posted on May, 25 2014 @ 08:02 PM
originally posted by: cestrup
Every thread that has to do with any major conspiracy has the same brand of posters who run in packs basically - abruptly discrediting sources and
then turning on those who keep an open mind on certain subjects. It's not even a discussion as these types of posters only see one side - their side
- and thinking otherwise will end up in personal attacks, as if that's their motive - then discussion is stopped and the thread is deemed out of
I'm all for hearing every side and every option as that is how a healthy discourse should conduct. But the tactics I see on display here are far from
productive. In fact, they only want you to think one way - their way. Generally, most people post a thread as an idea to discuss and every, single,
fraggle-rockin' time these know-it-alls come in and destroy the thread. Maybe there is a board where this bullying isn't allowed - because it
snowballs, in every thread and then it's basically over. They have official sourcing and all we're concerned about is questioning just that. We know
the official responses - what's wrong with asking "what if???"
Does anyone else feel this way or notice this?
That seems like a question (or complaint) subjectively imposed by the polar nature of human perception, cultural frame of reference, personal
knowledge and so forth.
I do understand the point from my own perspective. There was a recent thread that dealt with failed immigration policies on a a federal level, which
had the effect of obfuscating a widespread social problem of child molestation and more serious crimes. The person who created the thread was
summarily accused of being racist, until someone posted national rape statistics in which it was stated that race had direct correlations with sexual
The lesson learned from this post for me, was that 90% of the posters were reacting to deep emotions about rape or sexual abuse for any number of
reasons. Perhaps related to their own ethnicity. Some were deeply offended, writhing in denial for other reasons or just emotional dupes parroting the
popular social culture that is (ostensibly) politically correct.
I can't prove it, but I get the impression that a good number of posters know nothing about the topics they weigh in on. Even 15 minutes on the web
could help them review a topic that is well referenced.
You mentioned how they run in packs. That's true, but then so do those with open minds and some education. Why is it that the antagonists are better
organized than the others? Why not gather your friends and form a committee to look at the negating patterns, then devise a simple plan to engage them
in a way that puts them in the hot seat?
If someone is the antagonist, ask him to make his case and then you can also dispute his points and sources. If he refuses to make his case, he's
invalidated on the spot and its time to move.
edit on 25-5-2014 by Gianfar because: grammar, arraingement