New Forum for Conspiracy Theories

[scribblet]

I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to have a new forum for conspiracy theories, that way it might cut down on threads veering off in that direction. A political forum which had its own conspiracy area has recently closed down, thereby giving MLW some new members. Any thoughts on that one Greg et al.

[Charles Anthony]

I think that would be a bad idea.

I have my own theory about conspiracy theories: they differ from political theories only in HOW they are presented as opposed to the issue per se. Anything (for example, the inherent evil of the state or bilingualism) can be made to be a conspiracy theory as opposed to a political theory.

Personally, I enjoy conspiracy theories but only in a casual while-I-am-stuck-waiting-in-the-line-at-the-checkout-counter sort of way.

[jdobbin]

I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to have a new forum for conspiracy theories, that way it might cut down on threads veering off in that direction. A political forum which had its own conspiracy area has recently closed down, thereby giving MLW some new members. Any thoughts on that one Greg et al.

You're just trying to suppress the truth, the truth about how UFOs are actually responsible for Bush being elected.

[Catchme]

I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to have a new forum for conspiracy theories, that way it might cut down on threads veering off in that direction.

You're just trying to suppress the truth, the truth about how UFOs are actually responsible for Bush being elected.

[scribblet]

You're just trying to suppress the truth, the truth about how UFOs are actually responsible for Bush being elected.

Sheez, and here I thought it was the Illuminati messing around with those hanging chads

[August1991]

I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to have a new forum for conspiracy theories, that way it might cut down on threads veering off in that direction. A political forum which had its own conspiracy area has recently closed down, thereby giving MLW some new members. Any thoughts on that one Greg et al.

Scriblett, I agree that this is a serious problem. It's not a joking matter.

My thoughts on censorship and Internet forums have changed 180 degrees since I started posting here. I once believed in absolute free speech. Now I believe in strict censorship.

The Internet offers ample opportunity for anyone to express themselves. But this forum has no obligation to give everyone a venue to argue their case. On the contrary.

I drop into this forum to argue, read and think. It's interesting. IMV, this forum should have posters who contribute to interesting debates. It's a club, or a pub. It's one small corner of a much vaster public space. The public space should ensure free speech but this corner has no such obligation. If I want to read nonsense, I need only change the url. I come here for something else.

Greg banned eureka and maplesyrup (to name two) and I found them far less irritating than polynewbie and Wendy. I am reasonably open-minded but I have absolutely no desire to log on to this forum and find yet another thread about nonsensical 9/11 conspiracy theories.

I never thought of leaving this forum because of eureka. The only previous reason I thought of leaving MLW was because maplesyrup was banned.

I am now thinking of leaving MLW because of polynewbie and Wendy and all this conspiracy nonsense. Greg, if that's the kind of forum and "political" discussion you want to support on the Internet, go ahead and make MLW "Conspiracy Central". I'll find another place to relax and discuss Canadian politics. On my Quebec forum, there aren't these kinds of silly discussions: the moderators intervene quickly and posters are more civilized and reasonable. (An aside to Argus and Leafless: Go figure - Quebec more civilized.)

Anyway and lastly, where is kimmy when we need an opinion?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

I have absolutely no desire to log on to this forum and find yet another thread about nonsensical 9/11 conspiracy theories.

I drop into this forum to argue, read and think. It's interesting. IMV, this forum should have posters who contribute to interesting debates. It's a club, or a pub. It's one small corner of a much vaster public space. The public space should ensure free speech but this corner has no such obligation. If I want to read nonsense, I need only change the url. I come here for something else.

I have to agree. It is almost like we are trying to make a soup or a stew, and everyone is welcome to add their own spice. Yet that means some are allowed to come and piss in the soup too. I don't enjoy this 'pissed in soup' either, but what can one do short of changing restaurants?

[August1991]

It is almost like we are trying to make a soup or a stew, and everyone is welcome to add their own spice. Yet that means some are allowed to come and piss in the soup too. I don't enjoy this 'pissed in soup' either, but what can one do short of changing restaurants?

Trust Thelonious to come up with the best metaphor.

[geoffrey]

In all honesty, the threads with such non-sense are quite easily identified. Their incursion upon the index page of some of the discussion areas of this forum is a very small inconvenience upon your enjoyment of the forums. The censorship of ideals that fit a specific worldview would be a fair bigger loss.

There is a great 'ignore' function on these forums... and a great ignore function hardwired into the human mind as well.

I'm sure there are forums that cater to strict ideologies and people that don't care to even consider something beyond their opinions... Rabble and Freedominion come to mind. Fortunately, MapleLeafWeb has never gone down this path.

If we had people posting conspiracy threads under titles such as "Bank of Canada raises interest rate 0.25%" then ok, maybe that's a bit more of an inconvenience. But that's simply not the case.

I refer to my common response to those that find certain TV shows or advertisements offensive. Change the channel, don't watch. There is nothing forcing you to click on the "Captured Brits Staged / BBC" or the infamous 130 page 9/11 thread.

I completely understand that this is a private domain, and freedom of speech is really an irrelevant concept... there are lots of places where those like PolyNewie can express their views on the world. That said, I still think any political view, regardless of how ridiculous in our opinions, is appropriate to be expressed here as long as it is done respectfully and in good taste. It's truly what sets MLW apart from the other forums out there and it's the main reason why I enjoy the discussion here.

I think PolyNewbie's posts are definitely respectful and while I must admit the guy has very little in terms of facts supporting his ideas, he honestly tries to put together a logical argument. This is far more than I can say about many of the newer (and some of the older) members of this forum. I don't care to name names, but we all know who the one track minds are here.

Until I see PolyNewbie or the other conspiracy theorists acting belligerent towards members of this forum, I'm going to strongly support them in this regard. 90% of those posting here should take a lesson from PN in particular in how to respond to the occassional personal attack.

To TLFB, I disagree with your analogy. This isn't like a big collective stew. The way these forums are constructed allows you to avoid the portions of the stew that have been pissed in and enjoy only those with the spice combinations that you enjoy. It'd be more appropriate to say that this forum is a big potluck, with various dishes that each individual brings, and that we all have a choice in sampling from.

Bottom line, if you don't want to read it, don't read it. There is plenty of conspiracy free discussion happening on these forums. Banning people for their opinions would be a strong step in destroying what makes this forum unique.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear geoffrey,

Banning people for their opinions would be a strong step in destroying what makes this forum unique.

Well said. However, I have met a great number of people in my life, and 'hang out' with very few. I viewed this forum as a 'scotch and cigar and intelligent debate' sort of pub (to borrow August1991's phrase), yet we find ourselves at times surrounded (in the name of 'absolute freedom with no repercussions') by 'ranting bag-ladies'.

[geoffrey]

In the case of the pub metaphor, just talk to those at your table then. Even the scotch and cigar type of pubs have their 'less than the rest' patrons, if you know what I mean. I know I don't find myself obliged to talk to everyone in the pub when I head out for a drink. These "ranting bag-ladies" generally don't raise their voice to be heard by those beyond their tables. They do however, highlight another segement of political thought in this country.

If you want an only academic thinker type forum, I think you'd find it much more bland than what you have here. Some of my favourite posters are quite obviously not that educated. That doesn't mean there isn't a place for real debate here.

These people mostly stick to their few threads, they aren't a great threat to the discussion in general on this forum.

[August1991]

Bottom line, if you don't want to read it, don't read it. There is plenty of conspiracy free discussion happening on these forums. Banning people for their opinions would be a strong step in destroying what makes this forum unique.

Good post, Geoff. You changed my mind, sort of. I like this forum because it has a bit of everything and I wouldn't want it to be less.

Then again, everything? To what point should we let someone else choose for us?

[scribblet]

Bottom line, if you don't want to read it, don't read it. There is plenty of conspiracy free discussion happening on these forums. Banning people for their opinions would be a strong step in destroying what makes this forum unique.

Good post, Geoff. You changed my mind, sort of. I like this forum because it has a bit of everything and I wouldn't want it to be less.

Then again, everything? To what point should we let someone else choose for us?

You make good points, but now that there are more of these posts appearing, at least having their own forum would isolate them from the main stream and not clutter up the main forums. It would also save us time and bother. I wouldn't ban people for politely posting an opinion, this sure isn't Rabble.

[DogOnPorch]

Not only would a Tin-foil hat section be helpful, but an Off-Topic section as well. It allows members to show they have other interests besides beating their chests or engaging in verbal knife-fights all the time. Sort of a: "wow...I didn't know we liked the same types of music...perhaps you're not the total nut I thought you were...lol."

----------------------------------------------------------------

A tinkling piano in the next apartment

Those stumblin' words that told you what my heart meant

A fairground's painted swings

These foolish things remind me of you...

---Holt Marvell & Benny Goodman

[Wilber]

I think PolyNewbie's posts are definitely respectful and while I must admit the guy has very little in terms of facts supporting his ideas, he honestly tries to put together a logical argument. This is far more than I can say about many of the newer (and some of the older) members of this forum. I don't care to name names, but we all know who the one track minds are here.

For the most part but I think at one point or another he has called just about everyone who has dissagreed with him a liar, self included. You can't debate with someone like that so I just don't respond to his posts anymore because it is a waste of time repeating myself. Perhaps that's the answer.

[Charles Anthony]

You can't debate with someone like that so I just don't respond to his posts anymore because it is a waste of time repeating myself. Perhaps that's the answer.

Bingo!

If a troll falls down in the forest, who rushes to feed him?

Part of the logistical problem with objectionable forum behavior is that others feed it. If everybody ignored the "conspiracy theory" threads, they would be nothing but repeated post after post after post after post by the same member with NO discussion -- which can objectively be identified as a forum rule violation independent of the political point of view expressed. On the otherhand, if other members are feeding the "conspiracy theory" how is a moderator to maintain political neutrality????

[GostHacked]

Dear geoffrey,

Banning people for their opinions would be a strong step in destroying what makes this forum unique.

Well said. However, I have met a great number of people in my life, and 'hang out' with very few. I viewed this forum as a 'scotch and cigar and intelligent debate' sort of pub (to borrow August1991's phrase), yet we find ourselves at times surrounded (in the name of 'absolute freedom with no repercussions') by 'ranting bag-ladies'.

Sometimes you have no choice of who you run into out there in real life or in here online. Throw me in the conspiracy camp. I try not to let that into every post I make for other threads. I try to keep my posts on topic without going all crazy conspiracy.

I don't really think it is the content of conspiracy theories that get you people upset, it is the way it is presented to you. Kind of like the way I am sick of MSM like Foxnews and the way they present the right wing agenda for the administration.

But again, like others said, you have it in your power to hit that ignore button. Or maybe respond to a crazy post with some great counter arguments. For those conspiracy threads like the one Polynewbie has. It is now over 130 pages. If you people really hated it, why the hell did it get to 130 pages? Polynewbie cannot do it on his own. Most of you fueled that fire and are now wondering why it wont stop.

If the other does not walk away, and you know it is a useles battle, then maybe you should walk away.

For the most part but I think at one point or another he has called just about everyone who has dissagreed with him a liar, self included. You can't debate with someone like that so I just don't respond to his posts anymore because it is a waste of time repeating myself. Perhaps that's the answer.

For the record in that thread, insults flew around in both directions. I agree Polynewbie has thrown the majority of them in the 9/11 thread. But we are all not 100% innocent in that nature. Sometimes it is really tough to be the better man and just walk away and laugh.

In the case of the pub metaphor, just talk to those at your table then. Even the scotch and cigar type of pubs have their 'less than the rest' patrons, if you know what I mean.

To me I find that the older I get the less and less I can tolerate the general public. Many people I encounter are just idiots. I come here for something more.

You just need to have the power in yourself to not contribute to the topic you don't want to get into. There are many threads I want to contribute to, but can't think or find anything substantial to progress the thread.

Take a look at my 9/11 thread and compare it to Polynewbies. Conspiracies can be discussed rationaly. Although I think me and Montey Burns had thrown mud at each other.

[ScottSA]

Why is there always a tendency to drift toward censorship in forums? First it's the rather subjective topic of 'flaming' (which can be quite entertaining in the hands of a master like Morris), then it moves on to curbing the various heresies of the current intellectual western world like "racism" and "bigotry" and the other ridiculous preoccupations of right-think. Finally the scales tip in favor of one philosophy and the process of incremental censorship ends up producing a choreograph of same-think posts by a certain cadre of posters while everyone else wanders away.

I have no particular issues with the truthers. It keeps kids off the street in the same way that it kept Trekkies out of trouble a generation ago. Searching for bogeymen is a fairly harmless pursuit, as harmful occupational choices go with youth these days, and if nothing else their ideation is a demonstration of just about every know fallacy out there http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ . It also serves, ironicallly, to demonstrate the truth of Goebbel's "big lie": if you make the lie big enough and ridiculous enough, people will start to believe it. In any event, I prefer to believe that than to believe that mass hysteria, or worse, insanity, has grabbed western society by the throat.

I dunno, I co-admin a forum http://24.69.78.93/forum/index.php with one rule only: there are no rules beyond the obvious no spamming rules. People can flame and use pottymouth to their heart's content, and things seem to work quite well. My co-admin has even gone completely off the wall and become a truther himself, but I just ignore the threads, or if I'm feeling ornery I pop in for a bit of flaming and then pop out. My co-admin was considerate enough to create a forum dedicated to conspiracy theories, so that cuts down on the nonsense a bit, but my experience with conspiracy minded crackpots is that to them everything becomes a conspiracy and reality is absorbed into an alternate reality where nothing is what it seems and the wooscary puppetmasters control our minds. But it seems to me that. as with everything else, the best antidote is simply to ignore an idea or to put it to the test of debate. Censoring an idea obviously leads to it gaining more currency

[Argus]

In all honesty, the threads with such non-sense are quite easily identified. Their incursion upon the index page of some of the discussion areas of this forum is a very small inconvenience upon your enjoyment of the forums. The censorship of ideals that fit a specific worldview would be a fair bigger loss.

There is a great 'ignore' function on these forums... and a great ignore function hardwired into the human mind as well.

The problem is that having these people repeatedly posting their BS provokes ridicule, jeering and insults which carry over onto other threads. Since it is impossible to actually discuss anything intelligently with these people it establishes a tone where mockery and insults are common.

Polynewbie, Wendy, Drea, Catchme and anyone else who chooses to post ridiculous conspiracy theories - which have nothing to do with politics, btw - should all be banned for the atmosphere they help foster

[Argus]

Dear geoffrey,

Banning people for their opinions would be a strong step in destroying what makes this forum unique.

Well said. However, I have met a great number of people in my life, and 'hang out' with very few. I viewed this forum as a 'scotch and cigar and intelligent debate' sort of pub (to borrow August1991's phrase), yet we find ourselves at times surrounded (in the name of 'absolute freedom with no repercussions') by 'ranting bag-ladies'.

Not to mention most of this stuff is off-topic anyway. This is a political forum. Vast international conspiracy networks should and do have their own web discussion sites where the true believers breathlessly discuss how the shape of their cornflakes that morning was altered by alien mind control under the influence of Jewish bankers.

[ScottSA]

Not to mention most of this stuff is off-topic anyway. This is a political forum. Vast international conspiracy networks should and do have their own web discussion sites where the true believers breathlessly discuss how the shape of their cornflakes that morning was altered by alien mind control under the influence of Jewish bankers.

Oh I don't know...the Great Captains of Industry, including the Kelloggs, are all puppetmasters too, and since they control the minds of politicians and plebes alike, I'd say its relevant. I spose there are always grounds to argue for banning folks, but I suspect the argument that control of the Polis doesn't have anything to do with politics is a little on the weak side.

[Figleaf]

The problem is that having these people repeatedly posting their BS provokes ridicule, jeering and insults ... [they] should all be banned for the atmosphere they help foster

Way to blame the victim there, Argus.

[gc1765]

Polynewbie, Wendy, Drea, Catchme and anyone else who chooses to post ridiculous conspiracy theories - which have nothing to do with politics, btw - should all be banned for the atmosphere they help foster

Don't forget B. Max et al. for their global warming conspiracy theories.

[BubberMiley]

Don't forget B. Max et al. for their global warming conspiracy theories.

There are a lot of tin-foil hat winguts on this forum who think there is a global socialist conspiracy that includes most politicians, all the scientists, and the media to promote the concept of global warming in order to destroy western society.

But I would never argue they should be banned. But the jerks who spew negativity throughout this forum and then whine about the negativity in the forum--them I would ban.

[sunsettommy]

I feel for you Greg.

They forget to use the Ignore button or just stay away from the threads they dislike.

I have stopped responding to a certain member because there is no point banging my head at the sillines I get in reply.Others can do the very same thing.

Maybe you will have to make a definitive statement to stop this fragmentation among the members on how this forum should run?

Oh well.