Important Information: If you want to start your own website on ATS topics...

Well, if a mod would like to answer my question, you can send it U2U. Obviously, it isn't worthy of addressing.

I'd say not. But it is entirely possible.

I create a webserver that logs all traffic that accesses it. I solicit you to come by my dandy webserver.

I now potentially have your IP - unless you were to use a proxy.

Now, more a problem is that you sign into My dandy webserver using your run-of-the-mill credentials. Your Email address and your common password.

I then potentially have access to any forum that you may frequent, unless you are smart enough to use different passwords (common sense) on every forum/website you use.

Worst case scenario, I have your Email address, your login password for your ISP and then all sorts of shenanigans can go on.

Hence the No Soliciting from ATS rule - makes sense to me.

I think that the TACs here are really awesome. They allow anyone to use this site in a way that tries not to offend others. It ensures the success of the company.

This is one of the only conspiracy websites around that does not have extravagant cursing or off-topic, rude discussion. The TACs ensure that.

Guys and galls, surely you are aware that other peeps can see the interwebs right?

Some of you have spent the best part of the last week hurling insults at ATS staff, ownership, and members, calling them things I would call an enemy ... including CIA shills, government agents, idiots, disinfo agents, money grabbers, and all sorts of creative variations of insults. Heck, you're doing it right now as we speak!

All of that is your right of course, but surely you can't be surprised by ATS' view of the peeps involved?

Too bad too, cause there truly are some intelligent people behind said site, and would have made for great collaboration.

reply to post by LiveForever8

---

No, you may not have specifics. What you get is a U2U and a vague thread outlining ATS future plans to maximize advertising.

its a big thread if you wanted your question answered you should have sent a u2u in the first place.

reply to post by LiveForever8

---

Apparently it is against the rules to speak about banned members. Exile comes to mind. I asked and was promptly put in my place. Everybody, get out your terms and conditions agreement so that we can all be on the same page.

reply to post by Hazelnut

---

i think that all banning should come with a reason that would be publicly displayed so that more people are not harassed for asking questions.

reply to post by VelmaLu

---

Common sense, if someone posts links to the very same website every time they post that should beg the question why...

If it turns out they own the website it becomes self evident.

Hope that clears it up for you.

Springer...

And what exactly determines that? Daily site visits?
What would happen if all members stopped coming on here regularly, and a majority of the time it was just Admin and Mods on here? Would it still be worth all that $$ then?
What if all of the true content contributors stopped visiting, would you and SO be able to fill to void and create enough quality content to drive the traffic and interest here? How much is the site worth then?



What good is ATS to the rest of us if all the quality content contributors stop visiting, or are banished away?
What good is ATS to the rest of us when certain dedicated truth seeking members are vilified; while other members who contribute hoax's, misinformation, and overall self indulgent garbage are pretty much applauded by the staff?



This is very true, and I respect that.

WTF? I shouldn't address my questions in the THREAD that generated the question in the first place?

I guess what you are saying is that this thread is for pissing and moaning, arguing and hurling insults, but not actually addressing the issue?

Besides, my last THREE emails to staff regarding sign on issues were never answered.

Obviously, it's all about the DRAMA. . . .

I have many other things that need attending to...

The message in the OP is clear and the thread is now closed.

Springer...