You, ATS and Decision 2008.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
BH, I love you to death but I'm pissed at me because of you most of all.
I should have never dropped it that day. I could see it so clearly.

I'm sorry.

I just didn't want you to push it beyond the limit. You shouldn't have listened to me.

Sorry.

Darn you and your adorable puppy eyes.
BH you are the sweetest person, there are so many others.
They threw me a surprise party yesterday on BTS and made Sdog cry.
This place is full of life and knowledge and friendships and we're letting these fools piss all over it.

We really need that hammer. Or that freakin desk Huckabee promised.

There's nothing wrong with the new forum. It works wonderfully! I LOVE it! If we didn't have the Bully Pulpit where I felt protected from the mimicking, partisan bull, I doubt I'd be posting at all.

Decision 2008 has become the "slums", though. ATS could just get rid of it. But then the hate filled rhetoric would just move to political news or something...
It's hard to know what to do.

Is this the type of thread we're talking about?

www.abovetopsecret.com...


And if so, why are there no comments in the thread by mods?

And if not, why not?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


1. Reinstate Above Politics as it's own site.
or
2. Enforce the T&C and SO's guidelines.

That's it.

For Jamie or anyone else that is tired of the trivial political baiting, you could sign up for the Bully Pulpit forum for a more intelligent political discussion.

Welcome To The ATS Bully Pulpit: Civilized Political Debate

The Bully Pulpit forum

Originally posted by jetxnet
We don't see Mods like Dbates or Semper whining about this stuff.

I bite my tongue as much as possible, but I have to admit there's some playground name-calling politics going on here at times. (some of it from me) I think Intrepid is just trying to say that we can do better than political bickering. We can have actual intellectual political discussions if we work at it.

The main stream media (MSM) takes care of fishing out the basic-non stories. We need to look below the talking points and fish out the real issues. Look at the post that mister.old.school made the other day. Now that was interesting. Do I buy into the whole idea he made? No, but it made me actually think and that's a good thing.

Let's face it. You're not going to convince anyone here to switch their vote. You can however raise some interesting points that others may find interesting. I'd say a good political post will cause others to do some research before responding. It's probably not something you heard a talking head on MSM talk about.

Originally posted by dbates

The main stream media (MSM) takes care of fishing out the basic-non stories.

I think what we've seen in the last week is the MSM relinquishing any claim to journalistic integrity. Maybe it used to be the MSM fished out the basic non-stories, but since Sarah Palin was announced as McCain's VP, the MSM has run with every rumor and innuendo that's been talked about.

And it's worse online. Anybody with a blog can post whatever they want, and then people link to the blog as a "source." The entire rumor about Palin's baby being her daughter Bristol's originated not even from a blog, but from COMMENTS made on a news story about Palin.

I like it the way it is. Sure it isn't perfect but it isn't the worse either.

I also wonder why people who are using the bully pulpit continue to come back to Decision 2008. I thought that was the whole purpose of the new forum- to discuss real issues without the bull. I am sure you don't encounter these kind of problems in that forum.

Do you miss the sarcasm, the insults, the variety of threads...or what?

I made the pledge but have yet to post over there.

I made the decision to stay here. Sure sometimes my posts get ignored, sometimes somebody takes a shot at me or me at them, sometimes somebody posts something incredibly insulting or racist, but that is what keeps me grounded. This is reality. This forum is just like the real world I live in. Full of good and bad people and those in between who come from all walks of life and differ from me in many ways. But that doesn't mean we can't learn from each other.

Not everyone share my views or my thinking. I have learned a great deal on this forum, good and bad. I have come to understand that I am not always right, that I can't always have it my way. I have learned to respect or ignore posts or threads that I do not agree with. I have increased my knowledge over many issues and non issues. I have learned to not believe what I read or hear 100% until I can confirm it through my own research.

The mods do an excellent job and I am sure that from time to time they may let their decision be guided by bias. But they are only human and are prone to mistakes like the rest of us. They do the best they can and deserve respect for trying to keep ATS as one of the best sites on the web.

The only complaint I have with them is the off topic tag. If someone opens up a thread about Obama and I mention McCain then I get the off topic thread saying that the thread is only about Obama. I feel like I should be able to bring up McCain in order to prove my point. As long as I am not being insulting I don't see why it is an issue. What good is it to debate if I am limited
in what I am allowed to say in the debate. Especially if I am trying to point out that both candidates do the same thing.

ATS has given its members many choices. If you don't like a post, ignore it. If you don't like a thread, ignore it. But censoring or tightening down on someones comment goes against the same freedom of speech we talk so much about upholding. As long as people are courteous they can post the most outrageous thing they so desire. I may not like it but I sure can ignore it.

Originally posted by intrepid
So, let's raise the bar please. I've been here over 4 years and I know what ATS members can do. RAISE THE BAR!!! Drop the battlelines posting and give something back.

The problem is that it is a political season. There are strong emotions running around. People with an issue will attach something political to it while automatically thinking they are contributing something of importance. This is natural and it happens with both sides.

Anyone with a political issue and takes a political side will automatically think his or her issue is relevant and of some kind national importance while the other side's argument is just spurious trolling or irrelevant to the issues of importance.


example:

One side might feel that Barack Obama's convention speech was inspiring and historic. They might feel that he talked about all the issues affecting the country and gave a clear path in solving them.

The other side might feel totally the opposite and will argue to back their positions.

The Obama side somehow gets offended. and puts down the Obama opposition, saying their arguments don't mean anything and are really just cut and paste trolls from the RNC and Fox news.

Switch the names around, take out Obama and insert Palin, and the exact same thing will happen (change RNC to DNC and Fox News to biased media.)

example finished

This is the nature of politics. Everyone is amped up. People have been like this during times of heavy politics for ages, especially with representative governments. Politics is always divisive no matter how much people they claim their side unites.

I can assure that if the political issues drastically affected the lifestyle of a large portion of the population, these forums would be on fire with insults, overblown claims, lies, fearmongering, and outright threats. This happened before (minus the ATS), during the years before the Civil War.

I say let it happen. Let people say what they want. Let people cut and paste form their political blog sites. Yea its irritating to some but to others it's of great importance. It is hard to judge what is important and what is not without inserting a personal political bias.

There are far more offensive things (from a point of view) on ATS. I see threads about religions all over the place. If there is an issue that will bring out the worst, it is talking about someone's religion. And it is always open season on that.

All this political stuff will all pass in 2 months or so, well at least it will calm down some.

I think people are getting too soft. I'm starting to wonder if ATS is getting soft. Is this a BOARD? Aren't "boards" supposed to be "debate"? Can you have a "debate" without saying something that SOMEONE isn't going to like? If everyone agrees then its no longer a debate. How can you "DENY IGNORANCE" if a person can't say what they really think?

Some people can't handle what others think so a third party has to step in to "comfort" the wounded. Usually the "discomfort" of a few results in more rules or banning altogether (anyone old enough to remember how fun "dodge-ball" was in school? Can't play it anymore because "little Timmy" down the street got a booboo and therefore its "too dangerous" now). Unfortunately, that "third party" is the government all too often and now the US is pretty much becoming known worldwide as a "nanny state". I suppose ATS's "government" would be the Mods?

I guess what I'm saying is this. We are adults (or trying to be) or we wouldn't be in here. Right now Tom Biscardi would be raking in the big bucks with his "sasquatchsicle" if someone didn't ask questions or have an opposing viewpoint. By all means, enforce the rules but DO NOT CLOSE OFF THE DEBATE. I'm sure even the mods hear and see plenty they don't like on here. Hopefully, they handle it with professionalism and let the "opinion" be heard. If the mods start "sterilizing" posts because they don't like the content, then YOU are the ones taking away value from ATS.

I hope ATS does not become soft. I also hope it doesn't become slanted. Some people need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and take a little criticism. Otherwise, go back on your mother's breastmilk.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by CreeWolf]

funny, i thought ATS, PTS, and BTS were places that anyone could speak their mind freely

I think that the owners of the site are more likely owned by those people in the media we all distrust

Whats with this post about censorship? since when has censorship been ok? sure, if someone is making a post that does nothing but say "this person sucks" without giving any information or reason behind it, but if people have information or reason backing up their post, it shouldn't matter how harsh they are, censorship in any form leads to abuse of power, especially by people who enjoy having the words "moderator" or "admin" put onto their profile/posts


Why censor? That is what the real media and our government does...
forums should be kept clean but when the people provide links, references, and direct information regarding the topic, who the hell cares how rude their post is, if they feel strongly enough to insult people about the topic while providing direct information as to why they are so upset, let them insult all they want.

I mean really, does it hurt you to see threads on this forum that much? If you don't like it, don't READ it. Bias may be ok in the news media on TV etc, but in forums you should leave the bias to the viewer, they can choose to be biased in their selection of topics to read, in other words "I'm for obama so I'll only read threads that promote him and don't insult him"

When you start censoring posts because you feel they may be "insulting" to other people you are being biased, let them post because in all honestly, if a thread on an internet forum upsets you so much then you need to get help(internet addiction is very real)

So no censorship if there is information/references/links provided, regardless of "where" it came from, because who the hell are you to decide what information is false and what information is correct? why don't you let the viewers/readers decide for themselves, and not worry about the insecure posters who get all depressed because "someone insulted me on a internet forum, in cyberspace! im so upset!"

who is anyone to decide what is "bull#" and what is "legit", and who is anyone to decide what is "worthy" of being discussed and "what isn't worthy", the media and the campaign teams may say they need to avoid the little things like "palin's kid is having a kid" or "obama is a celebrity", if you ask me anything regarding the candidates is fair game, everything from how they speek, eat, crap, breath, and everything they have ever done or may do

When we are talking about who will be the next two people that will be responsible for over 300,000,000 american citizens, not to mention the hundreds of millions of people around the world that depend on our country for their way of life, and be in charge of the most powerful military and strongest economy of the world, EVERYTHING COUNTS, doesn't matter how little it is or how personal it may be, these people should not be given power without the public getting their fair chance at digging through their garbage. If this country will take away its own citizens privacy, it should better take away its possible leaders privacy

I have seen the Bully Pit mentioned a few times as a viable alternative to the floatsam that is here with the unwashed masses.

I choose to remain here with my usual participation as it inspires me in threads that I choose to comment within. For myself, the Bully Pit just seemed to be an out to weed out a digested opinion.

For some that course of action is okay, but for me I follow the old guidelines of watching TV or listening to the radio: "If I don't like it, I change it to something else. Yes the sniping and mudslinging is utter garbage and only proves the old "fooling some of the people some of the time" but it can also be entertaining in to how creative the load of bull can become.

Many comics love the whole process for the easy pool for material. Even the sell on eBay commentary could be turned into something, which is about as non-story as it gets...unless there is a thread that Palin is a cheat because she eats healthy and exercises to maintain her figure and that disenfranchises the common mildly overweight voting block.

While I admit there is a lot of honest crappy threads going on, there is always a different way of viewing them. Some days it really pays to not be a mod that HAS to wade through them.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Please, sd. You are as guilty as anyone in that regard. I've called you out on it myself several times this week. "I told you so" rings transparently hollow and false.

Back on topic..

First Obama was crucified on ATS. Then that cooled down when the MSM stopped covering his misdeeds. Now the shoe is on the other foot, except the MSM is on a feeding frenzy over Sarah Palin.

It's already September. Only 2 more months. Then it's over. Unless, of course, we have to put up with another 4-8 years of _________ bashing, as we had to do with Bush.

I've got a question for the moderators.

Are moderators supposed to be unbiased in their opinions or can they actively participate in discussions where there is clearly two or more sides?

reply to post by Ahabstar

Originally posted by Ahabstar
I have seen the Bully Pit mentioned a few times as a viable alternative to the floatsam that is here with the unwashed masses.

I choose to remain here with my usual participation as it inspires me in threads that I choose to comment within. For myself, the Bully Pit just seemed to be an out to weed out a digested opinion.

The Bully Pulpit is a good idea and when used appropriately, serves it's stated purpose. However, I have seen members here misuse it. When I asked about keeping a topic serious, one member stated that if they wanted serious discussion, they would go to the Bully Pulpit.

To me, that is misuse of the BP and disrespect for Decision 2008 and the rest of ATS. The BP is not meant to be the classroom while the rest of ATS is the playground, where rules are ignored. The same standards and code of conduct should be applied across all of ATS.

Just my .02.

reply to post by jamie83



I've replied in the ATS Issues Thread where "ATS Issues" should be discussed. Please keep this thread on topic.

Thanks.


[edit on 6-9-2008 by SkepticOverlord]

I'm sad that this thread turned into the very thing the OP was trying to derail.

Many of us believe that the state of government today is part of an old an enormous conspiracy theory. Anytime someone posts something to support this; 911, hypocrisy of candidates, etc. it is immediately turned into a partisan debate.

I believe this is a deliberate tactic and one that appears to be very effective.

Originally posted by CreeWolf
How can you "DENY IGNORANCE" if a person can't say what they really think?

That's true, but IMO, what Intrepid is trying to get across is that there's too many posts being put up when the poster doesn't think before posting. Once the trash takes over, there's no rescue for the debate.

Once any thread gets down to the same mud-slinging that the MSM promotes between candidates, then ignorance has reigned supreme & there's no way to Deny Ignorance...Let's face it: Who really cares to filter through 10+pages of mud to (perhaps) find one small gold nugget? Even though I've taken the pledge (My post in pledge thread points out that I've tried my best to abide by that pledge, before it was even committed to writing), I don't even go through the topic anymore...There's already been far to much "pledge-breaking" going on.

[sarcasm]OMG! Isn't that just like the people in Government Offices right this very moment? Pledge Breaking/Oath Breaking? Who would have thought that possible? [/sarcasm]

[edit on 6-9-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]

I wasn't going to open this thread because I knew what it would be. The propblem here is that as long as people are slamming and insulting Republicans and conservatives, there is no problem. But just as with the media bias we see displayed on the TV, when the axe swings the other way, the thought police come out and begin to cherry pic certain sites and now on this thread, try to slap the fingers of those bad naughty conservative Republicans because they say hurtful things about the opposition. Certainly, you would think that here on the ATS freedom of speech would prevail.

My suggestion to the Mods and Super Mods is this. Unless someone is making a threat to any person, or is making an attempt to lead others to do so, let it ride. This is the blood pulse of freedom set out here among these threads of thought, debate, and yes to a certain extent struggle and conflict. But the struggle is of the mind and will and I would like to think that here on the ATS freedom of speech and thought prevails.



[edit on 6-9-2008 by Fromabove]

Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by schrodingers dog

 

Please, sd. You are as guilty as anyone in that regard. I've called you out on it myself several times this week. "I told you so" rings transparently hollow and false.

No, please to you.
How incredibly perfect. The usual suspects and the piper posting on this thread with their hands up in indignity, tacking onto Intrepid's OP saying: "I know right it's terrible what's going on." And since once again YOU decided to make it personal, in the very thread addressing this very issue, consider yourself having called yourself out.

Deep breath.

Originally posted by jsobecky
To me, that is misuse of the BP and disrespect for Decision 2008 and the rest of ATS. The BP is not meant to be the classroom while the rest of ATS is the playground, where rules are ignored. The same standards and code of conduct should be applied across all of ATS.

Could not agree with you more.


These elections can't come soon enough.



[edit on 9/6/2008 by schrodingers dog]