Something needs to be done about the conspiracy theories forum

Yep. The quality of "theories" has gone off a cliff.

I remember when people used to dig and try to find evidence to actually support their "theory".

Now they just say its a fact and if you question it further its an "attack".

The forum is fine. The "conspiracies" need to improve to any decent standard.

Ahh that is not true

3 years before you signed up I was already discussing 9/11 I believe I was pretty detailed and did all I could to answer questions

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2056830161/building-7-the-saga-continues#latest

Because it used to be about fun stuff like Bigfoot or the grassy knoll but now most supposed theories are known to be BS by the OP and are designed to push a political agenda around things like vaccines

Didn't realise that the Kennedy assassination was something that was typically filed under "fun stuff".

Yep this desire to amend the charter to allow BS to go unchallenged is blatant.

If its a theory there'll be actual evidence of some kind. If not then just find an echo chamber where you wont be asked a question.

So there are nonsense CTs and real CTs and we should ignore the fake ones? But how do we know which ones are fake, and which are real? And why should one be ignored and the other afforded credibility?

I think that question was poorly constructed and served to push your own agenda and were I to address it in any detail I would be wasting everybody's time here.

Personally I feel (and I have outlined this in detail previously on this thread) that a more structured format for posting new threads would be extremely beneficial and would remove a lot of the chaff that makes up a lot of the forum content at the moment.

I also feel that an updated charter that puts respect of users if not their opinion front and centre thus removing a lot of the condescension and grandstanding that makes the forum so inhospitable would be a radical and welcome departure for the forum.

So far you have spoken about how unreasonable you find a lot of users of the forum to be. We then find that you were given carte Blanche by a previous moderator to set ground rules that suited you. This married to the fact that my own personal interactions with you I have found you to be curt, condescending, and openly rude makes me reassess your motivations for wanting the status quo to remain in place.

Some people here have mentioned that pro conspiracy users want a safe space for their views, which is a daft idea and shouldn't be entertained. What the forum is right now is a safe space for you and other like minded users to not only question other people's beliefs (perfectly fine by the way) but to be abusive to them as well.

A middle ground needs to be found where all stakeholders take responsibility for themselves within a much more robust framework.

Right now the forum suits you, when it needs to be fair to everyone.

Nope I posted the charter ... And then you come up with that nonsensical post .... Read things first , I have been spoon feeding you information the whole evening and you still don't get it

Fine, that's your personal opinion. My question still stands, and is completely relevant.

Your question is redundant and only exists for your own gratification.

I put forward a framework that puts responsibility on the shoulders of anyone posting a new topic on the CT forum to provide at least some evidence for what they're saying. That should be music to your ears Dohnjoe, but did you bother to read it? Or do you just enjoy talking down your nose to people you don't agree with?

The status quo isn't equitable and you're not pushing that "answer my stupid question or else" BS with me. You argue in bad faith on a consistent basis. You are suggesting no improvements could possibly be made, I wonder why?

Not only in his opinion

Any update on the previous charter being a temporary one ?

So rather than hold a community standard of posting a CT with a cogent basis and some form of supporting evidence?

People should know what's true and what's not.

It's not down to posters to debunk CTs or ask for evidence in an effort to act as guardians.

But...

It is up to the mods to act as guardians and decide what's appropriate? Can mods expect to have the CTs evidenced then? Or do they just protect the CT posters from having to actually evidence their position whilst ensuring every debunker outlines and cites their evidence?

Surely then the best way to ensure mods aren't overloaded cleaning nonsense from the forum is to accept a minimum posting standard that includes an OP evidencing their position?