A Conspiracy Against ATS?

Originally posted by enigmania
I don't care if certain people break the rules. It's still censorship, whatever the reason is.

Want me to enlighten you with the dictionairy definition of censorship?

Already done. Check this link.

Interesting topic, this.

The trends you speak of are fairly obvious to most observers, and Im sure most of us on here at times have wondered exactly what was going on.


With all due respect however, its obvious ATS can easily track IP numbers and e-mails and the like.

On any message board on any topic Ive ever seen , you get a lot of disgruntled malcontents. To suspect a conspiracy might be a bit of a reach, particularly since the admin/mods should easily be able to determine such. Vocal troublemakers arent conspiratorial nesseccarily.These same idiots are on NFL, Needlepoint, Video games, etc. message boards all over the internet.

You guys are very likely seeing about the same thing as any mod or admin on any message board on the 'net.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Topical Focus is not Censorship

Every Website you visit has a topical focus...stuff that is discussed there and stuff that is not discussed there. Defining which topics are discussed here and which are not is no different than a website on pussys saying that no dogs will be discussed or only baby-cats will be discussed.

That's not the same. .the same would be if they said only baby cats, except for Persian baby cats, we don't talk about them, they're too tricky.

reply to post by enigmania


A website gets to choose which topics it will feature and which it will not feature. And if it defines itself as "a website that is safe for the underaged to visit" and "a website that does not discuss illegal activities" it has the right to do so.




[edit on 28-2-2009 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by enigmania
I don't care if certain people break the rules. It's still censorship, whatever the reason is.

Want me to enlighten you with the dictionairy definition of censorship?

Already done. Check this link.

Don't make me laugh.

"We don't supress anything, we just have rules"

Rules to supress in this case.

Wow, I never expected to see such spin driven by mods.

reply to post by Skyfloating


It has the right to do so, and in doing so it alienates itself from it's own motto and it's audience.

Originally posted by enigmania
It has the right to do so, and in doing so it alienates itself from it's own motto and it's audience.

...thereby focusing on another type of audience.

Originally posted by enigmania
reply to post by neformore

 

It's not that hard off a concept. For instance I feel that my experiences with certain substances have been beneficial to my spiritual growth, yet I'm not allowed to speak about it.

You haven't grown enough to understand that when you are in someone else's home, ya don't crap on the rug because he pointed to the bathroom.

I don't care if certain people break the rules.

so, you would choose to...have ALL people who break the rules get penalized, or none?

It's still censorship, whatever the reason is.

Want me to enlighten you with the dictionairy definition of censorship?

It would not apply. This is (this has been pointed out SO many times) a Privately owned website in which you agreed to follow certain rules to use. "Censorship" elludes to having a public say, not a privately owned forum say.

Do you not recognize the fact that you are employing the exact tactics Neformore is referring to, in your own attempted arguement?

"I can't say what I want and ATS is responsable for that!"

You already know what any parent would tell a kid with that 'tude...I would hope.

I say, "I want to continue discussing everything I can discuss on this -really quite open- website, so I will abide the best I can, these small conditions.


Cuhail

[edit on 2/28/2009 by Cuhail]

Originally posted by enigmania
Wow, I never expected to see such spin driven by mods.

Its not spin.

I think you're missing the point.

See - no one forces you to post here. No one is holding a gun to your head telling you that you have to discuss things on ATS.

As such, you have a choice.

That choice is a simple one. You can either stick with the site rules, or you can go elsewhere.

Thats not censorship. Thats your freedom of choice.

So what you are saying is that you choose to stay here, and break the forum rules, because it suits you to do so.

And when you do that, you say "its not my fault - you are censoring me"

reply to post by neformore


I do notice a trend.
For periods of time there are a lot of thought provoking topics, and then for a period of time, all of the headline news on ATS is silly little kid stuff. Then a period of great topics again, followed by headline news full of hate speech. and so on and so on.
I never thought to connect it to outsiders trying to bring the quality of ATS down, but it does seem every time the admin has to step in, things get better.
The current topic on the drug issue, needs work, by both the mods and the members.
Whether from the outside trying to make ATS a bad site, or just that we have fluxes of bad topics, I have definitely learned to be a much more patient person because of ATS.
I dont get too riled up when I see stupid topics. I learn to sift through the garbage. But some times they get the better of me.

Good topic though. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

ok, I wasn't going to add this but, at the request of a mod, I shall. *peeks head out of shell*

There might be another element which we haven't talked about before and it might answer a couple of questions we have as to why are they doing this and what would be the interest.

ATS might be being tested by a element of people that need information about what ppl think, values and such. Ha! Just look at the our name and should bring all the bees of the world to gather the nectar within. and why wouldn't we bring in a rainbow of ppl/grps with a name like this. Shoot, it's a military term and what would be the one bee that wants that nectar (info) within?

What better way for data collection than to post subjects that they need info on and post the same as what the mods have seen. Simple tactic is: get the info, then drop out of site for awhile or 'sleep' if you will, which in the military world means=go silent till needed. *do I need a wiki ref for this? LOL .. you get the idea*

IMO, some of it is a military/FBI/CIA Psychological operation to gather data. Seriously.

I certainly can't prove this but, after reading your data presented/described defiantly has the 'earmarks' of such. How do I know this? You can call it a 3rd eye, but call it my 'knower'.

It's just another point to think about. If they want data/info on what members think, what they value and what their stance is on Gov issues/president, they just have to login, post up a thread on data collection needed for the day, throw in a few comments to get the flames roll'n and wala! Then it's just a matter of copy and paste comments.

As for the hard core breaching of the T&C, it might be gov, but, highly doubtful, seems more like disgruntled groups of ppl or single elements (Crackers, pissed off members, ect)

the question(s) to ask is:

*If it is an alpha agency, is the data collection harmful? hmmm...not in that it brings down the site, but, it certainly brings out our core values.

*why would they be doing this? completely unknown for now, and might never know. but, that certainly belongs to another thread


-cheers!

reply to post by Cuhail

You haven't grown enough to understand that when you are in someone else's home, ya don't crap on the rug because he pointed to the bathroom.

Well, I thought I saw Deny Ignorance on the doormat as I came in.

so, you would choose to...have ALL people who break the rules get penalized, or none?

No, I would penalize people that don't have common decence in replying, racists and such, but not ban entire topics.

It would not apply. This is (this has been pointed out SO many times) a Privately owned website in which you agreed to follow certain rules to use. "Censorship" elludes to having a public say, not a privately owned forum say.

Then the forum should man up and admit that it is not the beacon of truth and free speech it portrays itself to be.

Do you not recognize the fact that you are employing the exact tactics Neformore is referring to, in your own attempted arguement?

I'm not sure. If the tactics Nef. was referring to are nothing more than people that are angry that they are being shut up, then yes.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by enigmania
It has the right to do so, and in doing so it alienates itself from it's own motto and it's audience.

...thereby focusing on another type of audience.

So now you are trying to alienate me from the audience.

What other type of audience, the type that is ok with censorship?

Feels like 911 aftermath all over again.

"We all have to give up a little freedom to be safe from the terrorists."

Originally posted by whoswatchinwho
Well I think sadly your probably spot on Nef,

I think it is inevitable that a site dealing with conspiracy theories would be targetted like this.. This one especially, as the amount of the amount of deep critical thinkers around makes it rather dangerous..

With the amount of threads started and posts made it's almost a certainty that someone wil hit the target, even if it's accidental..

So when a thread or post comes up thats acually the truth what better tool to use to hide it than misdirection, whilst we're all shouting about our rights, your rights and the owners rights, that little gem that showed us the truth slips away into the void never to be heard of again.

So the next time this happens don't jump into the fray, start looking elsewhere, see what they want hidden.......

I would definitely agree on this !! especially on the last sentence !!!

2nd line, because i haven't nothing else to add here

Originally posted by neformore

So here we are, sitting on the worlds most popular site for alternative topics and conspiracies, and yet there's one that never really gets discussed, and that is the Conspiracy against ATS.

Nice read, thanks for the incite into this issue without singling anyone out. We've all probably lost it a time or two but there seemed to be a concerted effort to cause problems by some in the midst of the election run. Especially the last couple months.

Mostly personal attacks on the candidate or a fellow poster's position in the discussion. That is normal in any debate, but the line was crossed in my opinion many times. And that was just the threads I read, many more I didn't read thinking "Oh man, it's gonna be a pit of vipers", and just ignoring it.

Thanks for inside mod information.

InfinityO'Reilly

Very good thread. The trends you speak of, nef, and noticed by staff usually originate from sensational main-stream-media news stories! Everyone and anyone seems to want to jump right into the fray on the internet immediately after the story breaks, and post their two-cents worth, without hesitating.

Sometimes with cool common sense, but mostly with emotionally-charged enthusiasm, which is accompanied by a certain unwillingness to "hear" another person's view, let alone the patience to even consider them.

It's a sad fact that so many of us have beliefs that won't ever be altered by civil discussion, therefore leading, inevitabley, to a degradation of decorum. My clearest example is when someone posts a reply to any given thread, without the gosh-darn common decency to READ that entire thread first!

One last part, and I'll shut up; When a member gets insulted, or disrespected, or treated with no courtesy, or suffers any other type of percieved injustice, there is really no cure. No going back. No way of reversing that "injury"; and subsequently that member's otherwise decent posting begins to slide, and a sort of ripple-effect emerges, forever changing the outcome of that thread. Instead of walking away mad; or simply walking away, they will continue to propagate and pass along that anger, or hate, or depression, and bring the entire site down with them a little, in my op.

reply to post by enigmania

Well, I thought I saw Deny Ignorance on the doormat as I came in.

You did, it does. You just have a different interpretation than that that was intended when coined.

No, I would penalize people that don't have common decence in replying, racists and such, but not ban entire topics.

But until the rule is lifted, on this, a privately-owned website, it is going to remain so. Again, by being here talking, you agreed not to. Period.

Then the forum should man up and admit that it is not the beacon of truth and free speech it portrays itself to be.

The beacon of Truth would point directly at those who agreed to post within the rules and then did the opposite.

I'm not sure. If the tactics Nef. was referring to are nothing more than people that are angry that they are being shut up, then yes.

No, I think Nef is refering to more than just the small group of "apparently" pettulant (sp?) "Freedom of Speech" criers. They are just one topic this drapes over.

I think.

Cuhail

Originally posted by enigmania

You haven't grown enough to understand that when you are in someone else's home, ya don't crap on the rug because he pointed to the bathroom.

Well, I thought I saw Deny Ignorance on the doormat as I came in.

Wow. Just wow.

Are you honestly equating dropping a load on someones rug because it's how you express your denial of all things ignorant?

There is something wrong on so many levels there.

You know, we have folks here in my small town who used to express their dissatisfaction with the "Established Order" by going into the local bookstore cafe bathroom and smearing excrement all over the walls.

Faults with that line of reasoning?

1.) The bookstore/cafe is not "The Established Order".

2.) Some mimimum wage kid had to clean that up. How is that kid the "Evil Tyrant of Oppression"?

3.) Millions of books on the shelves to be read. Heck you didn't even have to BUY them - they were more than welcome to sit in the cafe and browse through them for free.

4.) They weren't the only ones who had to use those bathrooms.


So, essentially - claiming that since your poop smells like fresh baked cookies to YOU, the rules don't apply?

How does that make you any different than "The Evil Elite Behind the Scenes"?

That's their modem operendi as well, you know.

The whole "me, me, me, the rules don't apply to ME" rationale.



[edit on 2/28/09 by GENERAL EYES]

reply to post by neformore


Very interesting. Thanks for putting this up. I've actually noticed this throughout MANY threads but for the most part brushed it off until recently.

What really got me thinking was the other day when a "drug related" thread had been closed (pending review I believe) but somehow kept getting more and more attention on the main page. The only way I really saw that happening was if a core group of like minded people made a concerted, organized effort to continue pushing this thread to make some sort of point.

I've seen what I consider an organized effort, by other members in threads to get people banned or try to push others out of certain threads with opposing view points. They use the person who can scream the loudest and longest tactic to win their argument as opposed to using logic or factual information or just stating their points of view as opinion.
At times, it feels like a hostile takeover but it doesn't seem to be limited to just the three area's you've covered. I've seen 9/11 "truthers" harass skeptics to the point of exhaustion where they feel their opinions don't matter and aren't considered so they leave or allow themselves to get pushed to the point where they say the wrong thing and get warned or banned.
Just to be clear, I'm not picking on "truthers", I'm just using that as an example. There are many examples on both sides of almost every debate.

The reality is that the owners of this site have the right to run it as they see fit and if we would like to participate, we must obey the rules they've instituted-PERIOD.
The owners must take many things into consideration. They must walk a line knowing that if things go too far, the realities of homeland security may affect them and their site and not for the better. Because this is the largest site of it's kind, all the members need to be aware that the owners are under a microscope and maybe we should support them instead of taking every opportunity to complain about how unfair they are or how they're trying to curtail our "rights".

The simple fact of the matter is, if you don't like the way the site is run and feel like the owners have not addressed your concerns, DON'T COME HERE ANYMORE.
Find another site or start your own and see how easy it is

reply to post by FRIGHTENER

One last part, and I'll shut up; When a member gets insulted, or disrespected, or treated with no courtesy, or suffers any other type of percieved injustice, there is really no cure. No going back. No way of reversing that "injury"; and subsequently that member's otherwise decent posting begins to slide, and a sort of ripple-effect emerges, forever changing the outcome of that thread. Instead of walking away mad; or simply walking away, they will continue to propagate and pass along that anger, or hate, or depression, and bring the entire site down with them a little, in my op.

I mean this in the most honest and friendly discussion kind of way, make no mistake.

Sincere apology. It's a great way to start a healing process. Regret for going past a certain point of technique in honest debate. I've done it in this thread and lost no face for doing so.

Cuhail