It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Cygnific
Atleast we know why somebody was banned. It's not nice to trow around theory as facts and not participate in talks while leaving a mess. People think they can say everything and hurt others making statements as proof for something coming not even close to a proven fact. We should not forget many innocent people died that day, and any theory should be carefully studied and only posted if it is without any doubt proof of some sort. It becomes more and more the loony tunes with ridiculous theories.
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Carnival, if history repeats it self this will escalate to fever pitch, if the admins at my old forum would have stepped in and took charge of the situation instead of fear of being called censors they would still have a forum
as I always say it is not what the cts say it is HOW they say it.
It is not about the topic and all about bad attitude.
Originally posted by BrokenVisage
Well, I don't get it, I always thought his theories and investigation into those theories was pretty well documented and substantiated compared to what others come up with on a daily basis.
Originally posted by tyranny22
I don't think the banning had to do so much with his threads and/or contributions to the site. It had more to do with the sladerous remarks he was making on other sites toward other truth movements and towards ATS itself.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Actually, to be specific, it was due to how he was using the critical response from ATS members as some kind of credibility enhancer on "safe" websites. Some of this included highly negative commentary about ATS members.
We've had lots of ATS members post very inflammatory comments about members and staff on other venues without resulting in any bannings. We felt this was different, and part of a specific strategy to inappropriate use the response of ATS members to his minimal participation in purposefully provocative topics.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Actually, to be specific, it was due to how he was using the critical response from ATS members as some kind of credibility enhancer on "safe" websites. Some of this included highly negative commentary about ATS members.
We've had lots of ATS members post very inflammatory comments about members and staff on other venues without resulting in any bannings. We felt this was different, and part of a specific strategy to inappropriate use the response of ATS members to his minimal participation in purposefully provocative topics.
Originally posted by bairdseeds
Are you paid handsomely to keep content swept and off the front pages?