Something needs to be done about the conspiracy theories forum

Someone posted the image of seal lioning and then all the conspiracy theorists suddenly jumped on it saying that’s the issue. Not one thought of mentioning it beforehand, so it’s obviously a clutch at straws job to try and make the 2015 charter seem good. However, when challenged no benefits of the 2015 charter over 2019 can be found.

No man. Go look yourself.

You dodged the point originally. You go back and find them to address them.

I asked you address them repeatedly.

If people are trolling then report them. You're just looking for an excuse to turn it into a safe space.

You want an echo chamber where any wild claims can be posted without being questioned lol.

"Sealioning", love it.

Great to be able to dismiss queries under a specific term to suggest someone is trolling.

Plenty of politician potential in here.

But the charter doesn't mention Sea-Lioning (assuming the screenshot I've posted below is the version you're referring to). It mentions demanding proof, it says nothing about requesting evidence, or asking questions for clarification. In fact, the charter goes on to outline the kind of debate that is acceptable:

However, to arrive at a place where DH4 - DH6 can be used, questions may need to be asked, or the OP may be requested for background of how the conclusion was arrived at in order that a counter-argument may be formulated. None of this is prohibited by the 2015 Charter as far as I can see. In fact, I think I could live with it if it was made clear that the first paragraph below refers to demands "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" and not requests for evidence. A forum isn't a court of law, after all.

No we all know "sealioning" is the buzzword you to try and disable discussion.

It didnt work last time you tried it either.

I do need to answer. Asking someone to explain what the confusing and convoluted block they posted means is not wrong. Asking questions is not a counter argument and no one but conspiracy theorists claim it is. It’s trying to get information relevant to make sense and see if there is really any truth in what the truthers say.

This very page of posts we're on is dedicated to finding a post of questions one particular poster made a few pages back in the thread. If you can't even keep track of your own posts they why do you expect anyone else to?

This is the whole problem with the conspiracy forum, it's been turned into the fkn document control section of the civil service. It's like watching a bunch of doc clerks scrambling around looking for a photocopy of someone's birth cert so they can apply for a passport.

I'm outta here, so long!

And after all the talk of the 2015 charter, it doesn't even mention Sealioning, or even asking questions at all, never mind repeated, persistent and unnecessary questions, which seems to me to be what the term actually means, after looking at definitions from a number of sources. It was interesting to see that link-dumping and video-dumping are prohibited too. I was wondering why the original screenshot from the charter was so small and selective...

Not sure if this is a bit or not.

But no, that isn't the point I was asking you to address. Though that one did take 2 or 3 goes for you to answer.

So again to make things very clear:

I am asking you to comment on the issues I pointed out about your suggestion.

Namely I feel your template is too long demands too much off the bat and would be off putting to conspiracy theorists. Do you think this would be the case?

I also believe that the vast majority of conspiracy theories would not actually be able to answer most of the questions in the first place even if their proponents wanted to. Do you think this is the case?

I also point out that this information if lacking in the op could easily be obtained in a natural discussion by asking.

I think the fact you know that this is a problem is not because of the questions or who's asking. It's because conspiracy theorists just don't want to answer those questions.

I also point out that if such a template was enforced that it should be made clear that not all threads would be required to use this format.

And in general I've asked how you guys what would and wouldn't be a valid conspiracy theory. Never got an answer for that.if a conspiracy theory isn't able to answer all of the points in your template does that mean it's an invalid conspiracy? If so does that mean that I can't be posted? Is it just rejected out of hand and the discussion is not allowed to occur? Should it be allowed under the assumption that it is just makey uppy?

Now I know this is a lot of questions and you'll be tempted to just pluck one or two out to answer. Please don't do that. Just answer them all directly the first and there won't be any need to go back and chase you down on them. If you can't answer them or just plain don't want to, please just say that and explain why. Don't just ignore them.

My issue there though is that if conspiracy theorists are able to just ignore or skip any of the points they don't feel like answering, it makes the template a bit redundant.

Are you thinking that conspiracy theorists have to address and respond to all of the points before they post?

And what do you believe should happen if all the points are just ignored or the answer is just "I don't know" to all of them? Should that post be deleted or should the post be allowed and people shouldn't respond to it or...?

It must be said, you might get further if you didn't have 5/6 questions in every post. Just pick the important one.

The main peroblem is the dump and run tactic. Dump a link to some crap conspiracy waffle and then vanish for days. That needs to be banned. Grow some balls FFS.