I am going to take a leap of faith and gamble on the possibility that this isn't just another attempt to simply bash ATS for taking an action with
which some disagree.
Opposition to what?
The OP's question related to a thread created which declared that an "announcement' would be made regarding sensational technology which was to become
available on a particular date, and that you had to go to a particular site to see it.
Needless to say the announcement fell flat. Nothing has been revealed, and those staunchly supporting him have nothing meaningful to show for it
other than their good intentions.
In and of itself, there is nothing wrong with that. It is not expected that anyone should know that whatever was being anticipated would fail to
But the member providing the material was also a beneficiary of the website, and a stakeholder in the 'technology' he claimed he would 'provide.'
This kind of promotionalism, based on sensational claims is not the kind of activity that ATS is about. We are not here for members to market their
wares... and while we do not begrudge anyone a capitalistic venture, we will not allow members to sully ATS with personal commerce.
I thought most were aware of this fact, but people seem to remember the ugliness that came out of the decision rather than the subsequent reality that
I was not involved in the affair at all, except as you were, as a member. But I remember thinking to myself "I wish you would make a thread with the
actual announcement, instead of a declaration that you would eventually be making an announcement." It might have changed matters considerably. But
as it was done, it was little more than a marketing pitch which ended in "Come to my website."
Is that really what members want? I don't. If you have a revelation that you wish to share with the world, then do so. Don't tease with the story
that you will, but somehow the whole discussion becomes about nothing short of 'waiting' and having eager people flailing about while you get more and
more attention for yourself.
edit on 16-5-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)