Political Discrimination on ATS

reply to post by VaterOrlaag


That's because you're playing defense. The progressive machine is in power now. All policies are done by "your" team. The conservative element can sit back and take shots with impunity because you guys won.

The next time a conservative gets into office, you'll have the luxury of sitting back and taking shots at all the policies.

reply to post by MadDogtheHunter


Does freedom of speech mean tolerating trolls that disrupt threads and refuse to follow the TOS?

How about new posters that use the Introductions forum to get past the minimum amount of posts required to put up a new thread? How about new posters that post something with no links to support it and then argue with anyone who disagrees with them?

Just saying. There's a fine line between free speech and promoting stimulating intelligent discussion on the issues.

reply to post by beezzer


Far from the truth.

The Tea Party controls the U.S House.

The Republicans stomp on and obstruct Obama every chance that they get.

Guns are a bigger issue than the economy.

I could go on and on.

This presidency reminds me of the last time that we had a Democrat for President.

Nothing ever changes.

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by beezzer

 

Far from the truth.

The Tea Party controls the U.S House.

I wish! We'd have less spending then.

The Republicans stomp on and obstruct Obama every chance that they get.

I wish they did a better job of it. Especially with Obamacare.

Guns are a bigger issue than the economy.

Not guns. Crime. Not one law has been written or proposed that would increase penalties for persons using a firearm in the commission of a crime.

I could go on and on.

So could I.

This presidency reminds me of the last time that we had a Democrat for President.

Nothing ever changes.

Clinton was a bit better than Obama, but Obama sure as hell reminds me of Carter.

reply to post by VaterOrlaag

Does freedom of speech mean tolerating trolls that disrupt threads and refuse to follow the TOS?

I think you and I suffer from the same condition; we both have a hard time NOT responding when attacked.

Sometimes you’ve got to not feed the trolls. It’s tough but rather than complaining about how things are or attacking back you’ve got to walk away sometimes and not take things personal.

I just lurk now because I thought I was bringing good things to this site.

Apparently not.

reply to post by seabag


You call that an attack?

It was a moderator asking me to clarify what I meant. And I did.

And beeezer, I don't know what decade you're living in but violent crime has been declining and continues to do so.

What we're seeing is an amplification of isolated incidents in the case of gun violence.

There aren't MORE incidents per se. The media plays on the illusion of such.

I consider the economy and getting people back to work far more important than gun control, the 2nd amendment, et al.

The latter is nothing but a distraction that they roll out conveniently whenever things are in the crapper.

reply to post by VaterOrlaag

You call that an attack?

Not at all…I was referring more to the general conversation the OP started and your comment when you said:

Does freedom of speech mean tolerating trolls that disrupt threads and refuse to follow the TOS?

By the way, a certain avatar on this thread looks familiar to me. That newer member who is bitching about the way ATS is recently called me “Teabag” or “Scumbag” or something to that effect because he/she was losing. I won’t name names….

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by seabag

 

And beeezer, I don't know what decade you're living in but violent crime has been declining and continues to do so.

What we're seeing is an amplification of isolated incidents in the case of gun violence.

There aren't MORE incidents per se. The media plays on the illusion of such.

I consider the economy and getting people back to work far more important than gun control, the 2nd amendment, et al.

The latter is nothing but a distraction that they roll out conveniently whenever things are in the crapper.

I actually agree.

We are just at opposite ends on determining how it should be accomplished.

As it should be, really. We all can't see eye to eye on everything. It's what makes this place interesting.

It's just that some can't handle another person having an opposing view.

I've run into a few people like that here. They are actually shocked that someone could believe differently than them.

I've generally just been watching the thread with interest but not much in comment as I don't really see discrimination.

There have been times where I've been on the receiving end of tag-team debate style on the left ..and gotten my fuzzy little tail stomped into mush on the thread. It's annoying at times...infuriating at others. (I've also been the recipient of U2U's asking if I'd come join the same being done the other direction...and declined without comment) It's all a part of the package though and not discriminatory. That's the breaks in a high tempo, high energy political debate forum. Others have noted that staying outside the traditional debate forums where 'combat threads' tend to crop up is a real good idea for those who it genuinely bothers. Right or Left.

Having said that, I popped in here to share this.



Those are the stats as of this afternoon and posted by ATS on the Forums index page. I post them to make the point that people need to Alert, as the tools allow, when they see something out of line. It took me awhile to realize and then fully accept what Mods have told me when the subject has come up. They honestly and sincerely DO NOT see everything or even every thread that crosses ATS. Given the above stats, it's not that hard to see how that happens.

As I've come to drop alerts a bit more than I ever used to (At one time, I wouldn't click that if it was a figurative 5 alarm fire, burning the house down...then realized, I was part of the problem by thinking that way), I've found they do respond when asked to come look. Certainly not always, and sometimes I think they've been a bit ...over-tolerant. I'll bet cash others would say the very same about things going the other direction though. So it balances out. It always seems to around here in some way.

The fact they do respond when alerted, as much as they do, tells me they are completely honest about not seeing whatever it was. If that weren't the case, merely telling them about it wouldn't bring action they already chose not to take.

*A couple things I've seen them respond to only after Alerts WERE raging combat threads....but not one's they'd had anyone mention they ought to look at. Not ones they'd stumbled into out of personal interest either. They're only human against those activity numbers, IMO.

Originally posted by rival
You are absolutely right.

The truth on any issue is almost always somewhere in the middle between two opposing ideologies.

Two heads ARE better than one.

It was a very humbling moment for me when I realized I was not ALWAYS right. It took me about
fifty years to figure this out

I have great admiration for those that are humble enough to realize they don't have all the answers!
We are mere human beings who quite often make mistakes, even in our opinions!
At one time I thought socialism was the answer, thought majority rule was a good thing but today I am more
in the middle politically! I don't have all the answers but I like to take pride in the idea that I try to do the right things! If we could all humble ourselves and realize that there is no definite truth and that it usually depends on
ones perspective! We could perhaps advance our social understanding greatly!
We may never have a world that is just and free for all but maybe the first step in getting their is to realize we are
all important to developing social understanding, respect and admiration! keeping an open mind is key to seeing this through.

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by MadDogtheHunter

 

Does freedom of speech mean tolerating trolls that disrupt threads and refuse to follow the TOS?

In a sense, yes. It's their right to express their opinions. However, rules do have to be followed. But trying to "silence" a "troll", is a form of censorship. Whether we agree with someones opinion or not, they still have the right to express it (again, within the posted rules/terms). Our beloved Constitution promises that.

Not sure how it can be approached when it's a person living in another country that expresses their opinions. I guess their country's laws and/or rights would govern that. That could be considered a bit of a gray area I would think.

I think looking at the stickies in the forum you've posted this thread in basically covers what ATS thinks about politics. Five threads about conservative politics around the world, not a single one about any kind of liberalism. Even the FSME is listed only as "conservative," no liberal counterpart. It's irritating.

Originally posted by CasaVigilante
Oh, I thought the average reader would have surmised, by virtue of the context within which my remarks were made, that the author was alluding to such 'manifestos' as written by Marx or Mao Tse-tung - aka TOS

. In other words, my use of the term 'manifesto' was rhetorical inasmuch as it was a pejorative (uncomplimentary) expression intended to convey a particular point of view, i.e., a literary device.

Oh I understand but I get tired of the misrepresentation of terms, that are vague digs at the left.

The Communist manifesto, for example, was simply the plan of how to move from capitalist to socialist economy. It had nothing to do with taking peoples freedom, in fact the opposite is the truth. Socialism removes the chains of exploitation and oppression of economic private property, there is no freedom in economic private property, just privilege for the few and poverty for the many.

Incidentally - my remarks with respect to a lack of 'freedom of expression' here at ATS come by way of personal experience. Unfortunately, I would be in violation of the TOS if I were to reveal (copy/paste) the full contents of a U2U that I received from the owner of this website wherein it was generally conveyed - in no uncertain terms - that this is a "private website" and that there is no such thing as "freedom of speech" as we "Americans" would normally understand the term.

BTW - As a test for anyone here interested in 'freedom of expression' here @ATS please just try writing freely about Sandy Hook as a fraudulent enterprise and see how quickly your posts are deleted as "off topic" or your comments and/or threads will either be closed or taken down altogether. It has happened here so many times that I have stopped counting. So much for "freedom of speech" @ ATS -

Well the Mod would be right, Americans have a very romanticized view of what freedom of speech means. One thing it doesn't mean is you have free speech on, or in private property. ATS is private property.

This is one of the issues I have with capitalism, your rights are not always protected when on private property, and most of the world is private property. You have no free speech in the workplace for example.

Hmmm, in 9 years on ATS I have never seen a Mod close a thread for any reason other than posters were getting out of control, and breaking t&c all over the place. What would be the benefit to ATS to delete threads based simply on content, that don't break t&c?

I don't see the point in whining about it when there are many many other forum sites you could go to instead if this one doesn't offer the experience you want.

reply to post by VaterOrlaag

I totally agree. Its like one side of the conversations is Romper Room, and the other is trying to have intelligent discourse. Upon which the romper roomers stick their nose in and accuse the learned poster with "got any proof" or, "are you always in denial?" They don't officially violate the etiquette, they just violate it very nicely. And who asked them anyway? I don't jump in your contrails are meteors are satellite and UFO's sandbox...

But to no avail. Pages of ooh, it looks like a UFO and Oh, I agree.

I liken it to going to a college university course to learn from someone and when I arrive the class is half full of children, making wise cracks and shooting spit wads. They don't care whats being taught, in their mind older people don't know spit anyway, (because they're old). Hey, shut the hell up or take it outside.

Which you can't say, because then you are trampling on their rights. What? I said you are trampling on their rights! I 'm sorry, theres a lot of noise in here could you repeat that and yell a little theres a lot of shouting...

One side of my head tells me this is by design to discredit a truth and expose site. The media is sorely pissed that they are not the only source of information anymore. If I were in their rabid "control freak" minds I would set to infiltrating and discrediting every site I thought had any anti media agenda. I would do that by pretending to be a young un but cleverly not violating T&C. I would have fantastically fast typing and editing skills but bring a jetliner contrail video and call it a UFO. Then log on all my other accounts to star me. And never log off. After all I am paid to do this.

Originally posted by facelift
reply to post by unb3k44n7

 

And this site is not about civility, though it does have its place.

On the contrary. From the Terms And Conditions topic:

... all Users and members are expected to participate with the same common every-day social graces used in civilized mixed company. Our desire is to foster an environment of civil decorum that enables our members to discuss highly provocative and intensely speculative topics without concern over personal attacks or insults.

And I think this goes to the heart and spirit of what TC is trying to say.

It is certainly true that in the past the site has been accused of having an anti-conservative bias, while today it is accused of displaying an anti-liberal bias. Like TC, I dislike such distinctions myself to begin with. As far as I'm concerned, we're all human on the same planet. We're just looking at it from different vantage points. And I think this perceived bias changes with the times. It's understandable because when one group is in ascension, a site dedicated to conspiracy theory is bound to direct its suspicions and concerns toward that group and away from its predecessors. It ebbs and flows like seasons.

The issue is in how people go about it. People are going to disagree, and profoundly so. People are going to feel their emotions stir in response to these disagreements. The goal is to communicate with one another - even when we might passionately disagree - with mutual forbearance and without direct personal hostility. I can't speak for anyone else, but I take that policy seriously. This doesn't mean to not speak our minds or take strong positions and stands. It just means that we need to find ways to argue the points and debate the positions rather than trying to tear one another down as individuals.

In my opinion.

Peace.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Others have noted that staying outside the traditional debate forums where 'combat threads' tend to crop up is a real good idea for those who it genuinely bothers. Right or Left.

Yes.
And as you and seabag ( guys) have said, "if you can't stand the heat...."
I, too, have learned a LOT in the 25+ months I've been here.

We have to remember that not all members have as much mileage behind them, or perhaps have not been exposed to, or explored, other points of view.

Still, it does hurt the cause (to find common ground) to call people names and label them unjustly due to ignorance of what one is talking about.

reply to post by TheToastmanCometh

I just lurk now because I thought I was bringing good things to this site.

Apparently not.

I don't know your post history at all - and I don't think I've seen you round the boards....
but, PLEASE, don't give up.

We need ALL VOICES here.

reply to post by unb3k44n7

For someone who doesn't indulge in such things - you sure had a lot to say. And it appears that if someone says something against your man - you are going to play the race card. It sounds like - if you don't agree with what is said on ATS about politics and your man it is racism.

Nice try