Southwind17
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 5,154
And here was I thinking you were on some kind of a self-indulgent mission. Silly me!
Tisk, tisk, for shame!
- Thread starter jandarian
- Start date
-
- Tags
- conspiracy nwo
And here was I thinking you were on some kind of a self-indulgent mission. Silly me!
Anytime you need to be an intelligent person seeking validation, come share some facts with a truther and help him mature and seek knowledge instead of hearsay and lies. But it takes a whole lot of time; precious time. So if you can not find an interest in spreading facts and are happy with a guy at the corner spreading lies and false information. Do not let me get in your way of acting intelligent and validating yourself, like you just did.
so witty Southwind. Hmm, yes, a year on the boards, staying quiet until I felt I had something valid, or at least sincere to say, yes i see how that can be considered self-indulgent..not. Although it can be argued that indulgence is at the heart of most threads at one time or another.
I love how you consistently validate that OP though southwind17.
But anyway, thanks again folks for contributing.
I love how you consistently validate that OP though southwind17.
But anyway, thanks again folks for contributing.
Beachnut: "Come share facts.."? You mean come to Jref, and wait for them to come to me? Like you?
I've put my years and years in with truthers, CT'ers and woo folk of all kinds, from all over. I just preferred to take the face to face approach...out there, off the boards that are dedicated for thinkers...you know...taking it to them...anyone can hide out on a Jref board and cast judgment from amongst the safety of peers.
IMHO, Jref has become less about validating, or challenging one's intelligence and far more about trying to hold it over those deemed 'uninformed'.
I really don't think there is a better example of the OP than this thread. No offensive language, no great assertion, just an observation, that i did find a bit disturbing, and 62 posts later, we are still on about it. If that's not proof enough of a group of people wanting to hear themselves speak I do not know what is...perhaps, including myself at this point.
I've put my years and years in with truthers, CT'ers and woo folk of all kinds, from all over. I just preferred to take the face to face approach...out there, off the boards that are dedicated for thinkers...you know...taking it to them...anyone can hide out on a Jref board and cast judgment from amongst the safety of peers.
IMHO, Jref has become less about validating, or challenging one's intelligence and far more about trying to hold it over those deemed 'uninformed'.
I really don't think there is a better example of the OP than this thread. No offensive language, no great assertion, just an observation, that i did find a bit disturbing, and 62 posts later, we are still on about it. If that's not proof enough of a group of people wanting to hear themselves speak I do not know what is...perhaps, including myself at this point.
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Right, thanks.
Arguing with Conspiracy Theorists doesn't really interest me much, but good luck with that.
Um yes, thats why i mentioned it. Pointlessly responding to a simple OP, is only likely to cause more pointless posts.
I'm rereading all the posts here, looking for examples of 'friendly' and 'lively', somehow i seem to missing them, except in most of mine, perhaps a bias?
Randi himself deals with these people all the time, should he take examples from these forums as to how to do that? Or should we be taking his method as an example?
Hmm, Jref forums, the left paddle, Alex Jones the right..anyone up for a game of Pong? I know I am not, maybe the woo-followers are strong enough in mind to handle it.
So is this deal where no matter what, if i respond to someone we just keep going round and round and round, all for a thread that pointed out an observation, that was validated by a veteran responder anyway? How do I close a thread?
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
You seem to be complaining that people are responding to your thread? Why? What would you like posters here to do in response to your OP?
No, responses are great. up to a point anyway. but, if you ask a simple question, get the answer, how many times do you need to hear the answer? or for that matter, the answer to a bunch of questions never asked?
I know, I didn't ask a question, it's just an analogy. See, I am already trained to defend my posts as I post them..this isn't good, (no, don't take that too seriously either (or that(or even that(tell me no one is writing a response to this)))).
OK, I GET it...everyone knows, nobody cares, I'm a moron for bringing it up, I'm just as guilty (not in my opinion tho) and EVERYONE IS BORED!
I know, I didn't ask a question, it's just an analogy. See, I am already trained to defend my posts as I post them..this isn't good, (no, don't take that too seriously either (or that(or even that(tell me no one is writing a response to this)))).
OK, I GET it...everyone knows, nobody cares, I'm a moron for bringing it up, I'm just as guilty (not in my opinion tho) and EVERYONE IS BORED!
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
I don't understand.
There's lots of posters on these forums. You have to expect everyone to give their own response; we don't have spokesmen. There's been 70 posts in this thread, with responses from 25 individuals, plus yourself making 26 contributors. However yourself and I alone have contributed 27 posts on the debate over whether 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists are cultists or not, and PhantomWolf has himself contributed another five posts, meaning that 23 responders have contributed only 38 posts. If you take into consideration the derail (9 posts), very few people have responded more than once to your OP.
In addition, I don't see many examples of people taking issue with your observation - most posters here would agree that the atmosphere is fairly hostile towards new poster and that a lot here are jaded by repeated sock puppets and trolls causing them to snap at new posters without reason.
What most posters seem to take issue with is your suggestion for how things should change. You cannot possibly suggest to an entire subforum that they change the way they post and not expect people to engage in discussion about your suggestion.
That is, after all, the point of such a thread, isn't it?
Personally I think previous threads of this nature have suggested far better solutions - I like the idea of having a sort of litmus test of the person's genuine interest in learning facts; if a person demonstrates a willingness to learn most here are more than happy to provide them with information and help them. The problem is what do you do when the person reveals they are not willing to learn? I say ignore them, and I wish more people would, instead of allowing themselves to be baited into said troll's games.
What I can't agree with is that these people are cultists, and even assuming they are, an internet forum is absolutely the wrong place to be attempting to extract someone from a cult. That's the sort of thing that should be left to trained professionals in a face-to-face scenario.
If I may suggest something; don't be so defensive. The posters here, by their nature, are quite ruthless and frank in their analysis of a post, but you shouldn't take this as some sort of personal confrontation or a rejection of your entire position. It's just a discussion.
I personally would be interested in a discussion on the topic of the 9/11 Truth Movement and Cultism. It seems to me, your entire OP is based on the premise that the 9/11 Truth Movement is a cult, so I think it's important to actually analyse this premise and establish it's accuracy. Perhaps another thread?
Well, I certainly noticed this.
Just like I noticed that the professional-plumber crowd often displays the same superior "I know how to fix leaky pipes" attitude that they so often chide others for.
And don't get me started on those MDs, with their superior "I know what prescription drugs you should take" attitude and yet they have the gall to criticize others when they act the same way.
We should all acknowledge the real truth, which is that absolutely no one ever knows any more about anything than anyone else, and anyone who pretends otherwise in any instance whatsoever is a hypocrite.
So, back to all that advice you were giving us...
Respectfully,
Myriad
Defensive? moi? never.. It's the post I'm defending, I'm doing my best to keep me out of it. Which might be the problem, and I can see how that maybe got in the way. i guess i did come in with a 'drop the message and move on' attitude. Didn't figure on being taken serious until I had been 'jumped in' at around a 100 posts or so. 
Yes, a litmus test is a good plan. I have to concede the point on some of these folks that come in, there just isn't anything about their agenda that seems to include learning anything.
I have seen a few though that i think are genuinely looking for answers..hard to tell I admit. In the chat rooms, it's just so much easier, the real time nature of it means they have to actually address you with something cogent, or simply run away. In here, days can go by before someones intentions come to light.
Not sure i ever directly said they are in a cult, just that they behave like it, and that the mind games played on them have similar results. Definitely worth a thread on it, but I won't jump too quick on that one, perhaps that was my misstep here. (although, of course, I still support the thought behind my OP)
Myriad, do I sense some sarcasm? A little bit o' the not so subtle mordancy? Any advice in my posts were strictly of a coincidental nature, I assure you. I give my kids advice, though you wouldn't be looking for that I'm sure.
Gumboot, thanks for guiding me to the ground. Floating above these forums for a year in silence, and chatting with the impossibles, I think affected my ability to relate; but just maybe.
It's the post I'm defending, I'm doing my best to keep me out of it. Which might be the problem, and I can see how that maybe got in the way. i guess i did come in with a 'drop the message and move on' attitude. Didn't figure on being taken serious until I had been 'jumped in' at around a 100 posts or so. Yes, a litmus test is a good plan. I have to concede the point on some of these folks that come in, there just isn't anything about their agenda that seems to include learning anything.
I have seen a few though that i think are genuinely looking for answers..hard to tell I admit. In the chat rooms, it's just so much easier, the real time nature of it means they have to actually address you with something cogent, or simply run away. In here, days can go by before someones intentions come to light.
Not sure i ever directly said they are in a cult, just that they behave like it, and that the mind games played on them have similar results. Definitely worth a thread on it, but I won't jump too quick on that one, perhaps that was my misstep here. (although, of course, I still support the thought behind my OP)
Myriad, do I sense some sarcasm? A little bit o' the not so subtle mordancy? Any advice in my posts were strictly of a coincidental nature, I assure you. I give my kids advice, though you wouldn't be looking for that I'm sure.
Gumboot, thanks for guiding me to the ground. Floating above these forums for a year in silence, and chatting with the impossibles, I think affected my ability to relate; but just maybe.
Confuseling
Irreligious fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2008
- Messages
- 1,243
I'm new here, but for what it's worth, I think jandarian does have a point - and I don't consider anything he said psychobabble.
The thing that I think might be escaping him here though, is that there a many ways to crack a nut, and when the nuts walk and talk, they are often quite capable of finding a nutcracker that fits them.
This is certainly a combative board, filled with sardonic humour - anyone that denies that hasn't got a handle on the state of the rest of the internet. But it's also notorious. Every CTer has heard of it, and many of them consider it a vipers' nest of cointelpro agents; and that is precisely, for them, what gives it its perverse allure.
There are no doubt more reserved and polite boards where the same things are discussed, and I honestly think that anybody thick-skinned enough to believe in CTs despite the derision they will inevitably receive in real life is quite capable of surviving the initial wave of mockery, and then if it isn't for them, retreating and finding somewhere more suited to their temperament.
But there are also much more vicious places - you only have to look at the comments on youtube to realise that there is a strong tendency to let fly with the "**** off you brainwashed ****" response as soon as 911 is mentioned, in both directions, the balance largely being determined by the nature of the video.
The point really is that you can't have an interesting debate in the latter environment. And there is a sense in which you can't in the former either, because without a contingent of attack dogs (or cats, mice and bunny rabbits) the real points are soon swamped by the persistence of the zealots. Your only real option is a tough moderating line - removing or displacing their posts, or banning them - otherwise the more measured posters get bored by the noise to signal ratio, and find somewhere else to post.
If you're making the case that the moderating here is too light, you could perhaps discuss it in forum management. It certainly does create problems - you get a resident group of trolls, and a culture of responding to them, and that can be offputting (though to be fair, it can also be damn hilarious - it's a kind of gallows humour, a survival instinct brought about by the relentless drudgery of it).
But I personally think the free exchange of ideas format works brilliantly, warts and all, for people of a certain mentality; and the more delicate constitutions will find the exit quickly enough. If they find somewhere more refined, so much the better. If they find their way back to the CT boards, one can only assume they weren't really looking to test their beliefs in the first place.
What it does for the trolls is anyones guess - but I don't think you can make the case that it harms them. If they were kicked, they'd troll somewhere else, and there's an outside chance that some of the sense creeps in by gradual osmosis.pigsfly)
The thing that I think might be escaping him here though, is that there a many ways to crack a nut, and when the nuts walk and talk, they are often quite capable of finding a nutcracker that fits them.
This is certainly a combative board, filled with sardonic humour - anyone that denies that hasn't got a handle on the state of the rest of the internet. But it's also notorious. Every CTer has heard of it, and many of them consider it a vipers' nest of cointelpro agents; and that is precisely, for them, what gives it its perverse allure.
There are no doubt more reserved and polite boards where the same things are discussed, and I honestly think that anybody thick-skinned enough to believe in CTs despite the derision they will inevitably receive in real life is quite capable of surviving the initial wave of mockery, and then if it isn't for them, retreating and finding somewhere more suited to their temperament.
But there are also much more vicious places - you only have to look at the comments on youtube to realise that there is a strong tendency to let fly with the "**** off you brainwashed ****" response as soon as 911 is mentioned, in both directions, the balance largely being determined by the nature of the video.
The point really is that you can't have an interesting debate in the latter environment. And there is a sense in which you can't in the former either, because without a contingent of attack dogs (or cats, mice and bunny rabbits) the real points are soon swamped by the persistence of the zealots. Your only real option is a tough moderating line - removing or displacing their posts, or banning them - otherwise the more measured posters get bored by the noise to signal ratio, and find somewhere else to post.
If you're making the case that the moderating here is too light, you could perhaps discuss it in forum management. It certainly does create problems - you get a resident group of trolls, and a culture of responding to them, and that can be offputting (though to be fair, it can also be damn hilarious - it's a kind of gallows humour, a survival instinct brought about by the relentless drudgery of it).
But I personally think the free exchange of ideas format works brilliantly, warts and all, for people of a certain mentality; and the more delicate constitutions will find the exit quickly enough. If they find somewhere more refined, so much the better. If they find their way back to the CT boards, one can only assume they weren't really looking to test their beliefs in the first place.
What it does for the trolls is anyones guess - but I don't think you can make the case that it harms them. If they were kicked, they'd troll somewhere else, and there's an outside chance that some of the sense creeps in by gradual osmosis.
pigsfly)
Last edited:
Confuseling "The thing that I think might be escaping him here though, is that there a many ways to crack a nut, and when the nuts walk and talk, they are often quite capable of finding a nutcracker that fits them."
Yes, have to agree there.
Nope, definitely not a moderator issue, it's not that type of aggression. No, it's the kind that comes with bashing your head against a wall one too many times. I was just worried that, since my perspective is that there are lots of woo and CT people out there, and that since they are on the net and they have a reach; that maybe it's about more than just correcting their errors.
But then again, I always did put too much emphasis on 'reality repair', as opposed to light hearted debate; i shouldn't be expecting that everyone feels the same....and I think I definitely came at the board that way.
Crack a nut...now that is funny.
Yes, have to agree there.
Nope, definitely not a moderator issue, it's not that type of aggression. No, it's the kind that comes with bashing your head against a wall one too many times. I was just worried that, since my perspective is that there are lots of woo and CT people out there, and that since they are on the net and they have a reach; that maybe it's about more than just correcting their errors.
But then again, I always did put too much emphasis on 'reality repair', as opposed to light hearted debate; i shouldn't be expecting that everyone feels the same....and I think I definitely came at the board that way.
Crack a nut...now that is funny.
Confuseling
Irreligious fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2008
- Messages
- 1,243
No, but I do entirely see your point. This isn't just a back-slapping exercise. Real lives are at stake, and it's easy to be too frivolous about this. I don't know the truther suicide rate, but I don't doubt for a second that it's way above average. How much of that is correlation and how much causation is one of the imponderables...
But who are we trying to help? That's essentially my point. The trolls are hopeless cases, and I honestly think if you're in that psychological state you're probably in more trouble if you get banned from the forums, because you're suddenly confronted with the utter void that your life must represent.
The people that casually breeze through (aside from debunkers) are either fence sitters or people who have just joined the 'cult'. I think there's a tendency to downplay the number of fence sitters still in existence. I think people will already have formed opinions, but it only takes someone to be in a suggestible mood and watch the wrong video before suddenly they're teetering on the edge, and I think a robust exchange of ideas is precisely what they need to be pulled back.
As for the neophyte cultists, I think you're entirely right - guns blazing attack just causes them to retreat back into the arms of the fully indoctrinated. I think we have to be careful, and try to treat each case as an unknown upon arrival, and then try to remain civil once we've classified them.
But the humour is part of the life of the forum. You take that away, and you'll get a different forum, with different posters. And another forum will take the place of this one. You can't regulate human nature; your best option, if you think a more nuanced and gentle approach is needed, is just to pitch in and lead by example.
But who are we trying to help? That's essentially my point. The trolls are hopeless cases, and I honestly think if you're in that psychological state you're probably in more trouble if you get banned from the forums, because you're suddenly confronted with the utter void that your life must represent.
The people that casually breeze through (aside from debunkers) are either fence sitters or people who have just joined the 'cult'. I think there's a tendency to downplay the number of fence sitters still in existence. I think people will already have formed opinions, but it only takes someone to be in a suggestible mood and watch the wrong video before suddenly they're teetering on the edge, and I think a robust exchange of ideas is precisely what they need to be pulled back.
As for the neophyte cultists, I think you're entirely right - guns blazing attack just causes them to retreat back into the arms of the fully indoctrinated. I think we have to be careful, and try to treat each case as an unknown upon arrival, and then try to remain civil once we've classified them.
But the humour is part of the life of the forum. You take that away, and you'll get a different forum, with different posters. And another forum will take the place of this one. You can't regulate human nature; your best option, if you think a more nuanced and gentle approach is needed, is just to pitch in and lead by example.
Last edited:
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
The clue is in the title... this forum is associated with the James Randi Education Foundation which is specifically orientated towards "reality repair". I think you'll find many posters here actually are active in promoting critical thinking, not just regarding 9/11 but in all walks of life.
This site is actually one of the few places on the internet that is solely dedicated to precisely what you're advocating. Welcome.
Gumboot: Indeed, and that is what's kept me coming back for more.
Thats why it bugs me to see it bashed in some places the way it is. After spending some time on AJ's forums, i began to think that maybe it was the approach of some folks on here. So there is the reality behind my OP.
The reality behind me, frankly, is that I don't want to admit that most of that crowd are hopeless. It breaks my heart that humans can get so lost, so easily, and even worse, that there are so many vultures waiting to scoop them up.
Sorry to get emotional, that's not even the point of the thread.
Thats why it bugs me to see it bashed in some places the way it is. After spending some time on AJ's forums, i began to think that maybe it was the approach of some folks on here. So there is the reality behind my OP.
The reality behind me, frankly, is that I don't want to admit that most of that crowd are hopeless. It breaks my heart that humans can get so lost, so easily, and even worse, that there are so many vultures waiting to scoop them up.
Sorry to get emotional, that's not even the point of the thread.
Last edited: