It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 16
77
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlySolo
Calling someone a shill or a paid poster is in NO WAY an insult for crying out loud.

Yes it is.



PC has rotted the brain to the point no one can tell the difference anymore between being a realist or a bigot.

Idiocy. Don't toss the "PC Card" around because you lack the basic simple common manners to operate in a mixed environment.



It's pathetic really and it needs to stop.

Hence this thread. Feel free to go to the circle-jerk that is Prison Planet.



If I'm debating someone over and over and realize it's not an open exchange of thoughts and opinions, but rather just continuous contradiction, lies, based on an agenda to tire an opponent to win favor with your side, that's a shill.

No. It's your stubborn refusal to accept that someone else might have a point.







I see it's impossible for this forum to continue. And the member FlySolo is the poster child as to why.
edit on 2-1-2016 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
I totally agree with this for this reason.

I’ve told this story before but will tell it again.

Years ago I was on a forum-- with little rules--where people literally when bat # insane because of the abuse they got from a group of members who piled up on them. A few Buddhist sect members were proselytizing and were piled up on by the traditionalist Buddhists. Boy it got ugly!!!

It was the ugliest thing I have seen on the internet (and among the ugliest things I’ve seen or heard in my life) and literally changed my own actions.

I felt such pity on the sect people I went on their side and got in the scuffle…shouldn’t have done that.

Believe me folks you don’t want to see such awfulness from human beings when abuse goes too far. Its something you'll never forget and should never see.

It’s a shame because 911 is a vital topic to peruse so we should try to maintain objectivity.


What you saw was an example on what happens when entropy ensues between two belief systems. This isn't new, and this type of thing actually goes back to ancient babylon and the history of Israel. When israel was divided in two belief systems. One of Abraham, and the other the followers of Babylon. Both sides of jewish descent, but one side strayed from the group of Abraham. (Just to give one of many examples)

Through history, you see examples of entropy between two belief systems ultimately ending up in chaos and destruction. What you are seeing within these forums, is, but a reflection on what is going on within the real world. That by itself lets us know where we are heading as a species, and that is a very scary thought. because if we can't reach an agreement in a forum, that says a lot about the world as a whole, and that is indeed truly heartbreaking to say the least.

But to sum up the words above. What you witnessed, was the dark side of humanity, known as The beast. There is no coming back once you've witnessed the beasts actions in its true form. This is when you really wake up, and take a long look in a mirror to see those very flaws within yourself. The ugly truth reveals itself, and that is what gets us to turn away from our previous paths to try and do good instead.

But trying to do good, will be met with resistance. And this is the part we need to accept. (At-least I know I have to accept this, otherwise, I myself will not survive long within ATS.)


But, even trolls are human too, and even they can one day see the errors of their ways. I am more frightened about those who believe the lies, rather than those who know its a lie, but derail in favor of the lie. However, the Troll can turn away from his ways, whereas when the belief system is set in place, and that belief system is a lie, then it becomes a dangerous situation for all sides.

(Trying to remain neutral, but giving some points across, because I do believe in morals and ethics. How can we go wrong by seeing things through the eyes of morality and common sense?)


I do agree that the 9-11 forums should remain open, (even if I personally don't post within it), for the same reason you mentioned, 9-11 is the topic that will get to the bottom of everything. And its an important one.) I know why, but I wont reveal those reasons here in this post, nor plan on doing so on any posts. I know the truth behind it all, but i'd rather not discuss that because I value my own sanity and don't wish to get into an argument with people.

Personally, 9-11 topics I would post them in an environment where I have full administrative control, where I can moderate my own topics. But that, needs a different platform that is not a forum. Maybe you can create your own platform and moderate that?

There are Hundreds of sources where you can build your own platform. WordPress, bloggers, or create your own domain name. In a way, this is what everyone on ATS who research topics such as these should do, if they want to reach people in the info-war.

You will reach more people that way, instead of preaching to the choir anyways, so, in a way, I thank the trolls because they fueled the fire in me to do just that. Its a way to effectively counter them, and also *snip them off* because their intentions actually ended up escalating the awareness of people.

Its a win/lose situation. We lose because we who post serious topics like this. will have a hard time. But the win comes when you take matters into your own hands and take control of your environment.

Its like a game of chess. And Ive already reached millions of people by myself. yes im proud of that fact, because the trolls inspired me to do my own thing. Which everyone should do. And it is not hard to create your own platform. It is encourageable, the more the merrier. Its not about competing, it is about spreading what you know, one way or another. And learning some basic html to atleast manage a platform is not that hard. If a kid can learn basic html simply for the sake of hobby or messing with profile layouts such as myspace (back when myspace was the king of social media before Facebook took over), I think anyone can do it.

I highly encourage doing this if you are having problems delivering a message to a mass of people.



edit on nd2015000000Saturdaynd000000Sat, 02 Jan 2016 11:38:33 -0600fAmerica/ChicagoSat, 02 Jan 2016 11:38:33 -0600 by SoulSurfer because: Grammar, adding, rephrasing.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: AnonnieMuss

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: AnonnieMuss




I had no idea one was insulting but the other was not.


It's all about context. Saying that all Truthers do X or all OSers do X is disingenuous and insults your own intelligence.


Typically, I would agree. But that particular thread was for those who question the official story (Truther) discussions though.


Creating threads on ATS means it is open to all members. There are no instances of threads here where the OP can dictate which opinions are shared.

Even if the OP states that this thread is for [fill in the blank] idea exchanges? I thought the OP stated the topic and the mods kept the thread on topic?



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
I think the best way to rectify this situation is to restrict the 9/11 forum like the debate, research and collaborative writing boards. To that extent, only vetted members will post there and the forum could start to become a healthy place of information and discussion once again.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

That is gatekeeping, which is not allowed on ATS. You are allowed to start a thread, you are NOT allowed to decide who posts, or what information is posted in the thread.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Can I respond or do you want the last word?



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital

I would respectfully ask what the vetting process would be?

Isn't it veteran members (some) also who took the threads into personal attacks and flaming ugliness (my made up phrase) instead of healthy places of information and discussion?

It is unfair (IMO) to think that new (unvetted ?) members could not contribute new ideas or theories to the 9/11 forum.

I enjoyed reading from those both newer and veteran members.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

If a post is off topic then report it, but saying a thread was created and only people of a certain view can participate then that really isn't what ATS is about.

Threads for just Christians or just believers in evolution or just people who agree with you are not what people come to ATS for.

If it was I wouldn't be a member.

There are plenty of sites that filter out dissenting views for that sort of thing.

I completely disagree. If I want to start a thread for the purpose of discussion and education into (making one up here) "Why Bigfoot Always Hides in the Woods". I want to know (being a bit tongue-in-cheek with this example) why Bigfoot doesn't show up in cities and malls. That is my topic and that is the discussion. Someone coming in and saying "BIGFOOT DOESN'T EXIST" is then...by definition...off topic.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: daaskapital
I think the best way to rectify this situation is to restrict the 9/11 forum like the debate, research and collaborative writing boards. To that extent, only vetted members will post there and the forum could start to become a healthy place of information and discussion once again.


Thats not a bad idea. It brought me one.

@SkepticOverlord,

Instead of closing the 9-11 forums. Why not have that forums for "specific" members who can qualify for writing within those forums?

Maybe a system where, members can be promoted to post in that forum due to how responsible they are or have been?

For instance, if people have the habit of using insults or tactics such as baiting or luring, and they have a record of that, then they cannot have the privilege of posting in that forum.

I think, the writing forums had something like this. (if I'm not mistaken. Where people could qualify to post in such forums, to keep the writing forums informative.) Not sure if it was ATS or somewhere else. But it is an option to consider.

Requirement: Must have not resorted to insulting, character assassination, derailment of any kind in past history. The 9-11 forums could be a "Reward" for good behavior. Where responsible members can be "promoted" into using it.

Just giving out ideas, maybe you can expand more on this. Giving some options or "a middle ground" but based on rules of morality and ethics.
edit on nd2015000000Saturdaynd000000Sat, 02 Jan 2016 11:54:20 -0600fAmerica/ChicagoSat, 02 Jan 2016 11:54:20 -0600 by SoulSurfer because: Grammar and correcting.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: daaskapital
I think the best way to rectify this situation is to restrict the 9/11 forum like the debate, research and collaborative writing boards. To that extent, only vetted members will post there and the forum could start to become a healthy place of information and discussion once again.

I have an interesting idea...but it requires some tech understanding. Create new thread option or thread category where the OP becomes the moderator. Allow only within the thread created by the OP to remove posts or boot out posters. That way, the OP can control their own thread, get rid of what the OP considers "off topic" and still allow discussion among like-minds. And...save the mods the need to get involved at all. Make these thread non-searchable within ATS and from outside. So if some people wish to discuss Sandy Hook or 9/11 with specifics, they can. It wouldn't take much from a programming standpoint depending on ATS's platform.

Just a thought.
edit on 1/2/2016 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: FlySolo

You've had 20+ replies from staff and three from SO already. Is there anything left to be said?

This thread will be here tomorrow. Why not come back after a night's sleep and with a cooler head? You're heading over the cliff here and a parachute is being offered.

That's a friendly, heartfelt suggestion that a lot of members in this thread would probably agree with.




posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

If that's the gist of what they're saying, I'd agree with you. If their answer was something like "Bigfoot always shows in the woods because those are the easiest locations to hoax with" I'd say it's definitely on the mark.
edit on 2/1/2016 by Eilasvaleleyn because: Reasons



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Yup. What do you think of the other idea of a OP-moderated thread?



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I think that is some excellent advice.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:05 PM
link   
I would like to say in my opinion closing the thread temporarily the way it was, not cool.

SO, it's your site, but sometimes YOU have to walk away, send a text, post in the mod section, make a call, whatever. Not take an action like you did.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

it's 10:09 am here. I'm well rested and tenacious as ever.

I just want to say, you guys have me all wrong. Subjective opinions of people can go south rather quickly and I see I'm heading down a slippery slope with my stubbornness. I'm against all odds here. But with that said, if you can get over the fact that I'm not the enemy, there is solid value in my opinions. imo. I appreciate the parachute so I'm going for a drive dtwn.

And one more thing. Just because I'm hated doesn't make me wrong. Unless I'm wrong of course, which I would happily and publicly admit.

Till then. Ta ta for now



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE




What do you think of the other idea of a OP-moderated thread?

That's a very divisive idea.
For lack of better terms:
Truthers will delete OS'er post's and OS'ers will delete truthers posts.
Perfect moderation but total lack of conversation.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

And then the thread degenerates into an echo box where only people that agree with the OP are allowed to post, and everyone else has their posts removed.

Gatekeeping is not allowed on ATS, period. If a post appears to be off topic, alert the staff, and we will review it. You may not agree with our decision, but we will review it and decide if it needs removal or not, and if it does, remove it.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:17 PM
link   
There is already a process of gatekeeping in ATS. This after all is the “9/11 conspiracies forum”. We do not post about big foot or aliens here.

It has already been established in this thread according to various members that we have a small dedicated group within this forum whose sole objective is to spam official narrative and to hijack threads that go against the official narrative.

Why then don’t we have a dedicated “official 9/11 conspiracy theory forum” in which only the official conspiracy theory is discussed. Members who believe in discrepancies can go and debate the official theory there and these dedicated members who believe in the OS can defend their beliefs.

People who attack the members who believe in the 9/11 story will have their privilege to post in this forum revoked.

Then why don’t we have an “alternative 9/11 conspiracy theory forum”. Where the official narrative is not allowed. Threads would develop rather than being constantly derailed.

People who talk about the official narrative in this forum will have their privilege to post in this forum revoked.

This will resolve tensions IMO and even bring more members towards the 9/11 forum. It is not "gatekeeping" or a form of backslapping.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: daaskapital
I think the best way to rectify this situation is to restrict the 9/11 forum like the debate, research and collaborative writing boards. To that extent, only vetted members will post there and the forum could start to become a healthy place of information and discussion once again.

I have an interesting idea...but it requires some tech understanding. Create new thread option or thread category where the OP becomes the moderator. Allow only within the thread created by the OP to remove posts or boot out posters. That way, the OP can control their own thread, get rid of what the OP considers "off topic" and still allow discussion among like-minds. And...save the mods the need to get involved at all. Make these thread non-searchable within ATS and from outside. So if some people wish to discuss Sandy Hook or 9/11 with specifics, they can. It wouldn't take much from a programming standpoint depending on ATS's platform.

Just a thought.


This idea came to me, but I also saw the flaw behind it. I can see the huge potential of this being abused. The idea of debate goes down the tube, and everything becomes a bias topic. Which leave no room for a challenge into the topic.

I don't know, maybe others may have a different opinion on this idea. It was an interesting idea at first, but i think administrators promoting people or " allowing people" to post within those forums based on a code of conduct could work better.

Maybe an application process where moderators can choose who to let in based on how the poster behaved in the past.(Im brainstorming, maybe you or others may have a better idea. Many minds work better than one, so lets help the owners think of a solution to this problem.)

(Not shooting you down, just letting you know about the flaws and the potential of abuse in that system.)

But it was an interesting idea.


Edit: On second thought, maybe promote members to be able to moderate their own threads based on "past behavior".

edit on nd2015000000Saturdaynd000000Sat, 02 Jan 2016 12:26:14 -0600fAmerica/ChicagoSat, 02 Jan 2016 12:26:14 -0600 by SoulSurfer because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
77
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join