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

Nobody else is going to say anything about the stupidity of grouping hemp in with illicit drugs?

Moderators should do their job and moderate peoples' posts, not close entire discussions because of a few bad apples.



[edit on 25-2-2009 by alaskan]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I think that's a great idea. As long as EVERYONE has the opportunity.

I don't believe in a moderator, or even an advisory panel, deciding who and who doesn't "get in" to a forum.

You know ... "Absolute power" and all the cliches that accompany the like.

reply to post by alaskan


In a lot of places, they are one and the same.

Not right, but true.

reply to post by ravenshadow13


But you have to remember, Mods are volunteer. Sometimes, RL gets in the way and they cant always be here... *for example kleverone*

He's an excellent Mod, great member, great guy - but RL has kept him from the boards as much as he used to.

You can't just impose this sort of idea on the Mods... 2 or 3 on at all times in that specific forum, is a bit demanding of someone who volunteers their time.


- Carrot

Originally posted by spliff4020
And as far as "go post on some other site"... Well, why? I find most sites filled with trolls and spam bots. Not something I find here. I find these forums well modded and lots of thoughtfull posts made. If you ever spent an hour on the yahooka forums you would know what I mean.

There is a strict critera here for posting. I have had many posts deleted over the years. Lots moved to BTS. All of them aggravated me. I always thought the people that run this site are a bit preachy for my liking, but I dealt with it. It was quality.

The solution here is simple. It gets its own folder and subject matter needs to be clearly defined. Whats allowed and whats not. Then assign a mod or two (I'll do it!! I love banhammers!!). And keep it within the T&Cs. The folder could be "Conspricy on the Drug War" or something similar.

Just remember--- over 40% of Americans favor some sort of repeal of the prohibition on it. The numbers are growing..

Skeptic---> pimpin IS easy...
-runnin ATS isn't.

^^^^^ just said that 7 pages ago^^^^^^^^

I'd be a part of it. I'm laid off, living on unemployment and savings. Not a lot to do in my neck of the woods.

given the seriousness that is being placed on the subject by the owners, for whatever reason, i don't think a simple oath is enough, i think it should be a thing where you actively apply before you have posting rights and then you have a zero tolerance policy to useless posting.

posting is immediately blocked in the forum and you need to re-apply to post again.

it's not a big issue if you're willing to make a decent contrabution but it's a disincentive if you just want to mouth off about getting wasted.

getting banned from ATS for one mistake is a high price for a member and pre-approving every single post is a lot to ask of a mod, i think this is a good middle ground.

Originally posted by Cutwolf
And then on top of that, you can add levels...1st offense a week, 2nd offense a month, 3rd offense lifetime.

I like this idea. but I don't think it should be connected to ATS participation at large. Just the drug forum. I would make the time spans longer, too. Something like first offense, two weeks away from the drug forum and then you have to recommit. 2nd offense... Well, I believe in 2nd chances, but not third.

Originally posted by tgidkp
its probably a moot point at this point of the thread, but i have to say: what could be more obtuse than conflating growing cannabis with child molestation.

Oh good lord. Doesn't anyone understand using hyperbole to illustrate a point. Sweet Zombie Jesus.

reply to post by Reddupo


It would be hard to moderate, which is why I suggest that 10 moderators with significant experience moderating already be appointed. And such a high number so that if something gets questioned, there will be more than one person deciding if a post is to be removed or not.

Although the drug issues do come up in other topics like the economy and stuff, I think the best idea is just to move them ALL to this proposed forum as to not offend anyone and to allow for stricter moderation. Kind of how, like, posts get moved to Skunk or sometimes mine get moved to Politics when I post them elsewhere. Just to organize it better.

Magic, you won't have to change your name! And discussion of drugs would be allowed in it's own forum.

Does that make everyone happy?

And then those who really are against even hearing about it and who are mad because of what they agreed to in T&C wouldn't even have to see it if they don't want to. And the immature posts would be weeded out, and on repeat offenses so would the posters from that single specific forum. And if they go complaining all over BBQ about it, they get banned, because we're really all giving them a second chance right now.

Here's an example of what's to come if this happens and continues...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Then it will be discussions of psychology or hypnosis or NLP... these are also mind altering. So is the IDOSER which has been discussed frequently in relation to how it can affect you like a drug.

Seems to me that if it's gotten this bad then the T&C hasn't been followed, that's why its lead to this...

Maybe what is needed is for this group that you are forming be sent a U2U when any key words are used in a post and then they can decide if it PROMOTES the use of illegal drugs or is a valid and clear point. If they think it valid the post is sent through like the anonymous posts, if promoting illegal usage of drugs then the post is deleted and the member gets a warning or banning depending on if it's his first warning.

Can you not see what is happening? We will be like the article above soon. I really hate having to see all the promotion of torture going on here on ATS and have learned to stay away from it when possible. This prevents me from constantly complaining to the mods about how the promotion of this activity goes on. That will change though when drugs are illegal to talk about. Doesn't matter if they're legal where you are, they're illegal in ATS land.

It is illegal to talk against the government also, yet we have it in almost every thread. They even have a name for it.... sedition... When does this become illegal in ATS land people?

Here we go...


Rgds

Anyway 1 very simple proposal to keep every one happy could be one based on the point system you have in place.

Step 1. Place a points ban on posts in such threads of say 10,000 points and ban anonymous posts. This will surely eliminate a lot of the problems of derailers. Anyone breaking the stricter T&C in these threads gets an immediate ban. I'm guessing such people will lose patience with trying to build 10,000 points just to get banned straight away.
Step 2. A moderator would be shown the thread in question to proof read it so to speak. When given the go ahead and because of step 1 conditions the thread will stay on topic for sure!

reply to post by CA_Orot


Oh totally. I mean, if we appoint 10 to the forum, 2 or 3 on within an hour seems like it would be fine. And that's not even including the supermoderators who would be part of that 2 or 3 checking in on it.

I don't think people should have to initially apply to post. I think they should agree to the terms of the forum publicly. And if they get banned from the forum, they should be able to ONE TIME reapply for entry to a moderator, who is aware of why they were initially banned. After that, you're forever banned from the drug issues, but if you don't violate any other part of the T&C then you will still be able to have full membership on the rest of the site.

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
I think that people should, first, be able to get banned from that forum and not the entire site if the drug issue is the only place where there seems to be a problem.

Absolutely. By "this forum", I meant the drug forum, not ATS.

Also, who would the U2U be sent to?

Someone yet to be named. Maybe any one of the mods that get assigned to that forum?

In the forum I think it would be okay to discuss illegal drug controversies, but personal stories and insults calling others "potheads" or saying "you don't understand because you're a drug-phobe" would be prohibited.

Exactly.

A sticky phrase ontop of the board and it's topics could work just as well as a U2U and would take some pressures off of the staff.

It's written in te T&C now and it's ignored. That's why we're here. I just think a focused, clear message and personal commitment would cause fewer troubles later on.

It's just an idea.

I don't like the idea of applying to get into the forum. It's a large topic (obviously), and more and more is it showing up in news. It should be easily avoided for those who have no interest in it, and easily visited for those that want to check up on current events every so often.

I DO like the idea of very strict moderation and banning/warning. This is what will keep the forum clean while not inhibiting any information to everyone who wants it.

No it dose not make me happy becasue this is the start of the slippery slope, ATS has been infected with the nanny state disease. As I said whats next? I'm sure we won't have to wait long before we are told yet another subject matter cannot be discussed and I could name plenty of topics that are candidates for the same action.

There is better ways to deal with something rather than banning it.

reply to post by kcfusion


There's a reason why they don't already have a "negative" rating system. I'm not sure if what you suggest is the best way to make sure we're getting quality posts. I'm afraid the final say should come from "qualified" candidates and not the general public.

As for banning anonymous posts in the designated forum - I think that is a great idea! I second the motion.

1st, i'm a bit curious as to the objection to applying to post.

2nd, shouldn't we at least attempt to vote on a member lobby for the subject, as requested. i mean, seriously, we should at least have a tight group to present this to the staff. if we can't present a group of five between us then what's the point in even talking about a proposal.

[edit on 25/2/09 by pieman]

reply to post by ravenshadow13


By using a public oath (such as the bully pulpit) the responsibility is placed on the MEMBER themselves.. and less on the Mods who have other things to do, then to hold our hands and babysit us throughout our time here on ATS.

They are members too. They should be able to post and participate in discussions. Having someone commit to being on that board a certain number of hours per day - I still think, is demanding.

I like the idea of having the posts approved, before they are posted and seen by the membership. Kind of like the anonymous posts - but again - does this put more work, strain, and responsibility on the Mods?

- Carrot

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I agree....

...dedicated forum
...strict moderation from a large group of Mods
...strict oath/rules to agree to before being allowed to participate
...2 strikes and you are out of dedicated forum
...certain drug topics allowed but nothing about illegal personal use or personal "pothead" stories
...maybe a review of posts before they appear in the dedicated forum??




[edit on 2/25/2009 by skeptic1]

Not sue if I'm too late or anything has changed...

My vote is for ANOk!!