The seven rules of propaganda or fun with Shills 101.

originally posted by: Greathouse
It's quite obvious what I'm doing there. I'm making the stain statement I made in this thread.

I do apologize that it has further exposed your tactics.

And not trolling just pointing out the completely obvious to anyone of intelligence on the Internet.

I'm not sure to whom. If one reads them, your posts are jarringly inaccurate.

I'm still not sure what 'tactics' you refer to.

Anyone who bothers to read will note that you are taking those 'rules' out of context - as the most generous assessment. It is quite apparent that neither post fits those rules. Instead, it would seem that you broaden the rules so much that anything fits within them. For example, where you see "attack" what is written is "attack America."

a reply to: dollukka

My question was quite simple in that I asked you to explain yourself ,in which you have failed to address other then to say I needed to read between the lines ...save me the mental torment in which I am sure to get wrong and lay it out for all to see :>)

a reply to: Greathouse

"A fellow propagandist" you say?

Props on the thinly veiled implication there

If somebody agrees with you time and time again, perhaps they just agree with you. It's been known to happen, and doesn't always have nefarious implications.

a reply to: sosobad

I was expecting you and I knew you would instantly use rule number one in rule number three. Seriously you guys really need to get a different playbook.

a reply to: the2ofusr1
Well i gave you all the instructions i was able, if i would show you directly to thread or a persons doing it, it would be against TOS.
All you need to do is open your eyes (as I can´t do it for you) and see it yourself.

a reply to: Shamrock6

That's completely stupid nobody on earth agrees completely with what everyone else says all the time. Never does not happen ever in the world unless you are in collusion.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Which went so well with a previous post

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: sosobad

I was expecting you and I knew you would instantly use rule number one in rule number three. Seriously you guys really need to get a different playbook.

Just pointing out what you were doing. Must of hit a nerve, another tactic that propagandists use is to deny when they are wrong or make up things isn't that right? Nudge nudge wink wink

Always cool when something gets exposed when many think it's a big secret tactic.

Hearts get broken, dreams and ideals get busted to pieces.

Effective only on the ones not "in the know", or the ones who agree 100% on an issue.

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: johnwick

There was not a doubt in my mind that the group would show up.

Did you and johnwick just form a group?! Shocking.

originally posted by: AreUKiddingMe
You forgot the number one rule for shills. Try to detract attention by shouting "Shill!"

To me that's the most frustrating of all. My views are often not "correct" for a place like ATS. I am more conservative and very distrustful of the many claims of "conspiracy" thrown about here on a daily basis. Challenging the runaway and rampant illogical speculation that is on this site often gets me labeled as a "shill" by people who claim they have some sort of special insight and can "tell" because they are so very intelligent or skilled in the art of detection. This kind of thread is quite common here where someone decides to post a list designed to educate the plebeians in the art of shill detection.

But the real issue is whether or not this "list" actually is representative of a true "shill" and, when a point is detected, means said shill has been "defrocked," if you will. Or does the list reflect general behavior indulged in by a great many people who are decidedly not shills at all? The best example here is the common "ad hominem" attack against the person, not the issue. When you call someone else a "shill," which almost always lacks any hard evidence, that's exactly what you are doing. And when you claim to "know" by some sort of superior power how to tell a shill, well, that's on the list, too.

So I'm not impressed. Insisting that "shills" are on this site with the intention of disrupting it is just another unfounded conspiracy with no evidence to back it up. No one here "knows shills" any better than anyone else, and indulging in such a fantasy is simply delusional.

a reply to: Greathouse

Did I say a person agrees with everything everybody says? No. I said its not impossible for somebody to agree with everything you say on here. Does that mean that they agree with everything you say? No, it means they agree with whatever they happen to have seen you post on a website.

And now you're getting personal about things. Wasn't that another behavior you listed? Or was that somebody else that contributed to your list?

Perhaps it's you who needs a new playbook? But I will give credit where it's due: your "admit nothing, deny everything, make counter-allegations" game is strong and unwavering. *applause*

a reply to: dollukka

Here let me refresh you mind .

who try to influence the public with feelings more than realistic data, with real trustworthy and official neutral information.

Now come clean and explain this statement to the group or forever be considered a incoherent troll , at best . :>)

a reply to: the2ofusr1

As i said, it is used here in ATS in shill`s replies, if you don´t see them yourself i can´t help you. Repeat is the key !

a reply to: sosobad

Which you are intern doing in the same group and you always do it in. wink wink

This thread seems to be going exactly how I predicted. At this point there's about five of you ganging up on me all agreeing with each other and staring each other's post to make it seem like everyone else agrees with you.

Like I said " give them a little rope they will hang themselves"

Instead of on addressing the OP and admitting that propaganda does exist on the Internet (both sides) A group of you has chosen to launch ad hom attacks against me and not my statement. Every point that is being made is an attack against me not my OP.

The only conclusion I can come up with is that a group of posters wants to pretend the propaganda doesn't exist.

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: sosobad

Which you are intern doing in the same group you always do it in. wink wink

This thread seems to be going exactly how I predicted. At this point there's about five of you ganging up on me all agreeing with each other and staring each other's post to make it seem like everyone else agrees with you.

Like I said " give them a little rope they will hang themselves"

Instead of on addressing the OP and admitting that propaganda does exist on the Internet (both sides) A group of you has chosen to launch ad hom attacks against me and not my statement. Every point that is being made is an attack against me not my OP.

The only conclusion I can come up with is that a group of posters wants to pretend the propaganda doesn't exist.

Sweet. Another mind numbing "if you don't agree with me, you're a shill" thread. This is what happens when you're so self-deluded that you can't imagine how anyone in his right mind could possibly disagree with your super awesome opinions — unless of course that person is being paid to do so.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

That's funny, jonwick has left the thread am I am fending all of you off by myself. Two people sharing the same opinion on one thread does not make a group.

The group that is currently on this thread makes a group.

But again don't address the OP make it a personal attack. Rule number one and rule number three.

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: ~Lucidity

That's funny, jonwick has left the thread am I am fending all of you off by myself. Two people sharing the same opinion on one thread does not make a group.

The group that is currently on this thread makes a group.

But again don't address the OP make it a personal attack. Rule number one and rule number three.

"I am rubber you are glue, everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you!"

Play #1, Kindergarten Debating, volume 1, revised edition

a reply to: Shamrock6

No I said that. A group of posters that continuously agrees with each other and never voices deception is a bunch of liars.

Or you could agree that there is propaganda on both sides like I do. To instantly attack the thread as if propaganda doesn't exist is fallacy at its best.

The way I see it is anybody pretending the propaganda does not exist is trying to hide something. That makes me wonder about the motivation behind many people on this thread.