Validated posters

TonyGosling · Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 11:45 pm Post subject: Validated posters

This is a continuation of the previous topic about validated posters where xmasdale has been continually posting my PMs to him.

Please feel free to continue to discuss the rights wrongs and finer points of this move toward quality control if you wish while we decide what to do with xmasdale who has sucessfully torpedoed the previous thread.

iro · Moderate Poster Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 376

could you not have split the topic instead of moving it out of public reach or deleting it?

why should i continue debating something if you have ripped my points out with the bathwater?

i dont want to be a nuisance here, so ill just leave it now. i'm sure the management will be discussing this and thats all i was aiming for.

landless peasant · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 9:48 am Post subject:

Oh thread gone thats freedom for you, nice work oppressive overlords! Funny but this is just the sort of thing I'm trying to fight.... Very sad, very like the real world... With posts being removed by admins at their whim or damage to ego's whats the point in this forum? Time for a new site maybe and new admins.... Very disappointing.... Sad

xmasdale has not successfully torpedoed the thread Tony you did that...

xmasdale · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:59 am Post subject:

I hesitate to say more, or no doubt I shall be committing some grievous crime which deserves punishment, but thanks for your support guys.

Noel

mr nice · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:58 pm Post subject:

As an observer of yesterdays debacle I would like to go on record to say that the removal of the original threads/posts leaves me with a very different and considerably worse opinion of the forum's management. I thought this was a place for free thinkers to discuss and unravel the lie's and censorship of the official information sources,and as such would remain uncensored unless there is a clear attempt to discredit misinform or agitate.
Tony this looks bad mate and not because of the reasons you give but more due to the removal of xmasdale's validated stamp of approval as soon he committed the crime of saying he didn't understand or necessarily support the validated tag that was bestowed unasked upon him.
The apparent anger displayed regarding the posting of some seemingly innocuous PM's seems a very convenient excuse to punish noel for publicly questioning the validated scheme.
I will not go any further with my own personal opinions on this matter as it is not my intention or desire to undermine the forum management at this stage. I am well aware that mistakes and disagreements are unavoidable in the battle against the darkness.

TonyGosling · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:21 pm Post subject:

In a nutshell... Any of the present admins can make someone a validated poster, whether they know and trust them personally or have seen them regularly posting valuable material. It is their judgement alone.
The point I hope is obvious... to do something about the most regular complaint I get here which is quality control. This forum is percieved by many to have too many disinformation posters and shills who deliberately mislead thus degrading and torpedoing discussions much to the frustratio of real campaigners.

I got a private message from Xmasdale today saying that the private message of mine which he published here was 'not confidential' and explaining at great length why.
Then he said he thought this was an example of my 'autocratic' editorial stewardship of the forum and that he would be informing the movement of this.
I have just sent him the following reply.

Frazzel · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:45 pm Post subject:

can someone elucidate how this argument started?

iro · Moderate Poster Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 376

i asked what validated posters were, and not being one did that make the rest of us 'invalid'

xmasdale gave me a detailed answer including references to the train of thought he and tony gosling discussed on how the status rank came to occur - in doing so he posted bits of tonys pm correspondance (innocent stuff - nothing personal about it) and then tony yanked the thread and revoked xmasdales validated status - which is a joke

now tony is telling us to continue the debate - but he has moved all the blasted posts or deleted them so the debate is already heavily censored

????

xmasdale · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:00 pm Post subject:

mr nice · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:47 pm Post subject:

to anyone interested in seeing xmasdale's initial post for themselves I saved the thread just after the offending post Wink

it is here >>>
http://rapidshare.com/files/79412034/validated_thread.rar
I as typical london cynic sometimes save forum threads when there is the chance of deletion by admins,but I feel it should be noted that this thread continued long after my saving point with at least 1 more exchange between tony and noel.
again I am not trying to stir up dissent but feel that there has been a certain misuse of power here not to mention having serious concerns about the workability of the validated poster system.
On the subject of quality control another visit to the drawing board is in order I think.

iro · Moderate Poster Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 376

i know running a forum and balancing moderation is tough, i walk that line every day myself over on illusions forum, but tony's actions here are untenable. You cant excuse that kind of angry chastising moderation on a forum set up to deal wth the war on freedom and dishonesty!

what a contradiction!

ian neal · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 5:07 pm Post subject:

Here are my thoughts

I understand the point of having a validated poster recognition is

1) it is thought to be useful for users to know which other users here are known to other campaigners as honest and genuine
2) to give recognition to the many excellent posters here

However problems may arise
1) if this recognition causes arguments over who is and is not seen as honest and genuine
2) if users not recognised in this way are aggrieved and it causes unnecessary divisions and acrimony amongst users
3) if this recognition is seen as an endorsement of the user's viewpoints. After all you can be an honest and genuine campaigner and still type a load of * and it is not the job of the moderators to decide what is and is not * IMO
4) if this recognition is withdrawn or threatened to be withdrawn because of disagreement with a mod

These problems may require a rethink of the system as mr nice suggests. Thankfully not my headache at present.

Should PM's and emails always be treated as private? Yes this is good netiquette but we should always be aware these may not stay private and we should always be aware of this.

I'm sure noel meant no harm by his posts and merely posted them to help others understand the validated poster system. So yes he should not have posted PMs but I'm sure he was well intentioned and to me intentions count for a lot. Given this and given Noel's dedication to the campaign over the years, I would have hoped this could have been resolved in a polite, less acrimonious and less public manner. Hopefully this will now happen

xmasdale · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 5:36 pm Post subject:

landless peasant · Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:38 pm Post subject:

Use the rar link at the bottom of the page on http://rapidshare.com/files/79412034/validated_thread.rar it says Select your download: click the free button, opens a new page type the code you see at the No premium user. Please enter bit...

andyb · Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:10 pm Post subject:

I can see the benefits of having a validated poster function but as Ian N said it will create certain problems. I don't think threads should be pulled though unless they contain libelous or offending material.

I was a vlaidated poster for a day or two and then that suddenly disappeared Crying or Very sad

mr nice · Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:32 pm Post subject:

your still valid in my eyes andy Laughing

ian neal · Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:46 pm Post subject:

TonyGosling · Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 7:37 pm Post subject:

It started when Xmasdale copied a PM I sent to him on to the forum.

iro · Moderate Poster Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 376

ok tony - it started, then went off topic with all the moderation and moving and censorship

but back to the topic at hand that i raised

is validated posters not just something done on the whims of you, the admin? i hear stories of people havng this status appiled then removed, and see before my very eyes a known and trusted uk campaigner, xmasdale, have his status removed because he p-ed you off.

why do you not address any of the comments regarding this topic, instead just taking the personal aspects of it and commenting on them?

If this system is to be 'valid' (sic) then it has to be outside and immune to the whims of one man. There should be a process that is transparent.

sometimes this forum represents what it seeks to oppose - all too often in fact.

paul wright · Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:00 pm Post subject:

It's quite simple as I said before somewhere hidden.
You establish some guidelines for making someone 'validated', these can then be applied to posters by admins as they come across them, and anyone who feels like they are being unjustly left out can apply for status, and be accepted or rejected according guidelines, with an explanation being given by admins in case of rejection, and a chance to argue to toss for the rejected one.
I doubt it is right for someone to be stripped of their 'Validated' status because of some mistaken transgression of humdrum forum rules - it doesn't after all invalidate them as 'validated' in other aspects of their work.
Give me Alice in Wonderland any day
There's massive nonsense going down in this world.....

TonyGosling · Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:30 pm Post subject:

Thanks Paul,
Validated Poster status is a small acknowledgement of a job well done, a pat on the back, which is sorely lacking in these activist circles.
But with that status comes more responsibility I feel.
I'd far rather it's something we as moderators 'bestow' without users specifically requesting it though. Reason: we'd then be getting into rancour over status not being granted and that decision taken personally.
People who are known active campaigners sticking their necks out and striking blows for WoT truth should have the status. As well as unknowns who are consistently moving things on by hard diligent and discerning research.
Most importantly it will help non-believers and other outsiders to see what are the sorts of opinions we as an active movement have, as opposed to random people, both friendly and unfriendly.
At least that's how I saw it.
It is still a live trial and we may decide to drop it entirely.

btw - at some point, when I can be bothered, I'm going to split off and hide all the posts which link to my Private Messages.
After you've all saved them to your hard drive that is Wink

paul wright · Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:41 pm Post subject:

Sure Tony, but you need some standards to apply.
That's all

landless peasant · Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 11:21 am Post subject:

However problems may arise
1) if this recognition causes arguments over who is and is not seen as honest and genuine
2) if users not recognised in this way are aggrieved and it causes unnecessary divisions and acrimony amongst users
3) if this recognition is seen as an endorsement of the user's viewpoints. After all you can be an honest and genuine campaigner and still type a load of * and it is not the job of the moderators to decide what is and is not * IMO
4) if this recognition is withdrawn or threatened to be withdrawn because of disagreement with a mod

I think it should be dropped for the above reasons and more. Seems like it has only divided so far. I care not weather I'm valid poster or seen as honest and genuine, I do how ever care about needless division on the web site.

kbo234 · Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:16 pm Post subject:

I don't like this idea.

Although one can recognise that it might be helpful to casual visitors to this site to see who is a 'trusted' 9/11 activist and who isn't, there is a 'Big Brother' aspect to this status that is somehow at odds with our 'for the people' posture.

Also, if the security services are really cynical and effective (as they usually are) who is to say that their most effective operator is not in charge of our whole campaign (no offence guys)......just waiting to misdirect and destroy it the moment 9/11 Truth gets too big and influential.

Looking back at other 'opposition' organisations (social credit party, IRA, Stop The War etc) we should be able to see that this has happened time and time again.....so why should we be any less vulnerable to this kind of infiltration?

It is likely that if this movement ever reaches a position of influence, it will break up into factions with the 'controlled' faction getting the most significant funding and, hence, end up having the most influence on public perception.

In my view we need to avoid centralist decision-making and judgements and stick with being a loose alliance of all sorts of disparate people and groups working fairly independently......and where there is necessary leadership (and I have been aware of a certain degree of concentrated influence for quite a while) we should strive to ensure that no one gets too much control over activists and their actions. An alliance of small self-commanding activist groups (9/11 London, 9/11 West Yorks, WeAreChange, AllFaiths 9/11 group etc.) is how we should remain.

I might have moved off-topic a bit here but this post is relevant to the thread and these are my genuine concerns.

acrobat74 · Trustworthy Freedom Fighter Joined: 03 Jun 2007 Posts: 836

TonyGosling · Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:43 pm Post subject:

I would love to hear some other ideas then from you anonymous lot out there about how we get some quality control. Because all I ever seem to hear both o PMs and face to face with people is how there is so much nonsense peddled as fact, deliberate or otherwise, is posted here. And how much it puts new and existing people off.

There is no suggestion that disagreeing with me or any other mod or admin is going to get your validated poster status recinded. That is a deliberate misrepresentation. Breaking any of the thankfully few forum rules though probably would.

There seems to be nothing to reward diligence and inspired research work here which to my mind is wrong. Before long one realises that all we ever get here is gripes and complaints about users and what I think are an excellent crew of admins and mods which is sick, and doesn't do credit to the forum as a whole.

We need pats on the back not just slaggings off.

It may become a way of bringing on possible moderators for the future too.

Does anyone think it to be a step forward except me Wink

kbo234 · Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:54 pm Post subject:

landless peasant · Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 3:37 pm Post subject:

I think disinformation is something the 9/11 truth movement just has to deal with. Unless you can validate every single person that posts here, its an open forum. But then disinformation is everywhere. All people need to check facts out and not believe what they are told by anyone. Which to me at lest is not a bad thing, do your own research, and be your own leader... Having said that I'm more than happy to send proof of ID or what ever is needed to any admin that asks.

iro · Moderate Poster Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 376

acrobat74 · Trustworthy Freedom Fighter Joined: 03 Jun 2007 Posts: 836

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> About this website	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2