ATS Hoax Involvement?

[Shawnna]

Either ATS preserves threads and posts in their entirety or they do not. You can't have it both ways.

Sure you can. We do our best to ensure threads remain intact. But when we get posts that are contrary to our terms and conditions, we consider removal... simple.

we can agree to disagree and have a nice weekend!

No.

You've made some claims and implied we're involved with hoaxes, back it up with proof. Simple.

Well Bill, in case you don't remember, I already stated here that

..........I have circumstantial 'evidence' supporting my personal opinion (that would probably not meet YOUR personal standards given your ownership position at ATS!).

Notice I acknowledged in the first post in this thread that the information supporting my opinion of your pathetic business venture would probably not meet your standards. You will not rope me into this circuitous dialog.

As for proof you delete posts arbitrarily, I'll start with this one. Prior to Centrist opening the serpo thread at ATS, a previous poster ("thirty3") created a serpo post on ATS as reported in the Serpo Summary that YOU commissioned. The link to that post brings up this dead ATS page.

And with that as proof that ATS deletes posts arbitrarily and without explanation, I'm done with giving ATS more publicity. ATS is old news and from my perspective, no more relevant that OMF.

[Access Denied]

As for proof you delete posts arbitrarily, I'll start with this one. Prior to Centrist opening the serpo thread at ATS, a previous poster ("thirty3") created a serpo post on ATS as reported in the Serpo Summary that YOU commissioned. The link to that post brings up this dead ATS page.

FWIW I can confirm that as of 1AM PST that link did not work.

Wow Shawnna, I had not seen that page before, you sure put a LOT of work into that. That is an amazing piece of work! You gave credit where credit is due to everyone...

[lost_shaman]

I pointed out statements that seemed 'fishy' and that if confronted people need to be on their toes. (For example, Jeff Ritzmans statement that he had found Other Photographs taken from the same vantage point. I could not find any. Nor could anyone else. I pointed out that perhaps he should be prepared to back that statement up if anyone should ask, etc.)

Now that you mention it, that is interesting. I for one have never been satisfied that I knew with any certainty exactly where that photo was taken (which runway? What direction?). What is a certainty is that the "congestion" photo that Jeff Ritzmann found on Google is actually a photo that portrays the exact horizon thus taken from a similar vantage point, even if being simply a manipulated version of the "congestion" photo or not. Apparently, that photo ("congestion") was a photo from O'Hare.

So to the point, if Jeff claims he found the "congestion" photo and he made the statement that he "had found Other Photographs taken from the same vantage point" and was referencing the "congestion" photo in the plural, then that makes sense.

If he's talking about other photo's other than the "congestion"photo, then this doesn't make sense to me for the simple fact that I can't presently confirm that. Which in-and-of-itself doesn't mean anything other than I too haven't seen that evidence yet.

That being said, speaking of the "00000000" photo, I believe there is enough visual information to conclude that the object is clearly in the WRONG place according to the 'involuntary witness' reports no matter which runway or direction you wish to assign to the photo. IMO, there is no way to rectify the witness reports with visual information present in the "00000000" photo considering location of the object according to the witnesses.

Now, if all the witnesses had said that the 'object' was Damn near directly over the "X" Runway and Damn near the approach lane and a direct threat to incoming aircraft, then the photo would make more sense. That simply isn't the case. What witnesses said was that the 'object' was above gate C-17 which is a rather small area looking at the airport from an aerial view.

I do remember that Jeff seemed to flip-flop on the legitimacy of the "00000000" photo. Even claiming to know the vantage point the photo was taken. And again, I'm not convinced that the vantage point is known and IMO the photo doesn't visually corroborate the witness statements.

[TheSkepticOverlord]

Firstly, torbjon, do you now see, via the single-post function, that your accusations of inserting posts into the thread were unfounded, and based on errant or misconstrued information?

Again, I'll avoid using excessive quoting in my reply as I find that tactic to be somewhat insulting to the intelligence of the people trying to read this conversation

Sequential partial quoting is an age-old (in relative terms) technique of responding to large online conversations, whether in forums or listservs. It has nothing to do with an insult, and more to do with ensuring the conversation points are kept salient.

The issues you've chosen to address are an attack against the person and not the data or the event.

It wasn't intentional, nor an attack, merely responding to what stands out as important (to me). I've not seen something in the limited data presented that needed a response... maybe a brief post to summarize something in the data you believe to be the one or two most important items?

Since you are indeed a 100% honest and up front individual with nothing to hide and nothing to be ashamed of would you be willing to post all of the data contained within that forum here for peer review?

There are other members than you who posted in the forum who had an anticipation that all posts were to remain private. Opening the content up for public purview would not be appropriate. But I'm not sure what that would reveal or prove.

I have to ask: If my goal was to 'cause problems' then why did I keep it all in Private Forum?

I didn't indicate we thought your goal was, only that we didn't intend to suffer the discussion of made-up stories about us, within our domain.

I pointed out statements that seemed 'fishy' and that if confronted people need to be on their toes. (For example, Jeff Ritzmans statement that he had found Other Photographs taken from the same vantage point. I could not find any.

But the similar vantage point image was posted in the public O'Hare UFO thread.

We have two of your data points here that are completely wrong, and refuted with publicly viewable information at the time. Can you not see why we were impatient with you, ignoring existing data just to cast dispersions?

=================================================================

I have circumstantial 'evidence' supporting my personal opinion (that would probably not meet YOUR personal standards given your ownership position at ATS!).

You still haven't posted it. So as far as I'm concerned, until we see it, you're making it up.

As for proof you delete posts arbitrarily, I'll start with this one. Prior to Centrist opening the serpo thread at ATS, a previous poster ("thirty3") created a serpo post on ATS as reported in the Serpo Summary that YOU commissioned. The link to that post brings up this dead ATS page.

It was just a matter of management.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread185005/pg1
The thread, while indeed first (by mere hours), didn't take off like the one posted by "Centrist" and in the interest of avoiding confusion, we closed it (as you can see) and directed users to the larger, more active thread. In the hoax fallout, we removed many Serpo-related threads from public view, and over time, after the dust settled, returned many of them. (I've returned this one so everyone can see that it was closed with a link to the main thread)

[Shawnna]

I have circumstantial 'evidence' supporting my personal opinion (that would probably not meet YOUR personal standards given your ownership position at ATS!).

You still haven't posted it. So as far as I'm concerned, until we see it, you're making it up.

Wrong again, Bill. You see, I have every single chat log and email related to the whole Serpo tale. In the course of my association with Centrist, Zep, Ry and others, I saved every damn thing.

Suffice it to say that were I to publish the chat log where a certain individual relayed to me the alleged source of the fake Serpo Team log originally posted on GLP, all reading this would see the source of that allegation and have as little doubt as I do of the truth that ATS was allegedly involved.

But..... regardless of what anyone may think of me at this moment in time, I am not going down that path.

As for proof you delete posts arbitrarily, I'll start with this one. Prior to Centrist opening the serpo thread at ATS, a previous poster ("thirty3") created a serpo post on ATS as reported in the Serpo Summary that YOU commissioned. The link to that post brings up this dead ATS page.

It was just a matter of management.

You're most certainly right about that. It is the management of ATS , whose pathetic attemp to portray themselves as the embodiment of altruism, trust and sincerity that I take issue with.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread185005/pg1
The thread, while indeed first (by mere hours), didn't take off like the one posted by "Centrist" and in the interest of avoiding confusion, we closed it (as you can see) and directed users to the larger, more active thread. In the hoax fallout, we removed many Serpo-related threads from public view, and over time, after the dust settled, returned many of them. (I've returned this one so everyone can see that it was closed with a link to the main thread)

As I said, you will no doubt be able to dig up anything needed to try and sway opinion your way. That is quite predictable given you hold the keys and are the manipulator of the information under scrutiny. The fact remains that ATS is nothing more than 3 guys funding their retirement at the expense of those gullible enough to fall for the b.s. flung by the likes of John Lear.

Now I really AM done with this............... really..............

*taking a deep breath*

[Access Denied]

But..... regardless of what anyone may think of me at this moment in time, I am not going down that path.

Shawnna, I for one support you and I wouldn't let Bill's inability to concede a point bother you... from what I’ve seen here so far he has an amazing ability to dump everything back on his critic’s lap... probably a good talent for a master of deception to have and it’s what you would expect I think from someone who would have no problem propagating a hoax upon the ignorant (or innocent, depending on how you look at it… ignorant can be such a cruel word which gives the ATS motto a whole new meaning in my book) masses. Just my observation, not saying he would...

“Safety In Numbers”

Let me remind you that there are a LOT of folks out there watching this go down and they can read between the lines and make up their own minds. Don’t think for one second that you or anybody else out there can’t make a difference… all it takes is the guts to say NO, I won’t be part of this charade, I want something better. I say stand up and BE HEARD and say what’s on your mind even if you might be completely wrong… there’s a reason you feel that way and it’s not always YOUR FAULT. Sure, it’s a battle, you’re going to takes some hits but one thing I’ve learned (or maybe I should say I believe) the truth will prevail.

OK that was really corny…

*taking a deep breath*

Now that’s the Spirit.

I think we could all use a break… and then come back and see if there's any meat to this.

[torbjon]

TheSkepticOverlord:

Firstly, no, I don't see any single post function as a Visitor. I took a couple of screen shots. For some reason the mouse pointer does not capture with the screen shot. In this one the mouse is over the the line "reply posted on 24-1-2007 @ 12:30 PM by SkepticOverlord" The pointer went from its normal arrow to a vertical line, but no information popped up anywhere on the screen and there was nothing clickable:

http://www.torbtown.com/screen_shot.jpg

In this one the pointer is over your link to the original image. The pointer changed from its normal arrow into a little hand with finger pointing and a url popped up at the bottom of the screen:

http://www.torbtown.com/screen_shot_2.jpg

I'm not seeing any "single post" function anywhere... or any ID / Tracking numbers for posts, or anyway to find that information... as a Visitor. I'm not looking very hard, either, just at the screen shots linked above. If that information is buried somewhere, great. If you have to be a Member to obtain that information then that rules me out as I've been banned.

As you may recall, I asked for verification regarding ID / Tracking numbers, so far you have been the only person to offer that verification. I believe I thanked you for that. Allow me to thank you again. Thank You.

As you also may recall, I conceded the point that the chances of me missing that at that time are almost (but not quite) 100%. I conceded the point Twice. Allow me to do so a third time: The chances of me missing that information at that time are almost 100% and the chances of you (or someone) inserting that information at a later date are almost NILL.

Almost.

I'm a web master. You have web masters. There are web masters here at RU. There are web masters reading. All web masters are Gods of their respective domains. We can re-write every single bit on our servers and rearrange our respective realities on a whim. This ain't static hard copy, it's active content.

Regardless, I'll concede the point a Fourth time. The information was very probably there and I just missed it. That seems to be the most likely scenario. Neither you nor I can prove otherwise so arguing about it is pretty much just a great big waste of everyones time and a nice little diversionary tactic that I personally am getting kind of bored with... aren't you?

Onward.

Yes, I'm well aware of the hows and whys and time honored custom of "sequential partial quoting". As I said, many people do it. I've done it myself. I still find it to be lazy, crass and vulgar. The key word is "partial". It takes things out of context. I don't care if you or other people do it. Some people like it and prefer it and find it helpful. Others don't. I'm one of the others. I'm not going to do it here. I feel that it is rude and cheap. We all have our personal preferences, right? It's not a big deal and certainly not something worth bickering over.

However, to illustrate the point, allow me to do it to you:

merely responding to what stands out as important (to me).

important to you... just you. You are merely (and only) responding to those things that are important to you and you alone. No one else matters. It's all about you...

See? Taking things out of context and replying to them and making issues out them seems wrong to me. I don't want to play that game. It's not fair.

Onward.

I recall the Fair Skeptics forum having the Creative Commons Copyright button on the posts. Even if it didn't (and it very well may Not have) ALL content on your site is licensed under a Creative Commons that states it's okay to use the stuff as long as you give credit where credit is due, right? So just give credit and link back to your site.

If that is not an option then let's simply ASK the few people who participated for Permission to use their stuff. It was less than a dozen. The Libra, Armap, Cheepnis, Lost Shaman, Jeff Ritzman, myself, you, and Springer... a few other stray posts here and there... less than a dozen. Cheepnis is easy to find, he still spams me on a regular basis. I'm here, Lost Shaman is here, you are here, I'm sure you can find Springer and ask him, yes? The others are probably still at your site, easy for you to locate and ask...

You say you are not sure what releasing that information would reveal or prove.

Well, Let's Find Out.

Let's Be Sure.

Let's deny a little ignorance, seek a little truth, and Be Sure.

You have it within your power to release the data and Be Sure.

Wouldn't you Like to be Be Sure?

The choice is yours.

Onward: (and this one I do want to quote, special just for you TheSkepticOverlord:

I didn't indicate we thought your goal was, only that we didn't intend to suffer the discussion of made-up stories about us, within our domain.

If I am reading this correctly (and I probably am Not) the implication is that I was banned (and the forum was closed and locked) for fabricating a story about ats, is this correct?

That's a pretty heavy accusation, don't you think?

I'm curious what it is that I "made-up".

And finally, your last little out of context quote / reply.

At That Time, Way Back When, Jeff Ritzman stated that he had found other images (plural) from the same vantage point, And No One Else could find any anywhere. Not me, Not Anybody. Now perhaps some surfaced After I made my statement to Jeff... But At That Time? No.

Again, I made that statement Then to HELP Jeff save face in case anyone should confront him on it. You seem to have neglected to include that in your "sequential selective quoting", the HELP phrase, the HELP concept, the Trying Really Hard To Be A Team Player gist of what was going down then. Why is that?

On another note:

I'm really surprised at you on many levels. You have a Golden Opportunity here. Not only that, a Money Making Golden Opportunity. And it's being handed to you on a silver platter. And you seem to be either unaware of that or unwilling to take it. Very surprising indeed.

*ponders*

Maybe Nobody gets it... Maybe I'm the only one... nawww, can't be. I ain't that smart.

oh well.

Good night, good luck, and have a pleasant tomorrow.

[TheSkepticOverlord]

You see, I have every single chat log and email related to the whole Serpo tale.

Impressive. I don't have the tenacity or time to devote to a single subject like that, used to... don't any more.

Suffice it to say that were I to publish the chat log where a certain individual relayed to me the alleged source of the fake Serpo Team log originally posted on GLP, all reading this would see the source of that allegation and have as little doubt as I do of the truth that ATS was allegedly involved.

There's a-lot-o-allegeds there. Well then we have a genuine impasse don't we.

But..... regardless of what anyone may think of me at this moment in time, I am not going down that path.

You're most certainly right about that. It is the management of ATS , whose pathetic attemp to portray themselves as the embodiment of altruism, trust and sincerity that I take issue with.

You didn't respond to the reality that some of the content you allege was deleted, never was (well, removed)... and a reasonable reason for the removal was just now given to you, which you seem to have rejected. Is this like the time you refused to believe the reasonable and sound explanations that ATS was not a video game?

The fact remains that ATS is nothing more than 3 guys funding their retirement at the expense of those gullible enough to fall for the b.s. flung by the likes of John Lear.

(John's not posting on ATS at this time, and when he was, his material accounted for less than 0.5% of all our daily traffic... now that he's not active, it's somewhat less.)

I've been online since it was possible to claim "I'm online." I've built three different business, two before the "dot com bubble," and one after that we're focused on various aspects of web development and/or advertising. Suffice to say, I'm aware of dozens of ways to make much more money, much more easily, than from running a business that has a conspiracy website at it's core. ATS is definitely the "hard way" to make money... as anyone who runs a moderately successful forum will concur. But user-generated content and free expression are my passions, so like an idiot, I pick the hard way.


=======================================================================

from what I’ve seen here so far he has an amazing ability to dump everything back on his critic’s lap... probably a good talent for a master of deception to have

Must be from all my years in advertising.

No really... as I've indicated, I understand why people get mad at us and seek to find ways to cast aspersions and look for angles that will exact some retribution. ATS is not the only forum/board that encounters this, and quite frankly, given our size, I think we see a relatively smaller percentage than other highly popular discussion venues.

Even still, there's a broad spectrum of people out there who, for one reason or another, are exaggerating rumor, innuendo, lies, or even jokes into great big conspiracy theories about us. Very often, these tidbits of muck raking are discovered by the newly annoyed and are further extended, amplified, or used to create new fantasies of grand scale. In some cases, we've handled things poorly and made matters worse, but it's all a learning process and we have never tried to perpetuate the idea we're perfect.

Some time ago, in Shawnna's zeal to find fault, she mistook Simon's early interest in a video game to mean that ATS was based on, and is now, a massive game. She was wrong, she angered several people, and it caused a falling out with her friends here. Just one example of how overwhelming the appetite to find fault in ATS can become, and how it can lead people down horribly wrong paths.

I was hoping that my straight-forward involvement here could bring clarity to the discussion or at least provide a point of view that is lacking in all other venues that speculate about our evil deeds. Instead it seems like you'd rather not have me, as it appears to be spoiling the fun (after all, as we've seen in many places, people seem to derive a great deal of entertainment value from the raking of muck about us, our site, and our business objectives). I had hoped it might be different here, but apparently not.

So, if you'd rather "watch ATS" without being pestered by my interjecting of an alternate side of the story, just let me know and I'll politely back away.

[torbjon]

TheSkepticOverlord:

"(after all, as we've seen in many places, people seem to derive a great deal of entertainment value from the raking of muck about us, our site, and our business objectives)"

True, but really it's probably more like:

"people seem to derive a great deal of entertainment value from the raking of muck"

I mean, if ats just dropped off the face of the earth THIS sorta stuff would still be going on, ya know?

Let's face it, it's an entertaining diversion. Sure, a few folks are emotionally charged, a few others feel some sort of "higher cause", but most folks? *shrugs* Just something to do or read between whatever Other diversion they got going on in their lives, right?

I Personally have appreciated (and still am appreciating) your involvement here on Many levels. The emotionally charged and higher caused folks may be having a hard time expressing that appreciation, and gods know I haven't said Thank You enough, but I'm trying. I'm trying now.

I can see you are putting a lot of time and energy into this. That is valuable stuff, time and energy. More valuable than money.

I, for one, am glad we are talking. Talking is Good. Sure, it gets crazy and hurtful things are said, but Still, Talking is Good.

But let's face reality here:

You simply CAN'T admit to any bits of nastiness over there (if there is any) while you maintain the title of Amigo. Not "won't", CAN'T. I know that, you know that... maybe some day when you retire you'll write a book or something, but until then? Uh-uh, ain't gonna happen.

I don't think very many people here get that yet...

I'm not looking to uncover some bit of nastiness, I'm just trying to figure out why I was banned and why my oh so spiffy private play pen was locked...

But that's the rub, see?

I really was trying to be an honest, up front, Loyal Team Player and I got the ax in the back and a door slam in my face for it.

Now here we are bantering about it...

And you got three choices:

You can admit that you made a gross error in judgment and made some really bad decisions (which you CAN'T do as an Amigo)

You can admit that there Was some bits of nastiness going on and you were trying to hush it up (which CAN'T do as an Amigo)

You can do your level best to make me look like a numbnut (which is something you may not Want to do (or maybe you do, I dunno) but it's the Only option left open to you, kinda sucky but there it is)

Okay, I'm cool with that and I don't hate you for it. Is what it Is.

I'd love a few answers that make sense to me but I can live with out 'em *shrugs*

But look, this is a great opportunity for everybody. You, me, them, everybody.

We're Talking.

We're talking about crap that we Can't talk about over there...

We're having a conversation Here that you and I Couldn't have over there a year and a half ago...

Other such conversations are going on Here that couldn't take place over there...

You don't like having "anti-ats" type conversations over there and I don't blame you one bit. A board needs to be Extroverted, not Introverted, right? Otherwise it'll just eat itself up.

Soooo... please don't go. Let's Run With This. It's a Good Thing.

There will always be folks trying to find bits of nastiness on / with your site. Always.

The policy in the past has been to ax them before it gets out of hand...

I, and I'm sure many others, feel that a third party independent 'watch dog' type organizations are good things... The Ralph Nadar thing, yes?

Instead of damning us, why not Endorse us?

Send those "disgruntled" bozos with their pathetic little "baseless" stories to tell over here, Link To Us, let folks know that yes, we're mad as hatters and crazy as loons BUT...

But it's a solid little board with some lucid moments of clarity.

They'll tell their "baseless" stories... They'll link back to threads on your site... traffic will increase in Both directions...

And communication and discussion will Continue rather than be deleted, axed, locked, misplaced, or whatevered.

And swing by from time to time. Have these conversations Out In The Open, not behind closed doors... This has Got to be building some trust and respect within your own community, yes?

I don't think it's hurting this community any...

Everybody is winning. Kind of like Strategic Arms Limitations Talks... "yer still the enemy But, let's work together" kinda thing...

Something to think about.

I wonder how many points this post will win me with my new found comrades *laughs* I MUST be a shill, new kid on the block, talkin' SALT, how dare me *grins*

Okay, I go play incredibly violent and mindless video games now... Much More entertaining and diverting.

Good night, good luck, and have a pleasant tomorrow.
twj

[Access Denied]

Well, I see while I was preparing my response TJ has already touched upon a number of issues I wanted to touch upon so FWIW...

You didn't respond to the reality that some of the content you allege was deleted, never was (well, removed)... and a reasonable reason for the removal was just now given to you, which you seem to have rejected. Is this like the time you refused to believe the reasonable and sound explanations that ATS was not a video game?

With all due respect Bill isn't that a matter of semantics? Shawnna was right… from her perspective, and the rest of the world’s, which I would think you should be even more concerned about (never mind the fact Shawnna contributed in some part to the success of your web site), for all practical purposes it was deleted, and the material in question wasn’t a violation of the T&C. This proves your assertion was false. It also raises serious questions about the validity of your GPL. (thanks for bringing that aspect up TJ)

Did you ask any of the posters if they cared if you “deleted” their material? Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn’t, or maybe they didn’t know but that doesn’t make it right… or maybe they thought they’d have no recourse and never bothered to bring it up… or maybe they did and were ignored. I know I was. What’s seemingly insignificant to you, an “irrelevant” post/thread by some obscure poster, may mean a whole lot more to the individual. I would hope as someone who’s been involved in online communities as long as you say you have, you would understand this?

Some time ago, in Shawnna's zeal to find fault, she mistook Simon's early interest in a video game to mean that ATS was based on, and is now, a massive game. She was wrong, she angered several people, and it caused a falling out with her friends here. Just one example of how overwhelming the appetite to find fault in ATS can become, and how it can lead people down horribly wrong paths.

With all due respect, the hypothesis proposed by the title of this thread has not, as of yet, been proven incorrect… I think enough circumstantial evidence exists to warrant further investigation. If ATS is involved in the perpetration of hoaxes on unsuspecting members then it could be argued that there is a “culture” of video game mentality at ATS that perhaps has no qualms about blurring the line been fantasy and reality for entertainment and profit. Certainly, and at the very least, it has been proven Simon was involved in that culture at a very young age… what was the name of that game again? MAJESTIC?

Shawnna’s earlier mistake I think was that she initially could not prove her assertions to the satisfaction of a majority of her peers as opposed to simply engaging herself in the exploration of a hypothesis. I should know, I had the same problem. I would hope she learned a valuable lesson there.

So, if you'd rather "watch ATS" without being pestered by my interjecting of an alternate side of the story, just let me know and I'll politely back away.

On the contrary, and on behalf of my partners, I appreciate your participation here and the time and effort you are putting into this.

That said I think there’s a fundamental problem here that has yet to be addressed, I would imagine there are a number of current ATSers who are concerned about certain things they have seen happen and would like to see that stop but in order to prove it’s happening, they can’t do it on ATS and if they come here to address those concerns, they may reasonably expect they will be punished for it and risk losing their identity at ATS… a community they most likely care about otherwise they probably wouldn’t be there in the first place.

Are you prepared to offer immunity to any current members of ATS who wish to come here and express their concerns without risk of being banned? That is assuming (and comes with the important caveat) that it can be shown they’re not just making unfounded accusations because they're pissed off or whatever and that they had a reasonable and normal concern that at the very least might be attributable to a simple misunderstanding or misperception that went uncorrected.

Regards,

Tom

[ryguy]

Wow...I have to say, I've only been gone about a week or two - and I'm surprised at how many changes I've seen around these parts.

Lear and some other "make-outrageous-claims-and-offer-ZERO-evidence" lunatics actually JOINING RU...um...ok...I've got a lot of reading to catch up with. Boy am I looking forward to that.

Also, seeing S.O. and Springer responding at length to members here is nice to see - and I'm grateful for the time they are clearly putting into writing here at RU. So thank you to S.O. and Springer for doing that.

Suffice it to say that were I to publish the chat log where a certain individual relayed to me the alleged source of the fake Serpo Team log originally posted on GLP, all reading this would see the source of that allegation and have as little doubt as I do of the truth that ATS was allegedly involved.

There's a-lot-o-allegeds there. Well then we have a genuine impasse don't we.

But..... regardless of what anyone may think of me at this moment in time, I am not going down that path.

I'm not sure what the evidence means...nor do I really care. But the interlocking mechanisms between ATS and the Serpo ordeal did not end at the point when we (Steve and I) published the Netchicken antics on ATS. In fact, that was only one small piece in a much larger puzzle.

But as far as the evidence Shawnna refers to, even though I don't personally have an interest in threads being removed or who gets banned at some other forum, I do have an interest in standing up now and confirming that what Shawnna claims is true. Such evidence exists, and it's convincing and serious enough that it would give most reasonable people pause.

Before anyone attempts to belittle anyone presenting such evidence - for what it's worth, AD and Shawnna's claims here are not the deranged rantings of paranoid individuals. They are based on serious and convincing evidence that hints at something much deeper going on.

I've learned from the Netchicken episode not to draw conclusions quickly - but I also learned not to ignore the overwhelming evidence. It is in the best interest of every serious researcher dedicated to the "truth" to pay close attention to what AD, Shawnna and others are laying out here.

In time - when I've finished with some personal business early in the week, I will come back and do my best to support them as best I can if they decide to start to lay out more of that evidence.

Best,
-Ry

[TheSkepticOverlord]

You simply CAN'T admit to any bits of nastiness over there (if there is any) while you maintain the title of Amigo. Not "won't", CAN'T. I know that, you know that... maybe some day when you retire you'll write a book or something, but until then? Uh-uh, ain't gonna happen.

Sure I can, and have. People are human, including me and the ATS staff. We've had staff members get irritated, we've had admin get irritated, and myself as well. I've repeatedly said we're not perfect and do our best to learn from mistakes.

The problems we always encounter when we defend ourselves or not are:
1) If we ignore it, the assumption is "we're on to something" because of the silence from ATS
2) If we attempt to address it, the assumption is "we're on to something" because we got the attention of ATS
3) When we present logical reasons for peoples irritations (missed posts or removed threads), it never matters
We're seeing some of that here... so no wonder our staff, admin, or "Amigos" can have a short fuse or portray very-human intense irritation when new or old issues rise to the surface.

I'm just trying to figure out why I was banned and why my oh so spiffy private play pen was locked...

The Fair Skeptics thingie wasn't getting anywhere... and additionally, soon after the closure, we decided to go even further down the road of "editorial neutrality," which means sponsoring something like that may have been a bad decision anyway.

Sure we (me included) were irritated by your conclusions, which hopefully now you can see were partially based on some assumptions that weren't true, so yes, I didn't respond to your initial queries and thought the one explanation was enough. But in this thread, while you've expressed deep concern over your account being banned, you've not asked if you could return... do you want to?

I've said we're constantly learning and doing our best to have forward momentum, shall we learn from this and move forward?



==================================================================

Shawnna was right… from her perspective

She was right about the thread being removed from public view, wrong about her assumed reason.

Did you ask any of the posters if they cared if you “deleted” their material?

In what regard? Most "deletions" are due to T&C violations, and in the case of the other Serpo thread (now restored) had no bearing on anything whatsoever (it was removed to ensure that Google searches on Serpo went to the main thread, we were seeing lots of search activity on the short, non-productive thread, and very few of those people were crossing over to the larger more informative thread).

With all due respect, the hypothesis proposed by the title of this thread has not, as of yet, been proven incorrect…

Nor has it been proven correct.

If ATS is involved in the perpetration of hoaxes on unsuspecting members then it could be argued that there is a “culture” of video game mentality at ATS that perhaps has no qualms about blurring the line been fantasy and reality for entertainment and profit. Certainly, and at the very least, it has been proven Simon was involved in that culture at a very young age… what was the name of that game again? MAJESTIC?

What am I in the Seinfeld Universe? As George Costanza once said, "It's not a lie if you truly believe it."

Because Simon was/is into video games, that means ATS might be a game? That's the extent of it?

That said I think there’s a fundamental problem here that has yet to be addressed

Yes indeed. The problem is, that no matter what sane and logical reason we give for events that have inspired aggravation, it's rejected. No productive exchange can ever come of such an attitude.

[Chorlton]

SkepticOverlord said:
"Yes indeed. The problem is, that no matter what sane and logical reason we give for events that have inspired aggravation, it's rejected. No productive exchange can ever come of such an attitude."

The problem here is that your's and Springer's idea of 'Sane and Logical argument' isnt the same as other people's.

If you cannot see, given everything that has been said on this forum (and a lot that hasnt) that ATS has a problem then theres really no hope is there?. You simply seem to put it down to people who are aggravated at being booted from ATS when it goes deeper than that. You just cant see it.

[Shawnna]

If ATS is involved in the perpetration of hoaxes on unsuspecting members then it could be argued that there is a “culture” of video game mentality at ATS that perhaps has no qualms about blurring the line been fantasy and reality for entertainment and profit. Certainly, and at the very least, it has been proven Simon was involved in that culture at a very young age… what was the name of that game again? MAJESTIC?

What am I in the Seinfeld Universe? As George Costanza once said, "It's not a lie if you truly believe it."

Because Simon was/is into video games, that means ATS might be a game? That's the extent of it?

No, Bill but that was a stellar attempt at rewriting the history of that situation. What I wanted to do at that time was point out the hypocrisy of a forum trying to portray itself as altruistic, trustworthy and sincere when in fact, one of the owners originally used ATS in the course of an alternate reality game (which is very different from a simple video game). Which by the way, for anyone unaware of what they are caught up in, can be quite the mind-bending situation.

That said I think there’s a fundamental problem here that has yet to be addressed

Yes indeed. The problem is, that no matter what sane and logical reason we give for events that have inspired aggravation, it's rejected. No productive exchange can ever come of such an attitude.

To put this quite simply Bill - you claim posts are deleted, moved or edited only when they violate your T&C. Yet when provided with evidence of posts that have not violated your T&C being tampered with, you offer very sane and logical business reasons for those events but they are not consistent with your statement that manipulation of posts is done only when they violate your T&C. It really is quite simple.

Didn't I say I was done with this?

[torbjon]

TheSkepticOverlord:

ats Amigos, admins and mods are Always admitting to 'human' errors and emotional reactions. I've always found that to be one of the more refreshing aspects of your site. However, that was Not what I was getting at with the CAN'T thing. Admitting to little human errors and acts of emotionalism is one thing, admitting to premeditated deception and falsification of evidence is quite another. Yes, the first you can do, the second, no, you "Can't" *shrugs* that's all. (Again, I'm NOT saying you are engaged in bits of nastiness, just that, IF someone was, then they couldn't admit to it and still go on with 'life as usual'. An insider admission of that nature tends to shake the pillars of Heaven, ya know?)

Earlier you said that I 'made-up' stories... I asked what those stories where... not prove that they were made up, just, what were they? I'm not seeing an answer to that here. Apparently the 'made-up' stories were the reason for my banning... I don't expect an answer to that but it would be nice...

Above you imply that the Fair Skeptics forum was closed down (and Locked, yes?) because it wasn't getting anywhere. I find this fascinating. I don't recall there be any time limits set upon us to generate suitable / usable results. I Do recall both Cheepnis and myself asking both you and Springer on numerous occasions for access to the .org domain so we could upload some large files for examination and Never receiving a response from either of you. Perhaps your delay and lack of enthusiasm contributed to our delay and lack of enthusiasm....

Regardless, as I currently understand it (and my understanding is probably in error) I was banned because I 'made-up' stories, and the Fair Skeptics forum was closed (and Locked, yes?) because it didn't generate results fast enough to suit you, is that more or less correct?

Again, I'm curious what it was that I 'made-up' and perhaps letting us know that there was a Time Limit and that it was some kind of a Race might have been a nice thing to do at the time.

Moving right along...

You mention being irritated by my conclusions. This is news to me. Um, Not your irritation *laughs* I got that in one way back when, but rather the 'conclusions' thing... I don't recall making any conclusions in FS. Afterwards, while trying to ascertain what went down and receiving no reply from the official ATS CONTACT US form I concluded that the statement in the auto responder "someone will get back to you within 48 hours" was a great big crock o' crap. I still stand by that conclusion as no one Ever got back to me. IF that line is still in your auto responders you May wish to consider revising it as it seems to be error.

*ponders*

I just had a nice little de-ja-vu.... that last sentence was Exactly the type of thing I would have posted in FS... *laughs* Very hostile, very aggressive, very anti-ats indeed.

I'm not Concerned about my banning nor the closure of the FS forum and removal of the data therein. I am Curious about it. I'm still Curious about it as I have yet to receive an answer that I can understand. If that means I'm stupid then so be it, I'm stupid *shrugs* I do feel that I would be capable of understanding it if someone would just take the time to actually Explain it rather than play little games and dance around the edges. ("someone" does not equal "you", just "someone")

If you were asking if I wanted to go back to ats then I would have to answer no. Thank You, but no. As you've said many times, ats is not for everybody. It's not for me. I doubt I'd ever feel comfortable there and just don't have the time and energy to try to find out if I could fit in over there. But thanks all the same.

I'll tell you what I Think went down... I feel that you strolled into FS at the end of a particularly bad day, did a quick visual scan, caught some buzz words presented in bozoboy style, said buzz words were posted by a guy who had already had some run ins and post bans in the past, and just said to 'ell with it, ax the 'trouble maker', close the forum, and move on to the Next item of business on your never ending plate.

I STILL feel that... it's the simplest solution, the occams razor thing... and it's such a safe out for you, too. Very Human, very acceptable.... and that option has been there since the get go...

However, the fact that you've never bought into that option just fuels my curiosity and perhaps the curiosity of others as well, I don't know.

Okay, maybe not SALT but it's not pepper spray either, yes?

I'm sorry it's taking me so long to understand what it is you're trying to tell me but I Greatly Appreciate all of the time and energy you are spending on this....

I have a wonderful friendly tongue in cheek joke I'd just Love to make here, but some numbnut (NOT you Skeptic!) would "selectively quote" it out of context and there would be 'ell to pay for it in the morning so I won't... That's gotta be worth something though, yes? Wanting to end on a friendly Ha Ha?

SALT baby, SALT

Good night, good luck, and have a pleasant tomorrow.
twj