ATS Decorum for members and moderators : May 2023

originally posted by: some_stupid_name
I think your point is flawed, you think people don't speak to other people in real life as they speak in the mud pit and they are telling you that they do.

Not just the Mud Pit, online in general.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: shooterbrody

Pretty obvious the point went over your head.

No
It did not
I’m sad you feel you can’t express yourself, without threats of violence.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: some_stupid_name
I think your point is flawed, you think people don't speak to other people in real life as they speak in the mud pit and they are telling you that they do.

Not just the Mud Pit, online in general.

okay, but again they are telling you they speak the same way in real life.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I’m sad you feel you can’t express yourself, without threats of violence.

Where did I say I need to resort to violence? Again, the point went over your head.

originally posted by: some_stupid_name
okay, but again they are telling you they speak the same way in real life.

No, most people don't. SO had a thread on this subject years ago, it's still valid today.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: some_stupid_name
okay, but again they are telling you they speak the same way in real life.

No, most people don't. SO had a thread on this subject years ago, it's still valid today.

Nobody said most people, they simple said that they do. Also most online statistics are made up anyhow.
That last bit I made up for you.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Again
No it did not
Unless you simply make stuff up?
Are you not “most” people?
You did claim that, did you not?
I think it would be terrible going through life not expressing yourself because you are afraid, how did you put it “ getting punched”?
Self defense brings with it self esteem which makes expressing one’s self easier.
I pray you and others like you find that peace.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Are you not “most” people?

Nope, I'm not, that's why I didn't say 'all people'.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Oh
Ok then
Thanks for that clarification

Still very sad you think most people are afraid to express themselves because of threats of violence.

It seems the battle is between who you are, who you want to be, and how you want others to see you.

We are all human. Are we humane or inhumane. Do we wish to be humane or inhumane? Do we want others to see us as humane or I humane?

The struggle is becoming more real and more difficult to control. We are in a society that promotes feeding the beast. A beast that will consume all around it until it devours the person that gives it life.

If I said every though that came into my head I would be rightfully thought of as being insane. No one would think of me as just being true to myself. Nor should they.

We are connected to all living things in this planet. For a healthy relationship, we should be sensitive to the vibrations of others. If you have to ability to sense the vibrations of the environment in which you live, you will often feel things that are unpleasant, but does not require a negative response.

That is why discernment is a very important gift. And a very powerful one, when used as it should be.

a reply to: xuenchen

Hi Xuen,

My suggestion would be to chat with a mod before posting information marked as classified.

Some things will obviously be fakes, but a lot of it might be in a gray area-- could be the real thing, or not.

Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

A great suggestion for all!

Some of the posts above this one are a great example of how things can start off good but end up with insults and off-topic garbage.

You said ALL. No, I said SOME. You said ALWAYS. No, I said SOMETIMES. Etc etc etc.

FFS - just take the general concept and leave the useless nitpicking out of it. If you have to drag something down to the absolute minutia to make a point - your point probably isn't worth making.

When someone uses a colloquial saying such as, "Everybody does it." They don't mean literally every single person on Earth.

col·lo·qui·al
adjective
(of language) used in ordinary or familiar conversation; not formal or literary.

If your whole point is that not every single person does it, you don't need to create a post to present that point, then drag it out again and again. Here is an idea, in the example "Everybody does it." focus on the "it", not the "everybody".

I remember back in the old days when we had to diagram a sentence in school. The 'subject' figured prominently in that diagram. I think a lot of people here would benefit from that sort of exercise once in a while...

a reply to: Vroomfondel
Yeah, I wasn't sure why they were so caught up semantics of the statement.

originally posted by: F2d5thCavv2
a reply to: ats admin

@ats admin-- Wikileaks has interesting information, but I would suggest ATS be wary that information posted from WL and like sources does not contain classified information. Keeping that material online can bring the site all kinds of unwelcome attention from the federal government.

@all ATS members-- For those unaware, the position of the government is that even if classified information has been made publicly available, it is still considered classified and passing it around, hosting it, etc., is inviting trouble. Whether any of us agree with that policy is immaterial; the goal is to keep ATS online and not get the site zapped in the name of "information wants to be free".

Cheers

See, the *only* real problem I had with ATS not allowing wikileaks as a source because it published supposedly classified data (and I couldn't care less about wikileaks itself) is that, for instance, NYT (*specifically* NYT v. US (Pentagon Papers)) and other media outlets have also published classified leaked info, yet Wiki was banned, while NYT and others are still allowed.

Double standard. but I get the liability issue.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Still very sad you think most people are afraid to express themselves because of threats of violence.

Go back and reread that, I didn't say anyone was afraid to express themselves.

a reply to: ArMaP

I don't see it as a double standard, as one thing is to link directly to something that is considered illegal, another thing is to link to another site that, among other things, includes links to that same something that is considered illegal.

NYT & Co. v United States
How would you know if what you read was illegal? We either have freedom of press...or we don't.

Also, for all intents and purposes, real media sites may have a special protection, as recognized journalists and the like have a slightly different position regarding the law.

This is a real media site. There are no special certificates, qualifications or authority to answer to in order to be a journalist or a media site for that matter. "Real media" sites as you describe them may have some well paid attorneys for defamation and libel etc.

Here in the US, all Americans have a 1st amendment right which includes freedom of press.

I know you're in Europe so your mileage may vary.

a reply to: SirHardHarry

I get what you're saying and don't care for double standards either.

NYT, because it is also actually in print, can probably more reliably expect "freedom of the press" protections than a site on the internet. Seems like the internet has had leashes put on it that would have raised a stink had the same been done to printed news media.

But then, there are the broadcast corporations who don't print anything, so I may well be wrong about the "freedom of the press" issue.

Cheers