ATS Identity Verification Panel

I was wondering if it is a good idea to have a community of trusted ATS members who can verify the claims of people wishing to stay generally anonymous but do not mind having their identity and claims verified as long as it stays private.

I ask because I have a recent thread that is getting hijacked as false, and to keep the integrity of the thread I thought what a great idea is to elect a few from the community that posters can go to to verify their identity, in which the trusted few can then validate the claims are accurate. This would save pages of "im skeptical you are.." or "pics or it didnt happen" type replies.


Here is what I had in mind. There are many in the community that are revered as trustworthy. (Phage comes to mind)

1. A poster submits verifiable evidence of identity and claims to the panel - whom can independently verify the validity of such claims (at a minimum identity). The
2. The panel can then post up top (or even be noted in the thread header it has been panel approved) that the claimant is legit...
3. ATS readers can rest assured that the claim isnt a bunch of malarky because it was verified by trusted members.

What are your thoughts?

Is this a good or bad idea?

Who would make a good verification panel?

reply to post by mrperplexed
Why not mods?
Or a mod as a verifier?

Interesting idea.

Simple, the validity of a poster is and must be decided by the community as a whole, not a small group of "trusted members."

Although I can appreciate what you are trying to do, it is the community that decides, every single one of them.

Originally posted by PW229
Simple, the validity of a poster is and must be decided by the community as a whole, not a small group of "trusted members."

Although I can appreciate what you are trying to do, it is the community that decides, every single one of them.

But I see the OP's point with SME's.
(subject matter experts)

It would add to the validity of a threads claim.

reply to post by mrperplexed

who can verify the claims of people wishing to stay generally anonymous but do not mind having their identity and claims

What identity and claims? We do not have an identity on ATS, only an avatar.

in which the trusted few can then validate the claims are accurate. This would save pages of "im skeptical you are.." or "pics or it didnt happen" type replies.

I think this is possibly the worst idea anyone has come up with. You are attempting in effect to remove another's point of view.

Taking possibly the most contentious subject at present - climate change - who decides the accuracy? The deniers? The warmists?

No sorry, BAD idea.

There is nothing wrong with "I'm sceptical" or "pics or it didn't happen." and in fact the last makes sure claims are validated - by the community.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by PW229
Simple, the validity of a poster is and must be decided by the community as a whole, not a small group of "trusted members."

Although I can appreciate what you are trying to do, it is the community that decides, every single one of them.

But I see the OP's point with SME's.
(subject matter experts)

It would add to the validity of a threads claim.

Granted my friend but SME's are already clearly identified and where they are not a few days on ATS will give you an indication of which opinion to trust and which to discard.

My point is this, and it is said with all due respect to the OP, "Let's not try to re-invent the wheel."

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by mrperplexed

 

who can verify the claims of people wishing to stay generally anonymous but do not mind having their identity and claims

What identity and claims? We do not have an identity on ATS, only an avatar.

in which the trusted few can then validate the claims are accurate. This would save pages of "im skeptical you are.." or "pics or it didnt happen" type replies.

I think this is possibly the worst idea anyone has come up with. You are attempting in effect to remove another's point of view.

Taking possibly the most contentious subject at present - climate change - who decides the accuracy? The deniers? The warmists?

No sorry, BAD idea.

There is nothing wrong with "I'm sceptical" or "pics or it didn't happen." and in fact the last makes sure claims are validated - by the community.

Thinking it through, I must agree with you.. There is no way to feasably do this. I am just trying to come up with a way to verify identity while remaining anonymous....

reply to post by PW229
Good point.
Second line.

The whole point of just having an avatar is that we can discuss things without worrying about someone coming after us ... someone like the government or some whacky internet user who is has mental health problems. I dont' want my identity on this site made public. Too many freak'n nutters out there who could come knocking on my door if the information got out.

I have given my home address to two people here.
One is hasn't been here in a long while .. is very sick .. and I dont know if he'll be back.
The other person I trust with the information.

I have given my home email address to 5 people here.
I changed the email and now only four people have it.
I trust those four people with the information.

THATS IT. If I had to give my personal info out here, I'd leave.

If someone looks like they are posting unbelievable stuff, then a moderator can request some kind of verification. But I'd say that should be a rare case.

Double post? Deleted this one

I personally think this is a bad idea, although it's interesting that it has been made into a thread as I'm very curious to follow where it goes, and I presume it's a very slippery slope.

First off I don't think that the community power should be reduced into the hands of a few. The community is what ultimately makes ATS what it is, and it's the people engine that runs it, and makes it very efficient.

I thought the OP could change their idea to make something such as a verification forum. In said form the community could determine certain claims by individuals to be true. Such as proof of someone being in the military.

Ultimately, however, I believe the community as a whole is better at determining things to be true or not, than a select group of "experts". That would only slow things down, and not give any real benefit. Simply by posting the community is able to determine someones credibility fairly easily.

Additionally you have the benefit of cross examining people under a ton of circumstances. The ATS community is huge, and very diverse. For example look at the 9/11 threads. There are people commenting who are firefighters, police, military, soccer moms. All with very different skill sets, but by utilizing the entire community you're able to get much faster responses, and experts tend to get attracted to information that they can relate to their field, even if it doesn't come from someone else in that field.

A police officer may know nothing about sagging trusses, but based upon what they saw an enginneer can then extrapolate the police officers testimony to something they personally know about, although they may not be able to help you analyze the criminal aspect to 9/11.

The community as a whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. Those parts being the verification team mentioned in the OP

reply to post by FlyersFan
I have to use an avi on some of the political things I comment on. I couldn't use my name, (I guess I could, maybe) but what I do, where I live,. . . . I'd get into trouble. (military)

But just havng personal info verified by a separate entity, SME, or community based, might be beneficial for a thread.

Dunno.

Good arguments on both sides.

Are you trying to take away our internet freedom (to troll) ?
On more serious note, i do not think that it would achive anything. Majority of people who are into conspiracies are ,ehhm, more paranoid then the average population and tend to distrust any authority. So if this will be done in the open it will have the usual levels of "shill" vs "no proof" wars.
Maybe i am wrong though.

There are members here who will buy into anything. There are also members who will debunk anything. It is to neither of these groups that you are posting a thread anyway.

The majority of our members seem to fall to the middle of these two extremes. And they will at least consider an OP or a post based on their perspective, and usually some fact checking. Providing there are any facts to check.

As has been said, It is up to each individual member to decide for themselves the legitimacy of any claims made. That's the nature of an anonymous forum such as ATS.

As far as I know, people posting on ATS claiming to have sensitive information wanting to be anonymous, but asking their identity to be verified, has per usual contacted the CEO, CFO or COO. I think this is a sufficient panel that has already been established. Moving beyond the borders of the small circle of the owners and upper administration is likely a waste of resources and probably not wanted by people wanting to step forward. Besides, with all of the other mediums existing on the internet, this is probably not the best place to release such information.

Most of the more valuable threads on this site are based on second hand information, these are well researched and documented with all other sources exhausted. Most here will probably not contend that first hand information are attention seekers at best and frauds at worst.

Originally posted by Droogie
As far as I know, people posting on ATS claiming to have sensitive information wanting to be anonymous, but asking their identity to be verified, has per usual contacted the CEO, CFO or COO. I think this is a sufficient panel that has already been established. Moving beyond the borders of the small circle of the owners and upper administration is likely a waste of resources and probably not wanted by people wanting to step forward. Besides, with all of the other mediums existing on the internet, this is probably not the best place to release such information.

Most of the more valuable threads on this site are based on second hand information, these are well researched and documented with all other sources exhausted. Most here will probably not contend that first hand information are attention seekers at best and frauds at worst.

This answers the question and sufficiently ends the thread...

Mods you can close this.

reply to post by Droogie

As far as I know, people posting on ATS claiming to have sensitive information wanting to be anonymous, but asking their identity to be verified, has per usual contacted the CEO, CFO or COO

Once unassuming ATS member, Crakeur, won a Sumo Lounge chair in an ATS game a few years ago, gave ATS his mailing address to send him the chair, and suddenly became CFO of ATS

I've heard rumors that some of the mods were forced into their positions in a similar fashion.

Unless you want these guys showing up at your front door, stay anonymous!

reply to post by mrperplexed

ATS Identity Verification Panel

Thank you. let me be frank...

Trust comes hard these days and as much as I genuinely appreciate this website, I will not sacrifice my perceived privacy for the right to post here. Period.

We don't know who or what is behind ATS... quite honestly, it could be a storefront op for the CIA or NSA or any other alphabet soup agency. To deny the possibility of this is simply silly. I love this site but pure trust is impossible.

I am sure they would not hand me the keys to ATS.

Nope. We need as much perceived anonymity as possible or this place will go to hell in a heartbeat. And I do say 'perceived' because no one who comes here as a simple member, knows for sure what is gleaned from our visits.

So... chances are, to me, at least even that ATS is a government op. But at the same moment, I like it here so... I don't care.

When I start caring is when they... ATS or anyone else, begins demanding more of me than an email addy, name and password. If it goes much beyond, I gots better things to do than amuse.

Cheers

I don't think your identity is your real problem. It's the quality of your presentation. I took a look at your thread and I see that you are extremely vague in presenting the issue. You won't really come out with details for fear it will lead to identifying your elite family, plus you don't seem to know what you want to reveal. You say in your title that this is a "top 2%" elite family, then say they are one of the wealthiest 500 families in the world. That's not a top 2% familiy at all. It might be a top .00002% familiy. I'm not sure exactly, but a top 500 is far in excess of the top 2%. So I think your definitions are in error.

When you set up like this people don't really know what you are offering. Are you talking paranormal alien secret society stuff? Or are you simply talking "Lifestyles of the rich and famous" stuff? It's really unclear, so people are fishing around and trying to guess the identity of your elite family. Because you want to keep the identity secret, you come across as evasive. To many people evasive=troll so you're getting a negative reaction. The other possibility is that you are simply wanting to brag where you've been.

So your problem with your thread really isn't a matter of verifying your identity. Even if you could get someone here to say, "Yup, this person is who he says he is and really did work for a rich family," the reaction might very well be, "So?" You haven't made a compelling case as to why we should pay attention to you.

reply to post by schuyler


Shuyler,

Thank you - your reply helps and I think you are right.