You, ATS and Decision 2008.

Hello all,

This is my first post on ATS, although I've been lurking on the boards for about a month now after I stumbled onto the page from a Google search...(I think I was trying to look up info on some obscure conspiracy, the type my friend and I like to talk about)

Coming in as a new member, I'd like to give you guys a little info on what it's like for people who have just stumbled across the board. I can't tell you how many times I almost registered to join in the discussion of what seemed to be an interesting thread, only to stop at the first field and think twice about what I was doing.

The recurring thought that kept nagging at the back of my mind was, "Why bother?" After reading through the entirety of the thread, it became obvious that the thread wasn't about debating or denying ignorance at all, it was about getting a rise at bashing one side or the other, usually using some "fact" that was actually more of a he-said-she-said rumor.

I personally don't think it's right to censor someone's posts, but wouldn't those types of threads be easily squashed if you just ignored them? A ludicrous claim about Obama or Palin that is obviously false should just be ignored...leave the worm to dangle on the hook; let the fish outsmart the fisherman, he'll eventually leave the lake.

In fact, that's exactly what the puppetmasters of our society want us to do, they want us to rip at each other's throats over candidates so we never really search for the truth that would set us free, and that's what ATS should be about, in my humble noobie opinion.

Anyway, that's my view from the outside...I don't know how to make a signature (I haven't registered for a message board since Everquest), so I'll leave you with my favorite saying,

"A man's reach should exceed his grasp"

reply to post by jamie83


Your wrong. I'll back you up on some of the threads you start, but your wrong on the mods. They are allowed to voice their opinion as members and enforce the rules as mods. If you didn't agree with his opinion that he posted as a member you could have countered it with proof instead of blaming the mod of being bias as a mod.


That said Even within this thread you can see how easily it is for a thread to go in a different direction by responding to somebody's comment. Is it wrong. I really don't think so as long as it is civil. This is part of a debate.

Many people are voicing changes I say leave it like it is.

If you Ignore the threads that are point blank just out to irk the other side they will fail. I have seen those threads survive because opponents will quickly jump in to defend their candidate. Then it's off to the races as everybody else start to jump in.

The power we have is to ignore those threads that are extreme.

The Mods need to ask themselves this question also. How many time a day do you intervene in this thread compared to the religious forum. Is there really a huge discrepancy?

People always say there are two things you don't talk about, politics and religion. We do both. Compare them and see if there really is a problem here.

reply to post by kosmicjack

I would also suggest, in addition to the flagging and starring, a mechanism by which members can vote threads up or down. But I think that privilege should come with tenure and/or points as it would indicate your track record and commitment to ATS.

I’m really not interested in being a part of a forum (in *real life* or here) where my *voting right* (or lack thereof) is based on a point system or tenure.
Like so many forums *out there* it turns them into just another clique for the *HomeBoys* (no offence Ladies) and a oh-so-biased-read by the *Homies* all the way around.
Sure practically everyone on this forum has been here longer than I have and sure I’ve made a couple of *thud* threads as I didn’t have the experience yet to fully search forums for existing posts. Oh well oh hell that’s just mechanics.

Tenure? Points? LOL
What are any of you going to teach me *over time* about what's rot and what's not, free speech, fair play and treating others with respect (even when you don't agree) that I don’t already know?
And since when has it become a *privilege* to give my vote/opinion as to what constitues trash, and not?
Track record and commitment?
Dang, the way you're headed you should change the name *ATS* to *One World Forum*.

You don’t like what I post - ignore me.
You don’t like what others post - ignore them.
That’s what the ignore feature right there by their name is for right?
Beyond that - posters break the rules - ban them.

As for me, you want me to *Deny Ignorance* but take away my vote to do it?
No *Thumbs Down* unitl I *earned it*?
That’s ok, go ahead deny my thumbs down vote - I've still got a perfectly good middle finger I can use
(Hopefully you can see the humor in that as I can)...






...one potato - two potato - three potato - four...





[edit on 6-9-2008 by silo13]

The Origins/Creationism Conspiracy Forum is also out of hand. There's constant insult and mocking by both sides in debates, and its so prevalent that I'm sure the Mods are seeing it, I just have no idea why they are allowing 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.

As usual I applaud your efforts, but I suspect this will just continue until the election ends.

Perhaps slightly beyond.

- Lee

reply to post by Avenginggecko


Very good observation, Avenginggecko. Ignoring the trolls will eventually make them go away; it's a proven tactic.

Welcome aboard, and with that type of attitude, I look forward to your future participation on ATS.

Originally posted by jamie83
To my esteemed colleague Dr. Love, I would suggest that your final line of your post as quoted above reflects the type of personal insults that are unnecessary and are part of the problem, not the solution.

He said you shot yourself in the foot with your own contradictory statements. That isn't a vicious personal attack by any stretch of the imagination, it's just a commonly used expression. It's as harmless as someone saying the "pot is calling the kettle black". Sure it shows someone disagrees with ones opinion but that shouldn't send anyone into a berserk rage over something that innocuous.

You too have said the same thing, just phrased it in a different fashion.

(example, not intended as personal insult)
"Dr. Love, how can you see my foot is bleeding with your head so far up your arse?

Now THAT would be considered a lowbrow attack, not so cleverly framed as an example.

Not the same as saying "you shot yourself in the foot" at all.
I am sure you can see the difference.

- Lee

[edit on 6-9-2008 by lee anoma]

reply to post by jamie83


jamie, i'm with you and your opinion concerning obama and the mods-------they all should be held to a higher ethical standard than the rest of us visiting guys and girls.
you might be interested in a book obama just wrote:audacity of hope-------and a quote from 1 page:i will stand with the muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.
my friend just hotmailed this too me but neglected to give me the page number.
have e-mailed him back.will contact you as soon as i find out.
google for the title of obama's book please

Wow quoted twice, glad I said something of substance in the previous post.
Now to expound...

I agree that the Bully Pit should not be touted as pinnacle only threads while the rest of the discussions are left in a limbo/hell of moderation. In that respect I do not envy the Mods but not sure I would decline the position if offered. There is a level of reward of being noticed by Admin and Staff that the quality of your opinions and participation is worthy of consideration to join the team at a higher level.

That said, we as members also have the responsibility to continue to post our opinions relavate to the discussion and self-moderate if not to make life easier for the actual Mods, then to keep ourselves from looking like total tools/turds/(insert your own) so that other members and guests can hold the opinion that what you say may be worth reading even if they completely disagree with what you wrote.

The unfortunate side effect to ATS's size and popularity is that there will indeed be targeted strikes esspecially by pundits (paid and unwitting volunteers) of various "talking points" on either side.

I make no secret that I did not support Ron Paul, but I did support some of the ideas that he presented. Contrary to point? Not exactly. I just felt that Paul would not be able to get his ideas going if he had been elected. While that isn't opposed to the idea, it is opposition to the person. A lack of confidence by me of his ability to lead.

To view that in regaurds to this thread, the reaction should I have posted that paragraph of opinion is that I would have recieve no attention or conversely that it would have 5 pages of protest, name-calling, random misdirected posts, and a maybe a Red State Update fan stating that Paul was in it to steal votes from Thompson in the primaries as part of a Rove plot to make McCain get the nod.

So while I agree with Intrepid that the quality of posts have gone down, I urge him to consider what it would be like without Mods or self-moderation by a few that can inspire (however insignificantly) others to do the same. And if that don't cheer you up, think about going over a WATS vote on a thread that "Palin's daughter's unborn baby is reptilian hybrid fathered by the Pope in a secret Masonic ritual designed to bring down Obama--sourced in the National Examiner, btw Bat Boy supports Nader"

Note--If anyone does research what I have posted elsewhere out of boredom, curiousity or the off chance to throw it back in my face with examples of poor posting...many things I do with very dry humor that some people catch and of the very few posts that have been removed by staff have a story attached. The last time I devoted half of the post to defending a member who thanked me for doing such but the U2U collapse prevented discussion to whichever mod censored the entire post despite the on topic half being refferenced. In the end, I decided speaking my mind in the defence of another was merit enough for me, that the member dropped me a short thank you via U2U was icing on the cake.

I've been coming to ATS for a goood while now, for at least three years, if not more.

And I have seen a drastic change from my time as a lurker, and as a member.

Some good, a lot bad.

I suggest, that if you really want this war to stop, then take HEAVY action. You can't rule with a fluff of cotton. Make the members who continue to act like idiots regret for doing so.

That's all I can come up with, good luck.

Peace,
FK

P.S.
I do not endorse Obama, McCaine or anyone else. (But I do like RP.)

Originally posted by jamie83
And whether you want to accept it or not, Mods have a higher standard they must adhere to. Mods are seen as leaders. If a Mod leads the way, then others will follow.

That's a cop out. Only you are responsible for your posts. And mods are responsible for theirs. If you see a mod dipping into the dirt and use that as an excuse to "go there", that's YOUR decision and your responsibility.

The height of personal responsibility and accountability is living to your own standards, regardless of the standards to which others choose to live.

Mods should even error on the side of enforcing the TOS more strictly on those they agree with.

That's just crazy talk.

Trep


You guys got rid of all the members who care. Remember?




In all seriousness, this kind of crap can't really be avoided on a small board, much less a large one.


The trolls have set up residence. Accept it or ignore it. Those are your only real options.

Originally posted by jamie83
With all due respect, give me a break.
Your posts as a "member" are as partisan as any other.

Yes, that much is true by anyone who posts as a "member." But "with all due respect" you're forgetting that a Mod posting as a member is not automatically establishing any kind of connection between his/her opinions (or statements backed by facts) to the actual policies (& T&C's) of ATS itself. Even with "all due respect," it seems to me you are trying to establish such a connection where no connection exists. That's a faulty assumption that only makes for faulty arguments & may wind up directing personal insults which are, let's face it, against the T&C's in the first place.

Originally posted by The_Alarmist2012
Force everyone to abandon partisanship for a centrist position and perhaps you will have more civil, meaningful and substantive discussions.

Yeah, just like kosmicjack, I agree with everything except the usage of the word "force" in this context. There is no Law that can justify any compulsory action from an unwilling person, so even a mere forum discussion should not be allowed to do the same. However I'm inclined to consider that as a mere "slip of the tongue (keyboard?)" & let it go at that.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Everyone wants to be right and prove it. And if they make the other person wrong, they are, by default, right.

And there's the root of the problem that Intrepid was talking about in the OP: The political "mud-slinging tactics" all center around the false assumption that someone can always make himself look better by making their opponents look worse than himself.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Recently, and not just on ATS, it seems that if people disagree, they lump "dislike" in with it. In other words, "If you don't agree with me, I don't like you." I don't understand it, but disagreement inevitably leads to suspicion and personal attack, even among those people who are considered to be friends.

Well, that happens with some people anyway...
"I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend." -- Thomas Jefferson

Mods are people too....keep that in mind. They have opinions and political slants like everyone else. If they decide to get down and dirty in a thread, that doesn't mean that any one of us have to follow suit. Personally, I am not a big fan of mud; too difficult to get clean after the fight is over. And, if you feel that a Mod has gone too far, then alert someone; that's what the button is for. This place, like most places on the Net and in everyone's "real" world, has a chain of command.

Like BH said, you are the only one responsible for your posts, how they are worde, the "tone" of them, and the opinion/slant of them. Don't blame someone else if you decide to sling mud....would you jump off a bridge just because someone else did it?? I always knew I'd end up quoting that little cliche one day.....

We, as members and posters, are responsible for our own actions, our own words, and our own posts. Sure, we all want to be right, we all want our opinions to be respected and valued. But, do you really think that your opinion will be valued and respected if you state it, get responses to it that don't agree, and resort to name calling and finger pointing? I don't think so.

Now, all that being said......

Our freaking politicians can't even rise above the name calling and finger pointing, so why should we be held to a higher standard than them??

Well, most of the posts I see, left leaning or right leaning, point out the problems of the candidates, their policies, their party, the government in general. So, we all have problems with them one way or another.....and we want them to act more mature and focus on the issues that touch our lives.

Why can't we focus on those things, too, instead of just griping, moaning and complaining about the politicians involved.......because, if we don't, we are just adding to the problem and acting just like the crazy people we are griping about.....we are proving to be just as immature and unfocused as they are. Then, the problem is ours, as well as theirs.

All of the above is just my opinion.....

Timothy Leary once said, "the only way to talk about politics is on all fours.", which means that political disputes appear mostly territorial. I think most people forget that they create the lines in the sand so to speak and don't imagine themselves barking at intruders, but that appears how they look to me. Here some fun to lighten the mood.

Soldiers of Reason: The RAND Corporation and the Rise of the American Empire

Also here could be considered a symbolic aspect of what people arguing on the boards appear to most civilized people...

Google Video Link

And one more to think about the election this year....

Google Video Link

reply to post by jamie83


sorry jamie and friends for taking so long to get back to you about the quote from obama's book about his saying he will stand with the muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.
my friend just contacted me and says this comment is on on page 261

Originally posted by skeptic1
Our freaking politicians can't even rise above the name calling and finger pointing, so why should we be held to a higher standard than them??

Well, personally, I try to stay above our politicians...After all, the Constitution itself puts the individual Citizens above politicians in the first place. The whole point of accepting any Office of Public Trust means that each such Officer must be held more accountable than the rest of the Public at large. That's one of the reasons why I don't want to run for any such office...I don't want to be forced to stoop to their level.

But I do sometimes stoop to finger-pointing...On the serious issues, anyway. I see that as an inherent civic duty of the Citizen when politicians start stepping out of line.

One time, here on ATS, I even started a political campaign! But I made it abundantly clear in that thread that I was not taking the campaign seriously, I do take the issues seriously...So that little "indiscretion" can be easily rendered as irrelevant.
BTW, I started that particular thread before I had even heard of Ron Paul...Make of that statement what you will.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by jamie83
And whether you want to accept it or not, Mods have a higher standard they must adhere to. Mods are seen as leaders. If a Mod leads the way, then others will follow.

That's a cop out. Only you are responsible for your posts. And mods are responsible for theirs. If you see a mod dipping into the dirt and use that as an excuse to "go there", that's YOUR decision and your responsibility.

The height of personal responsibility and accountability is living to your own standards, regardless of the standards to which others choose to live.

Let me clarify in case there was a misunderstanding.

Most people don't bother to read, let alone memorize, the T&C.

So when a member sees a Mod make a post that includes a personal attack, the member might presume that personal attacks are allowed per the T&C.

Then when that member is on the receiving end of a personal attack, he or she may think nothing of firing off a zinger in retaliation.

So no, I won't accept that Mods shouldn't hold themselves to a higher standard. They should err on the side of compliance with the T&C because average members will assume what the mods posts is in compliance with the T&C.

First it's Hilary Clinton & White dude, Then Hilary I dunno has PMS or something, Then it's a Black Guy, & White dude, Mccain looks like an ingrade I dunno, doesn't look like he's even in politics fatty. Obama, doesn't that sound like Osama, Scarey, & he's leader OMG, The predictors that have predicted every election for as long as they have say Obama will Win., It's amazing ppl you never otherwise see that showup to vote, wheredo they hide, All Presidents are reicarnated Atlanteans, And I bet if you recountedvots half ofthe voters were dead before Reagan, I am hoping for a surprise like crosseyed Floridians who can't read a halfy/halfy votecard,

Noone knows but they say never vote for a Ross Perot if you want Bush over Clinton.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by hoverboarder]

Originally posted by lee anoma

He said you shot yourself in the foot with your own contradictory statements. That isn't a vicious personal attack by any stretch of the imagination, it's just a commonly used expression. It's as harmless as someone saying the "pot is calling the kettle black". Sure it shows someone disagrees with ones opinion but that shouldn't send anyone into a berserk rage over something that innocuous.

What are you talking about, "a berserk rage?"

Anyway, the point I am making is that the T&Cs say to discuss the topic, not the poster. Dr. Love in the examples I provided violates that premise. The first example was a thread in which he said he would bet the OP is a Palin supporter masquerading as an Palin critic. This type of comment is about the POSTER, not about the topic.

I've seen warnings time after time to stick to the topic and not discuss the poster, and when a Mod violates this then it sets an example for all the other members.

Likewise, Dr. Love made his point in the post to me, and then felt compelled to add a personal commentary about ME at the end, the "your foot is bleeding" comment.

Of course this is a stupid comment that's not going to bother anybody. I pointed it out to show it as an example of the type of personal comments that are supposedly against the T&C.

Now normally I wouldn't care what the mods do, but this thread was started by a mod asking members to raise the level of discussion. It's the mods job to make sure the posts that violate the T&C are removed and the members warned. When a mod himself violates the T&C and when the mods do not warn members of T&C violations, it's going to lead to the exact problems that Intrepid is bringing up.

I.e., the mods have the power and authority to fix the problem. And they also have the social status to do a better job of leading by example. That's all I'm saying.