AboveTopSecret.com Video and Media Portal.Books, posters, and more.T-shirts, mouse pads, cups, and bags.Member podcasts.Conspiracy theory wiki.Alternative news headlinesBelowTopSecret.com - off topic and general chit chat.AboveTopSecret.com - conspiracy theories and


 

 

This topic is in the Rant discussion forum.  (rss)


When did ATS become a place to ignore debate?




Topic started on 1-12-2008 @ 12:03 PM by gormly


When did ATS become a place to ignore debate?

I have seen a tremendous amount of threads started in the last few months that either begin with or contain dismissive statements or qualifyers that attempt to rule out debate on a particular subject. I think this should fall under some rule on this forum and if it doesn't already, xpand the rules to include identifying it to the rest of the membership.

Sort of like all of the nice stickers many users get like "Off Topic", "Road Closed".. that type of thing. Maybe a nice "Pontificating & Postulating" sticker or something?

I am not sure exactly how to explain what is going on correctly but anyone who has been an active viewer here probably knows what I mean. The poster will take a subject say for example:
UFO's and then start the topic by saying:

"UFO's are real, we know that, this topic is about...blah bah.. so no one needs to debate UFO's here..."

Or

"Ok, we all know now that God isn't real, so lets move on to deunking the bible verse by verse"

This is happening with 9/11, UFO, NWO, and just about all other topics. There are a few examples on the front page today. We are being beseiged with anti-debaters, people who loathe anyone challenging what they put forth. These people KNOW what they are doing, they are getting many replies from like believers who derail any debate whatsoever.

I would like this to be monitored just a tad bit? Is that asking for censorship (I don't think so)

Is it right that someone can pose something as fact in a thead topic title or first post and dismiss any comment preemptively? Shouldn't that fall under the same kind of header that baiting, off topic or otherwise anti-ATS talk does?

I know everyone has ever right to comment regardless of what the original poster states or requests, that is not my concern. My concern is that we are allowing a belief to become "fact" by virtue of not.

I could be over reacting,
Am I?


[edit on 1-12-2008 by gormly]



   copyright & usage 
Click here for more Rant topics
Hot Topics   |   Top Topics   |   This Week   |   Subscribe   |   Home


reply posted on 1-12-2008 @ 01:41 PM by CA_Orot


reply to post by gormly



I've notice it too, but you know if your looking for a well structured debate, perhaps you might consider applying for Fighter Status? The debates are based on facts and provide great reading too

- Carrot



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 1-12-2008 @ 01:54 PM by AshleyD


reply to post by gormly



Yes it's annoying. lol

More than anything, it's a poor choice of words. I have no issues with someone who says 'THIS is the specific and targeted topic of this certain issue so please let's not rehash the tired old issue of Issue A vs. Issue B.' Especially when there's 100 threads already on the A vs. B debate. So in that sense it is understandable but when they specifically say, 'We all know that THIS is true so let's go on from there,' is a whole other story.

Not sure if it should actually be censored but it is annoying. Not sure if you have seen this thread, Gormly, but it might help:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It is loosely about the issue you bring up. Springer is the first one to reply with an answer. I understand you are not bringing up this precise issue but it is similar.



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 1-12-2008 @ 03:02 PM by whaaa


There is nothing in the T&C that keeps anyone from responding to "We all know" or "It's an accepted fact" etc. with.....

"You're wrong, dodo" or "in your dreams, knucklehead" or "you wish, yahoo" or perhaps "to me that sounds...retarded..."


maybe there is something in the T&C about that kind of response but I see them all the time....maybe they are allowed to slip thru just to keep the debate lively and entertaining.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by whaaa]



   copyright & usage 
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.


reply posted on 1-12-2008 @ 03:08 PM by nyk537


You may have also noticed that those types of threads that seek to avoid debate generally flame out rather quickly with limited response.

That's because when a member see's a statement such as that, they quickly realize that the OP is not looking for discussion, but is just trying to bait people into their trap.

Most often the types of threads you're talking about don't last very long. Sometimes they do though and I can see how it can be rather frustrating.

Of course, you could always do what I do in that case, and ignore them.




   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 2-12-2008 @ 02:29 PM by dalek


case in point
I don't give a damn ..........

There certainly appears to be accounts made who then post "Facts" that are not open to debate, and then within a few days their accounts get banned due to breaking T&C, and then within a week or so another troll pops up to take over.



   copyright & usage 





















































ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.020 seconds
Page processed in 0.146 seconds
6 total database queries (1)

(:)








The Below Top Secret General Discussion Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownershipwho maintains
strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.






It looks like you're using some kind of software designed to block advertising while surfing our site.

We work very hard to provide an efficient Internet presence that services over 200,000 daily visits from people and automated web spiders. A large web site like this, that can handle that amount of traffic, is increasingly expensive to operate. Our only viable source of revenue (for now) are the ads displayed on each page.

If you enjoy our content, please enable our domain in your ad-blocking package.

more information       contact us

[hide this message]