A Call To Action: Ending The Political Game on ATS

Originally posted by Dronetek
So, it looks like there maybe a tactic to move threads someone doesn't like to unknown locations. I've made a coupe threads and I've seen a few other good ones, moved to unknown locations on the forum. they are being spread to all kinds of places. Some of them, not even on this forum. One of mine was moved to BTS.

The the threads don't break any rules. So, have the powers that be found a way around that? Simply moveing them to different locations? That way, nobody ever sees them.

I see that your thread on Whoopie Goldberg was moved to the "People" section of BTS and your comparison of media interviewing styles was moved to the "Media and Education" section of ATS. What's wrong with that? Where else would you want these threads to be?

Edit to add: may I respectfully suggest that people spend more time exploring ATS and BTS to see what's here that they can learn from? Just posting thread after thread telling the rest of the world what you think is not "denying ignorance." Denying ignorance is learning -- reading both sides of an issue, considering them. Respond thoughtfully to other people's threads sometimes instead of just generating content.

[edit on 9/12/08 by americandingbat]

And yet, if we have more Productive and more Solution based threads to actually solve our problems and not just talk, bicker and whine about them, then maybe the world would change.

Most of ATS is speculation, hence your productive solutions to the majority of conspircies on ATS cannot happen.

How do you come up with productive solutions to Alien abuductions or sightings?

This thead is just an excuse to derail some very good political threads.

The pathetic whining by certain mods prior to this thread is the result of going to those in charge and asking for such a rule.

It is ignorance, the very thing this site objects against.

Jamie's last thread "Predictable Obama Patterns" was closed. It had some very good points along with other threads. It was closed because of this new rule.

You should be able to research and analyze the campaigns and their stratagies without having to worry about some bi-partisan mod using this thread as an excuse to "cry foul".

Originally posted by Dronetek
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

 

You demonstrate the problem nicely. What point does it serve to state the middle name of only one candidate?

Well, you demonstrate another problem. The idea that there is something wrong with saying someones middle name. Are you claiming that the middle names of candidates and presidents haven't been often used? There is ample evidence that using their middle names is quite common. I certainly don't remember any problems with calling Bush "Dubya".

It's kind of obvious, but the guy was mentioning "Hussain" as a little political bait, because he shares the name of a rather prominent dead man. If you had looked up what the name actually meant, you'd know it's an Arabic name which is the diminutive of Hasan, meaning "good" or "handsome" although the name is so common it is also given to persons of secular backgrounds. You're demonstrating a problem by being obtuse, and not gathering that it was political bait as he was only mentioning ONE candidate's middle name.

This could go on and on.

Originally posted by jetxnet

And yet, if we have more Productive and more Solution based threads to actually solve our problems and not just talk, bicker and whine about them, then maybe the world would change.

Most of ATS is speculation, hence your productive solutions to the majority of conspircies on ATS cannot happen.

Well, that depends on opinion and what one believes to be true.

How do you come up with productive solutions to Alien abuductions or sightings?

Lets see. Was I talking about that? Well, to be honest I really was only talking about politics and governments, etc. Solutions to be applied where necessary. And who knows, if abductions are a problem for some people, why not find solutions for them?

This thead is just an excuse to derail some very good political threads.

The pathetic whining by certain mods prior to this thread is the result of going to those in charge and asking for such a rule.

It is ignorance, the very thing this site objects against.

Jamie's last thread "Predictable Obama Patterns" was closed. It had some very good points along with other threads. It was closed because of this new rule.

You should be able to research and analyze the campaigns and their stratagies without having to worry about some bi-partisan mod using this thread as an excuse to "cry foul".

Sounds good. My eyes hurt so I cannot read anymore.

Thanks.

BTW: Sorry. I was not referring to the staff whining (even if that may be true), I would never be that disrespectful. I was talking about the world's problems!!!!

For example, NWO.

Originally posted by elevatedone
all the whining and crying.... if Skeptic hadn't taking this stance and announced this, then each and everyone of you in here complaining would still be posting and complaining about all the BS that the staff is allowing....

I think part of the problem is all the BS that the staff is STILL allowing, to use your own words. It should be obvious, from the responses you are still getting, that some still feel the new regs are not being enforced completely. If you are going to be 'by the book" by all means do that, just don't allow some questionable material and delete other questionable material. It sets you up for the double standard talk. I am giving you guys time to sort it out, but the enforcement is rather haphazard at the moment.

Just an honest criticism, try to take in that spirit. I know the Mods jobs, which while you make 6 figures doing, isn't worth the grief everyone is giving you.

This all seems really easy to me, and I wholly agree with SO:

1. Support your ideas with good sources.
2. Don't be a twit.
3. If someone uses an ad hominem attack on you, point it out to them kindly, and go on.
4. If you get ticked off, perhaps there is information there for you. Else, go to another thread, cool down, come back.
5. Don't make up crap, much as it's fun and entertaining to try to craft the opposition as a minion ob de debil, it's a blatant waste of time, and virtually NOBODY is going to change their vote based upon such an assessment.
6. Breathe. Meditate. Think. Decide.
7. Debate the idea, not the personality. If you get into an argument with an idiot, keep in mind that we might need scorecards to tell the difference.
8. Now I'm just milking it.
9. My favorite number -- it's elegant.

Cheers

Originally posted by elevatedone
threads started before the announcement aren't being removed

That's the first I have heard of that. Why, if I may ask?

Some the the threads preceding the announcement were some of the most divisive ones out there, some are surely deserving of being burned. They are the threads that caused the new policies in the first place. Will they still be allowed to be added to or will they be locked?

reply to post by pavil



Wait... I might be wrong on that. I'm going to let someone else weigh in. I've been in and out a lot this week.

reply to post by pavil


Actually, I think elevatedone misspoke. I've seen several that preexisted the policy get subsequently closed.

Most of the the really egregious ones seem to be locked now.

I'm sure a few stragglers remain, but if revived, they should probably be locked too.

reply to post by elevatedone






Yup.

EDIT: Adding more to this post to keep it within the T&C.... < Insert presumed brilliant comments here. >



[edit on 12-9-2008 by loam]

New threads in the Campaign 2008 forum must be based on published candidate platform items, either officially, or from recent interviews.

No new thread, in any ATS forum, shall be based on silly school-yard innuendo idiocy such as who had the baby, or what lipstick means.

As Skeptic said "new" threads.

reply to post by loam



I never claimed to know everything...

reply to post by elevatedone


While I cant speak for other members the majority of the time I manage to avoid the kind of partisan fights that prove to be so unproductive . Most of the time if a topic screams avoid that is what I do . You cant regulate common sense either members will know or come to know what yopics to avoid or they wont .

reply to post by elevatedone



www.abovetopsecret.com...

Opened 9/9/08, two days before the new rules. Totally innocent thread, closed because

"The Madness Stops Today".

We are not "removing" any threads.

We are closing/trashing NEW threads that violate the new policy as well as closing any old thread which may be bumped and revived only to circumvent the new policy (please don't do that). In fact, Intrepid closed one of my old threads from June that was bumped (you Nazi Mod you )

It seems many of the whiners have tried dredging up many old threads trying to "catch us" in a contradiction. :shk:

Let's leave the past where it belongs and move on shall we?
.

[edit on 9/12/2008 by Gools]

reply to post by Gools





You know, I'm getting a bit tired of seeing people asking for clarification on this new policy only to be called "whiners" by members and moderators. We have been told that the rules are so clear that everyone should understand them by now. Yet, I can guarantee you that only a handful of people here fully understand the new policy, and that includes both members and mods.

People are offering genuine examples of confusion and inconsistency. Yet they are being silenced through intimidation of demands that they stop whining or leave ATS. Since when is questioning a new policy verboten? We are adults here for the most part, and resent that sort of condescending treatment.

Calling people "whiners" does not invite polite discourse, and adds absolutely nothing to the conversation.. And if you (generic you) are tired of hearing people ask questions and offer up examples of inconsistency, then I suggest you take the advice so freely tossed out here - leave the thread.

And gools, nobody is "bumping" threads to circumvent the new policy. Accusing people of doing so does not invite polite discourse. People are genuinely concerned, and do not want to wait until their thread has been closed to be told "You were warned", when they may not have understood the rules in the first place.

reply to post by Gools


Well and fine, but can't you preempt some of the older threads and just close them? Why do you have to wait till they surface and rear their ugly head again? Some you can tell just by the titles that they are candidates for closing. Do a clean sweep of the house to get all the trash out IMO.

Just trying to be constructive, I am not whining, not the greatest choice of words there.

Just an FYI, I did not see the post above mine before posting.



[edit on 12-9-2008 by pavil]