+ Reply to Thread
Page 19 of 21 FirstFirst 1 9 19 21 LastLast
Results 361 to 380 of 420

Thread: The 'censorship' discussion

  1. Link to Post #361
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,436
    Thanks
    8,494
    Thanked 9,727 times in 1,384 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Jayke (here)

    For the record, there was a study published by Rachel Wyman Phd, Kings College University, London, called ‘America’s Political Paradigm Shift’. The study verified what the Q supporters have been saying since before the fires broke out.

    As Rachel Wyman states on page 248 of that paper, Qanons method “trains users to engage in self-directed research based on comparison. Research methods which promote critical comparison work to counteract the effects of totalitarian programming.”



    Interesting paper coming from a prestigious university. Why would we not want more people of Rachel Wymans calibre posting on Avalon?
    Jayke, Rachel Wyman is only a student at the University and this is only a student paper submitted there, not work that the faculty or university research staff produced. You can also see from the last three sentences of the page above, Ms. Wyman is far from being the non-partisan observer of sociological phenomena.

    If you want to defer to academia, and academic credentials, you would probably find that in the liberally biased world of academia, the vast majority of the papers submitted that refer to the Q phenomena will connect it to populism and make comparison to the rise of Fascism in Europe in the 1920's.

    A friend of mine, who's views I disagree with, a University Professor, received a grant from the Mellon Foundation to study "the surge of right-wing populism across the globe" and how it conflicts the the values of neo-Liberalism, which (their definition) "favors free-market capitalism." I am sure if he were aware of the Q threads on Avalon, and if he could access them, he would make use of them to make his case that those of us who are for Brexit, or aren't beating our chests because Hillary didn't win, are all part of some irrational, intolerant, hyper-emotional movement opposing the "enlightened values" of multinational corporations, banking conglomerates and the military-industrial-pharma complex.

    And he's not the only one, there are many more academics doing similar research, thanks to the "generous" funding of organizations like Mellon . I am glad the Q-thread is members only and out of view of those academic "researchers" who want to characterize those of us against globalism and corporatism and associate us with a faith-based system of thinking based on cryptic 8chan messages generated by people within the deep state intelligence system.
    Last edited by Kryztian; 7th January 2020 at 20:39. Reason: editing error as pointed out by Running Deer

  2. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), BMJ (10th January 2020), ClearWater (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Jayke (7th January 2020), onawah (7th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  3. Link to Post #362
    United States Avalon Member RunningDeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2012
    Location
    Forest Dweller
    Posts
    13,390
    Thanks
    99,268
    Thanked 113,950 times in 13,133 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    I am glad this thread is members only and out of view of those academic "researchers" who want to characterize those of us against globalism and corporatism and associate us with a faith-based system of thinking based on cryptic 8chan messages generated by people within the deep state intelligence system.
    Quick FYI: Kryztian, this is a public thread.

  4. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to RunningDeer For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), BMJ (10th January 2020), edina (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Jayke (7th January 2020), Kryztian (7th January 2020), Sadieblue (8th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020), Victoria (8th January 2020)

  5. Link to Post #363
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,436
    Thanks
    8,494
    Thanked 9,727 times in 1,384 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by RunningDeer (here)
    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    I am glad this thread is members only and out of view of those academic "researchers" who want to characterize those of us against globalism and corporatism and associate us with a faith-based system of thinking based on cryptic 8chan messages generated by people within the deep state intelligence system.
    Quick FYI: Kryztian, this is a public thread.
    Thank you for that correction RunningDeer. It's nice to know there are careful readers like you out there.

    I mispoke . I meant to refer to the Q-thread, not this one. (I will edit above to make that clear).
    Last edited by Kryztian; 7th January 2020 at 20:41.

  6. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), BMJ (10th January 2020), edina (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Jayke (7th January 2020), RunningDeer (7th January 2020), Sadieblue (8th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  7. Link to Post #364
    United States Avalon Member RunningDeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2012
    Location
    Forest Dweller
    Posts
    13,390
    Thanks
    99,268
    Thanked 113,950 times in 13,133 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Jayke (here)
    For the record, there was a study published by Rachel Wyman Phd, Kings College University, London, called ‘America’s Political Paradigm Shift’. The study verified what the Q supporters have been saying since before the fires broke out.
    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Jayke, Rachel Wyman is only a student at the University and this is only a student paper submitted there, not work that the faculty or university research staff produced. You can also see from the last three sentences of the page above, Ms. Wyman is far from being the non-partisan observer of sociological phenomena.
    PDF downloads of Rachel Wyman, Ph.D. papers, talks, and teaching documents.

    Rachel Wyman is a former student. She attended King’s College for five years: 1/10/2014 - 1/10/2019. This fits a normal timeline when one goes full time for a BS(or BA)+PhD. Ms. Wyman’s Doctoral Thesis was on October 1, 2019




    Last edited by RunningDeer; 7th January 2020 at 22:24.

  8. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to RunningDeer For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), BMJ (10th January 2020), edina (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Jayke (7th January 2020), justntime2learn (7th January 2020), Sadieblue (8th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Star Mariner (8th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  9. Link to Post #365
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th February 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    8,406
    Thanked 5,668 times in 934 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Jayke, Rachel Wyman is only a student at the University and this is only a student paper submitted there, not work that the faculty or university research staff produced. You can also see from the last three sentences of the page above, Ms. Wyman is far from being the non-partisan observer of sociological phenomena.

    If you want to defer to academia, and academic credentials, you would probably find that in the liberally biased world of academia, the vast majority of the papers submitted that refer to the Q phenomena will connect it to populism and make comparison to the rise of Fascism in Europe in the 1920's.

    A friend of mine, who's views I disagree with, a University Professor, received a grant from the Mellon Foundation to study "the surge of right-wing populism across the globe" and how it conflicts the the values of neo-Liberalism, which (their definition) "favors free-market capitalism." I am sure if he were aware of the Q threads on Avalon, and if he could access them, he would make use of them to make his case that those of us who are for Brexit, or aren't beating our chests because Hillary didn't win, are all part of some irrational, intolerant, hyper-emotional movement opposing the "enlightened values" of multinational corporations, banking conglomerates and the military-industrial-pharma complex.

    And he's not the only one, there are many more academics doing similar research, thanks to the "generous" funding of organizations like Mellon . I am glad this thread is members only and out of view of those academic "researchers" who want to characterize those of us against globalism and corporatism and associate us with a faith-based system of thinking based on cryptic 8chan messages generated by people within the deep state intelligence system.
    Your friend and Dr Wyman might have left vs right hemisphere dominance in terms of how they process the world, but it seems they’d both agree on the fact there is a paradigm shift taking place. Dr Wyman might see the paradigm shift as something beneficial to the world, whereas your friend might see it as though the sky is falling on the current neo-liberal paradigm that’s been status quo in the West for a while now.

    Although if Neoliberalism truly meant “free market capitalism” then populists wouldn’t have a problem with it. Pretty sure both sides of the aisle want to be free from the protectionist schemes the globalists use to manipulate the markets in their favour.

    Personally, I’d enjoy having Dr Wyman and your friend on board, and as long as they presented evidence to back up their claims and assertions, I’d take everything both of them said into consideration.

    Both sides agree there is a paradigm shift taking place. What I’d like to see more of is an exploration of what that new paradigm might look like? An exploration of this new paradigm that’s mature enough to see through the fears and anxieties that cause people to conflate a populist paradigm with the old national-socialists of Hitler or religious fundamentalists of whatever faith-based system of thinking is in vogue right now.

    2020 is going to be a time to build. A time of education instead of condemnation. Identity politics is meaningless to those busy working to build a brighter future. I’m still waiting patiently for the bridge to be built and everyone in the West can start working together peacefully again. Probably be another 50 years before that happens though, it’s going to be a long ride

  10. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Jayke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), BMJ (10th January 2020), ClearWater (7th January 2020), edina (7th January 2020), Franny (8th January 2020), Keyholder (7th January 2020), Kryztian (7th January 2020), Mark/Rahkyt (8th January 2020), RunningDeer (8th January 2020), Sadieblue (8th January 2020), Sammy (8th January 2020), Star Mariner (8th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  11. Link to Post #366
    Avalon Member justntime2learn's Avatar
    Join Date
    22nd April 2014
    Posts
    1,384
    Thanks
    45,031
    Thanked 8,701 times in 1,340 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Thank you Paula.

    Perhaps some need to be patient with others learning curve?
    “To develop a complete mind: Study the art of science; study the science of art. Learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else” – Leonardo Da Vinci

  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to justntime2learn For This Post:

    BMJ (10th January 2020), edina (8th January 2020), Jayke (8th January 2020), RunningDeer (8th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  13. Link to Post #367
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,436
    Thanks
    8,494
    Thanked 9,727 times in 1,384 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Jayke (here)
    Your friend and Dr Wyman ... both agree on the fact there is a paradigm shift taking place.
    If Rachel Wyman sees a positive paradigm shift in Q-anon, then my liberal academic friends would also see positive paradigm shift in the anti-racist and anti-fascist groups that are springing up, and also possibly in the pro-science movements the advocate mandatory vaccination.

    Quote Although if Neoliberalism truly meant “free market capitalism” then populists wouldn’t have a problem with it.
    That's the Mellon institutes definition I was quoting. For me, "neo", either liberal or conservative, means pro-war, pro-corporation.

    Quote Personally, I’d enjoy having Dr Wyman and your friend on board, and as long as they presented evidence to back up their claims and assertions,
    Personally, I would loathe having any academics here. They would only be interested in observing us, as entomologists might observe the mating habits of Madagascaran cockroaches in a terrarium of their laboratory.

    A positive paradigm is more likely to occur when we stop thinking of our political and media figures like Marvel Comics superheroes and supervillains and realize that they are just meaningless shadow puppets fashioned with Janus faces, so some of us will love them and some loathe them, and then we will all begin to bicker senselessly as to who is good and evil. If we wanted to find real heroic acts that lead to a better world, we would find it in the ordinary people around us who act kindly, intelligently and with integrity in the world, and that evil, emanates from some dark mysterious place, but can be found by reading in between the lines in both popular media information sources (e.g. main stream media including both left and right news outlets) and in occult source too (e.g. Deep State propaganda posts left on 8chan and other places).

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    BMJ (10th January 2020), Jayke (8th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  15. Link to Post #368
    United States Avalon Member RunningDeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2012
    Location
    Forest Dweller
    Posts
    13,390
    Thanks
    99,268
    Thanked 113,950 times in 13,133 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by justntime2learn (here)
    Thank you Paula.

    Perhaps some need to be patient with others learning curve?
    Yes, Chuck. In the mean time, how about simply skipping the thread.

  16. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to RunningDeer For This Post:

    BMJ (10th January 2020), edina (8th January 2020), Jayke (8th January 2020), justntime2learn (8th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Sammy (8th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  17. Link to Post #369
    United States Avalon Member RunningDeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2012
    Location
    Forest Dweller
    Posts
    13,390
    Thanks
    99,268
    Thanked 113,950 times in 13,133 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Personally, I would loathe having any academics here.
    FFT: They may already be here. Maybe even before you arrived? Many of the posts blow my mind. There are lot of bright folks. It wouldn't surprise me that they choose the academic route.
    Last edited by RunningDeer; 8th January 2020 at 21:06.

  18. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to RunningDeer For This Post:

    BMJ (10th January 2020), ClearWater (8th January 2020), edina (8th January 2020), Jayke (8th January 2020), justntime2learn (8th January 2020), Kryztian (8th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Sammy (8th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  19. Link to Post #370
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,436
    Thanks
    8,494
    Thanked 9,727 times in 1,384 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by RunningDeer (here)
    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Personally, I would loathe having any academics here.
    FFT: They may already be here. Maybe even before you arrived? Many of the posts at Avalon blow my mind. A lot of bright folks. Some are bound to have gone the academic route.
    No, you are not off topic. Your comments are spot on and I should be more clear about "academics." I am not trying to be anti-intellectual, just anti-elitist. I just notice that among so many academics I have met, there is a tendency to see their own political views as the product of reason and enlightenment, and the opposing views as the products of sociological neglect: "They are the products of poverty" or "they didn't get a good education" or "they are missing cultural stimulation" etc. etc. If they teach psychology, then they associate certain personality disorders with various members of one political party. Good parenting and mental hygene will lead you to join their party instead. If they have a political opinion it is the product of all the philosophy books they've read. If you have a differing opinion, it is the product of your social circumstances, your brain chemistry, etc.

    There are probably a lot of academics that aren't like I describe them. I don't know them. But, I do know the ones that are. They aren't quite like the ones the write articles about "the thematic analysis of table dialogue at breastaurants" (which study why heterosexual men like to eat at Hooters) or who write about "human reactions to rape culture and queer performativity at dog parks", but they are not that far away either.

    Sorry if I have offended any academics out there. Learning is a great thing, especially if pursued over a lifetime. But the university environment and the laurels it bestows upon people have also lead to elitism, and the elitism has gotten worse in our divided political climate. The people I am describing here, some of them, are my friends - so they have many good qualities too.

  20. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    BMJ (10th January 2020), ClearWater (8th January 2020), Jayke (8th January 2020), RunningDeer (8th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Sammy (8th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  21. Link to Post #371
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th February 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    8,406
    Thanked 5,668 times in 934 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Quote Posted by Jayke (here)
    Your friend and Dr Wyman ... both agree on the fact there is a paradigm shift taking place.
    If Rachel Wyman sees a positive paradigm shift in Q-anon, then my liberal academic friends would also see positive paradigm shift in the anti-racist and anti-fascist groups that are springing up, and also possibly in the pro-science movements the advocate mandatory vaccination.
    That’s precisely where we’d measure each of their arguments against the evidence presented to see whose worldview more closely matches the reality of the situation. A process that helps to cultivate reasoning and logic skills. Comparing and contrasting is how the mind sieves the wheat from the chaff to find the kernels of truth amidst the noise.

    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Quote Although if Neoliberalism truly meant “free market capitalism” then populists wouldn’t have a problem with it.
    That's the Mellon institutes definition I was quoting. For me, "neo", either liberal or conservative, means pro-war, pro-corporation.
    Agreed on that one, their definition of free market capitalism only applies to themselves no doubt—the entrenched oligarchy. A free market to them is one that’s free of any and all challenge to their products from bright or ingenious creatives, inventors or engineers.

    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Quote Personally, I’d enjoy having Dr Wyman and your friend on board, and as long as they presented evidence to back up their claims and assertions,
    Personally, I would loathe having any academics here. They would only be interested in observing us, as entomologists might observe the mating habits of Madagascaran cockroaches in a terrarium of their laboratory.

    A positive paradigm is more likely to occur when we stop thinking of our political and media figures like Marvel Comics superheroes and supervillains and realize that they are just meaningless shadow puppets fashioned with Janus faces, so some of us will love them and some loathe them, and then we will all begin to bicker senselessly as to who is good and evil. If we wanted to find real heroic acts that lead to a better world, we would find it in the ordinary people around us who act kindly, intelligently and with integrity in the world, and that evil, emanates from some dark mysterious place, but can be found by reading in between the lines in both popular media information sources (e.g. main stream media including both left and right news outlets) and in occult source too (e.g. Deep State propaganda posts left on 8chan and other places).
    Would those on the forum who subjectively interpret the Q posts to be deep state propoganda from occult sources be able to remain heroic while acting kindly, intelligently and with integrity if the Q posts were made public again? Or would they bicker senselessly as they villainise anyone who chose to follow the Q thread as a source of research potential?

    Heroism starts in the self no doubt.

    Personally, I’ve always found the main Q thread to be benign, it’s just a collection of data points that track the emergence of the populist paradigm while also tracking the dismantling of certain aspects of the old neoliberal paradigm. That’s my subjective interpretation of the Q thread at least, how I personally view it.

    Everyone is entitled to their own interpretation of course, but is it really heroic to censor or condemn one group of people who challenge your worldview with new ideas, just because it offends your sensibilities of what you subjectively interpret to be right or wrong? What makes one person the arbinger of truth over the other?

    For a more peaceful paradigm to emerge, surely there has to be an ontological basis to reality that everyone can agree on? (Not that this is a realistic expectation of course)

    Honestly, the main difference between the fiery types that engulfed the Q threads, is that one side tracks positive developments, while the other side tracks negative developments. The world is never going to be all peaches and roses. Just as it’s never going to be all hellfire and brimstone. There’s always going to be a balance between the two. Sometimes it’ll swing further one way, before swinging back the other.

    To the Buddhists ‘equanimity’ was heroic, meaning “equal naming”, the ability to remain composed and see the balance of life, even as things appear to be heating up around you, the Phoenix of greater awareness can always be reborn from the flames, they believed.

  22. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Jayke For This Post:

    BMJ (8th January 2020), edina (8th January 2020), gini (8th January 2020), Kryztian (8th January 2020), RunningDeer (8th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020), Star Mariner (8th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  23. Link to Post #372
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,749
    Thanks
    27,963
    Thanked 50,803 times in 10,288 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Questions:
    How many Avalon members quit the forum due to the Q thread taking up so much space and time on the forum when it was public?

    How much does the forum's ability to generate revenue play into this controversy?
    Last edited by onawah; 8th January 2020 at 18:15.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  24. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    BMJ (10th January 2020), Ken (8th January 2020), Kryztian (8th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  25. Link to Post #373
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th January 2011
    Location
    Outback in the Four Corners
    Posts
    1,807
    Thanks
    12,813
    Thanked 13,220 times in 1,698 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Thanks Running Deer for your visual's on the traffic pattern here on Avalon.

    I felt there was much more than a few people that left.

    By my estimate, just noticing who is no longer here, I put that number from between 60 - 80 people.

    Your charts indicate I had under-estimated the number of people who left.

    The readership dropped dramatically. By hundreds.

    Some people are not interested in the Q posts information, but many people are, your charts seem to indicate that as well.

    I feel that there is a genuine need for people to have a place to take in Q information and perhaps lurk on the Q information without having to slog through drama.

    People can research the posts at Qmap and QProof, but sometimes taking in the information through forum conversations helps people process it better.

    At this point, there are 3744 Q posts, that cover over 100 themes or topics of information, over 140 and growing (players/people) and by some counts, 22 ongoing investigations, that are global in scale, (US, Ukraine, Italy, Australia, UK, EU, China, Russia, Iran, Pakistan....) that will probably be breaking out into public awareness over the next year, or so.

    This information is covered in isolated ways in some media, mostly independent journalists, but not necessarily in a comprehensive manner.

    It is also being actively suppressed not only by MSM media proxies of the controlling elite, but also by Alternative Media proxies of that same elite.

    Bluegreen has been doing a good job of taking one aspect of the information that came out of the Q posts and expanding upon it in the Hollyweird Awakening thread.

    I think that thread gets a good amount of readership traffic.

    As I was reading some recent posts in Hollyweird Awakening, I once again thought of the potential utter collapse of trust that could happen as people discover, more and more, the truth behind and beneath today's current events.

    There is a real need for a place where people can process what I feel will be a deluge, or a tsunami, of paradigm-altering information.

    I didn't feel that Avalon was ever seen as being pro-Q or anti-Q.

    At this point there are 8 threads in the forum that express anti-Q sentiment.

    And 2 threads that express a positive constructive dialog on the content of the Q posts.
    (I'm including the Project Looking Glass thread.)

    In my opinion, all the Q related threads ought to be open for public readership access.

    This conversation is happening in the larger world, regardless of it happens in private or public view here on Avalon.

    I'm neutral on how Avalon decides to handle the discussion here.

    Personally, for me, as an empath, and a highly sensitive person (HSP), it's easier on me if less people read what I write.

    Sometimes, when a lot of people read my words, or have strong emotional reactions to them, it can be hugely distracting to me, in my body.

    What I just said is an understatement. Some people's ill will directed at me can be very physically uncomfortable.

    I'm limited on the amount of time I can participate so I usually focus on just sharing the posts, and a couple of analysts that I feel cover most of the bases.

    Sometimes, I'll share interesting tidbits not covered by others.

    However, as events unfold, I may try to process my thinking a bit more here.

    I always hope to do that in a positive, constructive and balanced manner.
    Last edited by edina; 9th January 2020 at 01:36.

  26. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to edina For This Post:

    gini (9th January 2020), Jayke (8th January 2020), RunningDeer (8th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Star Mariner (9th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  27. Link to Post #374
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,749
    Thanks
    27,963
    Thanked 50,803 times in 10,288 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Another question: Is there any way to know how many members left because of the Q thread being public, as opposed to how many members left because the Q thread became "members only"?
    And of the latter group. how many were new and only came to Avalon because the Q thread was public at the time?
    Thanks.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    AutumnW (8th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  29. Link to Post #375
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,749
    Thanks
    27,963
    Thanked 50,803 times in 10,288 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    The first 4 minutes here describes precisely what happened when the the Q thread was public:

    The rest of the discussion is very relevant too, not to mention part 1
    (Thanks to Bill's post here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1330477 )
    I think that discussion (parts 1 & 2) is "required viewing" for anyone who is sincerely concerned with the issues at hand on this thread.
    Last edited by onawah; 8th January 2020 at 19:58.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  30. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    AutumnW (8th January 2020), edina (8th January 2020), Franny (9th January 2020), Jayke (8th January 2020), Kryztian (8th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  31. Link to Post #376
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th January 2011
    Location
    Outback in the Four Corners
    Posts
    1,807
    Thanks
    12,813
    Thanked 13,220 times in 1,698 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    I agree onawah, in that people were trying to make sense of the information.

    Different people have different processes in how they do this.

    One of the first points laid out in the Q information was about propaganda and how it is used.

    I think that was the underlying basic concept for people to get, before they could take in the overall information.

    Over the course of the last few years I've expanded that into understanding its relationship to hybrid warfare, information warfare.

    I wonder if anyone here has ever tried to think strategically about how the general public could be brought up to speed very quickly on the many topics discussed in this forum.

    This looks to be an excellent video series and one that will be good to keep in mind as I think more about how people can make sense of the coming deluge of information.

    It's long, I imagine the other videos are, too. I have quite a few long videos I'm already behind on watching, so it will be some time before I can get these watched.

    Thanks for bringing them up here.
    Last edited by edina; 8th January 2020 at 20:50.

  32. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to edina For This Post:

    Jayke (8th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  33. Link to Post #377
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th January 2011
    Location
    Outback in the Four Corners
    Posts
    1,807
    Thanks
    12,813
    Thanked 13,220 times in 1,698 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    Another question: Is there any way to know how many members left because of the Q thread being public, as opposed to how many members left because the Q thread became "members only"?
    And of the latter group. how many were new and only came to Avalon because the Q thread was public at the time?
    Thanks.
    I don't know about the specific numbers, hopefully Paula can address that with her ability to look at those numbers.

    But from memory of simply watching the viewable stats on the forum, the viewership of the forum and engaged members was increasing on a steady basis.

    Someone once mentioned how many members joined due to the thread being closed, so they could read the thread? I don't think it was many.

    I do know from personal experience about a dozen members told me that due to how the situation was handled, they felt they could no longer donate to the forum, on principle.

    If that has affected the long-term donation pattern of the forum, I don't know?

    Whether that actually matters in the decision-making process of the forum, I believe that Bill has said, it does not.

    As long as the existing members can sustain the forum, it may not come into play, at all.
    Last edited by edina; 8th January 2020 at 21:21.

  34. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to edina For This Post:

    ClearWater (8th January 2020), Jayke (9th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  35. Link to Post #378
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    4th November 2012
    Posts
    2,350
    Thanks
    4,311
    Thanked 9,779 times in 2,071 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    If it's a matter of dollars and cents, I guess the Q forum could be made public. But, if it is, it should be with the understanding that those on the thread can be challenged directly, on that thread.

    In other words, it will be a free for all with booze, hookers and blow, rather than a private tea party with crustless conspiracy sandwiches. Now that would be interesting! Horrible to moderate. Call it the "gloves off" thread and a trigger warning, or just a warning and then don't bother moderating it at all. See how it goes.

  36. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to AutumnW For This Post:

    ClearWater (8th January 2020), Ken (11th January 2020), Kryztian (9th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020), Tintin (9th January 2020)

  37. Link to Post #379
    United States Avalon Member RunningDeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2012
    Location
    Forest Dweller
    Posts
    13,390
    Thanks
    99,268
    Thanked 113,950 times in 13,133 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by AutumnW (here)
    If it's a matter of dollars and cents, I guess the Q forum could be made public. But, if it is, it should be with the understanding that those on the thread can be challenged directly, on that thread.

    In other words, it will be a free for all with booze, hookers and blow, rather than a private tea party with crustless conspiracy sandwiches. Now that would be interesting! Horrible to moderate. Call it the "gloves off" thread and a trigger warning, or just a warning and then don't bother moderating it at all. See how it goes.
    To save people time and energy, I'm not here to answer another's challenge. That's not why I participate on the forum. I share health information, links, videos, how to trouble shoot the technical stuff, etc. I'm a strong believer in people problem solve and find answers for themselves.

    If I could wind back the clock, I'd not add those posts above.

    UPDATE: I've asked they be removed.
    Last edited by RunningDeer; 8th January 2020 at 23:10.

  38. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to RunningDeer For This Post:

    ClearWater (8th January 2020), edina (9th January 2020), Franny (8th January 2020), Jayke (9th January 2020), justntime2learn (8th January 2020), Ken (11th January 2020), onawah (9th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020)

  39. Link to Post #380
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th February 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    8,406
    Thanked 5,668 times in 934 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    The first 4 minutes here describes precisely what happened when the the Q thread was public:

    The rest of the discussion is very relevant too, not to mention part 1
    (Thanks to Bill's post here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1330477 )
    I think that discussion (parts 1 & 2) is "required viewing" for anyone who is sincerely concerned with the issues at hand on this thread.
    He does make a good case for why the Q thread should be viewable publicly. At the 24mins time stamp:

    Quote ...I don't have a chance of possibly engaging in a constructive or meaningful way, so all I can do is villainize them and engage in warfare and then to various degrees win or lose but to some degree all lose — and like that's a very very simple thing I would suggest everyone doif you tend to be left-leaning and most of your friends kind of agree with you about climate change or abortion rights or whatever, I would actually really like you to find follow-up in Shapiro, follow the proper pterion institute, follow Heritage Foundation and Cato Institute, and actually seek to understand both where they're sharing things that you actually didn't know, and even where you really disagree, why it's compelling with an answer that isn't just because they're all stupid, because you actually don't have any chance of healing a culture war otherwise, you only have a chance of engaging in it.

    and if someone happens to be more right oriented, and of course saying right-left is itself over simplified, but we'll use that as a simplification for all of the perspectives that are engaged in some kind of warfare that actually need to be engaged in some kind of more generative dialectical conversation. Study intersectionality, like follow some of the thinkers that are actually giving arguments for and history, for why some of that's important. Actually read some of the postmodern thinkers, read Foucault and darrid on whatever— before just saying all post-modernism is stupid —and again look to see are there true insights and critiques in there and can you factor them to understand them and even where you don't think they're true. Can you see why they're compelling? and so that's a very very easy step so I'm speaking to why it's important because I think that we have more issues in the world today from now weaponized drones.
    The Buddha called this technique Samapatti in ‘the complete enlightenment’ sutra (1 of only 3 techniques needed to end all suffering in the world). The renaissance artists knew it as syncretism. A time tested mind-expanding technique to build bridges and cultivate more nuanced rhetorical diplomacy.

    Only 30 minutes in to his presentation, I’ll watch the rest tomorrow, (midnight now in the UK). Thanks for sharing Onawah, his thoughts are very pertinent to the task at hand—bridging the divide .

  40. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jayke For This Post:

    edina (9th January 2020), Sadieblue (9th January 2020), Sammy (9th January 2020)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 19 of 21 FirstFirst 1 9 19 21 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts