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: 5
42
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   
I have seen far worse comments in the religious topics or those about racism or sexism than i have ever seen in any drug related topic.

I wonder where this will lead.....




posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   
I fail to see how my post was in direct conflict of your zero tolerance policy.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Out of curiousity, I wonder if it would be possible to propose a happy-medium?

Perhaps, but not for a while.

This drastic action has been taken to "normalize" the board and get us back to an environment where real issues rule the day.


--- side track ---

The conspiracy theorist in me sees a real problem with the sudden rise in media stories about the potential legalization of pot. This is no coincidence folks. As we who frequent ATS know, distracting stories and issues always happen for a reason. And now, with really serious problems spreading throughout the world as a result of financial malfeasance by bankers and governments, we're given this issue (pot legalization) to deflect our attention. Really?

--- end of side track ---


After the dust settles (4-6 months), we've speculated on new tactics to introduce topics such as legalization and the war on drugs in a way that ensures the discussion totally avoids inappropriate divergences into promoting illicit personal use. But for now, we need to "clear the air" and reset.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
So should topics that discuss Obama be next? They fall into the same pit with the remarks. What about terrorism and religion? They all do the same. What is the difference that makes drug topics so dangerous?


It should be a very simple matter to understand. If you are discussing doing harm to the President or committing an act of terrorism, or some other illegal act then YES it is (or at least should be) forbidden.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Nice.
So ATS has joined the NWO in their war on drugs huh. Nice indeed.
For a site that holds itself out to be a source of information that the government would rather we didn't, All I can say is that it is truly disapointing that now it's against the "rules" to talk about this, or that, or the other.

I guess it's okay to talk about things, as long as they're not frowned upon by the Government of the USA, since even if it's legal where you're from, you better not upset the masters.

Nice job ATS, you have just become another agent of disinformation and control of the masses, good going.

I'm out! this site is owned by hypocrites.

Thus place isn't out to change anything, just to give the false appearance that it's "Above top secret"... gimme a break, what a farce.

**edited to add that I don't use drugs, never have, but when the day comes that ATS begins to enforce the US governments ajenda, I know it's no place for me.

[edit on 25-2-2009 by uaocteaou]

**edited again to point out that the signature line.. "SUBVERSIVE ELEMENT FOR LIFE" wel, I guess we know who tows their masters line huh... LOL....

[edit on 25-2-2009 by uaocteaou]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


True that, it's amazing how drug related topics can trump sexism, homophobia, racism, etc. And the bad thing is that these kinds of topics are way more prevalent than the few who talk about their illegal drug experiences.

ATS seriously needs to get it's priorities straight.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Beautiful.

This makes so much sense, I mean heck, it's not like drugs are part of the real world, real problems, real people, and they sure as heck are NEVER part of any real conspiracy.

Way to go scholars. Continue to remove ingredients from the recipe and see if your bread continues to rise.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Nice side track. Do you see danger in taxing something that should be free? Is that some sort of slippery slope? Just curious



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
I have seen far worse comments in the religious topics or those about racism or sexism than i have ever seen in any drug related topic.

I wonder where this will lead...


Nowhere, because it is not illegal or be a racist, sexist, or another other variation of intolerant.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I think when the owners of this site look back on this decision as it relates to the purpose and motto of this website, they will be very dissapointed in themselves.

I come here for freedom of speech; to be able to discuss subjects that are of utter importance to our culture. There are some very big changes going on with the war on drugs and now i will be going to other sources for information and discussion.

Just because a few can't follow the rules dosen't mean everyone should be punished! The decision really isnt consistent with how you portray your site and its purpose and I think you will eventually see that it is a mistake.

MHO



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by tristar
I fail to see how my post was in direct conflict of your zero tolerance policy.


It clearly wasn't, nor was mine.

I found a post last night calling for the killing of all gay people, from the fall of 2008. That's perfectly fine, evidently, as the thread has been open for months. But God forbid you should question drug policy.

I can hardly believe that an entire topic has been outlawed. Show me a topic here on ATS that doesn't eventually result in some degree of immaturity.

I agree with the administration here that personal discussion of one's own drug-related exploits has no place here. But it's rediculious to me that the entire topic of drug prohibition has been outlawed.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by uaocteaou
 


I do not think they are joining the "NWO", and the accusations you make are very hasty.

Although i disagree with the decision they made(As it takes out a whole subject worth discussing), and yes it is hypocritical of them to do this, but i believe they made the decision it out of good intentions.

Regardless the negative feed back will continue.

[edit on 25-2-2009 by darcon]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


I've contributed to many threads here on Cannabis and I've never seen anyone say that. The most I've noticed is subtle hints. So at a guess I'd say it happens no more often than someone breaking T&C in any other thread.

So why not just delete and warn that poster?

Isn't that what you do in other threads that break T&C?

Sorry but I just don't buy the ATC reasoning on this.

A blanket ban on Cannabis discussion is of course the right of the owner but I wish you'd be more honest and more consistent with your 'rules'.

You may own the site but it's the posters that keep it open. Maybe all the Cannabis smokers should boycott ATS? There are a lot of us....



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by outatime


If a crappy little web site can't ensure your freedom of speech then how in the hell are entire countries supposed to do it???

What do you mean by "entire countries." You can saddle the Internet and ride anywhere you want to.

[edit on 2/25/2009 by stander]
 

Edited to remove link



2e.) Illegal Activity: Discussion of illegal activities; specifically mind-altering drugs, computer hacking, criminal hate, sexual relations with minors, and stock scams are strictly forbidden. You will also not link to sites that contains discussion of such material.


[edit on 25-2-2009 by dbates]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
We dont have to like the rules,just abide by them.But i agree this is a huge step in the wrong direction.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ranhome
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 

Nice side track. Do you see danger in taxing something that should be free?


No.

I don't think the government will ever legalize pot or any other substance... there is too much profit to be made from the "war on drugs." Instead I think the "under-30" crowd has been thrown a distracting bone during these exceptionally stressful times. Look around... how much as the legalization issue dominated other sites that are popular in the culture? Shouldn't we be focused on more important issues? We're on the precipice of financial armageddon that will effect everyone world-wide, and suddenly pot legalization becomes a dominant story? Come on. It's obvious.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by ANOK
 



The difference being, in most other threads, people aren't going on about how much fun it was to get "so totally blasted, man" on whatever their drug of choice is.

These people are, or rather were, in the minority. That much is true. But it doesn't take many to ruin it for everyone else.


Then moderate said posts on a per post basis, instead of making up stupid catch all rules that end up being a flameflower in a firestorm.

This is a site about conspiracy theories, censorship has no place here, and I for one think it's a case of lack of testicular fortitude by the part of whoever is taking the decisions. This sort of rule type is basically ATS nutering itself.

Add these sort of rules with the obligatory use of in site hosting, another precious little piece of fascism, and the signs are clear that ATS is falling to the side of debate shaping instead of debate hosting, because in site hosting allows for in site censorship. Or is it for our "security"?

I can understand the legal pressures behind some of these decisions and perhaps my criticism is still a bit premature as you have not, to my knowledge, been that active in user censoring, but you guys are either in the business of denying ignorance or embracing it. That choice is yours, not mine, to make. The trend is not really positive imho.

I've made truth a lifestyle for years now, I recommend it. It does however take some courage.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   
I do not agree with this decision at all, and I question the direction of ATS.

Rather than ban an entire realm of discussion, strictly enforce a two-strike rule (warning then ban) on certain sensitive topics.

Yeah, it'll lead to more work for the moderators, but that comes with the expansion that ATS seems so desperate to achieve. And if it really is that much of a problem, hire more moderators.

This decision is a hatchet when what is needed is a scalpel.


I don't think the government will ever legalize pot or any other substance... there is too much profit to be made from the "war on drugs." Instead I think the "under-30" crowd has been thrown a distracting bone during these exceptionally stressful times. Look around... how much as the legalization issue dominated other sites that are popular in the culture? Shouldn't we be focused on more important issues? We're on the precipice of financial armageddon that will effect everyone world-wide, and suddenly pot legalization becomes a dominant story? Come on. It's obvious.


No offense, SO, as you know I have nothing but respect for you and have since I joined...

But I really don't see why you believe you have the right (Of course, it's your site, so technically you have the right) to funnel discussion to certain topics that you feel are more important rather than allowing "nature to take it's course."

It goes against everything ATS has stood for for as long as I can remember.




[edit on 2-25-2009 by Cutwolf]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uniceft17
...t's amazing how drug related topics can trump sexism, homophobia, racism, etc. And the bad thing is that these kinds of topics are way more prevalent than the few who talk about their illegal drug experiences...


Let me break it down for you, since you are having so much trouble comprehending this.

It is not illegal to talk in a sexist, bigoted, homophobic, racist and any other intolerant manner. It is not illegal act in such a manner either.

However it is illegal to purchase and use illegal drugs.

ATS does not want the discussion of illegal activities (and don't try to split hairs on this. Everyone understand the spirit of this policy) on their forums. And that is their absolute right.

Let's take this example. Imagine someone comes in to your home and starts discussing a topic you do not wish to discuss, for whatever reason. Is it your right to tell them to stop? Of course it is. And you are going to think that person is a moron if they start whining about how you are violating their freedom of speech or not allowing them to express themselves.

[edit on 25-2-2009 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
This drastic action has been taken to "normalize" the board and get us back to an environment where real issues rule the day.


OK S.O., I can't let this pass without comment. When you say "real issues" are you referring to the Blossom Goodchild issue, the Nabiru issue, the John Titor issue, reptillian issues? Even you have to admit that trying to paint this as being based on keeping discussions here focused on so-called "real issues" while promoting an environment in which issues clearly pulled from worlds of fantastical dementia fails even the most basic "stress test" (to steal a term from Tim Geithner)

I also would say that, at least from where I stand, the bringing up of the legalization discussion as a conspiracy by the MSM to distract from real issues was a stretch at best. (At the risk of violating the rule by saying this, and it's the only time/place I'll post this if you're concerned) I see this as being more an example of a generation of site admins who grew up with a very narrow viewpoint of negativity towards illicit drugs and now sees that there is a real mainstream movement towards aleiviating that negativity, supported by a public deconstruction of the old steriotypical "pothead loser" image previous generations were ingrained with in school and by the media. I see a group of people making a decision based on fear, namely the fear of change. (Edit Note: Your "under-30 crowd" comment in the next post actually affirms my generational gap theory. Thank you.)

[edit on 25-2-2009 by burdman30ott6]



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join