conscientious ATS users replied. How nice! Thanks guys.
I could spend a lot of paragraphs umming and erring and going through the notions so that it LOOKS like i've thought about it, but I'm an honest
guy, I'm not going to do that, because I've been thinking about this for some weeks.
Without naming names, posts like these; from users who IMO are nothing but attention seekers, earning their little points on the site.
Well, I for one actually say what I genuinely think, not what people want to hear, and especially do not intentionally say things controversial.
I'm really at a loss how to 'control that' - without giving the other ATS' users who are like me, not being thanked, not getting flags and stars
constantly, not being considered a 'flag contributor' - but I do contribute.
I dunno what to say, other than that I am finding myself somewhat upset, I think sensationalism is an extremely important tool, but somehow it is a
mistake putting or allowing this in the hands of your average philosophically unfair, irrational 'scientist' type persona - because then we'd be
rewarding exactly which we seek to avoid..
Ignorance and pure speculative waffle.. I think that if everyone on the site at ATS spent their time discussing a way to overcome depopulation, than
argue who has a better anti-thesis, a hell of a lot of good practical
things could be achieved.
However, apparently, I'm an idealist, and the rest of the world isn't playing ball.
Please though, if anyone has the outright cheek to call me unrealistic or unpractical for being an idealistic man, bugger off! I'm playing ball.
The only thing that isn't practical to idealism is a lack of communication, a lack of awareness and most importantly of all, a lack of co-operation.
The only thing worse than censoring those who have something to say , that is refused to be heard, is arguing over semantics, or worse anti-thesis to
inevitable thesis - or worse still, allowing it to happen just to increase your traffic or earn ATS points for being a controversial SOAB.
I don't know
Why is it idiots are allowed to post total dribbel about depopulation, or 9/11 yet some of the highest intellectuals of humanity, for
instance Steve Jobbs would be insta-banned for contributing something about entheogens that not only benefited society for tens of thousands of years,
but actually is claimed by the protagonist to be a major help in his innovative genius.
It's ironic, because exactly what you would expect is happening as a result of this attention seeking, and Stigmatized business. The really
intelligent people have stopped posting and are upset as much as I because they cannot discuss important things in society, because of the stupid
idiots who would abuse them; is it not with a somewhat sick irony that the same people that resulted in the barring of the entheogenic intellectual,
are the same ones posting absolute flawed dribbel ?
Well how about the intellectuals stop paying for other peoples irresponsibility, and those who would abuse systems, intellectual argument,
philosophical fairness and sensationalism, ethnobotany, entheogens, the occult be stigmatized and punished, for their irresponsibility instead of
those who wish to discuss useful scientific and philosophical questions. That would at least, be justice. Would that also not be far better than a
bunch of lunatics who 'know' they are right brawling it out for ATS points?
You could say I was angry, angry that those who are responsible members of society are continuously victimized because they want to talk about
stigmatized subjects, in a desire to learn and improve themselves, because of others' inability to be responsible or reasonable. It really is sad if
not ironic the very same people that caused such 'bad words' to be banned from discussion in the first place - are the ones totally derailing
threads on a continual basis.
So you know what is it going to be? Let the madmen continue, or continue punishing the intellectual? Good question but..
Perhaps i'm imagining it,
[edit on 5-1-2010 by UFOabducteebe]