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: 32
42
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Whomever applies for this thankless job will need to either be very informed on the Psychopharmacology, Drug law, enforcement and criminal laws, sociological and cultural uses, history of uses in cultures and psychology and behavioral studies, or be very very diplomatic.

Moderators slapped with this charge might find it prudent to find experts on tap to ask on the blank areas of their personal database.

I have studied this subject area for 38 years, have known DEA chemists and psyco-pharms actually creating and testing. I was raised in a law enforcement family concerned with this issue and I have done great amounts of reading and study on the uses, anthropological study and cultural anthropology of substance related spiritual uses. Still, I would not want to be seated in any judgment position for this.

In other words, I know enough to know I don't know enough for this type of moderatable communications. (no, I have no time or interest myself)


For whomever mods, get your experts in line and have your browser library handy. It will be easy to see the glaring violations, but when they arrive in a allowed subject-related thread because there is nowhere else to pawn their interests, and you dismiss the whole thread for a few stoners who spam the thread with irrelevant associations, you will have done great damage to the important discussions that we need to understand better the subject.

Great caution is warranted. I can think of uncounted important subjects in danger of nowhere to go. That the entropy of our intelligence might accelerate, is the danger.

ZG

[edit on 2/25/2009 by ZeroGhost]




posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
can we do a live vote like finally use the chat or something?



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1

Originally posted by SvenTheBerserK
Well we have the nominees,i say we let administration pick from that list who they want to talk with.

It looks like a good broad spectrum list.


I like this idea, too.

Then, it is less of a popularity contest and more of a actual group of people that Admin is willing to talk and listen to.

JMO....



I kind of agree too.
I think it could turn into a popularity contest rather than picking who is best suited to the role..



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
I don't think we should vote today. There is an entire membership who should be included in this.

I still think, that having a panel of equal distributions is a good approach...

- Carrot



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I'm sure the NWO & CIA are happy not to be exposed here any longer.

Of course all the Jailers and coppers can feel more secure with themselves that nobody will challenge their view or racket here.

Since 65% of everyone in jail or prison the West happen to be illicit drug related offenses - I guess we can't talk about that either.

I guess I must of missed all the controversy or problems that came up, or maybe it was an important advertiser - I don't know.

Regardless of the diminished content, I still happen to love ATS and I'm sure I'll survive. After all I only commented on drug threads a half dozen times in the past couple years.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


That was what me and benevolent thought, but skeptic overlord said we had to vote, which is going to be a bit complicated.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by darcon
 


Personally I think voting is a better option. Then then people (the members) feel like they've actually got a say in whats going on and who is representing them.

- Carrot



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


Wait...I thought I had read every post so far, and it was mentioned several times, with no apparent decision, that the members on this committee should NOT have an opinion the subject, but rather the ability to apply rationale in setting up the NEW Forum and the handling of the subject matter at hand...

If they are allowed to bring their opinions, then shouldn't the committee be divided equally into pro and con..? Has this been established..?





posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by darcon
 


I thought he just wanted us to nominate people?

I lean towards Admin picking. It is more fair, and they are more likely to listen to the people who haven't mocked them or been mocked by them in this thread.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Benev, we should do it now and not leave it open, this is getting out of control with the number of nominees. We should not increase the number anymore than it is now, and decide between us. Leave 10 minutes for voting.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 

Yes he did say nominate. He also said nominate 4 or 5 people.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by CA_Orot
 


Voted for the people by the people. Makes sense. Regardless i believe it is going to be a vote. I just hope it is organized well enough.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by darcon
 


You're welcome - thought I might as well round it up





posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
They want us to vote and will approve of who we nominate. So like, we really should just do it now, and as long as people have 10 minutes to 30 minutes, I think it's fair. It's not like everyone is involved in this thread, and I think they should be... in order to vote fairly.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by CA_Orot
 


That's what the nomination process was for, right?

This shouldn't be a popularity contest......and that's what a member vote would turn into (I fear).

But, like I said, this is just my opinion.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
Benev, we should do it now and not leave it open, this is getting out of control with the number of nominees. We should not increase the number anymore than it is now, and decide between us. Leave 10 minutes for voting.


I like Skeptic's idea better. Let the admins choose; that way it is less of the popularity contest some are worried about.

That and the fact I'm going to be going offline here in a bit and would not be able to vote.

[edit on 25-2-2009 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Reddupo
 


Since everyone nominated themselves


We the people are going to vote on the nominees.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 




Well you sure did that. Came into the thread at the exact right time for sure.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by chapter29
If they are allowed to bring their opinions, then shouldn't the committee be divided equally into pro and con..? Has this been established..?


I did suggest this, as it would be the fairest approach to having a fair representation for all members.

I feel like this is too rushed guys...

- Carrot



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Can admin send a community U2U with a list of nominees and ask those who want to, to vote for 5 members?

Instead of adding another 30 odd pages to this thread.



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join