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

I've been a lurker on ATS for years and recently offically signed up so I don't know how much my op is worth but, I'm going to offer my two cents on the issue.

I am a liberal open minded individual with strong beliefs on legalization/decriminalization. I have to also state I don't have much of problem with the new policy. I believe I have a clear, intelligent understanding of the underlying conditions contributing to the decision.

I do wish it didn't have to be so cut and dry but I can tell you with 100% accuracy if you get into an intelligent discussion/debate on a myrid of related topics (afganistan, legalization, even economics) there is going to be a handfull of people who won't be able to stop themselves from inappropriate comments. I for one believe in personal responsibility but it's clear not others hold the same belief system.

I don't believe everything is a conspiracy. I do believe in questioning authority - with intelligence. I'd advise the owners and mods (which I'm sure they are more then painfully aware) that some people like to argue and fight, get so caught up in 'being right' they lose site of the original dispute. Fight just to fight. ::sigh::

For me, this is an important and informative website. My personal views of the 420 issue is just that, personal. I adore ATS so much I for one am willing to give up such discussions to keep this site open to schools and businesses. And please people, not to line the pockets of the owners but to add enlightenment and education to all of those seeking. It's a matter of priority.

Thanks to Skeptic1, Americandigbats and others for all their hard work.

Edit: Typo - too much coffee

[edit on 3/2/2009 by Whisper67]

It's kind of funny that people are so upset about this subject when the staff and management are actually trying to be on your side and in fact are trying to help protect you.

It's true.

If you post on here, your posts can be used against you in a court of law. If you for instance post about some crime you committed and law enforcement agencies found it, they may tie it to you individually and then use those posts against you.

Its willingly giving up your right to protect yourself against self incrimination.

But most don't see it that way, what they see is that Big brother is stepping on their right to free speech.

It's sad really, because if people would just simply remember that and post within what is really simple guidelines there would be no problem. The problem arises when a select few people can't grasp the simple concept of covering their own behinds enough to not confess to what is in places criminal behavior.

Advocating criminal behavior puts ATS in jeopardy and they have the right, the obligation, and the duty to protect themselves from potential litigation arising from user generated content that may be questionable or illegal.

There are things in this life that are illegal that shouldn't be, case in point the focal issue in this thread. There are things in this life that are legal that shouldn't be, case in point, overweight hairy men in speedos.

The problem is when people insist on harming this site with subjects that go outside of the T&C, the rules that every member agrees to when they sign up for this site. There are a few here that have the mindset that this is wrong, this is censorship and they must somehow for some reason disobey that rule.

But I think that those people fail to understand that the T&C protects those individuals as well as the site. What people fail to understand is that every single piece of information they choose to post here is available to anyone, member or not, at any time.

reply to post by whatukno


whatukno?

Considering there is thread after thread with people posting incriminating evidence you think they're doing this to protect us?

Ive seen posts talking about making homemade explosives, I've also seen many many posts talking about government overthrow. The list goes on and on.

Have you not seen the videos from St.Paul during the RNC, people laying on the stomachs with guns in there backsides because they had regular household goods that the police were calling weapons?

What about the video outside of this years bilderberg where a young man was pulled out of the crowd for joking on a conspiracy site he was going to bring a gun?

I would love to see a judge throw me in the clink for talking about the relationship between psychedelics the pineal gland and spirituality.

I would also love to see someone get a warrant for my ISP so they can find out what name is linked to my ip. "Umm yes, we have an individual posting links to John Allegro's books as well as making the blasphemous statement that "psychedelics are the root of spirituality", can you please give us his info."

That's the thing about the war on drugs it makes otherwise rational people act and think irrationally.

Peace





[edit on 2-3-2009 by TheRealDonPedros]

[edit on 2-3-2009 by TheRealDonPedros]

reply to post by TheRealDonPedros

Considering there is thread after thread with people posting incriminating evidence you think they're doing this to protect us?

What threads are those? Are you sure that what is talked about is incriminating? And yes I do think they are doing this to help protect you.

Ive seen posts talking about making homemade explosives, I've also seen many many posts talking about government overthrow. The list goes on and on.

Neither subject is illegal. Now if a poster started a thread with the phrase "I made a (insert whatever here)" or "I am going to (insert government overthrow act here)" then yes that would be illegal. Its the I do that is the issue.

What about the video outside of this years bilderberg where a young man was pulled out of the crowd for joking on a conspiracy site he was going to bring a gun?

Exactly my point.

I would love to see a judge throw me in the clink for talking about the relationship between psychedelics, the pineal gland and spirituality.

Thats not the problem here, the problem in this issue is the people that have for some reason to state that they personally use these substances. Not the relationships between these substances and spiritual growth. The site owners don't have a problem with legitimate discussions on these subjects, what is the problem and a concern is people giving full blown confessions to what is criminal behavior.

I would also love to see someone get a warrant for my ISP so they can find out what name is linked to my ip. "Umm yes, we have an individual posting links to John Allegro's books as well as making the blasphemous statement that "psychedelics are the root of spirituality", can you please give us his info."

They couldn't. Even if they did it would get thrown out of court by even the most mediocre defense attorney available.

The crux of the problem is personal confessions of criminal behavior, not the subject as a whole. It's a few select people that are so intent on divulging and confessing to their own personal drug use, they might as well walk into the nearest police station and state the same things they post here.

reply to post by whatukno



Neither subject is illegal. Now if a poster started a thread with the phrase "I made a (insert whatever here)" or "I am going to (insert government overthrow act here)" then yes that would be illegal. Its the I do that is the issue.



Have you not seen the dept of homeland security handbook? It may not be illegal but it does give just cause to bring the eyes of your neighbors and the authorities onto your doings.

I can't find a link to the one I'm looking for but here is Texas's spin on it
www.iranaffairs.com...

Also, there's a thread going on right now that breaks the T&C and could very well be used against an individual in a court of law.

Here -www.abovetopsecret.com...

In it we have users discussing how to crack into a USB flash drive that is "NOT THEIR OWN". Cracking falls under the umbrella of hacking and breaking into someone elses property (usb key) seems a bit on the grey side of the law to me. Even one of the mods is getting in on the action.

Nice, I just had my post removed for siding with a member who said they should give it back and pointing out the hypocrisy of allowing a thread to stay alive that is completely against the T&C

But its not censorship?


Kudos to following your own T&C ATS admins!!!

Like I said before this has nothing to do with looking out for us and everything to do with personal opinions and the almighty dollar.

Peace

PS - Oh and Mr.Overlord, I just found a post by Mr.Gray from 2000 in which he advertises ATS as a get rich quick site. That would be less than 9 years ago putting Mr.Gray into his twenties I believe.





[edit on 2-3-2009 by TheRealDonPedros]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
What mindset do you believe that to be?

Wow. You really have to ask that question? After you've repeatedly hurled so much sarcasm at others about not being able to grasp the obvious, that's ironic. The mindset that many of us believe to have evolved in the owners, is one of greed and a personal dislike for "stoners". Not to mention an obvious indirect obedience to the very entities that most of us are here to share and read ideas against. No need to reply to this post with a snarky one line rhetorical question, or a statement that I'm accusing you guys of something more than this is. To me, it's pretty obvious that you guys were drilled into by some advertiser or sponsor that is now indirectly calling the shots. Just like Wayne's World when they sold out. Hope that guitar is worth selling out.

[edit on 2-3-2009 by 27jd]

Originally posted by Resinveins
Yes. Anything that would constitute child pornography would be an example of government censorship.

Such a topic is something any normal civil person would avoid.

I was wondering if you believed there was a topic we would normally cover, but that you think the government restricts us from covering?

Originally posted by TheRealDonPedros
For every example of "stoners" wrecking a thread (of which I've seen very little, as I'm a stoner and try to have my voice heard in all drug threads) I can find you 10 more examples of other ATS member wrecking other threads.

Most members rarely see the "stoner thread hijacking" as we usually delete those posts as quickly as possible. And while I'm sure you and many others could come up with dozens (if not hundreds) of examples of improper thread derailment, such examples like do not include topics that are prohibited in the terms & conditions.

Are you telling me that you're happy with all the moths that showed up in "Truther's" UFO thread that Crackeur had to shut down?

Again, as mention above, such problem were not related to subjects we restrict.

Once you start turning off lights/lamps its a slippery slope but its a slope of your own design.

How so? By joining ATS, these are topics you agreed not to mention. And our terms & conditions have had that specific restriction for six years.

Originally posted by 27jd
Wow. You really have to ask that question?

Yes. The answer varies from time to time based on the current reasons for disgruntlement. I just want to ensure I'm responding to the proper concerns.

The mindset that many of us believe to have evolved in the owners, is one of greed and a personal dislike for "stoners".

Unfortunately, yes. I've come to dislike what "stoners" have wrought on ATS just as much as I disliked the madness caused by groups of "9/11 Truthers." Except in the case of drug-related topics, the so-called "stoners" feel they have the right to inject advocacy of personal use into threads discussing valid drug-related conspiracy theories... despite agree not to when joining ATS. In fact, that just happened right here in this very thread... even with all the discussion that doing so will result in being banned.

Not to mention an obvious indirect obedience to the very entities that most of us are here to share and read ideas against.

There is no such thing happening. Not now. Not previously. Not ever.

To me, it's pretty obvious that you guys were drilled into by some advertiser or sponsor that is now indirectly calling the shots.

There is no such thing happening. Not now. Not previously. Not ever. If you believe that to be the case, can you point out the major advertiser that would be calling such shots?

I've said it before. It's been in our media kit to advertisers. And I'll state it right here, right now, unequivocally for all to see and hold me to:
The Above Network, LLC never has and will never agree to any editorial changes on AboveTopSecret.com of any kind in response to requests from advertisers or investors.
Please bookmark that statement and have total confidence that we will hold fast to that.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Unfortunately, yes. I've come to dislike what "stoners" have wrought on ATS just as much as I disliked the madness caused by groups of "9/11 Truthers." Except in the case of drug-related topics, the so-called "stoners" feel they have the right to inject advocacy of personal use into threads discussing valid drug-related conspiracy theories... despite agree not to when joining ATS. In fact, that just happened right here in this very thread... even with all the discussion that doing so will result in being banned.

What about the personal use accounts that are negative, why does the policy only apply to advocating? I completely understand not allowing people to confess illegal activities on the site, only an idiot (or a kid) would do such a thing. But instead of halting the discussion of very legitimate and widespread conspiracies involving this subject, why not call on us, and trust us to alert the staff very quickly when those idiots start in, and ban them immediately? No tolerance, either pro or con for personal use.

If you believe that to be the case, can you point out the major advertiser that would be calling such shots?

I dunno, Kellogs? There's many ads on these boards, and by calling the shots, I was pretty clear to say indirectly a couple times. Meaning that to reach a wider audience you have to play by their rules. It's kinda the nature of the beast I guess, you can't make money and please the old school fan base.



[edit on 2-3-2009 by 27jd]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by Resinveins
Yes. Anything that would constitute child pornography would be an example of government censorship.

Such a topic is something any normal civil person would avoid.

I was wondering if you believed there was a topic we would normally cover, but that you think the government restricts us from covering?

Whether normal civil people agree with the policy or not doesn't change the fact that it is indeed censorship. From the Government. Thereby government censorship.

And no as things stand now ... today... I don't think there is a subject the government restricts you from that you'd ordinarily want to include on your site.
I mean... that's my opinion of things... for all I know you might be a secret anarchist who wants to put bomb schematics and meth recipes on your site.
I'd like to hope not, but hey... ya never know.

That being said I hope you'll enlighten me as to the relevance of that particular question... because I'm failing to see it.

[edit on 2-3-2009 by Resinveins]

Originally posted by 27jd
There's many ads on these boards, and by calling the shots, I was pretty clear to say indirectly a couple times. Meaning that to reach a wider audience you have to play by their rules.

The only "rules" or "shot calling" going on with the current and future advertisers on ATS is limited to the dimension and size of the banners.

We do not, nor ever have, allowed any content to be influenced by advertising. Even when an advertiser purchased a dedicated forum (Search for Atlantis), we didn't moderate that differently than any other forum.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
We do not, nor ever have, allowed any content to be influenced by advertising. Even when an advertiser purchased a dedicated forum (Search for Atlantis), we didn't moderate that differently than any other forum.

K, I'll take your word for it. I'm not one to beat a dead horse, but I do think this new rule, regardless of motive, sucks. There are better ways to deal with moths without turning the porchlight off. Bug zappers come to mind, in the form of immediate banning when idiots come in and ruin our ability to discuss one of the biggest conspiracies.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by 27jd
There are better ways to deal with moths without turning the porchlight off.

There might be, which is why some members are working with staff in the DISC forum right now to see if that's possible.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
There might be, which is why some members are working with staff in the DISC forum right now to see if that's possible.

Cool, I skimmed through about 90 pages of back and forth arguments about that, lol. Hope they can work something out though. It's an important time in our country right now, and alot of tired and counterproductive policies need to be reviewed for all of our benefit. To ban important discussion on it right now makes no sense.

D.I.S.C. UPDATE

We've encountered a rather serious stumbling block in the member committee process. It appears that portions of what was anticipated to be a confidential speculative discussion has been "leaked" by a new DISC committee member via private messages/chat/email to a select few other members not on the DISC committee appointed to solve this problem.

I never anticipated that I should have to reinforced that, in order to have frank and honest discussion, an anticipation of utter confidence was expected.

Given the extensive breach of trust, and ill-will it has caused towards one of the committee members, I'm uncertain as to if this effort will survive.

More soon.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Which may be why some of us would have liked a vote. Not beating a dead horse. All I am saying on the issue. Sorry it has worked out this way. Sincerely.

Edit to add; I hope the member can be reprimanded, and removed from the committee and not have the whole endeavor come crashing down. Just a wish. I know I am not "entitled" as some members have so kindly said, but I hope the owners can work around the issue as it is one that matters a great deal to quite a few of us.

[edit on 2-3-2009 by Illusionsaregrander]