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.

 

**ALL MEMBERS** The recent surge in Hatred, Racism, and Sheer Stupidity STOPS NOW.

page: 13
224
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   
It is about time that this happened, perhaps it will curtail the faceless cowardly posters with a hidden agenda, they manage to get away with things which should make their consciences twist them up inside. Some people enjoy being wind up merchants and bigots, they word replies in ways that just about get them off, or ask questions as though they want an answer, when they already are force feeding their answer on others.

Like my dear old Mum used to say " Good mouth gets a kiss, bad mouth gets a slap " be kind to each other, you know it makes sense !




posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Springerwe're replacing them with this simple concept, "Is this content good for ATS and our Community".

Going forward we'll be checking Opening Posts and Replies against that standard. We'll also be looking at the history of the poster...


So just to clarify, the new policy is "don't make waves unless you're one of the favoured few"?



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


While i understand what you are trying to say/do here.... it is very hard to stay civil on some Threads when the very Topic at hand demands Anger/Belittling and or Rudeness!!

We all get riled up over something and alot of the time we vent it in Forums as there is nowhere else to vent!!

I mean ATS even has a rant forum doesnt it? Well on BTS anyway....

I think it will be very tough not to type our views on something which upsets us or Angers us however i will try my best!!

I know i won't be starting many threads anymore anyway and have tried staying away from SUCH threads so as not to get myself more angry than i already was.....


edit on 4-4-2012 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


I think this is a smart move but one aspect concerns me a little:




We'll be reviewing member history and making determinations on intent from there, if you're here to use ATS as your personal "bully pulpit" to inflict your views on the rest of the world, logic, the truth or civil debate be damned, you might want to find another forum.


Now, I can see in some cases how this makes perfect sense, there are plenty of users here spewing the same diatribe wherever they can, and clearly have an agenda. Using their history to verify that an agenda appears to be present makes sense, I'm concerned about stifling people's opinions.

I clearly have a view point on Israel and the situation in the middle east, and anyone going through my post history would clearly see that. Does this mean I have an agenda? No, it means I follow those topics and have an opinion. I am glad that the staff understands people can get riled up, have a bad day, and post something they really normally wouldn't. This shouldn't be a get out of jail free card, but a user with a long history of quality posts should be allowed a mistake here and there while brand new users should be held directly accountable to the letter.

I guess I'd just like clarification on if this post history review is a total all encompassing thing, or merely searching for specific topics. If you searched for Israel or Palestine in my history it would probably appear I'm here to complain about that to no end, yet, the majority of my posts are in other irrelevant areas.


edit on 4-4-2012 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
Unfortunately, I personally don't believe that this is something new at ATS. I have gone on "sabbatical" several times for a few months, because of the atmosphere you described. There are several forums I ignore now, because the hatred posted on them gets out of hand. For instance, posts about religion almost always end up with such people condemning entire religions or the people who believe in those religions. It disappoints me tremendously that such posts are not removed. I know that the moderators cannot read every post, but even when I mark them with an Alert, they usually are not removed. Until ATS decides to change the removal policy, I'm afraid this will still continue. It is a shame, because I joined ATS years ago, to continue intelligent debates, but it is hard to find any that don't degrade to nothing more than a mud slinging contest. Perhaps it is time for ATS to change the way members are identified, and require people to post their real names, before they become a member. If people truly believe what they post, then they should not have a problem posting with their real name. This, of course, will only work if everyone agrees to this.


There is a clear bit of hypocrisy in this. From what I have experienced, a good number of members here will sweep in on a religious thread and hurl religious bias against Christianity as quickly as possible. When I first started here as Superiored, it was frightening how quickly my posts were smeared by a clear prejudice against the Christian viewpoint. You won't find many Christians "condemning entire religions" apart from noting how these religions--for instance Muslem extremists--are killing people in the name of their cause.

To keep this on topic, let's be consistent if the new policy will be followed. If we are going to ban Christians for sticking to the obvious truth of the Christian faith, let's make sure to also ban the Atheists who spew their own bias against the Christians. I would like to see this policy avoid hypocrisy. The problem with this thought is obvious. To stifle speech in any way requires bias of some type, shape of form. Consult my last post in this thread where I narrow this idea down to its essence.

If we want to be consistent on the issue of bias, we need some type of forum where free expression takes place. From there, the bias that is obvious is then answered by context and not more bias. The obvious answer is to allow free and unfettered speech that adheres to the laws of the land. Currently, the speech here on ATS is consistent with the constitution. There are only five things we must avoid to stay consistent with law:

They are libel, slander, obscenity, revealing troop movements (Happens constantly on ATS) and incitement to commit a crime. We am given two abilities by God: Think and move. That's all any of us can do. Movement is restricted by law and so is speech. Thought is not. As long as my speech is consistent with the five aspects above, there is no reason to be restricted by a biased moderator. By the way, we are all biased by our own ideologies, theology and moral background. How can you police the three when the five are what you should worry about? Is it possible apart from your own bias? No. Is it possible if your own bias is removed in place of the five elements of law above. Yes. The market takes care of it for you.

LINK
edit on 4-4-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:28 AM
link   


There is a clear bit of hypocrisy in this. From what I have experienced, a good number of members here will sweep in on a religious thread and hurl religious bias against Christianity as quickly as possible. When I first started here as Superiored, it was frightening how quickly my posts were smeared by a clear prejudice against the Christian viewpoint. You won't find many Christians "condemning entire religions" apart from noting how these religions--for instance Muslem extremists--are killing people in the name of their cause.
reply to post by EnochWasRight
 

Would you kindly explain how my post is considered "hypocrisy", since I basically said the same thing you just said? I am truly confused.



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:30 AM
link   
This is great!

It's too bad most of us are "grown" and need our ATS parents to make sure we are being nice to one another but I totally agree with the concept and think it's a great challenge.

I have often tried to make people see a different kind of light and rarely do I get fused but with that said there are certain members that can belittle like no other and I think its because they are able to hind behind a keyboard. If met face to face not even a third of what is said on the screen would be said to their face. Its cowardly in my opinion and down right disgusting. Hate can go somewhere else..... leave it off ATS! So yeah.... I approve this message.


The ONLY concern is based off experience from not too far in the past here. I have seen threads go on for lots of pages before something is done...before the thread ceases to exist all the while watching in dismay the "nice" ones continue to be ridiculed while the mods take up for the bully. It leads me to think that although some members are down right mean....they are buds with the mods so....politics takes over and one side-ed-ness takes over and bam...we have a conspiracy.



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
If we are going to ban Christians for sticking to the obvious truth of the Christian faith, let's make sure to also ban the Atheists who spew their own bias against the Christians.


I must be reading a different thread?

Where did anyone say that was going to happen?

I suggest you re-read Springers post. You've missed something.



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


What about liars?

That "Jameela" poster you are being ever so considerate to, has claimed to be Iranian - wasn't Iranian, has claimed that the people in Iran are free - while the people in Iran are not free. Through private messaging they(yes, she or he alluded to a second person named hamid who also talked to me at one point without me knowing, but they sure remember me) told me that they believe ISLAM is at war with the "them", I could only interpret "them" as "Westerners" and then more specifically "Non-Muslims". And here's the clincher:

That I should not give "them"(the Westerners) ammunition for attacking "our" people. "Our" being Muslims while time and time again I have explained I'm not a Muslim.

So the truth is not in her/his favor, the person admitted he/she was not who he/she claimed. Then this person claims to have regular contacts with people inside Iran, which is another load of bullcrap.

When I said I would have no part in their bull, I was made out as a non-Iranian or an ignorant person on the Iranian issue. While it is clear that this "Jameela" character is abusing the Iranian issue to spout pro-Islamic messages, while having zero knowledge on what is actually occuring inside Iran.

How do you plan to deal with posters such as "Jameela" who post disinfo to get more people to like their religion?

This issue is close to me as an Iranian because a non-Iranian is saying the troubles Iranians face daily inside Iran are non-existant(a quick search will prove otherwise, if not I can give you personal accounts privately to prove my side of the story)...to promote Islam.

Thank you for reading.

(It's nice to see my tips throughout the years are finally being put into action).

reply to post by Jameela
 


I've no intent on discussing any matters with you. You're a person that abuses the suffering of other human beings to promote his or her religion.
edit on 4-4-2012 by InfoKartel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by Springer
 


I think this is a smart move but one aspect concerns me a little:




We'll be reviewing member history and making determinations on intent from there, if you're here to use ATS as your personal "bully pulpit" to inflict your views on the rest of the world, logic, the truth or civil debate be damned, you might want to find another forum.


Now, I can see in some cases how this makes perfect sense, there are plenty of users here spewing the same diatribe wherever they can, and clearly have an agenda. Using their history to verify that an agenda appears to be present makes sense, I'm concerned about stifling people's opinions.

I clearly have a view point on Israel and the situation in the middle east, and anyone going through my post history would clearly see that. Does this mean I have an agenda? No, it means I follow those topics and have an opinion. I am glad that the staff understands people can get riled up, have a bad day, and post something they really normally wouldn't. This shouldn't be a get out of jail free card, but a user with a long history of quality posts should be allowed a mistake here and there while brand new users should be held directly accountable to the letter.

I guess I'd just like clarification on if this post history review is a total all encompassing thing, or merely searching for specific topics. If you searched for Israel or Palestine in my history it would probably appear I'm here to complain about that to no end, yet, the majority of my posts are in other irrelevant areas.


edit on 4-4-2012 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)


I know you did not ask me, but my understanding is the rule lies in HOW we post, ie: are we just spreading hate or are we trying to discuss a topic (sensitive or not) We can still discuss Israel, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and so forth, the issue is in how we are bringing it forward....

Kind of like saying as a title for a post:

"G##@#@m Jews are at it again!"

verses something more like:

"Israel attacked the Gaza Strip"

and the same for the reverse


it would be how we approach to discuss rather than avoiding the discussion, and making sure to walk away instead of posting out of anger (since these are sensitive issues)

I do not know what side of the fence you are on, as I do not know if I have been in a thread with you, but this is my understanding of the rule



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfoKartel



you understand here that we can say the same for you...

in one of your posts you accuse Imam Khomeini (q) of being Pakistani, in another you accuse Him of being British....

If you believe I am spreading disinfo, (which I also believe about you) then counter me, if I feel like having the discussion with you then I will, if I do not then I wont....

quit whining.

and I never once claimed to be Iranian, what I claimed is that I speak to Iranians inside Iran regularly, close to every day. ( I skipped two days this week) This is not a lie, just because I refuse to tell you what country I am from so you can attack me on that basis does not mean I am a liar, I just do not think you need my life history!

what I have said outright, is that I am Sayyida Arab. www.abovetopsecret.com... (who is in university) in the US) THAT is self explanatory enough! You do not need country of origin.
edit on 4-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   

"Play the ball not the man"

We can be bold enough to make a stand and do battle for our views and beliefs. But we must strive to be mature enough not to resort to unnecessary personal attacks upon people with opposing views.
The "ball" is our personal view and the "man" is someone with the opposing view.
Your phrase really is from the world of soccer.


They way I see it, it should ok to 'hate' an idea, and be free to express it.
The alternative to this is terrifying.

Expressing 'hatred' toward christianity or islam or religion or atheism should not be censored.
Degrading people on unavoidable biological factors, such as race, should be frowned upon.

edit on 4-4-2012 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


Dear Springer,
I couldn't agree more, however I would like to add one request too please:

This site is called Above Top Secret, it used to be filled full of topics which were, funnily enough, not covered in the MSM, and could be considered outside of the norm. It is now full of posts which regurgitate MSM, with links to newspapers and other forums which we are all able to go to of our own accord.

I would truly love for this forum to be purily for non MSM based threads, even opinions on MSN content. So much is posted here with the OP having some biased opinion of the story is truly seems to detract from what this website is all about (and a lot of it professes to be fact or truth and is pure conjecture).

T



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
It never ceases to amaze me how much whining goes on in threads like this one. And in the interest of full disclosure, I've even engaged in a fair amount of it of my own in the distant past.

But I no longer worry about these kinds of 'announcements', because it's pretty simple. This is a PRIVATELY held website. The ownership gets to decide what they like or don't like. This thread merely provides courteous notice of that FACT.

It seems pointless to strain any muscles trying to offer countless examples of how enforcement of this policy may be 'abused' or applied 'unfairly'. If you're an honest broker here to DISCUSS the issues, then I doubt you have much to worry about with regard to how ATS manages their website.

There are so many 'other' options out there, that if you feel this place isn't the right one for you......well, then....simply move along. No one FORCES you to post here....or to read here.

When one fully accepts this simple truth, the experience is really easy sailing.

When I post, I rarely self censor-- except to the extent that I apply my own sensibilities with regard to what I think is permissible on ATS.

I'm in their home, not the other way around.


If the ownership doesn't like what I write, then I either learn this fact and adjust accordingly or decide to move along. Isn't that what you do in your real life?

ATS isn't limiting your 'free' speech. They aren't the government. You can still post whatever you want in a thousand of other places on the internet. That's not too hard to understand, is it?







edit on 4-4-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:01 AM
link   
NEW WORLD ORDER!




posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


Good.

Not really got anything to add to that apart from it is about time.



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by rom12345

"Play the ball not the man"

We can be bold enough to make a stand and do battle for our views and beliefs. But we must strive to be mature enough not to resort to unnecessary personal attacks upon people with opposing views.
The "ball" is our personal view and the "man" is someone with the opposing view.
Your phrase really is from the world of soccer.





It's not even just about that though.


It's people who come on and spread lies and disinfo about entire groups of people.
Not even attacking the person they are replying to or using foul or offensive language.



It's not all "I HATE JEWS" or "****ing Muslims are scum" and things like that...

Some are not so obvious... It's a much more subtle approach.

We saw much of it in the Trayvon Martin threads...


It's saying things like "But yes 90% of blacks are thugs and criminals, It's a fact, it's the black mentality" and things like that... and then keeping on repeating things about Muslims and so on.

Any subject... we've had people spewing about all of it.

Using far-right blog articles and racist forums to back up their argument...

Or attacking gays and then using AFA articles and articles from hate groups to attack and belittle groups, members and so on.


This forum is used and viewed by many, many people from all different walks of like and races and creeds.

It's just disgusting some of the things that get posted here and some of the things that people have to put up with

But this issue was here before I officially registered and will be long after I stop posting.



It's the culture.

There's probably all a group or section of society we don't like or find annoying or offensive or "dodgy"

But It's how we go about it.

I'm not a huge fan of organised religion or religious folks telling everyone else how to live their lives.

But I don't go into every thread about religion telling them they are scum... or being nasty for the sake of it... in fact the only time (usually) I get involved in religious, racist, sexist or homophobic threads is because I see people spewing hate and attacking a group or whatever.

I've been in threads where 7 or 8 people are posting nonsense and blatant propaganda from right wing site, about Muslims and I'm trying to say that not all should be tarred with the same brush, that most "people" regardless of religion are decent and just want security and protection and love for their family and are just like you and me and so on... and I've had people screaming at me that when I'm beheaded by "them" when they take over, being a Muslim apologist wont help me,

I mean seriously... how does any of this help ATS?

People just have some foul and disgusting views.

I've had similar experiences in threads in just about every "touchy" subject.... race, sexuality, religion, politics... OWS, BNP...


You name it... There have been people posting disgusting, aggressive and just appallingly offensive nonsense about it.


And to be honest... I'm glad (although a little underwhelmed) that this is now being tackled.

Like most things, I'll believe it when I see it.

edit on 4/4/12 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Yep, it's April. Time to do some spring house-cleaning.



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:10 AM
link   
I don't get to spend too much time on ATS but the last few weeks I have noticed that the pervasive vibe has been getting toxic. Deny ignorance can be changed to embrace ignorance for quite a few members that continue to post and say nothing other than trying to support their narrow viewpoints. This place has become a sounding board for paranoia, delusions and intolerance, even in the face of evidence that contradicts their position. I like ATS but I have been finding myself just not even wanting to bother getting involved in a thread because engaging someone who has an opinion that tends to be based on information coming from someone else who is poorly informed and then makes further assumptions without facts has become more frustrating than it is worth. I am in the medical field and I see so much wrong information on this site and I really just feel like giving up on ATS and leaving these people to their deluded conclusions.



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


When I fisrt joined this site was awesome. But in the short span that I have been a member, I have seen tyhe quality of this site dipp abit. I'm glad that you are taking these steps to assure a greater quality in both new threads and replies.



new topics

top topics



 
224
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join