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: 89
42
<< 86  87  88    90  91  92 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by darcon
 


I respect your position.


Originally posted by darcon
I just do not want to drag this out any longer.


Just help me understand why this is so important that it can't be done in a couple of days? What do we lose?



reply to post by americandingbat
 


With what I propose, it shouldn't be just the nominees who vote. Any member should be able to exercise their voice.

[edit on 27-2-2009 by loam]




posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:07 AM
link   
Loam, I understand where your coming from. The problem I have with the expanding of the list is that we'd be doing so simply to involve and please some other members. Now there is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to do this, but in reality you have to ask -- will it really make a difference in the end? The likelihood is that the same top members that we have in the current list will still be elected, and in any case, whoever is nominated will surely be capable of doing the job, right?

So yes, we could wait a couple days just to please the others -- but then we could also please a lot more by making this forum a reality, a lot sooner.

It's okay to want to be involved simply for the sake of being apart of something, but when that means halting progress and making people wait, when in reality it would make no difference in the outcome.... why bother?

[edit on 27/2/09 by Navieko]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


I see no reasonable problem with allowing the current vote to complete and then having those who didn't vote apply there opinion on the results - to the extent of acceptance or rejection.

This way we are moving forward without any blatant disregard for the input of those who did not have the oppurtunity to vote.

We can perhaps look at this as a political preliminary of sorts - not the best analogy, I'll admit...



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:10 AM
link   
Well regardless my opinion stands.

I am not sure about the other nominees, but i think changing the whole ball game, now that we got things rolling again, is only going to add confusion.

Like i said, lets see what tomorrow brings.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Wow. BH's call to vote is from the list on page 49. Think about how long of a day and pages of debate that has covered for a minute...

Now imagine narrowing not from 30 to 6 but from 100+ to 6.


I did say if selected I would accept, if a general consensus could be found.

I think that is why people were eager not to draw this out any more than needed instead of some secretive conspiracy of some animals being more equal than others.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


Navieko said it pretty well.

Regardless, i think it's just going to add more confusion.

I mean, finally, after trying to get the ball rolling, after many halts, were finally going to get this done.

and the Any member vote has the potential to make this current vote into a disaster.

[edit on 27-2-2009 by darcon]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by loam
With what I propose, it shouldn't be just the nominees who vote. Any member should be able to exercise their voice.


I really think this is a bad idea, and potentially unworkable.

We got no evidence that the administration had any interest in providing the kind of support that would be required for a membership-wide vote.

In any such vote, I think it would be inevitable that a lot of people would be voting based on who had the most points, or the least points, or the best avatar, or just the most familiar name. And I really don't think we could do a membership-wide vote with 100 names; that would just be asking for stalemate I think.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Ahabstar
 


Hey there, i U2U'd her about the situation, she is not all caught up, but at least she has some information lol



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by americandingbat
 


It has already shown to be confusing enough. Adding more names to the list and adding more time only adds more.....confusion.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
I wish I had joined this thread sooner, quite funny if you think about it. We all want the same outcome and no one can decide how to go about it.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Okay then,I side with the "Let's see what happens tomorrow" group.

I doubt there is anyone of us who wants to exclude members from deciding for themselves or being involved.

However,if we slow down too much,or come to a stalemate,the whole topic could just be dropped out of frustration by the staff.

Would the members really rather this whole thing be stopped dead,or that it go ahead as planned?



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   
I have tried to stay on the sidelines for most of this process, but please ...

... I beg you, please stop going around in circles.

Is this how any of us are going to behave should we be picked for this "thing?"

It's enough to let any member or staff observing this to lose total faith in our collective ability to communicate or get anything done. I am practically at the point of conceding to this reality myself.

Everyone can and should voice their opinion, just please don't do it ten times.





[edit on 27 Feb 2009 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Uhm 89 pages and counting to pick a handful of members to be added to DISC.
Now some of you would like the staff to make the decision, no offense but it does make me smile. Though I'm glad you the members are making this decision. I look forward to seeing the outcome later today.
The chosen ones will have there work cut out for them.
So good luck in your endeavors


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



[edit on 27/2/2009 by Sauron]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by DocGonzo
 


That is my greatest fear realized.

Them getting frustrated(As skeptic is already), and trashing the whole committee.

Then NO one wins. We all lose.

No drug related topics at all, HELL, we cant talk about it now, so the faster we get this committee formed, the committee can try and get this BAN removed.

All about Compromising though.

[edit on 27-2-2009 by darcon]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Look guys, I get you are eager to get going. I also understand the point that even if we delay or add more nominees that the same selections may take place.

But to exclude members from nomination or voting simply because they missed the opportunity to be on this thread during the middle of the work day, replaces one unfairness with another, in my opinion.

I just asked for us to slow it down a bit-- to allow for a reasonable chance for others to participate. That is all.

Whatever is done, I just hope it turns out well.



[edit on 27-2-2009 by loam]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


And, with those wise words.....that everyone should listen to.

I bid all a good night.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
It's enough to let any member or staff observing this to lose total faith in our collective ability to communicate or get anything done. I am practically at the point of conceding to this reality myself.

Everyone can and should voice their opinion, just please don't do it ten times.




And, thanks for the wakeup call.

Or, in my case, the go-to-bed-dammit call


I'll see you all tomorrow.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Sauron
 


Indeed they will. It's just that the main group of contributers early on, that made the initial decision, are getting a lot of negative feedback. That is just some of the reasons we wanted staff to choose. Regardless were going with the vote.

I am sure the Chosen Ones will have negative feedback to.

Thanks for checking in.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
Everyone Going to bed, i think i will go to bed too.

Goodnight.

Wow, 1 30 in the morning.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   
With all due respect, and I know I came in late in the game, I think we should do what Loam said.
If we open up a thread with details and deadlines then everything will be carried out on a much more productive scale. I think its ok to ask for a mods help in setting this up. It would mean that we came to a decision in moving this thing along.

The problem I think a lot of people had is that this was a monster thread. There were sure to be valuable members who did not read every post or gave up with all the bickering that was going on, and like me even, just left the thread and had no idea elections or anything were taking place.

If the issue gets solved in a week even, thats great and no harm done. I think people can wait that long (hopefully less) to put a new plan in action.

These are my thoughts, and I dont know who has any say in this matter, but I think we can all agree that loam's plan is a good one.
We've still accomplished something if thats our decision.

[

[edit on 27-2-2009 by Odessy]



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 86  87  88    90  91  92 >>

log in

join