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 SUSPENSION of illicit drugs/mind altering substance topics on ATS (The experiment failed)

page: 13
42
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I'll participate in the committee, or not. I'm not concerned about that as much I am about supporting non-biased, fact-based discussion on this topic. Thank you SkepticOverlord for being rational and caring about the satisfaction of your members.




posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I absolutely, 100% congratulate you on this move to include members in your decision making. The whole aspect of closing things down so (the collective) you could decide and then tell us, wasn't sitting well with me.
I am glad you seem to have heard some of your constituents.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by dbates
 


If I'm under 21, yes, and I can certainly abuse it to achieve a mind altering state.




the misuse of any substance to achieve a mind altering state




posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
the discussion sounds great and i don't mean to pre-empt it, but i just had a thought, (yeah, it did hurt)
there's a forum for collaborative fiction that you need to apply to in order to post on BTS, wouldn't a similar forum for drugs conspiracies be a really quick and easy answer if mature discussion is the only concern?

[edit on 25/2/09 by pieman]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I would like to participate in this special comittee. I care deeply about the drug problem in our country (the USA) and I feel it's a topic that should be discussed. I feel we can do it without being immature.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
This thread is getting popular. Anyways I should throw my 2 cents in.
There are many other things to talk about rather than drugs. Drugs are bad m'kay.

If site moderators want to make rules not to talk about drugs than that is ok with me. And if they want to make rules not to copy peoples work that is ok with me too.

I would rather read about end of the word scenarios and alien takeover conspiracies. They tickle the mind.

If there was a choice on weather to have a rule-less community with anarchy, or one with civilized rules that allowed for intriguing discussions I will pick the one with civilized rules.

Anyway, I do not contribute much to the site but I find it very fun to visit everyday . My intelligence does not allow me to trump the best of the best posters, so I read the best of the best and learn as I go.

At least they stood for something rather than fall for anything.
I give 1000 points to all the people who came up with the decision to make a stand on some sort of order. Not that my points mean anything, they are still my points.

Keep making interesting threads people, they are addicting to read.

Thanks. From me.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
One step forward, 100 steps back... Could I just ask why we aren't able to discuss this?

*Explained*

[edit on 25-2-2009 by TNT13]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I nominate Reddupo

That is my first nomination. I have read his posts. He seems like a good candidate



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   
I'm glad you've considered re-considering on conditions.

I just don't understand what makes drug topics different from any other topic in which hundreds, if not thousands of people post hateful comments that can be just as damaging.

Remember when you had to institute a strict watch on 9/11 topics? Were those people "undesirables" too. You didn't decide to ban 9/11 discussion because this topic tended to attracted the personality types that continually disputed certain topics with hate-filled responses.

I've seen people here talk about how they would kill a home invader and go on to verbally attack those that argue the point. Thought, I believe murder is illegal in MOST countries. I've seen people here talk about taking peoples kids away from parents that are obese, which to me doesn't even deserve a thread of it's own.

How is talk such as this different from other threads where people drift off topic? Because people tend to reference their own life experiences (which in some countries may or may not be illegal) when talking about drugs? It's like asking a World Trade Center survivor to talk about 9/11 without mentioning their own experience because they've outlawed talk of 9/11 in Pakistan.

This TOTALLY blows a hole in your "Deny Ignorance" slogan if you ask me. "Embrace Drug Ignorance".

It's like my pre-marital counselor once said, "Ignoring a problem rarely makes it go away. Often times it can aggravate the real issue."

[edit on 25-2-2009 by tyranny22]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by TNT13
One step forward, 100 steps back.

Please read this.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


I think that's a good idea. The "personal use" clause would still be in effect and the rules would be understood before allowing entry. Maybe someone could write up a strict rule and send it to anyone wanting to be a member and the prospective member would have to agree to the terms before getting posting privileges. One strike and you're out.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Edit: Whoops, two posts up friends.


Stop posting so damn fast.


Peace


[edit on 25-2-2009 by Dr Love]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Concerning the Drug DISC committee, I would be glad to volunteer my efforts if the membership would accept my representation.



Originally posted by darcon
Lets all take a moment to review this thread, we have to nominate someone not biased on both sides of the spectrum.


I believe I would qualify in this regard. I'd like to see an appropriate solution for both sides.



[edit on 25-2-2009 by loam]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
I would like to be nominated
I know the topic fairly well



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
I would love to participate in such a committee.

I will bring a scalpel, my opponent wants to use a hatchet.

I will bring hope, my opponent wants to use fear.

Universal healthcare! Tax cu...

Oops. Got carried away.

But in all seriousness, I would definitely be up for participating.

I'm not a big participant in drug topics by any means, but I feel that I can bring a valuable viewpoint to the handling of the issue in general.

[edit on 2-25-2009 by Cutwolf]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I nominate Reddupo

That is my first nomination. I have read his posts. He seems like a good candidate

My second nomination is Benevolent Heretic

He too seems unbiased.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by tyranny22
I just don't understand what makes drug topics different from any other topic in which hundreds, if not thousands of people post hateful comments that can be just as damaging.

Neither do I. Hence our decision.

As other members have replied in this thread, and as serious drug topic starters have complained via our complaints feature, drug-related topics are a porch light for a certain kind of disruptive moth. Perhaps we need to reconfigure and find the frequency of light that won't be noticed by those types of moths.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   
So, how is the committee formed..?


Both sides of the fence get represented? i.e. those that believe 'it' should be legalized and those that don't...only to ensure the integrity of the committee.


Or are they appointed, and what's the criteria..?



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


This is simply not true. In fact, every post indicating as much is nothing more than a propaganda laden lie.

I've participated in very few, but read nearly all of the related threads, until they meet their demise of course. First, it's no more work to ban a member than it is to trash the entire thread. Second, the need to do so is monumentally inflated. Hence the complaints that "excuses" to close these threads are being used, rather than justifiable violations of terms in conditions.

The very same "infractions" that get these threads closed, result in absolutely no action when the topic has nothing to do with cannabis.

You know what, there are countless other places on the net to discuss these things. And you know what else, many of them strictly enforce the same policies that this new zero tolerance policy replaces here at ATS. Want to know one more thing? These communities thrive. Plenty of intelligent discussion, without the stereotypical pot-head "I'm soooooo stoned" BS posts. Users who post such garbage are promptly and permanently removed from the community. Even places with more lax policies have member bases that have proven their abilities to police themselves in this regard.

Let me ask this, as I fear that I may be, just as SkepticOverlord pointed out, too "dense" to understand. Exactly what harm does discussion of these topics bring to ATS? There are no legal ramifications, no revenue related consequences, and those that prefer not to be exposed to such discussions don't have to read them. All I can gather to piece some logical explanation together leads me back to SO's recent comment about letting "real topics rule the day".

I'll be up front about this SO, then I'll kindly refrain from posting further in this thread. If it's solely the staffs personal feelings about the matter (which you've refuted time and time again) then the staff is the biggest bunch of hypocrites on the site. The thing is, your (meaning the entire staff) actions are saying something completely different than your words are. Although, I do have to give credit where it's due, and you guys have perfected your Ostrich defensive maneuvers.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   
You know, you -could- make a board dedicated to illicit/mind-altering substances.
Here's my thinking:
1. You could have it set so that it perhaps does not show up in recent posts, and even if it did, it would not show up in all the other boards, and if people were offended by the discussion of the topic they could avoid the board and never see it again.

2. You could have moderators (some of your best) assigned to that specific board. Perhaps more than in other boards. That would assure that the posts that should be deleted, will be deleted, and the the discussions will remain on track.

3. I would also suggest not allowing starring in that board in the beginning. This way the people who post would have to really think about what they are posting.

That would be my suggestion, and I feel like everyone might be okay with at least the first 2 points.

Benev is a she, by the way. ^_^

[edit on 2/25/2009 by ravenshadow13]



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join