ATS Banning Practices?

Any discussion related to ATS goes here

Re: ATS Banning Practices?

Postby mojo » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:00 am

Jack'sDead wrote: Very un-professional. [-X


yet not all that surprising to many of us.
User avatar
mojo
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 4:00 pm


Re: ATS Banning Practices?

Postby torbjon » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:59 am

Thanks Jack,

We need to document that ATS is still not honoring the statements issued by their Contact Us auto responder.

I had a long conversation with Bill Irvine and Mark Allin regarding this exact same subject some months ago here in these threads. They stated that they did indeed receive my attempts at civil communication with them but that they intentionally chose to ignore them (and me). They further went on to say that it was an isolated incident.

It would seem that they are intentionally ignoring you as well, and that we have another isolated incident.

I wonder how many more "isolated incidents" it will take before the phrase "standard company policy" can be used?

===
(satire)

FLASH! This just in:
Everybody on the face of the planet has just contracted a fatal virus and will be dead before they finish reading this.
No cause for alarm as this is only an isolated incident.
And now back to our regularly scheduled program (in progess)
==========
Expendable Guy. The show is no good without them.
User avatar
torbjon
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:08 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: ATS Banning Practices?

Postby Jack'sDead » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:39 pm

Coincidentally enough, I did some poking around in the days leading up to my banning. I noticed that a good number of former members now listed as banned, had actually been there for quite some time and had racked up a large number of "points." Now compare that fact with the relatively low number of long-term members still in good standing over there who post regularly. Now factor in that small number of members who might soon be axed, as I was, with no warning or explanation. Adding the three points together, the signs all pont to one place, a-g-e-n-d-a-.

I have had many members tell me that they came to that site specifically because I was there, and to read my posts and threads. Or more that I was the reason they kept checking back anyway, once they had visited. You would think that facts like this might give the owners some pause in dealing with any sort of infraction that I may have committed, and others like me.

At best they might argue that someone like me "hurts" their bottom line. That they are willing to sacrifice quality in favor of quantity. But even that doesn't really add up, considering that I did nothing to interfere with their revenue. I didn't go around trolling boards letting obscenities fly gratuitously and derailing discussions, and I didn't start a thousand threads on why pot should be legal.


In the end, I see it as they are carrying out some un-published agenda. Take the rule on posting foul language for example. They have auto censors that will snip, say an f-bomb for example. What they seemed to always frown upon, was the people who would try to circumvent the auto-censors. I was warned once about the evasion, and from then on, went ahead and spelled the word right out so that it could be auto-snipped. No problem with that for a long time. In fact, they had a mode you could "purchase" with points, that would allow you to read what had been typed without the snip. In other words, so that you could read the bad words.

Then just before my first banning, a fairly new mod spanked me several times for swearing, even though I had not evaded the auto-censors. I told him that it had never been a problem before, and he basically told me "too bad, it's a problem now." So the whole point of that little story is this. That they don't want you to know exactly what the rules are, because they are applied selectively for other than the reasons stated. Much like law-enforcement these days in the age of the NWO.
...You can call me, Joker!
User avatar
Jack'sDead
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 6:04 am
Location: New York

Re: ATS Banning Practices?

Postby GigaShadow » Thu Oct 16, 2008 5:40 am

Any one follow how jose escamillea the rods videographer got banned off ATS this past summer. I couldn't beleive how ATS let the guy get beaten over the head from bashers attacking jose on his vids and opinions. ATS was more interested in banning jose rather than the attackers who hounded him into a defensive stance..
User avatar
GigaShadow
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:48 pm

Re: ATS Banning Practices?

Postby Chorlton » Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:51 am

GigaShadow wrote:Any one follow how jose escamillea the rods videographer got banned off ATS this past summer. I couldn't beleive how ATS let the guy get beaten over the head from bashers attacking jose on his vids and opinions. ATS was more interested in banning jose rather than the attackers who hounded him into a defensive stance..


He was connected, albeit tenuously, to the Hoaxer, Gridkeeper/John Lenard Walson/Simon Anderson
His language, if I remember before I was banned, was a little errrr 'fruity'then again any dealing withs Gridkeeper/John Lenard Walson would do that to you as he's as mad as a march hare

Then again... Rods.?????? PLEEEEEEEZE
I have become that which I always despised and feared........Old !

My greatest wish, would be to own my own scrapyard.
User avatar
Chorlton
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:02 pm

Re: ATS Banning Practices?

Postby AgitatedBrain » Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:40 am

Here's an interesting question. Who's logging in banned members? I've seen it done. Not the login process in itself, but the banned members name in the members who are online list at the bottom of their page.
AgitatedBrain
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:40 am

Re: ATS Banning Practices?

Postby Jack'sDead » Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:01 pm

AgitatedBrain wrote:Here's an interesting question. Who's logging in banned members? I've seen it done. Not the login process in itself, but the banned members name in the members who are online list at the bottom of their page.


Interesting indeed. I would say that first off, they are probably doing it to make it look like they have more traffic than they actually do, which is right up their alley as far as ethics go. But they are also probably diggin through these accounts, accesing the banned members U2U's and such. Going over the profile from within, with a fine-ttothed comb. Perhaps even editing original material posted by the since banned member.

Very interesting indeed. I'm sure they would just try to explain it away as some "glitch" though.
...You can call me, Joker!
User avatar
Jack'sDead
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 6:04 am
Location: New York

Previous

Google

Return to ATS Watch

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

cron