Something needs to be done about the conspiracy theories forum

I'm not interested in the topic here at all.

What does interest me is seeing YOU indulging in a spot of moral grandstanding when you made accusations against me, that were utterly without foundation, I called you out on it and made a point of making sure it was clear that you were utterly wrong in what you said and that you were demonstrably incapable of practicing what you preach (basic written comprehension being one of the more pointed issues), and guess what? You went missing from the thread for a week, never addressing my last reply to you.

This type of posting shows precisely that there are problems aplenty from both sides of the aisle on the CT forum, intellectual dishonesty being an issue for both groups. This is relevant to this thread because it shows, yet again, that the issues in the CT forum are not concentrated in one camp.

You're free to air your suspicions and I can appreciate where you are coming from.

I'm an infrequent poster in the CT forum, and yes I did have a spat with you and Kingmob last year, which whilst we are on the topic of intellectual dishonesty was based on you describing another user as a holocaust denier (go big or go home with the labels you apply to your enemies would seem to be the order of the day in the CT forum) when they were (from memory) talking about the other victims of the Nazis as being recognized as part of the holocaust which to your and Kingmob's mind was akin to stating that holocaust never happened. It was an example of how skeptics pile onto a poster and beat them into submission, which to my mind is not a noble cause and in that particular case was based in what any rational person would describe as an extremely dishonest position.

I did post in the CT forum a long time ago and gave it a miss for the most part because of the behavior described by other people on this thread. I feel the CT forum should not revert to a prior charter but begin again with a focus on reigning in the behaviour of poster such as yourself as it makes the forum an insufferable mess.

My motivations for being on this thread are not based in personal grudges (sorry to burst your bubble on that one) but rather to see that forum FINALLY be run correctly. The template idea adds a reasonable set of constraints to the CT side and a new charter should /would stop the piling on that gets carried out by the skeptics. Both sides need to change, and to be frank the whole forum needs to grow up and cop on.

Thanks for the openness

The poster you are referring to openly admitted (on previous occasions with different iterations of their username) their belief that the Jews exaggerated the Holocaust and that only 1 or 2 million died. On any forum, anywhere, that is classed as Holocaust denial, and will usually result in a ban. On the CT forum, that debate continued, for years, with the user continually modifying the numbers but using the same denial techniques. You just jumped in at (much) later stage in that whole debate and judged it based on your perceptions at the time. And a spat ensued. Not going to get into that.

Back on the subject, and to repeat, the template idea is decent, why do you think there has been zero uptake by any of the conspiracy-minded posters? (for use of a better phrase)

Why do you think they don't want to say what the conspiracy is or give any evidence for it in any sort of template? how do you think that relates to intellectual dishonesty?

You made a number of statements about the intelligence of other people and myself.

I was incredibly polite in how I dealt with you. You should give it a go sometime.

Sly digs?

You openly stated that I was incapable of reading at a basic level as well as calling a group of people stupid.

I have been polite and respectful to someone who does not deserve to be treated with respect and that's somehow landing "sly digs"?

My reply to you last week was openly scathing, because your post deserved that. You engaged in that behavior and I defended myself and showed you to be a hypocrite. Beyond that my language and tone were respectful. I don't engage in that way unless provoked, and you provoked me. If you have a problem with that then look at how the situation deteriorated, I'll give you a clue, you were responsible.

And the standard of posting from skeptics is supposedly beyond reproach?

You offered a solution of a template, one side/group/whatever is willing to try it, then other seems to have flatly rejected it. Yet you are criticising the "side" that is willing to try it.

You bring up "respect", indeed there are issues on both sides, there are mods on the forum for civil behaviour, cards are handed out. Yet with this you are again singling out one side for personally apportioned blame.

In fact a constant theme in your posts in here is you seem to have reserved most, if not all of your criticism, for "the skeptics". Okay, as an infrequent poster on that forum, these are your subjective personal opinions.

Am willing to try the template (I've filled it out myself with a conspiracy, didn't seem too much of an issue). Am willing to try better rules on civility, stronger mod rules to tone down the insults, etc. What other solutions are you proposing?

We have had contributions to this thread from Beasty who has commented on the issue of the behavior of skeptics and it would indicate that there is room for improvement.

The reason I am focusing on the behavior of skeptics is because a lot of threads descend into a group of skeptics piling on to a CT believer making lists of demands. Part of the logic behind the template was to remove the scope for a lot of this type of posting.

What other solutions am I proposing? Beyond the only rational a workable solution presented in a thread with over a thousand posts? Easy, people being more civil with one another, and yes that means you as much as anyone else.

You asked why the CT side were so reticent to take up the template idea, I told you in plain language that it's down to the skeptics not being willing to change. You said the moderation was sufficient, evidently it is currently leaving a reasonable amount to be desired (hence this thread existing) and you are unwilling to give the other side any ground at all.

Until you begin to treat the CT people with a basic level of respect you can expect these issues to continue to be raised, you can't see people as "stupid" and in need of correction and nothing else. You wouldn't speak to them like that in person I'd assume, so why is it acceptable here?

Cool.

Why did you claim that I was falsely accusing him of being a holocaust denier a few posts ago?

Why did you claim that he was "talking about the other victims of the Nazis as being recognized as part of the holocaust" when this never happened?

My memory of the thread isn't optimal.

My reason for joining that thread was that at the point that I joined, that appeared to be the case.

I'd really have to go back and read it again to be 100% clear on it, but I have never claimed to be infallible, but I did subject the poster in question to my own questioning and distanced myself from holocaust denial all the way through it.

I was characterised as "defending a holocaust denier" on this thread and that isn't accurate either.

that is what you did. you jumped in feet first and lashed out because you didnt understand what was going on. What was that about "go big or go home"?

that still doesn't explain you jumping into threads and lashing out without an understanding of what is going on. You talk about standards in posting in relation to others but you need to take a look in the mirror.

I jumped in, defended the poster in question and then questioned the poster in question and told them I didn't agree with them.

What else could I have done differently?

I'm light of the fact that I was labeled as defending a holocaust denier, when I told them in that thread that I didn't agree with them it would appear that more than one party is capable of getting hold of the wrong end of the stick.