GICC Is a great place for keeping up with current affairs. I do object to this forum becoming a sounding board for groups with an agenda no matter who they are. If the forum wants to become something else I personally do not want a part of it. I have tried over the past year and a half to keep it on an even keel and so far it has worked out pretty good. Please post your thoughts so we all know where we are going with this forum.

-- Martin Thompson (mthom1927@aol.com), September 25, 2001

Answers

Understanding current affairs often requires hearing extremely diverse viewpoints. There are lots of political opinions that have been posted here over the past year and a half that I disagree with, but I try to keep an open mind. I've learned a lot, and hope that people continue to post news from their various perspectives (there is no such thing as completely unbiased information).

"Those who are willing to forfeit liberty for security will have neither." -- Benjamin Franklin

see

www.commondreams.org www.alternet.org www.prorev.com/fastnews.htm www.counterpunch.org/wtcarchive.html www.mindpollen.com www.fair.org www.workingforchange.com www.whatreallyhappened.com (prior warnings) www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/wtcbomb.html (FBI let 1993 attack happen) http://www.aci.net/kalliste/ www.cryptome.org

-- mark (mrobinowitz@igc.org), September 25, 2001.

Martin -- As I understand it, this is your board and was set up for one purpose...to be a repository of news items form all over the web.

If it changes in character, 95% or more of those that come here to read and post areticles will leave, I know I will.

If it is your board, I urge you to delete those posts that are not in keeping with the original purpose...including mine.

Again, if I understand the purpose of this board, it is NOT the place to extend the reach of individuals and groups seeking to push political agendas...including mine!!!

I would also support you requiring registration so people that insist on abusing the privilage of participating here, in light of the purpose of this board, can be blocked from posting...including me

JB

-- Jackson Brown (Jackson_Brown@deja.com), September 25, 2001.

What's the beef? I enjoy both the articles and all the opinions people express of them. That's what gives this board spice and life. Without all the comments, which only enhance and embellish the base information, this board would be drier than toast, and I would be outta here in a hurry.

-- QMan (qman@c-zone.net), September 25, 2001.

I don't get it. When ever you have a group of people reading news that's all over the map, which is routing out every dung heap of unpleasant information such as about terrorists you are going to have folks own thoughts that range all over the map too.

I find all this as real interestin stuff.

-- Buck (bigbuck@trailways.net), September 25, 2001.

Sure, there's a mix of straight news reporting, and biased propaganda. So what? -- I think I am smart enough to distinguish between the two.

-- RogerT (rogerT@c-zone.net), September 25, 2001.

Martin- In principle, I agree with Mark and QMan, but also feel that as the proprietor of the board, you are entitled to determine its content and to set limits to posts that are not in keeping with the original purpose or that are offensive to your personal values.

Thinking about the original TB Y2K and how it deteriorated post-Y2K to a place that lacked even minimal civility and appreciable content, and a couple of other boards that were more or less "highjacked" by individuals with special agendas or beliefs, it seems to me that boards such as this are potentially vulnerable to exploitation. Free speech and reasonable rules for constructive functioning do not necessarily exclude each other- a balance can be found. As the owner of the board, the judgment is yours, in my opinion.

-- Swissrose (cellier3@mindspring.com), September 25, 2001.

Without you this board might as well cease to exist. Delete the posts, news items and/or comments, as you see fit. Those that object may leave, those that are quick readers or do not object will stay. Good luck in your decision.

-- Joe (CactusJoe001@AOL.com), September 25, 2001.

Lighten up, Martin. I've seen stuff here lately that is so inane it has given me a good laugh. We all need a good laugh now and then, right now, to help us through these depressing times.

When I say depressing I mean both mentally and economically.

-- Wellesley (wellesley@freeport.net), September 25, 2001.

I'm not sure what your point is Martin. In one sentence you say you don't object to the forum becoming a sounding board but in the next you object to the forum becoming something "else"? Could you be a little more specific. I haven't seen anything objectionable posted (But I don't read all the posts, just the ones that appear interesting).

However I did think the forum was collapsing when we started to get a bunch of chemtrail postings. That's worse then the rags at the checkout counter with articles about the baby with two heads and stuff like that. Maybe I missed the posts you are referring to?

Are you talking about the question concerning national ids?

-- Guy Daley (guydaley1@netzero.net), September 25, 2001.

The board is fine as it is, it's pretty obvious when something is not in tune, just delete to your hearts content, honestly though I don't see that much that is not fitting in.

-- Will (righthere@home.now), September 25, 2001.

I come here a couple times a week and I've noticed a difference that may be a sign of things to come.

People have started posting petitions and papers by radicalized groups. This is a very different thing than was seen here before a couple weeks ago.

I've seen other BBs and newsgroups get overrun by those that are only interested in propaganda and not information as soon as they find they can get away with it and the word spreads.

Mr. Thompson, if this gets out of hand I would urge you to delete your hearts away. This is the prime reason that most groups that survive with their original purpose in tact are those that are moderated.

Comments added as "answers" (replies) in another thing. There is plenty of room for free speach there.

Seth

-- Seth (mstrcrftr@aol.com), September 25, 2001.

Seth

Thanks for the support. You are correct on what has been happening recently. It is a very subtle thing, but it is there. The answer part is not a problem.

-- Martin Thompson (mthom1927@aol.com), September 25, 2001.

Keep up the good work, Martin. I like to see what's going on and comments about the news stories. I'm not particularly interested in "agendas" - although I do have an agenda - the one this board was originally founded on. That is preparedness. This board was founded on the idea that tracking events would show trends that crossed disciplines and would alert thoughtful people that just maybe action should be taken somewhere somehow...

Sally

-- Sally Strackbein (Sally@Y2kKitchen.com), September 26, 2001.

This can be a very lively board at times. And I think this thread proves it.

-- LillyLP (lillyLP@aol.com), September 26, 2001.

My advice, for what it is worth: keep the board exactly as it is. All the recent propaganda and obviously antagosnistic posts only fire up responses and reactons. In a free society you always have to put up with a lot of sick people. Who cares? We hard-core members of this group know how to chuck this stuff off and appraise properly.

-- R2D2 (R2D2@earthnend.com), September 26, 2001.

Martin!!!! This board IS the best board around! You are doing one helluva job! This board is reaching more people than you ever imagined! Please don't get discouraged, people need this board for vital information. There's no other place to go IMHO to get accurate and up-to-date information. Keep up the good work!

-- (CAkidd_94520@yahoo.com), September 26, 2001.

Ditto the above, Martin. I visit several boards. THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM--"nut cakes" as I believe Wellesley put it--but yours is the BEST. I always stop here first--to find out what is TRULY going on in the world. Without you I would be a babbling, incoherent idiot, a no-nothing imbecile.

-- JackW (jpayne@webtv.net), September 26, 2001.

If GICC hadn't "changed" since Ground Zero Day (that's 2001/09/11, not the day we thought it would be, 12/31/99!); something would be quite wrong indeed. This terrorism crisis is shaping up to be the awesome crisis that Y2K wasn't. So, GICC is more important now than it ever has been. The need for preparation has never been greater.

There is an important difference between controversial Opinion, (acceptable) and incorrect Fact statements (unacceptable). The dissemination of wrong factual information is what I believe should be any moderator's first policing priority.

I believe in, and ask for, in everyone's name, Due Process. This means persons making offensive posts should be notified and warned by Email. Any post deletions should be accompanied with an emailed notice to poster of deletion, and why. In this way those with valuable contributions, but who also make objectionable posts, can get feedback for improvement. Of course, a false Email address voids "due process" privileges. These shold be delteted if offensive without compunction or apology.

My sincere and heartfelt THANK YOU for making GICC possible. It has become my favorite website for the Third Millennium.

-- Robert Riggs (rxr.999@worldnet.att.net), September 26, 2001.

Martin, I know I have come to depend on this site for NEWS. The central reporting of locally reported NEWS is very, very valuable. I think you've been doing a fine job trying to keep it that way. It can be hard to keep opinion out of the NEWS, because some news isn't reported any other way. But I think everyone would agree that we don't need the posts that are either 1)Pure Opinion or 2)Mis- or Dis- information.

This is NOT a free-speech issue.

This is "Keeping this forum valuable for the intended users."

Could you perhaps add a reminder along the lines of, "This is grass-roots information, not opinion?" I suggest deleting postings that don't meet that criteria, including my own if I don't make the grade.

Thanks!

-- Rich Marsh (marshr@airmail.net), September 26, 2001.

Hi folks, and Martin especially. Been away from GICC for a week or so due to other pressing issues... and come back this morning to find some soul searching going on. Haven't even skimmed lower down to see what may have prompted this (if anything in particular did).

I agree with the gist of the comments, that this is a first and foremost a NEWS service and it's Martin's call. Period.

I do think a little discussion or perspective on the news is fair, and so far I like to think we (myself included) have kept comments to a reasonable length. There's very little bitterness evident here, and when we (myself included) get a little angry, we tend to let the thread just die out. That's great.

One of the comments above noted the "board would be drier than toast". Well, that's OK. There are lots of places on the Web for extended discussions. In fact, one of the nice things I've noted in lurking here and there is that other boards do reference/link specific postings here. GICC is serving a useful function far beyond this board itself.

On those other boards, extended discussions do take place. If that's your cup of tea, that's the place IMHO to have such extended (and sometimes heated) discussions.

It strikes me that most of the time the discussions here die out pretty quickly -- even after recent events, the threads here are trivial compared to the volume elsewhere. And that's OK.

I do suggest that new GICC threads be based on news items or sensible op-ed pieces. In my opinion, GICC isn't really the place to post stand-alone "questions" as such (despite the way the Greenspun software uses the word "Question" when you post items and replies). If a news item leads to a little back and forth, that's OK, but Martin should feel free to act as he wishes.

Martin, this isn't to suggest you must take on lots of additional "moderator" work on top of your posting efforts! I think whatyou've done so far is great. Keep up the good work. But if something seems *to you* inappropriate for GICC, it seems reasonable to me for you to delete or lock or whatever, and indicate to the person that there are probably a dozen other places on the web that are more appropriate. It's not censorship.

I will make an effort in the next day or so to contribute some news and op-ed pieces -- and some background "replies" here and there.

Sorry about my absence.

Andre in southcentral PA

-- Andre Weltman (aweltman@state.pa.us), September 26, 2001.