I’ve been away from the boards for a week and probably haven’t been on here very much since I began blogging. This past week I’ve put in an effort to really dive into ATS and read some big posts in order to catch up with the community.
In doing so I discovered something I found a little disturbing.

It really seems to me that many of us can not find any common ground and assume there are only two positions in any topic. I read threads all across the board the UFO forum, 9/11, WoT, Fragile Earth, it didn’t matter where I went I found people reacting and not reading.

It is odd in the medium of the written word that none of actually seem to be reading. I know we are all guilty of this, including myself.
I believe the new Star System will help us to overcome that particular issue.
But even when we do read are we really paying attention?
Some topics such as 9/11 can be pretty emotional and we seem to read a comment, assume the poster is on a “side” and attack everything that that side is supposed to value or believe in.
Here are some quick examples of (usually) false conclusions about those who may not have the same opinion as you:

If you dislike Bush you must support the Democrats.

9/11 conspiracy theorists believe that Bush is the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks.

9/11 “debunkers” are plants or closed minded.

WoT conspiracy theorists are terrorist sympathizers

Anyone who speaks out against radical Islam must be a bigot and thinks all Muslims are out to get them.

UFO debunkers don’t believe in aliens.

Wanting to reduce Green House Gasses means you support and promote everything Al Gore has to say.

I’m sure some of you have also noticed other leaps of false conclusions about fellow members.

I think this community prides itself of being open minded but as a whole we sure have a long way to go. All our different view points matter when it comes to “denying ignorance” and not everything is black and white. A lot of people’s point of view brings them to gray areas if we try to see other people’s points of view this will not only improve our selves individually but will allow our community to really get at the truth of all matters.

I think that some of what you are looking for will come from experience. We're not all veteran posters. We are not all trained academic writers. As long as new blood comes in to any online community, there will always be a certain amount of partisanship and instability.

Even if the veterans can keep their cool, there will always be that strata of members who pop their cork at the least little thing. Being partisan and making your case are NOT the same things, and it takes time for people to learn that. It has been my experience with online communities that quality of content and the general tone of the boards can never be sculpted beyond a certain point.

We can and we should be asked to be the good examples. If we want to be taken seriously, we will be the good examples.

I've gotta agree that the tendency to read half of a post and then react to it is becoming far too prevalent here. if you're not going to take the time to read all (or most of) the thread before replying, you should at least read the original post in it's entirety so you actually understand what the thread is about.

there's a lot of wasted page space around here because of people reading (or even just skimming) half of a post and then saying something in response that doesn't make any sense.

these are just as bad as the "me too"'s and the thread-derailing comments that don't add anything to the discussion type of posts, if not worse. we're supposed to be denying ignorance, but to me, reading half of what was said, misinterpreting it, and then responding to your own flawed interpretation is the definition of ignorance.

Just my thoughts.

The problem is that it's stopped being about discussion, and it's started to be about being right. People don't care what the other side says, because it doesn't matter. If they don't agree then obviously they're wrong, sheeple, stupid, blind, etc. It doesn't matter what side you're on, I've seen both sides of many "discussions" doing this. I've seen threads where the people on the other side of the discussion hadn't even posted in it, and they were being attacked and called names. And others where someone has stopped posting in the thread after the first couple of posts and a page or two later someone was still calling them a disinfo agent, or saying something about them.

We need to get things back to being an exchange of ideas and a discussion, instead of being concerned about who's right and who's wrong.

A part of the problem is that one can find whole threads on AP that are based on certain political lines that many Americans follow. Now the problem arises one someone makes assumptions about my political views based on an a stance I take. I tend to avoid threads that deal with topics along the same old party lines such threads may put people off AP who aren't political junkies because they wont know where to find the quality threads.

I only registered to post yesterday, but I have been reading for quite some time, and I agree that people seem to have pre-conceived notions about every stance, and judge a whole post based on those assumptions. With topics such as the one's at ATS I'm surprised that there are so many close minded people. I'm big on evidence and I need proof to really believe that something is true, but even if there is no proof I don't dismiss it out of hand..I remain undecided until evidence presents itself. It seems that many here have a line that they are not willing to cross. I suppose some people's minds can only go so far, but I think it would be a lot more fun if everyone discussed and debated things with the assumption that all things are possible.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The problem is that it's stopped being about discussion, and it's started to be about being right. People don't care what the other side says, because it doesn't matter.
We need to get things back to being an exchange of ideas and a discussion, instead of being concerned about who's right and who's wrong.

Great post Zaphod58!! I have noticed on many threads that it starts out with a discussion based on the initial post and then slowly it turns to take on a life of its own and by the time you get to pg5 it is almost unrelated to the original post. Someone says something and adds something unrelated and next post deals with that and on it gfoes. OR, a post is replied to by someone who actually has no clue about what the original post was and then due to no attention given to that person they wonder off and start a new thread, called something else but regarding the same issue or re-punt their POV.

Good post...I've been noticing that too.

Originally posted by Umbrax
I think this community prides itself of being open minded but as a whole we sure have a long way to go. All our different view points matter when it comes to “denying ignorance” and not everything is black and white.

Open minded does not mean posting like you've got another hole in your head...Ok, got it!

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I think that some of what you are looking for will come from experience. We're not all veteran posters. We are not all trained academic writers.

Amen to that! I'll be one of the first to admit that, even considering the sheer volume of what I've posted at ATS, I still don't get it right! As the professional writers are wont to say, "I've written a lot of good, solid, entertaining material that nearly became world famous, but always barely fell short of getting published."

Originally posted by Nick Nightstalker
I've gotta agree that the tendency to read half of a post and then react to it is becoming far too prevalent here. if you're not going to take the time to read all (or most of) the thread before replying, you should at least read the original post in it's entirety so you actually understand what the thread is about.

I try to avoid that by copy/paste with Wordpad. That way I can respond to all of the quotes I wish, look over my own stuff to modify/edit to try to inject better clarity & I can still come back to the thread & finish reading it & thinking about it...Before I actually start shooting off my own mouth (keyboard?). I even try to remember to Preview Post before I actually commit it. But, like I've said above...Sometimes I still don't get it right.

Originally posted by xpert11
A part of the problem is that one can find whole threads on AP that are based on certain political lines that many Americans follow. Now the problem arises one someone makes assumptions about my political views based on an a stance I take. I tend to avoid threads that deal with topics along the same old party lines such threads may put people off AP who aren't political junkies because they wont know where to find the quality threads.

I avoid this in AP by making my firm stand with the Constitution, regardless of party...That way all someone has to do is read it to know where I stand. As a side-effect, this also gets more Americans to dig up a copy & read it for themselves, which I believe is a positive step.

Originally posted by UmbraxI think this community prides itself of being open minded but as a whole we sure have a long way to go. All our different view points matter when it comes to “denying ignorance” and not everything is black and white. A lot of people’s point of view brings them to gray areas if we try to see other people’s points of view this will not only improve our selves individually but will allow our community to really get at the truth of all matters.

Thanks enormously.

Helps me realize it's not just me thinking such things.

It has dismayed me no end to see post after post after post virtually totally miss what I'd tried to say in . . . I'd thought . . . fairly straight-forward English.

The narrow, rigid, often haughty biases . . . brittle biases too often . . . seem to be . . . dismayingly common hereon and very lop-sidedly in one general direction. Those of us on the other end of the spectrum seem to get dismissed

WITHOUT even a semblence of being read and understood by seemingly a sizeable majority percentage of the more "vocal" posters hereon. Very dismaying.

And, if and when such folks who are unwilling and/or unable to comprehend maybe overly complex prose . . . if and when they can't respond to the arguments presented very convincingly . . . they seem overly given to tossing out more rigid, narrow, hostile bias stuff and running away. Not very impressive. But I guess it's better than a useless . . . p*ssing contest.

I don't know how successfuly your efforts on this thread will be. I hope a lot successful. But I'm skeptical. It seems that the spirit of our age is increasingly brittle, hostile, "AGIN-IT (against it)," contrary, "prissy, p*ssy, pouty, poopy, pontifical & poor," . . . AGAINST VIRTUALLY ANY other position, perspective, group not identical to itself.

It's like the old IN-GROUP/OUT-GROUP dynamics have intensified to the poitn where ALL "OTHERS OVER THERE" are to be hated, dissed, attacked, destroyed as worthless "OUT-GROUPIES."

I think that spirit so increasingly common across the globe--I think from demonic forces tweaking things in that direction--anyway--that kind of attitude, spirit on a forum such as this is particularly deadly.

HOMOGENIZED PABLUM is not very contributive, in my humble opinion, toward DENYING IGNORANCE . . . . EFFECTIVELY.

With all due respect, i think some of the posters on this very thread do not read what others post and its their way or the highway.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but i notice also that there is a mentality that says "You better listen to me- i'm the better writer and i will not respond to you because you lack writing skills and you're not worthy of a reply"

In fact, some post and post and post and answer their own questions and on and on and if you say something oposing them, they ignore you because why give time to someone who's obviously wrong??

Its the nature of the Internet. I dont think this can ever be changed.

Originally posted by dgtempe
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but i notice also that there is a mentality that says "You better listen to me- i'm the better writer and i will not respond to you because you lack writing skills and you're not worthy of a reply"

Oh absolutely - but sometimes it hasn't so much to do with "You better listen to me- i'm the better writer and i will not respond to you because you lack writing skills and you're not worthy of a reply" but more of "i will not respond to you because it's beating a dead donkey".

I do that - i am guilty, if i have made a post and the thread starts to go in circles i don't post any further replies or comments - nothing i wouldn't be able to say again and again or just keep posting further comment regarding the comments i already made. I am not ashamed of that and like i said, if the well has run dry i won't keep throwing the bucket in.

I don't believe it is being the better writer at all, anyone can add to a thread but should at least add a little value - but what happens is that someone will post something in a thread and the responding parties half read, or do not read at all, what is posted. They do not read the links posted and start to argue the same point over and over - fanatically. I will then move on to something "fresh" unless something new arises in the thread to discuss. Yes, i am guilty but that's not cos i believe i am better but do not like to regurgitate.

Originally posted by shearder
...but more of "i will not respond to you because it's beating a dead donkey".

Sometimes I feel like saying something to such idiots like, "I'm not Dr. Doolittle & never learned to speak "jackass"...
Fortunately, I've always been able to restrain myself...So far...

Originally posted by shearder
They do not read the links posted and start to argue the same point over and over - fanatically.

And usually the same point they argue over has little or nothing to do with the topic of the thread itself; You know...Derailed. I've seen quite a few threads wind up closed because of that...Sad, really.

I just wish people would get to the point! I often don't read whole posts because they just ramble on and on. I do try to find the central thesis, which I think I do pretty accurately usually but still there's the chance for making a mistake there.

Originally posted by Umbrax

9/11 conspiracy theorists believe that Bush is the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks.

Yeah, this seems to be a big one. While I certainly don't think the whole 9/11 thing adds up, I don't really think Bush is personally responsible for it. He is, at least in my opinion, just a fall guy.

Do I think he knew something was to occur? Probably. Do I think he knew what was going to happen? Probably not.

Helluva a post Umbrax, well said. There is another aspect to this too. Some people DO read the posts, they just read into them what they think another is saying because they've had dealings with said member before. And when you read things into a post that isn't there, you only open yourself up to ignorance.

Some people DO read the posts, they just read into them what they think another is saying because they've had dealings with said member before. And when you read things into a post that isn't there, you only open yourself up to ignorance.

Well said.

Ignorance . . . Deny Ignorance . . .

It is so easy . . . being human . . . for most of us to

ASS U ME

that ALL the ignorance and the willy nilly wallowing in it is

on the OTHER side; over THERE; THEM.

Such a mind-set can easily lead to reading into posts--especially by

ONE OF . . . THEM (out-group individuals divergent from our primary reference group; someone of THOSE SORTS . . . who've likely pontificated to our extreme distaste before . . . )

Such a mind-set can easily lead to reading into posts--especially by

ONE OF . . . THEM . . . things we ASSUME they are saying/would say BECAUSE we have them all sliced diced and packaged into our tidy little boxes that we depend on so much to make reality tolerable, comfortable and comfortably intellectually manageable.

And, to be fair . . . often the strongest, most intense amongst us (yes, my mirror works) do tend to be pretty stereotypic in a LOT of our pontifical pronouncements.

Yet, I don't know of anyone hereon who is totally a card-board cut-out of a 2 dimensional shallow critter of no depth and complexity at all.

But when things are intense--and a lot of our issues hereon are by nature inherently intense--when things ARE intense, we tend to cleave all the more to stereotypic tidy little boxes with which to construe and manipulate components of reality more toward our comfort zone--even if it's "only" the comfort zone of understandability per our perspective.

And, many times, our perspectives have been arrived at through enough painful hell and high water that we are loathe to even contemplate changing any significant components of it.

Not sure therefore what.

I think it's helpful to earnestly endeavor to take each post as it's own BEING-NESS. And, then, to relate to it on that basis, in the present, freshly--with as much fair-mindedness as possible.

Sure, there will be referents to other connections, history, evidence, perspective, structures etc. And those may need tied in sooner than later. But to needlessly slam a new slant on life's complexities into some unfitting tidy little boxes FOR OUR EXISTENTIAL COMFORT, primarily, or only--is to miss . . . a LOT. at least to potentially miss a lot.

Life and our typical issues hereon ARE ENORMOUSLY COMPLEX. Simple explanations and interpretations likely of necessity leave out a significant amount of detail. Sometimes those details are critical details that change the truth of the reality entirely when left out. Denying ignorance means we must include them no matter how offensive to our sensibilities and biases.

I think that takes courage and graciousness on all our parts.

--My flawed 2 cents worth.

dgtempe, I agree forums have been like this since I have been reading and posting on them.

However I think they have gotten worse in some aspects,

A common assumption that I have encountered is that if you don't support the coalition withdrawing its troops from Iraq you must have supported the initial invasion of Iraq and the removal of Saddam . Of course it is usually quiet a few frustrating posts before such an assumption is proved to be incorrect by myself.

As some will note, this is the first post in some time on this thread. But I didn't do it, the thread was already bumped when I found it!

What is posted above me is true, in it's own way. Yet it leaves out a basic need. I try, at the risk of being long winded, to pre-answer those points that I see will be brought up against whatever I say, in the hopes that by doing so, I will avert the need to address them later.

But people are lazy! They seldom seem to read the whole post, and if it's a long post, which many of mine are, then they skip it entirely. What is the problem with reading four or five paragraphs? Isn't reading, and then reflecting a moment essential to the idea of Deny Ignorance?

But I'll cut my thoughts short, I don't want to tax those with some form of AADD.