Something needs to be done about the conspiracy theories forum

Obviously it extends to the other side of the argument. Those people are rightly belittled regularly by society. However their posting history on the site tends to be short-lived. They come on thinking every current affair is a conspiracy, blather on a bit and then probably slither off to whatever Facebook group keeps them up at night. These types of people are well known worldwide.

Its the other group that's far more interesting. What exactly do they get out of it? I can understand being knowledgeable about a topic such as JFK for instance or a socially important topic like climate change and arguing your point as a once off etc. I don't really understand spending years going on disproving every single crackpot who comes to the site about every single theory they have, while contributing nothing elsewhere.

Its easy to look through posters histories. There was a thread dragged up from 2011 last week and it was the same people disproving the weird theories as it is in 2021. I looked into the forum about a year ago and it was basically one poster who seemed too far gone in the CT direction, and basically 5 people arguing the other side with him. Over and over again in every thread

Like CT's aren't a big issue in Ireland. 95% vaccine take-up, the highest in Europe, is surely testament to that. Why the need to so veciferiously and regularly disprove points, 95% of which don't even occur here. To protect the reputation of the CIA or George Bush or the Catholic Church? Im trying to figure out why it's such a hobby for some

The issue here is that no one demands proof in the first place.

Conspiracy theorists are conflating requests for evidence (especially for specific claims they make) and questions such as "why do you believe this" as "demands for proof."

Do you think it's reasonable to ask for evidence if a conspiracy theorist makes a claim of fact? Is the question "why do you believe" unfair?

Should these things be disallowed from the forum?

But it's cool for people to look back into people's posting history to make comments about their mental health apparently.

If that happened, in the manner you describe? I'd advise you to start a separate Help Desk thread to seek an appropriate resolution.

If it is similar to your claim that within minutes of opening a thread that you discussed Easter being Anti-Semitic that you had 3 mods threatening closure?

It might well be more a case of recollections varying? Because in that instance, your claim bore no relation to what actually occured.

If there is indeed substance to your claim that you were treated in the manner you say? Report it, open a help desk thread and get it dealt with appropriately. Which will be quite easy because luckily, as you said. It's all on record, and rather than anyone needing to be careful, you can expose the issue and the mod who did that to you and get it dealt with appropriately.

Anyone going to any forum and making an extraordinary claim is likely to receive questions on it. If the user evades and dodges reasonable questions but continues to post it's likely questions will continue to be asked. The issue is not the questions, it's the user evading them.

This happens a lot on the conspiracy forum where the most elementary questions are avoided from the outset, you can easily see this for yourself or countless examples can be provided

In reality, the crux is that most of these conspiracies are ill-thought out and baseless, and basic questions expose this very quickly, therefore the proponents naturally resort to dodging the questions rather than admit that their beliefs are baseless. It's not rocket science, everyone knows this, including the conspiracy believers. It will pretty much always be the case for the majority of topics on the conspiracy forum

One way to potentially bridge the gap would be to have some sort of template outlining what the conspiracy is, some details, evidence, etc, but there doesn't seem to be any uptake on the conspiracy side for that

The poster suggested to you that questioning is not attacking and that discussions require two (or more) people in order for it to, in fact, be a discussion.

You described this as creepy. Did you quote the wrong post? I've read over the post you quoted multiple times and your response just makes no sense.

Can I ask you to explain what part is creepy?

Not only this, but I think it's worth re-iterating that noone is asking CTr's to prove their theories.

Evidence is not proof, it is information of a multitude of types that can definitive, circumstantial or inferential. It is information that can be open to interpretation.

What I do think is important for any poster on any forum is that where they seek to rely on evidence, or make a claim that presupposes the quality or validity of a claim resting on evidence?

That the OP includes it, and lays out what their inference and understanding of said evidence is.

Hi, Sorry to repeat a question, but you seem to have missed the one I asked.

I asked:

Could you answer this question?

Or if you aren't going to do so, could you explain why?

Ah yes, now I remember his previous username 🤣🤣🤣

Same....they just can't help themselves using the same silly phrases 🤣

The comic strip is completely inaccurate in the context here. As there is no other fall back available you are resorting to using it out of context. It really is simpler to answer questions then to try to think of excuses not to.

Ok cool. You're just ignoring questions then.

Any questions you believe are too difficult or expose your position's failings is "sealioning".

However, the point remains for other people to see.

You claimed that "CTs have changed. They are no longer daft ideas". However, I pointed out a recent example of a conspiracy theory that most people would classify as daft.

I think you realise it is indeed one of the ones you'd classify as daft. However you don't want to admit this as it would undermine your point.

Markus's theory that all space missions are faked is an example that disproves your assertion that conspiracy theories have changed and are more plausible. They are as equally as plausible as they've always been.

Also, there seems to be a very strange taboo among conspiracy theorists about commenting on each other's conspiracy theories.

It's really odd that conspiracy theorists don't actually want to discuss conspiracy theories beyond the ones they buy into.

It's really odd that conspiracy theorists don't actually want to discuss conspiracy theories beyond the ones they buy into.

You know what I think is even odder tbh. The number and volume of CTr's that are serial re-reggers.

I honestly can only think of 1 whom has rage quit a few times but never sought to obscure their prior accounts and indeed chose their usernames as a variation of their previous ones.

On this thread, there a few re-regs who are railing against the charter. 1 of whom has made serious accusations amounting to abuse by a mod if true. Yet none seem to want to discuss their past and in the case of 1, has even gone so far as to try to lock down their posting history lest it be reviewed?

Think about that, posting on a public forum and complaining when their posts are queried?

It's almost as if they are ashamed of what they posted? Or that they know it's incoherent and indefensible.

At least there's a teensy bit of credit for just admitting he's ignoring questions and points rather than pretending otherwise.