It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


A Call To Action: Ending The Political Game on ATS

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:02 PM
reply to post by Kernel Korn

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I would have to say not. A bit of introspection might be in order here.

No Maxmars, you've not missed anything. No one ideology is being singled out here, despite accusations to the contrary.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:04 PM
reply to post by MrPenny

You do realize (or maybe you DON'T), that by this standard, if someone is asked to back up their statement with facts, that it is a violation of guidelines to reference ANY book, since unless that book was written by a candidate, it is out of bounds.

I truly DON'T think you have a clue as to what this leads to. Again, I repeat, this new "policy" was issued WITHOUT serious discussion or input from anyone other than the moderators. It was a knee-jerk reaction, and there is no doubt that much informative debate is being thrown out, along with the tripe.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:06 PM

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by nyk537
What was wrong with the thread discussing options for VP?

Why is it not clear that such a thread is unrelated to platform?

Also, does this mean that legitimate discussions about things like Obamas association with Ayers are off limits?

Within the normal political forums, unfortunately, yes. Within the strict environment of the Bully Pulpit, however, it would be allowed.

Thank you. That actually cleared it up in my mind where this is headed.

All that is going on here is that ATS is reflecting the current state of politics in America. It has indeed turned in a giant Soap Opera for the masses with little or no discussion of important issues. I'd wager most can not give details of their Candidates plans, including the Candidates themselves.

Good move SO

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:19 PM

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

The Burning Question: why are there no new threads on candidate or party platform policies/issues in the hours since this announcement? We've made it clear that quality threads of that nature will be rewarded.

It could just be because the Party Platforms are so shallow and even finding topics to discuss will be interesting. All we truly get is little tidbits from Candidates with little substance to begin with. It will take lots of digging to put together exactly what their stances are.

From what you said before, the "Bully Pulpit" is where the best discussion will take place, carefully monitored of course. That is if I'm understanding correctly? You are in fact driving the possibly incendiary discussions into the "Bully Pulpit" to stop the nonsense in an environment where bad behavior will result in expulsion; correct?

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:22 PM
There is a very interesting DeesIllustration on Rense, which directly applies to this debate:

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:23 PM

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by jsobecky
Why choose ATS?

Our traffic is high.

Our Quantcast and Alexa rankings have been steadily increasing.

And what's posted on ATS shows up in Google searches within 9 hours of posting.

Not many other venues provide that killer combination of exposure for defamation and disruption attempts.

Just my opinon at this point because the fallout isn't known yet, but I suspect the majority of "high traffic" --- "94,00 page views" would be linked to the very discussions/debates you have disallowed. 94,000 people aren't coming here to read bland boring subjects, this much I know. It brings to mind the old adage: "I just shot myself in the foot"

[edit on 11-9-2008 by Bombeni]

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:35 PM

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by Dronetek
What you're doing here is basically a broad character assassination of anyone Republican.

You are wrong. Here's a list of the thread titles deleted as a result of this new policy:
McCain is apparently sexist too
McCain 'Freed From Prison' Video
McCain's New Ad Re: Sex Education Vote by Obama
Audacity of Deceit-new book outlining Dark Future for America under Obama
The case against the case against Palin
McCain's "lipstick/pig" comment
MTV VMA Host: "Elect Obama, Bush is a retard"
Deadline for Impeachment
My breakdown of casual neocon rhetoric

In this short amount of time, it appears that more rhetoric threads critical of republicans have been deleted than those critical of democrats.

but there is definitely an "us vs them" feeling here.

I agree. Those who care about real issues -vs- those who care about divisive disruption.

No --- there were others closed in addition to what you've listed.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:36 PM

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
You do realize (or maybe you DON'T), that by this standard, if someone is asked to back up their statement with facts, that it is a violation of guidelines to reference ANY book, since unless that book was written by a candidate, it is out of bounds.

Just like the Golden Rule...."thems that has the gold...makes the rules."

The owners of the forum make the rules, thus;

New threads in the Campaign 2008 forum must be based on published candidate platform items, either officially, or from recent interviews.

Barack Obama didn't write, transcribe, dictate, or telegraph the contents of the book in question. Nor did John McCain.


Clear cut.


[edit on 11-9-2008 by MrPenny]

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:39 PM
Outstanding and so badly needed not only on ATS, but for our Nation and MSM as well.

Once again, ATS makes a path through the hate and ignorance that is manipulating this Nation. By doing our part here and now, ATS stands as a guide for others to follow and live up to.

Thank you ATS.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:45 PM
To me, it appears that political discussion on ATS is now limited to whatever issues and positions the candidates release in the newspapers or in press releases. True?

To expand, if a whistleblower were to uncover corruption in one of the camps, that would be disallowed until it was proven/disproven by another website, and by that time, old news. Correct?

[edit on 11-9-2008 by jsobecky]

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:46 PM
How many threads can you make about healthcare without rehashing the same ol points?

Personally I felt that ignoring the threads or posts I wasn't interested in was power enough.

If somebody was being racist or rude mods took care of it.

By the way, you can bring Karl Rove and any other Republican or Democrat talking head in here and we will debate them too.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 03:05 PM
Wow SO, you have unleashed terror on ATS. Already after what just happened to me, I can say I'll think more than twice about participating in any political threads. After a brief discussion, the staff took care of it, but whoa.

Maybe you should really reconsider on bringing AP back here to have it all mixed. Besides, I thought Majic was supposed to be taking care of AP, and doing things to get more traffic?

Or alternatively, at least you could add a new line to the top flagged topic scroll bar to differentiate ATS threads, so that there always is a display of the most flagged ATS topics.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 03:25 PM

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by eye open doors

You are, of course, correct. I was making a poor attempt at being funny, and I failed entirely.

Perhaps it was I who did not read the irony in your words. I demand you append a face with emotions to every post you make. This way I will not feel like such a fool. Blame-blame-blamity-blame.

Also, I never thought of this community as generally like-minded, as some here appear to intimate. While members here can be very outspoken, I have seen a broad spectrum of ideologies represented.

Amen to that... it's the differences that make the world go around. Now if we were the borg, or ants, or some other hive mind... I may want to cry heretic. Thank goodness this is not so.

Nevertheless, staying away from such exchanges is clearly preferable to trying to 'steer' the thread after the fact. That much is for sure.

Yeah but, people are so easily stirred up by negative energy. The temptation is too strong to ruin peoples experiences, and to feed the ego. Gods forbid that people respect one another in an environment where there is so little risk.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 03:30 PM
I just want to first say that (YES) I knew there were political plants here on ATS, I have encountered shills on both sides of the fence and it was so very obvious that anyone could see. I am glad to know that these people are finally being singled out and dealt with accordingly.

Although I still feel the idea of re-opening PTS and moving all political material to that forum would have made a world of good sense, and it would have cleaned up the boards for those who have no interest in politics.

That being said, I do applaud this decision. Even though I am waiting to see how it all gets implemented, I think this was a wise move by S.O. and staff to bring the bickering and pettiness to a screaching halt. This is a conspiracy site FIRST, politics should take a back seat to the true content of choice.

And for those who are still bickering and back biting and complaining - my advice would be to get over it. There are THREE Amigos who own and operate this site, and if you aint one of them then really you get no say in the matter. Respect the ownership and the quality site that we all get to enjoy at no cost.

There are a hundred sites that cater to nothing but political bi partisan muck slinging, if your constant need to take part in these types of topics overwhelms you (like mine does) then go relieve yourself elsewhere. It is not the purpose of this board to cater to you or me.

Think of it like this. You are invited to a friends home. You are told that you will be treated well and given the opportunity to discuss any topic of interest that your heart desires. The only one and simple rule is that you are asked to be respectful and behave like an adult. Would you honor the wishes of your host? Or would you choose to keep on behaving like an ass anyway?

Im not the smartest man in the world, but it really doesn't seem that difficult to follow. Why can't everyone agree to act to a higher standard moving forward? I am guilty of getting out of line from time to time just like all of you, but enough is enough.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 03:36 PM
And can we please keep all the pointless political threads to the political forum only so they don't clog up the main page every time I go to it (PALIN THIS MCINSANE THAT OBAMA DID THIS PALIN SAID THAT - WHO CARES!!!!! IT'S POINTLESS!). I'd like to see them in the political 'bar' below the main first topics and that's it.
I, like many on here know the election is a big fraud and I don't see the point in discussing mindless drivel and having it drag down the integrity of the rest of the site.

In brief: The two party politics in USA are corrupt and meaningless. I am sick of political threads about pointless topics and seeing them clogging up the site in regards to the usual two party divide and conquer.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by jsobecky

To me, it appears that political discussion on ATS is now limited to whatever issues and positions the candidates release in the newspapers or in press releases. True?

To expand, if a whistleblower were to uncover corruption in one of the camps, that would be disallowed until it was proven/disproven by another website, and by that time, old news. Correct?

By Jove, someone that understands the implications!
Again, for those that DON'T still get it, it means that you cannot refute what the candidate says, with anything other than what the candidate says.
Get it now, other people?

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 03:38 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 03:59 PM

good stuff

no more

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 04:03 PM
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

What exactly is meant by "regain control"?
Almost feels like this will no longer be an outlet for voicing ones opinion.

What makes politics different from the many, many topics already being discussed here?

Politics affects our lives more than many of the same conspiracy theories that are continually being regurgitated here.
When many of these conspiracies eventually turn out to be hoaxes, that would mean the entire thread was nothing more than a big huge lie.
In the process, how many Man hours were spent in the discussion of these threads/hoaxes?

If a candidate makes up a lie that his/her followers are quick to believe and accept as truth, what is wrong with making an attempt to refute that lie?

Sadly and obviously, times have changed.
The once respected media publications of yesteryear are now extremely biased and getting caught more and more printing lies, all while the tabloid rags are now, ironically, reporting real news.

I know things get out of hand and downright silly sometimes in some of these political discussions, but if you really want to make things fair and unbiased across the board, why not remove the "MSNBC: Featured Politics Videos" sidebar section?

I know ATS has no control whatsoever over MSNBC, but how often do Olbermann and Matthews break the very rules of conduct that are now being enforced here?

If some of these discussions have gotten "silly", it's only the "fight fire with fire" approach that is being used.

What I find interesting is the timing in the implementaton of this new rule, especially since the lead in this race now appears to have shifted a bit.
I'm sorry but it almost seems slighty Oprahesque.

There are many boards here on ATS, and with the tons of forums that already exist, why not just create a new forum called Silly Politics, Politics R Dumb or something to that affect?
Kinda like an "enter at your own risk" slash ATS virtual Fight Club where one can just let loose and vent.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 04:04 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Thats exactly the way I interpret this situation. All opinion of whats said and thought by members is moot. Stories about the platforms and talking points don't matter if not pertaining to the exact platform stated. This sure sounds like an end run to completely stop all political posting here. If thats what they want then, by all means, say so!


top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in