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: 32
132
<< 29  30  31    33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
The Internet is the worse nightmare that could ever happen for Government, and systems of thought and methodologies such as sciences where quacks that might claim the earth was round do not get to publish their wild assertions and papers as such. Oh who is to control it all, people must be controlled.

However as demonstrated by the Open Source movement there is a new paradigm in town, and that is one where everyone gets their say, even the kooks today, and in that mess it all boils up to a official distribution of thought and agreement, just like a Linux distribution. And those who do not like the current system of thought, can just go out and make their own distribution and take what they want from the original one and put their new stuff in. Everyone is happy. Self determination of the masses.

However as we all know it scares the # out of the Government. How will we ever build in the back doors the Govt. wants to have in every computer so it can watch it citizens and their activities, if the source code is open. Best to outlaw the open source then, throw it all away was Gates solution.

And well the Internet, there are a few racists on there with their ideas, actually collaborating, and other people might believe them, so they need to be monitored so they do not away the thoughts of the stupid people we have in our society.

And the perverts, I mean if we listened to the news we literally have 30 percent of men on every block over 30 years old trading child pornography. Who is going to watch them, we need tougher rules, we can't have this wild west of free thought happening, etc. Be careful of the boogy man idea.

Then there are the drug issues, sites promoting drugs etc., illegal activities, come on, it is just a bunch of crap. And really, we need to let this board do what it has to do keep these monkeys out of our business. The Internet is the first chance ever, in the history of the world, where for a very low cost, even a Kook like me can spread his opinion, put up a website, tell others his theroy and let others decide for themselves.

And that is the concern. See already the young people have to shift through millions of pieces of information every day, on the TV, cell phone, Internet, Junk mail, and learn at a quick age to see the crap when it comes to them in some form of media. They are becoming very smart in discernment, and that, is the problem.

The Internet is under attack on every level, and places like this is number one. And so is open source by the way, personally every person on this forum should throw their windows away, and not buy office anymore. Trust me, it does not take much to drop an Elephant the size of Microsoft.

Yet, you don't have to do these things if you do not want to, but please do not delude yourself that these things are not under attack or being manipulated to take your rights of free speech away.


reply to post by neformore
 




posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Exhausting read. A conspiracy against ATS? Maybe. (I'll elaborate in just a second). First, thanks nef, SO, and mods for giving me more insight into the behind-the-scenes workings of my favorite site than I've ever seen since I joined.

Infiltrators; CoIntelPro; Disgruntled ex-members; Scientologists; Sleeper accounts; Masked IP addresses; DisInfo agents; Forum software; WOW!

Poo fetishes??? Yuk. I might need to get checked out for any CTD's (Cyber-Transmitted-Diseases!) I may have caught while reading here!

Neformore-I can see how you would like good answers, and are perhaps frustrated by being bound to your duties and confidences, and can only pose your theory & questions in a general way, without giving away real intel about ATS. Sorry. But very well done.

I believe our own gov could be the perp. I've heard more from them about "Intelligence Gathering" in the last 7 or 8 years (since 9/11) than any time in history. THEY seem like the paranoid ones, wanting to listen in, in secret, to whatever they can, from whatever source, in the guise of "Security" and "Protecting Freedom", and "Preserving Democracy", that it makes sense to me they would be the largest 'Moths' attracted to the glowing flame of ATS. (And hardest to eradicate).

Recently, I've tried to be a little more serious of a member, cause God knows, I joke around ALOT. (Stress Reducer). So this is my attempt at a straight-faced post.

And if our gov does it, then with all the mention of other countries on this site, foreign govs must do it as well, with equal enthusiasm, to see what's being said about them, to pre-empt criticism in the MSM, and to better understand their enemies and/or allies.

Seeing how the trends are noticed, but not really always identifiable, tells me that some of these 'attacks' or patterns come from some extremely knowledgeable, technologically-sophisticated Un-Subs. If it's a conspiracy against us (I'm part of the ATS site, too) then 'they' might be succeding. I hope not, and wish I could do more, (besides being a good boy) to help.

We must prevail, and I'm confident ATS owners are smarter than the disruptors. All my faith,
FRIGHTENER.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 02:51 AM
link   
For the Site Owners & the Mods.....

I believe that something is going wrong with ATS, I have noticed some disturbing trends. I honestly do not believe that is not caused by those who organise and run/hold together ATS, rather it is coming from outside... and I see the owners & mods struggling to keep it going in the right direction.

My observations

a) Rapid increase of bad attitudes and personal attacks and lack of respect for others

b) Anyone who has a genuine experience of something unusual, (and they try to share it, albeit difficult for them to do so), seem to get immediately heavily jumped on and criticised to death before they can finish their story. Immediate demands of absolute proof come out and anything to ridicule them – and we keep missing the truth of peoples 1st hand experiences as a result. I have noticed this many times, and sometimes felt that i had to u2u the originator to encourage them not to give up, because some had given them such a bad time. There are many occasions where (rightly so) claims have been proved to be fabrications –disagreeing with something and seeking the truth should be expected here, and anyone posting should expected questions etc, but not personal attack.


c) Often once a thread starts to get interesting and people begin finding and revealing good data sources and evidence, the thread suddenly gets overtaken by the “prove it” and “rubbish everyone” gang – and the thread is destroyed.

d) Threads which are utterly ridiculous (suitable for totally rubbishing and discrediting ATS) do not get the negative attacks that many of the good threads do.

e) It comes across to me that many people posting are becoming miserable (as opposed to happy) in the conversations – starts to feel like chatting with depressed people, rather than people excited by the wonder of all that is around us that is greater that the restricted world view of the main stream media.

What happened to the fire that would burn in people to listen to the amazing and seek out the truth, to stand up against oppression and suppressions in honourable ways?

I for one am not going to give up and let our ability to share and communicate and learn about our greater world and universe be taken away from us – we need to be able to ask and talk about and share information on the topics that “powers” would like us to ignore.....

Is there a conspiracy against ATS ? – no idea
Are some people trying to damage ATS – I believe so
Are they succeeding in damaging ATS – they are definitely having a negative impact....



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zepherian
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.

Specifically the two very hot topics are Zionism (in as much as this conspiracy theory would branch out into revisionist history of the holocaust, Isreal and possibly even organised religion) and drugs (in as much that it would branch out into drug advocacy because of the alleged spiritual enlightenment and natural connection attained by the use of psychadelics).


You make some valid points and I agree with you in some ways. The problem with the term "Zionism" is it actually has so many meanings and implications just at face value. To name a few:

1) A Jewish person's support for the State of Israel and allegiance to the land.
2) The belief that Jewish people deserve a homeland.
3) A Jewish person's belief that other Jewish people should have the right to a home land.
4) A term that describes the perseverance and livelihood of Judaic history and culture.
5) A sinister group of elite and corrupt individual who control and are behind anything secretive, including non-Jewish people.
6) A dangerous ideology that is aggressive and unwavering in its pursuit to fulfill its goals.
7) The acknowledgment that Semite individuals deserve a homeland.
8) A word used to describe people who may confirm a supposed "Protocols" type organisation.
(I'm sure there are even more that come to mind for the reader.)

I do not necessarily agree or endorse any of these above points, I just feel they sum up the many interpretations that this word holds.

Keeping this in mind, I think it is easy to see why the topic of "Zionism" is so tricky AND vulnerable. Especially people who endeavour to portray "Zionism" in a negative manner.

Unfortunately, for many people, the word "Zionism" is the convenient answer to all their problems and misfortunes. It is a word that can be used in any context to describe anything sinister that has, does and will happen in the future. Since for many this word is so "factual" and "'logical" in its use, practically ANYTHING can be somewhat linked and associated with "Zionism". The way some individuals use this word, and the passion and certainty they seem to express as a result when using this word, leads me to question this: "Can anti-Zionism exist in a world without Zionism?" For some strange reason, I think it could...



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 09:34 AM
link   
I believe it is the natural evolution of the site.

As it is pushed to become larger and with a growing membership that is diverse so do the opinions and actions of the members change. More and more people are starting to use discussions on the internet and they bring their personalities with them. And of course those who seek to create chaos for it's own sake will arrive also. It is just an echo of the real world. And it's anonymous so actions do not have much effect on a person's real life.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
the op was wrong....


IM OUT TO GET EVERYONE MUAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAA


but seriously, we've all seen these people. If you have ever spent any time online at all, then you have been able to assign voices to the words you are reading. those of us who know people, also know who the problem makers are, and those who are intentionally throwing a stick in the wheels.

they are usually dealt with. then again, there are the people who dont really know people who would rather argue with the trouble makers then present their case.

there really are a small number of us that do truely belong here. we are cooks and crazys for sure, but all of us want the answers to come out.

unfortunately there are many people who show up, and think that it would be fun to mess with us. sometimes i agree that it takes the serious edge off of some of the topics.

as for the hate speech. we will always have that so long as ignorance runs rampant. just ban them and move on. im sure they will be back, but at least we are setting an example. (how can you even deny the holocaust happened... i mean seriously. i am kinda ticked that i cant use the word holocaust as it was intended: to mean an inferno blaze that cant be stopped. that is a sweet word.)

all things aside. i think most of us do a pretty good job keeping in line, and also of policing the idiot disinfos that show up.

one thing that bugs me really, when normal posters get called disinfo agents just because they disagree or dont see the whole picture. i agree there has to be some here, but seriously. some of the real crazys here are very quick to call disinfo on someone. i think that should chill out, but its still not that big a problem.

ATS IS IN THE NEWS, and we usually look dumb to the rest of the world because of this "Conspiracy theorist" label that is so repulsive that it should be considered a derogatory term like retard. We often have facts that obviously refute all rebuttal, but still, because we go against the grain, we get labeled. we usually have the last laugh, even tho we may be crying because we didnt want to be right in the first place.

i think that this happens on all boards. not to the extent as here. ats is in the public light now. we cant be denied.

THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
It is a Conspiracy within Conspiracy within Conspiracy.
It is not me saying this, but Dune.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Skeptic,
Im not quite sure why you have not addressed me as of yet. It seems like this topic is being swept under the rug. None of the mods or the OP has either. I understand that things come up, and your not always to get on line, but this thread has died. And for none of you to check into this seems unrealistic. I would like you to either engague in discussion here, or allow me to post a new thread where this can be talked about between us. I had my first thread closed saying that the topic was already being debated. So i come back here and noone will talk about it. Why do i keep getting the run-around? Its like when you call tech support...except I HAD the owner on the line. A good buisness man never hangs up on his coustomers. Hanging up on customers is not good business practice in tuff times like these Skeptic.

[edit on 5-3-2009 by eyeforalie]



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I have also seen the trend where lively debate turns to bad attitude very quickly (and many of us switch off). Not sure why this is but certainly if I was a statistics man - the mention of Isreal or Palestine - really gets peopes juices flowing so quoting this as an example is extreme example (compared to say moon landings where debate is often tempered).

If I am honest, I do not see a conspiracy here, but I think we are going through a breakdown of "barriers" particularly around religion - another very hot topic to make peoples blood boil. In the last few years, Richard Dawkins have given the aetheists and agnostics the courage/confidence to stad up to the christians, moslems etc., and say "Why can't we discuss your faith? Why does this ground have to be off limits?". I think this has generated polarisation between people, their religion and actually this new voice of the non religion.

I am not taking sides here - look at the threads of a religious nature. I bet they suffer more from abuse (ironically) than some of the pure science ones



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
OK, this is going to get me in trouble no doubt, but you need to hear it anyway.

I think many of the Mods here are biased in their own area of interests so much so that they cannot be entirely reasonable or objective towards opposing points of view. There are also a bunch of you who uphold ATS as if it were second to the constitution of the United States. We can do no wrong, why is anyone questioning me (us, ATS)

I am not trying to pick a fight but it is OBVIOUS that you all lean toward being proponents of progressive ideals. I do not mean a liberal vs. conservative thing (although I have seen that as well) I mean you are a conspiracy site so by definition you must be PRO theories no matter what…

The problem is that you are so PRO progressive that you are almost equally ANTI-skepticism. (with the exception of some specific mods obviously) It’s that issue that leads you down this path… the paranoid’s path, seeing things where they aren’t or ignoring other pieces that do not fit the puzzle you are creating.


Lets take Nerfs reasoning:


Originally posted by neformore
Before I became a mod, as a member, I noticed that ATS was being visited by a "cluster" of bigots. These people manifested themselves in a number of ways, some were subtle, some more direct. Their MO was to appear "reasonable" whilst they lined up their agenda, and then they banded in to promote it - the eventual subject of choice for them at that time was holocaust denial. There were two or three of them tag-teaming each other in threads, all with the same or very similar message. I could, and did, make predictions of who would post in certain threads at certain times.


The first problem with this is the assumption of bigotry.
In almost ALL cases on ATS (as in life) a BIGOT is someone who doesn’t agree with a progressive ideal, assumption or attitude. If you do not “condone” homosexuality, you are a BIGOT. (notice I didn’t say “hate”, just “condone”)

A BIGOT on ATS has become anyone who does not hop on whatever bandwagon has been proposed in a thread. Someone who vocally comes out and states their opinion opposite is a BIGOT and in many cases an “agent” of some government agency.

Lets break down his statement …

“Before I became a mod, as a member, I noticed that ATS was being visited by a "cluster" of bigots.”

“Cluster of bigots”, this could simply mean people who did not agree with whatever neformore felt would make one a bigot for not agreeing.

“These people manifested themselves in a number of ways, some were subtle, some more direct. Their MO was to appear 'reasonable' whilst they lined up their agenda, and then they banded in to promote it”

This statement is describing a bunch of people related or not who feel the same way and happen to come across the same thread (which isn’t hard if you frequent the site) and post “reasonable” responses. But Neformore has singled out the side he is biased against. Neformore has assigned that side “Bigot” in his mind. And not just an ordinary bigot.. but an ORGANIZED band of BIGOTS.

Is Neformore saying that you cannot find a band of proponents in a thread posting "reasonable" theories or arguments in a similar or duplicate manner? Really?

also.. What's with the 14th Century english? (whilst)....


Moving on....
“There were two or three of them tag-teaming each other in threads”

So any group of people who believe in the same thing and who post similar beliefs and feelings are proof of a conspiracy against ATS?

"I could, and did, make predictions of who would post in certain threads at certain times.”

I can make predictions all day on people who I know will make and promote predictions, how is that for ya?

The proponents of alternate theories are REALLY EASY to predict. Predicting the “other” side shouldn’t be hard or shocking to anyone. If you were to follow my posts I am sure you could get a reasonable assumption of what and where I am going to post and what I might say. It is not that hard.. most people are consistent.

My point here is that based on neformore’s evidence, it is clear to me that he is being paranoid toward his bias. Plain and simple.

Just like all the members who swear we are visited by agents of this or that governmental agency.
My advice neformore, is to not let it get to that level, where you do not engage in conversation with opposition and just label everyone an agent of some sort or another.


I'm sorry but the rest of the theory is just ....


People trying to 'cross the line' so they can whine after the hammer comes down .. or not whine when they get banned, only to whne about banned accounts, or gang up with shadow accounts to whine about their secret accounts getting banned? Really? This is supposed to be able to take down ATS?


To be honest guys, the only problems (besides the bias) I see are with your U2S mass statements, you run the show, so run the show....
I f I never get another U2U screaming bloody murder about a bunch of unruly members causing you curtail or ban this or that I'll be very happy.

Honestly, it's embarrassing, it makes you look like your not in control.


[edit on 6-3-2009 by gormly]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by gormly
I mean you are a conspiracy site so by definition you must be PRO theories no matter what.
>>>snip



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
If all we do is our best to provide a tolerable venue for anyone to say what they believe (which is indeed all that we try to do), how can you make the claim you're making?


The only claim I have ever made against ATS is that it is biased in it's own rule enforcement.

I make no claim as to anyone’s sincerity.
It's just usually biased one way or another. Human Nature I guess.


Edited for my poor spelling (again)...

[edit on 6-3-2009 by gormly]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by gormly
The only claim I have ever made against ATS is that it is biased in it's own rule enforcement.

Do you have an example where you believe rule enforcement was focused on a topic rather than the behavior of the contributor?



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
In the smaller online circles of extreme conspiracy theories, we're often seen as a den of debunkers. There are precious few UFO sightings or 9/11 conspiracies that survive the kind of intense scrutiny that happens here on ATS. I'm really at a loss as to how you can come up with such a statement.


I starred your post here Skeptic and I truly enjoy reading every one of your responses.

You are right in that ATS provides a value in the "scrubbing" or revealing of true conspiracy. That is to say (if I understand correctly) that ATS will scour any conspiracy theory and that is to the betterment of truth.

I agree with you that this is a value, and I saw ATS scrub stories that also got ATS great traffic due to being "a scrubber on behalf of truth" or what have you. I do agree, and I am glad ATS dug so hard to get to the bottom of SERPRO. I didn't post anything in that whole goose-chase, but I valued the attempt just like one respect coon-hounds that are working hard on the wrong scent. The dog still does good work.

I am proud to have spent my free internet nickel here because ATS is a forum for everyone's views (so long as they adhere to T&C which is a sort of 'living' document I guess?) and so I really do not see how anybody can complain about the ATS network as a whole. It is superb as are the people who become Mods and then have to go silent to keep up with the workload. Maybe there's a way to promote education and self-moderation on ATS rather than more and more posts and Google-clicks? That way Mods could post more and we could see more of the minds that direct the board.

As for a conspiracy against ATS, it's like a church of sorts. Where does a church come from? They seem to just appear, and they're always the pivot of the total dialectic including all aspects as you have so excellently listed here. Churches are as old as the human brain and heart.

So ATS is like a church, yet even here ATS members would have trouble agreeing about what to do with churches in general: Do we burn them and re-educate or do we preserve them as historical artifacts or do we rush into them to pray? In a way, the ATS database, servers, modcrew and T&C are like that. My point is that yes, there are those who want to set all churches on fire. I disagree with that goal.

Thanks for this site.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by gormly
The only claim I have ever made against ATS is that it is biased in it's own rule enforcement.

Do you have an example where you believe rule enforcement was focused on a topic rather than the behavior of the contributor?


Bill, that's not a fair request.

If I hated ATS and was bent on it's destruction, maybe I'd do some copy and pasting, but I'm not. I like ATS, with some exceptions, it's a great place to learn something new. I don't plan on keeping a journal either, that's too much work and I am a lazy bastard.

But you're not really asking me for proof are you Bill?



The bias isn't black and white, and it's hard to see bias when it's on your side. Much easier to see when you're on the other side of the opinion.

What makes me a tiny bit different from many here is that I see bias in life on both sides... For example, I see bias in Fox News AND MSNBC where most would see one or the other and fight that opinion tooth and nail.

ATS is like that, many of the MODs are biased against those who hold an opposite opinion of the "majority" in a particular thread. The "popular" opinion. The kind fostered on a conspiracy board if you know what I mean. I know that you know a majority doesn't make something real or truthful. So it can and should be challenged.

More often than not I have witnessed someone on the minority side get stickered or otherwise silenced while a more agressive majority player gets away with breaking the rules to a greater extent.

I normally wouldn't have brought this up in a thread like this but it gave background to my reasoning into why I though nerf was being paranoid.







[edit on 6-3-2009 by gormly]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExamineAllViews

Originally posted by Zepherian
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.

Specifically the two very hot topics are Zionism (in as much as this conspiracy theory would branch out into revisionist history of the holocaust, Isreal and possibly even organised religion) and drugs (in as much that it would branch out into drug advocacy because of the alleged spiritual enlightenment and natural connection attained by the use of psychadelics).


You make some valid points and I agree with you in some ways. The problem with the term "Zionism" is it actually has so many meanings and implications just at face value. To name a few:

1) A Jewish person's support for the State of Israel and allegiance to the land.
2) The belief that Jewish people deserve a homeland.
3) A Jewish person's belief that other Jewish people should have the right to a home land.
4) A term that describes the perseverance and livelihood of Judaic history and culture.
5) A sinister group of elite and corrupt individual who control and are behind anything secretive, including non-Jewish people.
6) A dangerous ideology that is aggressive and unwavering in its pursuit to fulfill its goals.
7) The acknowledgment that Semite individuals deserve a homeland.
8) A word used to describe people who may confirm a supposed "Protocols" type organisation.
(I'm sure there are even more that come to mind for the reader.)

I do not necessarily agree or endorse any of these above points, I just feel they sum up the many interpretations that this word holds.

Keeping this in mind, I think it is easy to see why the topic of "Zionism" is so tricky AND vulnerable. Especially people who endeavour to portray "Zionism" in a negative manner.

Unfortunately, for many people, the word "Zionism" is the convenient answer to all their problems and misfortunes. It is a word that can be used in any context to describe anything sinister that has, does and will happen in the future. Since for many this word is so "factual" and "'logical" in its use, practically ANYTHING can be somewhat linked and associated with "Zionism". The way some individuals use this word, and the passion and certainty they seem to express as a result when using this word, leads me to question this: "Can anti-Zionism exist in a world without Zionism?" For some strange reason, I think it could...


Indeed.

However, the more concrete definition of Zionism, which is being brought up by the people who dedicate themselves to this particular conspiracy theory is the political and economical force behind the implementation of Isreal, or, to put it more concisely, the jewish economic elite. Zionism is a very specific form of elitism, high up the pyramid. Note that there are 16 million Jews, give or take, but I would guess there are less than 50 000 zionists, some of which, like Joe Biden by his own words, are not even jewish. So, understood this way Zionism is not anti semitism or any form of jew bashing, having instead a much more precise critical focus on a smaller group of individuals who can be categorized not by their race or faith but by their socioeconomic footprints.

This is the more specific Zionism I was alluding to, and not wanting to take the thread off topic I didn't go into more detail, but since I caught your post I felt the need to respond. It falls under 5) and 6) of your definitions.

Zionists, if the conspiracy theory is true, and there are many indications that it probably is, have extraordinary reach and influence, which is why they use the anti semitism and hate speech laws as a sort of smokescreen to hide behind.

For the record I do not identify Jews with Zionists. It's a bit like an IQ test I guess: Some jews are zionists and almost all zionists are jews. Ismael is a jew so he must be a zionist. True or false?

(pssss, it's false).

A wider definition of zionism like you brought up would leave us with the conclusion that within zionism there is a core of elitist manipulators. This would be usefull in allowing the meme to have a positive underlining so as to not stain reputations of people belonging to the group. To be honest this is probably more accurate than considering all zionists blood thirsty maniacs. However this definition leaves little to distinguish a zionist from any other jewish person, so I favour considering zionism as the actual players behind the implementation of isreal and the high finance associated with it.

But it's not really my call, I just brought it up because of the hate speech issue which, no doubt in my mind, is one of the reasons the staff here would like that we not go into much detail on the subject. Like I just did. Darn.

For the record, while I read some stuff regarding zionism I don't really have an opinion formed, other than to acknowledge that there are some really big movers and shakers there that have strong ties to US foreign policy and international banking. A complete picture as to how this group fits in world politics is not mine to make at this point. That's one can of worms I'm not at this time interested in cracking open



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by gormly
But you're not really asking me for proof are you Bill?

Actually, yes, I had some degree of hope you could provide some. In the same regard where you would seek proof behind an ATS member posting about a conspiracy, I am asking you if you have something to substantiate your statement.



What makes me a tiny bit different from many here is that I see bias in life on both sides... For example, I see bias in Fox News AND MSNBC where most would see one or the other and fight that opinion tooth and nail.

And what makes me different is the belief that the only tool available to fight bias in all forms is that of supporting all opinions from all sources. Bias is often a more powerful tool through omission than it is inclusion.



ATS is like that, many of the MODs are biased against those who hold an opposite opinion of the "majority" in a particular thread.

Do you have an example? It would really help the discussion here if you could link to and explain a specific thread where you believe this is happening. I think you may be interpreting our agnosticism as being supportive of one viewpoint over another.



I know that you know a majority doesn't make something real or truthful. So it can and should be challenged.

If we supported challenge from one particular vantage point, would that not result in being biased?



More often than not I have witnessed someone on the minority side get stickered or otherwise silenced while a more agressive majority player gets away with breaking the rules to a greater extent.

Perhaps an example may help better focus the discussion here. Keep in mind that few actual T&C infractions within heated threads (that result in bannings) actually end up being noticed or retained within those threads... or, infractions may occur in other unrelated threads.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


I'm not so sure ther is a comspiracy against ATS - nor even a conspiracy to abuse ATS for hidden purposes. In fact, I'm not even sure there are all that many people involved.

I think probably many of the so-called "clusters" are actually a few people playing "sock puppets", using false accounts to apparently bolster whatever position they're taking. Safety in numbers, even when that number is only one.

Something many people seem to overlook is that freedom of speech is not a right on a private Website; it is a privilege. You (ATS mods) can delete my comments, block me, remove my account, etc. at any time, for any reason - or for no reason at all. You are free to do whatever you want. You're paying for hosting and bandwidth and the whole bit. The rest of us are guests on your site. You have every right to tell people to play nice or go away - and to enforce it. Your terms of service are reasonable and clear. They don't restrict reasonable discussion and disagreement. They *do* restrict abuse, which is exactly their purpose.

For those who chafe under these restrictions, I invite you to check out some unmoderated newsgroups on Usenet. They almost invariably degenerate into a cesspool of name-calling, abuse, and endless off-topic flames. Even alt.math gets crazy. All it takes is a few knuckleheads to ruin it for everyone.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by chiron613
 


One's freedom ends when it meets the freedom of the next individual. This is a widely held principle behind all freedom laws, and it's an ethical principle behind just regulations. So while ATS or any other online forum, in the international vacuum of regulation regarding the internet, can indeed do anything to the content people put here, that does not mean it should, nor does it mean it will always be able to.

If free speech advocates win in the long term free speech will be mandatory, as long as it dosen't harm the rights and freedoms of others. This is what a right is. Rights, within their limits, are non negotiable. And rights are not defined by webmasters, they are usually defined in widespanning social contracts after much blood, sweat and tears. However, Free speech is not the same as difamation, we all know that, again we have the balancing act of one's rights and the rights of others. Keep this in mind.

Many abusive moderators on forums the web over abuse free speech ethical principles every day and get away with it because people bend to their supposed authority because they 'own' the site and provide the service. This imo is selling one's freedom a bit cheap, because I am of the opinion that if someone opens up a forum they should be obligated to maintain free speech, not just do as they please, infracting the liberty of others.

That said the above is not a criticism of ATS, the moderation here has been generally over par of what I have seen on the internet and, while I don't agree with restrictions of debate regarding drugs or any other issue, I do understand that certain posts have unpleasant consequences that it might not be prudent to allow happen at this troubled time in history.

However I disagree in principle. Free speech is not a privilige. It's a right in most of the civilized world. It should be so on the internet too. I personally see no problem in people advocating certain drugs that are known to have little to no health consequences in a world awash with alcohol and hidden in tobacco smoke. I am not an advocate but I see no harm.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   


ATS is like that, many of the MODs are biased against those who hold an opposite opinion of the "majority" in a particular thread.


Do you have an example? It would really help the discussion here if you could link to and explain a specific thread where you believe this is happening. I think you may be interpreting our agnosticism as being supportive of one viewpoint over another.


Yes Billy. I have a perfect example! This very thread! 2 of your rather well respected members have been BANNED for questioning the motives and ideals of the Mods and management of this site. They were ignored and flamed THEMSELVES, to the point that they (possibly, but we cant know that cuz we can see em) reacted in a way that would give em the boot. This was over statements directly related to the OP.

"You could hardly ban me."----BAM! Banned.

Again, in case you missed it...I know that you know what i know. I know why they were banned.

Thats a really great example to set forward.

I have given you many chances to respond to me and you have foolishly ignored me.



Secondly, and very nearly as important as the first item, we are, by definition, an editorially agnostic organization that values the opinions of our users well-above the opinions of the owners.


Yea...alright. You Posted ONE post after I asked you why you havnt responded to me as of yet. And you "opinions of our users well-above the opinions of the owners"

And you dont like when you are called a liar.
I have an easy solution to that...Can you guess it?
Im an owner of a company too. I would never treat my clients as you do yours.

WE BRING THE REVANUE TO THIS SITE, NOT YOU.

By the way...As I said before...Im a lone gun. Not a sock. Dont even try to loop me into one of nefs ultra-generalized groups.



new topics

top topics



 
132
<< 29  30  31    33  34 >>

log in

join