**ALL MEMBERS*** Before Its News as a source

Somewhat unrelated but can the staff confirm if there is a problem between ATS and GLP??

I started an account there last week and mysteriously got banned. I didn't commit any flagrant violations or anything. Someone told me I shouldn't post about ATS there but I didn't take them seriously. WTH is up with that?

sorry for the off topic post but since we are discussing alternative sites I figured I would get it off my chest. It kind of bugs me a little. Are we allowed to discuss GLP here or is that a taboo as well?

reply to post by Springer

We've come to realization that "Before It's News" has pushed more hoaxes than "Sorcha Faal" ever did

Just now? You all have just now figured this out? Some of us *cough* *cough* have been pointing this out for years.

Thank you for finally looking in to the matter.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Oh god let's not go there. There were a few....events a while back if I am remembering correctly (They say the memory is the first to go. I don't remember what the second is) that turned....not so pretty.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Oh god let's not go there.

There were a few....events a while back if I am remembering correctly (They say the memory is the first to go. I don't remember what the second is) that turned....not so pretty.

Yeah maybe the owners of GLP are schizophrenic. That could be it.

All this infighting if indeed true is bad for the alternative community imho!

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Superhans

 

Its a slippery slope my friend. Of course its not my site, but if you look through the first two pages you will see some people are calling for infowars, presstv, to also get banned. I think we need to be careful to preserve the alternative viewpoints.

MSM is so damm fake. Why didn't they report the new egyptian revolution that took place yesterday, and they instead focused on the zimmerman trial to build hate??

Im not familiar with presstv but i don't see anything wrong with deleting the links to infowars. Just yesterday they put out some BS about a low flying plane over austin and how it was going to be a falseflag attack. I think they should ditch naturalnews.com, well it is entertaining to see how incredibly stupid people are for believing these stories it does get old seeing hoax after hoax.

reply to post by LeatherNLace


Trust me, we've seen it for years too.
(The following is NOT directed at you LeatherNLace)

The deal is we don't like relegating, (Which is NOT BANNING by the way) the entirety of everything from any site to the HOAX Bin.

It takes LOTS to get us to, that's why it's been so long coming. we just hate doing it and it needs to be certainly true that the site in question is "in it" for all the wrong reasons.

Springer...

I come to ATS for the real deal in news and information. So I fully support any action that limits the amount of disinformation posted here.

I do use one sometimes questionable site to source news items because they cover a very wide range of information. They tend to over dramatize their own comments, but they also provide links to their sources. So I use them to get material but also check out the original source too.

But the sorcha Faal site and BIN are sites that have been of late posting garbage that cannot be verified anywhere on the web. Another source that some web sites won't ballow is WND (World Net Daily). They also have a tendency to stretch the truth a bit too much.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Lets be honest, GLP is laughable. The owners/mods there have a terrible racist/bias against certain groups and censor based on that bias.

It can be an entertaining site but between the dancing bananas and well, other "interesting" features, its just not comparable to ATS, not even a little.

reply to post by Springer

Is it ok to link the original source?

Whether its Before Its News or a Sorcha Faal site, often times they are quoting another source. What if we were to click through to the original source, verify the information (as much as possible) then post accordingly.

Understanding that BIN as an original source is no longer permitted.

reply to post by gladtobehere


If you find the original source and use that source, it is fine..

Just remember, that source may be a hoax as well.. It also may not be...Basically a crap shoot but but no one here will fault you..

Originally posted by Superhans

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Superhans

 

Its a slippery slope my friend. Of course its not my site, but if you look through the first two pages you will see some people are calling for infowars, presstv, to also get banned. I think we need to be careful to preserve the alternative viewpoints.

MSM is so damm fake. Why didn't they report the new egyptian revolution that took place yesterday, and they instead focused on the zimmerman trial to build hate??

Im not familiar with presstv but i don't see anything wrong with deleting the links to infowars. Just yesterday they put out some BS about a low flying plane over austin and how it was going to be a falseflag attack. I think they should ditch naturalnews.com, well it is entertaining to see how incredibly stupid people are for believing these stories it does get old seeing hoax after hoax.

Indeed and I called them out on that in a thread here on ATS that was rightfully moved to the hoax bin. But not everything that gets labeled a hoax is actually a hoax. Lots of people have a pro-government bias and cannot fathom our government doing false flag attacks so these folks tend to call everything a hoax when it is not.

Infowars is a good source. Much better than any msm outlet. Freedom of speech comes with its downsides as well. We should be careful not to silence people. Even if something is a hoax its not always clear if it is intentional or accidental. People with paranoia can create something out of nothing or exaggerate stuff.

I find infowars about 75% reliable. Global research, EU Times, etc are ok as well.

reply to post by gladtobehere


In my experience if you take that route it's best to continue sourcing back as far as the links will lead. Often the trail of bread crumbs ends up leading in a circle... IE a blog or site fabricates a story, another site innocently does an article based upon that story - and the original ( made up ) story is then altered to include a link to the second article as a means of adding provenance to it.

God that even confuses me....

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by gladtobehere

 

In my experience if you take that route it's best to continue sourcing back as far as the links will lead. Often the trail of bread crumbs ends up leading in a circle... IE a blog or site fabricates a story, another site innocently does an article based upon that story - and the original ( made up ) story is then altered to include a link to the second article as a means of adding provenance to it.

God that even confuses me....

A lot of stories appear fabricated for the simple reason they are not covered by any major news network.

In all honesty I think this whole hoax thing is being blown out of porportion and I am not sure why. Infowars, beforitsnews, natural news, eu times, global research and countless other alternative sites share links with each other and with blogs.

I think people should be able to use their own discernment rather than ask staff to ban links. Most of the people who dislike beforitsnews also dislike the other alternative sites as well. Just look in this thread and see for yourself. It becomes a slippery slope at some point imo.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

A lot of stories appear fabricated for the simple reason they are not covered by any major news network.

True enough, but not really applicable here. We're not talking about speculation or even stories that are possible though unprovable. We have forums for those stories that are not the Hoax forum. What we are discussing is a site that has a proven and long term track record of flatly manufacturing fiction and passing it off as truth.

Speculation versus deliberate falsehood. That's the yardstick - and the line in the sand that any critical thinker should be drawing.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

In all honesty I think this whole hoax thing is being blown out of porportion and I am not sure why. Infowars, beforitsnews, natural news, eu times, global research and countless other alternative sites share links with each other and with blogs.

I think people should be able to use their own discernment rather than ask staff to ban links. Most of the people who dislike beforitsnews also dislike the other alternative sites as well. Just look in this thread and see for yourself. It becomes a slippery slope at some point imo.

This throws a lot of things into the mix that aren't actually there. All that is there is that one sight has been deemed untrustworthy and is being relegated to the Hoax forum. The list of sights that have achieved this honor is very, very short and it has taken a long time for this one to gain that "status". Those other sites, though conversationally mentioned - do not apply at all to what is happening. Just BIN.

FTR asking staff to "ban links" simply is not how it works. The Terms and Conditions explain clearly what is allowable here and what is not. Deliberate Hoaxing is specifically forbidden and listed as a ban worthy offense. Thus a sight that engages in serial deliberate hoaxery should face the same scrutiny that you, I, or anyone else would be subjected to if we made a habit of making things up and posting them here.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Somewhat unrelated but can the staff confirm if there is a problem between ATS and GLP??

I started an account there last week and mysteriously got banned. I didn't commit any flagrant violations or anything. Someone told me I shouldn't post about ATS there but I didn't take them seriously. WTH is up with that?

sorry for the off topic post but since we are discussing alternative sites I figured I would get it off my chest. It kind of bugs me a little. Are we allowed to discuss GLP here or is that a taboo as well?

EC they do that to everybody I been banned a dozen times, they want you to be a paid member, I refuse.

I don't post much mainly read.

This is the reason I'm still here.

I love that the Forum Staff keep a heads up on sites that aren't good sources. Honestly, it seems like ATS is the best news source I can find. Anyone remember the thread on the Oregon Mall shooting? That was here before anywhere else. That's why I love this place.

Awesome! Very good to know and I'm glad to hear it.
Thanks!

peace,
AB

Before Its True / Before Its News

The BIT BIN!

reply to post by Springer


Dear Springer,

We've come to realization that "Before It's News" has pushed more hoaxes than "Sorcha Faal" ever did, therefor ALL threads started with BIN as the only source will go immediately into the HOAX Bin.

I had to think about this for a little before commenting. Firstly, I don't and won't use "Before it's News" as a source because I find it sensationalistic and non-sense. Having said that, if I did read it and they pointed me to a source document AND I included that source document, I would think it would be right to give them credit for having presented the source.

When I post, I try and always show the source that I came from and as much as possible the person that I learned about the source from. Your site, your rules and on occasion I have violated the T and Cs, have been corrected and accept your decisions on what is allowable on your site. I treat my personal blog the same way.

Here is my question. If you are going to allow people to post about Nibiru or the "Galactic Federation of Light" or other fringe beliefs, how different is it if they link to the site in question? If I may, if they repeat the same stuff as is posted on the site in question without attributing where they got their information from, is ATS better off?

I think it helps to know where they get their information from. That is just my opinion and this is not my site; but, you posted and I assume you wanted to hear possible different thoughts. I like ATS and really do try to respect it's rules and I also try and bring different thoughts into consideration. I think that is what denying ignorance is all about. Peace.

reply to post by Maxmars


Happy 5th on the 3rd, Maxmars

Great way to explain what is happening here. I get what everyone is trying to say, the site owner should have expected any banning of a "news source" would cause an uproar and appear to be denying members some type of freedom of speech.

Honestly, I see what is being said here... and I'd hate to think that threads were being started based solely on one source, that happened to be nothing more than an individuals opinion or total fabrication of truth, or worse an out and out LIE.

What is even more disturbing is to think that a sight may have created an internet "rumor" which could cause more trustworthy sites such as ATS to "link them" for the sole purpose of creating tons of "hits" at their site to incur tons of revenue and all the while spreading nothing but TOTAL B.S. all over the internet, yet make butt-loads of money in the meantime...now that is quite disgusting!

I say BAN them... and Ban them good... it's disgraceful in the face of journalism "or what's left of it today"

Ok, here comes my opinion, please stand by:

A lot of things that get said on the ATS do not have absolute proof positive about their certain truth. We could put on the list, time travel, free energy, UFO lore, and so much more. Using BIN as a source would seem prudent to those that consider it to be reliable, even if it weren't.

I don't consider MSNBC, The Huffington Post, The New York Times, as reliable sources of truth but as propaganda tools, yet I still would not censor them on the ATS. I guess where I'm getting at here is that it should be the reader of the post who decides what is reliable and not the press police regulators.

The people who are members here are some of the brightest minds around. Not only can they put words together into sentences but they also do their research on any topic. No one here accepts any single source as truth, do they? No.

I say let it be, let them use BIN if they want to. And that's my opinion. Let reasonable minds prevail on this issue.

As for the beef by site owners and mods about the possibility of advertising by the BIN on the ATS, it sounds as if this is the only reason for the actions being taken and not truth or falsehoods. All the other news organization are getting free time and advertising on the ATS so what's the beef and who cares?

And that's the opinion. Carry on.