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.

 

T&C Ammendment? Stating you have proof and then refusing to produce it

page: 1
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   
This thread: I got abducted by aliens Last night! Ive got proof!, is only the most recent example of this trend on ATS.

No offense to the staff, but hoaxers can get pretty much free reign on some of the ATS forums due to this loophole in the T&C.

How can you prove something a hoax when the 'evidence' isn't produced at all? That is how they get away with it.

Recently there has been an influx of these 'OMG I experienced X and have Y proof of it'! threads. When you open the thread, there is a few lines of text and that is it.

Where is the proof?

The members post asking for it, demanding it even. I am on their side.

There is a clause in the T&C as follows:



You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.


Is not saying you have 'proof' of something in the headline misleading and/or inaccurate when there is nothing to show?

And then we get the 'oh, but we are waiting for them to upload it' excuse. In this particular instance linked above, the OP stated he knew how to use Imageshack and even alluded that he had the photo uploaded and ready to go.

Why then, is it fair that the vigilant member base should have to wait patiently for over 2 hours for this link to non-existent photos to be posted?

Sorry mods, but I think you are protecting the wrong people in these cases.

We've had so many of them that I wouldn't be surprised if ATS isn't getting a reputation for being easy to fool.

Why not punish these horrible hoaxers who mislead the membership with inaccurate headlines and threads? Stop punishing the members who simply want the T&C and ATS' reputation to be upheld.

[edit on 13-7-2009 by fooffstarr]




posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   
I agree.

Especially during the summer months when theres more bored kids around we see loads of these threads.

My suggestion would be an immediate termination of membership and an IP block on the member's computer to stop them spitting their dummy and repeating under and alias.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by fooffstarr
hoaxers can get pretty much free reign on some of the ATS forums


Uh, hello?

Check out the early season episodes of America's Idol to see why that phenomena is tolerated.....especially by revenue generating media.

Watching those train wrecks, posting a couple of snarky comments......ahhhhhh, it is the best of forum lawlz.

And it keeps 'em coming back.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by fooffstarr
 

I agree that when people openly claim to have evidence and refuse to share it there should be some repercussions for that user. I know there are some that say OMG! that could endanger the posters life, but in reality, if someone knew they had information they could be killed for it is unlikely that they would post it in public anyways. My $.02



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I kind of agree. I was going into this thread thinking I'd disagree, but I agree.

Members should be banned if they knowingly promise to produce some sort of evidence and the evidence does not turn up.

Or something. Huge points deduction. Post ban. Not just a closed thread... It disrupts the flow of the website and it's an insult to many reputible members.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Yes these threads are annoying but I dont think they should be banned right away. I say give them a certain amount of time like a day to produce evidence they claim and if they dont close the thread and give them a warning. Some people cant spend all day on here and should at least be given a chance instead immediately being thrown to the dogs. This is just my opinion anyways.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
Yes these threads are annoying but I dont think they should be banned right away. I say give them a certain amount of time like a day to produce evidence they claim and if they dont close the thread and give them a warning. Some people cant spend all day on here and should at least be given a chance instead immediately being thrown to the dogs. This is just my opinion anyways.


I'm not even talking about a ban... at least not straight away.

But my thoughts are as others have stated above.

Close their thread and move it to the mods only area. Put a posting ban on them until they U2U a moderator or staff member the 'evidence'.

If that evidence doesn't come, and it is easily seen if a member has been online within the required time limit, THEN ban them.

But I'm sure we'll be told (as per usual) that these obvious time wasters and immature kids looking to rile up a gullible crowd have rights and bla bla bla.

[edit on 13-7-2009 by fooffstarr]



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   
Maybe instead of an outright ban that's permanent, maybe there should be a progression of punishment--24 hour IP block, 72 hour, and so on, eventually leading to being banned. Would that even be possible with the coding?

I've always wondered, why, if someone has proof of something, they wouldn't just post it in the OP. I know if I had a picture of an ET chillin' on my couch watching the news or something, I'd put the picture up immediately.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Well, than they should lock the thread until they do. If this was in the gray area, than maybe we should learn to wait like we've been doing for years now. I didn't bother to even post on it.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by fooffstarr
 


I agree I was just stating what many have said on other posts about people who post threads like this. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt...I did however find the one thread you mentioned really annoying ESP when they put "I have proof" in the title and there wasnt any. If they couldnt upload it right away they could have said so and then come back later to add it....To me it just seems that many on here love to give those kinds of threads crap...but that's my opinion based on what I have seen while being on here. I personally read the threads and follow up on them to see what "evidence" they have and go from there...



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 


There has been some over the time that have produced photos after a day or 2, but they showed a completely different style than the posters I am targeting.

The genuine ones stay on the thread, address questions and continue to update about how and when their 'evidence' will be posted.

The hoaxers tend to make an elaborate (or in today's case, pretty pathetic) attempt at a first post to get interest, and then either disappear entirely or attack other posters in their thread for asking to see the evidence.

I think that the solution could please all sides in this issue. To avoid embarrassing the forum and some of the members who jump on hoaxers bandwagons, the post ban + moderator U2U request would work well.

If they have the evidence they claim to have, it can be verified first and posted by the moderator after re-opening their thread.

If they don't have it, then the thread is permanently in the trash bin and it doesn't give outsiders more ammunition to call ATS members gullible. No harm done.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Using the thread your speaking of as an example of how I deal with them as member is as follows.

I noticed the thread pop up as a new thread posting in mutter.

I read it but don't post to it as the OP stated there will be pics.
There were no pics so I did not bother to post to it as there was nothing but A claim to respond to.

I noticed several people post to a thread of no substance.
I did not post.

A Mod then expressed proof or closure.
I did not post.

And now I'm posting in a thread about a thread that was a waste of time.

Why you ask.

so that the next time one of those thread show up you will follow my lead and realize that that thread should of had one reply in it.

The one by the MOD

Hopefully the next time a thread POP's up like the one your referring to fooff ....I don't have to post in your thread about how to deal with such a thread from the position of being a member.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   
I would most certainly vote for this one. It amazes me that these posts get as much attention as they do. I think at bare minimum they should be locked for a few hours to allow the OP to post their "proof", if said proof is not forthcoming a deletion of the thread and warn would be in order I think.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Most of my threads are purely speculative, philosophical concepts to discuss or the suchlike - mostly speculative, however I don't tend to label them as anything revelatory and wouldn't want to do so.

Thing is, there are plenty of help sections on ATS to show you how to post pictures, links etc, so if you're claiming to have "evidence" especially in the original post, there's not really an excuse for it to be presented.

I'd like to see some mod feedback on this, it really is disruptive...



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by The Utopian Penguin
 


I agree that should be the case mate, but sadly, ATS is not an ideal world.

Notice that I didn't post in the thread I linked either, for the same reasons, but somebody always will.

It has got to the point I think where the majority of ATS members are getting fed up with these kids with too much time on their hands and are taking out their semi-bottled up frustration on the newest cases.

I don't agree with that. I'd like to see, as you say, a 1 post thread that shows no evidence and a moderator lock in the 2nd post. But it will never happen.

So my proposal is threefold. To deter hoaxers from trying these repeat threads, to protect frustrated ATS members from getting themselves into trouble and to protect the slightly decaying reputation of ATS as being a place of intelligent members who think before they leap.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Interesting.

Personal anecdote: I had a unusual event occur and posted a thread just to see if any people had any ideas about it.

Suddenly I am being asked to provide proof.

Uh, listen, you want proof? What is this..., court?



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by jokei
 


I thought the rules about creating threads at ATS are quite well defined.

Why does this thread even exist,as this is all ready covered in the rules.

Now all we have to do as members is stop posting to those threads until the supported pics arrive. If the person proclaims they needs help ...it's rare that it pans out.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
Interesting.

Personal anecdote: I had a unusual event occur and posted a thread just to see if any people had any ideas about it.

Suddenly I am being asked to provide proof.

Uh, listen, you want proof? What is this..., court?


Ummm, sorry, but please read the OP.

This about members who STATE THEY HAVE PROOF before asked about it, and then obfuscate and/or simply disappear without providing the proof they previously stated they were going to show.

Nobody is suggesting that everyone has to prove their stories. That isn't going to happen. Nothing is wrong with a story without proof. What is wrong is when people say they have it and then refuse to produce it.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by fooffstarr
 


Hey fooff.. my friend ;

We already have rules about this.
Yes these threads are annoying.
Yes you and I didn't not post in that thread.

But why this thread.
lol

thats my point.

Peace.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by fooffstarr

Ummm, sorry, but please read the OP.

This about members who STATE THEY HAVE PROOF before asked about it, and then obfuscate and/or simply disappear without providing the proof they previously stated they were going to show.

Nobody is suggesting that everyone has to prove their stories. That isn't going to happen. Nothing is wrong with a story without proof. What is wrong is when people say they have it and then refuse to produce it.


I apologize. I didn't mean to be flippant about your concern; which I did read. I see your point clearly.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join