Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)

page: 7
90
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
 


I agree one hundred per cent.
I don't ever have to insult the person I am interacting with.
But that's not the same as speaking badly about external mass groups of people in whatever crude portrayal seems most thrilling to me.
Plus the thing about rules like this is they just breed more rules. If you tell people something (formerly allowed) is too offensive to allow, that tells some of them it's okay to be offended, soon they find new bad phrases, the goal posts just keep moving, soon you have a phonebook full of self-censorship and vitiated content.
People should just be embarrassed to be offended. I would be.
You don't call me names (personally), I don't call you names (personally), and the rest of the objects in the universe are all fair game. That should be the rule. THAT WOULD BE EASY.




posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by nine-eyed-eel
So how is a derisive nickname towards a public figure, or his devotees, the same as "being nasty and uncivil towards one another"?

As we've seen here on ATS, it creates a polluted environment such that derogatory terminology eventually migrates from public figures to one-another.



That's kind of a "gateway drug" theory, I think it would be better to wait until it does migrate into one-on-another. That would be much more clean intellectually. Driving tends to lead to drunk driving, but we need cars (so to speak).
But don't get me wrong, boss, this your sandbox, I still like it and am actually just trying to help.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by nine-eyed-eel
 


It has, in a HUGE way, "already migrated". That's why we are doing this.

Springer...



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
From this moment forward, the following rules apply throughout all of ATS:

(1) Politically inspired name calling of an ideological group is not allowed: examples: "Loonie Libs," "Obamaites," "Repuglicans," etc.

(2) Alterations of a politicians name, or any other high-profile political personality, for disparaging political effect is not allowed, including within member avatars and signatures.

(2a) Avatars designed exclusively to denigrate a politician or political figure, using derogatory wording or photo-manipulation, is not allowed.


#2 and #2a seem to prevent political satire, which is one of the best ways to get a point through peoples mental filters.

As such I CAN NOT agree to these and do not accept these new rules as a whole.

In addition I agree with SO that the left/right thing is just a game they use against you. In the past I recieved a warning and a point reduction for refering to ATS members as barbarians.

Right now I'd like to tell you that if you believe in the left/right paradigm you have yet to become a civilized human being and as such you are by deffinition a barbarian.

Please warn/delete me now.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Vasilis Azoth
 


It's simple, abide the rules and enjoy our site, don't abide them and you will not enjoy our site.

Try not to take yourself so seriously either mate, you are every bit the barbarian any other human is.


Springer...



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I have to agree with Springer, even though I am all in favor of political satire and using a politician's name to create a funny telling nickname for him.

The fact of the matter is that ATS is a facility, like a playground or a recreation room in somebody else's house. When visiting, I have to abide by the rules of the house. I may think the rules are unduly tight, but the homeowner has the rules they have for reasons sufficient to themelves. If I don't like the rules, I can take my games elsewhere.

Whatever free speech rights one might have in a society as a whole don't extend to the interior of another's home. There, good manners supercede constitutional rights. Your hosts decide what they will and will not tolerate.

Springer suggested that one poster take himself less seriously. We all should take ourselves less seriously and by extension we should take ATS itself less seriously. If ATS were a serious outlet for freedom of thought, then rules restricting how we post would be a serious, even vital, matter. But they are not. Right?

Bottom line. ATS is a business, and as another poster said, the number in the Quantcast banner at the bottom of the page is very important (relative to ad revenues).

I have to say that I take myself seriously. I take ATS very seriously and I take the evolving political situation very seriously. I still think I can make my points under the current posting regime. I don't like it. I'll have to make do with it.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:16 PM
link   
That is a great idea! I think people should come to this site to discuss the issues and I honestly think everyone needs to drop the titles period Republican/Democrat/Libertarian who cares. Come here to discuss issues as a fellow human being. Discussion does not have to turn into name calling and low level attacks. If you do not agree just say you don't agree and move on. We need to find the things that we agree on and go from there. We will never get anywhere when we dwell on the little things we disagree about. We need to find a new way of doing things in this country because obviously whatever we are doing now doesn't work. Let's start here and have valuable conversations about our future and all the possibilities if we would just hang up our feeble labels. The politicians will not do it so WE have too.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vasilis Azoth
#2 and #2a seem to prevent political satire, which is one of the best ways to get a point through peoples mental filters.


Trust me, we can be all sorts of satirical and sarcastic without mutilating people's names or beliefs.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
And why are we starring and flagging this post? Just because the "CEO" lays down new laws, I don't consider this to earn a S&F.

Stars and Flags should be given to an individual who had done a tremendous and outstanding effort composing a revolutionary post, bringing an exciting video to light, etc. Simply giving a S&F to new rules about trolling and sarcasim is a bit ... ummm ... unwarranted



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Quazze
 


First of all there is no "starring" on this thread ...

Personally I would have flagged the OP 50 times if I could to show my appreciation and approval of this decision.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quazze
I don't consider this to earn a S&F.


Isn't personal choice grand?



Stars and Flags should be given to an individual who ...


Isn't having and expressing your opinion (even though it's different than other people's) just great?

Not everyone stars and flags for the very same reason that you do. We each get to choose.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Thank you for all you do to make this place so stimulating. I will try very hard to behave.

So I have a juvenile question. Hate to be like a five year old child, but I guess deep down I am.

So how come there are new posts and threads today with the word "Birthers"? Isn't that politically charged? I find the term insulting ...I equate it with teabaggers, which I am sure you will not allow. I know we can not say Obamanics...so what about birthers?



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Missing Blue Sky
 

I got warned twice (for the same single post) in this thread and lost 1000 points. I asked a similar question about using my favorite nickname for Bush, another for Clinton and a play on Obama's name.

Take care to use the new rules when asking about the new rules. We are living in the Obama era now.

As an aside, have they actually started to sign people up for the new civilian national security service?



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 

You can criticize the Obama administration all you want. Honest. Just lose the name-calling and keep the T&C Lite™ in mind.

Please, work with us here.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
Why not also broaden this to topics that just should not be discussed on ATS?

Its no mystery that when topics that are not accepted as mainstream ideals get discussed, people become disgruntled.
When people feel it is an insult for certain issues to be even addressed, maybe they should refrain from commenting on a particular thread altogether.
Just peruse the board.
If there is something too close to the bone without getting narcky, choose to reply to another of the great many threads available, unless you can get on there an do it in a diplomatic fashion.
I am guilty of this also; I do not claim to be innocent.
However, in some threads of late, I have experienced this kind of antagonization from certain MODS also.

The truth is that to get people interested in your thread, sometimes you have to give accounts bordering on the outrageous, to ignite initial interest. Intellegent people can see this from a mile.

Before you think of an intial post as a troll, care to add constructive critiscism, use the art of persuasion and logic; AND accept that sometimes individuals are going to have different views and ideals than yourself.
Take it on the chin, get over your ego and move on.

No matter how smart you may think you are, there are others that are indeed smarter in an a miriad of ways; only different to yourself.
We don't all see the world through the same eyes.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 03:35 AM
link   
I think some people need to read what the OP was about....

It is not about the subjects.. its about insulting each other


ATS wants to keep it to a minimum, and lets face it, if it was not a problem i think the staff have better things to be doing than baby sitting people who want to insult each other...

We come here to debate not mud sling each other.. I can not see no harm in the rules here.

I think its a step in the right direction.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


This is really amazing. I don't remember any rules against saying "Bu#ler".

Anything for the dear leader.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 07:36 AM
link   
My thanks as well. ALthough I have been drawn into a few of these things I am happy to see something done to quiet it down. ATS has been a favorite inet place to go for many years and I hated seeing it devolve into a political rant. I already have a board I run for that and I come here to read breaking alternative news topics and of course the paranormal and aliens. I had almost left because I was so tired of seeing "new" Obama BC threads saying the same thing over and over. Thanks again from a loyal ATS'er



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   
I really glad you are taking these measures - more so every day.
There is a real danger in a place like this that allows people to give vent to the craziest and most paranoid of ideas.
These people feed on each other's paranoia and continually ramp up the tension and fears.

The risk of this kind of thing spiraling out of control and eventually spurring some the weakest to act on their paranoia is very real.

I would normally be the last person to want any sort of sensorship on thought and ideas; however ideas that have no merit in fact but instead border on the insane are not to be encouraged or entertained. There is just too much at risk. Toning down the temperature is a very good thing.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by wayno
There is a real danger in a place like this that allows people to give vent to the craziest and most paranoid of ideas.


Are we now going to start censoring ideas as well as tone and terminology? I'm sure there is a constituancy out there for it on ATS.


These people feed on each other's paranoia and continually ramp up the tension and fears.


Listened, esteemed member, all, repeat, all people feed on each other's paranoia and continually ramp up the tension and fears.

Did you ever tune into the Bush administration on the subject of terroism in the last eight years? If anything, what goes on here is a counter-rant designed to release pressure and undo some of the insanity abroad in the land especially in the mainstream media.


The risk of this kind of thing spiraling out of control and eventually spurring some the weakest to act on their paranoia is very real.


This is precisly and exactly what was done to the American people by the Bush administration. A lot of young people with raging hormones went to war on the word of a lying provocateur and murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Iraq. Congratulations America, you entered your Nazi era!!

But heaven forbid that anyone actually against that insanity might do something about it.


I would normally be the last person to want any sort of sensorship on thought and ideas; however ideas that have no merit in fact but instead border on the insane are not to be encouraged or entertained.


Don't kid yourself. You are on the cutting edge of making ATS national security state compliant.


There is just too much at risk. Toning down the temperature is a very good thing.


David Rockefeller, surely a candidate for American traitor of the century, could not have put it better.





new topics

top topics



 
90
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join