pheony wrote:
He gave his reason on the forum pheo, he said he'd decided there was nothing much to this conspiracy stuff other than plain old human stupidity and decided to leave it at that.
Its all there if you want to go have a look.

sanctumzone.co.uk/forum/Members-Chat-Are...-to-say-goodbye.html

^ 'i dont believe in this conspiracy stuff anymore'.

he went into that a bit more in some other posts but you get the jist.

Maybe the posts discussing moderation could be split into a separate thread?

I feel unhappy that the news thread which I took an interest in recently was clearly trolled - personal attacks from Guevarista, and antagonism generally and 'tactics', which made me stop posting on there even though there's tons of new stuff come to light on the topic, and I believe it to be a hugely important subject.

It's not about agreement - as stated in the thread, I'd be pleased to have my suspicions proven wrong on the matter in question. DM, for eg. actually posted at some length disagreeing with my own point of view. But because it was done in a perfectly logical, non-antagonistic way, it was very helpful in aiding evaluation of the points.

Thanks to the energy draining BS from others, I now know this isn't the place to come for serious debate, as some people are out to hinder it. That's spoilt the atmosphere of SZ place for me to some extent, and I'm angry about it.

Gilly wrote:
I don't notice it much tbh, I put up with far far worse on DIF.

andyh wrote:
Well good for you - and DIF's got nowt to do with it!

Gilly wrote:
lol... well true this is SZ

Gilly wrote:
If someone else could I'm intermittently posting between single-handedly nursing a snotty n snoozy baby and keeping her elder sister entertained and preparing for a massage!

I've been thinking about this one too for slightly different reasons. Perhaps we need distinctive Todays News info and Todays News discussion sub-forums. The first just as a thread for collating facts(as much as we can verify them!) and the other as more of a Comments and Speculation thread. That way if people don't want to get into the whys n wherefores and general conspiracy chat and just want to report the facts of the case, they can. Those that want to get into the whys n wherefores and general conspiracy chat also can.

That would be good if the people who 'don't believe in conspiracies' aren't allowed to troll the discussion.

It's one thing contributing to debating a point, but if people come in trying to ridicule you for not accepting the official story (especially people who squeak, wimpishly, about having been spoken down to in the past, then after being lavished with copious amounts of moral support, attempt to do that very same thing to others) and saying things like, "It's disrespectful to question", I'll be verbally head-butting shills folk, making a dramatic exit and seeking pastures new!

*Edit* And while my soap box is out, I'll just add that judging by the PM's I got, plenty of other people did notice it and weren't happy - but not everybody chooses to confront it. That doesn't mean it doesn't spoil things for them too.

Didn't realise you felt so strongly about this Gilly.

I, personally, don't want to let a certain couple of posters on here ruin it for everyone else.

Gilly wrote:
The ongoing problem with that is who calls shill? I read most of Gues posts in that thread as playing devils advocate, even if in a more provocative manner than may have been necessary/fit for that thread, you see it as shilling.

oioioi wrote:
Really Oi? The ones with the Benny Hill clip, and enquiring about mine & Nosey's husbands - stating he's trying to save my marriage? He's worried because myself & Phem wrote long posts? Devil's advocate my arse. Troll! Do you want me to go & copy those posts so we can dissect them?

And when there are pages of posts by various members devoted purely to feeling they have to defend themselves for examining a subject at all, instead of being able to devote that time & effort to examining the subject - which there are - something's not right!

Plus post after post after post where people objecting to it being discussed, are patently not making any attempt to read, let alone answer the many salient points that have already been raised, yet are determined to hinder any progress - classic disruption tactics!

I've had a character transplant. Mod me up and I will single handedly whip the arses of all transgressors with no reference to the community. Dub down moderation. Starting with myself of course...which may cause a slight problem for my ability to mod the arse off everyone else.

Gilly wrote:
No need to C&P, I believe you but mostly avoided that thread (although the Benny Hill reference has me curious!) for various reasons and just popped in and out of it so may have missed bits. The point still remains even if you do/had drawn my attention to it the community then needs to decide what happens (unless I missed a rule in my modified mod rule book) in such instances.

Gilly wrote:
Well this would be easier covered with my Todays News splitting suggestion.
And you could almost be talking about RA's recent posts!

Well I'd personally just call them out on it and then constantly repost my most salient point and/or question to them until they showed a willingness to engage.

Gilly wrote:

oioioi wrote:
I agree.

And yes, how perceptive of you , but RA's not alone.
oioioi wrote:
Exactly, so that their purpose is achieved in talking incessantly in circles, & making little, if any, progress.

I think the splitting idea is good.

Today's News

Conspiracy News

or something similar

Gilly wrote:
They'd be talking pretty much to themselves, I'd be spamming them with the same pertinent question they keep swerving. But yes, things need to move on a bit here to the 'next phase', whatever that may be. I feel the fallout from the last upheaval has pretty much settled now and it's been refreshing the last couple of days to see certain posters seemingly taking some notice of criticisms aimed at them.

I'm optimistic but would be a little less so if you didn't stick around.

I'm taking that last sentence as a compliment, so thank you (and Mikey too).

I'm in no hurry to leave, but it's just that if folk did continue to frustrate attempts at debate, I know I'd just be feeling mad all the time, which then makes it pointless coming.

But yep, I like your suggestion, and it's a step forwards, which is always a good thing.

I appreciate the skepticism of people like dogsmilk (one of the best posters of this or any other forum I have been a member of) but I also agree that skepticism should be aimed at rational debate and not merely mocking.

I think DM posts very rational arguments personally.

Others not so much.