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.

 

Removed Threads and Bigotry

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Earlier today in the "OMG I can't believe this thread is already up to 22 pages" Muslim Woman vs Mall Cop thread, I let my emotions get the best of me in a somewhat heated debate, and masque nuked a few of my more colorful posts. At first I was a little aggravated by it and was even a little nasty to him. But I collected myself and realized that this forum is great place to find information (and disinformation), and have some real good conversations with people. But it's also very easy to allow your emotions to enter a debate, especially one in which there are very strong convictions on both sides of the topic. The fact that it's not an IRL conversation makes it that much easier to forget there's another real person on the other side; it's not just a concept or opinion your arguing with, it's someone just like you (but wrong). I apologized to masque in PM for the trouble and he was totally cool about it. So I just want to say that I'm happy the mods are here doing there thing, because without them this place would be a nightmare world of tin-foil hats, secret alien interview footage, 36 different versions of the Zapruder film, and ranting lunatics like me in an unbridled frenzy. Thank you masque, thank you mods, thank you other wackos




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by AQuestion
I am not quite sure where I am going with this


You got that right,
nor do i good buddy,
nor do i.

Just relax, take it easy
don't take it so serious.


edit on 25-5-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


Dear masqua,

Thank you for your response. I have to say that I do have a friend who has her own site and I have seen what the moderators have to do. That is why I didn't want my thread to sound like a complaint. I didn't know that this site had 70 moderators, I cannot imagine even trying to manage that many people on a site like this where they don't get paid. Please let them know that they are appreciated. I was also particularly pleased to know that the decisions on removals are discussed and how you explained what was considered before such things occur.

As for where the line should be, heck, while rules help, I think each situation is individual if we are going to explore the boundaries of what is acceptable. I don't know where that line is; but, I want to see as much freedom of speech as possible without allowing things to devolve into purely hateful or promoting crime. In the end, we are all just trying to figure out what is right. Peace.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by AQuestion
I am not quite sure where I am going with this


You got that right,
nor do i good buddy,
nor do i.

Just relax, take it easy
don't take it so serious.


edit on 25-5-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)


Dear pospmayhem,

When I started the thread I think I was grappling with what is coming and what is coming is more regulation over what we can and cannot post in public. We hear a lot about cyber-bullying and there are calls to prohibit anonymous posts one the internet (New York has just proposed a law on the matter). While some are calling for no regulation over the internet, that is not history, we will see regulation and the question is what should the limit of it be. What should be allowed even if I find it offensive? I struggle with this even on my own poor blog. Peace.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by AQuestion

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by AQuestion
I am not quite sure where I am going with this


You got that right,
nor do i good buddy,
nor do i.

Just relax, take it easy
don't take it so serious.


edit on 25-5-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)


Dear pospmayhem,

When I started the thread I think I was grappling with what is coming and what is coming is more regulation over what we can and cannot post in public. We hear a lot about cyber-bullying and there are calls to prohibit anonymous posts one the internet (New York has just proposed a law on the matter). While some are calling for no regulation over the internet, that is not history, we will see regulation and the question is what should the limit of it be. What should be allowed even if I find it offensive? I struggle with this even on my own poor blog. Peace.


The government would love to shut up
people, governments have been doing it
to their people longer then I can recall.
Sure, they would like to take away free speech
but they can't, it is in the constitution.
Say what you want but understand
what you say can have consequences.
I say your blog should be a place where
truth is your bitch and whatever you have
to say, say it.

Truth is my bitch make it yours
and you have nothing to worry about



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 07:20 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Cosma
reply to post by HumanCondition
 




Chrisitans and the like often cannot answer them because they essentially believe in nothing more realistic then the tooth fairy they will simply avoid the questions or call you a name.

Which is exactly what you just done....call the belief of the christians "tooth fairy".

Amazing.
What is your point, their belief is no different then believing in the tooth fairy



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 


Dear AQuestion,

Bigotry is the natural consequence of a global "culture" moderated by political correctness. And nowhere is it more evident than on public internet forums, which are driven by a majority of more or less ignorant teenagers who fancy themselves as "free thinkers" (when in reality they are the exact opposite).

Judging by your posts, you're clearly a literate and cultured person who doesn't form opinions in accordance to the pop-philosophy du jour. Which is why I think you're probably wasting your time and your precious natural resources on public forums. There's absolutely nothing here or anywhere that you cannot figure out by yourself; there are only depressing distractions.

I know, none of the above is strictly on topic, and you may not even like this reply, but I just had to say it.
Just so you know you're not the only one who notices things.






edit on 26-5-2012 by AdAstra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by HumanCondition
 


So too are moral beliefs, yet morality and law plays a huge part in human civilization. You dismiss their religious beliefs as nonsense because they cannot be proven via scientific method, yet concepts like good, evil and justice aren't empirically provable either but are still valued by modern society.

Religious beliefs and symbols usually reflect cultural values and important ideals held by those that practice and many concepts therein are useful in creating a stable society. So while you personally may not value religion or religious beliefs, they are meaningful part of life for those who hold them. Attacking those beliefs and symbols may make one feel intellectually and morally superior but it often hides an ugly sort of ignorance and hypocrisy. Even when many atheists assert that religious ideas are rubbish they often turn around and use their own "fairy tales", subjective moral values, to attack those they disagree with.

Typically they don't see their behavior in that light, but I've yet to find an atheist or anyone else provide a scientific basis (apparently the only valuable tool to discovering truth) for believing, promoting or practicing a specific ethic over another or any ethic at all. This doesn't provide the atheist with a rational position from which to try and diminish or stigmatize the faithful as uniquely gullible, foolish or weak minded and thus easily dismissed by society.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by talonreaping
 

Then do not claim them to be universal truths

edit on 26-5-2012 by HumanCondition because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by AdAstra
 


Dear AdAstra,

What an interesting response, it was appreciated. But, I think it may have been on topic, if we accept the following. Firstly, the internet will eventually be regulated because of the recklessness which we see by people's obscene, offensive and evil posts. At this moment, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that there is a move to give the United Nations legal authority over the internet (the article is on-line). In France (and other countries) are so called "hate laws" and those can see you jailed for saying someone else's religious beliefs are bad. Determining where the line should be for free and open public debate is something that by having the discussion may help these kids to see what is going to come later.



Judging by your posts, you're clearly a literate and cultured person who doesn't form opinions in accordance to the pop-philosophy du jour. Which is why I think you're probably wasting your time and your precious natural resources on public forums. There's absolutely nothing here or anywhere that you cannot figure out by yourself; there are only depressing distractions. I know, none of the above is strictly on topic, and you may not even like this reply, but I just had to say it. Just so you know you're not the only one who notices things.


As for why I am on ATS, it gives me updates on the news, provides an opportunity to see what people out there that I would otherwise not hear are thinking and provide another perspective for people to consider. I think it is only fair that I ask you the same question if you think it is a waste of time. I do have to absolutely correct one statement, I am far from cultured, it is all I can do to not cuss when I am giving sermons. LOL. Our church is full of foreigners, homosexuals, junkies and whoever else doesn't feel they can go to a "regular" (hypocritical" church; but, still believe. I am straight, white and like some red wine and a cigarette to go with it. We can never hope to lift the level of discussion if we do not participate in it. Peace.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by HumanCondition

Originally posted by Dr Cosma
reply to post by HumanCondition
 




Chrisitans and the like often cannot answer them because they essentially believe in nothing more realistic then the tooth fairy they will simply avoid the questions or call you a name.

Which is exactly what you just done....call the belief of the christians "tooth fairy".

Amazing.
What is your point, their belief is no different then believing in the tooth fairy


What's my point?
Dont you read what you write?
This is what you said;


they will simply avoid the questions or call you a name.


Yea. Exactly.
But I gather you're either kid who doesn't even know what he's talking about or you need think about what you write, to make sense that is.

Because to me, you simply avoid questions and call people names

You see?



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Cosma
reply to post by HumanCondition
 




Chrisitans and the like often cannot answer them because they essentially believe in nothing more realistic then the tooth fairy they will simply avoid the questions or call you a name.

Which is exactly what you just done....call the belief of the christians "tooth fairy".

Amazing.


INDEED.

Same song as plays here 24/7/365

What the . . . 6,666,666th verse?

Sigh.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bleeeeep
reply to post by AQuestion
 


I think something needs to be done in regards to the trolls/flamers as well. I know this is just the internet but when you're deep in thought and someone starts to troll/flame you and nothing is done about it then it becomes even more off putting. I mean, this is supposed to be a place for civilized debate, right?

I guess my suggestion/request would be to make more mods to monitor threads more closely and be ready to issue 1-5 hour bans to keep people civil and discourage others in the thread from being uncivil. Maybe make it something lighthearted like a flag on the field.


Excellent points I agree with wholeheartedly.

Assaultive trollish behavior tends to become slicker and slicker. Yet, against Christians, it tends to always evidence some horrific degree of insult if not out-right verbal assault. I haven't paid close attention the last month or so. However, it used to be that the verbal assaults were way over the line into mean-spirited character assassination attacks; insults about their sanity; insults about their capacity to be logical etc.

And such attacks WERE ROUTINELY seemingly ignored by the mods--and sometimes joined, though in a toned-down a bit way by the mods active on the thread.

Yet, the least bit of negative statement by a Christian about Islam--regardless of how respectfully put and how rooted and referenced in Islam's own sources--WOULD IN A FLASH result in harsh rebukes by one and all and often an almost immediate censure or thread of some kind by a mod.

THAT kind of double standard hogwash was outrageous and often infuriating.

Eventually, it became too discouraging for me to bother trying to engage anyone on ATS about anything any more.

Have things really changed on that score, or not?



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Hmmmmmmmmm . . . I was hoping for some comments . . .

not to kill the thread with my ponderings, observations and questions.

Sigh.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Hmmmmmmmmm . . . I was hoping for some comments . . .

not to kill the thread with my ponderings, observations and questions.

Sigh.



who cares what muslims have to
say about christians or athiest have to say
about it ignore them...
Just proves who is more tolerant and
holds themselves to a higher standard
if you know it in your heart forget the naysayers
there are plenty of anti-christian avatars and backgrounds
who cares
what level does that put you down on then to put up an anti-islam background and av
puts u on their level.
it takes a strong person in their beliefs
to be able to battle don't stoop to their level..
sure the muslims over seas burn bibles their
barbarians. start stooping to the other sides level
what does that make you?
Hold yourself to a high standard


2One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. 13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way
niv.scripturetext.com...

aint got nothing to prove
edit on 31-5-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


I was referring more to threads being closed due to flamers/rudeness than I was bigotry/prejudices. I want mods to start throwing red flag markers on any posts they come across, that has unnecessary rudeness, so that they don't have to resort to closing a thread. I feel like threads addressing hatred, bigotry, racism, etc need to be talked over so we can work it out, mentally, with others and ourselves.

When a rude/personal attack post(Ad Hominem Attacks) is left unchecked to gather stars, it promotes the bad behavior.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by popsmayhem

who cares what muslims have to
say about christians or athiest have to say
about it ignore them...
Just proves who is more tolerant and
holds themselves to a higher standard
if you know it in your heart forget the naysayers
there are plenty of anti-christian avatars and backgrounds
who cares
what level does that put you down on then to put up an anti-islam background and av
puts u on their level.
it takes a strong person in their beliefs
to be able to battle don't stoop to their level..
sure the muslims over seas burn bibles their
barbarians. start stooping to the other sides level
what does that make you?
Hold yourself to a high standard


2One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. 13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way
niv.scripturetext.com...


Very worthy points.

I think mine was more along the lines of . . . not stooping to their level per se . . .

but how to tell or talk about the truth about such evils without being accused of bigotry, hate etc.

I think I TENTATIVELY reached the conclusion that the tests now seem to be keyed to:

1. civility--no big problem, there.

2. SOUNDING like, appearing to . . . RESPECT others' perspectives . . . PROBABLY no problem there except that RESPECT, too tends to be in the eye of the beholder and the other side are Olympic gold medalists in whining about lack of respect from any who disagree . . .

3. SOUNDING like, one does not think that one is the only one right about ideas, philosophies, life, etc.

That one's a bit trickier. If one doesn't believe that one's perspectives or beliefs are right or mosly right--WHY WOULD HE HOLD THEM? I don't understand how that one is supposed to be practically applied and it is one of the buggaboo's that's left me very hesitant to write much hereon at all.

I think it's probably pretty workable to avoid sounding like a rigid, narrow, arrogant know-it-all. If THAT'S the issue, then I think I can manage that--at least most of the time.

But IF the standard is to avoid sounding like one believes strongly what one believes, then, THAT'S not likely to be a very workable standard.

Is that any clearer?



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bleeeeep
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


I was referring more to threads being closed due to flamers/rudeness than I was bigotry/prejudices. I want mods to start throwing red flag markers on any posts they come across, that has unnecessary rudeness, so that they don't have to resort to closing a thread. I feel like threads addressing hatred, bigotry, racism, etc need to be talked over so we can work it out, mentally, with others and ourselves.

When a rude/personal attack post(Ad Hominem Attacks) is left unchecked to gather stars, it promotes the bad behavior.


Sounds reasonable, to me. There's 2-3 orientations hereon who TRADITIONALLY seem to run roughshod over such standards of civility--with far too much impunity. Anything to help that would be wonderful.

Thankfully, that issue seems to have improved markedly in the last few months.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join