Judge Anna: Wouldn’t the entire readership act as “troll detectors” if you simply provided a rating button?Posted on September 10, 2015 by arnierosner
On Sep 10, 2015, at 9:29 AM, Anna Von Fritz
Wouldn’t the entire readership act as “troll detectors” if you simply provided a rating button?
Unfortunately and this would be true of your group/committee, too, the truth is often unpopular either because it seems “impossible” at first or because it debunks cherished prejudices or assumptions.
People resist the truth, no matter how black and white it may be.
Anyone you would assign this task to would be as susceptible to this human trait as anyone else.
What’s that famous saying? Something to the effect– when you first expose the truth you are laughed at and ignored, then if things are bad enough people wake up and reconsider– and all of a sudden the formerly ridiculous truth becomes popular and accepted.
This is the universal dilemma in which we too often equate truth with popularity.
You see the problem. Everyone has to use their own powers of logic and discernment but it is more convenient to depend on a group evaluation instead and the group evaluation is too often just a vote of what feels good at the time.
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 10, 2015, at 1:01 AM, ARNIE ROSNER
This message is to solicit your thoughts.
Consider if you will…
Some events of the last several weeks point out the need for measures to be taken to ensure the integrity of the posts made to the Scanned Retina. Since from the beginning, the purpose of the Scanned Retina was to be a resource for the people, who better than the people themselves, are most qualified to take personal responsibility to assure this integrity?
Interested parties who are who are willing to act aggressively to protect and promote the concept of free speech, are invited to submit their names for consideration as part of a small oversight group to review and rate submissions.
The major purpose of creating the ScannedRetina was to document and archive, as accurately as possible, the information provided by the independent thinking people of the globe. Another function was to deliberately peek the curiosity and stimulate independent thinking. These ideas were based upon our understanding of the plans from almost the beginning to deliberately deceive and to minimize the quality of education provided to all Americans over the last several decades. Documentation of this conclusion is presented here.
Even though the format of the Scannedretina appears as a blog, and people do have the opportunity to express their views, the information contained is considered to be an unrestricted and free resource for everyone to use as they see fit. There are absolutely no restrictions of any kind of the use of the material provided.
The accuracy and the quality of the content is the sole responsibility of the submitter. However, considering the current volume of activity it is potentially possible for submissions to be provided by subversive individuals with nefarious agendas, in an attempt to use the ScannedRetina for purpose of shaping public opinion and essentially propaganda.
People who might be willing to engage in protecting the quality and integrity of this resource, would be able to operate as a review group to assure a more diverse opinion as to what would be deemed as legitimate versus subversive content. it is proposed that this group might operate independently to make these determinations. While it is the intent to post all submissions, the committee might simply add a legitimacy rating to help guide the visitor in making their own decisions on the acceptance of the content or not. This is consistent with our responsibilities as sovereign Americans.
Your thoughts ad suggestions would be appreciated. Those willing to engage personally please contact me directly.
Some background to this proposal.
It seems that the people themselves are voting by way of indicating their public interest. This is just an assumption on my part as we do not advertise or use social media directly.
The fact that the number of views versus the actual number of visitors would seem to reflect the satisfaction with the quality of the content provided. This is another assumption on my part. The last report average number of pages viewed per visit is over 8.0 and the average time of visit is around 17 minutes.
the responsibility to continue to provide reliable information on which people can depend, has become greater than any one person can accomplish satisfactorily. The increased growth and acceptance of the site, would seem to have attracted those who would seek to discredit any activity exposing the truth.
By acting as troll detectors, the beneficiaries of the information, can become the gatekeepers themselves. This would ensure that no one individual exercises any particular influence over the final ratings of the individual posts.
If you agree with the above, and are willing to participate, please submit your request to join the oversight committee.
Thank you for your kind attention.
In the service of the Creator.
American Civil Flag – at Peace since 1874
It takes so few words to express the truth!
Available 24/7 –
Thanks to: http://scannedretina.com