rigorousintuition.ca

I left RI for a bit, 'cause I decided this is not a conspiracy forum. The problem is that posters raise a lot of issues that fall into this realm and then I get roped into CT discussions... I'm finding it very difficult to determine where people draw the line. Perhaps I'm too touchy but I feel I've been attacked numerous times for raising "verboten" issues... It seems to me that a conspiracy forum should allow the posting of of virtually anything (except for perhaps hate speech and things of that ilk) and through the discussion people can determine for themselves if they want to give any credence to a subject.

I plan to actually stay away from "conspiracy stuff" as much as possible. But I'm sick of trying to censor myself. I'm going to go back to posting more freely, and if that leads to my eventually banning, then I'll totally accept that.

I do consider myself to be a conspiracy theorist by the way, and I think there are quite a few genuine conspiracy theorists on this forum also... I'm just voicing my thoughts on perceiving that I've been personally attacked numerous times. Anyway, as I said I plan to actually try and stay away from CT material. Sometimes I post things somewhat leisurely. I think my standard is just what I find interesting, and that doesn't seem to be good enough for a lot of RIers.

p.s. This is not a provocation, I don't intend to start a bunch of crap with this. This is just something that's been on my mind that I want to get out to the community.

Don't stay away from CT, post more of it. The folks who don't like it will voice their opinions because that's just the way it is, but don't let that stop you from voicing your own.

I don't post much anymore because I'm more of a nuts and bolts conspiracist and there is no longer a lot of interest here in these types of discussions. That's how the conspiracy crumbles, I guess.

I don't know, Montag. Although I don't always agree with your point of view* (given sufficient time, I won't always agree with my own points of view!), I think you are an important voice.

Personally, I like having you here. Please don't be discouraged.

_________
*But a lot of times I do! I always consider it though.

Post freely, but remember that responses that apply rigor or diligence to a sketchy argument are not necessarily attacks. Remember as well that some songs began long ago and will never end... so often there'll be a 'not this shit AGAIN' aspect to responding posts.

The few subjects which are "verboten" here are spelled out very clearly in the posting guidelines. Any other problems you might have regarding the defense of your positions just might be intrinsic to those positions. It happens. Not all conspiracy theories are created equal.

As an aside, "conspiracy theorist" is not a political position, though some people seem to feel that way.

If it's any consolation, Montag...and it's almost definitely not...I have read your post twice and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

barracuda wrote:The few subjects which are "verboten" here are spelled out very clearly in the posting guidelines. Any other problems you might have regarding the defense of your positions just might be intrinsic to those positions. It happens. Not all conspiracy theories are created equal.

As an aside, "conspiracy theorist" is not a political position, though some people seem to feel that way.

Not a political position but certainly a (skeptical) position from which to view politics and this is a good thing, as far as I am concerned.

Wombaticus Rex wrote:If it's any consolation, Montag...and it's almost definitely not...I have read your post twice and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

I know Montag can speak for himself but I think he's upset because people were dissing his defense of Wayne Madsen? I imagine it felt like people were dismissing HIM as a credible person.

Wombaticus Rex wrote:If it's any consolation, Montag...and it's almost definitely not...I have read your post twice and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

See? This is why we can't have nice things, such as a server and database that satisfactorily perform the functions of hurting our feelings from time to time. I've come to recognize that this is one of the negatives about this dump. As if a dump needed anymore negatives as it was.

I understand what you're saying Montag and appreciate your presence.

Ok good,
Those are mostly positive responses... Perhaps I have reacted poorly to somethings that I kind of dreamed up myself. I'll read over more closely in the future people's responses. I think I do have a tendency to skim things and interpret negatively certain people's comments at times.

sunny wrote:

barracuda wrote:As an aside, "conspiracy theorist" is not a political position, though some people seem to feel that way.

Not a political position but certainly a (skeptical) position from which to view politics and this is a good thing, as far as I am concerned.

Agreed in spirit, but by the letter I guess it would depend upon the meaning and context of the term "conspiracy theorist". It's a pretty vague notion, overall.

It's not an agreement forum, it's a discussion forum. If your ideas can't take a challenge, why bother presenting them?

You might consider doing a search on the subject you're about to post to read what (if anything) has already been discussed here to avoid the

'not this shit AGAIN' aspect to responding posts.

that norton just mentioned.

The last thing I'd want is for this forum to become a place where anyone can post anything. It's ok to be selective, Nature does it.

Rigorous is the first word in the name, Intuition is the second. That's how I keep it straight.

annie aronburg wrote:It's not an agreement forum, it's a discussion forum. If your ideas can't take a challenge, why bother presenting them?

You might consider doing a search on the subject you're about to post to read what (if anything) has already been discussed here to avoid the

'not this shit AGAIN' aspect to responding posts.

that norton just mentioned.

The last thing I'd want is for this forum to become a place where anyone can post anything. It's ok to be selective, Nature does it.

Rigorous is the first word in the name, Intuition is the second. That's how I keep it straight.

Yet, in many ways this is an "agreement" forum. It's small enough that we recognize one another and we stick to the "charter" of RI so to speak. This place spares no room for a fascist. I come here to be away from the LULZ, PWN3D, tin foil accusations and more for the "family" atmosphere. I don't know why I think that. Perhaps it's that the agents have gotten that good at emulating people I don't know yet am able to trust them all the same. I will say this place has its dicks and it has its bitches and all of them lovable in their own unique ways. I come here to see Nordic get pissed, MinM to bump a thread, justdrew to have a friendly interesting comment, to see barracuda release some of his snark, for Jeff to finally toss up there a "new blog post" thread, to see Twyla's tits, Montag's big fish -- you name it. Yes, shit is discussed here and shit is agreed on too, at the end of the day though it is only an Internet board where a lot of borderline neurotic people tend to look out for the feelings of the other members -- as it should be. As they say in the south of France, "No gran cosa".

Just stay within the bounds of what is acceptable, hospitable and safe for other members and allz good.

Just stay within the bounds of what is acceptable, hospitable and safe for other members and allz good.

I agree. Which is why I didn't posit the theory that Jenny McCarthy's kid's autism might have been caused by all the old man semen his mom swallowed, because that would be being a dick.

norton ash wrote:

Just stay within the bounds of what is acceptable, hospitable and safe for other members and allz good.

I agree. Which is why I didn't posit the theory that Jenny McCarthy's kid's autism might have been caused by all the old man semen his mom swallowed, because that would be being a dick.

I'm flagging this and sending it down the chain of command.

Montag, you didn't have it any where near as bad as this fellow:

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=24976&p=283084&hilit=multiple+orgasm#p283084

I second Annie's stance.

Anyone who proposes becoming overly concerned with the "feelings" of anonymous user names in a forum as heavily trolled and gamed as RI is opening himself up to a world of hurt. I advise rather employing a set of good boundaries, them sending out the love within those.