Is this the chemtrails forum?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

[Ohio Joe]

1. I expect this is the place for chemtrails

The new home for all things CT.

[freshwest]

2. I'm not sure. Read this snippet from the Terms of Service:

"...Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.

Democratic Underground is not intended to be a platform for kooks and crackpots peddling paranoid fantasies with little or no basis in fact. To accomodate our more imaginative members we tolerate some limited discussion of so-called "conspiracy theories" under the following circumstances:

First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like).

In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism, and Democratic Underground has zero tolerance for bigoted hate speech..."

[Ohio Joe]

3. I had not seen that... or missed it

This forum will have Hosts just like every other one, it will be interesting to see where they make the cut-off line based on the TOS, the Group Purpose and who the group community decides to make Hosts. We are being given a lot of freedom here on DU3 and I would expect the final limit line to be drawn at the selected Hosts line.

Select well CS Group and you will have the group you want.

[zappaman]

4. Huh

Does this mean no more posts on chemtrails?
At least I see no mention of the moon hoax so I'm keeping my fingers crossed that we will get to keep those discussions...

[freshwest]

5. Pointless speculation on my part.

Last edited Thu Dec 8, 2011, 05:26 PM - Edit history (1)

[Ohio Joe]

6. No, it does not

This is the group creative speculation should be posted in. My interpratation of the TOS is that if it was alloed on DU2 in the 9/11 forum, it will be allowed here... And perhaps even other topics. There will be a line though and exactly where that line will fall would require... Some creative speculation on my part that is beyond my ability

The Hosts that the group community decides to put in place will be the ones who determine that line.

[freshwest]

8. Video must be a problem.

Last edited Thu Dec 8, 2011, 05:21 PM - Edit history (1)

[greyl]

9. Re the video: Yep, it's there.

Only the "&feature=channel_video_title" wasn't translated. I think vids being allowed everywhere is one of the new DU3 features, though.

Can you try something? Go into edit your post and change the height="315" to something like height="20" and see what happens.

[freshwest]

10. Thanks, but my browser doesn't give me full options. I can't reduce the size.

Last edited Thu Dec 8, 2011, 05:23 PM - Edit history (1)

[greyl]

12. You can safely disregard what I said. :)

I was thinking the link you posted included the height and width of the video before it was translated by the forum. The video wasn't too big at all, typical smallish size.

edit: Iow, I was thinking the height could be changed to only show the play controls, hiding the actual video portion.

[Bolo Boffin]

7. Sticky wicket.

First, you're right, I think, about chemtrails specifically. If 20% of the threads in this forum were chemtrail-related, we'd have a problem. Every once in a while? One or two might form in the atmosphere.

HA! That's a joke there, son. Maybe you should be writin' these down.

However, creative speculation as to the motives behind ANY poster here are best left to the alert functions and the Malicious Intruder Removal Team! MIRT for short.

OK, even I creeped out writing that. All kidding aside, anyone who feels compelled to talk about WHY someone is posting here should do so through the alert system, not publicly. Good faith is not just to be assumed, it is to be acted upon.

[greyl]

11. The way I read the TOS, chemtrail and black helicopter stuff are not permitted at all.

By name, even.

[Bolo Boffin]

13. "those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland"

First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like).

None of it is permitted in heavily-trafficked forums, and they "cannot stray too far into Crazyland." That to me says that the subjects are not forbidden, but that they can't become a recognizable focus of the group. From that, I'd say that threads can't be started in those subjects, but if the subject occasionally come up in a thread now and then, it's not a lockable issue. All of this would be at the discretion of hosts.

[greyl]

14. Since "eg" means example, I take those to be examples of "too far into crazyland."

So, where those "limited discussion(s) of so-called "conspiracy theories"" are allowed, like in here, they "cannot include chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like."

That's how I read it.

(Quoted bits are directly from the TOS, bolding mine)

[dixiegrrrrl]

15. Bilderberg group and Trilateral Commission are real organizations covered by MSM, for god's sake!

To lump them in with Bigfoot is not appropriate.

Interestingly, one CAN post about members of the groups in other forums with no problem.

[freshwest]

16. I just quoted, I didn't make the rules. I edited out my own opinions.

I don't know if this board is going to allow discussions of that. For example, a thread on 'holograms' was locked, but the poster later said in the Lounge that she was joking.

I would like to discuss all things wacky and weird, especially anything to shine some sunlight on things that effect the world. But I don't know what this board will choose. It's been confusing to me, so I'm not sure this board will allow my interests.

[Bolo Boffin]

17. If they are discussed as what they really are, then they could be brought up all over DU, I'd think.

If they're considered the center of the century-longs quest of the Knights Templar to take over the world and/or code for the Jooooooos, then no. It's the second usage admins are talking about, I believe.

[greyl]

18. "as what they really are" That's where I'm afraid it might get sticky.

Not sticky as in pinned, sticky as in pissing people off and maybe appearing to be unfair. Including amongst the group hosts.

There is huge disagreement on "what things really are" on just about every subject, after all. The nature of reality itself has been heatedly debated since 5 minutes after the dawn of consciousness and communication.

By what measure does this group want to judge "what things really are?", and how will that be evenhandedly enforced?

(forgive me for just throwing out some thoughts here - I'm interested in everyone's opinion on this)

[dixiegrrrrl]

19. When the REAL DU3 starts, this should be a VERY interesting group, then.

Perhaps more interesting than the old Dungeon, since we will have a range of views, and it will be the hosts who decide, not Admin.
Come to think of it, that might "free up" quite a few forums, don't you think?

[Remember Me]

36. I had the same response when I read that

Ridiculous -- and ill-informed.

[defendandprotect]

21. Chemtrails as "crazyland" --- ???

Administrators are seriously under informed !!

First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like).





ROFL

[Bolo Boffin]

22. But there it is.

And that's the Terms of Service agreement you signed to start posting on DU3, not the Statement of Purpose description for this group. The Statement of Purpose we can probably change. The Terms of Service will probably be a lot harder.

[greyl]

24. You say "Chemtrails are not speculation." I guess they don't belong in this group then. ;) nt

[defendandprotect]

26. True -- chemtrails are acknowledged by Congress --

can be plainly seen in our skies with just brief observation --

and more than one network has pointed the chemical "fall out" which

reaches the ground, naturally -- in discussions about them --


It's been an ongoing program for probably 20 years and its international.

It's been related to "weather modification" connected to Global Warming.

No one know what the chemicals actually are -- all of them -- or what they

are actually being used for.

[Remember Me]

35. You know, I was thinking about this the other day as I looked out my window

I've been real reluctant to get into the whole "chemtrails" thing.

But it could not be denied: there yet again were those contrails that don't go away criss-crossing the sky overhead, and beginning to spread out as they do.

CONTRAILS don't do that. Period. I'd like for someone who doesen't believe in contrails to explain to me why contrails would (1) not disperse and (2) spread out until the sky is overcast?

I should've taken a picture.

[Bolo Boffin]

37. Unfortunately, defendandprotect no longer has posting privileges here at DU.

His insistence on discussing chemtrails was given as the reason. You can check out his transparency page.

[Remember Me]

38. Oh, that sounds like a threat

Or, perhaps, merely a warning.

Is my understanding accurate?

Fine, I'll won't mention the term again.

[Bolo Boffin]

39. It's not a threat.

I was as surprised as anyone else. Defend was here a long time. The admins are very serious about this, evidently.

[dixiegrrrrl]

40. "those are not the chemtrails you were looking for"

( waves hand languidly)

[Remember Me]

41. ?????

Not sure I understand your comment.

[dixiegrrrrl]

42. Play on words, if you are a Star Wars fan.

[Remember Me]

43. Oh, well I guess I'm not ENOUGH of one.

That's okay.

[dixiegrrrrl]

45. Oh lord, I must have gone to the first Star Wars over 20 times.

It was back in 1977, I was still in college, it became almost an obsession, never got tire of it.
That and Rocky Horror Midnight showing.

[Capn Sunshine]

46. These are not the DU you are looking for

[RZM]

44. +1

Clever

[napoleon_in_rags]

20. It should be. If its going to be in "offbeat" and be called "creative speculation"....

...we should damn well be able to talk about chemtrails and aliens. I for one love aliens.

I think they should have called it "politically unacceptable discourse." Conspiracy people would have loved the Orwellian sound of that.

[greyl]

25. My reading of the TOS would allow aliens, but not alien abduction or chemtrails. nt

[defendandprotect]

28. The TOS needs some updating --

If it's an indication of what the administratiors know now about these

subjects, they also need updating --

[greyl]

29. If you feel that way, why did you agree to it? nt

[defendandprotect]

27. "Politically unacceptable discourse" -- !!

Heavy on the "Orwellian" lately here -- !!

ROFL

[zappaman]

30. Heavy on the WOO as well!

ROFL

[napoleon_in_rags]

32. The world is getting heavy on the WOO stuff. I read conspiracy stuff to relax, escape.

Then when I want to get paranoid and freaked out, I go to find out what the latest scientific advances are, or I turn on the news.

[Merlot]

33. Me too: "I read conspiracy stuff to relax, escape"

Nothing like a good conspiracy theory. I actually think we can learn a lot from looking at these theories - where they come from, what seeds of truth they spring from, what makes people believe them. I also think it's a good idea to question the given, which is what conspiracy theories do.

Doesn't mean I believe them.

[napoleon_in_rags]

34. Same here.

I saw this good series, called "Prophets of SciFi", I think on the science channel. IT goes over how so many wacky ideas SciFi authors dreamed up have come to some kind of fruition. You've heard the old saying: "Life Imitates Art"? I think there is a lot of truth in that, more than most people know. So conspiracy stories, even when they are just stories, can get at certain truths. Also, perhaps more important, they can shape social truths, like propaganda is designed to do, but unwittingly.

Societies rise and fall based on the stories they believe in. Some time ago I was studying Soviet propaganda. It revolved largely around this fat, cigar smoking character in a top hat, 'the capitalist', who was the source of oppression for the people, and through his designs held them down from achieving the communist state. This created a short term common enemy facilitating social cohesion, but ultimately set in the people's minds the idea that communism was the natural state, just waiting to break out if this guy got out of the way. In retrospect, I can see how this weakened the communist cause, because in the end, there is no "the capitalist"...Capitalism is an emergent system, like a life form, that grows in certain conditions, decentralized in many facets. It was the communists who depended on centralized control by powerful soviets and individuals who chaired them. So in the end, while their stories addressed very real inequalities that emerge in capitalist systems, they were divorced from reality in their belief it was caused by a few malicious individuals, and that divorce from reality ultimately lead to their demise.

I bring all this up because I see the same trends largely playing out in the conspiracy scene. They address all these real evils, these real threats, but then the faces of this malicious elite are pasted on, like "the capitalist". But what I fear are not some evil malicious few, what I fear is a new kind of emergent entity, larger than any of us, who's designs are accomplished through the summation of our small, individual, and seemingly rational actions. (Check out my new cell phone! What tracking device!)

In other words what I fear most is not a conspiracy of them, but a conspiracy of us.

[napoleon_in_rags]

31. What, its a direct labeling of what it is.

Like the TOS says, there's certain ideas that they don't want put in the main forums, because they are so outside the mainstream that having them popping up would... mis-characterize the site as something other than a mainstream political forum. But the thing is, there is a pretty small window of politically acceptable mainstream discourse. So after a thing becomes too rote, the rebellion against it becomes very appealing. Look at the history channel, the HISTORY channel, totally devoted to aliens and the Bermuda triangle - alternative history stuff. Why? Because of rebellion from the main stream telling history that itself seemed inconsistent. Its like Fox, the news channel with the most viewers, routinely bashes the "main stream" media. There's this general appeal to being outside the box now days.

So that's all I'm saying, the best way to label a conspiracy forum is to say its too outside the box, unacceptable, extreme...nay: XTREME! Dark secrets of history! etc. The reason why is that this "fringe" stuff is getting more mainstream than the mainstream, might as well celebrate it when you see it!