The 9/11 Conspiracies Forum is a Mess. And it’s The Fault of Many Members

a reply to: WeAre0ne

The real problem is that ATS is no longer a conspiracy forum, it has become a debunking forum. It's great and all to demand proof, and argue what you know to be the truth, and get to the facts, but it has gotten to the point where people do it with a snotty, arrogant, 'I know everything' tone... and all it does is piss people off.

I agree wholeheartedly. It more closely resembles something like Metabunk than anything else. If some new member dares proposing some conspiracy theory, far-fetched or not, you can be sure that the first reply will be someone flaming them mercilessly and basically destroying the thread from the word go.

a reply to: Flatcoat

Au contraire, that is what the Gray Area and Skunk Works are for.

It would be nice, however, if those forums were linked to whenever such an event as the one you describe occurred.

Pull It

originally posted by: Informer1958
I am not the only one on here that believes this, you just had another poster say the similar thing here. You are correct I don't have proof, however reading this member content on a daily basic and the member repeatedly using the same old media propaganda and some of it as now been proven false and using edited videos which was proven by another credible member who brought real science to his 911 thread and the member in question was ask to stop using these tampered video to demonstrate there was no explosion from the WTC and yet this member still is using them while claiming to be authority over the 911 topic.

Now this is wrong.

I thought ATS was firmed about members not to be allowed to use proven fraudulent sources. And pulling some of their information from well known OS bias websites like 911 Myths.

I thought ATS looked down on sources that have been proven as disinformation.

This is not about disagreeing with this member this is much more. It doesn't matter what the thread topic is, as soon as this member come in many ATSers leave. ............Only a few stick around.........

Exactly, and ......Only a few stick around......

And the people that stick around long enough, come to the impression that there is two types of moderators on the 9/11 ATS forum. The official moderators of this forum, and the very small group of unofficial moderators who monitor the board on a daily basis to hijack and derail any thread that does not correspond with the official 9/11 story. Which is bizarre to say the least.

I used to be a moderator of another forum. What I don’t understand is how the moderators are handling this situation. Because it seems to me that certain individuals (who believe in the official conspiracy theory) are constantly protected. They are allowed to dish out the “truther” label and attack fellow members, but moderators only seem to be concerned when these posters are attacked and not the other way around. I am not saying this is done purposely, maybe unwittingly.

Like this thread for example. The thread was started by ATS owner saying there is repeat offenders. Yet the four prime examples (unless I read them wrong), are very one sided.

If so, I am disillusioned by it all. It seems to me, that ATS moderators are more concerned with its members being labelled “shills” than members who have genuine interest in alternative narrative being ridiculed or attacked. In this case, it’s not looking good for the future of this once great “conspiracy forum”. Instead we have culture were official government narrative must be adhered to. That is a very strange position for an alternative website.

'cutting off the nose to spite the face' comes to mind.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Just my 2 cents, but I spend much of my time in the vitriolic political forums and if the 9/11 forums are worse, then they should probably have an NC-17 rating, or a warning before entering.

:/

I mostly stay out of both forums for that reason.

I come to threads like this because it's an opportunity to see what the mods are thinking concerning this website and what their mindsets are.

Harte

originally posted by: Wookiepbut this thread is one-sided. It only appears to address the bad behavior of anti-OS posters. Which is nonsense imo. Yes, 'truthers' break the rules here, but I have seen countless OS supporters doing the same thing.
The OP only provides 'truther' comments, which makes the OP seem extremely biased IMO. So what's the deal? Is this a consppiracy site or not? I became a memeber here thinking it was...I'm having my doubts lately. My God, just look at how some of the more out of the box threads have become here lately. Constant insults by 'debunkers' and such. More emphasis needs to be put on that crap. Why are we all here anyway? To discuss mainstream bs?

I comment on ATS only occasionally these days but what you have said above is the reason why I decided to move on and comment elsewhere. The bias by most of the moderators against Truthers on this forum was obvious to me from the very start and gave me the impression that the ATS forum itself was some sort of controlled opposition.

The endless noisome and vacuous diatribes from OS-advocates has overflowed this forum for years and the moderators rarely take action against them. These people are evidently engaged in a psychological war upon all who have the temerity to dissent from the official story and they have no compunctions about smearing and slandering others.

Truthers have refuted the official story so many times now that I've come to believe the chief tactic of OS-advocates is simply to tire us out. Truthers have demonstrated, repeatedly and in diverse independent ways, how real science contradicts their arguments and refutes their claims, but still they persist in asserting those baseless, substanceless, science-less claims as though we had not demonstrated anything. Such studious indifference to everything we show them and say implies that they are the ones here who are a menace to honest and open debate on this forum.

By the way, the term OS is merely shorthand for 'people who subscribe to the government's official story'. Such people are defending the official story. Therefore I think it is quite appropriate to describe them as OS-advocates and the language has been very moderate in relation to them so far. We are not implying that they are anything other than what they openly declare themselves as being. It is amazing that the moderators would deem the innocuous term OS offensive and yet somehow ignore the offensive content that OS-advocates such as Dave have posted over the years.

ATS may as well be called 'The Government-Owned Shill Site'. Don't like it? You could always ban me I guess.

I don't see a compelling reason to even have the 9/11 forum around anymore. Everything that could feed a discussion has already fed twenty discussions. Thats why the threads keep derailing because theres not enough fresh material. and I seriously question whether there is going to be. at this point, its more a matter of whose theory has more merit and thats what everyone is getting riled about in those threads. spinning wheels and road rage because no one is getting anywhere and its everyones fault.

probably its a good thing all 9/11 trails lead here now.

originally posted by: Debunkology

originally posted by: Informer1958
I am not the only one on here that believes this, you just had another poster say the similar thing here. You are correct I don't have proof, however reading this member content on a daily basic and the member repeatedly using the same old media propaganda and some of it as now been proven false and using edited videos which was proven by another credible member who brought real science to his 911 thread and the member in question was ask to stop using these tampered video to demonstrate there was no explosion from the WTC and yet this member still is using them while claiming to be authority over the 911 topic.

Now this is wrong.

I thought ATS was firmed about members not to be allowed to use proven fraudulent sources. And pulling some of their information from well known OS bias websites like 911 Myths.

I thought ATS looked down on sources that have been proven as disinformation.

This is not about disagreeing with this member this is much more. It doesn't matter what the thread topic is, as soon as this member come in many ATSers leave. ............Only a few stick around.........

Exactly, and ......Only a few stick around......

And the people that stick around long enough, come to the impression that there is two types of moderators on the 9/11 ATS forum. The official moderators of this forum, and the very small group of unofficial moderators who monitor the board on a daily basis to hijack and derail any thread that does not correspond with the official 9/11 story. Which is bizarre to say the least.

I used to be a moderator of another forum. What I don’t understand is how the moderators are handling this situation. Because it seems to me that certain individuals (who believe in the official conspiracy theory) are constantly protected. They are allowed to dish out the “truther” label and attack fellow members, but moderators only seem to be concerned when these posters are attacked and not the other way around. I am not saying this is done purposely, maybe unwittingly.

Like this thread for example. The thread was started by ATS owner saying there is repeat offenders. Yet the four prime examples (unless I read them wrong), are very one sided.

If so, I am disillusioned by it all. It seems to me, that ATS moderators are more concerned with its members being labelled “shills” than members who have genuine interest in alternative narrative being ridiculed or attacked. In this case, it’s not looking good for the future of this once great “conspiracy forum”. Instead we have culture were official government narrative must be adhered to. That is a very strange position for an alternative website.

'cutting off the nose to spite the face' comes to mind.

Every thread in the 911-forum has been allowed to be derailed, most of the time after 1 page of on-topic comments. Then every thread changed in the same style of "discussion", where it would just be endless pages of off-topic posts. Why hasnt there been 1 mod in the last year trying to prevent this?

Also name-calling is wrong, but it is very obvious certain tactics have been used and thus been allowed. But oh my if you actually call those tactics by name: then you're the one doing ALL the dirt? I think in most cases it was obvious there were 2 sides at play in this name-calling.

For example: This week I had a disccussion and I asked for a member to produce material proving some claims that person made, instead of being just that: claims. Instead of giving the material I asked for my question got quoted like i ment the material I myself had used to disprove that same claim. And then that member gave me that material I had come up with myself... As if he honestly had answered my question. So he takes my question out of context and answers it in that way. I call that tactic by name and I get the warning. Im sorry but that is exactly how it has been going for over a year now. One side is taking most of the hits. If not from mods then by just having to swallow all those kind of tactics, which are by the way: against your very own rules......

And if you close it you have to make that side take the biggest hit so far, since people are actually still interested in looking for truth on this topic.

I honestly can't believe the number of members on a CT site just willing to #can a discussion forum on 9/11. Wow. How about if you don't like it, don't click it?

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
Bill, this is synonymous with the meme of "flogging a dead horse".

For some reason these individuals think that what they write will actually change their opponents stance on the matter!

Some folks just don't know when to give up and walk away.

The problem is, that those that do want to walk away from the person or persons tend to also be followed around, thread by thread. So, those who try and be the better person, try and walk away, but at the same time want to keep addressing the topic they created to speak with like-minded minds. However, some individuals bait others into reaction on purpose. And this needs to be looked at carefully, because whether ATS likes it or not, this place has become a troll fest and character assassination, In an attempt to shoot down the ball they try and take down the person too, so the insults start.

Personally, I am a grown man, but I have my temper moments. I recognize when someone is trolling, and while "entitlements" can seem egotistical, I think I am qualified in knowing who is who, by analysis because of my studies within psychology. I studied the human mind carefully (mostly because I myself suffered from chronic depression for years, so I wanted to identify my problem more and help people through it. It taught me how to see past deception on a grand scale, to the point where I saw the truth behind it all. Society in general, is one big psychological experiment and psychologists is at the middle of all of it.

Point is, I think ATS members would be wise if they chose to get a crash course on psychology, with many sources around to identify who is who. I used psychology and other sources to write the thread "How To Identify A troll" In a sad attempt to teach people how to see past deception.


The major thing that I see that annoys most people is when their threads becomes hijacked and derailed. I think this would *Snip* anyone off, especially after writing article length-ed threads of 2000 + words. Let alone discourage anyone else from posting such topics, or any other topics that is not part of the "OS".

Perhaps a forum for like-minded minds only can fix the problem.

We're not allowing members to block other members. If someone's not mature enough to post with appropriate decorum, or not be able to contain themselves after reading a post, then they shouldn't be posting on ATS.

I see whats happening in general, and why the ignore button is a need at this time within ATS. (But hear me out moment.)

What is occurring with these forums is a clash of belief systems. It is of the kind that actually does creates (or leads) to wars. And there is a war going on not just on ATS, but globally. What you are witnessing, is exactly the reason wars began at the dawn of man. Two belief systems cannot co-exist within the same space, because all it will do is create chaos.

It is a very bad idea to try and create entropy between individuals with two sets of belief systems. It is oil and water, and one will try to shoot down the other because it is the opposition. Sadly, this is how the world works, and it wont end until only one belief system is left remaining.

There are those however, who do not mind other topics outside of the ones they themselves create. I recognize (for example) that people have their belief systems, and arguing with anyone who stands on the opposite side of my own belief system, is pointless. In this case, i try and tell people "Let bygones be bygones.".

But they continue to punch back because since they "gained" the middle ground, now they are in view of "the win" and try and turn the thread around into their belief system. (And this is one example of a problem I myself have been having. However I also am guilty of falling to reaction and being "whiny". )

I honestly dont care much about reporting people when they try and bait one into reaction. (I am a lover, not a fighter), so I try instead to give them a middle ground, but at times, it does not work and they continue.) This actually becomes harassment especially after telling them to back off.

Harassment consists of the intentional crossing of your emotional or physical safety boundaries. You must have boundaries set in place clearly in order for that to apply. The legal definition of harassment, according to Black's Law Dictionary, is:

"A course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose" or "Words, gestures, and actions which tend to annoy, alarm and abuse (verbally) another person."

This is of course a very broad definition, which state and federal legislation and common law have narrowed and refined in various ways. However, for our purposes, WHOA defines online harassment as any actions that meet the qualifications of the above definition after the harasser has been told to cease.

Source

I was told in previous threads, after i threatened with legal action, that It wasn't illegal. No, they are wrong, it is against the law, and it can lead to legal actions if pursued. This is the reason why Facebook, and other social media platforms have the "block" button. Because by not doing so they are responsible for the life of that specific individuals.

I read cases, where the families of the victim of harassment(some actually lead to suicide), has actually filed suit and won against websites that allow harassment to continue. This is why many social media platforms uses the block button, to give some power to the individual to shut off someone who is harassing. In some cases, a judge orders them the owners of the website to use precautions, or the responsibility fall unto them as well as the perpetrator.


There is a fine line between harassment and disagreement/debate. The ignore button, is mostly for those who harass.

I understand, that you want people to be civilized, but many will not see it that way. Entropy will only create chaos and will further the degradation of the forums.

In previous years, ATS didn't have this problem is it does now. Yea there were people around with bad intentions, but today, with what is occurring with the world. Almost everyone is within stress, and not exactly thinking correctly and emotionally unstable. We are living in a time where the economy is collapsing, people are outside of work, trying to bring food to the table. People will be angry, and upset, and its not just a few, that number is now well above the millions of people, and its growing every day.

With the above in mind, would it not be wise to try and contain the chaos, by dividing the people who are in opposition? The ignore button (it may not be a real solution, but it is a temporary one)

I hope I gave some constructive feed back on this. I tried to write it through a psychological point of view, while being a bit realistic and aware with what is occurring with the world.

Regarding the 9-11 forums. Personally, I avoid posting in that forum like a plague. But I also know that the OS is not true. Should it be locked up? No, simply because there are those who wants it shut down and the topic silenced.

Evil and Good exist in this world. We have both sides on ATS. Those with good intentions, vs those with bad intentions. The Key is discernment.

I have had a couple of good threads closed due to trolls and degrading debate to insult and name calling. What I find both amusing and a little frightening is that it is always the same few people responsible. And those same people are on this thread talking about how they think "the other guy needs to be educated on proper interaction". These guys are the first ones to attack a source rather than the topic, resort to name calling and insult, and cry victim if you dare to speak to them in their own language.

I have seen multiple threads immediately derailed with complaints about the source. "Oh, its the DM, it must be a lie and you are a fool if you believe anything you read there. Only an idiot would reference a DM article." And so on. And guess what? The DM was right. And so are a lot of other sources that are immediately attacked by the same people.

Everyone knows who these people are. I have reported these posts more than once. And I know others have also. When someone starts a thread that is anti-liberal in some way and the next three posts are the same three people attacking the source, you can bet the thread will be closed, not because it ran out of steam or was not worth discussing, but because it is so badly derailed and perverted into attack and defend that the original topic was lost long ago. That is not the OP doing that. That is the same few people who employ the same tactics over and over again. And they will continue as long as it continues to work.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

A strain on the staff? Have you heard some of the rubbish that some folk spew over the refugee crisis? And yet the 9/11 forum is a mess???

I have read some vitriolic BS across a number of forums. Why should 9/11 be given special treatment? You are a mod and you should be able to see the broader spectrum.

Put your ear to the ground and you will hear- fragile earth, mudpit, Grey area-there are derogatory remarks being made in every forum. The 9/11 forum is not the exception.

I have read the whole thread from page 1 to where we are now, page 12. Divide and Conquer springs to mind to me and it looks like it has been divided and conquered.

I have Gb's of ORIGINAL data, captured on the day and the day after. Its interesting to see how the original data compares with what is out there now, i have interesting anomalies logged and tagged but due to the amount of data i have, i am still going through it so my project is not complete.

Oh well, guess i will have to post it elsewhere when it's complete

Cheers

CbG

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Pssst...Actually, he is the owner, but he moderates at times.


Anyway, the forum closure is temporary until people get ahold of themselves. Such things have happened before. Until then you can still read those threads just sign out to do it.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
I honestly can't believe the number of members on a CT site just willing to #can a discussion forum on 9/11. Wow. How about if you don't like it, don't click it?

It has nothing to do with whether I like it or not, it just seems to me like every argument that could be made by all parties concerned was made during the first 10 years and I'm hard-pressed to think of any revelations after that. At some point it seems like beating a dead horse to keep repeating the same arguments over and over and....

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: FlySolo

Here's a link to the terms and conditions:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Maybe you can find the part that says paid posters can't be here, or that posters have to post on more than one topic.

As long as they stay within the T&C, they can post here. I don't know how to make that more clear.

As for staff decisions, they are made based on those same T&Cs.

Its not so much as theyre being paid. Its the tactics they are not allowed to deploy according to those same rules, but have been allowed anyway.

But apparantly even calling those tactics by name is worse than using those actual tactics...

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: hellobruce

See? it's this circular crap. Bruce, stop messing and answer my question. If you're intelligent like I think you are, then you would come to the same conclusion as me.

No it's not disinfo if they don't agree with me. It's disinfo when I realize they're paid to post.

But you cant prove that. What you can prove is the tactics they deploy... And thats what they should have been banned for long ago or at least warned.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: FlySolo
If you're intelligent like I think you are, then you would come to the same conclusion as me.

So people who do not agree with you are .....

No people who deploy those tactics are....

a reply to: whatsup86

If posters violate the T&Cs those posts will be removed by staff, as long as we are aware of them. If people don't alert them, we don't see everything. And not everything that people think is a violation, actually is a violation.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: whatsup86

If posters violate the T&Cs those posts will be removed by staff, as long as we are aware of them. If people don't alert them, we don't see everything. And not everything that people think is a violation, actually is a violation.

I realise that now. But I thought the 911-board was heavily moderated.. says so when you click on it: "Due to member demand, the 9/11 forum is now under close staff scrutiny." So I actually thought mods were activily reading it. My bad I guess, but what does that message still mean if you are treating the 911-boards as any other topic? Or even worse in my opinion.

And are you telling us noone reported anyone for derailing a thread? Or didnt you consider it as derailment?