Something needs to be done about the conspiracy theories forum

You do realise a theory is reliant upon supporting evidence? It is a developed hypothesis with evidence and some supporting pillars.

What you seem to think a Theory is? Is not.

It's part of the problem, people keep using the word theory to describe half baked, unsupported and unevidenced hypothesis.

Then a cohort of that same group want to seek to shift the burden of proof, from them supporting and evidencing their hypothesis. To those who'd debunk them, yet debunkers or Skeptics must present evidence.

In the words of Christopher Hitchens, "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence"

It is a principle of discussion and debate that an onus and burden of proof lies with the person putting forward a claim.

Yes, most children are smarter than the adults i've seen post absolute drivel all over social media claiming it to be true.

It's not the children you should be concerned about.

The butchered meaning of the word "Theory" in this thread is indeed quite remarkable.

So akin to fairy tales then?

There was a time when conspiracy theories were somewhat different to fairy tales and fiction.

Would you prefer the area be renamed "fairytales & fiction" then? No one would ask for evidence and people could witter away unchallenged.

You don't demonstrate anything. You ask questions. Hence why we are here.

This "feedback" thread is literally a carbon copy of every thread in the conspiracy forum. The same few leftover because everyone else has grown tired and weary of the same droning repetition (and no it's not because they refuse to answer questions and are running away)

I think a lot of the examples used by people who don’t like conspiracies are some of the more wild and out there examples, like “why shouldn’t we question someone who claims the space program isn’t real or they are using 5G vaccines to turn us into lizard people” and while you do occasionally get some of that out there stuff on the forum it usually doesn’t get very far because no one wants to discuss this ridiculous stuff.

From what I see it’s the conspiracy which have more grounding in reality that are the ones which get shut down immediately with the bad faith 20 questions game. Someone will say they are worried about a global reset for example and then that person will be shouted down and mocked mercilessly.

Heres an example:

Poster 1: I think there’s a chance they are using the pandemic to accelerate a great reset, here’s some examples from the WEF website where they say they want to get rid of cars and private property.

Poster 2: We’ll what evidence do you have for your claims, because it’s on their website doesn’t mean anything, that’s very silly of you.

Poster 3: What justification would Klaus Schwab have to do any of this?

Poster 1: Probably so the rich can get richer and steal wealth from the lower classes while making us easier to control.

Poster 2: Well give me a source where he claims he wants to take your wealth oh you can’t ? You are spreading misinformation.

Poster 3: What’s so wrong with a great reset anyway it’s a great idea, give me a full in depth analysis of the 200 page book the great reset otherwise you are just spreading lies.

it doesn’t matter how many questions poster 1 responds to they’ll just be bombarded with 3 more until they give up and the discussion is stifled.

It would seem the poster that started the thread now wants the forum shut down. That the 2 posters who suggested what may well be a workable solution that both manages the burden of proof, and places it squarely on the claimant are being actively ignored and every post that brings it up is too.

There is zero valid reason to afford the posting of unevidenced theory, unless we are to afford CTrs the position of a religion? Where we accept the claims of Virgin birth and miracles and so as a part and parcel of posting in Christianity or similar fora.

Does a Conspiracy Theory deserve the protected status of religion? If it does, doesn't that just perpetuate the dogmatic BS positions that are taken in an effort to avoid evidencing the CT?

I proposed the template and also gave a breakdown of why the charter as it exists isn't equitable.

It seems to me that there are two camps here, one that wants the charter to change and one that wants it to remain the same. The charter as it exists now is not equitable but what is being proposed is also not equitable.

You all need to put your big boy pants on and learn to compromise with each other.

This may come as a shock to some of you Conspiracy theories forum regulars, but that forum is a horrible mess.

Change is required. People putting theories forward need to be more rigorous in their approach to discussing said theories, but the free reign others have to be condescending arse's needs to be addressed also.

The fact that nobody can even visualize a middle ground is the biggest worry.

You say it's not equitable. What improvement in equity will arise from returning to a charter that allows an OP to make unevidenced claims and to expect that any effort at debunking must present refuting evidence?

An OPs claim or theory should be evidenced, either by your template suggestion or as a default requirement. Without that, why should anyone engage in actual discussion or indeed bear a burden of proof in refutation?

Of course it is a mess .... the skeptic cohort has had free reign since 2019 Its at the same state now as it was prior to the 2015 charter change

Each side has equal right to make their case. It doesn't get more equitable than that. I think it's quite telling that the CT-ers are blaming everyone else for something that's very often caused by the poor quality of their own output. If they want to be taken seriously, they should try arguing seriously.

Exactly. "The Great Reset" isn't a plan - it's a title.