• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bring Out Our Dead! Pitch in to create a 9/11 CT Best Thread Index!

Norseman said:
I addition it could be a good idea to point out the name of the posters worth looking out for in a particular thread. Many threads contain a lot of noise from what we might call the peanut gallery, or the same argument repeated endlessly with some rare good posts in between. This will make it easier for a reader to skim through the relevant parts of the thread to find the good posts.
Click to expand...
I like the idea and might have implemented it if I'd thought of it, but since some people are well into their lists, I think we'll leave it as is. People reading the threads can usually quickly get an idea of who knows what they're talking about.

As you pointed out in the OP Gravy, certain threads I would think needs special treatment, like the now more than 5000 posts long thread that keeps popping up on the front page. It would be almost inhumane to ask a single person to go back through threads like that to extract the few gems that might be hidden there, that goes even for those of us who have participated in such threads. The best way would be, as you have suggested in the OP, to ask members familiar with threads like that to dig out relevant posts, or page numbers containing information they remember as relevant.
Click to expand...
I'm not asking people to do that. I'm asking them to judge if the entire thread is worth including, I don't want anyone reading 5,000 posts in a thread. If it's a shorter thread and they want to pull out an excellent post or two, that's great.

The reason I mentioned the 4 Loose Change threads (which are on the page I'll be doing) as exceptions is that they cover all 9/11 topics.
 
Last edited:
Volunteers still needed!

We've got 16 of the 28 participants I was hoping for, including me. Anyone else?
 
Gravy said:
I like the idea and might have implemented it if I'd thought of it, but since some people are well into their lists, I think we'll leave it as is. People reading the threads can usually quickly get an idea of who knows what they're talking about.
Click to expand...

True enough, when I entered this forum I quickly got an idea of who it was worth looking out for.

I'm not asking people to do that. I'm asking them to judge if the entire thread is worth including, I don't want anyone reading 5,000 posts in a thread. If it's a shorter thread and they want to pull out an excellent post or two, that's great.

The reason I mentioned the 4 Loose Change threads (which are on the page I'll be doing) as exceptions is that they cover all 9/11 topics.
Click to expand...

More than fair enough, I looked back at your OP and note that the example I had in mind clearly fails on criteria #2. A way out could be that when the final list is presented for quality control, that members who happen to know of specific posts that covers a topic clearly better than a shorter thread included on the list, adds a link to the relevant post or page range in the otherwise "hopeless" thread. Just a thought.
 
Last edited:
I'm happy to help out with the project.

I'm curious - have you thought about how to maintain this list? I know you feel interesting new information and original research are not being presented with any regularity anymore, but if something was to be introduced (the WTC 7 report, for example, was released only last August) have you thought about ways to include threads started after the completion of your indexing project? Do you (or someone else) plan to keep an eye on this sub-forum for new material, or (if the mods are kind enough to sticky the eventual index) do you think posts made in the index thread would be sufficient?

Thanks, by the way, for initiating and shepherding this project.



On Edit: I might be a little busy until November 4th. Hopefully you don't expect us to be finished by then?
 
If it wasn't that I'm trying to get the Apartment spic-and-span, write my novel, program my MUSH, and about 10 other things I really should be doing, I'd volunteer, but since I'm not getting all the things I'm meant to be doing done, I'm not adding another thing I'll be slackassed about to the list.
 
AZCat said:
I'm happy to help out with the project.
...
On Edit: I might be a little busy until November 4th. Hopefully you don't expect us to be finished by then?
Click to expand...
Thanks! I think you will be done by then, but I haven't set a deadline. As I mentioned above, one participant finished his page in half a day (I don't know how long that took, and he may have been stricter than necessary). I was guessing this would be 4 hours of work for an average page or 6 hours for one with more long or complex threads. That guess is pulled out of my ass, however. I'm busy myself: trying to figure out a new life, job, and place to live in a different city, preparing to move...none of which is resolved!

I'll send you the info, take a look at the first 20 threads, and see how long it takes to pick the good threads and enter their info. If you don't think you'll have time for it, just send me what you have and we'll find someone to finish.

I'm curious - have you thought about how to maintain this list? I know you feel interesting new information and original research are not being presented with any regularity anymore, but if something was to be introduced (the WTC 7 report, for example, was released only last August) have you thought about ways to include threads started after the completion of your indexing project? Do you (or someone else) plan to keep an eye on this sub-forum for new material, or (if the mods are kind enough to sticky the eventual index) do you think posts made in the index thread would be sufficient?
Click to expand...
I won't be updating it, but anyone is welcome to. The easiest way is for all updates to be on the spreadsheet only, which will be linked here (and stored on this server, If possible).

That's not ideal, of course, but I'm not sure what can done using this forum's formats in terms of updating an existing page or post. I haven't talked to the admins and mods about it yet.

I think the easiest way to present the finished version that we're working on now is as a stickied thread, with each post being a different topic category. The first post would be a table of contents, with links to each category page, a link to the spreadsheet, and links to other debunking sites (since this will not be the most efficient resource to use for quick answers to many topics).

Of course, a thread can always be added to at its end, but that would quickly become unwieldy. We could use new posts in the main thread as a way for people to add suggested best threads, which someone would add to the spreadsheet periodically. We're not seeing a lot of threads with new and significant information these days. I'll see what the admins think.

Thanks, by the way, for initiating and shepherding this project.
Click to expand...
You're welcome!
 
Last edited:
Couple of points gravy

You caution participants not to read the threads but so far I'm finding some nuggets in some threads that I would not have otherwise opened due to the thread title, so far out of the 84 threads Ive browsed through i have selected 18. so percent wise I'm just a bit over the target for 20%, yes its more work to read them but when i find three or so excellent posts in a thread over 5 pages in the first 2 pages I enter the thread. I have three questionable so far. and a nomination single post. perhaps some of my thread selections can be whittled down to the single significant posts but that would shoot up my percentage. But I understand you be cutting them down anyway. ok so im reading every thread. so kill me:) .


the excel right side problem

yes I had the same thing happen and it was unmanageable. what I did instead was select the dropdown 'open with" and used Internet explorer and the excel plug in. It worked beautifully. There was a macro warning i had because of strong security settings but I closed the warning and that tiny box that was open over the spreadsheet and cured that. whatever it was.
 
A W Smith said:
Couple of points gravy

You caution participants not to read the threads but so far I'm finding some nuggets in some threads that I would not have otherwise opened due to the thread title, so far out of the 84 threads Ive browsed through i have selected 18. so percent wise I'm just a bit over the target for 20%, yes its more work to read them but when i find three or so excellent posts in a thread over 5 pages in the first 2 pages I enter the thread. I have three questionable so far. and a nomination single post. perhaps some of my thread selections can be whittled down to the single significant posts but that would shoot up my percentage. But I understand you be cutting them down anyway. ok so im reading every thread. so kill me:) .
Click to expand...
To be clear, I cautioned people not to read every thread, or every post in the threads they do read. I renew that caution.

I trust your judgment, but if you're actually reading every thread because you think it might have a shot at getting in (as opposed to out of your own curiosity), you're wasting a lot of your time. Again, threads about truther (or debunker) personalities, truther events, and joke or mocking threads (along with the miscellaneous unrelated threads that pop up) won't make the cut. Those comprise a large percentage of the whole. I'll give you an idea of my thought process and method for the 20 threads I listed in my OP.

The first 13 threads below I excluded by reading their titles. So right there I've eliminated the majority. I may want to read some of them out of personal interest, but they simply aren't making the cut for this project. Remember that this is primarily for best threads, not best posts. The content of the last four in this group wouldn't be self-evident to most people, so I'd expect them to at least click on the thread to check.

LC Questions JREF credentials
Was Jack Bauer the real mastermind behind Charles Logan?
PrisonPlanet vs Weekly World News: An objective comparison
Hay guyz, did u know that JREF is a "Government Loyalist Site"?
James Fetzer - Past Stroke Victim?
[Thread closed technical problem] 'Proof' of Time Travel
When the Truth Movement Comes for You
The American Truth Bad Writing Contest
Massive Truther Rally 9/11/07 in New York

I have a new theory as to what destroyed the Twin Towers...
Pilots for Truth: "You don't have to be a pilot to be a pilot"
The Madison event
What is the greatest CT Forum Thread ever, ever?


The next three I checked out and excluded in about 10 seconds each.
The CT mindset and wasted youth
Question for Mark and Others
Question for those who live in NYC area


Two of the ones below took perhaps two minutes each to decide on, and the others took about 30 seconds. The first I rejected and the other four I accepted.
New PFT 3D animation depicts actual FDR values
peer review.
[Merged] Was Hani Hanjour really inexperienced?
Intel doctored Al-Quada videos/images (to some anyway
What is the truther understanding of Radical Islam?


the excel right side problem

yes I had the same thing happen and it was unmanageable. what I did instead was select the dropdown 'open with" and used Internet explorer and the excel plug in. It worked beautifully. There was a macro warning i had because of strong security settings but I closed the warning and that tiny box that was open over the spreadsheet and cured that. whatever it was.
Click to expand...
Smart! I'll include that advice in my instructions to new volunteers.
 
Gravy said:
I couldn't think of a way to assign categories to people, since some categories will contain vastly more threads, and work, than others. Assigning categories within a page range would work, if we had many more volunteers than the 16, including me, that we've got.
Click to expand...
I'm not suggesting that there's a better way to do it, I'm just pointing out the problem.

I've been erring on the side of inclusion for that reason, anything superfluous you can cull. (You should have my .xls file by now.)
 
Gravy said:
Originally Posted by participant
regarding the index...

I have found a few, very long threads. For instance, one... that lasted 59 pages. Now it has been hellish going through it, but there are a lot of good posts from a point, counter point pov. The thread relates to WTC7 (at least the first 8 pages does).

What to do about such a thread...no great compilations of debunking data...no single phenomenal post, but overall I think the thread has merit, if for nothing more, then to see how the topic is covered...

Just wondering how you saw such threads going...it is what you wanted for the index, or should it be left for the archive alone??
Click to expand...


These are the toughest questions (and bless your heart for wading through all that). How about listing, in the column to the right of the links column, the pages or page ranges that you think people should focus on? If you don't think that will make it much easier for people to follow, then the thread probably isn't worth including.
Click to expand...


Another option is to use the "good post" column. Select a few of the best posts, and save the link to that post. Group them all together, so it makes sense, and people can jump into the thread at whichever post seems most appropriate to their interests.
 
Horatius said:
Another option is to use the "good post" column. Select a few of the best posts, and save the link to that post. Group them all together, so it makes sense, and people can jump into the thread at whichever post seems most appropriate to their interests.
Click to expand...
That's a good idea. I can note on the finished list that links marked with a P may indicate the start of a good discussion.

I'll be out until this evening.
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
Thanks! I think you will be done by then, but I haven't set a deadline. As I mentioned above, one participant finished his page in half a day (I don't know how long that took, and he may have been stricter than necessary). I was guessing this would be 4 hours of work for an average page or 6 hours for one with more long or complex threads.
Click to expand...



..and he might have benefited from having a day off for Canadian Thanksgiving. :)


The second page is taking longer, and also producing better results, so I guess I just lucked into a mostly content-free page at first!
 
Noting that the goal of this project is the "best of the best" has helped me tremendously. It should be much easier now.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
Noting that the goal of this project is the "best of the best" has helped me tremendously. It should be much easier now.

TAM:)
Click to expand...
Great. So all my posts are excluded right off the bat. Thanks for nothing!
 
A W Smith said:
Couple of points gravy

You caution participants not to read the threads but so far I'm finding some nuggets in some threads that I would not have otherwise opened due to the thread title, so far out of the 84 threads Ive browsed through i have selected 18. so percent wise I'm just a bit over the target for 20%, yes its more work to read them but when i find three or so excellent posts in a thread over 5 pages in the first 2 pages I enter the thread. I have three questionable so far. and a nomination single post. perhaps some of my thread selections can be whittled down to the single significant posts but that would shoot up my percentage. But I understand you be cutting them down anyway. ok so im reading every thread. so kill me:) .
Click to expand...

I've eliminated a few threads from consideration just because I feel it isn't worth wading through miles of sewage just to find a few nuggets of wisdom. For instance, one of Max Photon's threads had one or two posts of good information hid within 10 pages of garbage. I decided last night not to include it on the list because the overall worth of the thread was below the standard I was imposing.

ETA: JUst in case anyone is curious, it was this thread. Thermite Was Placed in Box-Columns and Spandrel Gaps to Heat-Weaken WTC Steel
 
Last edited:
MJD1982's endless thread "Conspiracy Facts" (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84473) was on my page. I did not include it in the index thinking it was a (very large) pointless waste of time that no one really needs to be exposed to.

In fairness to a very large (and popular) thread if anyone can find a redeeming quality to that thread I will reconsider. (personally I think it should be buried and the shovel thrown away)

DGM
 
Last edited:
T.A.M. said:
Noting that the goal of this project is the "best of the best" has helped me tremendously. It should be much easier now.

TAM:)
Click to expand...
Actually, that's not what I had in mind, so sorry if I was unclear. There's a column on the spreadsheet to enter an asterisk to denote threads that you think really stand out above the others you've selected for inclusion. Those threads could be considered "The best of the best."

Other than that, we're looking to separate the wheat from the chaff by finding good threads that new shed light on their topics. That doesn't mean the threads have to blow you away with their excellence. It means they have to contain a decent number of solid, well-presented posts that add to the discussion (sometimes a single reply does it). It is important to me that people be able to follow the progression of discussions and be exposed to a variety of viewpoints and research methods, and only including the ne plus ultra threads won't allow that.

I received a finished page today with seven recommended threads. One was marked as questionable, and I agreed that it shouldn't be included. So that's six out of 250. That struck me as extremely low, so I checked out the page and found quite a few more that I would have (and have) included. So far, three of my additions have been in category 22, concerning psychology, logic, debate methods, bias, etc.; and four have concerned other conspiracy theories that truthers raise: OKC, Federal Reserve, etc.

Again, if in doubt, be inclusive. ETA: because it's much easier for me to delete an entry that I think is redundant or unsuitable than to look through 250 threads for what I think may have been missed.

I just received a finished page with 37 recommendations, which is about what I guessed people would be submitting. But it's true that some pages have much more fluff than others.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom