred that post, so I'm not the only one that sees the OP for what it really is.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Saying that ATS doesn't censor is an obvious lie.

It's not the truth anyway.

I feel insulted to.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 





You say the above, and then you say The theme of this topic is totally empty... But if the first is true, then the latter makes no sense. If the approaches are happening everywhere, then the topic theme is not empty whatsoever.


I say empty because you have created an off-topic yourself by denouncing Enigmania in a very Cultural Revolution way.

So he opposed you and you call it "trolling".
Is this promotion of Patriotic act of some kind here on ATS?
I say it is totally unnecessary and it is just the kind of ego-trip nobody really wants to see here.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Originally posted by neformore
Simply put - did you use the alert button on the posts you found to be particularly offensive? No.

No, I've never used the alert button before. But just to let you know, I will use it now.


Originally posted by neformore
Yes, sometimes we see things ourselves, but if we don't get told we don't always know.


It's funny how you mods always know about posts critical of Israel, but fail to notice those outright bigoted and ignorant posts against Arabs and Muslims


Originally posted by neformore
So please, raise an alert on the particular aspect and we'll look at it, but be aware of the difference between discussion and discrimination.


I'd be willing to bet that my coming alert will go seemingly unnoticed. As calling Mohammed (prophet of Islam) as a child molester or pedophile doesn't constitute 'hate speech', rather 'discussion' as you seem to be informing me of now.


Originally posted by neformore
conversely it its perfectly possible to discuss radical islam without resorting to it.


I haven't seen anyone resort to 'radical' Islam as you say.. care to show me one example of such a post please?

Keep in mind neformore, that I just referred you in my earlier post to a rather popular currently active 'hate speech' thread. I find it very hard to believe that it's gone "unnoticed".

[edit on 1/3/09 by Majorion]



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 


I agree with you and have from the start. This thread is pathetic. It IS censorship. You cannot punish the masses for what the few have done. That is what it all boils down to. I have read every post on this thread over the last 2 days and Nef cannot see that the so called "conspiracy against ATS" is not a conspiracy at all. There is though, if these subjects are censored, a conspiracy within ATS. Nef cannot admit that just as any other OP on any other thread when they are proven wrong after their thread is "derailed". It was derailed because the point Nef made had underling themes. When those themes where brought to light the topic didnt want to be discussed any longer. Nef pretty much just wanted people to agree with him. I agree with you Nef. I also agree with enigmania. You are going about this the wrong way mods.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 





If you think that by using broken record technique to try and push a single agenda debunks a conspiracy that potentially covers a whole site, then you aren't much of a conspiracy theorist, researcher and debater, are you? I gave you direct evidence from the server logs about the increase in visits from political parties during the election period. You completely ignored that. Sorry, but its not me who's got no clothes on their argument here. You are sitting completely naked right now.


I am not interested in this server logs right now, because you have derailed this topic to become an issue of accusing a participant of discussion of being a "troll" just because you avoid to admit that censorship is censorship.

What is your problem really?
Do I have to quote encyclopedia again to prove my point?
Rules are censorship. Period. Why do you persist in denying this?
You must have some hidden agenda for doing so.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by americandingbat
 


Nice to hear C word, finally


How so? We've been hearing it throughout this thread from enigmania, who has as much authority in the matter as I do



Originally posted by enigmania
reply to post by americandingbat
 


You don't get it.
It's not about agreeing with me.
The mods were just lying.


The mods were just expressing their opinions as members, and their opinion of the situation. I don't think any of them was lying: I think they really believe that they are using the more appropriate definition of censorship to apply to this case.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by americandingbat
 





The mods were just expressing their opinions as members, and their opinion of the situation. I don't think any of them was lying: I think they really believe that they are using the more appropriate definition of censorship to apply to this case.


SIGH!!!!

There is but one definition of C.

What you have made it for yourselves to find it more acceptable, is not based on reality.

It's a lie.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   
As for the original topic of conspiracy against ATS, I can see how outsiders would view ATS as hypocritical.

Conspiracy "debunkers" are given leeway, as far as to allow threads that seem to promote Freemasonry or Ron Paul, or the recruitment of new followers thereof. This makes ATS seem "soft" on the mainstream establishment, or at least on front groups like the liberatarian movement.

There also doesn't seem to be much discussion about front groups, and ATS members in general seem to be woefully ignorant about anything except superficial topics like 9/11, Zionism or forced vaccinations. Maybe background information about conspiracy theories could be provided.


[edit on 1-3-2009 by vcwxvwligen]



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   
To make my last post clear...There are groups that try to derail subjects. This is known to anyone who frequents here. They are usually ignored or dealt with accordingly. Its the job of the mods and the owner to stop this with the help of the members. Its not right to put a blanket rule down and punish all. That IS censorship. What are the mods going to do for us to keep these topics open, allow intelligent discussion and still solve the problem of flaming groups? Ban the subjects? Like i said before...If you dont take the correct action, alot of us here will see this as an ATS Patriot Act. Its already been implied that enigmania was a troll himself. Ive seen alot of genuine discussion from him and can say that he is not. This is Salem.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
There is an old saying:

The one who has the crow, he shouts: sheesh!

Does "fifth column" ring the bell?



new topics

top topics



 
132
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join