What scares those who scream "conspiracy theorist"

If you were to be ridiculed for saying that it would be because in 2001 forums would have been filled with all sorts of theories pulled out of all sorts of holes.

"Your" (its not yours) theory would have been mixed in with 'its the Russians' 'its the Aliens' and all sorts of shyte. The innundation would have lead to a single righteous universal demand 'proof or gtfo'.

And if you didnt have it then your theory in fairness was as good as 'its the British monarchy and Rotschilds'. Or any other of the hundreds of theories.

How can you blame people.

Cool. You're avoiding the question then. Thanks for illustrating my point.

Conspiracy theorists aren't even able to outline their own beliefs.

You are now also making a claim about me. Are you able to provide a quote where I called you stupid? Please provide it.

As for why: I don't think my characterisation of your beliefs is disingenuous. I can't provide specific quotes, but I believe that in broad strokes it's an accurate description of what you believe. (If you disagree, please just explain what you actually believe and show me up.)

Any differences would be minor and wouldn't substantively alter my point.

You believe very silly things about 9/11 that other conspiracy theorists would dismiss as invalid.

You don't seem to have any method to determine valid from less valid conspiracy theories.

It is discussed here

The charter was put together by input from users, mods, cmods and i think even some admin input was given in 2015 Then in 2019 a mod without consulting anyone, changed the charter because it basically didn't suit his point of view and clashed with the opinion he had in the threads he participated in himself. The original charter had some clauses in it that protected posters from being ridiculed and badgered to provide concrete evidence, all in line with the nature of this specific forum.

An example of what we have to deal with here illustrated by what Johndoe posted above

quoted below

"Also you have a long history with 9/11 trutherism, and you tried to change the charter to suit that. It's nasty stuff, you've be quickly dealt on any normal forum (e.g. science, history) for antics like that."

If you look through the charter feedback you can see I had an issue with the charter being changed by just 1 "biased" mod. specially if you take into account the long process it took to get a proper charter in place in the first place.

Johndoe is a perfect example of how The truth is twisted and turned to suit the narrative

Asking for concrete proof as to why someone beliefs a certain conspiracy theory is not

What about asking for a bit of credible evidence?

Is that the same discussion I asked him several times why the change was necessary in the first place ?.

Yup. And you kept dodging questions. It's your go to tactic it seems.

Define credible

I have an issue with not directly answering stupid self explanatory questions ... hence my lack of responding to most of your input

In that particular discussion Overheal removed the 2 key points regarding a bit of protection for people posting theories ... Its a bit silly to ask which ones I have an issue with ... He was fishing and I wasn't biting

Right.

There used to be a rule on this forum that conspiracy theorists didn't have to provide evidence for their conspiracies. Certain mods were just tired of moderating all the crap so they created it (one in particular), it was heavily argued against. No one needs to explain how absurd that rule was.

It's glaringly obvious you want special treatment for conspiracy theories to facilitate your fringe views and shield them from normal scrutiny (as is the case on normal forums)

Like I said, you wouldn't pull this **** on any history forum, making a sub-forum with "special rules" specifically to facilitate deniers.

exactly, protection. why do people who post conspiracy theories need protecting? what makes their posts so special?

No. You ignore all questions when you aren't able to answer them.

Like in this thread, you couldn't explain what your "real" beliefs were. The question can't be "self explanatory" as you need to actually explain your beliefs.

Maybe if you answered questions directly rather than trying to dance around them to avoid the traps you think are there, you'd be having less of a bad time.

But then, you'd be forced to think harder about your beliefs, and this is not allowed.

this isn't just about you and your posts. asking questions is not badgering. asking questions is not ridiculing. If other posters are ridiculing you then report the posts. that is against the rules. BTW one of those rules is broken constantly and nothing is ever done about it. The one about not regurgitating source material. posts with nothing but a long YT video is not a discussion.