ryguy wrote:Elendal - I don't mean to be rude, but I can't shake the feeling that you are here to lower the conversation into the paranoid conspiracy bucket that people (maybe seeking to defend ATS from these charges) can point to and say "see...they're crazy".
You are forgetting - probabilities. It's not that I believe PTBs are behind ATS. I am simply doing everything I can to shift the probabilities one way or another. When I started this particular game with ATS, which was in that last thread I started there, I began with a completely opposite assumption - that SkepticOverlord was indeed trying to do his job of making ATS the best conspiracy forum on the net (though, by that assumption, he was definitely quite clumsy at it) .
Providing that that thread still exists (which I really don't know since I don't go there anymore, and I don't care to know either), you should be able to see how quickly that assumption turned out to be dead wrong. The probability moved quite rapidly from 50% down to, I would say, 20-ish. These are strictly subjective assessments, but that is actually my point. We are all prone to agreeing with ourselves, and accepting only those facts that agree with us, while we ignore all the rest. However, once I noticed such a remarkable drop of probability of my starting assumption, I had to conclude that something else was going on behind ATS. So I devised another assumption, which is exactly what this thread title says. So far, that assumption has been confirming itself time and time again. Thus, I have to conclude that, at least partially, I have hit the target.
I'll just make one point. If you look at an example where we've made a conclusion about anyone using sockpuppets, it was because we found a very long history of that person using sockpuppets on various forums throughout the internet (the owner/admin of OM). So when we drew that conclusion we provided reams of evidence to support it. I can't think of a single piece of evidence I've seen anywhere that would suggest S.O. is not only Bill.
That's a good point. If I may say so, your own style of writing has changed significantly as well, but I believe that's only because you are beginning to learn, not because you are a puppet yourself. I only asked you that question to show you how easily it can be turned around, and you couldn't do a thing to prove to me that you are not. Every single piece of "evidence" that you could have thrown at me, trying to prove that you are not a puppet, I could have rejected for one reason or another. I'm pretty good at finding logical reasons for whatever conclusions I like to come to. I look at it as a nice practice.
However, there are certain psychological qualities that don't change that much in a person. If they did, that person would be completely different. The game of balance that reason has to play with itself in order to not go completely crazy is more delicate than people usually realize. Changing just one of the pillar-traits/beliefs that reason resides on (they are different for any individual), would produce a completely different personality. SkepticOverlod's pillars have changed so consistently and dramatically that he is either:
a) Schizophrenic, which I very much doubt since some of the traits are completely incompatible with it.
b) A stalker
himself, which I also very much doubt since he's done some terrible mistakes, but I guess there's still some probability to it.
c) A group of different people with different personality traits. I would aim for this one, and that's what I've been doing here.
But the available evidence suggests it has nothing to do with the PTB, but for a personal agenda and personal gain.
That's the only difference between you and me - the amount of evidence. While I take psychology to provide enough evidence for me, you are completely ignoring it, most probably because of your lack of familiarity with the field.
The reason I rely purely on psychology in this particular case is because there is simply no other way for me to prove anything. Unless someone working for ATS actually comes out in the open and confirm what I'm saying, with a very, very convincing evidence, in the form of his personal information, his official records in the agency (whatever it may be), and his story of how it all works, we won't be seeing any evidence any time soon. The probability of that happening is almost non-existent, regardless of whether what I'm saying is true or not. You certainly understand why.