Introducing a New Category: The Red Pill Roundtable

[Alex]

George Carlin ~ on The American Dream


The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)

by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
H. L. Mencken.

INTRODUCING THE RED PILL ROUNDTABLE (here)
Hi, I’m Alex, creator and moderator of The Red Pill Roundtable. I'd like to share an account of how my personal journey has led to my interest in starting this new discussion forum, a description of the subject matter and the type of participant it is being created for. I think George Carlin might have approved.


THE RED PILL, ME, AND THE GATHERING QUESTIONERS

Like many in my boomer generation, I began breaking family traditions in my teens by questioning many religious and social paradigms that didn't feel right. This essay is about how astoundingly wide the schism between my former and current views has now grown, but also about how the internet has provided a place where many worldwide who asked the same questions and revised the same views are gathering to talk about it.

Giving up the illusions of comfort and security of herd mentality as an unquestioning member of mainstream society by revisiting and challenging all it's foundational belief systems with an open mind and accepting any new truths regardless of any scorn and isolation it causes you in return is referred to as taking the Red Pill. I'll call this group the Questioners.

Questioners often refer to their lives as before and after they woke up. Numerous rude awakenings were experienced from being shocked, amazed and disturbed at the new information uncovered after taking these new hard looks at long held beliefs. There were few others to talk to, but with the advent of the internet age Questioners were no longer alone. Global forums filled quickly with others who had made the same discoveries and were anxious to share, compare and discuss the relentless stream of new puzzle pieces. The Red Pill Roundtable category at WaccoBB.net is being created as a safe-haven and exclusive club for local Questioners.

After waking up, the formerly absurd, impossible or sci-fi becomes conventional fact, and the formerly mundane like the trusted nightly news a bizarre, surreal and often creepy script. Aggressive manipulation jumps out at you relentlessly like in the 80‘s

B-movie They Live within news, advertising, music, movies, politics, govt/big pharma/military/industrial complex propaganda, mass produced foods, outdated science/physics/history/archaeology teachings, organized religion including many facets of the 'new age' movement and more...

Questioners soon realize that the machine (Matrix) has been a very healthy monster for a long time with limitless resources, long-term agendas and great determination to develop extremely advanced technology for use to ruthlessly deceive, damage and keep their unfair advantage. The unraveling web of deception

then necessitates seeing human origins, evolution and our place in the universe substantially different too... and much bigger.

You may wonder why I spend time pursuing all these subjects when I could live without bothering. The answer is, because it makes 100% difference in nearly all choices I make from what soap I use, what I ingest, inject, avoid, spend money on, what views and habits I choose to flood my body and health with, and much more. Though the proverbial rabbit hole keeps getting deeper constantly reminding me I am still in knowledge kindergarten and has forced me to consider that the big picture may be greater than my human mind can grasp, it is empowering to feel less and less ignorant and vulnerable as verifications pour in. I no longer have any doubt that boldly facing even the ugliest truths is far less costly to my soul than staying blind and asleep.

The most difficult thing to live with becomes the closed minds you walk among and their apathy to the glaring signs,

especially those with derisive and indignant apathy. Especially difficult is watching the erosion of America's constitution and foundational system of checks and balances due to complacent and servile citizens abdicating their constitutional duty to demand accountability of their decision makers. Those being given the power to make laws and spend America's tax dollars are really just being given the right to get away with anything with impunity and are getting more organized and taking deeper and deeper advantage of it every day.

Questioners ask from a new lonely void.... what can I do about it?

A common starting place is choosing to first stop being part of the problem as much as possible, then joining other Questioners to continue to dig, expose, compare and truth-test to both benefit your own evolution and hopefully the grand collective somehow as contributors to the primary stage of positive change - knowledge.

Questioners’ roundtables are very active and rapidly multiplying for these reasons, are getting very good at fitting puzzle pieces together and despite agreeing how big the monster is, do not complain, whine or use the language of being a victim. It's inherently understood that standing up to the monster begins with becoming informed, taking back your own mind and sovereignty, and especially not perpetuating the illusions of the Matrix any further.

For example, the Red Pill community long ago stopped debating the following foundational concepts except for details. Seemingly separate, these topics are ultimately connected for all leading to the same concepts within the true nature of reality and all represent opportunities to either wake up and free your mind, or remain an unquestioning Blue Pill member of the Matrix dutifully helping reinforce illusions:

1. 9-11 was an inside job - like countless other false flags. If you're looking for someplace to start, start here. The tentacles of 9-11 lead everywhere past, current and future - political, financial, techonological, historical, scientific, military, corporate, international, and much, much more.

2. Tax dollars primarily fund covert Corporate/Industrial/Pharmaceutical/Scientific/Technology Industry/Military/and shockingly unethical Black OPS agendas very contrary to public benefit.

3. All organized religions are oppressors with hidden creators, agendas and violent, manipulative practices and histories very contrary to their altruistic public face.

4. The true history of the Earth and Human Beings is far different, longer, richer and advanced than taught in school.

5. We are not alone.

Expand

Truth is the achilles heel of the Matrix. You're especially invited to also share your story of before and after waking up. I'm looking forward to sharing ideas with other Questioners within our community at The Red Pill Roundtable and extend a very warm welcome to all local brave, inquisitive and open minded thinkers, adventurers and truth seekers.

Alex
Red Pill Roundtable Creator and Moderator



NOTICE:
ACTION NEEDED TO RECEIVE Red Pill Roundtable posts IN YOUR DIGEST:

The new category will be available for anyone to visit and read online, but to reiterate, the intention is that ONLY those who consider themselves having taken the Red Pill should participate. The category posts will only included in your digest if you opt in - and this applies to everyone.

TO OPT IN,

• Goto the WaccoBB.net website
  
• Make sure you are logged in (see upper right of the website)
  
• Scroll down to the Red Pill Roundtable category, the default setting will be "No Email"
  
• Click where it says "No Email" in the right column
  
• Change that selection to "Daily Digest"

If you need help, here's a video demo of how to do so.

See you there!

[arthunter]

Alex,

I appreciate and share your quest for truth, but if you are at all interested in sharing this truth and spreading awareness then why is this category not included in the daily digest? ... why is it necessary to opt in to receive these messages, unlike other categories?

Also, is posting in this category voluntary or compulsory? ... I noticed that a couple of my posts were moved here and I'm wondering why? ... since this category is not included in the daily digest this feels like low level censorship,.. but then I've grown accustomed to the attempts to hide my information, probably because it shines a spotlight on government corruption, ..... so maybe I'm over-reacting ...

...
NOTICE:
ACTION NEEDED TO RECEIVE Red Pill Roundtable posts IN YOUR DIGEST:

The new category will be available for anyone to visit and read online, but to reiterate, the intention is that ONLY those who consider themselves having taken the Red Pill should participate. The category posts will only included in your digest if you opt in - and this applies to everyone.

TO OPT IN,

• Goto the WaccoBB.net website
  
• Make sure you are logged in (see upper right of the website)
  
• Scroll down to the Red Pill Roundtable category, the default setting will be "No Email"
  
• Click where it says "No Email" in the right column
  
• Change that selection to "Daily Digest"

If you need help, here's a video demo of how to do so.

See you there!

[Alex]

Alex,
I appreciate and share your quest for truth, but if you are at all interested in sharing this truth and spreading awareness then why is this category not included in the daily digest? ... why is it necessary to opt in to receive these messages, unlike other categories?

Also, is posting in this category voluntary or compulsory? ... I noticed that a couple of my posts were moved here and I'm wondering why? ... since this category is not included in the daily digest this feels like low level censorship,.. but then I've grown accustomed to the attempts to hide my information, probably because it shines a spotlight on government corruption, ..... so maybe I'm over-reacting ...

Thanks for asking. It's not me making those decisions. Requiring any interested party to have to physically make an effort to get the posts in their digest was Barry's requirement of starting this category..... and you are correct, a certain amount of censorship and cleaning house by moving any 'controversial/conspiracy' subject matter posts to this category was one of Barry's main interests in starting this category and will continue. So I guess you could call it compulsory.

It may take a while for all interested parties to figure out how to get on board, but I am still very grateful to get going and have a protected territory for unhindered and anti-ridicule free speech for a change. There are plans for keeping the full membership reminded of what is being discussed however, so it's not like being shoved aside and ignored.

Hang on...

[Barry]

Alex,I appreciate and share your quest for truth, but if you are at all interested in sharing this truth and spreading awareness then why is this category not included in the daily digest? ... why is it necessary to opt in to receive these messages, unlike other categories?

Hi Arthunter,

I am trying to run an efficient and effective bulletin board service for the progressive community of Sonoma County. A key part of our service is our Daily Digest email. While the digest is customizable, most people accept the default settings. If the digest contains lots of information the reader is not interested in, or worse yet, they object to, they will stop reading, and the whole community is diminished. Additionally, the larger the digest is, the bigger the strain it puts on our server (which I've upgrade several times in the last year) and the more likely it will be marked as spam.

My first attempt at the this was the Censored and Uncensored category. which similarly was not included in the digest. As you may remember, I had required you to post all your stuff there at point. (That changed along the way, but I forget why.)

Also, is posting in this category voluntary or compulsory? ... I noticed that a couple of my posts were moved here and I'm wondering why? ... since this category is not included in the daily digest this feels like low level censorship,.. but then I've grown accustomed to the attempts to hide my information, probably because it shines a spotlight on government corruption, ..... so maybe I'm over-reacting ...

Use of this category will be determined first by the posting user's choice, and secondarily by me based on the content of a particular post and the general topic of most of a user's posts.

In your case, you post a vast amount of stuff (1,139 posts!) much of it, but not all, is exactly the kind of information that The Red Pill Roundtable was set up to handle - conspiracy theories, including gang stalking, and other contrarian views. So I'm asking you, and other like minded posters, to post the more fringe articles to the Red Pill Roundtable.

If your content contains links to widely respected media (New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, Mother Jones, The Guardian, Rolling Stone, etc.) I'll consider it for inclusion in one of the categories included in the digest by default.

I've also asked Alex, who has volunteered to moderate The Red Pill Roundtable, to post a short weekly summary of the action in the Roundtable with links to the more notable posts to give them some wider visibility.

Alex has requested that Red Pill skeptics not be included in The Red Pill Roundtable, so if a debate breaks out between a "questioner" and a skeptic, I'll also host that in one of the digest categories as well.

This is all part of a larger category reorganization I'll be announcing soon that will be including other opt-in digest categories.

Thanks for your cooperation and participation!

Barry

[arthunter]

Thank you both for explaining things ... it hardly matters to me as I access the information on this site by coming to the site and clicking on "Recent Posts" and I suspect that many others do the same ... and I do understand that there are behind-the-scene complexities and pressures which I am not aware of and do not understand ...

I suspect that the Wacco community could have a very lengthy debate about what constitutes theory and what constitutes fact and which news links are reliable and which are controlled by big money, so I won't even go there ... personally, I have been extremely careful about sources, trying to present opinions of credible witnesses, and perhaps that's how I got out of the "censored" category ... thank you for that, Barry ... yes, I am a prolific contributor, but only because I care about this community and want to preserve the freedoms that we all have all come to expect ...

I do believe that it is a time of truth and exposure and I want to thank all of those members who have fearlessly contributed to this trend ...

As they say, it will all come out in the wash ...

Peace to all ....

[Jim Wilson]

I have read the introduction to the Red Pill Forum and the rationale for putting it in a separate space. As I understand it the rationale is that people who believe in, or want to discuss, the conspiracy theories (such as 9-11 trutherism) want to have a 'safe space' in which to speak and interact.

I am uneasy about this. First, the way the introduction to the forum divided people into blue pill people and red pill people strikes me as at best simplistic, and I suspect that it is deliberately structured to make those who sign on to the conspiracies listed feel good about themselves. The way this division is put forth is that there are those who accept consensus reality and there are those who have questioned that consensus (the red pill people). What this kind of division leaves out is the possibility that there are those who have questioned consensus reality AND do not accept the validity of the conspiracy theories listed (such as 9-11 trutherism). Such people would be neither blue pill nor red pill people. And that is what bothers me most about the structure of this forum. It isn't actually open to opposing views or the full range of possibilities.

This kind of conceptual division creates a closed system of thought wherein all people are divided into two groups and any new information must be placed in one of those two categories. This is typical of ideological thinking. It is my view, however, that the world is more complex than a binary division can encompass.

The second aspect that makes me uneasy is the idea that discussions about red pill conpiracy theories need a 'safe space' or forum. This is all the rage right now -- everyone wants a 'safe space' for their pet theory and view and if they don't get it, and if you don't provide it, that makes you some kind of oppressor. The result of this strategy is to seal yourself off from information that might undermine the view you currently hold. The 'safe space' becomes a hall of mirrors. My view is that it is a good thing to enter into the rough and tumble of contrary views and opinions. I wonder, actually, if the red pill forum isn't simply a strategy for those who believe in this list of conspiracies to keep critical thought, and critiques in general, at bay. If it is I don't think that is a good idea.

In closing I want to mention in passing that I am not apriori opposed to conspiracy theories. There are many successflu conspiracies in history such as the assassination of Julius Caesar, the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, the Reichstag Fire, et al. My view is that wherever there is political power there are groups that are organized to take it, and there are groups organized to hold on to it, and it is likely that some of these groups are secret cabals. That's just the nature of the human desire for power; it happens all the time.

Having said this, that does not give a blank check for any conspiracy theory that comes down the pike. Accepting the reality of conspiracies does not entail accepting the reality of any specific conspiracy theory. There needs to be evidence, objective evidence, along with inference that are actually tenable and follow the established rules of inference (that is to say, they are logical; either empirically or deductively so). In my opinion many conspiracy theories do not live up to these requirements. And it is my opinion that those theories are best discussed in the open rather than in a gated community among those who are already convinced.

Thanks,

Jim

[tommy]

The Carlin video is a very cynical view of our culture, although there is some truth in what he says. Unfortunately, he does not recognize other forces at work for truth.

George Carlin ~ on The American Dream

...

[arthunter]

Tommy, what's changed is the internet ... we can now share ideas and information in an instant and though there are a lot of attacks on this freedom, they have not yet been able to shut it down ... I am in touch with around 3000 activists from around the world including constitutional lawyers, ex-government whistle blowers, authors, etc. etc ... it amazes me ... when I was contacted by mainstream media and radio hosts for an interview, I realized the power of this medium ...

...

The Carlin video is a very cynical view of our culture, although there is some truth in what he says. Unfortunately, he does not recognize other forces at work for truth.

[arthunter]

well said, Jim ...

I think that debate is important and I know that the debates that I have been involved in on this forum have only benefited me by forcing me to search deeper and verify facts which I present ... I actually welcome this ...
https://idebate.org/about/debate/why

I have read the introduction to the Red Pill Forum and the rationale for putting it in a separate space. ...

[Shandi]

I think that since we now have a RedPill category, it doesn't mean that people can't continue to do as they've always done, including hurling insults at people who believe differently than they do. But having a clear place to share and discover without getting side tracked spending time defending one's opinions and beliefs makes sense to me. I see the RedPill category as "continuing education", and I'm glad to see it.

I'm not sure what makes you "uneasy". What's the worst possible scenario that you imagine? For those who don't see themselves as potential members of the RedPill, it's easy enough to opt out, and continue on as always.

I feel uneasy when I see name calling and divisive remarks from this conscious community. I always equated conscious with kind, but it appears not to be so in reality.

People will always gravitate to kindred spirits, and in my opinion, that's what the RedPill category provides. Do you hang out at places where you don't feel safe?

I have read the introduction to the Red Pill Forum and the rationale for putting it in a separate space. As I understand it the rationale is that people who believe in, or want to discuss, the conspiracy theories (such as 9-11 trutherism) want to have a 'safe space' in which to speak and interact.

I am uneasy about this. ...

[Jim Wilson]

A brief reply to some comments on my post:

Shandi, actually, I do hang out in cyberspaces at sites that I don't agree with. I visit both dailykos and the American Conservative sites. I visit antiwar.com (a libertarian site) and truthdig (a liberal site). Regarding insults in cyberspace, it is a serious problem; though I think Barry does a fine job in checking that kind of drift. I think the prevalence of insults in cyberspace is a result of the disembodied nature of the communication. Many people report having the experience of saying something in cyberspace that they would not say to that same person face to face. The internet is very new; less than a full generation of usage, and it is going to take some time to develope a cyberetiquette that facilitates good interaction without at the same time suppressing the free exchange of ideas.

What I have noticed, and others have as well, is that the internet actually facilitates conceptual isolation. This is counterintuitive and I was surprised when I first noticed this. What appears to be the case is that people gravitate to sites that reflect their already held views and opinions. Conservatives tend to spend their time at conservative sites, progressives at progressive sites, libertarians at libertarian sites, etc. What this means is that views that would have remained fringe and eccentric can now find companions on the world wide web. Prior to the web, people had to regularly interact intellectually with their neighbors, people at work, or at the store, or free-time associations, who did not share their views. Now such interaction is taking a backseat to cyberinteraction and because we self-select our cyberworld, we no longer are placed in situations of intellectual challenge; or at least we do so far less.

My concern with the new forum is that it reflects this tendency towards intellectual isolation. What I am beginning to realize is that when people use the term 'safe space' more and more they mean a space where they do not have to engage with anyone who disagrees with them in the slightest -- that seems to me to be what 'safe' is coming to mean and embody. I don't think that is a good thing and ultimately leads to a kind of intellectual atrophy.

Perhaps I am exaggerating. After all, Waccovians are pretty decent people. Nevertheless, I remain uneasy about this tendency to build up online communities that consist of only those with whom one agrees.

[arthunter]

Once again, I have to agree with you Jim ...

I've asked myself why I resist this tiny little change on an online community board ... after all, it's hardly earth shattering ... but then again it is significant in some way ...

Our community is diverse, with lots of people expressing lots of different opinions ... yes, there have been some lively debates, but that's as it should be in a normal society which claims to be a "conscious community" where people are listened to and taken seriously by their neighbors ...

Further to that, the joy of this forum, and all forums, has always been that all opinions were allowed ... I certainly have read some posts which I didn't agree with, but I would never suggest that the poster should be restricted to a certain "category" of beliefs ...

Information and ideas are naturally fluid ... one person says something, which prompts someone else to say something and on it goes ... to insert "flood walls" into the process to control the flow just seems counter-productive to me ...

The attempt to classify people, information, research, ideas? ... this is a judgement call best left up to each individual because our real system of beliefs is a fluid one ... it changes, it mutates, as we interact with each other .... this is how change happens ... hopefully, we don't stay in our cubicle of beliefs, but we actually affect one another ...

[Barry]

Some further comments about the Red Pill Roundtable and safe spaces...

Note that WaccoBB.net itself is a "safe space" (well, at least on good days ) for the progressive community. Because it is focused on the progressive community, the content and tenor of the discussions here are much different than on other sites, such as the PD. So I think there is a good case to be made for online communities that share roughly the same values, where we can talk among ourselves.... free from the ridicule and rudeness that sometimes escapes from otherwise well meaning people who don't share those values.

Since we all loosely share the same set of values, the conversations here feel more relevant and are a greater interest to all of you who have self-selected to join us. As the conversation drifts to less relevant topics people tend to self-unselect.

The RPR takes that concept one step further. There's always been a tension on WaccoBB and in the larger progressive community as to whether the conspiracy theorists are the true progressives, seeing the unseen web that connects what is truly going on, or just left-wing Wacko nutjobs.

I have my own personal opinions about that, but as moderator I've tried to stay neutral on the matter. Some interesting conversations have ensued as the allegations are explored. However the nature of those conversations is that of skeptic vs believer, which is a fine thing. But there is also a need for a place for believers to discuss the finer points, without being challenged by non-believers, just as we might discuss the questionable policies of the Democratic Party, without be challenged by Tea Partiers.

And there is value for bringing skeptics and believers together for a debate. I see that happening in this new paradigm that includes the RPR as either a reply to one of the weekly updates of the action on the RPR that I have asked to be posted to WaccoTalk, or perhaps a new thread started by a skeptic in WaccoTalk that quotes a RPR post.

There are certain topics that fall on the line between Red Pill and Blue Pill people (Vaccines and Chemtrails come quickly to mind), that I can easily see active conversations happening in both RPR (without skeptics) and in the other categories with skeptics.

Exactly how all this will work will get worked out over time. I'll be monitoring the RPR category as it goes along. But I think the premise of an digest-opt-in a believer only zone is valid and worth a try.

[Shandi]

Jim,
I appreciate your response, and find it interesting. I have to admit I'd never spend time reading or watching conservative or religious programs. It just doesn't seem to serve my intellectual or spiritual development. And, I have a limited amount of time, as we all do.

I remember hearing this as a child..."No discussion of politics or religion". I think there was one other, but I can't recall right now. (Sex?) I understand the reasoning behind this, was to prevent heated conversations, which could actually get serious. At least, online, we are a bit safer from having to deal with that "in person" threat.

The wonderful thing about all offerings is that we can choose to participate or not. And if not enough people choose to join the Red PIll Roundtable, it won't survive. So, it's up to the majority.

And meanwhile, there are plenty of discussions where people can agree to dis-agree. Or "admonish" people through private emails, as a recent Wacco contributor meant to do with me, but it got posted in public. That must have been a little "embarrassing"!

Shandi, actually, I do hang out in cyberspaces at sites that I don't agree with...

[arthunter]

Barry,

I appreciate your position on this, I really do, and I realize that your job as moderator on this forum can sometimes be difficult, and you've done an excellent job of it ... thank you from all of us ...

While I think that it's a fine idea to have a place where members can go to discuss the more controversial subjects without as much opposition, there is one thing that bothers me about all of this, and that is that the decision to go there is not voluntary ...

Most members who post their concerns about chemtrails, vaccines, government harassment, Fukushima, etc, etc, etc, do so because of their concerns for the safety of our community. They are trying to warn people ... "hey look at this, this might be dangerous to your life" .... I put myself in that category ... trying to expose government corruption? ... I pay for these posts, and there are many others in this community that know exactly what I mean by that ... but I do this to warn others ...

Mandating that these posts must be contained within a group which already believes in such things ... well that is just preaching to the choir ...

So let's say that we have a real threat in our community and someone posts about it ... it is determined to be "Red Pill" information and because of that lots of others don't see it ... this is my concern ... throughout history there have been folks running around warning other folks of dangerous circumstances below the surface ... some of them have been correct ... President Kennedy put out some very vocal warnings before he was murdered ... does this make him a conspiracy theorist?

I'm just being honest here and these are my concerns ... you are in a difficult position and trying to keep everyone happy and I realize this ... thank you, once again, for all that you do ...

Some further comments about the Red Pill Roundtable and safe spaces...

[Alex]

.... However the nature of those conversations is that of skeptic vs believer...

I think your post is fair, but can we please use accurate labels from now on.

Things are being stirred up by the questioning going on, not the face value following going on.

People siding with consensus reality - people not questioning - are the face-value followers/believers.
People questioning mass media consensus reality - are the people being the skeptics first.

So calling non-questioners 'skeptics' is saying they're the skeptics of the skeptics....

Would you please from now on refer to the duality accurately as the 'followers vs questioners'.... or 'non-questioners vs questioners.'

Much appreciation.

[Scott McKeown]

I think your post is fair, but can we please use accurate labels from now on.

Things are being stirred up by the questioning going on, not the face value following going on.

People siding with consensus reality - people not questioning - are the face-value followers/believers.
People questioning mass media consensus reality - are the people being the skeptics first.

So calling non-questioners 'skeptics' is saying they're the skeptics of the skeptics....

Would you please from now on refer to the duality accurately as the 'followers vs questioners'.... or 'non-questioners vs questioners.'

Much appreciation.

If I engage in skeptical questioning of, say, the assertion on this forum that the US Government staged or committed the Sandy Hook School massacre in Newtown Connecticut in order to pass gun control legislation (which I do question and have been called out personally in this forum for questioning it) I would not feel that an accurate label for myself would be "follower", which clearly is a pejorative as it is being proposed.

Perhaps those on the side of the debate they are on should be able to pick their own label, if, indeed, there needs to be one. Therefore, in such cases I propose the label for myself to be "realist". Those on the other side of the debate can choose "questioner" or whatever label they want.

Scott

[Jim Wilson]

I want to second Scott's observation. If I am skeptical of the assertion that the earth is flat (and there are people who believe this) does that make me a 'follower'? I don't think so. This way of classifying the two sides is simply a strategy of dismissal, so that one side, the red-pill people, don't have to listen to those who disagree with their analysis. This does not further discussion.

[Alex]

..... I propose the label for myself to be "realist". Those on the other side of the debate can choose "questioner" or whatever label they want. Scott

We're looking for a neutral description of the people who accept the status quo face value and don't look any further in 'conspiracy' topics - 'realist' implies a pre-disposed conclusion that you see things for 'real' and the others don't. Again you may be 'skeptical' of the questioner's questions, but you don't deserve the label of skeptic because you are not being the first vocal, skeptical challengers - at all.

Ya, follower is wrong, I don't think we've found the right word yet. Mainstream could be it.

Mainstream vs Questioners is not superior to or derogatory of either side.

[Alex]

.....There's always been a tension on WaccoBB and in the larger progressive community as to whether the conspiracy theorists are the true progressives, seeing the unseen web that connects what is truly going on, or just left-wing Wacko nutjobs........

I can't ignore how disdainful and insulting that is to me and all the wacco members you are insinuating with superiority are nutjobs... and pretty much lets the cat out of the bag about what side you consider yourself on. Can we stop pretending your strong predilection doesn't show and be transparent about it?

Regulars have long known how far on the Blue Pill side about you are from lots of right wing posts, derision of the left and other nutjob calling (can we call you BlueBarry?) and we clearly get that you do think the RPR community are mostly loonies without a point and have been a longtime big thorn in your side.

No, you're not anywhere close to understanding or being one of the RPR community especially with that language, but I appreciate that the door is creaking open a bit more and you're making an effort to extend more of an olive branch...albeit at arms' length... and live with us peacefully too.

So you're outed and have lots of company, but here's to no exceptions to the no ridicule or rudeness rule for anyone.

[arthunter]

Fact:

These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America

https://www.businessinsider.com/thes...america-2012-6

Also, do a search for "disinformation agents" and "controlled opposition" ... the links are too numerous to list here ...

Sorry, but I would hardly label those who accept mainstream reporting as "realists" ... I think that "mainstream/questioners" might be accurate without stepping on any toes ...

..Therefore, in such cases I propose the label for myself to be "realist". Those on the other side of the debate can choose "questioner" or whatever label they want.

[arthunter]

Alex,

You can not argue for the validity of your opinions and then blast someone else for their opinions. We all get to express our opinions openly ... period. The ideas that Barry expressed here are honest and I support his right to express them, and even though I try to keep an open mind I also see information that causes me to question the intent of the poster.

One has to realize that the goal of disinformation agents is to take factual information and pervert it so that it looks crazy thus confusing everyone ... so an attack on our freedoms suddenly becomes about UFOs, etc .....

I can't ignore how disdainful and insulting that is to me and all the wacco members you are insinuating with superiority are nutjobs...

[Barry]

First, regarding terms, I don't know that we need to agree on terms for the differing world views. The terms of "questioner" and "skeptic" have relevancy but both only have meaning when related to another point of view (ie skeptical of what? The government or the conspiracy theorists.)

Mainstream is less ambiguous, but also borders on pejorative being that so many things that are held as mainstream are roundly derided in progressive community.

For the moment, I'll use the "questioner" and "mainstream terms below to be clear avoid additional controversy.

Moving on...

There's always been a tension on WaccoBB and in the larger progressive community as to whether the conspiracy theorists are the true progressives, seeing the unseen web that connects what is truly going on, or just left-wing Wacko nutjobs. ...

I can't ignore how disdainful and insulting that is to me and all the wacco members you are insinuating with superiority are nutjobs... and pretty much lets the cat out of the bag about what side you consider yourself on....

While it's true I wouldn't count myself among the "questioners", as you call it, but my characterization of "left-wing Wacko nutjobs", along with "true progressives" was just an identification of the endpoints of the spectrum of the views of "questioners" within the larger progressive community. No ridicule intended. My personal views are someplace between those endpoints.

...
While I think that it's a fine idea to have a place where members can go to discuss the more controversial subjects without as much opposition, there is one thing that bothers me about all of this, and that is that the decision to go there is not voluntary ...

Most members who post their concerns about chemtrails, vaccines, government harassment, Fukushima, etc, etc, etc, do so because of their concerns for the safety of our community. They are trying to warn people ... "hey look at this, this might be dangerous to your life" .... I put myself in that category ... trying to expose government corruption? ... I pay for these posts, and there are many others in this community that know exactly what I mean by that ... but I do this to warn others ...

Mandating that these posts must be contained within a group which already believes in such things ... well that is just preaching to the choir ...

Your concern is valid, Arthunter. I think what is called for some level of balance, discretion, and dare I say, moderatoration .

There are several issues at play. For one, I can see the RPR category as being a great resource for the questioners, but it only works if the content is aggregated into a category.

When it comes to the interface between the questioner and mainstream communities, I think it's a question of balance, both in regard to topics and volume/frequency. Some topics are of greater interest and relevance to the wider community (EMF radiation, Fukishima, Vaccines, and Chemtrails) whereas others are less so (Sandy Hook and gang stalking quickly come to mind).

Gang stalking is also an excellent example of excessive "warning". A post or two would be fine, but your almost daily stream of gang stalking posts for a month or three, Arthunter, was way too much. Beyond being ignored, it turns people off and does not reflect well on our larger community.

So my answer to this is to ask you and other questioners, is to primarily use the RPR for your questioning, and then for the moderator of the RPR (or other chosen person) to post roughly once a week a well presented summary of the most important action in the RPR (with links) to WaccoTalk or WaccoReader, so that mainstreamers would choose to read it. I think this handles all the concerns and actually gives you greater mainstream attention.

Like I've said there are many topics that I'm fine with lots of posts outside of the RPR, but for some, I think it's better for the questioner community and the mainstream community if it is organized on how propose.

[Alex]

Alex,

You can not argue for the validity of your opinions and then blast someone else for their opinions. We all get to express our opinions openly ... period. The ideas that Barry expressed here are honest and I support his right to express them, and even though I try to keep an open mind I also see information that causes me to question the intent of the poster.

One has to realize that the goal of disinformation agents is to take factual information and pervert it so that it looks crazy thus confusing everyone ... so an attack on our freedoms suddenly becomes about UFOs, etc .....

The issue I was addressing was the name calling of a faction of wacco members nutjobs and loonies.

I don't see why it isn't an example of the rudeness and ridicule from the same essay reminding everyone not to ridicule or be rude. I didn't say anything about not expressing opinion AT ALL.

[arthunter]

this is my final word on this thread ...

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showt...631#post186631

[handy]

Well...

My first impression is that the "RPR" is very like a "free speech area" that is fenced off away from the event being protested. It seems to be a passive-agressive attempt to control others by creating an unnecessary division, and then enforcing that division by outright separation. How utterly "progressive". Yuck!

As for the terms used to define the "sides" of the division (mainstream vs. questioner, realist vs. nutjob, conspiracist v. believer), etc., perhaps it could be reduced to statists vs. individualists.

Or even, to put a finer point on it, Those who (psychotically) want, and feel they have a right, to control others vs. those who feel no need to control others, and would for the most part, just like to be left alone.

Those who resort to name calling when they cannot make their case simply lose their respectworthiness.
While intentionally hurtful, it isn't really damaging, and it's certainly nothing a strong, self-respecting individual needs protection from.

We'll see... Need more data before a decision can be taken. Good Luck.

[Shandi]

I don't see the RPR as an area to protest events, like an anti-war march. I see it as education for those of us who want to learn more from those who've done the research to become more informed on controversial topics, and a way to learn "the other side of the story". Many people look to mainstream media as their source for information. I think about people who pay over $100 a month to Comcast to watch "the news", so they "know what's going on". The news is the main reason why many people won't cut the cord with cable; most of these people tend to be seniors who've watched the news all their lives, and couldn't image a day without it. I think it's pretty sad, but there's no convincing them to give it up. They believe they're being informed.

Anyway, I find it interesting to read such reactions and accusations to RPR. Is this progressive, conscious, and in the spirit of caring about the community? It's not a closed group; it just has guidelines, like those that Barry has for WaccoBB, like any group has. If someone wants to be part of it, they have to abide by those.

[kpage9]

just one tiny editorial quibble: you really can't call others psychotic and then condemn name-calling.

Well...

My first impression is that the "RPR" is very like a "free speech area" that is fenced off away from the event being protested. It seems to be a passive-agressive attempt to control others by creating an unnecessary division, and then enforcing that division by outright separation. How utterly "progressive". Yuck!

As for the terms used to define the "sides" of the division (mainstream vs. questioner, realist vs. nutjob, conspiracist v. believer), etc., perhaps it could be reduced to statists vs. individualists.

Or even, to put a finer point on it, Those who (psychotically) want, and feel they have a right, to control others vs. those who feel no need to control others, and would for the most part, just like to be left alone.

Those who resort to name calling when they cannot make their case simply lose their respectworthiness.
While intentionally hurtful, it isn't really damaging, and it's certainly nothing a strong, self-respecting individual needs protection from.

We'll see... Need more data before a decision can be taken. Good Luck.

[Scott McKeown]

We're looking for a neutral description of the people who accept the status quo face value and don't look any further in 'conspiracy' topics - 'realist' implies a pre-disposed conclusion that you see things for 'real' and the others don't. Again you may be 'skeptical' of the questioner's questions, but you don't deserve the label of skeptic because you are not being the first vocal, skeptical challengers - at all.

Ya, follower is wrong, I don't think we've found the right word yet. Mainstream could be it.

Mainstream vs Questioners is not superior to or derogatory of either side.

I don't consider "Mainstream vs Questioners" to represent how I view or experience this at all. I'm sure you and others do, but it's through your lens. And it is not at all close to neutral.

Rationalists vs Kool-Aid drinkers? (Just kidding) ; )

Scott

[AllorrahBe]

If it's true, and you say this: "I think the premise of an digest-opt-in a believer only zone is valid and worth a try" ~ then I'm willing to grant that you know a lot more about it than most of your nearly 12 thousand subscribers, and I believe we collectively will figure out how to "do this" as we continue pushing the envelope together! Again, Barry: Good Job!!!
Rev. BE

Some further comments about the Red Pill Roundtable and safe spaces...

Note that WaccoBB.net itself is a "safe space" (well, at least on good days ) for the progressive community. Because it is focused on the progressive community, the content and tenor of the discussions here are much different than on other sites, such as the PD. So I think there is a good case to be made for online communities that share roughly the same values, where we can talk among ourselves.... free from the ridicule and rudeness that sometimes escapes from otherwise well meaning people who don't share those values.

Since we all loosely share the same set of values, the conversations here feel more relevant and are a greater interest to all of you who have self-selected to join us. As the conversation drifts to less relevant topics people tend to self-unselect.

The RPR takes that concept one step further. There's always been a tension on WaccoBB and in the larger progressive community as to whether the conspiracy theorists are the true progressives, seeing the unseen web that connects what is truly going on, or just left-wing Wacko nutjobs.

I have my own personal opinions about that, but as moderator I've tried to stay neutral on the matter. Some interesting conversations have ensued as the allegations are explored. However the nature of those conversations is that of skeptic vs believer, which is a fine thing. But there is also a need for a place for believers to discuss the finer points, without being challenged by non-believers, just as we might discuss the questionable policies of the Democratic Party, without be challenged by Tea Partiers.

And there is value for bringing skeptics and believers together for a debate. I see that happening in this new paradigm that includes the RPR as either a reply to one of the weekly updates of the action on the RPR that I have asked to be posted to WaccoTalk, or perhaps a new thread started by a skeptic in WaccoTalk that quotes a RPR post.

There are certain topics that fall on the line between Red Pill and Blue Pill people (Vaccines and Chemtrails come quickly to mind), that I can easily see active conversations happening in both RPR (without skeptics) and in the other categories with skeptics.

Exactly how all this will work will get worked out over time. I'll be monitoring the RPR category as it goes along. But I think the premise of an digest-opt-in a believer only zone is valid and worth a try.