The SUSPENSION of illicit drugs/mind altering substance topics on ATS (The experiment failed)

reply to post by Unit541


So darcon, I'm sorry if you were offended, but if so, I beg you to adjust your perspective, or risk a very difficult existence in this world.

You are missing it, i am not the only one who had a perspective, there are many on both sides that are arguing this thing.

Honestly i don't care anymore, do what you will. Form your own committee.

All that is happening now, is arguing.

In the end, the staff is looking down on this, probably in disbelief. Perhaps they expected this, perhaps they will lose faith in their members.


[edit on 27-2-2009 by darcon]

To append my previous post, it occurred to me I haven't once offered my opinion on a viable solution.

This is what I think, and is partly my reasoning behind my lack of faith in the entire enterprise:

The decision to impose a zero tolerance policy was made unilaterally by the Administration. It's my opinion, that if the same administration was actually willing to consider some sort of compromise, the simplest path down that road is for the administration to contact a few of the vocal dissenters and actually listen to their input on the issue, and actually take their perspective under consideration.

The most political thing to do however, is to ask an enraged community to pick 5 people to argue their side, at some point in time to be determined, in an environment to be determined. You don't have to be Nostradamus to predict the turmoil that ensues. If I needed to quell the dissent, without conceding, this is exactly how I'd start.

We've been quelled.

reply to post by Unit541


Don't think it hasn't crossed my mind, but i still have faith that the Staff would not do that, or so i hope.

Regardless, like i said, it is going to be up to the staff.

Anyways, i am sure the vote will be trashed, by many members alike.

[edit on 27-2-2009 by darcon]

Hmmmm. Did my post on page 99 slip through the cracks...?

reply to post by darcon


I can see that, and there's nothing wrong with hope. I, however, have a bit of personal experience with the staff on this matter, and that experience tells me the hope is false.

Yes, SO, I'm still jaded about my censored signature, which in no way violated any of the T & C.

[edit on 2/27/2009 by Unit541]

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
With this process, why do we need a committee?

We don't, it is however what SO requested.

I'm sure that SO would be willing to read a proposal that has been drafted out while we sort out this whole committee mess...

I'm sure he's not all that thrilled that we're eating each other alive...

SO said he's willing to listen to a handful of ats members... that doesn't mean that this committee is a requirement to progress... it simply means he's open to the idea of a committee..

If he wants a permanant committee... we can then take the time to do this properly...

reply to post by Unit541


i think it's crossed my mind at least every ten minutes since this started, it would some some dang good kung fu, no matter what happens now, it's not the bosses fault.

i hope we're both wrong, but there's only one way to find out.

I have been shadowing this thread from the beginning and must admit that this thread has a better storyline than most soap operas.


All I can say is to keep the common goal in mind. The bickering and insults will not resolve the common goal we are trying to achieve. If anything it shows the site owners and mods that they were justified in taking the action they took.

Let cooler heads prevail IMO.

Peace

reply to post by matth


Don't forget an age verification process... either a "click here if you're over 18" thing or something of the sort...

It removes potential legal liability from the admins/owners...

Also, the discussion of consumption/use/experiences would have to be strictly forbidden.

There's no need to speak of consumption and the like if you're honestly into discussing the CT aspects surrounding these subjects.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Hmmmm. Did my post on page 99 slip through the cracks...?

I think that is what happened to my post as well. My proposal was good ol' last post on page 99, which I'm sure will not get lost in the shuffle.

reply to post by nj2day


Actually I believe it was SO who put the DISC idea forth but I could be mistaken.

But I am in agreement with you, Skeptic1 was well into a process of collecting all input and generating a log. She could have easily accomplished this task on her own or with minimal help.

The whole "committee" monster, as many have observed, has obscured the primary objective. Hopefully this condition will fade, and whomever is on it can address the issue with both the membership at large and ATS staff in an comprehensive and expedient manner and we can put all this infighting behind us.





[edit on 27 Feb 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by nj2day


Agreed, age verification would have to be key. That would also keep potentially angry parents from being upset over what their kid might stumble into as well; or at least clear ATS of liability, like you were saying. Good call my friend!

We're following through with what was proposed 70 pages ago.

If the administrations deems it an unfair process, then the committee will be declined.

reply to post by matth


I noted both of your posts but didn't think it would be productive to comment on them at this point. You will note that others are also trying to forego the committee process. I wish you well.

Amaterasu, if you want you are presumably free to open a new thread for suggestions about a drug forum. My suspicion is that it will be closed and you will be redirected to this thread, but that's just a suspicion.

I can't help but wonder if this is the quiet before the storm.

For the first time I have been 'foed' by someone who's posts and input I admire. It raised an interesting range of internal thoughts.

Ostensibly, this is really just another chapter in the evolution and growth of ATS. I find myself wondering if it will be worth it. Far from feeling encouraged by the prospect of getting this ban lifted quickly, I feel more like the whole exercise may have been a clever 'ruse.' Pretty paranoid, huh?

reply to post by schrodingers dog


I sure hope we can. This fighting and bickering is killing me, and it's getting us nowhere.

This kind of infighting is not what ATS is about by any means. ATS is great because of OUR (as members) ability to work together and discuss things rationally and respectfully.

I hope we can get back to that soon, regardless of the outcome of this vote.

Votes and committees and the DISC are not the issue here, and I think that's been lost along the way.

reply to post by Maxmars


Me too - by 2 members.

It seems that they have taken this personally, and have decided to throw a little immaturity in for good measure.

Frankly, they have gone down in my estimation, simply because I think they have done it to everyone they have a problem with in a concerted and premeditated gesture, contrary to the T&C.

i.e. the bit about gangs

Originally posted by MaxmarsFar from feeling encouraged by the prospect of getting this ban lifted quickly, I feel more like the whole exercise may have been a clever 'ruse.' Pretty paranoid, huh?

Not at all my friend, read my posts on the last two pages, and you'll find you're not alone.

"Paranoia" is relative, and the 'ruse', whether intentional or not, has already proven to be quite effective.

I agree about the calm before the storm though.

I have a feeling, the Committee is going to be Carried out by a mob, with torches and pitch forks.

We will see wont we.

[edit on 27-2-2009 by darcon]

Originally posted by americandingbat
reply to post by matth

 

I noted both of your posts but didn't think it would be productive to comment on them at this point. You will note that others are also trying to forego the committee process. I wish you well.

The committee process is the reason we've made zero progress on this matter in the last two days...

I'm not saying a committee can't happen... I'm suggesting a proposal submission... meanwhile let all the committee mess sort itself out, and do a proper electoral process if S.O. wants a permanant committee.

I'm actually amazed at the one track minded approach to everything in this thread.

Seriously, we could have a proposal up and running, drafted and sent off within hours... quite literally...

meanwhile, we're waiting to hear on votes... after the votes are in, the talks will start, and it could be days...

Unnecessary beaurocracy IMHO.

Labor Unions first submit a proposal before they sit down for negotiations. This whole thing might be resolved in short order if the staff approves the proposal...

If it doesn't go through, than oh well... a committee can be organized in a proper sense, so we don't have membership feeling left out of the process...

This is now set up and primed for a massive explosion if this "committee" doesn't achieve its purpose...