Posts by Daniel Williams16

Keith Gonzalez said:I suppose you're right that alternative isn't exactly overflowing with rigorous restrictive measures, though I suspect some level of decorum will still be maintained. It seems everyone assumes they don't need to check if a suitable topic already exists.

Furthermore, as you pointed out, the interaction wasn't constructive, which I guess provides even more reason to close this out, since those kinds of (non)discussions were essentially the hallmark of this subforum—something I'm hoping might change. 😉

Regarding points 1, 2, and 3, I suppose the whole point of reviving old threads is that they might contain newer, more current, or more comprehensive content. That way, someone reading from the beginning can track the evolution of thoughts and stances as a thread "ages."
As for the material you mentioned, you should find everything you need regarding C. Alimentarius and vaccination within those specific threads.

If anyone else shows interest, the thread can simply be merged. I won't be reopening this one.

See, we can actually reach an agreement. Let’s just have it your way and leave it at that. 😍
But let's be realistic here; I guess you're correct regarding the unconstructive tone set by the provocateurs who initiated the teasing, even if that sort of thing happens across all subforums and topics. While those provocations certainly provide a reason to shut the thread down, they can also, in many instances, be used to actually fuel the discussion itself. However, as I said, you're the one deciding which of those two outcomes takes precedence, so while I'm somewhat disappointed we didn't give the thread a fair shake, I am equally relieved that you've saved me the effort and time. If I had to bet on what would likely happen, I'd probably bet on the negative outcome—that the thread would have eventually collapsed under senseless bickering and provocations beyond an acceptable limit anyway.
And really, what else could one expect from a conspiracy theory, right?
Regards, and thanks again for saving my precious time and energy!

Keith Gonzalez said:Since this topic revolves around population decline, vaccination, and the elites driving those agendas (based on the links you provided)—subjects that have been chewed over on the c. Alimentarius PDF hundreds of times already via various threads—I figured it was probably time to close it out.
The user in question has essentially just validated my reasoning.

We aren't glued to this forum 24/7, and I had to actually click through those links to understand your perspective.

Perhaps you have a point, though I suppose I would expect the ALTERNATIVE subforum to be less restrictive than some of the more "serious" sections of the site.
Furthermore, when you claim this subject has been exhausted on c. Alimentarius hundreds of times through countless different threads, it leads me to wonder why, after all those previous instances, this specific thread had to be shut down so abruptly—especially right as people were starting to chime in, even if most of them weren't being particularly constructive?
I mean, I guess maybe the thread could have been left open for perhaps 24 or 48 hours just to see where the conversation headed; then, if it failed to coalesce into anything remotely coherent or acceptable, closing it would seem perfectly fine.
As it stands, one might arguably contend—if they hired a decent enough lawyer—that this thread was essentially subjected to an unjust abortion.🙂
And finally, just because these topics are revisited frequently doesn't necessarily imply:
1. That the quality of these discussions is always identical.
2. That new facts haven't emerged which might make a previously covered topic relevant again (for instance, how Daniel Williams16 sparked renewed debates regarding the 9/11 scenarios).
3. That a reopened thread of a similar nature doesn't intend to examine things from a specific, narrow angle, which, in my view, warrants giving it at least a chance to evolve into a potentially interesting discussion.
If none of these observations or ruminations of mine somehow call into question the correctness of your decision to lock the thread, then I suppose I will apologize for my own misunderstanding—an error that, I suppose, can happen to anyone, couldn't it (perhaps even to moderators😉)?

Why was this thread locked in the alternative subforum?
THE FOUR HORSEMEN OF THE APOCALYPSE?
It seems there wasn't an issue for about twelve hours while nobody was responding, but the moment people actually started debating, the moderator stepped in and shut the whole thing down based on someone's suggestion—which I find quite interesting, I guess.
Does this mean certain users here are considered more equal or important than others, such that a moderator acts immediately upon a single user's whim?
I wasn't aware that some members held a more dominant position than the moderators themselves, perhaps.
I would appreciate a formal explanation regarding this matter.!!!