the info gathering of ATS members

i have noticed an uptick in posts that revolve around how do members reach their conclusions on a variety of subjects. i have responded to a couple asking what their intentions were...the subject at hand...or the process in which we here at ATS form our opinions on said subjects and the course of action to be taken. what is apparent is the LACK of interest on the facts of the subject, but the interest seems to revolve around on how we... learned about it, our thoughts about it, our opinions on what should be done about it.
to me this is obviously a study on us as to assertain "GROUP THOUGHT", and "GROUP CONCLUSIONS" my question is why the sudden interest? is it purely curiosity, academic research, or somebody compiling this into a data-base to be used later?

Interesting theory. I'm sure many normal ATS members are interested in how the public forms opinions, too - I am. But there may certainly be merit to there be a more 'coordinated' effort, too. I know if I ran an advertising company, and wanted to better understand a particular demographic, I'd try to interact with them directly. Can you give some more specific examples of what you're talking about though?

And, by the way, what caused you to decided to study this phenomena? (kidding!)

Originally posted by Ian McLean
Interesting theory. I'm sure many normal ATS members are interested in how the public forms opinions, too - I am. But there may certainly be merit to there be a more 'coordinated' effort, too. I know if I ran an advertising company, and wanted to better understand a particular demographic, I'd try to interact with them directly. Can you give some more specific examples of what you're talking about though?

And, by the way, what caused you to decided to study this phenomena? (kidding!)

i'm sure you have seen posts like this in the past, but pay attention to the focus of the O.P. and you'll get my drift

www.abovetopsecret.com...

i have seen other one like this, but i'm too lazy to post each and every one

reply to post by Ian McLean


they also never answer a direct question put to them. they will tend to answer a question with a question, or veer off of the topic to some related information. if one has studied oratory and debate, language patterns emerge,even from someone who has been away from the discipline a long time. this is why political speech becomes boring..as it is intended to be...it is not direct, and it is not clear. wordsmiths assume an arrogance of selfworth and intellect, when all that happens is that they lose their power to affectively communicate.

Well first off I’d like to know who this “they” is you constantly refer to. That might help us form an unbiased conclusion, by actually reading their post instead of just your interpretation of their intentions.

reply to post by jimmyx


Sounds like you're talking about deliberate 'disinfo' techniques. There's quite a few threads on that on ATS. For example, check out Skyfloating's recent thread.

It's an interesting topic. One thing I think is important to notice, like you said: the drowning out of actual productive conversation with 'volume': in terms of strongly-worded rhetoric with no real constructive purpose, and in terms of 'blanketing' an area of discussion with confusing and contradictory opinions.

The major trick seems to revolve around making what is "off-topic" a matter of opinion.

reply to post by jimmyx


Well, it should be an experiment that proves the human being is a wholly independent creature who craves freedom and self-governance above all other things. If we're being watched, and we are, then the people who waste their time will know how stupid we think they are.

Originally posted by Ian McLean
reply to post by jimmyx

 

Sounds like you're talking about deliberate 'disinfo' techniques. There's quite a few threads on that on ATS. For example, check out Skyfloating's recent thread.

It's an interesting topic. One thing I think is important to notice, like you said: the drowning out of actual productive conversation with 'volume': in terms of strongly-worded rhetoric with no real constructive purpose, and in terms of 'blanketing' an area of discussion with confusing and contradictory opinions.

The major trick seems to revolve around making what is "off-topic" a matter of opinion.

exactly... i tend to be pulled in by these posts with the expectation of meaningful discourse, only to find a different agenda. i tend to think we are being studied like caged lab rats. it is disconcerting to say the least. and by the way if anybody is interested, you might want to check out who the actual board members and "associates" are of the TRUSTe company located at the bottom of each and every page. it takes a few minutes of your time, but you will be interested in " their past and present work"

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by jimmyx

 

Well, it should be an experiment that proves the human being is a wholly independent creature who craves freedom and self-governance above all other things. If we're being watched, and we are, then the people who waste their time will know how stupid we think they are.

i agree, and this site could be used to develope a cross section data-base of rather simple but effective criteria on how people evaluate data that is presented to them.

example:

strongly believe in UFO's........1
somewhat believe in UFO's.......2
unsure.......3
don't believe in UFO's......4
strongly don't believe in UFO's.......5

each post would be compiled with either the medium, or mean, based on the numbers to form an emerging and/or changing profile.

another example:

when people see the post headline...PROOF OF ALIENS!!!!...it is responded to in a frenzied and emotional way, no matter if "the video" turns out to be a simply constructed pie plate thrown into the air. the gamut of responses run from disbelief and anger, to hopeful acceptance. each can be assigned a different number on the scale. this can be used to evaluate on how to present the subject by way of the government, and through the media.

Originally posted by jimmyx
each post would be compiled with either the medium, or mean, based on the numbers to form an emerging and/or changing profile.

I like the way you're thinking - but be careful, it's easy to extrapolate too far without evidence! Have you read Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars? Regardless of the actual validity of the particular claims there, it's a fascinating read.

My point in mentioning it: I feel that with regards to topical discussion, belief, argument, and motivation can be modeled, in effect, in a similar manner to how that document describes current, capacitance, and induction. The implications of that, if true, are startling.

Originally posted by jimmyx
another example:

when people see the post headline...PROOF OF ALIENS!!!!...it is responded to in a frenzied and emotional way, no matter if "the video" turns out to be a simply constructed pie plate thrown into the air. the gamut of responses run from disbelief and anger, to hopeful acceptance. each can be assigned a different number on the scale. this can be used to evaluate on how to present the subject by way of the government, and through the media.

At this point what you are describing is AI. In order to extrapolate emotional inferences the machine would also have to understand context. And that would be possible only with an artificial intelligence engine.

Originally posted by Ian McLean

Originally posted by jimmyx
each post would be compiled with either the medium, or mean, based on the numbers to form an emerging and/or changing profile.

I like the way you're thinking - but be careful, it's easy to extrapolate too far without evidence! Have you read Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars? Regardless of the actual validity of the particular claims there, it's a fascinating read.

My point in mentioning it: I feel that with regards to topical discussion, belief, argument, and motivation can be modeled, in effect, in a similar manner to how that document describes current, capacitance, and induction. The implications of that, if true, are startling.

interesting, i'll check into the book, as long as it is not a primer on how power=current x voltage., but silent weapons for quiet wars, sounds like a decent read.

Originally posted by jimmyx
my question is why the sudden interest? is it purely curiosity, academic research, or somebody compiling this into a data-base to be used later?

Why do you wanna know?


You data gathering or somefink? Coppah?