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: 69
42
<< 66  67  68    70  71  72 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:48 PM
link   
We will have to trust the wisdom of the mods. Choose well.

In the future issues I will likely have lots to say about how consciousness might work, the mechanisms, the behavioral and the nature of altered states. I will have to reference drugs and mind adulterants naturally, but not exclusively. I would never promote use to anyone however anyway. Even pharmaceuticals. Each persons predilection is quite different.

I will defer to the judgment of the ATS moderator, or be ejected. That is the way it seems to me.

We are all in the same boat. Just be sure to keep the shore in sight.


ZG




posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


But, that's why this committee is being formed. Some would like ALL discussion banned if they can't have it their way. That's just an immature "sour-grapes" mentality.

Whether you're pro or con ... at least it's still up for discussion. If this committee wasn't being formed this thread would have died a few dozen pages ago. If it weren't for free-speech loving individuals here, we wouldn't even have the option.

The bottom line is: Something has to be done. This was the best idea that has arisen in the short time we've been allotted.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   
The funny thing is that none of this would be necessary if the people who were complaining in this thread would have just stopped being immature in their responses to illicit drug threads in the first place.

Everyone wants to toss their own experiences into the ring because, for some odd reason, they think it will make them appear cooler to others. In rare cases my personal experiences with drug use actually contribute to threads, but in the vast majority of cases, my personal experiences would only serve to derail a topic. That's no good for a debate.

As a very private "burner" I have absolutely no issue with not being able to talk about drugs on this site. The web is a big place and I bet there's a thousand discussion forums dedicated ONLY to the use of illicit drugs. Will you freak out on them when they tell you that you can't post threads about conspiracies? Probably not.

PS: Sorry about inserting my own experiences in this response. I do think it makes me seem a little cooler though. Don't you? =/



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd]

I've seen juvenile and blatantly disruptive behavior in many different topics. The offenders posts are usually removed and they are warned and eventually banned. Should be no different here.


Maybe, maybe not. The point was that SO had cited other reasons for the ban than the filtering issue.

He says that they have noticed an overall decline on the boards, and what seems like a concerted effort to derail threads that try to address these topics responsibly.

Hopefully, the DISC would be able to look at that evidence and try to figure out how we can prevent it from happening in the future. There have been a lot of good suggestions already in this thread, and I'm sure many more will come.

And your position – that the only enforceable rule is a strict no tolerance policy – may have to be considered as well, though I personally don't think it has to come to that.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by The Cyfre
 


That was the whole crux of this problem: a few immature people who ruined everything for everyone because they could not or would not follow the T&Cs already in place.

It is sad that the actions of the few have the potential of ruining things for the many.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by Revolution-2012
 

If there isn't a compromise reached, the blanket ban will stand.


That doesnt seem to fair the Big guys have already made it perfectly clear they dont like Drug posts whether they are informative or stoner material, so what will stop them from being so difficult to the point they wont agree to compromise?

They make it sound like its such a toll on ATS to have drug related threads, honestly I havent seen much of any reefer madness they have been complaining about. I think they are being a little immature when it comes to what is acceptable thread material and what isnt. On BTS they have a group called "drunks of ATS" how is that any different from Stoner idiots who are ruining the sanctity of ATS?

They are also immature in the sense that they are punishing the enitre ATS community, not all of us are stoner idiots but when they enforce these ridiculous rules on all of us whether we are guilty or not makes it seem as though we are all guilty of being the stoner idiots they seem to hate so much. I think this whole problem could be solved the way that trolls or regular idiots are solved any where else in ATS, they make a stupid comment we act like adults and deal with it until a MOD sees their comment and deletes it. We could have a three strikes policy, three warnings and their profile is deleted, and it wouldnt be any different than what the staff deals with already.

I think of all the people in this mess, The big guys upstairs have made this a bigger mess than its really worth.

[edit on 26-2-2009 by caballero]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by The Cyfre
 


Yes there are other sites to talk about drugs,but ATS is THE conspiracy site,and drugs laws are a huge conspiracy,many people come to ATS to learn,debate and challenge other peoples views.I think ATS is the best place to tackle the drug conspiracy and i'd hate to see it blanket banned when it affects so many people.

[edit on 26-2-2009 by Solomons]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by caballero
 


There is no guarantee that the DISC will sway this ban.

But, at least Admin has promised to listen to them and work with them to reach a compromise.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by caballero
 


If I could star you, you know I would =)

Stoner idiots FTW!!!!

And I'm not a stoner, btw XD



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


I understand and thats all great and well, but I stand by what I say I think the big guys are the ones making all this madness.

Their strict policies have been questioned by many on ATS, and they seem to hold that age old bully mentality of "We have the power you dont, theres nothing you can do about it."



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


I completely understand what you're saying, but it's come to this.

If I had my druthers, I'd nominate other topics to be monitored as well. I think religious topics have a tendency to be bogged down in derogatory comments and flagrant personal bashing. But, that fact remains that those topics haven't received the amount of attention that Drug topics have by the general members.

If they had ... like the 9/11 forums, something would have to be address to correct the situation.

It's a sad fact that things have come to this ... I'm just happy that (hopefully) things can be resolved in a civil manner and we can continue discussing freely what we feel is important.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Sorry guys....so many pages again..

Are we voting...whats going on????

man this thing moves quick



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by tyranny22
But, that's why this committee is being formed. Some would like ALL discussion banned if they can't have it their way. That's just an immature "sour-grapes" mentality.


Yeah, I support your committee, good luck with it, just make sure it's fair. No agenda should be pushed, including anti-drug agendas. If personal use is something we can't talk about, then it should be across the board. Pro or con. It's still just ridiculous, IMO, for a conspiracy site to act like a highly regulated corporation with all these rules and mandates. Every other day there's an admin thread opened to chastise members about one thing or another and make us feel like naughty children. And to ban talk of one of the BIGGEST conspiracies and blame filters and immaturity, is just very transparent crap, and i'm gonna call it as i see it. Drug horror stories are perfectly legit, and have NEVER been addressed as far as I've seen, in my mind that puts the flood light on a very clear agenda somewhere up the line here.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by The Cyfre
 





The funny thing is that none of this would be necessary if the people who were complaining in this thread would have just stopped being immature in their responses to illicit drug threads in the first place.


True, now the people they ruined it for, sit here, trying to figure out ways to work through this BAN



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


If you were on the nomination list, Blup, check your u2us. BH sent out a ballot to all of the folks who were on the list.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by blupblup
 


If you were on the nomination list, Blup, check your u2us. BH sent out a ballot to all of the folks who were on the list.


I wasn't and didn't want to be.... but who is voting...how do we vote?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


Nominees voting for nominees.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


Ahhh ok gotcha.

Never mind.

Good luck then


I can see where this is going.....



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Revolution-2012
 


One could only hope that this ban ends.

However considering how SkepticOverlord and Springer handled this situation I dont see it ending. That damned bully mentality of their gets in the way of logic.

[edit on 26-2-2009 by caballero]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I figure this will get lost, but I'm curious if there will be a place to suggest topics of potential interest?



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 66  67  68    70  71  72 >>

log in

join