It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New survey for Political Discussion on ATS

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:45 PM
I think members are getting away with to much spinning of the topic, you can only spin it so many times. So much of it the same stuff.

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:52 PM
I think the board represents politics in it's purest form.

Gritty, Dirty, Raw, Unedited, Slimy, Confusing not to mention...Excessive.

Keep it the way it is. But add a board for 'Drugs and Psychodelic experiences'. Legalize it mods.

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 03:26 PM
Good survey.

I like politics and it is a forever ongoing discussion.

Although I do wish the Mud stayed in the Pit.

edit-( i dont know if the board supports this, but what about a political catagory, with a mild mudpit sub-category, and even possibly a Severe Mud & Wild Speculation sub-sub-catagory that does not show up in searches, posts lists, nor recent topics lists.)

[edit on 5-11-2004 by smirkley]

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 04:09 PM
The level of politcal discussion is getting absurd. This was a conspiracy board. I understand cultures change, but if this level of political discussion continues (that is, discssion w/o direct link to conspiracies) then ATS should change it's motto or something. deny ignorance != Gimmie Politics

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 04:16 PM
1. Election fraud is a conspiracy.
2. Misuse of intelligence to justify foreign incursion is a conspiracy.

The issue of needless proliferation of too-similar topics is in no way restricted to discussion of political conspiracy. It happens all over ATS and BTS.

What we see now is people who are shellshocked by the erosion of their rights and the falling of a democracy. The effects may be difficult to "manage" in a discussion board environment with untrained volunteers.

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 04:18 PM
its a fantastic idea to get the general consensus for the board, and the future of politics on ATS.

i do, however, think that we should keep the discussions as such. the posts are all part of ats, and that needs to be preserved in some way. people are pissed bush is elected, people are elated bush is elected. whatever, most ATSers know when they see a troll's work, and jsut ignore it; theres no use starting a flame war. this will eventually die down and return to our definition of normal because itll end up being just like the past few years. same old, same old.

we shud even be thankful kerry lost. if he had won, thered be tons of speculation and thoughts on what bush will do between now and inauguration, and what kerry will do.

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 04:57 PM

mud, mud an more mud!!!

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 05:30 PM
It's hard to answer that last question without an "other" choice...

It would be nice to see all of the Bush/Kerry crap about the US elections off the Recent Posts, or be able to be filtered out, but I'd hate to see the valuable threads with good discussion pushed off. So many political issues are tied up in ethics such as abortion, stem cell, etc... but those good discussion threads are easy to miss with all of the why you should think Bush people are stupid, or why Kerry is a liar threads.

The Political Mud Pit restricted access helps.

Hopefully as we get further away from the election, the threads will slow down and stop. I feel for all the people not in the US who have to wade through it all

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 06:19 PM
Im still pretty new here but id like to say that the single biggest thing that attracted me to ATS was being able to openly discuss heated topics with out mods and adminstrators overly interferring.if i had to pick between overly polite VS. total cut throat,id take cut throat everytime.not becasue i think we SHOULD be cut throat,but becasue i hate censorship THAT MUCH.anyway,for what its worth,freedom of speech should reign,even if it hurts someones feelings here and there,my own feelings included.thanks for letting us weigh in on this. ATS RULES!!!

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 07:24 PM
When a hotly contested election that's been labeled "the the most important election of our lifetime" happens, people are going to talk about it. People in Europe seem to have as much interest in this election than they do their own. By Monday everything will die down to almost normal. Don't forget in the week prior to the election, Arafat became gravely ill, and "Osama" issued another statement, two pretty big events further adding to the traffic.

I would consider myself a "political" member here. But that's not what brought me here initially, I originally found ATS through a google search on Billy Meier. I have the interest in alternative areas, but not the knowledge most of you have to weigh in on such subjects. I do read through those threads quite often. However, the political discussion is what keeps me logging in frequently. If it weren't for the political discussion, I wouldn't check in here as much. I don't know if any of the political members are the same way.

I don't think anything drastic really needs to be done. I'm sure it will all even itself out in the long run.

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 07:34 PM
This survey was fairly hard for me, as I often fell between two answers or didnt agree with any of them. So SO, here is my contribution to the survey:

1. How do you feel about the current volume of political discussion on the ATS board?

Volume is too high. I know this will die down after the election dies down, but there are a BUNCH of "this is why i dont like bush"(written as "bush is a *****, how could you vote for him?), and "this is why i like bush"(written as "hahaha, your just mad cause he won.") Any way to be stricter on this?

All of that must be reduced to: It bothers me, but there is the occasional good thread.

2. Please describe, honestly, your political leanings for us.

Alright, cant complain at ALL about this one. Not sharing the answer here though, its none your your business

3. If you discuss politics, what is your preferred style?

NO FLAMES. You can disagree with me all you like,and get as animated as you like, but the second someone i am debating says "YOUR WRONG" or "(blank) SUCKS", i loose all interest in the debate. Its no fun to be told you are wrong, especially if that person cant come up with any evidence except that they dont like your view.

So i have to cast my vote for : "I like calm discussion with occasional heat" even though i dont mind heat, only the flames that can come as well.

4. What would you like to see for the future of political discussion on ATS?

I'd like to have two forums: one for everyday political events, and the other for world-affecting changes. For example, a Politics forum and a US Election forum. When the election dies down, remove that forum. then when a bomb goes off in Madrid and kills the queen of england, that becomes the forum to go where the election forum was before.

That must be reduced to: UHHH... there isnt a good one, so i stuck with "one forum for politics"


posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 12:41 AM
Several things about the political discourse frustrate the hell out of me.

First, how many different ways can you ask the community if they agree that Bush is a liar/war criminal/baby killer/in bed with the Saudis/responsible for 9-11/member of the NWO? By the number of threads discussing the same issue at any given time, at least a dozen.

Second, there are way too many people that don't do any homework or research before they post. Issues that have been thoroughly debunked are brought up again and again. I believe that is due in large part to the young age of posters on ATS.

Finally, there is no chance of engaging many people in reasoned discourse. For example, I've answered at least 3 allegations of electronic voting machines being rigged by the Republicans with the same fact: In Philadelphia, evoting machines were apparently pre-loaded with votes for Kerry. What response do I get? Silence. On to the next post wiith the same arguments. It gets very tiresome.

I realize that it may appear that my frustrations show my political leanings, and yes, I did vote for Bush. But I'd like to think that my style would not change regardless of which candidate I voted for.

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 01:42 AM
Hi All

Personally, I don't get involved in political discussions, as there are far more important subjects to discuss.
Politics, as you can gather, does not rate, as far as I am concerned, but that is just my opinion and others are free to have theirs. I think that although there should be a separate section for politics, on this board, but that would be a little difficult, as many subjects can have a political connotations. It's a shame that politics has to enter the arena at all, but it seems to be an intrinsic attribute of many human beings, as it is related to the hierarchial mentality, from the family, the nation and the world.

The truth of it is, that there is only the perception of "two" sides, Right and Left, Liberal and Conservative, a bit like two brands of breakfast cereal, both made by the same manufacturer.
We would be all kidding ourselves, if it was all as simple as it is portrayed.
Like "Democracy", it is only the perception that is promoted, not the truth.



posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 03:16 AM
I don't know, but it seems to me that the best way to kill a troll is simply not to feed it. Obviously this may be an oversimplification of the problem, but then again, if you don't like the political discussions, don't click on the little Nixon Icon, they are pretty clearly labeled. There is no greater conspiracy than politics, IMO.

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 05:55 AM

3. If you discuss politics, what is your preferred style?

"I like calm discussion with occasional heat"

This was the closest I could come to my answer on this one, but I would have preferred the choice to be I like intelligent discussion with occassional heat.

Way too many people run from thread to thread no matter what the topic making the same lame comments about their political feelings with flaming remarks about the oppossing view to their own. These people continue to vent their position with what is often wild conjecture. (Actually these types do the same thing with religion.) It gets real old real fast and there is way too much of it that has been going on for as long as I have been here, and I am sure will continue since nothing has essentially changed in the political situation with Bush remaining in office.

There is a big difference between denying ignorance and venting. I'm sure there are plenty of places on the internet where one can go to vent. In fact there are places here one can go. If you want to just keep stating the same thing that bothers you with no further development of the thought, go start a Rant, or head to the mudpit, or just put it in your signature already.

I would prefer that this were curtailed in some way shape or form especially becuase of how frequently a political debate will pop up on any thread that is current news/events and totally derail a discussion that may have had merit to continue.

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 08:26 AM
I don't see the need for any new political boards. Tighter moderation perhaps - warnings about unproductive sloganeering and rhetoric, irrelevent posts removed or relocated. I've always had the impression this site was about truth, not politics. Given that politics infuses just about all facets of life, having one or two boards dedicated specifically to it seems like a reasonable concession. And I like the idea of lumping all politics, international and domestic-specific, onto the one board. If there's one thing American politics suffers from it's its inbred, inward looking focus. Obviously doesn't apply to everyone, but if you set up boards segregating Americans from British from everyone else, I fear you'd only be entrenching narrow spheres of concern. A different perspective often helps. Maybe it doesn't matter anyway, and this is only an aesthetic preference.

One issue with the survey - not enough political allegiances on offer. I'm libertarian-green-socialist. Anarchist. 'On my own' doesn't suffice, because there are...a few others out there. And while I would consider myself a socialist, that term has non-libertarian connotations.

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 08:29 AM

Every vote has counted and matters on ATS!

Soon the results will be posted, and the opinions of our members will be used to design the ATS strategy for dealing with the evolution of political discord within our boundaries. More later.

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 09:47 AM
Although ATS is by for an extremely liberal dominated forum, I enjoy reading and commenting on posts that deal with politics. I've learned a lot while I have been here.

I wouldn't mind seeing the political side of ATS done a little better, maybe this would make the people who don't enjoy discussing politics happier.

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 10:30 AM
I also think that many of the political discussions are challenges to the current political system and do go along with the conspiracy theme. It is hard to seperate political leanings from these conversations--this is precisely where the debate comes from. It is useful when arguments are supported by facts and evidence, but there are cases where passion is just as valid to prove a point. It is only natural that there is heated debate but I do wish that people would try to refrain from personal attacks.

But it is clear that there are many members that wish to participate in political discussion. And there are members that don't care to or are tired of the conversations. Eliminating the forums would compromise the members that still wish to participate in these discussions, but there should be a way for those who aren't interested in these conversations to turn them off. The ability to filter out forums from "Recent Posts" would help here. Perhaps an interim solution could be to use the functionality in My ATS that allows you to view postings by your favorite forums (which can be edited.)

I am not sure if creating a seperate section is a good idea at the moment because it is very likely that after the election buzz dies down, the extreme interest may go away and this might be unnecessary. I would wait a few months to see if the interest level continues to be high--and if there was a way to filter out threads from the "Recent Post" list, that may solve the problem altogether.

I don't think that all of the political forums should be restricted--many of the political discussions include valuable information that should be accessible to everyone. I do think however, that mud-pit type discussions should continue to be removed from general commentary. Because of the nature of political conversation, sometimes the line does become blurred. Perhaps a reminder message included at the top of non-mud pit political forums reminding members to only engage in information exchange and constructive debate would be useful (much like the reminder on the ATSNN pages.) I think that lively debate should still be encouraged--the line should just be drawn when it gets to personal attacks.

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 10:41 AM
The politics needs a proper subforum, I agree with UKwizard we need structure. Politics and conspiracy are heavily intertwined.
We should structure them into
then futher subdivieded
Domestic Policies
International Policies

This well help to structure arguments and discussion.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in