The 9/11 Conspiracies Forum is a Mess. And it’s The Fault of Many Members

originally posted by: qwerty12345
Larry Silverstein made a lot of money that day on his insurance fraud scheme.

He actually lost money....

Here's a possible suggestion (just a suggestion mind you). This was done on another forum I was involved with.

Implement a post limit on threads for a limited time. Limit the number of posts on a thread to 10-20 or even 30 responses then lock it. One Admin I worked with used to say a topic could be fully covered in 'x' number of posts, and after this there would be thread drift and degeneration. As a general rule, in the context of the subject matter of that particular forum, he was pretty much correct.

It wouldn't have to be permanent, but it might assist in reducing some of the bickering and rejoinder attacks. To carry on beyond the thread limit would mean starting a new thread...and then the personal nature of the discussion is quite evident.

Just a thought.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: FlySolo
If you're intelligent like I think you are, then you would come to the same conclusion as me.

So people who do not agree with you are .....

Would you like me to just ignore you? Man up and talk normally without all the cryptic subtleties. What are you hoping for me to say? "people who don't agree with me are... paid posters" Is that what you're expecting with your jedi mind trick?

I already told you my answer.

a reply to: seagull

Do you have his pay stubs? If not, you've nothing even remotely close to proof. ...and yes, I know exactly who you are talking about.

His sole crime, if crime it is, is daring to disagree with a whole host of people.

Come to think on it... Even if you did have his pay stubs, he'd still be welcome so long as he follows the rules here.

I am not the only one on here that believes this, you just had another poster say the similar thing here. You are correct I don't have proof, however reading this member content on a daily basic and the member repeatedly using the same old media propaganda and some of it as now been proven false and using edited videos which was proven by another credible member who brought real science to his 911 thread and the member in question was ask to stop using these tampered video to demonstrate there was no explosion from the WTC and yet this member still is using them while claiming to be authority over the 911 topic.

Now this is wrong.

I thought ATS was firmed about members not to be allowed to use proven fraudulent sources. And pulling some of their information from well known OS bias websites like 911 Myths.

I thought ATS looked down on sources that have been proven as disinformation.

This is not about disagreeing with this member this is much more. It doesn't matter what the thread topic is, as soon as this member come in many ATSers leave. Only a few stick around but it doesn't matter what is brought to the 911 topic those of us who don't buy into all the OS are insulted, and this member has an answer for everything discussed by none believers this member has made it very clear there are no conspiracies to 911. and oh yes this member goes on to tell the ATS 911 community repeatedly that he has to correct the conspiracy theorist that we are all wrong. Yes many times. I do know this as soon as this member come in a new 911 thread I have to leave, it's not that I cant handle criticism, it is being called a lair by this member because this member refuses to read the credible sources that I am presenting. This is what is really going on beside the mud slinging. what we have is a stanch OS supporters who seems to take over the 911 threads and anything outside the OS are silly conspiracy theories including 15 years of science, that has with out question proved a part of the OS is a lie. and has never been debunked on ATS.

a reply to: hellobruce

Wow, you're quick to reply, which one is not surprised. One has noticed you are always there with a refuted message. Why you do this; can only mean one thing.

If Larry Sylverstein benefits wasn't enough to persuade you into the obvious, then check out Halliburton. Black water, Acadamei, and etc...

originally posted by: Informer1958
I thought ATS was firmed about members not to be allowed to use proven fraudulent sources. And pulling some of their information from well known OS bias websites like 911 Myths.

What evidence is there that makes them fraudulent sources?

I thought ATS looked down on sources that have been proven as disinformation.

When have they been proven as disinformation?

a reply to: Informer1958

He tried to tell me he has proof that wtc 7 came down with no explosives. Then proceed to show a picture of the final little bit of WTC 7 being yanked down with chains. Something stupid like that. It's a tactic to make people go nuts. Effective too.

Calling someone a shill is like calling someone a hacker in an online game. So what?

The problem is some people here, probably shills, changed the real definition of shill to an insult when shill actually means something that exist, that's used, that's cheap, that pretty much every company, government and agencies have all around the world in the news, the internet and "education".

But noooo! On ATS we need to lie to ourselves and act as if shills didn't exist because it's now considered an insult. It's not an insult, it's a definition. If it fits, it fits and no one can prove anything if it doesn't fit, well the poster doesn't need to take it personally.

I haven't been a fan of the 911 forums myself as I'm sure we have enough information already to know that the official story is BS and my experience tells me that the closing of it's forums must have been orchestrated by shills and empowered by the people that fell for their traps.

a reply to: Informer1958

Belief and proof are not the same thing.

Do I need to repeat that for you, and others herein?

...and it doesn't matter. As long as any member, regardless of opinion, follow the terms and conditions, they are as welcome as anyone.

To repeat.

They are as welcome as anyone else.

I used to subscribe to a lot of 9/11 conspiracies, but my views have changed a lot, particularly after spending time on these boards. Whereas once I could have been considered a 'truther', I now subscribe more to the OS narrative. That doesn't mean there aren't anomalies, but a lot of the conspiracy theories put forth in the 9/11 forum I cannot accept anymore. The idea that 9/11 was allowed to happen is something I can perhaps accept, but many of the alleged proofs put forward as smoking guns, I feel they have adequately been debunked.

As for the poster being discussed as an alleged paid disinfo agent, I see someone who appears to know their stuff who is on the level.

a reply to: cuckooold

10 years posting only in 911 forums is not a little suspicious? It defies human nature. And he's not all that "on the level" Just has tons of the same old material tucked away to copy and paste from

a reply to: FlySolo

Isaac koi posts almost exclusively in the UFO forums.

He has tons of material tucked away.

I don't see anyone calling him a shill?

Double standards.

a reply to: FlySolo

10 years posting only in 911 forums is not a little suspicious? It defies human nature. And he's not all that "on the level" Just has tons of the same old material tucked away to copy and paste from

Thank you.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

It seems to me, from reading the odd thread in that forum myself, and indeed by reviewing this thread, that the issue can be boiled down to a few key problems in mindset with some of the membership.

It is interesting to me on a sort of anthropological level, that a sort of tribalism has entered into this topic, with two groups basically swinging their gonads at one another from opposite sides of a perceived divide. The OSer/Truther war has consisted of little else, and the reason is that tribalism is an old, tried and tested mindset into which human beings naturally fall.

However, that nature is something that we have a choice in nowadays, and it is the height of stupidity to engage in too much of that tribalism, given the choices, the alternatives available. Knowing where you stand on the issues is important. It gives you drive, determination, singularity of purpose and intent. Those are positive things, by and large. However, being so polarised that one cannot see the wisdom of a persons points, just because those points seem to do horrific damage to your own position is the height of idiocy.

What we need to remember at all times is this. We are human beings before we are anything else. Before we attain religion for ourselves, before we attain political bias, before we develop language skills, preferences for music, an understanding of science and technology, before we attain any of our intellectual and demographically relevant traits, we are human beings, and all of us have a duty to one another.

In the world outside this website, human beings are always taking a stand on one side of a divide or another, largely because there are no alternatives provided which seem sensible or offer a better future for mankind. Here on this site however, we have the option to maintain the position that we are human first, that all the differences aside from that are broadly superficial and secondary concerns, that treating those who differ from us in view, with enough respect to be intellectually honest with ourselves and our fellow members in our conduct is desirable, positive, and may just occasionally result in better outcomes for discussions, better learning in their outworking.

We have the choice to abandon tribalism here, and to accept our position as part of the greater tribe of humanity, to observe the aggregate, rather than focus on the microcosm of extreme locality, to see the big picture, rather than occupy a mere pixel with our intellects. We should embrace alternatives to our beliefs and understandings where ever possible, because it is by doing so that our understanding of humanity, and thereby of ourselves, may increase.

By refusing to accept the lessons learned by so doing, that understanding does not grow, or even maintain a base level, but diminishes over time.

Forget your tribe, forget your bias, and interact with the information itself on an honest level. Makes sense to me.

I see so many people labeling a posters behavior as a shill yet most of those people are guilty of the exact same behavior when it comes to other topics.

Ahm...AGW.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

The 9/11 Conspiracies Forum is a Mess. And it’s The Fault of Many Members

Why not deal with them in the normal standard way, some of my posts have been deleted for less than some of the quoted examples.

Perhaps the moderators standard approach could be to apply a rule that says attack the idea not the speaker.

I dont see the issue really.

a reply to: Chadwickus

Does he work for the government? Because this guy does, at least that what he told me.