A flood of 'old' members returning to ATS.

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
And there's also a certain wife of a certain triple-Z Supermod who left ATS and never returned...not even for a peep. Like a Banshee, she floated away into the ether, ne'er to return.

RANT too. What's going on around here?

Somebody once said "it's better to burn out than to fade away". I guess they were right.

Oh, and "welcome back" to the old-schoolers, yeah even the member who left for one whole day!

Peace

RANT posted today .

Really though who knows what has happened to our "lost" friends. This is the nature of the internet.

These last couple of weeks I have really noticed an increase of activity from people who haven’t posted in the last 12 months or so.
Is this coincidence or is there a common reason behind the return of these members?

Can you guys post some names so I know exactly who it is that has returned? All this mention of folks returning, but umm...I haven't noticed. Although I'm still a semi-n00b myself, I guess, so maybe I just don't know of these ppl when I see them.

Oh...................did he?

Well let's put it this way, I don't notice him and Gaz posting as much as they used to during the time I'm on here. It must be my deodorant.

Peace

Originally posted by Dr Love
Well let's put it this way, I don't notice him and Gaz posting as much as they used to during the time I'm on here. It must be my deodorant.

When yo' name is Dr Luuurvve, even yo' stank be damn sexy stank.

I'm Rick James, beeyatch!

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
Can you guys post some names so I know exactly who it is that has returned?

The only one that has dawned on me so far is Agent47.

Then of course there's that member that was gone for one whole day!

Peace

There have been a few that have announced their return. Mainly I'm noticing people posting that have been an ATS member for longer than a year but I've never seen them post since I've been here.
I'm seeing lots of 2003's and 2004's popping up.

If you guys cannot provide actual usernames as proof of that which you posit, then I will consider your "Flood of old members returning" hypothesis successfully DEBUNKED.

Fine! Here are some links.

My ATS Return
Im Back!! Or if you don't know me then Hello!
I'm back
Well it's been forever!
A flood of 'old' members returning to ATS.

Originally posted by Umbrax
Fine!

Here are some links.

My ATS Return
Im Back!! Or if you don't know me then Hello!
I'm back
Well it's been forever!
A flood of 'old' members returning to ATS.

Okay, let's look at your "evidence" then, shall we? And I use the term "evidence" lightly - a couple of links to a conspiracy theory website isn't exactly something which you could take to court, now is it?

Member A: My ATS Return
Username: UnknownOrigins
Registered: 2004-2-16
Last active: 2005-1-4
Time inactive: ~11 months

Member B: Im Back!! Or if you don't know me then Hello!
Username: Agent47
Registered: 2004-2-22
Last active: 2004-8-24
Time inactive: ~4 months

Member C: I'm back
Username: Zeta_101
Registered: 2005-7-16
Last active: 2005-9-28
Time inactive: ~3 months

Member D: Well it's been forever!
Username: JamesLimelight
Registered: 2003-4-29
Last active: 2004-8-8
Time inactive: ~16 months

Member E: A flood of 'old' members returning to ATS.
Username: N/A
Registered: N/A
Last active: N/A
Time inactive: N/A

Now, let's examine the hypothesis in question, which is, "A flood of 'old' members returning to ATS". The key terms in the hypothesis are "flood", "old" and "returning". Since the terms themselves are subjective and no qualifying ranges are presented, I shall use my own interpretations, unless the member Umbrax wishes to provide some qualifiers forthwith. My interpretations are as follows:

Old = Registered more than 12 months ago.
Returning = A period of inactivity in excess of 4 months.
Flood = 10 members or more

Member A: Qualifies as old and returning.
Member B: Qualifies as old. Does not qualify as returning.
Member C: Does not qualify for old. Does not qualify for returning.
Member D: Qualifies as old and returning.
Member E: Not a member.

As can clearly be seen from the above assessment, there are only two members who qualify to be considered part of this "flood". Furthermore, a "flood" being 10 or more qualifying members, it would seem that there is indeed NO flood at all. In fact, I would say it's more of a dribble, which is a much kinder word than I would use to describe this ridiculous hypothesis, unsupported by the empirical evidence as it is.

You see, this is what happens when you conspiracy nutjobs get together with your pathetic little theories. Pretty soon the entire Internet will be a-buzz with the "ATS Flood Theory". "Floodgate", I'm sure it will be called. And no matter how much evidence is brought to light proving it wrong over and over, it will still survive enough for scam artists to sell DVDs about it, and enough for conspiracy wackos who are six-degrees-of-separation from reality to entertain each other with "CIA linked to Floodgate" posts until kingdom come.

I see the obfuscation techniques are already being used, like posting a link to the same thread in which the original hypothesis was posted. The old circular citing method. A cites B, who cites C, who cites A and suddenly it's a "fact".

You guys crack me up.

A flood of 'old' members returning to ATS: DEBUNKED






[edit on 2005-12-22 by wecomeinpeace]

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
\
Member B: Im Back!! Or if you don't know me then Hello!
Username: Agent47
Registered: 2004-2-22
Last active: 2004-8-24
Time inactive: ~4 months


Old = Registered more than 12 months ago.
Returning = A period of inactivity in excess of 4 months.
Flood = 10 members or more

Member A: Qualifies as old and returning.
Member B: Qualifies as old. Does not qualify as returning.
Member C: Does not qualify for old. Does not qualify for returning.
Member D: Qualifies as old and returning.
Member E: Not a member.

Well I registered on Feb 21 2004. So I've been here over a year check.

Then call me crazy but with my math and granted I may be on a limb here but you will find in my post logs a post on 8/24/2004 and then a post on 12/20/2005.

The total number of days between those two posts is?

478 days or a year and some change.

Looks like the flood may still be in effect.



[edit on 12/22/2005 by Agent47]

Okay, I've got one.
Besides Agent47, I've seen Jonna posting the last few days.

WCIP

I think you've been spending a little too much time in the WTC forums. You seem to be suffering from some kind of post traumatic stress disorder.

Can I hook you up with a day of indulgence at a day spa? Or maybe some electro-shock therapy? We're all nice people in BTS. There are no evil members citing whack NTSB reports over and over and over and over and over. You can let all that go now. Welcome, it's happy time!!

Gotta love the guy!

Peace



[edit on 22-12-2005 by Dr Love]

Originally posted by Agent47
Then call me crazy but with my math and granted I may be on a limb here but you will find in my post logs a post on 8/24/2004 and then a post on 12/20/2005.

The total number of days between those two posts is?

478 days or a year and some change.

Looks like the flood may still be in effect.

Pfft! Okay, so I read the date wrong. Sue me. You're still 7 members short of this "flood" you keep talking about, assuming that 10 members out of 50,000 could be considered as such. I was being exceedingly generous, and you can't even meet that.

DontTreadOnMe
Okay, I've got one.
Besides Agent47, I've seen Jonna posting the last few days.

Oooh, let's see now...

Registered: 2003-9-19 = Old
Last active: Sorry, but he never took a break. Biggest I can find is 2 weeks
Time inactive: N/A

Sorry, but the immense flood is still merely a drool down the chin of some conspiracy idiot. And I notice you guys have even gotten a moderator sucked in by your conspiracy crappola. tsk tsk...

Dr Love wrote:
I think you've been spending a little too much time in the WTC forums. You seem to be suffering from some kind of post traumatic stress disorder.

You conspiracy kooks are all the same. When your pet theory is proven wrong, you simply resort to ad hominem and insults. Sad really... :shk:

Any more "evidence" for ATS Dribblegate?

Okay, so I just didn't see Jonna, but he's not among the new returns.
My bad.

Maybe ya'll are just seeing old names when you are doing the tagging??

Just for those who may indeed be returning and don't know me: I was JOKING!


I'm really a nice guy...really I am...




















...kinda..

[edit on 2005-12-23 by wecomeinpeace]

I think im an oldish member ( 1 year and a bit)- and i havent been here for ages until the other day and it has all changed!!

Originally posted by misspickle
I think im an oldish member ( 1 year and a bit)- and i havent been here for ages until the other day and it has all changed!!

God Lord!
where have you been misspickle?

Nanna_of_5 (or 6) was back last week.


Yet i wonder why some have left...Masked Avatar was one of my favorites.

Dr. Love, its not your deodorant, its your extremely sexual appeal that drives the women wild and out of here...to find you!!!!!

perhaps they are not returning. Just fleeing the inquisition elsewhere.

who knows