NEW High Quality Photo leaked - Dead Alien body

Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:43 pm » by **Giusdude**

chronicnerd wrote:Maybe...just maybe...

From the mounds of political and personal rhetoric being posted and information being buried in between people flaming one another...

He *could* have *missed* the post.... as I posted about last night?

If you don't comb the site every 30-180 minutes... then posts can get lost *very* quickly in the noise...

Banning someone who is posting something that happens to be related to what at least I thought was the original intention of this site versus allowing people to post nasty and accusatory "flame wars" at one another with no real *valid* information...

Seems a bit...backwards to the goals of this site?

Or perhaps the goals of the site changed I just wasn't aware of it....

and maybe, just maybe, you should check your facts before writing.
he missed the post?
nope, impossible.
because it's the THIRD TIME this shit is posted, with a youtube link to HIS CHANNEL, BY THE SAME POSTER.
so, in short, to get hits on his yt channel this spammer keeps on posting the same incredibly shitty video.
does that explain it to you?

Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:12 pm » by **Will69ease**

hibernate1908 wrote:this picture is a hq picture....... new video from today

Upload to Disclose.tv

Again, download the picture...or better yet a link to the original picture.

Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:15 pm » by **Chronicnerd**

chronicnerd wrote:Maybe...just maybe...

From the mounds of political and personal rhetoric being posted and information being buried in between people flaming one another...

He *could* have *missed* the post.... as I posted about last night?

If you don't comb the site every 30-180 minutes... then posts can get lost *very* quickly in the noise...

Banning someone who is posting something that happens to be related to what at least I thought was the original intention of this site versus allowing people to post nasty and accusatory "flame wars" at one another with no real *valid* information...

Seems a bit...backwards to the goals of this site?

Or perhaps the goals of the site changed I just wasn't aware of it....

Which...really... there should be a way to take a person's post and "link" them to existing posts...if their content is no different to the already posted content, then the link to the "new post" should just, possibly, look as if it is a new post to bring more visibility to the source of the information people are becoming aware of?

After all...or are we paranoid that some people are posting "YouTube" videos with "fake accounts" here to boost their YouTube visibility now?

Really... the general forum posting method seems to be failing..it might be time for some kind of change in the way information is posted...or re-classification of posts with actual valid information versus just rhetoric...perhaps posts could reach "article" status which would be voted upon by the admins.

An "article" post would then end up in a list of recent "articles"/"high rated" posts. Perhaps replace the images and/or audio or make a new area at the very top of the site that holds the top 10 "articles".

Once reaching that status...admins could cull out unrelated posts unless they are decently documented counter arguments and/or supporting data?

All it would take, from an admin side, is for one administrator to flag a new post as something they think should be "elevated"... if that happens...for all other admins...they see this new article/post (via filter and or additional module/area when they log in) and can rate it along side the admin who originally put it up as a "new candidate". Majority vote would determine whether it passes or fails. The oldest in the set would roll into the "previous articles"...and the new one with the rest would be kept in chronological order.

Perhaps more than 10...but probably no more than 20...they would be easier to moderate...and would encourage real discussion and supporting data...the rest of the posts would still be around...and roll on the left side...but the "top 10/20" articles would be the ones that admins rate based on some very basic concepts:

1.) Validity of the data as well as research that backs the concept up.
2.) If the validity of the data is still in "general" debate, at a minimum supporting evidence and the method in which it is posted. Just posting a single reference to a single article from a single source would not qualify as "well researched/backed up".
3.) The type of content and associated data. If it is a topic that has already been discussed and hit article status, then a person's post becomes a "child" post to the primary post/article.

This way...valid data and posts get the spot light they really should have...moderators would have a reduced set of posts to look through to make sure no one is just "stirring" the pot...

It could help encourage people to post relevant information...help reduce the amount of posts admins have to "moderate"...

As well, it seems disclose only rewards people for the amount of videos they have posted...seeing as this could become a very bad thing if the "powers that be" get their way with copyright materials and their new definition of what is "legal and not"... it would be an ancillary way to give users credit/credibility based on how many of their posts have been "elevated" to "article" status.

Adding a "Wiki" to the site with references to information discovered would also help greatly...and could be part of the whole raising a post to more "article" status. This wiki could slowly become a nirvana to those looking for specific information as well as making sure they aren't posting something here that is already "common knowledge".

This would move the "general posting" that has a lot of garbage and people bickering (I am guilty of this...but tend to post mounds of data with my arguments)... to a much less "visible" portion of the site...it would still exist and be accessible... but to the people who come to just "check out what is new"...it wouldn't be the *only* way to find actual "disclose" related data versus people flaming each other or calling for "banning" or that nonsense...

Just an idea...but there is one thing for sure...the site needs to adapt in its format a bit in order to preserve the type of information I *believe* the site was founded for...and to more easily cull out the rhetoric and "spammers"...they still can spam...until a mod gets around to banning...but the folks who don't have the time to figure out which people post *real* data...and which posts have *good* information...would then have a quick 10 to 20 articles that get moderated by admins based on topics that are backed by *reasonable* data and pertain to the original intention of the site... not a political platform to flame individuals of political biases...or not a place that has so many "seemingly" paid online thugs that do nothing but post garbage responses...to posts that have valid information...in order to cover it with enough *stink* that it would heavily reduce the number of people willing to wade through the muck in order to possibly pull out something meaningful...

If the "general" posts with more "community" oriented posts were still allowed to exist...but their volume was "turned down" a bit by accentuating the posts with valid data...and those posts were more heavily "moderated" to assure the integrity of such posts...as in...it would take restraint from the admins' side as some posts might not be to the likeness of some admins...but assuring that the discussion stays *relevant* and that counter arguments are backed by actual data and not just someone calling someone else a name or implying they are "propaganda" posting machines (as long as it has *valid* information...from *valid* or *reasonably* valid sources...then it is hard to discount...if it seems to only come from one website all the time...then obviously...an admin from that site digging for views...you know...common logic)

It just seems there might need to be a change like this...or similar to this...in order to get around the BS that seems to be posted more and more here.

The Wiki concept would also be a good idea...especially if entries are only added from "article status" posts...by admins...and not the "general" public...

Things like "re-posting" and the like would reduce... spammers and "theorized paid posters/disinformants" would still be allowed to "voice their opinion"...but they would not be allowed to "cloud the water" of true disclosure "type" materials.

The ones who do it just because... (i.e. ego or personal bias) would eventually stop posting...and the ones who do it because they are paid (if this is the case) would either have to come up with *valid* responses to discount the data at hand... or not have the same "power" to cover valid information (or at least information with some form of *potentially* valid source) through multiple postings, name calling, and the rest of the crap we are seeing more here on disclose...

Something...like this type of setup...could further elevate Disclose.tv as well as a companion Wiki would help "new comers" see what is known...to prevent reposting of already "known" data...related videos of "high rating" could be associated with the wiki posts...as well as pictures...etc..etc..

Many people don't have the time to comb through the system the way it is setup right now...so seeing different people post the same content...is due more (in my opinion) to this than their own personal gain...(unless it is blatantly obvious)...

Otherwise...this kind of thing as well as the BS that covers many great posts...will do nothing but further discredit and harm the site...and you never know... you might have some people here that are posting *new evidence and/or valid disclosure materials*... but never really know it...because there are so many "bad apples" in the mix.

Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:20 pm » by **Chronicnerd**

giusdude wrote:
chronicnerd wrote:Maybe...just maybe...

From the mounds of political and personal rhetoric being posted and information being buried in between people flaming one another...

He *could* have *missed* the post.... as I posted about last night?

If you don't comb the site every 30-180 minutes... then posts can get lost *very* quickly in the noise...

Banning someone who is posting something that happens to be related to what at least I thought was the original intention of this site versus allowing people to post nasty and accusatory "flame wars" at one another with no real *valid* information...

Seems a bit...backwards to the goals of this site?

Or perhaps the goals of the site changed I just wasn't aware of it....

and maybe, just maybe, you should check your facts before writing.
he missed the post?
nope, impossible.
because it's the THIRD TIME this shit is posted, with a youtube link to HIS CHANNEL, BY THE SAME POSTER.
so, in short, to get hits on his yt channel this spammer keeps on posting the same incredibly shitty video.
does that explain it to you?

Yeah...I understand...I *just* posted a lengthy post...but I *think* it covers what you are complaining about.

Don't doubt it is what you say...read the idea I posted on how this site could *fix* these issues ...not "for good"...but would make it much easier to find things as well as reward those with valid data and deny those with their own personal goals whether it be ego, monetary, or political...

Read the post... you seem to know more of the folks here... I am reclusive by nature...really...from what I can see...the above suggested solution...could work... and would prevent frustration such as yours...with this post.

(perhaps the idea needs to be a new topic)

Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:27 pm » by **Will69ease**

All I am saying is, if the poster made the video, then he has access to the original "Hi-Def" picture. Asking him to see that or a link to that is not asking too much. I provide links to almost all the anomalies on my thread "Willease's Space Anomalies" so that the reader can verify the authenticity of the pictures. Otherwise, this video is just spam.

Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:29 pm » by **Giusdude**

chronicnerd wrote:
giusdude wrote:
chronicnerd wrote:Maybe...just maybe...

From the mounds of political and personal rhetoric being posted and information being buried in between people flaming one another...

He *could* have *missed* the post.... as I posted about last night?

If you don't comb the site every 30-180 minutes... then posts can get lost *very* quickly in the noise...

Banning someone who is posting something that happens to be related to what at least I thought was the original intention of this site versus allowing people to post nasty and accusatory "flame wars" at one another with no real *valid* information...

Seems a bit...backwards to the goals of this site?

Or perhaps the goals of the site changed I just wasn't aware of it....

and maybe, just maybe, you should check your facts before writing.
he missed the post?
nope, impossible.
because it's the THIRD TIME this shit is posted, with a youtube link to HIS CHANNEL, BY THE SAME POSTER.
so, in short, to get hits on his yt channel this spammer keeps on posting the same incredibly shitty video.
does that explain it to you?

Yeah...I understand...I *just* posted a lengthy post...but I *think* it covers what you are complaining about.

Don't doubt it is what you say...read the idea I posted on how this site could *fix* these issues ...not "for good"...but would make it much easier to find things as well as reward those with valid data and deny those with their own personal goals whether it be ego, monetary, or political...

Read the post... you seem to know more of the folks here... I am reclusive by nature...really...from what I can see...the above suggested solution...could work... and would prevent frustration such as yours...with this post.

(perhaps the idea needs to be a new topic)

Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:09 pm » by **Theprophet**

Im looking for this video with dead Aliens on tables its a video, but actually it is a photo does some one have it ? :think:

Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:13 pm » by **Will69ease**

theprophet wrote:Im looking for this video with dead Aliens on tables its a video, but actually it is a photo does some one have it ?

If you read the thread, you would know that the poster ignored my requests for it.
Don't waste any more of your time.

Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:26 pm » by **Will69ease**

hibernate1908 wrote:

Upload to Disclose.tv

looks familiar?
[youtube]YQUUXdllWXM&feature=related[/youtube]

Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:32 pm » by **Opalserpent**

Looks like moulds from that balistics gel like on mythbusters. I believe this kind of crap should be backed up with evidense or the poster should be removed for spamming.