ATS's Bill Irvine Complains to host about ATSWatch

[rilence]

And if septictoiletoverflow and his brainless friend Springer don't like your recent update to ATSWatch, they can go take a running jump at themselves...

They do engage in totally unethical behaviour when it comes to milking their members for free content whilst offering nothing of value to their site themselves and they also make a buck out of it...

Lamers...Slowly but surely ATS members will wake up and smell the roses, one by one...

As an aside, strange neither of the above mentioned imbeciles have had the intestinal fortitude to post here with regard to this issue...Sure they'll say something like "oh theres stuff going on, legal issues, blah, blah"

Truth is neither of them will post here on this issue because a number of people here will verbally rip them both new ones if they do...

Weak as ATS Amgios...


[Mod Edit: discussion of this post moved to this thread]

[Shawnna]

NOTE TO MODS/ADMINS - I think the dialog between Ry and MrP is important but it needs it's own thread.

I'd like the focus of this thread to be on the fact that ATSWatch has been up for well over a year, one of the 3 Amigos has publicly approved and applauded that effort as "free publicity" for ATS

You've handled this well Shawnna.

This is just more evidence of Mark and Bill’s disingenuous (and unethical) behavior. As a matter of fact, Mark knew about the ATSWatch site over a year ago and who was behind it…

on Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:13 am

Here's what I think about "ATS Watch.com"...

Thanks for the FREE PUBLICITY!

I am a firm believer in the old adage "there is no bad press as long as they spell my name right"!

I have to wonder why these 4 loons (that's the total number) have nothing better to do than spend hours creating a website <25 people will ever see? Amazing...

and that for whatever reason NOW it is an issue for them.

Thanks.

[Shawnna]

And could it be just a coincidence that as a result of my little recent email kabookie dance with the amigos that my email is now being spammed - literally - with ads for everything under the sun?

nah... just a coincidence.

[Zep Tepi]

Interesting update.

Firstly, Bill (Skeptic Overlord) made the following post at ATS today:
We almost engaged in a lawsuit against our detractors...

We almost engaged in a lawsuit against our detractors...


In fact, we came so close as to smell the fresh ink on paper.



WHAT HAPPENED...

As many of our members and visitors may know, there are small pockets of people that have taken joy in creating fictitious stories about myself, Mark (Springer), Simon, and various aspects that make up the management and business operations of AboveTopSecret.com and The Above Network, LLC. Most often these are people who have been banned from ATS for various reasons and have some deep-seated resentment toward our success.

While it's often frustrating and tedious to encounter new efforts from these types of people, we've grown accustomed to seeing it from time to time. However, recently we've become aware of a proactively malicious attempt that represents a new level of harmful intent we've not seen. Our legal and business advisors agreed, unanimously, that we have an "open-and-shut" case to win an immediate injunction combined with judgement in our favor for damages. The path toward defending our name, our personal reputations, and the honor of our membership was laid out in a clear-cut strategy.

And it remains a well-researched and smart legal response to an overt attack against the people of ATS... and one which we can afford, even if we receive no judgement other than a cessation of hostilities.


There it shall remain.


WHY WE BRING THIS UP...

I bring this to the attention of our members so that you may be aware of the intensely difficult decision we made... the decision to "stand down," and move on.

My gut and heart screams for the opportunity to defend ourselves.

Mark's gut and heart screams for the necessity of drawing a line beyond which our tolerance stops.

Our advisors' and financial partners look forward to successfully establishing a limit on malicious fabrications.

But my brain, steeped in the digital culture of free expression from as far back as 1984, combined with the sober reason of all involved, won the day.

It hurts me personally to see what is being said of myself, my partners, and the business that occupies my daily energy. It hurts me personally to see that someone with nothing to lose would seek to damage all that I've worked on, all the hard work of our staff, all that my partners have worked on, and especially the stunning contributions of our members. It's frustrating beyond words to experience people who purport to have evidence of wrong doing here at ATS, but constantly refuse to offer anything more concrete than error-riddled opinion inspired by deep-seated envy.

If we were to move forward with this legal action, I and all those who work to further the goals of ATS would forever lose a small piece of our soul. And that is a price beyond compare that we cannot endure.


PREDICTIVE RAMIFICATIONS...

Our decision to "stand down" will be interpreted any number of ways with an infinite variety of misconceptions and speculative stories.

To each and every interpretation, we have the same response. We chose this path, this time. Our decision had nothing to do with money, nothing to do with the inability to recover the legal fees, and nothing to do with chances for success. It had everything to do with morals and ethics and the core ideals of free expression for which we all stand.


ESTABLISHING A HIGHER GROUND...

Long ago, we made the promise that "ATS" also stands for Altruism, Trust, and Sincerity (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread234212/pg1) and that this core ethic will be the foundation for how we grow ATS into a business we can be proud of. Being of obvious admirable ethics and upstanding business practices has been and will continue to be the cornerstone of how we operate. It's reflected in our joining the Internet Advertising Bureau and serving on their small publisher committee, and soon to be even more obvious through certification of a leading digital privacy advocacy organization. We take seriously the public trust we ask of our members and visitors.

We offer and enthusiastically tolerate methods for public questions of our operations and tactics here on ATS. The ATS Issues thread is a recent development intended to maintain a single-source and easy to locate place for a broad variety of concerns and questions. We've never shied away from valid questions and never intend to. For anyone who wishes to raise issues, please do so here and you will receive an answer.

Becoming a legal footnote as a company that stopped someone's opinion, even if it's one of vindictive hate focused on harming our efforts, is not a place I intend to go just yet. Some day our hand may be forced, but not this day.

For those who continue to cowardly post lies and stories from the safety of their blogs and forums, have your fun at our expense. We can take it. We will gladly respond to those claims here, on abovetopsecret.com, should the questions arise. We will no longer attempt to answer these claims on the boards where the claims are being made as it has proven, time and again, to be an exercise in futility and we are better served responding to these wild claims and fictional stories on our own site, where a larger audience can be addressed.

If we back up a little and read some of the posts in this thread, it becomes pretty clear *who* the "detractors are in the above post by Bill.

I received an email from Bill this past Monday (21st July), informing me that Shawnna had requested normal mail as a method of contact and if I would provide my address so I could be included in the hard copy. I readily provided my contact details, fully expecting to receive a letter from their lawyers somewhere along the line. I knew with 100% certainty that any legal action on their part would be ultimately doomed to fail. The way I saw it (and still do), they didn't have a legal leg to stand on. More on that in a bit. As it turns out, Ryan also received the same request, but because of a miscommunication on both our parts (well, Ryan mainly - I did tell him but he missed it! ), decided against sending them his details. He didn't realise they had already asked for mine and I had provided them. Some to-ing and fro-ing went on between him and Bill, culminating in Bill assuring Ryan, via an email cc'd to their (ATS) lawyer that his details would not be misused. This particular email also informed us that the management of Reality Uncovered would be included in the list of people that need to receive an official correspondence (emphasis mine). After discussing the matter with me, Ryan then also provided his private contact details.

As soon as he had done so, the professional tone of the emails changed ever so slightly and we were then informed yesterday (Thursday 24th) that we could "anticipate" their side of the story "very soon". As I said, that was yesterday. Bill's post above stating they "almost" engaged in a lawsuit was made just a day later.

What changed? Well, maybe they just wanted to "scare" us into backing down, or maybe their lawyers decided to have a read of the posts on display here before engaging in a fruitless excercise? Maybe the following email I sent them after receiving their final email had something to do with it:

Well hopefully it will contain the truth and not a whole load of nothing.
Even though atswatch.com has nothing to do with RU, I have examined the text on their homepage to see if you have a point. I can’t see that you do? The page states “the evidence suggests” – from reading your very own (extensive) comments at RU, I would say that particular statement can be construed as having some accuracy, IMHO.

unethical - not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior; "unethical business practices"

I could give you some examples if you like, examples that show the above definition in action? Then again, seeing as it appears you have chosen to take a “hostile” stance, I don’t see why I should… Best to wait for the inevitable letter from your lawyers before pointing out the obvious, eh? Don’t worry, we’ve made a list

Cheers,
Steve

Let's examine what the page at Shawnna's atswatch.com actually says, I emphasised the relevant section above, but here it is in more detail:

...an independent community of individuals who are concerned
over the promulgation of abovetopsecret.com as an
unofficial source for
'news and media' when there is evidence which suggests the owners of abovetopsecret.com engage in unethical behavior and activities.

There it is again, "there is evidence which suggests the owners of abovetopsecret.com engage in unethical behaviour and activities. It doesn't say "the evidence shows", or "the evidence clearly proves", it says "suggests". In my opinion -and this has changed since the inception of this section of the forum-, the evidence can be construed as exactly that.

Why? Well, Like i said, we've made a list. I won't bother highlighting all of the points because frankly, after receiving those latest emails and reading their update, it's good to hold something in reserve

The first point I would highlight (I'll source the links when I have more time, but the posts are in this section) is the fact that Bill admitted to the practice of "stealth banning" at ATS. Many users (including me at one point), have their passwords and email addresses changed making it impossible for them to login. They receive no communication informing them that they have been banned from the site and are left confused and bewildered as to what has gone on. Is that ethical? Would you expect to be treated like that by any other business entity? They don't need any valid reason to do so either. In my case, I had made no inflammatory posts and hadn't been behaving badly. It is pretty clear to me that this was done because they suspected my involvement with Bill Ryan. Apropos the Bill Ryan episode on ATS; there are still a number of items there that have yet to see the light of the day regarding ATS's involvement. Of weblogs and access... That however doesn't apply in this particular instance because that is from before they were a LLC - AFAIK. I include my own "stealth banning" from the same period because the evidence certainly does suggest is still goes on.
Another item from the list, one that was wholly ignored when AD brought it up here btw, is the promotion of the Clifford Stone material. The evidence clearly shows that Stone is a known hoaxer in the UFOlogy world and it equally shows that ATS have been promoting his work. How is that ethical? Sure, one could argue about the semantics of the situation all day long, but Stone isn't the only one, is he.

I could go on but this post is long enough already. I'll leave it to someone else to pick apart those nonsensical comments in Bill's post
I for one am not (yet!) banned at ATS and I am certainly not resentful of their self-proclaimed success. I admire a lot of the membership at ATS for their insightful posts and obvious intelligence. That doesn't mean however, that I can't call b.s. when I come across it.

Cheers,
Steve

[ryguy]

Geez...and they call Shawnna a Drama Queen?

-Ry

[ryguy]

Citizen Media Law Project - Legal Threats Database

Submitted July 26th, 2008:

****Start of Submission****

I received a personal email from Bill Irvine, the CEO of AboveTopSecret.com. I am co-owner of Realityuncovered.net with Steve Broadbent. We recently started allowing the owner of ATSWatch.com, and her supporters, to post their arguments on our website that supports the contention that the actions of ATS no longer support their motto "Deny Ignorance".

We've allowed posters to write their discussions on our forum, and the owners of ATS, Bill Irvine and Mark Allen, even took part in the discussions on our forum for some time. Suddenly this month they decided they didn't like the way the discussions were going, so they contacted the owner of ATSWatch, as well as Steve and I, and asked for our personal mailing address so they could send us "correspondence".

We knew ATS well enough to know that they were planning to send us legal threats, likely cease and desist letters, from their lawyers. Today, the day after I personally provided Bill my personal address, Bill posted on his forum that they've decided not to follow through with legal action, but they reserve the option to do so. We're not sure how or why they believe they can prevent free speech, but I just wanted to report this continuing legal threat against free speech on our forum, www.realityuncovered.net/forum. His "warning" today was issued here: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr ... pid4687694.

I would be happy to share more information with you if it would assist you in getting the word out regarding the sort of tactics utilizing frivolous legal threats in order to prevent free speech, which ATS appears to use often (I can list at least two other cases I know of where they've done so). Thanks for your help and your worthy cause.

[mojo]

(I can list at least two other cases I know of where they've done so).

jasn and i also received thinly veiled legal threats via email correspondance from Bill and Mark a number of months ago.
it seems to be a fairly common tactic that they use when they don't get their way, much like a small child throwing a tantrum in a department store, attention seeking and looking for sympathy.
looks like their getting plenty of love from the sycophant's in that thread, that should make them feel much better.

good luck shawnna.

mojo.

[torbjon]

SkepticOverlord:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg23
"We've made contact with the owner of the site and have officially requested a slight modification of the terminology they're using."

This is a lie. Query: Does lying to your membership constitute unethical behavior?

The "slight modifications" you tell your membership that you "requested" equated to a complete recoding of the entire ATSWatch.com website in order to optimize those pages for postive abovetopsecret.com search engine placement.

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=1393&start=15#p20148

Query: Is threatening the owner of another website with legal proceedings if they don't recode their website to better suite your business needs ethical?

Did you even Offer to buy the domain first? Or purchase advertising of your own on that domain?

Or did just go straight for the lawyer?

bah

xpert11:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg24
"As has already been established the internet gives some people a degree of anonymity(SP?) . Some people abuse this anonymity and what you have encountered appears to be an extreme case of this which must at least be close to slander"

Essan:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg24
"Those who make accusations behind the shield of internet anonymity don't deserve response. If they have genuine complaints they will make them publicly and let all know who they are. After all, what do they have to hide?"

S1LV3RD0:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg24
"As one other poster said, let the people who run that site put themselves in the public eye as you 3 have. (and other Mods too)"

Rhain:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg24
" ATS members sit comfortably behind their anonymity, whereas the trio stand open and unprotected. Their reputations and personal lives are open to the scum of humanity."


So, you numbnuts represent some the Best and Brightest of the ATS community, huh? mmph. Don't even TRY, okay? sheesh.

My name is Torbjon and I can be found at torbtown.com. There are pictures of me and my family there. Whois will tell you where we live and how to stalk us and harass us. I have been on the internet for over ten years and have been 100% open and honest about myself to the world at large the Entire Time.

How Dare you accuse me of Hiding from the likes of chicken poop losers such as yourselves.

which brings us to this little hummer:

SkepticOverlord:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg23
"It hurts me personally to see that someone with nothing to lose would seek to damage all that I've worked on,"

I'm sorry, Nothing To Lose???

Who Are You? Where Are You? Where Are Your Children? As "transparent" as you freeks pretend to be nobody knows where you or your kids are. The Amigos are 'safe' behind a wall of anonymity.

But not us. I'm not hiding and I don't see any of the others hiding either.

What have we got to lose??

Well, one of your blind ATS worshiping numbnuts could get a hair up their butt and decide to take justice into their own hands and stalk my kid or worse:

Maxmars:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg23
" Or a bunch of us members could just get together and beat the crap out of 'em (j/k of course)."

Roper:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg24
" There comes a time when a broken nose is the right medicine."

BO XIAN:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353530/pg24
" I'm sure the jerks deserved a heavy court judgment against them."

Yes BO XIAN, I too am just oh so SURE those pathetic JERKS Deserve to be Drawn, Quartered and Shot for Daring to be Different. Hey, let's punch them in the nose and beat the crap out of them too! We can rape their children and burn crosses on their lawns! Woo Hoo!!! ATS RULES!!!!

I'm putting my life on the line.

And because some folks can't differentiate between me and my family my Family is also on the line.

What about you Bill? What have you got on the line??? Any RU members threatening to beat the crap out of you or your kids?? You're worried about a little Money while your membership threatens physical violence on other human beings? Money first, people second, is that it? Talk about f'ed up priorities.

mmph.

SkepticOverloard LIED to you when he said:
"We've made contact with the owner of the site and have officially requested a slight modification of the terminology they're using."

Unless, of course, you ATS brainiacs believe that recoding an entire website constitutes a "slight modification".

[Access Denied]

Wow, just wow…

Does Bill really think his membership is so stupid they can’t see through his fabrications and hypocrisy? If indeed they can’t, as is apparently the case for many judging by their responses, is it any wonder so many there blindly follow anybody who tells them what they want to hear?

Scary stuff!!!

The Matrix has you.

[torbjon]

Follow the Holy Gourd! No, follow the Holy Sandal! Kill the unbeliever!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krb2OdQksMc

[Mad_Hatter]

Interesting update.

Firstly, Bill (Skeptic Overlord) made the following post at ATS today:
We almost engaged in a lawsuit against our detractors...

Oh wah, wah, wah...cry me a friggin river. What....a.....Loser. So what this translates to is that Bill "ATSOverlord" can't get his way and decides to publicly throw a pity party baby shower and make himself look as innocent as possible in order to gain sympathy from his community, whilst telling them nothing of the truth. In my neck of the woods we refer to this sort of person as a "hater" or a "lame" or other words i can't post here. To me, he is resorting to,

"well, i'd better go ahead and make up sh** and try to make myself look attacked and hurt first before my members find this out on their own. Better that I get the first word in here to appear to be honest with them."

Yeah, right. Truth is Bill, you have no leg to stand on in trying to censor free speech on the internet. You put yourself in a position that many celebrities put themselves in, in regards to what you classify as "slander," "defamation," or "libel." Simply put, your character judgment is fair game for the public to pick apart. YOU HAVE NO CASE! So quit with the BS crap about "we almost sued you but didn't. You better be glad." Once again, Yeah....right. And you have relinquished your legal Right(s) of Publicity when Mark thanked you for the free publicity in his...well...stupid letter.

[Forestlady]

It occurs to me that septic overlord has put himself in a place where he might well be sued for libel/slander, most likely libel. He has said that AmKon runs child pron, which is a complete lie. Someone posted a picture of their child on the potty - what parent doesn't have such pictures of their kids? They have also plainly libeled RU as well, by inferring that RU has done something illegal and deserving of a lawsuit.

Any lawyers in the house here who would know if this constitutes libel? At the very least, I would think RU and AmKon would both have good cases against ATS. Perhaps the 2 sites could join together to initiate a lawsuit? I know I'd happily contribute to any legal defense fund. Or maybe it's best to just ignore them, I don't know. Any lawyers around who can speak to this?

[Access Denied]

Hi Forestlady, I don’t know about anybody else but the way I see it I’ve been called worse by better.

I think filing a lawsuit would be stooping down to their level and I’ve always believed what goes around comes around eventually.

Now, if they were to threaten my family or friends then all bets are off and I would do everything in my power to personally see to it that justice is served.

Otherwise I say let them continue to make the bed they’ll have to lie in…

We’ll continue to do our best and alert the media.

[sandman]

A place called Above Top Secret (with most stories beyond belief) is worried about its rep?
So will they sue the US Gov every time they stamp a paper Above Top Secret?

This is to funny. Any judge would laugh his ass off.

I dont think ATS Watch has anything to worry about.