Civility And Decorum Are Required on AboveTopSecret.com

We are not here to talk # about each other. We are here to educate each other and share the vast knowledge that our minds possess about all that matters. Yes, we may not all agree with what is said, or may believe that
someone is full of it, not knowing, etc.etc. So be it. move on. Respect is a
two way street. You don't give it, you get the boot.
Keep up the good work ATS

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

However, I and some other staff have been noticing an irrational sensitivity from many toward harsh criticism of Obama...

Because of this surprising amount of criticism sensitivity in some, I can *understand* where terms like "Obamaites" and "Obamanuts" come from. Just as liberals often referred to Republicans as "Repugnants." Just like any such general term, usage is important. When used an insult directed toward a member, that's bad and warnable. When used to define a generalized attitude of a group of people, it ain't great but most likely not warnable.

Make sense?

Makes 100% sense, unfortunately it falls on deaf ears.

From what I see, liberal or left leaners on ATS only see one side of a coin.. if I had a dollar for ever person who now says they didn't bash Bush or Bush supporters but only his "policies" I would be a VERY rich man.

(I think one even happens to reside in this very thread)

Hypocrisy is rampant on this forum now and I am a little sick of liberals getting away with "hating" (as they would put it) on a personal level while at the same time calling foul anytime someone isn't lock step with Obama.So I am glad that you commented on this and in that way. Now when someone diagrees with me I can show them YOUR post!!

On a seperate note...

I think we need a new post on Doom and Gloom along the same lines of this Civility & Decorum Are Expected thread.

Maybe it would make some of us less sick to our stomachs when we visit ATS.

Can any of you honestly say you are not stressed after reading a few posts on ATS nowadays?

Not me.

Originally posted by gormly
From what I see, liberal or left leaners on ATS only see one side of a coin.

Actually, I'd say something more like: "Those who have been weaned on partisan politics, only see the side of the coin they've been told to see."

It's not a problem limited to one particular flavor of politics.

Both Sides Now

Indeed, from what I've seen over the years, it doesn't matter which extreme an opinion comes from, but the fact that it comes from an extreme in the first place.

Extremism in any form represents an unbalanced perspective, and from that all sorts of trouble follows.

The problems we see with courtesy on the part of some members have nothing to do with what their opinions are on the issues, but rather their inability to respect differing opinions.

Developing a healthy tolerance for different opinions is not only necessary for personal growth, but crucial to denying ignorance.

reply to post by Majic


Well that's exactly it, and I think that is what most people are missing. I know that a lot of those comments about people who only see one side of the coin are directed at posters like BenevolentHeretic and I. Fine, whatever.

But the real truth is that we are only arguing against mostly extremism. We are arguing against the same stupid rhetoric over and over. Whether it is Obama is a Muslim, he doesn't love his country because he doesn't wear a lapel, he doesn't have a dog so he hates animals, he was born in Kenya, he lost his citizenship in Indonesia, he is just like Bush because he said "I won", etc.

Off the top of my head, I just named about 80% of the crap I've had to defend Obama against on this board, yet I have to sit here and take name calling from members, and then disrespect from the Mods when I respond back to the instigators.

So people can call me biased if they want, that's fine. I'm sorry I don't subscribe to blogs and any conspiracy that people can think up in their heads.

This may be a conspiracy board, but that doesn't excuse ignorance.

reply to post by Majic


Extremists?

I have seen members of this site attacked and for nothing even close to extreme... Such is the pain of these times we live in, there are younger members here, the reason you have to push the issue of civility and decorum stems from a lack of good parenting. And I do not necessarily fault the parents for that. The stresses are higher, income demands greater, children and parenting are a much lesser priority in these times, and IMO... it is going to get worse.

You wear the title moderator, but in this virtual reality you are a virtual parent to hundreds of kids who will assuredly test your authority.

I hope you are paid well.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Walkswithfish]

Originally posted by Walkswithfish
[I hope you are paid well.

Actually the entire staff here is on a voulenteer basis.

[edit on 1/28/09 by FredT]

Originally posted by Majic
Developing a healthy tolerance for different opinions is not only necessary for personal growth, but crucial to denying ignorance.

"Creative Conflict" is the Nature of Life: Duality (Initiating), Polarity (Resultive), are the fields of Resistance. It does not deal with ready acceptance, which is why the world is not seen as harmonious.

Here's what you are dealing with, and why the Electric Prod of Force must be used to compel any type of tolerance (in the midst of the field):

“Chaioth,” the animals, belong to the kingdom below the Human Kingdom. Even though we call ourselves Human, we are still Chaioth. We are “intellectual Chaioth,” or intellectual animals as we say. We are still animals, but with intellect.
(Gnostic Teachings of the Kabbalah)

So, if someone doesn't understand that the flesh and blood they inhabit is animal, that is unfortunate. The beasts of the field prey upon one another, and all things living, for their sustenance. Humans merely take this to the next level, the more 'subtle' realm of intellectualization, where they prey like beasts upon those less powerful that they encounter. Hence this thread, and request of 'decorum,' that each human animal might deport themselves with some higher form of behavior. This is called development of the 'spiritual' or 'meta-animal' (beyond mere fleshy ways of behavior).

Politics are a particularly sticky category, being as it ultimately deals with who gets to eat first; who gets the best spots for sun and shade; who gets choice of mates. Purely instinctive animal behavior, intellectualized. Use the Electric Prod to induce decency, or 'decorum,' for it will not be given willingly. You have merely broken up a few 'fights.' Hard feelings will return, unabated.

("Unabated: Sustaining an original intensity or maintaining full force with no decrease.")

Prepare: Electric Prods to the Fore. Present...

[edit on 28-1-2009 by SS,Naga]

Feel Goal

Originally posted by SS,Naga
You have merely broken up a few 'fights.' Hard feelings will return, unabated.

Thankfully, we're not responsible for feelings, just enforcing the terms & conditions.

Honoring the agreement every member makes by posting here is all we ask.

reply to post by Cedik


Amen !! To your post....The majority of those that look to government to solve their personal problems generally stand for nothing and that is why they will fall for anything....Let us not forget....The Dems have control of all three branches of Government...They are in control !!The presidents rhetoric will give way to his actions....So far he has advanced the abortion agenda (murder of inocence)allocated several billion to Acorn (which is still under investigation for voter fraud)The agenda now is to secure future elections by any means possible....We will be watching the demise of the two party system in this country....If the American way of life as we know it is to survive good people are going to have to stand for something.....Put the media in their proper place.....and demand leadership where character is the first and formost requisite....

reply to post by FredT

Some who volunteer do so out of love, others out of, well, something else.

I've volunteered my services before, and strangely, others seemed to expect it. Some didn't know what they were doing, and some seemed to regret their involvement. So, it's not cut n dried.

There is still a prejudicial aspect that needs to be addressed; obviously, it's more than following rules. It's get off the 'favored child deserves more tolerance' aspect that bugs some of us. Denial of ignorance includes admission of error, something few care to face. And correcting it.

I don't say there aren't good hearts leading ATS, but if proper following of procedure had been embraced without favoritism, this thread wouldn't be here right now...

Am I the only one that sees this as kind of unfair? So one side has to be fair but the other side doesn't? I WILL DEBUNK the misinformation that I see on here and I will still be critical of Barack Obama. Just because I'm a Democrat doesn't mean that I support him mindlessly. I dislike how I have to put a disclaimer on all of my threads saying how when I talk about Obama and stuff I have to say that I don't mindlessly supprot him. There has to be some guidelines for the other side. I'm sick and tired of being forced to act differently just because I'm a member of the party that's in power. I try to help the neocons, and the conservatives, and the liberals here deny ignorance. But I am starting to dislike putting a disclaimer that just because my views are partisan or something like that doesn't mean that I mindlessly support Obama just so people will listen to me, or, etc...

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
Am I the only one that sees this as kind of unfair? So one side has to be fair but the other side doesn't? I WILL DEBUNK the misinformation that I see on here and I will still be critical of Barack Obama. Just because I'm a Democrat doesn't mean that I support him mindlessly. I dislike how I have to put a disclaimer on all of my threads saying how when I talk about Obama and stuff I have to say that I don't mindlessly supprot him. There has to be some guidelines for the other side. I'm sick and tired of being forced to act differently just because I'm a member of the party that's in power. I try to help the neocons, and the conservatives, and the liberals here deny ignorance. But I am starting to dislike putting a disclaimer that just because my views are partisan or something like that doesn't mean that I mindlessly support Obama just so people will listen to me, or, etc...

Substitute "Mason" for "Democrat" and I feel your pain. Quoth SO

Without fail, topics that begin with a critical analysis of one or more aspects of Freemasonry are soon inundated with rapid-fire defensive replies from a select few members. And, those select few members appear to have 95% or more of their focus on those types of posts, within those types of threads... or, rapid-fire atta-boy replies in threads with positive remarks about Freemasonry. In other words, an apparent dedicated single-minded effort.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

So yeah. I'm a Mason. I debunk misinformation when people accuse me of organized gang stalking, child prostitution, devil worship and any number of other absurdities. And other people debunk it too. But if the same people make the same arguments, whether they're Masons or not, all the sudden we get accused of gang posting. It could be that we're in agreement because the accusations thrown at us have no logical base, but the mods feel it safer to assume a conspiracy of users intent on derailing those who might expose our reptilian overlords.

Originally posted by JoshNorton

It could be that we're in agreement because the accusations thrown at us have no logical base, but the mods feel it safer to assume a conspiracy of users intent on derailing those who might expose our reptilian overlords.

People pretend to want the Truth, but they don't really want the Truth, they want the Truth couched in their own box-idealogies. This is difficult, indeed.

I agree, this is the reason the Skunk Works subforum was created: the Truth is Way Too Much for the masses to deal with. The church fathers and religious organizations saw carefully to this.

I will back up your self-same intent to deny ignorance in said manner. Prejudice of Truth is not denying ignorance, it's furthering it's influence, spreading the dwelling in darkness of ignorance for all humanity.

Attesting only to 'facts and proofs' limits most the human race's awareness, currently. The Invisible is more real than the Unreal, or concrete state of matter, that the masses aver is 'all there is.' Discernment is always required, but validations are available to those dwelling in both the Visible and Invisible states of awareness.

Even in the concrete matter realm, much that would clarify is kept carefully hidden, thus the emergence of the 'conspiracy' concepts, which most really enjoy debating, rather than actually encountering any Truths.




[edit on 29-1-2009 by SS,Naga]

I agree with the civility and decorum. Your new president has a good team behind him and he seems to be making good headway to improve things over there.

People should be able to debate without name calling, and other such-like on the forums.

At the end of the day, we learn more by listening and trying to understand another's perceptions without being uncivilised and impolite.

I prefer open civil discussions, and I think everybody is entitled to their view without being uncivil about it.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


You seem to violate your own expectations of civility and decorum. Some of your "opinions" are insulting. It appears you can dish it out but not take it. I was going to give you more info on John R R Searls reguarding your UFO video but it seems you know it all... Michael

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
I was going to give you more info on John R R Searls reguarding your UFO video but it seems you know it all.

What opinions are you referring to?

Are you sure you don't have me confused with someone else? I don't have a UFO video.

What's "ad-hominim" mean? It's prolly a stupid question but my dumb yahoo dictionary doesn't know either.

reply to post by ZenaV

ad ho⋅mi⋅nem –adjective

1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.

2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

Kinda what goes on here at ATS no?

just to put this out there, i havent had the time to read every other post here yet so someone else may have touched on this

but in my opinion one of the things bringing ats down is the incredibly stubborn close-minded aggressive individuals

frequently threads are being highjacked by a select few (different members in each thread, sometimes repeat offenders) by completely restating the same opinion over and over again just to argue their own logic

i understand this is a forum open for debate and arguments naturally come along with different view points

however when the same view points are pushed down members throats for pages and pages of the same thing over and over again, the quality of ats is taken down by leaps and bounds

i understand there is a fine line between arguments and debates on certain topics, but i feel its a fine line that needs to be a little bit more closely monitored and not just brushed aside as people having a debate

i know some threads, there are individuals with several posts, and the majority are all educational, touching on different points of the topic and providing proof to back up their statement, then there are others who simply restate what they have already said because they dont agree with the consensus or opinion of someone else

everyone here has their own opinion and has the right to express that opinion, but i think we all must show moderation in expressing those opinions in order to not become overbearing


best wishes to ats

edited to say this is in no way a attack or criticism of the moderaters and staff here on ats

the staff here on ats are great and and almost all posts i've seen from staff are great models of how members should act, unfortunately there are members (i include myself in this) who get caught up in the emotion of a topic that detract from the quality of the thread

[edit on 30-1-2009 by Dramey]