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.

 

Facebook Now Suspending Accounts Which Question Mainstream Media Reporting/Account of Events

page: 5
74
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by foodstamp

Originally posted by HIWATT

Originally posted by foodstamp

Originally posted by HIWATT
reply to post by foodstamp
 



So what's your point? Are you saying he had his account suspended for posting "false information" on his Facebook?

This thread isn't about whether that info is correct or not... it's about censorship.




My point?? Bud! really? My point is they have EVERY RIGHT to take off anything they deem inappropriate. And not only that, but the "User" agreed to those terms!

Your right it's about censorship! FB is not America, FB is a privately owned corporation/website.


edit on 12/17/1212 by foodstamp because: (no reason given)



Ok then. Calm down. That's all I wanted to know, as it wasn't clear in your post.

However, could you provide evidence (since this seems to be so important to you) that this photo was taken down because it was "inappropriate" ?

Yes, a member agrees to a the Terms of Service when signing up for Facebook.

Here they are BTW: www.facebook.com...

Could you show me the specific term there that would justify the removal of his photo?

Or you could check here: www.facebook.com...

Again. Please cite the specific area which would justify the actions taken against the OP.

... I couldn't find any... unless someone actually filed a copyright on a meme they created in Microsoft Paint and SOMEHOW saw it on OP's Facebook wall... /sarcasm

I appreciate where your trying to take this. But I'm not going there with you. FB resumes the right. (even if not in the agreement, which it is) That ANY material THEY deem to be inappropriate can be deleted from FB. Simple as that.. I won't argue under which "statute" that lies because frankley it's irrelevent. Because the assume final judgement and it's their right to edit or censor because it's their property... And that's all that matters. If you were the guy in question then certainly maybe you could argue that it technically isn't offensive and has some "weight" so to speak. But that's between him and FB. That fact remains, They have a right to censor it.


edit on 12/17/1212 by foodstamp because: (no reason given)


So you're assuming that they "have the right" based on what?

Your own opinion ?

It's either against the terms and conditions, or it isn't. Simple.

I have provided the links for you, and read through them myself, and found nothing supporting a removal in this case.

If you're too lazy to even bother reading for 5 minutes, then I suggest you stop pestering other people for "evidence and proof", as you are too lazy to even acknowledge such when it is presented to you.

They have every right to censor him, yes, BUT ONLY BY WAY OF THEIR OWN TERMS OF SERVICE AND CONDUCT

Your opinion does not trump a legal document.




posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
That's a joke...all the gang stuff kids put on their pages not to mention all the drug references....facebook you suck!



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ

Originally posted by Juggernog

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ
Good, that stuff doesn't belong on facebook. Facebook is not a conspiracy website.


Facebook is whatever you want to make of it. Who are you to decide what goes on someones FB page.


I'm not the one that suspended his account, facebook is and it's apparently because that stuff doesn't belong on facebook. Simple logic.


"apparently" ?

Has no one bothered to even check on this? There are a number of people in here blindly "siding" with Facebook simply because they see the photo that was posted as tasteless or what have you...

Well I looked that their Terms and didn't see anything that would justify a removal... have a look for yourselves.

www.facebook.com...

www.facebook.com...


It's facebook's site. They took it down. End of story.

If you want to ensure that nothing you put up is ever taken down, start your own website.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by chrismarco
That's a joke...all the gang stuff kids put on their pages not to mention all the drug references....not a big fan of facebook
edit on 17-12-2012 by chrismarco because: whooopss I quoted myself...



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   


Ct. Police to Prosecute People Posting False News on the Shooting "In Any Manner"

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ

Originally posted by HIWATT

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ

Originally posted by Juggernog

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ
Good, that stuff doesn't belong on facebook. Facebook is not a conspiracy website.


Facebook is whatever you want to make of it. Who are you to decide what goes on someones FB page.


I'm not the one that suspended his account, facebook is and it's apparently because that stuff doesn't belong on facebook. Simple logic.


"apparently" ?

Has no one bothered to even check on this? There are a number of people in here blindly "siding" with Facebook simply because they see the photo that was posted as tasteless or what have you...

Well I looked that their Terms and didn't see anything that would justify a removal... have a look for yourselves.

www.facebook.com...

www.facebook.com...


It's facebook's site. They took it down. End of story.

If you want to ensure that nothing you put up is ever taken down, start your own website.



If it's the end of the story then feel free to leave this thread. Some of us are interested in what's going on here


I would think any evidence of Facebook breaking it's own Terms of Service would be news....



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT

So you're assuming that they "have the right" based on what?

Your own opinion ?

It's either against the terms and conditions, or it isn't. Simple.

I have provided the links for you, and read through them myself, and found nothing supporting a removal in this case.

If you're too lazy to even bother reading for 5 minutes, then I suggest you stop pestering other people for "evidence and proof", as you are too lazy to even acknowledge such when it is presented to you.

They have every right to censor him, yes, BUT ONLY BY WAY OF THEIR OWN TERMS OF SERVICE AND CONDUCT

Your opinion does not trump a legal document.



So why are you fussing and fuming about it here instead of speaking with facebook about it??
It is their right, it's their website. If you don't like it, take it to them. If they don't satisfy you, take it to court.
They own the site, they took it down. Their site, their rules. Deal with it.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT



If it's the end of the story then feel free to leave this thread. Some of us are interested in what's going on here


I would think any evidence of Facebook breaking it's own Terms of Service would be news....



If this was facebook, I would. But, it isn't. This site isn't owned by you either and you don't make the rules here any more than you do on facebook.

Show us one single website in the world that hasn't at one time or another broken it's own rules. Not gonna happen. They always keep that little clause in there saying they can pretty much do what they want since it belongs to them.







edit on 17-12-2012 by L8RT8RZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ

Originally posted by HIWATT

So you're assuming that they "have the right" based on what?

Your own opinion ?

It's either against the terms and conditions, or it isn't. Simple.

I have provided the links for you, and read through them myself, and found nothing supporting a removal in this case.

If you're too lazy to even bother reading for 5 minutes, then I suggest you stop pestering other people for "evidence and proof", as you are too lazy to even acknowledge such when it is presented to you.

They have every right to censor him, yes, BUT ONLY BY WAY OF THEIR OWN TERMS OF SERVICE AND CONDUCT

Your opinion does not trump a legal document.



So why are you fussing and fuming about it here instead of speaking with facebook about it??
It is their right, it's their website. If you don't like it, take it to them. If they don't satisfy you, take it to court.
They own the site, they took it down. Their site, their rules. Deal with it.


First of all, I wasn't taking to you there (you know that)

I keep hearing "it's their right" .. if that's true SHOW US

They have a Terms of Service and Conduct and if they are removing user content in violation of their own Terms that is noteworthy.

I'm "fussing" about this, because maybe the OP will see fit to pursue this after realizing Facebook may be in error here.
After all, it seems many of you "just assume" things... I'm just here to deny that right now.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by foodstamp
 



Well, there unfortunatly is a fine line between actual conspiracy theory backed by evidence and just outright paranoid accusations based on someones belief system. I however, am interested in the first example.


Fair enough! But what do you consider evidence? Something that we hear the talking heads on TV telling us, whom by the way are all owned by 6 huge corporations?

Are critical thinking skills now officially outlawed and we must believe what the TPTB tell us is truth??

Not meaning to bash you, but truth is becoming an animal listed on the "extinction list" if you get my drift.....

I unlike you appreciate those on ATS that keep my mind working versus believing everything I am told.
edit on 17-12-2012 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)


By the above statement it would seem that your indicating to me that you can't believe ANYTHING you hear. If you actually believed this than there'd be no purpose in us talking about it now would it?

Now, let's talk critical thinking when it comes to the "poster" in question. Critical thinking IS NOT taking half baked suspicious news reports and taking bits and pieces from them in order to form a story into a "government sponsored conspiracy theory". That's NOT critical thinking!

Remember JFK or WTC? They had evidence! bits and pieces of evidence that not only proved the official story to be wrong, but the evidence also indicated other outcomes to the attacks in question. THAT my friend is critical thinking.

This is from Dictionary.com
Critical thinking
"disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence: The questions are intended to develop your critical thinking"

Now, back to the poster. It made some false statements as well as unverified and unverfiable statements in order to indicate a government involvement. But it's missing one thing. EVIDENCE! Evidence is required in order to even "critically think" over it. Does it not?

Now, this may help you bud when you're forming an opinion in the future. And I say this without sarcasm. If you can look at a story and find NO concrete evidence to support the original claim, then you my friend SHOULD NOT believe it! It's doesn't mean the said "theory" is impossible, i'm not saying discard it! But untill you have evidence or hell, even insinuation of evidence, then you CANNOt consider it to be a "theory" let alone a fact.

And all in all, that's what this boils down to. People like the one who made that poster are taking a "theory" with no immediate evidence and have touted it as FACT. To just "soak it up" or believe in it is NOT critical thinking. Critical thinking does not mean opening up to the possibility that maybe the government did it. It's basing your outcome on evidence. Something you have failed to do this time around and so has anyone on here who is insinuating that this shooting is an inside job when they have NO evidence.


Your post:
"I unlike you appreciate those on ATS that keep my mind working versus believing everything I am told."

My mind is working....very clearly, as I have described above.. Now, If you can show me some examples of your critical thinking by showing me some evidence you uncovered that may indicated a conspiracy concerning these shootings, I am all ears. Because bud, all BS aside.... Were on the same side...



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT


First of all, I wasn't taking to you there (you know that)

I keep hearing "it's their right" .. if that's true SHOW US

They have a Terms of Service and Conduct and if they are removing user content in violation of their own Terms that is noteworthy.

I'm "fussing" about this, because maybe the OP will see fit to pursue this after realizing Facebook may be in error here.
After all, it seems many of you "just assume" things... I'm just here to deny that right now.



The other member did show you. Did you not read it?



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ

Originally posted by HIWATT



If it's the end of the story then feel free to leave this thread. Some of us are interested in what's going on here


I would think any evidence of Facebook breaking it's own Terms of Service would be news....



If this was facebook, I would. But, it isn't. This site isn't owned by you either and you don't make the rules here any more than you do on facebook.

Show us one single website in the world that hasn't at one time or another broken it's own rules. Not gonna happen. They always keep that little clause in there saying they can pretty much do what they want since it belongs to them.







edit on 17-12-2012 by L8RT8RZ because: (no reason given)



That has nothing to do with this thread. It's about Facebook.

As far as I can see, they broke their own Terms here (unless there is more to the story) and the OP has a right to confront them on it.

I get angry when I see people (especially those who are part of large corporations or those with lost of $$$$) break their own rules and get away with it.
You have a right not to.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   
A hypothesis and a theory are two different things. The OP gave a hypothesis, not a theory. A theory has evidence to support it.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ

Originally posted by HIWATT


First of all, I wasn't taking to you there (you know that)

I keep hearing "it's their right" .. if that's true SHOW US

They have a Terms of Service and Conduct and if they are removing user content in violation of their own Terms that is noteworthy.

I'm "fussing" about this, because maybe the OP will see fit to pursue this after realizing Facebook may be in error here.
After all, it seems many of you "just assume" things... I'm just here to deny that right now.



The other member did show you. Did you not read it?



I don't see that anywhere.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by HIWATT
 


Dude, maybe you missed my reply, But I did read your rules and showed you some grounds on which they can do whatever they want...It's rule 15. where they say they can do whatever they want! Heh



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ

Originally posted by Juggernog

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ
Good, that stuff doesn't belong on facebook. Facebook is not a conspiracy website.


Facebook is whatever you want to make of it. Who are you to decide what goes on someones FB page.


I'm not the one that suspended his account, facebook is and it's apparently because that stuff doesn't belong on facebook. Simple logic.


"apparently" ?

Has no one bothered to even check on this? There are a number of people in here blindly "siding" with Facebook simply because they see the photo that was posted as tasteless or what have you...

Well I looked that their Terms and didn't see anything that would justify a removal... have a look for yourselves.

www.facebook.com...

www.facebook.com...


Took me 10 seconds to find the violation, you couldn't see it?


If you collect information from users, you will: obtain their consent, make it clear you (and not Facebook) are the one collecting their information, and post a privacy policy explaining what information you collect and how you will use it.


www.facebook.com...

It's not okay to post content from other users. If the image came from Facebook it falls under that category. If it came from a news source, it falls under the copyright protection that FB has. The news agencies obtained a license, or its their copyright.


If we remove your content for infringing someone else's copyright, and you believe we removed it by mistake, we will provide you with an opportunity to appeal.
If you repeatedly infringe other people's intellectual property rights, we will disable your account when appropriate.


Now, if the poster linked the picture from a news source, and made his own caption in text form, I don't think the picture would have been able to be removed. But since they edited the work and posted their own, that seems like the justification FB is using. Unless this has already been figured out...



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by HIWATT
 


It's their right cause it's there property..That's the US that's how it goes... If I'm in your house and I say something you don't like ands you escort me off the property. You will not find yourself having to defend against a lawsuit from me because you infringed on my freedom of speech. Lol, Because, I'm on YOUR property, with YOUR OWN rules..

FB is not different.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT


That has nothing to do with this thread. It's about Facebook.

As far as I can see, they broke their own Terms here (unless there is more to the story) and the OP has a right to confront them on it.

I get angry when I see people (especially those who are part of large corporations or those with lost of $$$$) break their own rules and get away with it.
You have a right not to.



No, that's what you were led to believe by someone who posted something saying it happened. He/She could have made the whole thing up, maybe it never happened at all. Have you considered that? Of course not. You just automatically saw something you didn't like and jumped right on the bandwagon. You don't have any facts, you didn't experience any of it, you don't even have observations to back up what you are trying to say. All you have is heresay provided by the OP.

That's not critical thinking, that's acting like a lemming. Someone shouts "look, follow me, I'm mad at somebody" and you jumped right in behind them and are angry and arguing about it even though you have been shown by at least 4 other people that there are holes in it as well as being shown the direct statement from facebook saying they had the right to remove what they see fit.

Who is really denying ignorance here and who is embracing it? I'll give you a hint, me, Foodstamp and a few others have been denying it. You can figure out the rest. Or maybe you can't.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ
Good, that stuff doesn't belong on facebook. Facebook is not a conspiracy website.


And WHO are you to tell people WHAT they can post on their personal FB page?
And who are you to say what does and doesn't belong on FB? JHC.

I post all kinds of "conspiracy" related topics to my FB even ATS links.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by foodstamp
reply to post by HIWATT
 


Dude, maybe you missed my reply, But I did read your rules and showed you some grounds on which they can do whatever they want...It's rule 15. where they say they can do whatever they want! Heh


This: ?




Termination If you violate the letter or spirit of this Statement, or otherwise create risk or possible legal exposure for us, we can stop providing all or part of Facebook to you. We will notify you by email or at the next time you attempt to access your account. You may also delete your account or disable your application at any time. In all such cases, this Statement shall terminate, but the following provisions will still apply: 2.2, 2.4, 3-5, 8.2, 9.1-9.3, 9.9, 9.10, 9.13, 9.15, 9.18, 10.3, 11.2, 11.5, 11.6, 11.9, 11.12, 11.13, and 15-19.


I don't see how that in any way is applicable.




new topics

top topics



 
74
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join