As ridiculous as FE seems, prima facie, until it's proven false, I keep my mind open to plausible explanations for why:
A) the moon landings were all fake and we've never "been back"
B) there are no actual photos of the entire earth from space (unless you believe the sizes of the continents are changing by 30-60% every decade or so)
C) the only people on earth that we give billions of dollars to, to go to space, are faking any, let alone much (or all) of the footage, using green screens, parabolic "zero gravity" flights, actual hair spray to make their hair stand up, underwater studios (unless you believe in air bubbles in space)
You might say "but these items have better explanations than FE". Well let's hear those theories also. Let's not shoot down those who are proposing an outlandish, yet mostly comprehensive, theory, one that explains these anomalies as well as a plethora of others, like how did they use radio frequencies that don't even purportedly bounce off the ionosphere to communicate hundreds of miles during WWII, how can the horizon be seen above an item whose entirety should be hidden behind it, why is Antarctica, aside from a tiny portion, entirely off limits to most civilians, how was Felix Baumgartner able to slowly float up to nearly 30 miles without drifting a thousand or more miles because of the earth's rotation, etc.
Suggestions that these things are not even worthy of discussion, on a forum dedicated to conspiracy theories, have to be disingenuous.
Original Research
Let's not also forget that FE researchers are literally the only conspiracy theorists doing original research. These people will buy lasers that cost thousands of dollars, cameras, etc., and go to some large body of water (large lakes, bays, etc.) where they can test their hypothesis with an actual experiment. Everything else I see on here is pure speculation, or videos of interviews involving various professionals with dubious backstories (Malone, etc.).
Does it Matter
Pertaining the "would it even matter" argument, you honestly don't need a lukewarm IQ to imagine how much it would matter, if FE was real.
Principles
Most of us are here because we couldn't speak freely elsewhere, because "hate has no place on our platform" type communist bullshit. Now we're going to make the same kind of rules, especially banning arbitrary content that is desired by a clear majority, on a platform with already-existing mechanisms for getting rid of low quality postd (downvoting, hiding)? If FE posts are banned, this place is no better than TGA, and don't even pretend to be pro constitution when you can't even stand up for free speech about a conspiracy theory in a conspiracy theory forum.
I'm out of here, for good, if FE is banned. Aside from spam, illegal, doxxing, banning has no place on our platform.
I think this is really important.
Kookifier is a term that needs to come into play here. I'd hope everyone here agrees that there are nogoodnicks in the world? Further, that WEF is a central hub of them and Klaus Schwab is not acting alone? Further yet that all such tyrants need to be killed and there is no political solution; ok some may not realize that yet but we can't just continue to gawk at the problem and do nothing.
So alienating people from the larger cause has dire consequence.
I think the very best solution is to organize info and discussion by topic. Most topics here can't be organized any way better than simply being here. FE has a dedicated .win, c/FlatEarthResearch
People interested in it can explore to their heart's content. People who don't want to engage in that topic at all don't get bombarded with it in unrelated conversations, which was my experience back when I used to try to engage here.
That's the exact opposite of censorship.
That is a very fair point, but I think old school Chomsky would disagree with you on the "opposite of censorship". I believe it would be his position that when you separate those things out you are censoring the separated one.
Paraphrasing him: "To give the illusion of free speech is very easy. First you decide what can be said within a desired band. Then you promote active, vigorous debate and discussion within that narrow band. When someone tries to speak outside of that band, claim it is harmful/dangerous/*ist/etc and when they complain about free speech, you point to the great discussion in the allowable area".
And just like that people are snowed into thinking one thing, when in reality the opposite is true.
Chomsky? If you have to bring a commie into the picture, you're going to a very bad place.
There's an entire .win dedicated to the topic of FE, moving it there isn't censorship. By definition. That point is moot anyway, voting is over 61 to 44. There are 105 active people here left.
I think a much more salient issue is how many active contributors were here in October 2020, and how many of us left because FE was brought into everything unrelated, with its attendant shit show? This would be one very likely place for those from TD disillusioned by politics; huge numbers of people left which is understandable. Why no spike here after that?
A broken clock is right twice a day - and only a fool gets caught up on who says something, over what is said. Which really underlines the point I have been making here in regards to the importance of questioning your own bias and the issues with censorship.
If Biden said 2 + 2 = 4, do you abandon math? How very silly, IMO.
Ohh, so there was a vote? Well then, that shows free speech. Democracy for the win!
Those of us old enough online have watched this exact thing play out. Whether it is slashdot, or boingboing, or Digg, later we watched the same thing happen to Reddit, then spread through Reddit subs, and FB and Twitter... the dividing, siphoning censoring..But apparently we haven't learned enough from history yet.
Finally, to answer your question regarding how many people left Vs stayed/came.. that is just another deflection IMO, because - What difference does that make? Is this a place to be popular, or share conspiracy theory ideas?
If it isn't a popularity contest(and it isn't) then your point is moot. Its about the ideas, not popularity. If people are offended at some truth - does it cease to be truth?
Those "truth seekers" who cant be bothered to sift through the noise to get to the signal - aren't ready for the journey yet, they are tipping their toe in, they will come and go until they themselves are ready, not when there is no more craziness around crazy conspiracy theories.
Watch what happens this time, as it has happened everytime - and then hopefully next time, those that are pushing for this(in good faith) are smarter next time. Of course, next time there will be all the new ppl that will not have learned this lesson, and you will be forced to watch on in disgust as we make the same mistakes all over again, and again, and again..
The most pertinent lesson in history, is that men don't learn the lessons of history.
Im off to the country side. Good luck to you all.
Your entire "point" is that you don't know the first thing about .win. Your fear is misplaced.
That's textbook gatekeeping. Other paths to truth exist that don't involve turning the signal to noise ratio as low as possible.