Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

ATS thinktank- working on solutions instead of theories

page: 3
24
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by locster
 




Should ATS have its very own thinktank?


i have yet to read all posts. sorry, shoot me.
me

comment:
i have thought of ATS as a thinktank.

but, this thread does make an intersting observation.

thanks OP,
et




posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I must admit i am a bit worried about the fact that noone part of ATS staff has voiced their opinion. I do hope the idea gets some serious interest from staff.



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by locster
Should ATS have its very own thinktank?

Example ats thinktank forum

A forum where only mods can post topics that need a solution (topics picked by doing a poll?). No flagging threads, only stars so members can acknowledge good ideas posted. After a set amount of time, the ideas with the most stars get listed together and we will work out one final solution by combining the best ideas.

So what do you think ATS, would this be a good addition to the boards?


What would be the point of Mods putting up threads for solutions, I thought as members we put up the threads and hopefully find the solutions, if that were the case it would discourage members from putting up quality threads. I personally don't think it's a good idea.



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by locster
 


I have been saying this for quite some time actually.

A think-tank is something that affects policy.

You can see my comments on the post linked below.

SKL's thoughts on think-tanks

I see quite a few problems with this happening though.

1) Divisiveness among membership.

A. Too many members hate Government, period.

Their inherent mistrust of Government will not allow them to even think for themselves, meaning taking on the role of a think-tank, is going to bring about their own self-destructive nature, to defeat themselves.

Believing falsely, that Government is always corrupt, they see even trying to do Government type things, from think-tanks, to policy decisions, as becoming that which they hate, not that I agree with that semblance.

But those members are an albatross to some extent.

While a think-tank definitely has to have disagreeing stances, to work, because of the differences of opinions being a part of the driving force, each member has their own unique stances, and not all know about policy.

Instead of speaking on a topic, they often disagree, and attack each other.

B. Pettiness among members through divisive nature, political stances.

Too many members believe the left-wing or right-wing is better, or the opposing side is up to no-good, often both sides are just as stupid through rhetoric, not the individual members of ATS, but the political partisan nonsense, the divisive nature of politics itself through a two-party system, designed to divide and conquer completely.

If we cannot agree to follow the terms and conditions of the website, how can we expect to get something of this magnitude off the ground to begin with?

Do we need Moderators?

Yes.

If this was Utopia we would not but that is a false dream to begin with.

People are people and react, often violently, and or divisively when their opinions are attacked, hence the necessity of Moderators and a semblance of order, through this sites terms and conditions that not every member realizes they agreed to by signing the proverbial line to gain membership.

2) ATS is privately owned by ATS LLC.

A. While the website is generated by member contributed content, it is ours only as much as we cooperate with the Administration, based upon courtesy, compliance, and compromise towards better attitudes and information.

Far too often do I see people bickering about petty issues and snide commentary.

If this is something Administration, and through them, the Moderators have to constantly, and consistently have to deal with, how could they even consider beginning the high-minded idealistic nature of a think-tank?

Would you or anyone else for that matter back us up if you were Administration of this website, if people acted like little children, instead of remembering everyone has their own opinions and or belief systems?

I would not.

And I would not blame ATS Administration one iota for not backing us.

Frankly, I love the idea of a think-tank, but I grow tired and weary of stupidity.

Notice I did not say ignorance.

Ignorance is not knowing you do not know.

Stupidity however is knowing and not cooperating due to not acting better.

Hence ATS and the motto of Deny Ignorance.

Deny not knowing so you can know more through sharing information.

B. Due to ATS being privately owned a think-tank would have to be supported, financially, and through that, events, books, literature might be used towards recognition of the website, offline, seeing as this website is only brought to people's attention if and when people are seeking out knowledge about U.F.O.'s, Government and or military.

You name the topic.

But they only find this out due to advertising paid for by ATS Administration.

Due to this and any agenda ATS membership might take on, any decision made, any policy pushed towards anyone, could potentially be seen as threatening to Government, a country, and or person with an agenda.

Unfortunately, due to that, and as well, this being an international website, it might be seen as a threat, through Interpol, something I am sure ATS would not like happening, due to the nature of the Internet and with all the Presidential Administration issues with the online environment.

I love the idea completely of using legally and non-violent means to change.

I do see ATS has the intelligence, the people who see this as a good idea, and as well the underpinnings of a think-tank, but the over all membership needs to shift in their minds that we are for a positive change.

Otherwise, while I am speaking my opinion, I would not believe ATS Administration would see this as viable, but that's because of my knowledge not of anyone's personal behind the scenes perspectives, but due to my knowledge of Government, American and World Government.

I do see ATS to some extent as a think-tank because of the diverse nature of membership.

But after a while, talk, without acting, through intent, is nothing more than words.

On a computer screen.

3) Recruiting as an issue.

A. The Government hates dissent, with a passion, look to the M.I.A.C. Report as a prime example, lying to keep a North American Union happening, using the laws against militia's, as a prime example of why recruiting is not only not allowed on ATS, but why Government might see ATS becoming a think-tank as a direct threat.

Through that the use of the law considering sedition might be enforced.

Whether I agree with that or not is irrelevant, I see that being a law being used.

Due to that and a threat against National Security, again whether I agree or not is irrelevant, it would be something used to shut down ATS.

People so often decry Agent Provocateurs, Government Agents, and Spies on ATS, blaming each other, again towards the divisiveness, but it really does happen, people from different Government agencies, both foreign and or domestic, do visit ATS continually.

Remember, America was originated around Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece, both were susceptible from injury and betrayal from within by the very own people.

The same goes for each country, around the world, America, Russia, Venezuela, and as well the same can be said for ATS, betrayal from within.

 


We as a conspiracy theory website cannot even agree on one conspiracy together.

Who shot J.F.K., was it Lee Harvey Oswald, or a Secret Pact of Government officials?

Was Oswald what we now call a conspiracy theorist or a subversive element?

What exactly are the differences between those two elements?

Does the Government differentiate between the two or do they see them the same?

Was Timothy McVeigh acting alone or was he a patsy through collusion of Government?

Was it an act of homegrown terrorism or like Arlington Road a False-Flag Operation?

What happened the Terry Nichols?

Did 9/11 happen the way we were told or was it Bush and Cheney robbing us through a covert intelligence fundraiser, in collusion with Osama bin Laden?

15 out of 19 "terrorists" were Saudi Arabian's?

How come a Commission was formed instead of allowing the F.B.I. and C.I.A. to do their jobs?

Do you see my point?

Until we can come to some semblance of agreement and a consensus of information, we are actually our own worst enemies, through disagreement, to dissent, to downright ignorance of self-preservation of our beloved website.

[edit on 21-8-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


Read the thread, i have explained the reason for that 3 times already.
Mods DO NOT pick the topics, MEMBERS DO!



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by locster
 


I understand that, still don't think it a good idea, that is my personal opinion, topics should be put up by the members at large.



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


Well that is what i originally wanted, but how do we keep it from getting messy? Problem solving needs focus.

I am all for members doing the posting, the thing is, logically everybody thinks their problem is the most important, resulting in a lot of new threads a day. And i would agree that every problem is important, but it's hard to keep track and solving something when a lot of topics are posted daily.
That would result in a long list of topics not being "solved" and that would be a loss, since every problem is important.
That is why i suggested some sort of poll, so the members do decide on the topics but the forum would still be focused.

I am open for ideas people



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
locster and Aquarius1,

You're making my point exactly.

Your two differences of opinion, while both relevant, and unique, are instead of speaking towards finding common ground, creating the divisiveness, between yourselves.

Find commonality between your thoughts.

I find that people who speak at each other, instead of to each other, are usually saying the same exact thing, from two different perspectives.

locster, your points are all valid, you see the stumbling blocks of your own thread idea.

Aquarius1, your points are all valid, you see the stumbling blocks of why you disagree.

But neither of you are finding common ground to change each others mind, point out something towards more defined differences of opinions, or why or how it might be different if you both found commonality.

Instead of shutting each other down try opening each other up?

A think-tank no matter its intent needs a free flow of information.

Whether ATS is behind it, or not, whether the Moderators start the conversation/policy discussion, or not, or whether membership gets it rolling, or not.

How about a joint thread, between you two, being leading people who disagree?

Possibly in Social Issues so as to make it fair to both of you?

As well as everyone else on ATS.

[edit on 21-8-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by locster
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


Well that is what i originally wanted, but how do we keep it from getting messy? Problem solving needs focus.

I am all for members doing the posting, the thing is, logically everybody thinks their problem is the most important, resulting in a lot of new threads a day. And i would agree that every problem is important, but it's hard to keep track and solving something when a lot of topics are posted daily.
That would result in a long list of topics not being "solved" and that would be a loss, since every problem is important.
That is why i suggested some sort of poll, so the members do decide on the topics but the forum would still be focused.

I am open for ideas people


My understanding of how think tanks work is they only meet together for a couple of days once or twice a year before that that they have the topic agendas that will be tackled and everyone who is involved does there own research and comes prepared with sources and how they arrived at their info and conclusions and then they go through the menu come to a recommendation and publish it



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


What you say is true....ATS is a think tank already.
But..all that energy is scattered.

I think the OP wants to harness all that scattered energy...and harvest it .
Brain storming is an excellent idea, because creative energy is very powerful.

How many souls are members here, or lurking here...if we concentrated all that energy into one....well who knows what can be achieved.



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by locster
 


Locster.....

What about having a "Think Tank" attached to each forum?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   
I completely AGREE and hope that this catches on!! This is a premise that can solve more than agitate. We have solutions, we all do, but we would rather discuss our opinions, than solutions.

I am for this and I would contribute the best I can. We have been distracted to the problem and less to the solution.

S&F.
Peace.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 

That is a very good idea! That would work well for most forums.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Bumping the thread.

I want to hear some staff members opinion on this.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by locster
 


It seems this idea has lost its steam, thats to bad as I also would of liked to see this come to fruition.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 03:42 AM
link   
Ok how about this. In order to function , this think tank will need the following things:

First and foremost, participants with time and energy to spare, doing reams of hard research , experiements , and so on and so forth. In short , seriously driven, and capable hardworking participants and contributors.
Second, those hardworking individuals will need to be able to share, compare, and compile thier works into cohesive and well structured posts.To this end, I would think that shared dropboxing would come in pretty handy , that way all information gathered by any member of the participating group, can be shared and used by other members, and dont forget that with the advent of video conferencing it might be easier to perform a sensible and well connected group investigation than some would assume. Its just getting it all routed through the site that would require some effort really.
Third, in order to ensure that the most popular topics are dealt with first (the mob rules after all) I think that topics ought to be suggested in a suggestions thread, with a star tracker coded in. That way , along with posting ones own suggestions for an investigation , you can star other interesting suggestions. Which ever has the most stars gets to be investigated next.
Thoughts people... share them.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 


And like many great ideas, distractions have taken away from the important work that is to be done. Would love to form a group of individuals to just discuss problems and solutions with, not that it would help, just help me expand my perspective.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 05:53 AM
link   
reply to post by DondeEsta?
 


It might be an idea to check out some threads you like the looks of, and then see which members populate those discussions. If you come across someone whos thinking appears to be sound to you, then ask them if they would be prepared to collaberate on some projects as a thought excersize of some sort.






top topics



 
24
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join