The End of Political Baiting and Sniping on ATS (was ALL MEMBERS READ)

I appreciate seekerof pointing out as two of my warnings seem to be for things that i said lightly and did not intend to offend anyone. It seems that, regardless of what i have said or done, i have become a target for certain mods to let off steam and vent at me and my opinions.

I have acted like a jerk recently because i feel that i was singled out and continually attacked.

Like seekerof said, this idea is noble in theory but impractical in application, Unless all political subjects are now off limits.

I actually seriously need to know if terms which are common place in a politics class can no longer be used here?

Originally posted by kinglizard

Originally posted by Seekerof
Example from a member who recieved warns for making these posts:

as posted by XphilesPhan
The downing street memo is worthless because it is the observation and OPINION of some analyst. It's an overblown cooked up piece of nothing exactly why no one gives it any serious consideration.(unless your a hardcore liberal desperate to find some 'evidence' to support your rantings).

Hmm, let me see here, the member was given a red-flag warn for saying "hardcore liberal"?

Not to mention that he referred to the statements of the “hardcore liberals” to be a desperate attempt to support his rantings.

Well, is it not true that agenda-driven people will misuse, misinterpret, or misrepresent certain pieces of information to support their case? Everyone has done this, if they haven't, they are lying.

I guess the point here is to make things a little less descriptive, such as....

"unless you're[sp] a hardcore (political advocate) desperate to find some 'evidence' to support your "

Is that not OK either? Let's reduce it further.

"unless you're a (staunch) (political advocate) desperate to find (information) to support your (agenda)"

Maybe more...

"unless you're a (staunch) (political advocate) (perusing for) (information) to support your (agenda)"

Is that OK? If not, maybe we can just take out all references to politics and all extremism, that should make it better.

"unless you're desperate to find some"

Wow, sounds like someone is going to a club tonight!


I remember watching a movie called Big Fish, and it was said that the French-Speaking Congonese bushmen would talk about everything except for religion and politics because you're always going to offend someone. That's just the nature of the game I guess. I don't think baiting will ever stop.

[edit on 21-8-2005 by Jamuhn]

Originally posted by Odium
I actually seriously need to know if terms which are common place in a politics class can no longer be used here?

Odium, that question has been answered in several ways within the posts made by administration in this very thread.. if you would actually read through this discussion you'd know.

Again, no one is going to be censored, as long as what is posted stays within the topic and within the terms and conditions of use.

Seekerof,

I dont think the staff are going to publically comment as to why Xphilesphan recieved those warnings. I read the deliberations over it all and believe me, it was justified.

The terms he used are not the focus of his warnings, its the fact that he is derailing threads with politically orientated tangents. The fact that he used the terms "liberal" or "left" is not the issue, its the fact that they didnt have a place in those threads that got him the warns. As well as previous behaviour that is not appropriate to share.

Edit: "Warns" not "ban"

[edit on 21/8/05 by subz]

Thanks for that clarification, subz, much appreciated.
Again, thank you.




seekerof

Originally posted by UM_Gazz

Originally posted by Odium
I actually seriously need to know if terms which are common place in a politics class can no longer be used here?

Odium, that question has been answered in several ways within the posts made by administration in this very thread.. if you would actually read through this discussion you'd know.

Again, no one is going to be censored, as long as what is posted stays within the topic and within the terms and conditions of use.

I really do not think it has.

For instance, if I call the "Times of London" a Conservative paper (due to its stance during the last election) would I then get punished for it?

I again direct you to the book I pointed out and would have to say it is censoring it because it is by no means a negative term (Liberal/Conservative Media).

(They dropped all stories (on going some for as long as two years) on Conservative MPs and did a complete U-turn during the election).

Crossed Wires

Originally posted by Seekerof
Now I have a Council member indicating that there are thoughts of banning me or giving me warning of heed to not be banned?

No, and I'm sorry if that's the impression I gave, because that's not correct.

Expressing opinions in this thread, no matter how blunt or candid, is not brinkmanship.

I am referring to the battle going on in the forums right now.

Nothing in that post was directed at you in any manner, unless, of course, you fit that description

My place here is not to sit in judgment of my fellow members. I do not have moderator powers, I can't ban people and I don't want such powers.

I am offering my honest opinions on the situation and the best advice I can give.

Crosstalk

While I appreciate principled dialog and reasoned debate as much as anyone else, including on this topic, my point continues to be that the reality in the forums is that the mods have been directed to bring some major smack down on members who don't want to engage in a decent semblance of topical discussion.

Some members will be simply unable to do this and will be banned. This can happen very quickly, and I would like to see less of it.

On the other hand, in cases where members are willfully violating the T&C and giving other members and staff a bunch of grief, I would like to see that behavior end one way or the other, the sooner the better.

This problem is not new, and there has been no shortage of dialog on it. The time for talking about it in a theoretical sense is over. Action is being taken NOW.

The fewer incidents of heedless members throwing themselves under the admin steamroller I see, the happier I'll be. But when members decide to do such things, it's their choice.

The best I can do is advise against it as stridently as I can, because once the ban hammer falls, the discussion is over.

Originally posted by subz
Seekerof,

I dont think the staff are going to publically comment as to why Xphilesphan recieved those warnings. I read the deliberations over it all and believe me, it was justified.

The terms he used are not the focus of his warnings, its the fact that he is derailing threads with politically orientated tangents. The fact that he used the terms "liberal" or "left" is not the issue, its the fact that they didnt have a place in those threads that got him the ban. As well as previous behaviour that is not appropriate to share.

Well, i think you have confused my chat privillege ban over these warnings, either that or im baned right now. Im not sure what you mean by 'previous behavior' because im not sure it really relates to why ive gotten these warnings. Regardless warnings are warnings and i will live.
As for the chat room issue that was between me cmdrkeenkid, I have apologised but that only goes so far. I may have derailed some conversations but i will no longer do that.

My biggest problem is being treated like a heinous criminal, notice few people will even directly respond to my posts in this thread.

Everybody, CHILL!

This is very clear, and it should be very clear why we are taking a new direction.

Nobody is looking to drop the axe on anyone! OK? We don't drop the axe, anyway, people seem to fall on it on their own accord! We hope that everyone will make it through the transition, back to a conspiracy baord and away from the Ann Coulter -v- The Democratic Underground.

One more time for those who are still trying to break out of the hard shell that has been built around you by them.
"They" created the left and the right, the liberal as well as the conservative, so that they can control us all. It is to "their" gain, that we fight and bicker and not pay attention to what they are doing!

Any idiot can argue politics, and me and a bunch of others have been proving that on THIS CONSPIRACY BOARD for too darned long!

We've had our political fun long enough! Now, lets start using our brains again, get out our shovels and start digging a LOT deeper than they want us to!

FALL OUT!

Your right, my wires were crossed, Majic.
My apologies and thank you for that clarification.




seekerof

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
We've had our political fun long enough! Now, lets start using our brains again, get out our shovels and start digging a LOT deeper than they want us to!

FALL OUT!

I agree TC, let's fight for truth and justice. How far down the rabbit hole will you go?

Quote from Xphilesphan: My biggest problem is being treated like a heinous criminal, notice few people will even directly respond to my posts in this thread.

Well I will directly respond. I do not think anyone is trying to treat you or anyone else as a criminal. I do think that you as well as a few others in this thread seem to want to continue to ruffle the feathers of the staff. This thread just keeps going on and on and the discussion seems no better than what it was suppose to accomplish. The staff seems to be trying to be polite in saying that everying has been said, the rules are made, follow them. I think the message is very clear and it is time for some members to get back to the threads on this website and away from this continued bickering. We all have something to say and add through out this website including you and I would like to see that vs what I am seeing in this thread.

Hope to see you elsewhere on the site.

[edit on 21-8-2005 by anniejhops]

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, a book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky.
..."the pressure to create a stable, profitable business invariably distorts the kinds of news items reported, as well as the manner and emphasis in which they are reported. This occurs not as a result of conscious design but simply as a consequence of market selection: those businesses who happen to favor profits over news quality survive, while those that present a more accurate picture of the world tend to become marginalized."



[edit on 21/8/2005 by Odium]

Originally posted by Jamuhn

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
We've had our political fun long enough! Now, lets start using our brains again, get out our shovels and start digging a LOT deeper than they want us to!

FALL OUT!

I agree TC, let's fight for truth and justice. How far down the rabbit hole will you go?

I got no boundaries. I got no political pets to protect.

It is they who are afraid of us, not the other way around. Do the right thing, and fear no man!

Amongst the flurry of warns, bans, slaps, and smacks in response to the baits, snipes, bashings and cracks, don't forget to keep stroking the egos and patting the backs of the newer hacks, who may be a little intimidated by all these sado-masochistic whip-cracks between the seasoned Jacks.

PS: Majic, thx for the rental on the bold title thingie...the cheque's in the mail.

The Bold Line Of Succession

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
PS: Majic, thx for the rental on the bold title thingie...the cheque's in the mail.

Pass it forward.

The more the merrier.

I think we are finally getting this smoothed over which im glad , i appreciate all the help that was given and i hope we can move forward from this thanks.

Smooth Sailing Ahead

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
I think we are finally getting this smoothed over which im glad

, i appreciate all the help that was given and i hope we can move forward from this thanks.

Dude, awesome!

Yes, I agree. I think it's going to be okay.

It may seem harsh and everyone can come up with all sorts of what-ifs and doomsday scenarios (I have my own, just like everybody else), but it's not the end of the world, and it's really not a bad deal.

All of us love ATS in our own way. Our ability to love it will not be diminished by this, but enhanced.

My opinion anyway, yours is very much welcome to vary, and that's not going to change.



Applause: You are the third person I have applauded since becoming a Councilor. I don't hand these out lightly, and I am not applauding you to patronize you. My applause is for something I would love to see more of on ATS, and I appreciate you demonstrating it. I know it's been a rough couple of days, but you're showing what you're made of, and it looks good to me. XphilesPhan, nicely done. --M

Good point... Also i think that bringing God and Jesus into non-religious threads should also be included (in both positive and negative ways of course)