ATS Decorum for members and moderators : May 2023

a reply to: purplemer

I try not to get to involved in the forum but I appreciate these questions and even more so the way you presented them:


1. Wikileaks would never be banned, in fact more wikileaks-type-information is encouraged. We do not rely on Google ads, angel-investors, or anyone else to fund the website, therefore we are not beholden to their standards. From a business perspective, I understand if the motivating factor of a website is monetary gain, this subject would result in a massive decrease in revenue. If at any time, under the current ownership we encounter such issues, the solution would be to create a members only forum that is inaccessible to web crawling bots but accessible to all logged in users. Wikileaks is an extremely important resource and it's unfathomable to think it was ever prohibited here. This was initially planned for the "mud pit" but it was unanimously decided to close it permanently as we feel the ATS brand is worth far more than the way it was represented by the personality types
who posted on that forum. Because we have no monetary interest in the website we are not afraid to say that we aim for a community more focused on deep dives and fact finding than engaging in crude and obnoxious behavior. We value quality over quantity and do not aim t appeal to the lowest common denominator.

2. P/gate is an interesting topic because I was personally ahead of this subject and the Clinton/Podesta e-mail dumps connected the dots and brought code-words to surface. This was such a deep-world-wide revelation that it was immediately bombarded with easily disprovable misinformation / disinformation in order to create a strawman and then discredit the entire idea. Our research led us to from the Clintons and their push to create CPS like systems in other parts of the world, Laura Silsbee's arrest for Trafficking' in the Dominican Republic, Jorge Pouala who was on Interpol's most wanted sent by Aberdeen (Clinton's assistant), her subsequent contract with Amber Alert, , Mark Dutrouux who was arrested and disclosed the inner working of "the network", implications towards the President of Belgium, all the way to artists like Louise Bourgeois, and Marina Abramovic. Epstein is a choir boy compared to the depths of depravity that takes place. The movies Hostel 1 and 2 pretty much explain how the system works. Pay close attention to when she mentions "I am taking you to the ART show".

I digress. As we were uncovering these revelations it seemed like the internet as whole was focused on a Pizza Parlor devoid of a basement which resulted in someone accidentally firing an AR 15 into the floor, after which the media used the event to establish causation between sites like this and violence. Thus, we come to the problem of disinformation covering up very real information then we are faced with the prospect of "becoming fact checkers" in order to preserve the truth and separate it from the misinformation purposefully meant to discredit it. Yet who are we to decide what is true and what is not? Therefore we run into a dilemma.

I suppose in a situation like that it would also warrant creating a sub forum only accessible to members but if the disinformation (like the pizza parlor) is easily disprovable and in fact far LESS sinister than the truth it is attempting to cover up then it might become necessary to ward off the disinformation campaigns and I would hope the community is sharp minded enough to shut it down immediately on their own through discourse and rebuttal, such as the fact that the Pizza Parlor does not have a basement. If that is an established fact and some people persist with pushing the narrative then the situation would have to be re-evaluated.

There is one other factor to this issue and that is deeply graphic content. I have heard podcasts going into such graphic detail that I have to turn it off simply because it feel like it's material that the speaker is relishing in delivering rather than the way most of us absorb it, which is with reluctance, holding our stomachs, and attempting not to vomit. Therefore that would once again warrant some type of action but I think it would come right back to the idea of "Forum Decorum".

It is my hope that next time something similar breaks the ATS community will be rid of the individuals who lack decorum and instead filled with individuals who can discuss these very sensitive subjects in a way that it is palatable to the average person, rather than so disgusting in detail that it drives away the average person and invites sick minded individuals who enjoy hearing the details as they are imaging them.

3. Linking individuals to such activities should never be an issue if proof is provided. It's difficult for me to imagine why that would ever be the case. Yet I have found that topics tend to get redundant which was a problem we noticed about the "mud-pit". Many topics were simply repetition of subjects already deeply discussed yet attempting to push the envelope in vulgarity for the sake of being graphic.

4. Linking to hacked information: I am also very disappointed to hear that "hacked information" was ever a banned subject. Elon Musk revealed how the DOJ and FBI attempted to quash the Hunter BIden Story and that Twitter employees and staff new within one hour that the "hacked information" ban wasn't going to hold water yet they did it anyway. Likewise, Mark Zuckerberg revealed the same on Facebook. I would imagine Above Top Secret should be the place where this type of information breaks and has similar information readily available months before the mainstream media has to admit its authenticity.

That being said, doxing anyone, even Hilary Clinton can never be acceptable. It's just bad form. Therefore it would depend on the information being disclosed because an individual who is worthy of being doxxed would suffer deeper from exposing their crimes and actions.

It is worth noting that it is important to also ensure information does not fall under defamation, libel, or slander and use the legal measurement to determine the necessity to ensure the accuracy of allegations. If it is a private individual or even a semi-publics individual according to legal standards then the standard of malicious intent is lessened and therefore the information must be scrutinized that much more to avoid legal issues for the individual poster and ATS as a whole. However, A -list celebrities and politicians are considered "public figures" and therefore the information must be weighed against the standard of "malice" which is posting information or allegations while knowing they are false. Thus, there is far more room to call out public figures than there is semi-public figures and private individuals.

In essence, as long as it doesn't put ATS in legal liability then calling out US politicians or anyone else should never be an issue.

Thank you for asking the question and I am confident this helps people understand where we stand on important issues and the nuances that come along with each subject.

Please note: this reply is NOT an invitation to debate these topics as this would be "thread drifting".

originally posted by: DirtWasher
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

I've been coming to ATS since 2006. I've seen how it has changed, especially in the last few years. I never even thought about the report button until 2022. If someone violates ATS T&C, that's one thing, but if someone violates the most basic 21st century common decency so many times that I encounter it in my short visits, yes I'm going to report it.

Changing the mood is the point.

I've lived long enough to know that it isn't my place to change other peoples' minds based on my own belief system. There will always be people that you'll disagree with. It's wrong to think you can make everyone think like you do. In fact, that's one of society's issues today. Definition of what's right and wrong are being changed and forced on people who have no ill intent but then are called bigots and racists for not accepting the latest narrative.

Don't report me.

I'd like to add in regards to "free speech" that because someone throws a turd at you what we collectively desire is the ability to reply with dignity or humor rather than a knee-jerk turd throw of your own. There is even the option of ignoring such posts which I find best as they will desist from insulting you since you give them no satisfaction. 100% free speech is more of an ideal than actuality. We can all find reasons why that is but is that any different from how a conversation among a group sitting together would be? Acting online as we would in person-to-person conversation is my personal ideal of behavior online
.
If anyone thinks I'm unwilling to push the boundaries note that I created many threads challenging the events around Sandy Hook. Touchy subjects are those most in need of discussion, something requiring multiple sides of view. It doesn't mean I have no respect for those killed but when authorities don't provide full details the public is still able to ask questions when reported facts don't add up.

I defend the right of people to display the confederate flag but that doesn't mean I defend slavery as an institution. I doubt you will find anyone else who has had their life threatened by the KKK that will also defend their right to speak publicly but that's me all props to Voltaire.

Live long enough and you may find your own views changing with experience. Keep in mind what feels absolute truth today may not be next year. Retaining an open mind allows us all to see how others view the world. Like being against Apartheid as policy in South Africa while understanding that allowing mass Democratic rule would lead to a dysfunctional state that we see today. Life is full of such contradictions.

I believe every human has enormous potential and ATS offers an extraordinary platform to expand who we are. Most of all lets continue being a community. ATS is also real life going on, abstracted to be sure but the people at the other end of every post are just as real as you are.
Cheers,
ATA

originally posted by: Quadrivium
I see it a little differently.
People that are easily offended haven't had much adversity in their lives.
They haven't ever had any real big problems.
They are offended because their lives suck and they take everything for granted.
Just my opinion though.

They may be easily offended precisely because they had adversity and/or big problems in their lives.

The fact is we do not know (except in rare cases) the person "on the other side of the screen", we know nothing about them, their life and their problems.

When discussing "hot" topics, what's the problem with being polite to people we don't know?

I don't understand how it can be free speech if that speech can only be made in a form that is approved by someone else. While I agree that it is unnecessary and adolescent to resort to name calling and nay saying, that is objective and difficult to implement and enforce. For example, if someone says something really stupid, can you tell them they said something really stupid? Or is that a personal attack, insult, off-topic, rude? Depending on who is reading it and how they see things, it could be any of those or none of them. Personally, I call it truth.

I know I have had posts removed for various violations when I had maintained a respectful attitude toward the discussion while receiving numerous backhanded, and some obvious, insults. Those posts went unnoticed. But when I responded to them in their own language, my posts were the ones removed. Brining that up to the mods is pointless. The answer is: the mods decisions are final. All in all I think the mods here are pretty awesome, but not perfect. But then, I didn't expect them to be...

Final doesn't mean fair. I know that no one promised a fair and equal world where everything is always the way we like it. But I don't like it when people pretend its something it isn't either. I do like ATS - very much. And I truly enjoy interacting with the majority of the people here. But there are some very dedicated left leaners (paid agents if you ask me) that drag down thread after thread spewing the same venom over and over again. They carry anger from one thread to the next. They typically go after the same people time and time again. I guess they call that, "...by any means necessary." It really gets old when you know others see it and nothing gets done about it.

I say if you want to enforce rules and regulations then enforce them straight across the board. If you intend to let this little one slide and jump all over that one, why bother doing it at all? Its just mixed messages and the appearance of favoritism. Of course, that will be called over-aggressive censorship. In other words, I appreciate how difficult the task is and I appreciate those who do it, on their own time, for free.

a reply to: ats admin

Sorry Ats Amin, darko & ats members

Going through some sleep deprivation and all kinds of sleeping issues the last two week's, Just waiting for the big crash where I will sleep a day away and readjust sleeping habits.

originally posted by: ats admin

4. Linking to hacked information: I am also very disappointed to hear that "hacked information" was ever a banned subject.

For clarity. Links to websites or posting "dark links" to content that has been illegally obtained was actually something that could get our hosting terminated. Terms & Conditions of website hosting companies often contain language to that effect.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: Quadrivium
I see it a little differently.
People that are easily offended haven't had much adversity in their lives.
They haven't ever had any real big problems.
They are offended because their lives suck and they take everything for granted.
Just my opinion though.

They may be easily offended precisely because they had adversity and/or big problems in their lives.

The fact is we do not know (except in rare cases) the person "on the other side of the screen", we know nothing about them, their life and their problems.

When discussing "hot" topics, what's the problem with being polite to people we don't know?

There is absolutely no problem with being polite. Sometimes, "throwing a turd" is called for though. I usually find it so with those that refuse to accept objective reality. That claim you are being dishonest or accusing because you posted a factual statement or study.
These folks want to to deny objectivity and want you to agree with their subjectivity.
We all have "our truth", which is subjective, that comes from our feelings and our life experiences.
There is objective truth as well, it is true regardless of your feelings or life experiences.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

For clarity. Links to websites or posting "dark links" to content that has been illegally obtained was actually something that could get our hosting terminated. Terms & Conditions of website hosting companies often contain language to that effect.

Thats fair enough.. But kinda weird how we could see content.. Not post it until it appeared in filtered white washed form in msm. This is heavy censorship and control meaning we oftentime could not break real news..

a reply to: ats admin

Thank you for your reply.. A breath of fresh air tbh.. A change of narrative.

a reply to: Quadrivium

The forum for throwing turds is Here.

But people could not and would not keep it confined to there despite many requests to do so and what seemed like hourly PSA’s explaining ends were not in the Mudpit.

The membership was challenged and failed to meet expectations. So it was archived.

Your account predates the Mudpit by four years. You may recall that people were more civil, that popular threads were more interesting to read and participation was more discussion than brinksmanship. Was that a bad thing?

a reply to: Quadrivium

Mud pit was tripe.. MK ultra on steroids. Dumb you down and focused on trivials, I am so glad its gone..

Good riddance..

Although it might not always be my feeling, but 95 percent of the time I've long realized the mods are actually doing me a favor by removing stuff.

Some of it may have future visa-legalities, and all kinds of self-incrimination involved I'm not even thinking about at the time of posting.

But then you think back ... mmm yeah, not such a good idea after all.

Now I look at it more as a safety-net, or even a free service.

a reply to: Ahabstar
There was plenty of mud throwing then as well. If I remember correctly (probably not), it was one of the reasons for the Mud pit, to try and give it an outlet.
ATS is my favorite place to come for news/topics of all types.
I don't do TV or twitter and rarely FB.
I honestly love this place and think "Hotel California" should be our theme song; "you can checkout anytime you like, but you can never leave".

Subjectivly I can understand what we would like to see happen.
Objectively, I think we are too (intentionally) divided.
There's always hope! I can and will try to MAGA (Make ATS Great Again).

originally posted by: halfoldman
Although it might not always be my feeling, but 95 percent of the time I've long realized the mods are actually doing me a favor by removing stuff.

Some of it may have future visa-legalities, and all kinds of self-incrimination involved I'm not even thinking about at the time of posting.

But then you think back ... mmm yeah, not such a good idea after all.

Now I look at it more as a safety-net, or even a free service.

Totally!
I have that "why the hell was that removed! " moment, then realize it was the right call.
I only had one (almost) bad call where a Mod thought I was a banned user, because of some of my post.
The same Mod looked out for me, and removed several (numerous) post, I shouldn't have posted (beer), when I had a (larger) drinking problem.
I now believe this mod is the best on the site and deserves a huge raise .
They really are one of the fairest mods I have encountered and do a great job!

a reply to: Guyfriday

Are you talking about the Jewish Shoah, or are you talking about the Armenian holocaust?

You know damn well what I'm talking about.

Obviously, I'm talking about the attempted systematic extermination of Jews in WWii (plus other undesirables) by Nazis. You know, gas chamber, ovens, mass burn pits, round ups, etc? The "Final Solution"?

THAT Holocaust.



There is no "both sides" to that.

Decorum for members and moderators.

Super-moderators on the other hand ... there's the dude in the shopping trolley wearing the elk-head!

a reply to: SirHardHarry

There are a lot of issues about the Shoah that needs to be discussed. Why do you feel that it shouldn't be talked about? We can discuss the issue without having to be an apologist for what happened. It's pretty clear to anyone that the situation happened, but the reasons and people behind it should be discussed.

Currently though if you bring up issues that aren't part of the "Official Narrative" you get called a denier, speaking of which did you go check out what the word Holocaust translates too? At any rate there still is a lot that needs to be uncovered about it, and blindly agreeing to the "Official Narrative" are arguing against anything else, doesn't really do any good in preventing this type of thing from happening again.

Oh my God... I went to my existing thread on Soros-backed DA/Prosecutors to add the good news below, and it wouldn't let me add. I knew creating new threads in the Mud-Pit was disabled. But adding to existing threads, in order to maintain chronological continuity of an ongoing subject/saga/etc., is also disabled? By design? Please say that was a mistake of overkill.
🤞

May 4, 2023

SOROS BACKED DISTRICT ATTORNEY KIM GARNER RESIGNS

I've haven't been following her criminal actions, but the people of Missouri (St. Louis especially) have, apparently.

Today, pressure from the public (and law abiding officials) caused Prosecutor KIM GARDNER to resign.

Source A: twitter.com...

Source B: www.wsj.com...

Source C: www.foxnews.com...

Apparently this must be really bad news for CBS-NBC-ABC-CNN-MSNBC, NYTimes, WaPost, etc.., because as of this moment, her resignation announcement is still missing in action, even though it happened 5 hours ago.

PROGRESS IS GOOD!

originally posted by: carewemust
Oh my God... I went to my existing thread on Soros-backed DA/Prosecutors to add the good news below, and it wouldn't let me add. I knew creating new threads in the Mud-Pit was disabled. But adding to existing threads, in order to maintain chronological continuity of an ongoing subject/saga/etc., is also disabled? By design? Please say that was a mistake of overkill.
🤞

May 4, 2023

SOROS BACKED DISTRICT ATTORNEY KIM GARNER RESIGNS

I've haven't been following her criminal actions, but the people of Missouri (St. Louis especially) have, apparently.

Today, pressure from the public (and law abiding officials) caused Prosecutor KIM GARDNER to resign.

Source A: twitter.com...

Source B: www.wsj.com...

Source C: www.foxnews.com...

Apparently this must be really bad news for CBS-NBC-ABC-CNN-MSNBC, NYTimes, WaPost, etc.., because as of this moment, her resignation announcement is still missing in action, even though it happened 5 hours ago.

PROGRESS IS GOOD!

a reply to: carewemust

Here it is on ABC. From 5 hours before your post here at

May 4, 2023, 4:07 PM

abcnews.go.com...

Maybe you should make a new thread since I don't think you can add to archived posts.