It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Index of threads possibly targeted by disinfo agents

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:17 AM
The presence of a disinfo agent in a thread suggests it is revealing more truth than some are comfortable with. As such I believe it would be of interest to compile a list of threads where this is seemingly prevalent.

I come at this from the angle of suspecting this kind of activity in a thread that has been going for nearly two years, 'The "up-to-the-minute" Market Data' thread. Over a very prolonged period regular posters have become keenly aware of how mockery, derision and insinuation have been employed to try and dissuade both readers and posters from taking the information provided seriously...

Not for the first time, it has come to a head.

Yesterday's debacle over whether a sensational thread was just a hoax perpetrated by a possible disinfo agent also comes to mind. (NB Still under revue by the mods: the result will be fascinating.)

If we can compile a list of threads where this kind of activity is particularly suspected it will serve a very useful purpose. It will above all demonstrate where the discussion is getting too close to the truth for comfort, thus vindicating ATS.

Please link to posts where disinfo is called out, not a suspected poster. That the exercise will not be personal.

We all know which forums are particular targets; let's see which threads are getting close to the bone.

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:25 AM
The problem I see with trying to do something like this is how easily the term' disinfo agent' is thrown around. Someone just disagreeing with a thread or a point made in it doesn't mean they are spreading disinfo, but people often get accused of it anyway which means you'll likely end up with some threads that haven't been targeted at all but do have posts from people who were falsely accused of doing so.

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:36 AM
reply to post by Jenna

This will need to be done carefully. But if we focus on bogus arguments based on deflection it will prove worthwhile.

Disinfo stands out in that it shows distaste for what ATS is all about: denying ignorance. When a poster makes an interesting and valid point but the response is aimed at making him/her look foolish it needs to be called, and seen for what it is!

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:45 AM
If tangible evidence can be given, like in the thread mentioned, then i think its a great idea. The problem is that theres so many people on ATS that throw the term 'disinfo agent' around so easily. This is where the mods will have their work cut out, deciphering the truth from the down right stupid. Something they'll do everyday here at ATS lol.

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:50 AM

So that is directed at me...



I have had private conversations with over 100 members, some about actually trying to employ them in my business and some with personal help about trying to boost their portfolio. Some looking to party which I wish I was in the position to oblige.

All, or none could come to my defense, as it certainly doesn't bother me. It would be better if they didn't actually, as it would be better fitting if this was one of my final posts on this website. I will probably take this statement back later.


What does bother me now, on this website, is that people are just buying into anything they read on the internet and willing to repeat anything they read as a "matter of fact".


Why when people present logical argument and actual research on this very website, when it goes "against the grain", is this person a disinfo agent?

I have thousands of posts, most actually trying to delineate things or help people out. Ohh.. but watch out.. I actually have another shirt I wear underneath that current one and it says FED.

Yeah, you got me, damn Ben Bernanke always sending goons into ATS and trying to get people to see the truth in things instead of being led astray into a world of "webclickz" and advertising dollars to visit the nearest opinionated (but supposedly factual) blog. Remember, this "blog" is always right, and they have to be because you believe it too, right?

Yeah, it has "come to a head" alright. What has come to a head is the lack of people being able to think for themselves anymore and to put it bluntly being completely gullible of the situation. ON TOP OF THAT, they will argue these fallacies until they have either been humiliated (then start on this next misinformed thread) or just will change the topic to something else where once more they will continue to repeat whatever they have read on the latest posting of

No doubt, if you want unfiltered, raw,TOTALLY FACTUAL, real news into what is going on in this world you gotta hit up that blogspot. I am not saying MSM is good either.

All I am saying is it wouldn't be so horrible, if on this website, there was a rule where you couldn't link to an opinionated blog as evidence anymore trying to back up your unsubstantiated claims.

If that is a new rule around here I think that would be great. Otherwise, I have to be truthful, it is getting pretty brutal around here.

Yeah, I know, don't let the door kick you on the way out GBM, ok sweet I hear that. Maybe 5-20% of the debates on here are stimulating, the rest you just come here for kicks because either some people are intentionally acting like this for whatever reason or as a community (ATS) we just have over time lost our ability to think and reason in a realistic manner.

Here, maybe if I throw in some laughing iconz and "roll eye" emoticons I can hammer down my point
This last sentence was only directed towards a few of you. You know who you are.

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:50 AM
reply to post by Catch_a_Fire

What we're looking for is something seen over weeks and months, not simply a dodgy post. If you think you have a thread that needs highlighting you could invite others who have called disinfo out in the thread to come in and back you up. It won't be 100% watertight, but it can highlight suspect activity.

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:52 AM
reply to post by pause4thought
Disinfo gets bandied about around here to point of losing meaning...particularly when used by some hysterical newer members. I've been accused many times and half of my 'sharp friends' list contains regular recipients of the allegation. Water of a duck's back I dare say!

From my perspective, the site management and Mods do a good job of reigning it in. The recent threads on BP, immigration and pro/anti Israeli have been good examples of this. New members sign up to be provocative and drum up their agenda, but often get warned or banned for their efforts.

In a sense, it's intriguing to see an unpleasant side to otherwise respectable members. They identify themselves as bigots and reveal their intentions.

I guess you might have a good idea, but will you be able to identify disinformation from those that share your views? If not, doesn't that undermine your objectivity? This is no criticism of you. I think the concept of name and shame has been shown, historically, to be a dangerous one.

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:53 AM
reply to post by pause4thought

True, but some people think any opposition is a sign of disinfo. Heck you could call me one right now and at least three people would be falling all over themselves to back it up just because I've disagreed with them in other threads. It's a good idea, I just think there should be a stricter guideline than just threads people think have been targeted. It leaves too much open to interpretation.

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 12:07 PM
reply to post by Kandinsky & Jenna

If calling it discourages deflection, arrogant condescension and ridiculing the whole premise of this site, it will be well worth the ride.

reply to post by GreenBicMan

90% of the arguments presented are full of half truths and misconceptions. It goes for this whole website.

Quit believing dumb things you read online by dumb people

Just a another ATS bogus argument. So many with so little truth around here.

Btw, you were born in 1991? This makes more sense. Go back to school kid, don't make my mistakes in life.

(Just from page 702 in the Market Data thread in response to a poster posting in good faith, who happens to work in a bank.)

Maybe time to reassess what impression you give. Perhaps I should also link to the posts asking for you to show more respect, which received more stars than all the other posts on the same page.

You can post what you wish. Others read it, and form an opinion. That's what posting in public is all about...

[edit on 23/7/10 by pause4thought]

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 12:09 PM
This thread is well-intended and maybe even a good idea but I`ll have to close it because ATS does not allow threads that either call out

a) other threads
b) other posts
c) other posters


Thread closed.

new topics

top topics


log in