Perhaps I am out of line, but...

[sunny]

phillipacentaur in my Heath Ledger thread, and OpEd at the very least in the Freemason Ritual thread, are acting as though discussion of these topics is stupid and seem to be making an effort to shut down people who are trying to talk about occult symbolism, Freemasonry, etc etc. at RI!

I know some people, or maybe a lot of people, are skeptical and/or uninterested in these topics,(I was once one of them, but I had no objection whatsoever to other people talking about them) but why are they coming here and raising objections, and quite vociferously I might add, where it should be and has been a safe place to talk about such things? phillipacentaur even went so far as to suggest my HL thread should have more closely followed along the lines of something written at DKos!

W. T. F. is going on here? Should we be concerned? Maybe I'm being paranoid but it sure looks like a campaign, by whom I don't know but the why should be obvious, to change the nature of RI and I would hate to see that happen.

[chiggerbit]

I really haven't been following it. Are they masons? That might explain their emotional(?) reaction to the subject.

[chiggerbit]

Btw, tkl's most recent subject is one that's giving me the creeps.

[sunny]

I don't know if they are Mason's or what they are. Remember et's thread, something like "Don't forget" with only the RI wallpaper as comment? He warned me later in a pm that certain ones were trying to change the character of RI, but I didn't see it at the time. My forte is parapolitics/conspiracy, crime and justice and I try to approach them in a practical, nuts and bolts way.

However, since my newfound interest in how the elite uses the occult to gain and enhance power, I have definitely noticed very aggressive attempts to debunk and disparage discussion about it. Also, there is an almost savage campaign by people like tKl to debunk the notion of elite pedophilia, to the extent that RI might become a de facto arm of the FMSF if we are not careful. Do we really want to become a place that is known for intolerant skepticism with regard to elite pedophilia?

This is a place of 'high weirdness' is it not? Has anyone tried to discourage threads purely about politics, culture, media, and so forth? No, nor would I want that to happen. But I think it is time for a frank discussion about just who we are.

[chiggerbit]

But I think it is time for a frank discussion about just who we are.

Hey, good idea!

[chiggerbit]

Holy shit! I just saw your response to tkl on his victim thread. You go, girl!!!!! Wonderful!

[sunny]

chiggerbit, when you mentioned it here I went over to see what was creeping you out. I literally saw red. No, I mean it, I really saw red. That is the first time that's ever happened to me-I thought it was only an expression!

I mean really, how dare he?

[chiggerbit]

Not sure, but I think his name says it all--he's a cultist--maybe a Crowley follower. I don't trust him. Why is he here?

[sunny]

I can't help but think the same thing. I can't remember the name of the thread right now, but he put one up essentially defending pedophiles but cloaking it as some sort of sociological "study". I admit I was too disgusted to follow it closely so I don't remember the details of his argument, but this attitude combined with his continuous harping against the victims of pedophilia raises big red flags.

[Jeff]

Thanks both of you for your observations and for getting this discussion started. It's important.

I think criticism and informed skepticism should be welcomed and encouraged, but that doesn't include members attempting to shout down appropriate discussions they object to for whatever reason, or drive them off the table with ridicule. When I can make the time, I'll post a general statement regarding this.

Also, if we're thinking of the same tkl pedophile thread from a few weeks ago, I came very close to banning him on account of it until I asked for elaboration and he seemed to backpedal. He's been on my must-watch list since.

[chiggerbit]

I wish I knew more about tkl, like his age, for instance. I think it's a mistake to underestimate the seductiveness of cults. I suspect that anti-authoritarianism is at the root of much of the attractiveness of them. I had hoped that exposure on this board would ameliorate that effect with those who might be vulnerable to the effects of those cults. But, I think it is inevitble that this kind of forum will attract both ends of the spectrum--the victims and perpetrators-in-waiting.

[sunny]

First of all, sorry my emotions got the better of me. I probably should not have gone off like that but after his pedophile thread of a few weeks ago I was overcome with rage. That is my only excuse.

Thanks both of you for your observations and for getting this discussion started. It's important.

I think criticism and informed skepticism should be welcomed and encouraged,

I've been wanting to talk about this for a while, but I was reluctant to because it might seem as if I were trying to stifle criticism and informed skepticism. Without these elements we could become a place like Godlikeproductions, where wild speculation runs rampant and no one checks themselves or anybody else. Conspiratainment. We need the balance it takes to consider deep and dark possibilities without falling off the deep end.

How does one go about shepharding the members into this balance without stifling discussion? That is the question.

[sunny]

Btw chig, I think tkl is pretty young, like around 30.

[chiggerbit]

Looks like you're right on his age, sunny:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=th ... tnG=Search

[Jeff]

I've been wanting to talk about this for a while, but I was reluctant to because it might seem as if I were trying to stifle criticism and informed skepticism. Without these elements we could become a place like Godlikeproductions, where wild speculation runs rampant and no one checks themselves or anybody else. Conspiratainment. We need the balance it takes to consider deep and dark possibilities without falling off the deep end.

Right. It's always been a tension, and probably always will be. On the one extreme there's GLP where there's zero discernment, and on the other a place like DU, where every variance from consensus reality gets called "tinfoil" and shuffled off to the crazy room. But I think we've also been fortunate, in that so many quality posters get what the place is about.

How does one go about shepharding the members into this balance without stifling discussion? That is the question.

True. And more positively, we can be thinking of ways to encourage more quality discussion.