Well, any fool can see that the rarer species orchids have a great deal more charm than those giant overhybridized Cattleyas.
What?
I’m my own personal NGO for nutballs spouting scheibnerisms as facts against vaccinating kids…ughgh!!! My agenda whenever I come across vaccination debates is debunking the same old liars over and over again, although the following of Scheibner and other aussie/new zealand liars is close to religious zealism!!! They will cling to their beliefs like those of cultists!!! What scheibner says is like scripture…and if you don’t believe, then you are a ‘brainwashed mainstreamer’!!! Cause viruses aren’t harmful if you eat right…meaning only organic…don’t ya know!!! :smack:
But anyone who can’t understand the differenct between ‘straight dope’ and ‘dope’…welllll, I can’t wait to LMAO 
Bwahahahahaahhahahahaaha.
Except A: There are far more efficient ways to use your voulenteer’s time than to have them post on message boards and
B: Anybody who would do this is likely already doing it already without you asking them.
Even if an NGO (whirrr-click) is auto-po-po-po-posting GD opinions so what? Is there a bigger and more powerful general purpose opinion/position shredding buzzsaw on the web than the SDMB? Watching opinons (even if NGO generated) being dissected is good family fun for everyone.
Straight Dope: dope that gives you a woody.
:eek: 
But whether you’re into cattleyas, oncids, dendrobiums, cymbids, phals or hybrids, we all can agree the American Orchid Society is the authority on these lovely, lovely beings. This Board can help bring us all together and allow us to quit the bickering. And the American Orchid Society can help.
Personally, I think this whole concept of people using chat and discussion forums to blatantly advertise has been blown way out of proportion. I mean honestly, how many times have you actually seen that take place?
BTW, if you like looking at orchids, check out my sister’s webcam site at http://www.
Well, I think the whole idea behind the OP is speculation about such actions. I think you and I are still on the fringe of said suspicion.
I suspect it’s prevalent here until a pattern forms, then the suspected NGO posters go into ignore lists.
We can’t go on together
with suspicious minds…
<wiggle wiggle> &;-?
Frist, I should state for the record that I had no intentions of flaming anyone.
Second, I agree that the using this board for commercial purposes is both difficult and unlikely; especially automated postings (although for some reason I really want to buy a Dell).
The point for debate has more to do with political organizations, like Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, Greenepeace, Republican Party, etc. These organizations have tons of money, and look for any opportunity to spread their message.
How they choose to spread their message could take many forms. There was a thread recently on “Bush, what good as he done?” Or something like that. The result was a looooong list of people shouting his praises.
It seems to me that it would be in the Bush Administration’s best interest to have a few very well informed individuals sign up on this board and monitor the threads. When debates start on topics that make Pres. Bush look bad, these pseudo-Dopers could chime in with what would amount to fully biased information, aimed at making Pres Bush look as good as possible.
And this could work the other way, look at the negative publicity this board and stir–the situation involving the Australian GG springs to mind. Or the threads on “Impeach Bush for War Crimes.” These are situations where the Democrats could have pseudo-Dopers working to undermine the current administration.
The question I meant to raise was, would this be wrong? And if it isn’t being done currently, why not? Is money/time the only answer?
Again, there is no intent to flame anyone, or imply that any of the threads I mentioned work for an NGO or directly for the government.
the equivalent in britain is the quango or quasi autonomous non-governmental organisation. sounds like this is identical to what yur on about.
Not really. Quangos are, as the name says, only quasi autonomous. They are usually partially state funded, at least some of the staff are selected or suggested by the state and their charters are usually partially state controlled.
Organisations like Greenpeece are completely autonomous.
Cite? [j/k] Sorry, I mean think of the implications. When called on the carpet, the NGO could not continually refer to the same cite when faced with opposing facts. They would need a network of different sites supporting their argument. Then someone would mention they all have the same IP block or something.
And then there is the spread of mindset. This guy could care less about the abortion thread, or Bavarian cream vs. Eclairs, or whether or not Jesus farted in public, or the ethics of driving a Humvee or whether Schroedinger’s cat could survive on grape nuts. Those that are like this already are suspicious and it seems like folks with a limited scope don’t tend to hold much weight. Or do they decide to pay him to form an opinion on these as well? Well we know George Sr. didn’t like broccoli so we’ll support that opinion. Hell, I’ll take the damn job. All those people bitching about welfare and I’m pulling in 6 figures for this? Me! Me! Beam me up Scotty! If only it were true.
OTOH, Don’t be naive. I’m sure there are opinion collectors lurking on just about every board. Reading magazines, zines, newspapers, chat rooms, talk radio, you name it. Our opinions are certainly heard and collected. I just question what the most effective means are that are used to sway pubic opinion after they know what we think. I think the Colin Powell rant about how the media is to blame for doubts on intelligence integrity is a prime example of what the powers that be think is the most reliable and effective means. Doublespeak and being incensed at questions of their impeccibility seems the functional response for now. No wonder Ari quit!
Sure, but it’s probably far easier to find unpaid volunteers who will post to discussion boards from home than those willign to go door-to-door or staff phone boiler rooms. When you are dealing with unpaid volunteers, you have to take what you can get.
**B: Anybody who would do this is likely already doing it already without you asking them. **
Yeah, but will they be on point? Political orgs like their messengers to talk about the correct topic, avoid incorrect topics and generally follow the order of the day. I’m sure independent partisans who share your opinios may be welcome when they say, “Candidate A is a SAINT, I tell you, a SAINT!” but when they then go to another thread and say, “I really think Candidate A would agree with me that mandatory electroshock therapy for the elderly would bring our Social Security expenses down over the long haul, due to all the dying” – well, that’s a different story.
:eek:
I think you could plenty of spinning just by selectively starting topics. After all, even topics started by newbies with one post often turn into long debates.
If a newbie popped up here and left a post like, “What was the evidence against Clinton, REALLY?” Or, “Should Bush be impeached?”, they’d like manage to stir up a long debate about something the other side would wish had been forgotten.
Greenpeace activists could do it just by going around starting threads like, “Is the destruction of the rainforest for real?” - thus helping keep their issues in the forefont of people’s thinking.
A Coke shill could start a thread like, “Are generic sodas really as good as Coke?” - knowing full well that most people would say no, and he’ll get some valuable exposure.
Or, sales people for the organization could actually spend time on dozens of message boards, develop a reputation, and use his ‘in’ to subtly hawk his produccts, candidates, issues, etc.
Yikes. Well, that’s troubling, because I might like to know what regular folks think about engineers. This information might aid me with my marketing proposals. Is this wrong also?
Not at all. What would be wrong is if you had a list of 30 message boards that you rotate through dropping topics about products you sell, because the boss has set that for a quota for you.
Here is an excerpt of a message from the moderator of a Yahoo group I belong to, who has experience running several message boards. He’s explaining why a new member was unsuccessful in uploading a graphic file to the group’s folder:
The advertisers are already out there on the message boards, for those of you who expressed doubt.