Badgering people for classified information

Mohsin77 · Sep 3, 2022

coolgod said:
I'm just pointing out Blitzo's value judgement that Patchwork has been single-handedly one of the most high-yield content posting new members that this forum has seen in the last five years which clearly demonstrates his bias and denigrates older SDF members.

I haven't been here for 5 years, but I'm certain there are new members who have posted defence-related content just as "valuable" as what Patchwork posted, they just aren't aligned with Blitzo's field of interest. For example, what makes Patchwork's posts more "valuable" than the posts by SDF members within China's Space industry? Semiconductor industry?

Obviously everyone is biased, but it would be wise to pick an impartial mod to rule on each specific case on this forum.

If only I had that option like Deadpool here. | Deadpool comic, Deadpool funny, Deadpool pictures

This is hilariously sad, which is why comedy is the flip side of tragedy.

Everyone I see on this thread who is using 'argument from authority' to defend what happened yesterday and questioning Patchwork's credentials or contributions etc. these are people who I've noticed to be completely useless on matters of defense (which by the way, is the actual field of this forum). I can't remember having read a 100 words these people have said that has educated me on the topics of warfare. In fact, most of the time, these same members make statements so ridiculous, I just laugh and move on, because it would be a complete waste of time to even engage with them.

Also, keep in mind, that the two members who were actually arguing with Patch are not taking part in this. Because @ZeEa5KPul and @manqiangrexue are actually not idiots, like this above set of people. Yes, I believe they messed up with a little too much jingoism (and they might disagree with me on this) but I know that ZeEa5KPul at least knows that Patch was not bullshitting about his credentials and knowledge-base. I think that if the whole thing happened again, all three of these guys, including Patch, would've changed what they said and did. Things just got heated and out of control. It happens.

The bigger problem is what is happening now on this thread. The members who don't have much of an interest in defence or any real understanding of how warfare works (though they sometimes pretend to know what they're talking about), are attacking Defense SMEs in general. This is probably because of their own insecurities, since they know they don't have anything really useful to contribute on such topics, so they denigrate others who do, or those of us who are here to learn about it.

Jj888 · Sep 3, 2022

solarz said:
I was under the impression that any info posted here is in the public domain. Is that not the case?

Me too.

However, some are expecting more & trusting. I have some white powder for sale, original from Colin. Trust me, good price too.

dasCKD · Sep 3, 2022

Abominable said:
I know what colour the queen's underwear is. Anyone who badgers me for more information needs to be banned.

Do you see the problem with this line of argument?

I think that the color of the queen's underwear is a teensy bit less important to national security that the performance characteristics and operational utilization models of modern warplanes but idk that might just be me and my koooooky standards.

broadsword · Sep 3, 2022

dasCKD said:
I think that the color of the queen's underwear is a teensy bit less important to national security that the performance characteristics and operational utilization models of modern warplanes but idk that might just be me and my koooooky standards.

James Bond would disagree.

broadsword · Sep 3, 2022

dasCKD said:
It's easy enough. Ask what the thrust of the F119 engine is to an SME. If they say that that's classified then stop badgering them for an answer.

It would be different if he says the F119 is less powerful than the WS-10. I really want to badger the SME. Sorry. I don't care if it becomes less of a threat.

ougoah · Sep 3, 2022

lol at everyone here making a mountain out of a molehill.

An alleged IC involved person left. Certainly a knowledgeable fellow BUT with a list of unprovables. Therefore the higher order "knowledge" offered beyond the scope of what generally accepted here and would earn you respect as knowledgeable, all that is a bit untrustworthy. Everyone can take it as they prefer but there is no authority on any of that stuff. So what's the difference in the member deciding to not participate? Any information offered is questionable. Anything verifiable (to the best of our abilities) is simply another voice claiming the same set of agreeable views held here and that extra voice is redundant. So nothing lost nothing gained essentially.

The jingoism aside, I do see where Zeak and Man were coming from and their logic isn't incorrect either (apart from Man's misinterpretation of a post of Patch's). But their conversation with a member may be too harsh for forum rules? I mean there's much, MUCH worse all over the internet. The conversation that sparked this was taaame in comparison. Bans? Really? Someone decided to leave a forum, no one broke rules (that I'm aware of). No harm no foul.

Some of you are lamenting a self proclaimed IC expert (again a knowledgeable guy I personally found to be a decent read as well) deciding that non participation is best for themselves and the forum. Maybe because the guy keeps telling you your hardware is awesome? A flatterer is very welcome clearly to some lol but all this feelings hurt and I think you didn't treat him right... honestly, no. There was no real issue. Both sides had their points and were sort of correct in their own ways. It's just all very ... uncomfortable and impolite and unnecessary. Basically just bad form from two members who perhaps could simply have let some trivial shit go. Normally most members won't re-engage after a few posts but in this case all were intelligent, knowledgeable on the topic (two of the three lol), and all were keen to continue engaging.

As for "losing" a "valuable" member to the forum. We don't know anything about how genuine IC claim is. That also isn't all that important because the information given can be deceptive especially if actually IC... not that IC would care what a lot of public domain plebs think and feel. And anything else claimed that's unprovable, well then where's the loss in information? information you cannot possibly verify and truly believe in.

One claim - F-22 dominates A2A role. Possible. Cool story... that's what most of us suspect anyway personally.

another claim from Patch - US intel and military have immense concern for Chinese EW and J-16D. Cool story ... is this true at all? Many of us suspect so anyway. :O

you see my point. There's really nothing to it outside of the social dynamic and how two older members don't seem to like just letting small shit go. Having said that I'm partial to their view, just not their method.

Essentially this was all a "ABC is better than XYZ... trust me bro" vs "we don't know anything and ABC would say ABC is better so I need to point this out constantly".

Abominable · Sep 3, 2022

dasCKD said:
I think that the color of the queen's underwear is a teensy bit less important to national security that the performance characteristics and operational utilization models of modern warplanes but idk that might just be me and my koooooky standards.

That post sounds like your baiting me to reveal more information about how it relates to national security. Mods!

Mohsin77 · Sep 3, 2022

ougoah said:
lol at everyone here making a mountain out of a molehill.

An alleged IC involved person left. Certainly a knowledgeable fellow BUT with a list of unprovables. Therefore the higher order "knowledge" offered beyond the scope of what generally accepted here and would earn you respect as knowledgeable, all that is a bit untrustworthy. Everyone can take it as they prefer but there is no authority on any of that stuff. So what's the difference in the member deciding to not participate? Any information offered is questionable. Anything verifiable (to the best of our abilities) is simply another voice claiming the same set of agreeable views held here and that extra voice is redundant. So nothing lost nothing gained essentially.

The jingoism aside, I do see where Zeak and Man were coming from and their logic isn't incorrect either (apart from Man's misinterpretation of a post of Patch's). But their conversation with a member may be too harsh for forum rules? I mean there's much, MUCH worse all over the internet. The conversation that sparked this was taaame in comparison. Bans? Really? Someone decided to leave a forum, no one broke rules (that I'm aware of). No harm no foul.

Some of you are lamenting a self proclaimed IC expert (again a knowledgeable guy I personally found to be a decent read as well) deciding that non participation is best for themselves and the forum. Maybe because the guy keeps telling you your hardware is awesome? A flatterer is very welcome clearly to some lol but all this feelings hurt and I think you didn't treat him right... honestly, no. There was no real issue. Both sides had their points and were sort of correct in their own ways. It's just all very ... uncomfortable and impolite and unnecessary. Basically just bad form from two members who perhaps could simply have let some trivial shit go. Normally most members won't re-engage after a few posts but in this case all were intelligent, knowledgeable on the topic (two of the three lol), and all were keen to continue engaging.

As for "losing" a "valuable" member to the forum. We don't know anything about how genuine IC claim is. That also isn't all that important because the information given can be deceptive especially if actually IC... not that IC would care what a lot of public domain plebs think and feel. And anything else claimed that's unprovable, well then where's the loss in information? information you cannot possibly verify and truly believe in.

One claim - F-22 dominates A2A role. Possible. Cool story... that's what most of us suspect anyway personally.

another claim from Patch - US intel and military have immense concern for Chinese EW and J-16D. Cool story ... is this true at all? Many of us suspect so anyway. :O

you see my point. There's really nothing to it outside of the social dynamic and how two older members don't seem to like just letting small shit go. Having said that I'm partial to their view, just not their method.

Essentially this was all a "ABC is better than XYZ... trust me bro" vs "we don't know anything and ABC would say ABC is better so I need to point this out constantly".

Well, we can agree to disagree here. It's irrelevant now anyway, there's nothing to be done here.

I apologize if I was rude to other members, water under the bridge etc. let's move on.

bjj_starter · Sep 3, 2022

Mohsin77 said:
Below is the legal explanation I received from Tempest, who gave permission to share it with those who are seeking clarity on the issue (I added the bold-underline):

"One of the more touchy-feely bits you get admonished about when you scribble on your SF-86 and go through the process to get a clearance, is that there can be no participation in groups, communities, social circles, clubs, etc. that solicit classified information (even if it’s frowned upon in that community, or a one-time affair, or done by outlier members of that community). This policy is particularly “zero-tolerance” when it comes to individuals possessing a TS (which he does), and even moreso when it comes to highly important platforms and systems (which the F-22 happens to be).

As such, to rephrase his words on the matter, he didn’t really have a choice but to abandon ship when members of the PRC-leaning, PLA-focused forum which he had already been “playing classification chicken” with (to use his words) by writing extensively on the more technical aspects of military operations and weapons systems (to the extent that some of his works are the most complete, comprehensive, and competent analyses available on the internet vis a vis their subject matter) began repeatedly requesting that he disclose and disseminate classified mission systems, data processing/fusion, signature management and emissivity profile, and integrated networking technical specifications despite making it clear it would be unlawful to do so.

Well, that is, unless his goal was to, at best, lose his clearance and career by violating those aforementioned OPSEC constraints regarding even being around individuals or groups doing so; or at worst, his freedom, by committing Felony Espionage in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 793 (Gathering, Transmitting, or Losing Defense Information).

^ In light of this, I totally understand him leaving the forum. No amount of 'warnings/bannings' on an internet forum would fix this problem, so it's pointless. This is an actual legal issue and internet 'bans' are meaningless in court. As soon as the first person asked him to divulge classified data, he was legally obligated to "abandon ship" immediately, which is what he did. Not because he wanted to, but because he had to legally.

Sigh... I guess the moral of the story is that IC and OSINT don't mix. It's a loss for us, because he was a very valuable asset. In his short stay on this forum, many of us learned a lot from his posts and he clarified a lot of things that a bunch of us were going in circles about for a long time.

His posts were by far the most valuable information I'd managed to find on how a hot war would likely actually go down, he had the best information I've ever seen on PLA AShM/AShBM salvo generation capacity, with ranges marked out on a map in pretty colours and everything, he was unfailingly pleasant to talk to unless you were speaking recklessly and without having investigated what you were discussing, he provided valuable insight into US military/political responses and thought processes about various scenarios (a sudden formal secession by the Taiwan government, a PLA first strike and AR without warning, etc), literally the best breakdown of how the Tomahawk weapon system is employed that exists on the internet in concise form as an aside to his response to a completely separate question, and what's potentially the most tragic is that there was so much more I think we could have learned.

I really wanted to know specifically how PLARF salvo sizes and ranges would change in a situation where the PLA had control of Taiwan or Taiwan and the Ryukyu islands, to what extent PLAN subs in their current forms would have their functional operational range extended if they held Taiwan and what that would mean for second strike capability - would it make second strike completely guaranteed, rather than just very very likely? Basically, what it would mean strategically for the PRC to achieve full control of Taiwan.

Now instead he's gone from the forum, because of hotheadedness and lack of concern for real world effects from the very serious matters discussed here. I do really hope that either the rules here are updated or if they are already sufficient, some other measures are put in place to try and prevent something like this from happening again. Patchwork was a goldmine of information, I hope this forum can retain similar once in a decade information sources in the future. The discussion here is best when it is as professional as possible.

coolgod · Sep 3, 2022

dasCKD said:
It's easy enough. Ask what the thrust of the F119 engine is to an SME. If they say that that's classified then stop badgering them for an answer.

So whether a piece of information is classified or not depends on whether someone else claims to be an SME and states that relevant info is classified? Why is the information regarding the package performance characteristics of F-22 treated as classified on this forum, while the # of J-20 in operation is not treated as classified on this forum?
If I claim to have ties to PLA IC and say 200 J-20s are in operation, then nobody is supposed to ask me for verifiable proof, even though I may possess "open source" proof that supports my position. What is the point of me making the statement regarding # of J-20 in service in the first place, just to show I can argue from a position of authority?

Badgering people for classified information

Mohsin77

Senior Member

Jj888

New Member

dasCKD

New Member

broadsword

Brigadier

broadsword

Brigadier

ougoah

Brigadier

Abominable

Major

Mohsin77

Senior Member

bjj_starter

New Member

coolgod

Colonel