Something needs to be done about the conspiracy theories forum

There's no false sincerity and indeed the framing of the template was presented by shock horror! A member of the "other" side.

The bad faith arguing, is from those seeking to obtain the position of protected speech for Unevidenced CT and who seek not only that privilege but to also ensure that any rebuttal of an unevidenced CT is rebutted with evidence.

Not how discussion and debate works.

This cartoon captures the very essence of what's wrong with the conspiracy forum. Somehow I don't think certain posters here will get it.

Relax ? You are spouting this accusation or hinting to it in different threads

Another example below from the CT forum

It's glaringly obvious you want special treatment for conspiracy theories to facilitate your fringe views and shield them from normal scrutiny (as is the case on normal forums)Like I said, you wouldn't pull this **** on any history forum, making a sub-forum with "special rules" specifically to facilitate deniers.

So I ask again .. Where was I looking for special rules or special treatment for my fringe views and where did I want to have the forum rules changed to benefit me?

People have every right to post any conspiracy theory to the forum and other posters have every right to question those.

Times have changed, conspiracy theories have gotten a little more serious, a lot of pandemic theories, theories on the US election, Qanon, medical disinfo, etc - these should not be placed in a special protective bubble where they can't be challenged properly.

There's a lot of nitpicking and tribalism going on here, but no one is really addressing the key points

This is a bit ridiculous really.

A poster posts a 'theory' (vaccine and magneticism with accompanying video), and another poster responds with a pretty detailed explanation of why the theory (or video at least) is very very unlikely to be true, because the apparently magnetised coins could not be magentised considering what they are made of.

We've got posters on here saying they're happy to discuss, debate, whatever, but your response to this is along the lines of 'why would you bother with an explanation'.

If that is the kind of interaction you think is a problem with the forum, then this is the very definition of wanting to be able to post something without anybody coming aloing to question/disprove it. It's absurd.

If someone makes a claim, especially an extraordinary one, it's only natural that others may want to question it

Would you favour a charter where your views weren't challenged?

What would you like to see in the charter?

It certainly does. There's only one thing funnier than that cartoon and that is how the very perpetrators of the technique think that we don't see it

"I'm just asking questions!!!" Lol!

Asking questions is the start of a counter argument, If you make a claim then surely I can ask questions as to why you believe your CT is true and why the evidence you have posted should be taken seriously?

As with the magnetic vaccine thread, the OP was asked questions about his theory, we had everything from nano robots to microchips thrown into the vaccine and he was adamant that the video was real.

Once I proved (by way of counter argument) that there was no way the video was real the OP dropped the subject and ran away, never posting there again.

If the video hadn't been proven to be a hoax then it would have left anyone in doubt about vaccines believing that they would somehow become magnetic.

This kind of CT needs to be questioned vigorously and debunked and if you don't see that then there really is no hope for the CT forum.

And should the same cards, warnings, bans be handed out to the CT people who post fake CT "facts"? Should the "bad faith" posters on that side not also get punished for refusing to explain thier CT?

The vast bulk of theories on that forum in the last year have been along the lines of, e.g. Covid isn't real, it isn't serious, masks don't work, vaccines don't work, etc. Do you think views like that need an echo chamber? Why?

Fully agreed. And I suspect some posters only want a charter change for personal reasons, but don't think of the wider implications

No ones theories or opinions are banned. But some people want to change the charter so that their opinions or theories can't be challenged normally.

That is what all this is about. There's quite a bit of bitterness and rancour here because some of us internet masochists have long histories with each other, and some just want a charter change out of sheer spite, whatever.

There has to be a solid reason for it, and certainly not some cheap stop-gap to try to curb the "squabbling".

No to the last question because a positive duty to give an account of yourself according to someone else's definition of evidence on demand isn't reasonable. How can any theory be fleshed out as long as posters are being mobbed by trolls anyway?

Fake/misleading non-"facts" can be exposed without mobbing, spamming, laundry lists of questions, demands for book-length summaries etc., etc. interspersed with insults (both 'sides' are guilty of this though in fairness), claims that non-answers to highly specific and idiosyncratic queries posed by posters who have hijacked a thread equal a refusal to participate at all, recommendations to seek medical treatment for paranoid delusions/schizophrenia/hallucinations/general mental illness etc.