Censorship

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 




The MSM does have an agenda....but it isn’t ratings.

And what might it be??




posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by SMOKINGGUN2012
I have been waiting for the closed threads to be moderated and reopened to continue to discuss those topics. The issues surrounding Sandy Hook are going to be discussed the only question is where. If someone opens a discussion of these topics on a new site by all means let me know. I have participated on a number of other boards some are heavily moderated some not. I have not been here long but have noticed a few things. Some posters who have been hear a long time jumping into threads and acting like a moderator and attacking everyone posting simply because they don't like the subject. If someone violates the rules moderate and move on. It appears to me that it was easier to close threads than to properly moderate. I don't think I would be wrong in thinking other posters also agree with seeing the same things. I am not surprised one bit people would start claiming this is some sort of conspiracy after actions like these. The irony is it is happening IN a conspiracy forum. Your choice.....we can talk about here or elsewhere.......but it will be discussed.


Pretty obvious that the site owners would like you to talk about things like blind accusations of child molestation, accusations that no one died, attacks on poor, grieving parents, and the posting of personal information ELSEWHERE.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by hypattia
Important info such as our Constitutional Rights, are being eroded regularly


You seem to be unaware that the Constitution does not guarantee "free speech" within privately owned venues. Instead it guarantees that the federal government will not pass laws that restrict free speech.


So basically what you are stating here is that you are going to create your own rules regarding free speech, and the constitution has no-say on this forum. Am I correct?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by WiindWalker
 


Can I walk into your home and speak to your family any way I choose, totally disregarding your wishes or house rules because the First Amendment says I can?

Just curious.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by WiindWalker

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by hypattia
Important info such as our Constitutional Rights, are being eroded regularly


You seem to be unaware that the Constitution does not guarantee "free speech" within privately owned venues. Instead it guarantees that the federal government will not pass laws that restrict free speech.


So basically what you are stating here is that you are going to create your own rules regarding free speech, and the constitution has no-say on this forum. Am I correct?


Welcome to the real world. Yes you are correct.

Have you ever read the Constitution?

It talks about Congress making no laws etc., etc., etc.

Do you seriously believe it applies to privately owned websites?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by WiindWalker

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by hypattia
Important info such as our Constitutional Rights, are being eroded regularly


You seem to be unaware that the Constitution does not guarantee "free speech" within privately owned venues. Instead it guarantees that the federal government will not pass laws that restrict free speech.


So basically what you are stating here is that you are going to create your own rules regarding free speech, and the constitution has no-say on this forum. Am I correct?


do you understand what the first amendment says? (Hint: S.O. has not made any laws infringing on your speech)
edit on 26-12-2012 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by WiindWalker
So basically what you are stating here is that you are going to create your own rules regarding free speech, and the constitution has no-say on this forum. Am I correct?


If the Constitution were to have a say in this then it would be unconstitutional. THIS is what the 1st is about:


The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.


en.wikipedia.org...

It's about protection from the government limiting free speech. Private enterprise is not the government.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Of course you are free to run your forum however you please.

I was only stating my opinion, my observations. Why don't you just ban and eliminate posts that are against tos, t&c? Why ban the whole thread? Many times the important relevant information gets thrown out with the the bickering, and insults. Why does the whole thread have to go?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by hypattia
reply to post by neformore
 


Of course you are free to run your forum however you please.

I was only stating my opinion, my observations. Why don't you just ban and eliminate posts that are against tos, t&c? Why ban the whole thread? Many times the important relevant information gets thrown out with the the bickering, and insults. Why does the whole thread have to go?



I will have a guess at that.......we are getting dangerously close to the truth..........



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SMOKINGGUN2012

Originally posted by hypattia
reply to post by neformore
 


Of course you are free to run your forum however you please.

I was only stating my opinion, my observations. Why don't you just ban and eliminate posts that are against tos, t&c? Why ban the whole thread? Many times the important relevant information gets thrown out with the the bickering, and insults. Why does the whole thread have to go?



I will have a guess at that.......we are getting dangerously close to the truth..........
so your claim is that ATS is somehow trying to keep us from the truth? Based on the fact that they have standards for their website?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by hypattia
reply to post by neformore
 


Of course you are free to run your forum however you please.

I was only stating my opinion, my observations. Why don't you just ban and eliminate posts that are against tos, t&c? Why ban the whole thread? Many times the important relevant information gets thrown out with the the bickering, and insults. Why does the whole thread have to go?



ATS is an entertainment website.

There is no important or relevant information here. No case was ever broken here. No mysteries were ever solved here. No prophecies posted here ever came true.

For somebody whose sig quotes Krishnamurti you seem to be lacking in awareness..... that was a joke....



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by sconner755

There is no important or relevant information here. No case was ever broken here. No mysteries were ever solved here. No prophecies posted here ever came true.



That is a joke right, you are just trying to be humourous?

There are plenty of things on ATS over the years that have been solved, from missiles that turned out to be contrails, to countless chinese lanterns.

ATS is probably the best site to get to the bottom of things (where possible), there are a lot of clever, resourceful people here.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Is this thread in response to the dissection and trashing of much of the material in the Rodia thread?

Really?

Three points I want to make:

1. It's the site owner's house - he pays for the upkeep, etc. so you have a place to discuss such matters. With this in mind, he is perfectly entitled to trash any threads which he finds personally unsavoury or (as in this case) ones which left him and the site liable for legal action.

2. Putting someone's personal identifying info online to support a THEORY is just wrong. How would you like to be doxed on a popular website with a large readership and an admirable google search ranking? ANY TIME someone typed your name into google there it would be. It's not our job to determine guilt or innocence. The issue can be explored without naming names and dragging up a private individual's potential skeletons in the closet. Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.

3. Life's not fair. Very little a person does these days is for truth, justice and the American Way. It's almost always about profit/gain or avoiding loss of some kind. Sad but true. In this case, there was little to gain and much to lose by leaving the offending thread as it was. It's a jungle out there and there are no safe places, only reasonably civil ones.

Personally, I agree with the censorship in this instance from a moral, civil liberties standpoint. Great job, admins and mods. I felt uncomfortable every time I saw that subject line.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
"Theory, by definition is :a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation"

That is a grossly insufficient definition. A "Theory" has already had much testing and a lot of evidence to support it. It is a MUCH stronger idea than a "hypothesis".



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   
If given the choice, I'd choose this venue over any other out there.

I don't care what else goes on here, or the claims of censorship, I've been to other forums where you have virtually no management of the content, and yet also will ban you for NO reason at all. Having to wade through threads full of offensive content, vulgar language, hate, disgusting racism, and almost every form of speech that lowers the human mind, and intelligence levels to that of something just above microbial life, gave me a new and dramatically enhanced appreciation of what ATS is, does and strives to be here.

Not only do I respect it, I applaud the owners and staff here that help to keep this all for the most part a pleasant experience free from most the crap above. FREE to explore topics of interest, discuss civilly with people from all walks of life, and to read highly intellectual posts from people all over the world.

I would argue that the way ATS controls the content here is more liberating than other venues that offer no limits on speech.

Go spend some time on the other side for a while, then come back here and not only see but appreciate the differences. If the other side is a better place for you, then I suggest you stay there and never come back.


edit on 26-12-2012 by ausername because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by hypattia
 


I'll try and answer....

Once a thread goes off the rails, its damned hard to get it back on track. There is always someone who wants to drag an issue back up, or wants to be a keyboard warrior, or who simply may just want to disrupt the whole thing for the sake of it. Some people- as is evident on this thread - will seek to capatalise on a comment from staff or from another poster and try and run the whole thing way off topic.

At that point, theres a couple of things that can be done. The first is to crack down hard in the thread, which leads to page after page of removed posts, warnings and actions.

The other is to close the thread, remove the worst of the posts and leave the rest of the information intact and let people cool down and think

Beleive it or not, the staff are not actively seeking to ban anyone, and we'd rather give people the benefit of the doubt most of the time when emotions are running high.

But... this is the internet. Stupidity (and I don't use that word lightly) is viral sometimes, and when - as has been the case on more than one occasion (not just recently) peoples private/personal information is put up in a thread there can be further consequences that are unpleasant for the person who posted, the person they are posting about and also the site as a whole.

Imagine - if you will - being a relative of one of the deceased kids at Sandy Hook and suddenly having someone you've never heard of in your life before phone you up and tell you that you've not been grieving enough for the loved one that you've lost and that you are an actor? because someone posted your personal phone details on an online forum

Or imagine being a guy who helped out, finding out he's been called a pedophile because someone on an online forum thinks he might be and has started a rumour about it thats gone viral.

Doesn't have to be an ATS member that does either of those. Remember that the forums are visible to everyone on the internet

Those are examples. I'm not saying either has happened but think about it.

When that stuff starts to happen (and personal addresses HAVE been posted up on ATS before) we have to be responsible and have to act. We ask for common sense and respect but when both of those are sadly missing, and things are progressing at a rapid pace, what are we supposed to do?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by hypattia

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by hypattia
I was referring to the MAINSTREAM MEDIA, not ATS.

Which are also independent companies under no obligation to enforce or practice free speech.


I was referring to the MAINSTREAM MEDIA'S obligation to the public thru it's Ethics and Standards:en.wikipedia.org...

Journalism ethics and standards comprise principles of ethics and of good practice as applicable to the specific challenges faced by journalists. Historically and currently, this subset of media ethics is widely known to journalists as their professional "code of ethics" or the "canons of journalism".[1] The basic codes and canons commonly appear in statements drafted by both professional journalism associations and individual print, broadcast, and online news organizations.

While various existing codes have some differences, most share common elements including the principles of — truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability — as these apply to the acquisition of newsworthy information and its subsequent dissemination to the public.[2][3][4][5]
edit on 26-12-2012 by hypattia because: Clarification, emphasis


You perhaps are not aware that a landmark decision found by an Apellate Court has determined that the news does not have to be true, real or factual.

So when you hear FOX say, "We report, You decide", the unspoken message is whether or not you believe
the stories are true or not. This decision has been celebrated among the media across all formats.

Yellow journalism has been given a green light as "free speech", also.
What a world, what a world.

www.dailykos.com...#

Have you noticed the difference in MsM reporting since 2007?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
While that is one definition of the word 'theory' - if you want to be more precise, use the word "Hypothesis". Literally a hypothetical thesis/theory. Or in laymans terms an unproven theory.

In science when something is referred to as a theory we're talking about a tried and tested explanation of how something works. Until its been proven it is just a hypothesis.

When someone comes up with an idea, or notices some behaviour, they formulate a hypothesis, then they find ways to test it, and share it with others who try to test it too.
edit on 26-12-2012 by cartesia because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Just one more important thing to ponder here.

What people think they know is not fact.

It is what they think they know

Too many people take what they think they know and espouse it as fact these days, when it is anything but, and then try to argue their corner from that position when they are not in the possession of fact at all. Some people are very good at doing that, and some people are not very good at thinking things through.

Not everything is a conspiracy. Tragedies do happen.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join