A Conspiracy Against ATS?

Great theory OP, and well written at that.

However, I have to disagree and here's why.
ATS Has become exponentially more popular in the past few years, even in the past year that I have been "active" here. This means many things, but in regards to your theory is also throws a wrench in the whole "organized group to shut ATS down".

I believe ATS is comprised of many more unregistered members than you realize. Speaking personally, I did not register until months after viewing threads on a weekly basis. It was not until a thread popped up that I felt I really needed to speak up, that I registered to do so.

My theory about what is happening is much simpler, and thus, not quite as intriguing as the OP. What we're seeing are the dormant ATS lurkers showing their teeth. Like I mentioned before, ATS is very popular now, im sure there are thousands, if not more, unregistered viewers. So what may seem like an organized group of newcomers out to get ATS, is really just a small percentage of lurkers that finally found a thread that they "needed" to post in.

When you think about it, why would you register on any forum? Most likely because you wanted to voice your opinion.

So are we under attack from an organized group of offline members with the agenda to shut down ATS, or are we just seeing a rise in registrations from lurkers that had their buttons pushed a little harder?

reply to post by roadgravel

Actually in a sense it is, a group of members, the plan is the stated mission of the site and the operation is the T&C.

I believe those who are "watching" are most certainly overriding ATS's T&C. Meaning, they don't give damn about ATS's disclaimer.

Because ATS, as a public forum, can be used by a group of people to promote their agenda, and the watchers are watching to exactly this kind of occurrence, then discerning possible motives and goals and evaluating them by their own standards (part of "feeling of being threatened" reality).

This is why ATS seriously considers possible action/reaction from the authorities, which produces the need for T&C.

T&C of ATS only reflects who the true boss is.

reply to post by roadgravel

Second, how would you know positively about your point and ATS.

I don't understand what you mean here. Can you please clarify?

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Indeed, and I am actually glad and applaud ATS is putting this effort to make this place pleasant and civilized, great discussions are born and thrive in such environment.
I just don't want to see it fall into this trap of correctness, today drugs but what will it be in 10 years time? What if doubting the official version of 9/11 becomes a crime or offence to the families?
Modern governments are trying to suppress an control us and many of us are here silently denouncing and quietly fighting our rights and I really want to see ATS at least remain neutral and allow us a certain degree of speech.
Right now I see good will from the site and I hope it lasts


[edit on 2-3-2009 by TheOracle]

Originally posted by TheOracle
I just don't want to see it fall into this trap of correctness,

I agree that there is way too much focus on being "politically correct" in our more provocative conversations... and there is a simple rule of thumb that should work for anyone both here on ATS and in nearly any other place where tough topics are exchanged:

I can be okay to offend, but it's never okay to be offensive.

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by roadgravel

 

Second, how would you know positively about your point and ATS.

I don't understand what you mean here. Can you please clarify?

No one but the owners and possibly a few others would know the whole truth of the site. An average members, such as you and I, can only listen to what we are told and draw own conclusions (opinion).

i think the paranoia is getting a touch out of hand all round ATS, i really get the feeling we're in danger of imploding because of it.

members suspect admin and mods of being organized for the other side, admin and mods suspect membership of being organized for the other side.

this type of suspicion is nothing new but i can't remember having seen a thread to that effect initiated by a moderator and this week is the first time i've seen it mentioned among long standing members. it's getting hard enough to be called a wedge. i think it's a sign that perspective is needed before the whole thing splinters and collapses.

it'ld be a shame to get this close communally and crap out at the last few hurdles.

i really think it's not civility that's causing the problem, it's trust. the "us and them" culture rearing it's head at the moment needs to be nipped in the bud now, before it becomes an anchor that drags this whole community to the sea bed.

just my thoughts.

and no, i don't think there is any new threat to ATS from outside, it perhaps has grown with the site, but it isn't new.

[edit on 2/3/09 by pieman]

reply to post by roadgravel


Agreed. And that is not an issue at all.

Sometimes I read someone's opinion contrary to mine and I just wanna jump outa my skin and shout at him the right version of the truth

I was attracted to ATS in the first place because of the great choice of topics and also practically instant appearance of very actual political and economical topics, and plenty of links to the source information (which is sometimes hard or impossible to find in the MSM). This makes ATS a very good alternative source of information, if you know how to filter inaccurate bits.

reply to post by pieman


IMO the economic situation and direction of the US and world is having an effect. I suspect people are having a difficult time trusting leadership given the actions that are taking place, such as the bailouts and war. They see agendas at so many levels. It can easily spread to many other areas.

It's not a conspiracy against ATS.

It seems to me like it's more like you (the moderators and adminis) don't have rules on how to discuss things so you're afraid of it getting out of control. Then when it does get out of control you blame it on a handful of people who are conspiring against ATS.

Sounds somewhat immature to me. If you don't have rules to discuss such things then admit it. There are ways to have civilized discussion about such topics but you don't need to go out and say that there is a conspiracy against ATS when there is none.

[edit on 2-3-2009 by Frankidealist35]

reply to post by neformore
[What we want is a place where all the interesting stuff we like can be discussed freely, ]

Just kick the FDA out of ATS, they have no place at ATS, they have no place in civilized society, they have no place in people's lives.

They won't cure ATS but they will treat ATS.

Originally posted by pieman

i really think it's not civility that's causing the problem, it's trust. the "us and them" culture rearing it's head at the moment needs to be nipped in the bud now, before it becomes an anchor that drags this whole community to the sea bed.

I agree that trust and a "them and us" mentality is a big part of the problem.

But I disagree that civility is NOT part of the problem. I feel that selective imposition of the rules of civility and decorum (or any rules) makes it appear that there IS a them and an us, and that trust goes downhill thereafter.

I am going to leave the whole drug issue alone, its too fresh and too heated, and say that in another thread, the banning of hate speech thread, I had some questions about what specifically (examples) of hate speech were. I got answers from both mods, and from other members that could be summed up as;

"Youre just being stupid, isnt it OBVIOUS? If you dont like it here leave, its a privately owned site, yadda yadda."

I wasnt being purposely obtuse, as SO would say. Hate speech is NOT a clear cut thing, and the way Springer worded that OP, it made it even more confusing. Posts were tolerated in that thread that were not questions about the policy, or opinions about the policy, posts that added nothing to the thread except to attack the questioners, imply they were troublemakers, stupid, and to let them know that if they didnt like it they could leave.

If thats not forum ganging, I dont know what is. But is was tolerated. No one was warned to not make posts personal, or not to post just to attack if it added nothing more to the topic. And it seemed to me the reason was that the forum gang was praising ATS. You seemed to be allowed to be as nasty and rude, and personal as you wanted, if you were saying, "ATS is great, if you dont like it shut the hell up" but if you had a legitimate question, you were a troublemaker.

Thats why I am suspicious of claims like Nefermores, that ATS is under attack by "troublemakers." I have been accused of that for just about every question I have ever asked in a board issues thread if my opinion of a policy ran counter to the policy. No matter how politely I stated it. No matter how genuine the question might be. I see forum ganging here, but I see that it is tolerated when it suits staff.

I dont know that I would call it a "conspiracy" on the part of the staff to allow uncivil behavior on the part of ATS "fanatics," (I wont say supporters, because I think they undermine ATS more than the critics do at times) I tend to think it is just human nature. Its not extreme behavior if it just so happens to suit you. Its only extreme behavior if it happens opposed to you.

While some critics can be less than civil, and their objections can be stated in less than a thoughtful way, people who come in and have nothing more to add than "if you dont like it leave" are not supporting ATS. They are creating the very climate of us and them within the membership that is fracturing a good website.

I think the mods should be imposing the T&C strictly. And fairly. Even when the ones breaking the T&C are doing so in support of whatever the ban du jour is.

reply to post by star in a jar


FDA is the one which killed WR?
And burned all his books?
Right? That's the one?

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
It seems to me like it's more like you (the moderators and adminis) don't have rules on how to discuss things so you're afraid of it getting out of control. ]

Could you elaborate on what you mean here - because there are rules.

They're called the site Terms and Conditions. If everyone sticks to the Terms and Conditons, what is there to get out of control?

I'm talking about people external to the site who come here to [i[deliberately set up a controversy around the terms and conditions in order to cause problems, and do so to serve their own agenda.

So I'm afraid you've lost me. You need to expand more with that one.

reply to post by jfj123



LMAO !!!!

Sheez .....



Mod Note: One Line and Short Posts – Please Review This Link.
Mod Note: Please Stay on Topic

[edit on 2-3-2009 by DontTreadOnMe]

above is my general thoughts on the subject but more specifically, this theory doesn't really stand up to the usual ATS standards, or the standards i'ld expect from you nefermore. it's pretty much a skunk works item.

there's no corroboration or "facts" as such, just a general feeling.

the election stuff was noticed at the time but could have been either ATS'ers at the conventions or people that were drumming up support for their parties. the "grass root's" manipulation issue could hardly be said to be confined to ATS.

there are a lot of people interested in illicit substances and they aren't renowned for their good sense or their organisational skills, just look at the thread.

the isreal/gaza thing was a heated issue that mobilised a lot of groups that felt angry and vindicated in their beliefs. the MSM played it's part in whipping the outrage.

the hate speech thing is........well, "some people are just jerks".

why link them together and call them a conspiracy? if there is evidence then share it.

reply to post by neformore


Not to sound overly paranoid because usually I'm the serious skeptic but I am wondering if part of these attacks could be by scientologists ??

I know initially it sounds kinda nutty but with all the attention they've been getting along with the group Anonymous and all the threads with scientology subjects on ATS......well it just gets me to wonder....ya know?

Do an ATS search on scientology and you will find tons of threads and most are or at least seem to be geared toward debunking or showing the negative side of scientology...not that there's a positive side to it

Here's an example of how scientology appears to handle it's "detractors" .

The “fair game” policy, for example, is responsible for the harassment of numerous scientology critics over the years. As L. Ron Hubbard said, concerning suppressive peoples (those who are not in support of scientology):

“The homes, property, places and abodes of persons who have been active in attempting to: suppress Scientology or Scientologists are all beyond any protection of Scientology Ethics, unless absolved by later Ethics or an amnesty ... this Policy Letter extends to suppressive non-Scientology wives and husbands and parents, or other family members or hostile groups or even close friends.”

www.whyweprotest.net...

www.xenu.net...
www.xenu.net...

I don't suppose some of these coordinated attacks started about the time the scientology/anonymous threads started really picking up steam????

Originally posted by roadgravel

Originally posted by jfj123
...Just for the record, they don't need to set up a website like this to collect IP addresses. The government "snifs" the entire internet for keywords and phrases , flags them with IP addresses for analysis. So putting up a single site where only a small percentage of the total internet populace goes, is to inefficient. ...

That is similar to stating it is inefficient to infiltrate of group to learn more about their plans or methods of operations.

Monitoring traffic specifically to and from a site for analysis would be more efficient than just looking for keywords randomly from traffic everywhere if there are certain topics of interest. The hit count most likely would be higher. I bet both methods are used. Why look in the oceans a for certain of tree when it would be most likely found in a forest.

Just because they can doesn't mean it is the preferred method.

The government can pull every drop of data coming into and leaving the site so there's no need to monitor it with humans until their Heuristic scanning software finds the keywords or phrases.
The computer software does what a human used to do.

Originally posted by jfj123

Not to sound overly paranoid because usually I'm the serious skeptic but I am wondering if part of these attacks could be by scientologists ??

Its an interesting concept jfj - scientology sure doesn't like to be dissed in any way, shape or form.

I'll have a think on that one a bit more and come back to you.

Originally posted by samureyed
So are we under attack from an organized group of offline members with the agenda to shut down ATS, or are we just seeing a rise in registrations from lurkers that had their buttons pushed a little harder?

Well thats one possible reason - I'll give you that.

I'm open to any suggestions. Thats the interesting thing about subject, because there are so many variables, and they need to be looked at one at a time and picked over a bit - as with all good conspiracies. I can certainly take that concept on board, thanks for putting it forward