Changes Coming to Origins and Creationism.

page: 1
71
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+62 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
This forum has become a cesspool of bickering and trolling. This is coming to an end. The change is not to the rules but an enforcement of them as some members are unable to post without causing disruption. Threads that have no conspiracy angle will be moved to Faith, unless they are disruptive, then they will be removed. The threads in Faith will be given the same treatment.

I'm sure there will be calls of "censorship" but these action will be taken against Deist and Atheist threads/posts alike. The staff wishes that these actions didn't have to take place but the disruption has been going on for too long with some NOT listening to the staff, who's responsibility is to the site for ALL members and visitors alike. Not just the few standing on soap boxes bickering. This is to let EVERYONE know what is going to take place in this forum. It is non-negotiable.

ATS is a place for intelligent debate. This forum was one in the past. It will be again. Most will applaud this action and that is the reason that is has to be done. We look forward for it to be one once again.




posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Change is hard and things always get worse before they get better. It's hard on both sides not to fall back into the same arguments time and time again when the circle of ignorance isn't broken.

I for one wish everyone good luck and hope that we can at least attempt to come back to a civil discussion; which is what made me a member of ATS in the first place.

King



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kingalbrect79
I for one wish everyone good luck and hope that we can at least attempt to come back to a civil discussion; which is what made me a member of ATS in the first place.

King


I couldn't have put it better. Thank you.


+2 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


Just a few questions:

What would qualify as a 'conspiracy' within the confines of this sub-forum now?
Would general discussions of evolution be moved to faith?
Would general discussions on origins be moved to faith?


+7 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Not playing those games MIMS. The OP is clear. You are a prolific poster. From that I take it that you are intelligent. If you can't discern that for yourself one would have to assume an agenda and a willingness for being intentionally obtuse.


+12 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


I'm not playing any games, I'm just trying to figure out where to put my next post that generally relates to evolution, as it doesn't have a religious tack to it at all.

I also have another idea relating to fossils, which I'm not sure of now...

And I just want a heuristic for what qualifies as a conspiracy in this sub-forum.

I'm not being intentionally obtuse, I'm being cautious and trying to prevent any period of hesitation to start new threads in this period of transition.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   

A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful
- a conspiracy to destroy the government

The action of plotting or conspiring
- they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice


Web definitions

a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act

a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act (especially a political plot)

a group of conspirators banded together to achieve some harmful or illegal purpose

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


do get what your saying though madnessinmysoul its hard at times to discern from were to post things i get confused aswell
edit on 12/6/11 by ronishia because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 

Will the new policy be retroactively applied to currently active threads or only new ones going forward?



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
I have a question. In the thread entitled New Forum for the Debate of Origins and Creationism a member (Shenroon) asks if this forum is for the debate of religion vs evolution/science or if that should be in faith/spirituality. SkepticOverlord says that this forum is exactly where that kind of talk should be. Is this still the case?

Sorry if this is an obvious question, but I haven't used these particular forums very often!


+35 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
Disgusted at all the people supporting further censorship at ATS.

As if it wasn't already getting a bit heavy handed, deleting whole threads and posts without even so much as a U2U.

We don't need to be protected from bickering and arguments, we are adults.

Thanks, but no thanks.


+3 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tephra
Disgusted at all the people supporting further censorship at ATS.

As if it wasn't already getting a bit heavy handed, deleting whole threads and posts without even so much as a U2U.

We don't need to be protected from bickering and arguments, we are adults.

Thanks, but no thanks.



It isn't censorship to remove arguments that add absolutely NO CONTENT to ATS as a whole. This is how trolling starts, and unfortunately is how most forums end. If there are ten threads created, and only one of them actually has a constructive conversation while the other nine are just mud slinging back and forth, what sets them apart from all the .com websites that try to live up to ATS standards?

In short, it's only censorship if they intentionally try and remove your content because they don't like the topic, instead they only try and keep the thread on topic and civil. I don't think that's too much to ask.

King



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by AlphaBetaGammaX
 

From the description of the O&C forum at the top of this page:


This forum is dedicated to the discussion of the organized conspiracy to influence science education through the introduction of creationism and other non-scientific origin concepts. Discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of conspiracies, scandals, and cover-ups. Members who would seek to refute such theories should be mindful of AboveTopSecret.com's tradition of focusing on conspiracy theory, cover-ups, and scandals.

What really boggles me is the sheer number of threads created in this particular area that have nothing to do with evolution or creationism and instead revolved solely around theism/atheism. In my opinion, that's the real problem with O&C recently - it's become a dumping ground for threads that people didn't want to put in the CiR or RF&T forums, for whatever reason. It becomes a pure theological discussion and ignores the underlying theme of the forum.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
omg NWO takes over ATS with censorship!!!


j/k !


Here is what i think you should have a section called FREE FOR FALL - Animal Debate style raw and unmodded forum of doom!

Give er HELL lool


In this section you should leave all the non conspiracy and religious debates . Let them have there wey ... let them speak there mind , and any members who go into that section and jump in will know that section comes with a disclaimer on the forum title.

that way nobody gets offended

ats still has its integrity side

and then it also has a side animal dish side

for the lions and tigers to come out and wrestle over the meat of debate

what do you say ?



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kingalbrect79

Originally posted by Tephra
Disgusted at all the people supporting further censorship at ATS.

As if it wasn't already getting a bit heavy handed, deleting whole threads and posts without even so much as a U2U.

We don't need to be protected from bickering and arguments, we are adults.

Thanks, but no thanks.



It isn't censorship to remove arguments that add absolutely NO CONTENT to ATS as a whole...
Says you.

Who decides which threads/posts add no content, the mods or the users at large?

What if those in charge find absolutely no value to a thread and the users of the thread find it enlightening and a vital source of information? Removing said thread would be Censorship. Wouldn't it?

What gets me is they can link to a site where it has war footage of a guy basically getting his head blown off but if you post a 'dirty' word or call another user an idiot that's just too mature a sight for us to behold.

No matter how stupid it may appear to you removing it is censorship. It is the very antithesis of FREE SPEECH!



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Not playing those games MIMS. The OP is clear. You are a prolific poster. From that I take it that you are intelligent. If you can't discern that for yourself one would have to assume an agenda and a willingness for being intentionally obtuse.



I think what Madness is asking is whether threads now have to directly contain some link to "conspiracy," or whether they can simply be explanations / walk-throughs / whatever of the scientific theories at hand? I'm curious about that myself, as if it's "conspiracy only" the scope is very narrowed 'cause, well, "there are attempts to undermine science by religious and political organizations" is pretty much saying it all.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   
I'm sorry but I honestly do not see the peeps managing these forums - asking & making it clear that you can make your opinions known in respectful, civil way & nothing else will be tolerated....as censorship.

I'm sure the mod does NOT want to have to be a "nanny" either.

I've seen WAY too many people eaten alive by the piranhas that can hang out here.

As a still somewhat "new member" to ATS - it can be very disheartening to see members so ready to insult & slam other members.

Is it that hard to respectfully disagree?

Or to converse in a somewhat civil manner?

I thought members flocked here because where else can we talk about our different ideas, theories, or beliefs with out being shunned???

Yet we're tearing each other apart.

Maybe I'm too wet behind the ears here on ATS to understand the frustration of feeling censored. I don't know. I'll tell you in a year or two-if we are still here. LOL.

Does anyone else see it like this???



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 


Ah, Thanks! I think that is kinda what I was getting from the thread I linked to above. I take it that, basically, this stuff was overwhelming the other areas of the forum so they created this to let the creationism vs. evolution themed discussions take place, and to investigate issues (like the push of creationism in schools) as being a kind of conspiracy.

So, it is okay to debate these things as long as you come at it as a 'conspiracy', as opposed to just discussing the merits of creationism as a whole?

I suppose this is the touchiest subject out there! From most of the arguments I've seen, a lot of the fighting occurs when posters are knowingly using different definitions of the same words, so they can claim the other poster is wrong, and then they just beat their points into the ground without listening to what the other poster is saying. Kind of like a high school debate, in which you are not there to learn, but to attack and counter-attack. I suppose that kind of thing should be left in the debate section, which would definitely make it easier, in my opinion, to enjoy the non-debate threads. However, I also see how this could anger some people if they feel like they aren't being allowed to voice their opinion. Maybe if the debate forum had a wider audience, then the fighting would die down in the other threads. That would be great.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Just an example of what constitutes a conspiracy.... piltdown man hoax.

If there is something to hide from history, that is a conspiracy.

I have enjoyed madnessinmysoul's threads. If he supports some of the arguments against or for the conspiracy agruments, then they stay.

I understand the concern. His threads are there to prop those threads. Like science and technology forum.

I, myself, support the ID theory. I want something like his arguments with scientific background. It is a part of a conspiracy theory. Something that they have hidden from us. Be it ancient astronaut theory or something else.

I agree with removing the non relevant posts.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


Excellent. I like that change.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by nerdyclutzyblonde
 


l agree with you lOO%.
Peace starchild.





new topics
top topics
 
71
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join