clarifaction of the rules for this section please

[elusive moonwalker]

the rules need to be clarifyed and /or. the name of the section changed because its not clear. if the only talk in the section that is allowed is creating conspiracys and agreeing with them then that needs to be confirmed.so we know where we stand and can take the right action.thats all im asking for. because at this point it seems like ppl are trying to act like all discussion is allowed then in the next sentence anyone who doesnt agree with a theory is told to leave.instead of ppl being warned,modqued and even banned the rules need to be confirmed and if we arent allowed to post that we dont agree with certain theories and arent allowed to point out false info then fine i will leave and leave u all to it. . things need to be clarifyed instead of acting like all are welcome to investigate and discuss when clearly that isnt the case

 

[Serenity3104]

Elusive, I don't think the problem is that "certain" people shouldn't be allowed to post. The problem is coming from every thread being derailed and taken off topic because some people don't belive the "theory" of that certain thread topic. If you don't believe it, that's fine, no one is saying that you HAVE to agree with everything. It gets frustrating, however, to be reading a thread about one thing and all of a sudden it has become a redundant debunking of the thread topic. Take the Grace thread for instance, it has been about Tohme the last 4 or 5 pages, and before that it had become about Murray because some people don't believe that Grace should be looked into. If they don't believe Grace has done any wrong, that's FINE, that should be stated and moved on. The thread should not be derailed into conversations about Tohme or Murray and that seems to be happening in almost EVERY thread. That is the problem that I'm seeing personally, threads have been constantly going off topic because some people don't believe the topic theory and therefore turn the thread into what they do believe. A simple solution would be to comment on the TOPICS and stop turning every thread into something totally different. I can go into about 7 threads right now and see the same types of comments about the same things because the threads have been derailed. That, to me, is what is getting extremely frustrating. So either you agree with the topic theory or you don't, either option is FINE, but derailing the threads over and over does not help anything or anybody. That is just my humble opinion. Have a good one!

 

[elusive moonwalker]

ok but im not sure what u mean by derailing the subject. saying u dont agree with the thread title and posting your opinions why isnt derailing. u are still discussing the subject.if ppl mean derailing by not agreeing with the thread and stating something other that what the majority want to hear well then i guess derailing is just an excuse for wanting to shut others up. anyway like has been said this board is only viewed by a minority as most members dont come here so theres no point me wasting my time when theres bigger fish to fry.if ppl want to create theories out of info that has been provern false which obviously doesnt help in getting to the truth then thats upto them. i have no intrest in being threatened by posters who only came here after june who have the gaul to insituate because i dont go along with every little thing that i and others are some kind of infutrators is frankly insulting. so i along with many other repsected posters are out of this section of the forum.its a shame its come to this. considering how things were when we tore apart sneddons case. when murray is hopefully arrested then maybe we can go back to that.

 

[Serenity3104]

ok but im not sure what u mean by derailing the subject. saying u dont agree with the thread title and posting your opinions why isnt derailing. u are still discussing the subject.if ppl mean derailing by not agreeing with the thread and stating something other that what the majority want to hear well then i guess derailing is just an excuse for wanting to shut others up.

Elusive, you are correct, the bolded is NOT derailing the thread. I don't know what others mean by derailing, but I don't mean stating your opinions or not agreeing with the topic is derailing. I mean changing the topic of the thread completely to something different. I'll go back to the "Grace fled" thread, if you don't agree that Grace is in the wrong, or that she should be investigated and state your case why, that's fine. I mean the thread has been derailed because its not even about Grace anymore, its about Tohme. How did that happen? Either way, I hope it is all sorted out soon, and I agree, maybe when Murray is arrested and we get an actual case going, we can all come together to tear his defense apart and get to the bottom of this, I sure hope so for Michael's sake. I hope I made myself a little clearer

 

[kasume]

Take the Grace thread for instance, it has been about Tohme the last 4 or 5 pages, and before that it had become about Murray because some people don't believe that Grace should be looked into. If they don't believe Grace has done any wrong, that's FINE, that should be stated and moved on. The thread should not be derailed into conversations about Tohme or Murray and that seems to be happening in almost EVERY thread. That is the problem that I'm seeing personally, threads have been constantly going off topic because some people don't believe the topic theory and therefore turn the thread into what they do believe. A simple solution would be to comment on the TOPICS and stop turning every thread into something totally different.

I am gulty of that :smilerolleyes: I went into the Grace thread, and saw they were all talking about Thome and I even thought, this is a Grace thread, then I started talking about Thome with them anyways.

Next time, I'll make sure to keep Thome in his his threads and so forth. And I agree, because that way, information gets mixed up. And whenever we want to go back and look at specific past info, we don't know where to look, because it can be in any thread on any page. Yeah, we should all stay on topic. If you are talking about the missing tapes, and you switch to Murray, then go to his thread...and so forth.

 

[Autumn II]

That is something that happens in nearly every thread, and not just in the I.U. It's kinda human-nature? The convo begins to go off topic and then meanders. I am guilty of that, as well, and will try harder to stay on the topics of individual threads. One thing that would be useful is when a thread starts to go off-topic, to post the URL of the thread where that topic is already being discussed? That could redirect people, and pull the thread back on topic?

I think the problem is that this I.U. was set up for the discussion of "conspiracy theories." It says so in the guidelines, which are actually quite clear. This IS the place to discuss "conspiracy theories," ok?

A conspiracy by definition involves more than one person, and has intentionality. That Murray, alone, made a mistake, is by definition not a conspiracy theory.

There are posters here who say in nearly every thread that there was NO conspiracy and that Murray made a terrible mistake. We get that view, but yet this STILL is the forum for discussion of conspiracy theories, so I'm not sure what the point is? To say there should be NO forum for the discussion of conspiracies? To say everyone who thinks there is a conspiracy is wrong? That's not very productive for conversations in a forum dedicated to the discussion of conspiracy theories, at the very least.

It's like, as an analogy, suppose there is a message board or forum for discussion of the music of Beyonce. OK? Someone comes in there and says, over-and-over, "Her music isn't very good and we shouldn't be discussing it." Uhm, what does that DO to a topical forum? It eventually kills it?

Anyone is free to post here, but I'm not understanding why someone who doesn't want to discuss conspiracy theories would WANT to post here at all? Other than to say that people shouldn't be investigating conspiracy theories? That just isn't very productive to the purposes of the forum, and it's been happening far too much.

Just thought of a better analogy. Suppose this was a forum for discussing Michael Jackson's music. Just the music? And suppose someone is really, really dedicated to proving, somehow, that Prince is a better musician, and comes up-in-here and posts, "Prince's music is better." Ohhhh, kaaaay? Someone else starts a thread to discuss "Earth Song." The Prince-advocate posts, "Purple Rain was a better song." That makes NO sense in a forum dedicated to discussion MICHAEL'S music, and it kills the topic, pretty much. If someone wants to discuss Prince, wouldn't a Prince forum be a better location for that?

 

[Serenity3104]

Vic, I agree that its human nature lol I know I get off topic at times too, but at one point it seemed like the ONLY redirect was to Murray, in almost every thread, it becomes frustrating.

I also agree that the description of this particular forum hasn't changed since it was put up, and it seemed everyone understood that until recently?

The truth is nobody knows anything but what they were told by their particular sources or media sources that they choose to believe, therefore no one can be proven WRONG, the only thing that can be proven is that your source said something different....right? This is a place for questions and speculation which is all we have at the moment along with leaked PORTIONS of some documents, even with the portions we still have to fill in the blanks...right?

eh....I don't know anymore :lol: back to it.

 

[TinaG]

That is something that happens in nearly every thread, and not just in the I.U. It's kinda human-nature? The convo begins to go off topic and then meanders. I am guilty of that, as well, and will try harder to stay on the topics of individual threads. One thing that would be useful is when a thread starts to go off-topic, to post the URL of the thread where that topic is already being discussed? That could redirect people, and pull the thread back on topic?

I think the problem is that this I.U. was set up for the discussion of "conspiracy theories." It says so in the guidelines, which are actually quite clear. This IS the place to discuss "conspiracy theories," ok?

A conspiracy by definition involves more than one person, and has intentionality. That Murray, alone, made a mistake, is by definition not a conspiracy theory.

There are posters here who say in nearly every thread that there was NO conspiracy and that Murray made a terrible mistake. We get that view, but yet this STILL is the forum for discussion of conspiracy theories, so I'm not sure what the point is? To say there should be NO forum for the discussion of conspiracies? To say everyone who thinks there is a conspiracy is wrong? That's not very productive for conversations in a forum dedicated to the discussion of conspiracy theories, at the very least.

It's like, as an analogy, suppose there is a message board or forum for discussion of the music of Beyonce. OK? Someone comes in there and says, over-and-over, "Her music isn't very good and we shouldn't be discussing it." Uhm, what does that DO to a topical forum? It eventually kills it?

Anyone is free to post here, but I'm not understanding why someone who doesn't want to discuss conspiracy theories would WANT to post here at all? Other than to say that people shouldn't be investigating conspiracy theories? That just isn't very productive to the purposes of the forum, and it's been happening far too much.

I'm a little confused here, so bear with me. The description of this forum states:

In this forum we question Michael's death, the latest news and stories surrounding his death and the conspiracy theories

It says the IU is a forum to question Michael's death, the latest news and stories surrounding his death, AND the conspiracy theories (not ONLY the conspiracy theories). In my mind, I have approached the IU as a means to view and discuss info about his death and everything surrounding it, including--but not limited to--conspiracy theories.

I don't know if I believe in a full blown conspiracy or not. I am definitely open to that possibility, which is why I like to read those posts as well. But if this is truly an investigative forum/unit, it seems to me that the focus should be on investigating MJ's death, and that means anything related to his death, conspiracy theories or otherwise. That's why I read and post here, because that was my understanding of the purpose of this forum. Have I just misunderstood it all this time? If so, perhaps there should be two separate IU forums: one for info and news surrounding MJ's death, and one solely for conspiracy theories???

 

[Mechi]

Freedom means to me here you can say: I believe this and that.

Then there of cuz others have the freedom to say: I believe different.

However there's to me no sense in telling:
You shouldn't believe this or that because you do not have prove for it.

However there can be sense in telling:
Hm I've found this piece (link) or that piece (link) and that's why I do believe this or that.

Just let ppl believe what they believe and listen and/or don't even bother to read?
Maybe as easy as that?
For some ppl these sources are credible for other ppl other sources are credible.

Facts out there are rare. And my personal advice for everybody is to get ready that we will never know the complete one and only valid truth.

Still the loss we all suffered is imense, so some are in need of some more truth? If that annoys anyone if that is not what you can take then stay away for your own sake? everybody is here by their very own free will?

To close a certain forum unit makes ppl just go somewhere else (so I welcome to keep this open for everybody). It does form diversity not community if you open it only for some or close it only for some and it's the death of tolerance... well to me... I know democracy is a question of a majority... then again this is a private owned forum so here's maybe the possibility for some more? I don't know.

We're here in this unit for posing questions? We're here for posing where we think (not necessarily know) things do not add up as they are told by the media/in interviews or even by fellow forummembers?

I would prefer some more structure also.
Like a thread for every person involved. A clear Murray, Grace, Phillips, Thome, Barrack, Anschutz, Joe, Katherine, or family thread and keep it strictly to that very person. But we need some self discipline for that, I think it's too much work for moderators. Then maybe we should put up timeline threads... like the day of Michaels death, who was interviewed by the police when etc.
Again it's up to us I think.

Then I would just beg everyone instantly not to follow a certain person through each and every thread and respond to each and every post. If you have a personal agenda with someone please please please take it to pm. You can wonderfully go on about your subjects there.
If ppl want to follow their belief in certain sources and not other sources then just let them... we do have some kind of freedom of speech here... just focus on yourself and why you believe what you believe and let others think and believe different? just do your own research in proving what you believe. Be ok with yourself and be satisfied with that and try not that much to prove others wrong?
It's clearly not about accusations here... it's about theories and possibilities, possible motives etc.
To me honestly nobody but Michael (who can't speak for himself anymore) needs really a defense in this unit? as non of us is functioning as a DA uh?
If you want to believe in what a certain person is telling then that is great. Just accept when others do not?
To everybody (included myself) don't hammer your general opinion into every thread, just please try to focus on topic and say what you have to say to that very topic and leave it at that? Try not to repeat yourself in questioning what others do question. Try not to prove someone else is stupid. Try to come up with some content and best with something really new?
And post links whenever you're able or think you're able to back up what you're saying.

Ok maybe like that... well I don't know... I really don't.

 

[Autumn II]

Mostly what I do is pose questions or suggest possible scenarios. Just because a scenario is suggested doesn't mean that I necessarily believe it. . . . just that it's worthy of exploring, using logic and the available information? So, I haven't yet advanced a "theory" of what I believe happened, because I don't KNOW. . . . . yet. Or at least my ideas have not gelled enough to make a decision on that?

"Murray made a mistake and killed Michael" is one theory that's been advanced, and now there is a thread for that discussion. That theory means that its advocates believe there was NO conspiracy. That's ok, but I do hope discussions about that will now be kept in that one thread so the other threads can move forward?

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=84382

As far as the guidelines of the forum are concerned, they have not changed. They also say this: "contains heavy speculation so please if you aren't able to respect the atmosphere of this section do not enter. That seems very, very clear and I hope we are on a healthy track now?

 

[rainny]

"Murray made a mistake and killed Michael"[/I] is one theory that's been advanced, and now there is a thread for that discussion. That theory means that its advocates believe there was NO conspiracy. That's ok, but I do hope discussions about that will now be kept in that one thread so the other threads can move forward?

I'm participating in that thread, but it doesn't mean that I've

reached any conclusions as to what I believe.

I'm reading all the threads with the same interest.

 

[Autumn II]

I'm participating in that thread, but it doesn't mean that I've

reached any conclusions as to what I believe.

I'm reading all the threads with the same interest.

Nor have I, reached a definitive conclusion, although now I do think some scenarios are more likely than others. . . . . . I continue to read with interest.