Suggestion Conspiracy forum

[Nekodaiden]

the idea that our health and our environment's health is improved by eating less meat is widely accepted now. No longer a minority viewpoint.

we ethically motivated vegans never needed anyone telling us that livestock is mistreated. you just needed to drive by a stockyard or a dairy. The thing that started me on my vegan journey was an article I read in the local paper about the conditions of cows on a local dairy farm. So I give credit to mainstream media for that.

anyone who can think for themselves can be skeptical of marketing and advertising. No theories are necessary for that.

the skyrocketing sales of plant-based food also show how acceptable and mainstream we are.

It is not widely accepted or practiced. It may be getting more "mainstream" coverage, however the majority of people still eat meat, dairy, eggs or other animal derived products.

But even if it were mainstream, this in itself does not make it true. Your argument rests on a logical fallacy known as Argumentum ad Populum or appeal to the masses. Vegans aren't in the majority, and even if they were, that in itself is not a valid reason for adopting it.

I'm glad you agree that "anyone who can think for themselves can be skeptical of marketing and advertising. No theories are necessary for that"

...except that you do not seem to agree that various viewpoints on various topics are exactly that - marketing and advertising of ideas on topics such as 911, moon landings, NASA "photography", and yes - even what we eat (government subsidies, government promotion of animal products, government laws against filming in slaughterhouses, government dietary guidelines).

 

[Sax]

If you don't want to read a user's posts just scroll past or use the ignore function.

 

[shyvas]

Think of it as a "smoking section". You don't stop people from smoking, but if they chose to do so, they have to engage in that behavior separately from others.

This.

 

[Nekodaiden]

Think of it as a "smoking section". You don't stop people from smoking, but if they chose to do so, they have to engage in that behavior separately from others.

A)Amount of scientific, peer reviewed, etc studies on tobacco harm: tons

B) Amount of scientific, peer reviewed, etc studies on Novel (new) Covid-19? 0

C)Amount of media hype on novel covid-19: tons

D) Evidence of conflicting information contradicting mass media - present.

E) Evidence of foreknowledge of this "event" before it happened? - present.

Your comparison is far from being even remotely relevant. It's just you, and people like you, blindly believing C.

 

[beancounter]

A)Amount of scientific, peer reviewed, etc studies on tobacco harm: tons

B) Amount of scientific, peer reviewed, etc studies on Novel (new) Covid-19? 0

C)Amount of media hype on novel covid-19: tons

D) Evidence of conflicting information contradicting mass media - present.

E) Evidence of foreknowledge of this "event" before it happened? - present.

Your comparison is far from being even remotely relevant. It's just you, and people like you, blindly believing C.

My analogy was relevant. It compared an isolated space for CT with an isolated space for smoking. That is, an area to contain undesirable behaviors.

The analogy had nothing to do with comparing the specific content of the CT with smoking.

 

[Nekodaiden]

My analogy was relevant. It compared an isolated space for CT with an isolated space for smoking. That is, an area to contain undesirable behaviors.

The analogy had nothing to do with comparing the specific content of the CT with smoking.

If you haven't noticed, so called "conspiracy theorists" are all over the place, especially on the net, where their voice can be heard and (often) without the threat of being trashed by the corporate media. If it's such an "undesirable behavior" (how is having beliefs contrary to mainstream opinions a behavior anyway?) then it wouldn't be so prevalent.

You started this thread right after I posted 2 links (which, btw, can be verified, so they are not "theory") because you disapproved.

Stop wasting moderators time by trying to make this forum part of your safe space. You and others who advocate for "idea approval" on topics not related to the theme of this forum. Frankly, it's childish behavior and a form of bullying by calling in mods to moderate what doesn't need to be moderated. If people don't like the content of a poster, they can ignore or pass over posts, especially when such posts do not violate the theme of this forum.

 

[Freesia]

Tbh... I have not trusted the main stream media for a long time. There have been too many instances where they have lied in a bare faced way. We just had a right wing prime minister for 9 years and the media in New Zealand basically worked for him as a propaganda machine, it was terrible...

We have an odd situation now in New Zealand where overnight we have lost 3 magazines which may have a few alternative journalists working for them... They were mainstream magazines enough but for unknown reasons they are now gone... This loss of magazine media makes me suspicious.

So over the last 9 years I have developed a mistrust of media, and politicians too. I see so much corruption.. I know many don't agree with me though.

 

[TofuRobot]

I’m with @Nekodaiden in those one. This is a bad idea. It puts anyone with a different from mainstream ideas into an automatic “tinfoil hat” box. I might also point out that not all theories are false, conspiracy or otherwise. And who, here, gets to be the judge of what’s supposed to be in this tinfoil hat box you’ve created?
I’m sure some of my positions on things might be dismissed by some as “conspiracy theory,” but it doesn’t make me or those theories wrong, so I won’t be utilizing this space for those discussions, or any other ideas or questions that may or may not be right or wrong.

if someone wants to discuss a particular topic, classified or not by anyone as “conspiracy,” I would want them to simply make a post with that title and let people comment on that.

 

[TofuRobot]

Well if a post is in (or was moved) to the CT thread, people will know to view it with an abundance of skepticism.

And I’ll ask again, who gets to play judge and jury for that decision? If that’s the way things are going to go here, well, I would no longer feel this was the safe place it’s been for me for the last 2 (?) years. I would not feel comfortable anymore.

 

[beancounter]

And I’ll ask again, who gets to play judge and jury for that decision? If that’s the way things are going to go here, well, I would no longer feel this was the place it’s been for me for the last 2 (?) years.

The mods and admin would make those decisions.

 

[TofuRobot]

Stop wasting moderators time by trying to make this forum part of your safe space. You and others who advocate for "idea approval" on topics not related to the theme of this forum. Frankly, it's childish behavior and a form of bullying by calling in mods to moderate what doesn't need to be moderated. If people don't like the content of a poster, they can ignore or pass over posts, especially when such posts do not violate the theme of this forum.

THIS.

 

[beancounter]

Stop wasting moderators time by trying to make this forum part of your safe space.

You are twisting definitions...

A safe space is where alternative opinions are banned.

I am not advocating the banning of speech. In fact, I explicitly stated that everyone should be able to say what they want, short of advocating violence against others.

I am advocating that certain speech have it's own special area on the forum.

 

[Second Summer]

MOD POST
I've been trying to catch up with this thread for a while, but it's been fast moving, and my available time is limited. I've now locked the thread, because I think the various points have been made by now, and further discussion doesn't seem like it will be very fruitful. Thank you for all constructive contributions.

Basically, no, I don't think making a special forum for conspiracy theories would be helpful. As @TofuRobot just pointed out, who has the right to decide a topic should fall into the CT category? The mods? We're not really experts on that sort of thing, and it would just create more work for us, and probably end up hurting some poor poster's feelings in the process. I also feel like we have more than enough forums already, so I don't particularly want to add another one.

This is what I will do:

• If there are posts that might be considered harmful because they contain dangerous misinformation (conspiracy theory or otherwise), then I will consider deleting them. Please report any such posts if you come across them.
• If there are posts that are taking the discussion off-topic, which sometimes happens when CTs enter into the discussion, I will split that to a new thread.

I'm also very seriously considering adding a 'disagree' and/or similar reaction buttons, so we can note our disagreement/unhappiness with a post without derailing the discussion.