"Shill Hysteria" Is Destroying the Conspiracy Theorist World

PsykoOps
Accusing another member of being a shill is actually specifically forbidden in T&C. If you see that happening just report the post. That's the best thing you can do.

And this is enforced?

S&F

Likely THE most important threat to conspiracy threats in light of characters such as ALEX JONES & ED SNOWDEN hogging the airwaves

Just curious ... did anyone follow the link in the OP and see anything wrong with the classification markings applied to the individual slides towards the top of the story? I did.

reply to post by Never Despise


Shill!

beezzer
Shill, is in the eye of the beholder, often.

its just the latest form of YELLOW journalism..nothing knew but the techniques

The term "dissemination" means the government initiated distribution of information to the public. Not considered dissemination within the meaning of this Circular is distribution limited to government employees or agency contractors or grantees, intra- or inter-agency use or sharing of government information, and responses to requests for agency records under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) or Privacy Act.

The term "information" means any communication or representation of knowledge such as facts, data, or opinions in any medium or form, including textual, numerical, graphic, cartographic, narrative, or audiovisual forms.

The term "information dissemination product" means any book, paper, map, machine-readable material, audiovisual production, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristic, disseminated by an agency to the public.
[snipped]

www.whitehouse.gov...


good snip
thanks

SLAYER69

beezzer
Shill, is in the eye of the beholder, often.

Love this slayer.. i am going to steal the gif.

"Shill" seems to have turned into a slur or insult, one commonly applied to people a poster simply doesn't like for one reason or another. "Oh? You're disagreeing with my far-reaching theory? Stupid SHILL! Go back to lurking, SHILL." It's a knuckle-dragger's insult anymore. Ultimately, screaming "shill" is like an off-shoot of Godwin's Law to me. If you resort to accusing people of being shills with no legitimate reason (disagreeing doesn't count) then you're kind of admitting your argument's out of steam right there.

Snarl
Just curious ... did anyone follow the link in the OP and see anything wrong with the classification markings applied to the individual slides towards the top of the story? I did.

I did too.

And I found it "offsensive"...among other things.

reply to post by greencmp


.

mikegrouchy
There is something I have always wanted to say about "shills" and online forums.

After WW2 it was decided to take a look at all the people's records who had been
spies for the Germans. To see if there was any commonality. You know. To help
detect spies in the future. Well they found something.

Every one that was actually a spy was always the best at their Job as well. They
got along, were respected, and frequently got promoted. Instead of grousing and
mumbling about their job, they were gung ho and wanted the team to do well.

Employee of the Month kind of people.

Mike Grouchy

That actually makes a lot of sense, now that you mention it, Its obvious.

Ill give a brief example, IM sorta of a "spy"

I work for a marketing company, they place me in retail ostentatiously as a "sales" rep for the brand.

Now, I need to record intel, and have a host of other duties outside of "selling" My brand in retail.

Anyway, my point is this, they send me into a Store, and 9 out of ten times, im the "best" in sales in the store while I am there.

WHY?

Because an outside interest is paying me a ridiculous amount to do it, when compared to the people who "work" in the store, getting paid almost nothing.

Spys, get Houses, stipend and a whole host of other "benefits" that go along with the risk.

They are motivated to do well, above and beyond the common worker in a situation.



Extrapolate that to online forums, say people with over a 10k in stars and similar post, probably means you are dedicating an unusual amount of time to the Forums, so much so it might just be a "JOB" a paid one at that.

That or you have no life...


*Looks around*

Wait a sec...

I dunno...

I don't think individual shills are doing as much damage to all this as much as conspiracy theory going mainstream in recent years has - it's everywhere now. ATS having a facebook page for example I've always thought was bizarre - but it's become a business now! Everything is a conspiracy now and I think that severely damages the validity that any given conspiracy may have. I started thinking along those lines when the 2012 meme was so mainstream that more and more people jumped on it to profit off of it from History channel to internet business - since then it seems even worse now. Conspiracy becoming pop culture is killing real conspiracy IMO (that seems almost counter intuitive? But, I can't help but feel that).

But - if I put myself in the shoes of the always elusive "them" I would actually WANT it that way lol.

right now the government is paying me to be ill
i threw the shill part in as freebee so i could practice my copy and pasting
dang that global warming..if it wasn't for the 5 feet of spring snow outside
id be out on the ice fishing for lake trout right now

What many of you don't seem to grasp is that the word shill does have its definition.

A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization

It's people that use words unjustifiably that weakens the meaning of them.

Stop using the word when it's out of context and it will hold meaning because I can assure you that shills do exist on the internet. The investment is minimal compared to the billions spent from spying organizations, they would be stupid not to abuse of weak people willing to step on their values to make a little money.

beezzer
reply to post by Never Despise

 

What many would consider "shills" are, in fact, just people that have been indoctrinated by the school system, media, social networks.

They don't consider themselves "shills".

They think of themselves as true believers who support a person or ideology.

Did you leave out the military, religion, and professional training for any particular reason?

I've come to believe that anyone with an agenda is a potential shill. Iv'e never seen a bigger collection than right here at ATS.

Snarl
I don't concern myself with name calling. When I see people calling others on this site shills, my brain translates that into, "Shut up. I'm not as smart as you.

I don't either. If I think they are really causing issues and trolling I report them. No one should ever call anyone a shill I believe that's a personal attack? So far I have only run into one shill on this website. We didn't call them shills back in the day we called them PR people. We employed 5 at a job I had from 2000-2002 or so. They are very real. Most of what you run into are people that represent a company. I am sure government has its shills. However I'm not privy to that information. I would also like to add that if they did not they would be doing a very poor job. Maybe unethical but a bad job.

reply to post by PsykoOps

Accusing another member of being a shill is actually specifically forbidden in T&C. If you see that happening just report the post. That's the best thing you can do.

True but some of these folks are good at tiptoeing along the edge without quite stepping over it as I just saw again. Apparently anyone who does not simply hate Putin for being Russian is a shill now. Which is getting rather tiring.

A timely thread OP. S&F.

I have been called worse.

Right On, OP. I guess that's the nature of a conspiracy site. Calling someone a shill or disinfo agent is the bastion of a weak mind out of arguments. It's argumentum ad hominem and illogical, but that doesn't stop people from thinking they are somehow being profound. I particularly like the language people use to sneak up on the issue without being outright about it.

For example, in the recent Stanton Friedman thread one fellow asked his "question" by proclaiming that UFOs have a paranormal aspect to them (I don't disagree.) Although Friedman, really a nuts & bolts guy who thinks UFOs are contraptions from space holding aliens, had tackled the issue twice before in the thread he failed to take the bait for this "question." Friedman did not answer within 90 minutes, so the questioner took offense. The response was that this "speaks volumes" and that Friedman was declining to say what he actually knew. I love the "speaks volumes!" phrase. Oh, really? What volumes, precisely, are they?

Another weasel phrase that was used on me recently is the, "I question your motivations [to answer thusly]" when expressing an opinion opposite to the current conspiracy theory. The idea was that the US had taken over Flight MH380 and had flown it to Diego Garcia, a US Naval Base in the Indian Ocean. I pointed out that if they flew "under the radar" (one of the claims) they would never make it because they would run out of fuel (a debatable point, I realize), but the point was not greeted with facts proving otherwise, but instead questioned my "motivation" to suggest it.

We're seeing this in operation in a big way on the Malayasian jet disappearance. It's becoming increasingly obvious that one of the pilots, an ardent supporter of the opposition in the Malay government, had motive, means, and opportunity to hijack the jet. Here is a comprehensive account of the issue. It accounts for the facts as we know them quite well.

But this is rejected by the conspiracy theorists as not enough of a conspiracy. It would be much better of the USA were at fault and hijacked the jet to Diego Garcia to use for, er, something. It would be much better if Islamic extremists had hijacked the jet to use in a 9/11 repeat, perhaps this time with a nuclear weapon. It would be much better of somehow the hijacking of this jet were connected to the Ukraine and the "start of WW III." And, of course, "the UFO angle must be considered!"

So the flights of fancy continue.

reply to post by schuyler


You sure raked me over the coals on that one but I wasn't being a shill; I was just expressing what I thought and felt.

Even honest discourse can be misinterpreted as shillary. And like Stormdancer777, I've been called worse as well.