Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

A place to discuss the foibles of our favourite bloggers
jimhabegger

Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#1

Post by jimhabegger »

I've been watching this circus (or these mating rituals?) for a few weeks, looking at it from different directions, and now I'm curious about the view from here in the Slymepit.

I can see how tempting it is to mock, ridicule and bait some of the FtB bloggers, and some of them seem to be encouraging it, so maybe it's fun for them too, in some perverse way, although I wouldn't see that as any excuse for such irresponsible, contemptible behavior. It reminds me of boys pulling girls' hair in kindergarten.

I'm more interested in the serious side of it though. I've seen them causing some real grief to some people. I've also seen some concerns about their influence on what happens at conferences and other events. Is that a big concern for some people? I mean, is that spoiling the conferences for some people? Are there other concerns that I've missed? Is there a concern that they might be distracting a lot of people from the work of counteracting religious aggression and oppression? If so, it isn't clear to me how pulling their hair can help resolve that problem.

Another question to the people who keep pulling their hair: Surely you see how pulling their hair adds credibility to their demands for harassment policies etc.? Can't you find any other ways to have fun on the Internet, that don't recoil on you liked that?

jimhabegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#2

Post by jimhabegger »

"I've seen them causing some real grief to some people." I meant, I've seen some FtB bloggers causing some real grief to some people.

I've seen other people besides them causing some real grief, too, but these questions are about the concerns of people campaigning against them.

jimhabegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#3

Post by jimhabegger »

Thinking about it some more, I'm not sure how much hair-pulling there's actually been. That would be people posting things on their blogs, or elsewhere where they'll be sure to see them, just to get a rise out of them. Thinking some more about what I've seen them complaining about, most of it looks more like people showing off to each other, rather than trying to get a rise out of FtB bloggers. Even so, you know they're going to see it, and use it as evidence for their cause.

Oh, I see. Is it to show that they can't intimidate you?

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#4

Post by Dick Strawkins »

jimhabegger wrote:Thinking about it some more, I'm not sure how much hair-pulling there's actually been. That would be people posting things on their blogs, or elsewhere where they'll be sure to see them, just to get a rise out of them. Thinking some more about what I've seen them complaining about, most of it looks more like people showing off to each other, rather than trying to get a rise out of FtB bloggers. Even so, you know they're going to see it, and use it as evidence for their cause.

Oh, I see. Is it to show that they can't intimidate you?

Don't view the slymepit community as a monolith.

Some people here act in trollish ways but that is really only a tiny percentage of the overall membership and those particular actions are not supported by the majority.
Most people are simply joining in the conversation which has as its theme, the idea that certain prominent bloggers act in ways that are anathema to basic skepticism - they seem to have fixed ideas that they search for morsels of evidence to support - rather than collecting all the evidence that is available and fitting that to the best hypothesis.
So most of us here probably think that PZ Myers and friends are not being skeptical about the particular brand of feminism they promote.
We probably think that his fight against 'dictionary atheism' is a huge mistake - as was his former promotion of 'atheismplus' (the movement, not the twitter handle!)
Basically we see a huge amount of hypocrisy coming from them and we discuss it - finding incidents of blatant lies, misrepresentations and threats of violence, and posting it here.
This is how there is now a video of PZ acting like a sexist jerk during one of his talks.
This is how we know that PZ has eagerly promoted rape porn just a few years ago on pharyngula and yet now behaves like anyone who would do so is untrustworthy.
This is how we know that Ophelia Benson and Stephanie Svan doxxed a woman atheist that committed the crime of disagreeing with them.
This is how we know that Stephanie Svan supported those making threats of violence against more than one woman.

Ask yourself, who exactly is making money out of these drama posts?
It's not us.

jimhabegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#5

Post by jimhabegger »

Dick, thank you.

Apart from irresponsible, contemptible idle muckraking and faultfinding, I'm wondering if there's any ongoing discussion about the harm all this might be doing to atheism and to atheist communities and movements, and what to do about it.

LMU
.
.
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:40 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#6

Post by LMU »

jimhabegger wrote:...I'm wondering if there's any ongoing discussion about the harm all this might be doing to atheism and to atheist communities and movements, and what to do about it.
Well if you oppose further damage to the community, like attempts to oust Ron Lindsay from CFI for example, then you could advertise Currie Jean's petition and try to get more women to sign it.

If you want to discuss more then you should head over to the currently active Undead Thread. Because the Slymepit was inspired by a series of long blog threads, an effort has been made to preserve the format.

jimhabegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#7

Post by jimhabegger »

LMU, thank you.

Do you know of any other initiatives, to help counteract the harm that the feuding and power struggles might be doing?

Aneris
.
.
Posts: 3198
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:36 am
Location: /°\

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#8

Post by Aneris »

Another good summary of issues:
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=282

LMU
.
.
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:40 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#9

Post by LMU »

jimhabegger wrote:LMU, thank you.

Do you know of any other initiatives, to help counteract the harm that the feuding and power struggles might be doing?
There have been initiatives to send Justin Vacula to conferences so that people can see that he's a human being and to give those who dislike him an opportunity to treat him as such.

jimhabegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#10

Post by jimhabegger »

LMU wrote:There have been initiatives to send Justin Vacula to conferences so that people can see that he's a human being and to give those who dislike him an opportunity to treat him as such.
I like that.

I looked at The Undead Thread, but I didn't see any discussions there about what to do.

Aneris, I followed your link, but I didn't see any discussions there about what to do.

LMU
.
.
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:40 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#11

Post by LMU »

jimhabegger wrote:
LMU wrote:There have been initiatives to send Justin Vacula to conferences so that people can see that he's a human being and to give those who dislike him an opportunity to treat him as such.
I like that.

I looked at The Undead Thread, but I didn't see any discussions there about what to do.

Aneris, I followed your link, but I didn't see any discussions there about what to do.
There are multiple of discussions happening simultaneously on the Undead Thread, feel free to start a discussion if you don't see a particular topic. I should warn you that getting piled on is possible (and the traditional greeting for new people is a test of the principle of charity), but you will not be banned (unless you spam or do something illegal), and you are not obligated to reply to everyone (in fact you probably shouldn't given the multiple discussions going on).

jimhabegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#12

Post by jimhabegger »

LMU, I'm not sure I understand. Your undead thread link took me to a forum, with a thread called "Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It," and some other threads which are all locked. Are you saying that I might find some discussions in that thread, about what to do, to help counteract the harm that the feuding and power struggles might be doing?

Do you know where else I might be able to find discussions like that?

Metalogic42
.
.
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#13

Post by Metalogic42 »

jimhabegger wrote:LMU, I'm not sure I understand. Your undead thread link took me to a forum, with a thread called "Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It," and some other threads which are all locked. Are you saying that I might find some discussions in that thread, about what to do, to help counteract the harm that the feuding and power struggles might be doing?

Do you know where else I might be able to find discussions like that?
We only have one "main" thread going at a time. "Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It" is the current one. Think of it more like an IRC chat room, not a thread on a forum.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#14

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

* Satire is a venerable and highly effective method of making a point;

* Ridicule of the ridiculous is meet & good;

* Some of the taunts here can get puerile, but some make me wet my pants (thinking of Green Star Trek Becca Party Grrl);

* Note how Pitters can fiercely argue with each other in one thread, while simultaneously palling around in another. Check FtB for signs of warm camaraderie. Just for shits & giggles, try to argue with one of their bloggers;

* Go, search FtB for satire, or even the tiniest shred of humor. You'll search in vain. That's cuz the FtBastards are downpressers. They are seriously in need of some major attitude adjustment. Getting a themselves a life would be a good start, too. Pitters have a sense of humor --- and perspective.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#15

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Metalogic42 wrote:We only have one "main" thread going at a time. "Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It" is the current one. Think of it more like an IRC chat room, not a thread on a forum.
I think of it more as tantric group sexting with relative strangers.

jimhabegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#16

Post by jimhabegger »

Some of the taunting might just be for fun, instead of a reaction to wounded pride and feelings of helplessness. If so, I despise it even more, excusing it as "satire" and camaraderie only adds to my contempt for it.

If anyone is curious about what I see wrong with it, you might get some clues by doing a Web search with "bullying" and "taunting."

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#17

Post by Dick Strawkins »

jimhabegger wrote:Some of the taunting might just be for fun, instead of a reaction to wounded pride and feelings of helplessness. If so, I despise it even more, excusing it as "satire" and camaraderie only adds to my contempt for it.

If anyone is curious about what I see wrong with it, you might get some clues by doing a Web search with "bullying" and "taunting."
Perhaps you could try a little research reading of your own.

If you want to see genuine violent threats, bullying, taunting and rapey language, you're not going to find it on the slymepit.

For that you'll need to visit Pharyngula.

I refer you to the following article on Skepsheik's site:

http://skepsheik.blogspot.com/2013/05/t ... exual.html
Pharyngula unique amongst atheist sites has, as part of their community rules and standards, an explicit promotion of sexually violent imagery as a means of abusing those it deems targets.
I quote from the PZ Myers official instructions:

“Don’t waste time whining at anyone that they’re not nice, because this gang will take pride in that and rhetorically hand you a rotting porcupine and tell you to stuff it up your nether orifice.”

‘OK’, you may say, ‘that’s just a humorous metaphorical line. Nobody is going to take it seriously’, are they?

The evidence suggests otherwise. It is trivially easy to find the most violent and triggering imagery being used against commenters who dare to disagree with the established members of the community.

1. “I am going to personally see to it that an especially rotten and dribbly dead porcupine is rammed so far up their rectum that they are picking bits of it out of their teeth for the foreseeable future.”

2. “Fuck ‘em with decayed porcupines and red hot pokers! I’m drunk and I’m priviledged and I’m human thus fallible all hell but fuck those douchcanoes and make it hurt!”

3. “the porcupines are still located to the left of the door as you leave. Grab on. Shove it where it will do the most good (to the entire world), and then go die in a fire. Slowly.”

4. “stick a decaying porcupine dipped in hot tar and glass shards up his pustule-covered arse sideways, slowly.”

5. “Take your fucking sympathies for predators and shove them up your ass and chase them with a dead, rotting porcupine that’s been marinating in capsaicin.”

6. “You are fucking tiresome and I wish you would shove a rotting porcupine up your ass.”

7. “May a necrotic porcupine fester, unremovable in your bowels.”

8. ” He should be pounding so many decaying porcupines up his asshole that quills start coming out of his ears.”

9. “surlyramics made me a custom necklace with a totally cute porcupine and the word “insert” underneath it. I get compliments on it every time I wear it (without even any questions about why the word “insert” is under the porcupine).”

10. “Surly Amy makes a lovely porcupine necklace now. It’s adorable, and has a one word label: “insert”.

That last quote was from PZ Myers himself, promoting the business of one of his friends who was actually selling necklaces featuring the rape threat imagery.

Not that the imagery is confined to brutal bodily violation using porcupines. According to one popular commenter the violation is merely a means to an end.

“You go fuck yourself. Get something heavy and sharp. Die whilst doing it, if possible.” – AnthonyK

And in case you think these are just anonymous drive-by commenters unknown to the host, think again. Many of the above threats are by individuals who feature alongside PZ Myers on Pharyngula’s Google hang-out, Youtube broadcasts.

And in case you think I’m exaggerating, here is a completely separate list recently compiled by a feminist who was deeply offended by the rape and sexual abuse threats and violent death imagery promoted by the host of Pharyngula.

““find a splintering stick and fuck yourself up the ass”
“go fuck yourself. And then die in a fire”
“Go. Fuck. Yourself. With a Hefty Bag full of rottweilers”
“Go fuck yourself with a chainsaw in that festering pustule of an asshole of yours”
“You can fuck yourself with a razor-bladed stick and go die in a ditch, you pompous, lying, gutless, disingenuous fuck” (link)
“Take your gun, lube the barrel and fuck your self in the ass.
“you should be fucked sideways with a rusty knife”
“Do us all a favor and kill yourself before you have a chance to have children”
“you can go fuck yourself. Do it deep, long and hard.”
“Go die in a fucking fire. The world will be a better place without you in it.”
“I will, however, say that this fuck up here is a complete asshole and needs to die in a fire”
“Go and die painfully, okay?”
And just for kicks: “Go fuck yourself sideways with a rusting chainsaw, you vapid, godbotting wank”
And more kicks:”fuck yourself up the ass with a splintering cross”
Even to the survivor of a brutal rape attack (Sheril Kirshenbaum)

He claimed that THIS was acceptable, because ‘they aren’t rape threats really’ – but NOW demands people use only *acceptable* insults – because words like “bitch” have a (undocumented, asserted but not proven) negative affect on women.
What kind of negative effect did his ANTI-FEMINIST abuse for this WOMAN SCIENCE COMMENTATOR have? When did he apologise for the misogynist shit-show he ran? “

Skep tickle
.
.
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#18

Post by Skep tickle »

Thanks for linking & quoting that, Dick Strawkins. Quite stunning.

Jim Habegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#19

Post by Jim Habegger »

Dick, thank you.

I'm well aware of the filth that continually pours out of Pharyngula, and I see that as possibly more responsible than anything else for the ill will against some of the members of that faction.

Jim Habegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#20

Post by Jim Habegger »

I have some objections of my own to some of the behavior of some of the people who are the subject of the idle faultfinding thread (aka The Undead Thread), including the filth that continually streams out of Pharyngula, and the divisive theatrics and power plays. If I saw anyone discussing *what to do* about any of that, outside of rooms full of fire and poisonous smoke, I might be interested in those discussions.

Metalogic42
.
.
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#21

Post by Metalogic42 »

Jim Habegger wrote:I have some objections of my own to some of the behavior of some of the people who are the subject of the idle faultfinding thread (aka The Undead Thread), including the filth that continually streams out of Pharyngula, and the divisive theatrics and power plays. If I saw anyone discussing *what to do* about any of that, outside of rooms full of fire and poisonous smoke, I might be interested in those discussions.
We could shine light on it, until everyone realizes what's going on and stops falling for it.

Oh, wait. We're doing that now.

Jim Habegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#22

Post by Jim Habegger »

I've called some behavior here contemptible, despicable, and some other harsh things. That applies only to some of the behavior that I've actually seen here, and I haven't seen anything any worse than anything I've ever done. In fact, I've done worse than most of what I've seen here. I have no reason to suppose that there's any more wrong with anyone's personality and character here, than with mine or anyone else's, and I certainly see nothing wrong with the way anyone here has treated me.

Some things I've said have been intended to stigmatize some kinds of behavior, but what I said about people wallowing in muckraking and faultfinding, in reaction to wounded pride and feelings of helplessness, was not for that purpose. I said that in the hope of helping anyone who might fit that description wake up and start looking for more healthy ways to recover from those feelings.

Jim Habegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#23

Post by Jim Habegger »

Metalogic42 wrote:We could shine light on it, until everyone realizes what's going on and stops falling for it.
That looks plausible to me. I'll ponder it.

Jim Habegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#24

Post by Jim Habegger »

Metalogic42 wrote:We could shine light on it, until everyone realizes what's going on and stops falling for it.
That might explain a lot for me. You think that some people are actually taking all those theatrics seriously? I haven't seen any sign of that. Have you?

Skep tickle
.
.
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#25

Post by Skep tickle »

Metalogic42 wrote:
Jim Habegger wrote:I have some objections of my own to some of the behavior of some of the people who are the subject of the idle faultfinding thread (aka The Undead Thread), including the filth that continually streams out of Pharyngula, and the divisive theatrics and power plays. If I saw anyone discussing *what to do* about any of that, outside of rooms full of fire and poisonous smoke, I might be interested in those discussions.
We could shine light on it, until everyone realizes what's going on and stops falling for it.

Oh, wait. We're doing that now.
They've got a very public platform (visible, 'popular', readily found for large group of people who are unsuspecting, unaware, neutral, or have been trying to ignore the "rift").

Well-respected others who speak from a similarly public or popular platform have, after they've publicly brought up concerns, been attacked. They sure seem to back off in response, and it's hard to blame them. Examples available upon request.

Specifically "what to do": All reasonable ideas, suggestions, and efforts are welcome. (Not that they might not be criticized from either "side" for one reason or another.)

What has been tried, with emphasis on more recent stuff cuz that's what I'm more aware of (all quotes are my terms and may be paraphrasing or rephrasing):
1) People (including many Pitters) have tried posting what appear to be reasonable comments at FtB/etc, including in threads where they are named in the blogpost, and including questions of clarification, only to find those comments never make it through moderation. Any of us who has tried posting at FtB in some of the main blogs there has run into this. Thread started for documentation here: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=323

Then there's the problem of not only being attacked in-thread, but having personal information presented for the commentariat to poke into, followed by another rounds (or 4) of blogposts attacking you. I speak from personal, recent experience on this.

2) People have tried participating in the dialogue process Michael Nugent proposed, set up, and was/is shepherding along. On "our side" those involved consisted of several Pitters and initially also one person who posted in the Pit ~2 yrs ago but not at all since then and does not want any affiliation with the Pit; each represented him- or herself and noone else (including not speaking for "the Pit").

That process has stalled (in part due to the back and forth having become unwieldy). Besides which, only 1 person from "the other side" agreed to participate and the others either vigorously decried it (notably PZ Myers) or didn't say anything, limiting its likely beneficial effects even in the best of circumstances.

(Some similarity to Harriet Hall and Amy Davis Roth "making up" at the urging of Steven Novella, which included what read to me like a not-pology from Roth, also hasn't seemed to have any larger effect.)

Here's one of Michael's earlier threads on the dialogue topic: http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/26 ... -dialogue/

3) People (Justin Vacula, accompanied by Karla Porter) have tried specifically attending a conference sponsored by, planned by, and tailored to "the other side" albeit with an ostensibly broad purpose (Women in Secularism 2). That led to calls for the conference staff to refuse entry to Justin, though he had registered and paid to attend, and proclamations about how certain attendees would cut him (in a social sense) if he tried to approach them. He was assured by conference organizers that he would be able to attend like any other registrant; at the conference by all reports he sat in the back row and said little (though, horrifyingly, one of his questions was chosen to be asked off of an index card during the entire conference, and apparently he clapped "too loudly" and in some people's eyes (ears) "inappropriately". He had said he welcomed discussion with anyone but apparently no-one chose to pursue that. His (non-threatening) message T-shirts were broadly denigrated by PZ at Pharyngula, if I recall; one of his T-shirts that weekend consisted of quotes from the CFI mission statement and an open invitation to discussion.

Next Justin is planning to attend a similar conference but this time the big leagues: international, less influence from ideology (AFAIK), and with a plan to craft and approve an international declaration on empowering women through secularism. While he hasn't before focused on women's rights, he has a well-established history of working for church-state separation, which will be a big focus of EWTS. The conference information specifically welcomes women and men to attend.

Justin's announcement that he hoped to attend was greeted with an accusation that it represented harassment if not stalking (see Butterflies & Wheels thread titled "Stalking"; I'm not going to link it here).

4) Since Ron Lindsay's speech and WiS2 and the resultant flame war, people have donated to CFI (many for the first time) and have written letters to the CFI Board in support of Mr. Lindsay and opposing efforts to have him removed from his position as CEO of CFI.

5) This statement was initiated by a woman who posts here and got input & feedback on it here: http://www.skepticwomen.com/welcome-statement

It seeks to demonstrate that there are women for whom the vocal feminists-and-allies not only don't speak, but also misrepresent and have attacked.

So, yeah, there are other efforts going on. And, like I said, please feel free to suggest others.

windy
.
.
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:41 am
Location: Tom of Finland-land

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#26

Post by windy »

Jim Habegger wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:We could shine light on it, until everyone realizes what's going on and stops falling for it.
That might explain a lot for me. You think that some people are actually taking all those theatrics seriously? I haven't seen any sign of that. Have you?
The comment sections of most popular FTB blogs? The number of people who've been convinced that Justin Vacula represents some kind of threat to women?

Jim Habegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#27

Post by Jim Habegger »

For context for what I'll be saying here, some of the issues that interest me in relation to the feuding are:
1. Competition for social and economic benefits. I see this as part of a larger picture: beneficiaries of the growth economics empire fighting over the spoils of its murderous global plundering and pillaging campaigns.
2. The hostility of any social environment for people who did not grow up in that kind of environment. More specifically, the hostility of some comfort zones of white men, for some other people.
3. An epidemic on the Internet of people depreciating other people and stirring up antagonism against them, which might be helping to perpetuate all kinds of violence in the physical world.
4. Adverse effects of all of the above on the initiatives, collaboration and morale of atheists in facing and counteracting religious aggression and oppression.

I haven't thoroughly investigated all of the allegations flying around, and I don't intend to, so I'm not endorsing or denying any of them. I will say how some things *look* to me at this point, also for context.

For some purposes, I'll reduce some of the contenders to two factions:
- F1: An allegedly feminist faction revolving around some FtB bloggers and their allies.
- F2: An informal network of people revolving around conscientious objections to what F1 is doing.

A lot of what I see F1 doing looks to me like competing for social and economic benefits, under a banner of social justice. A lot of what I see F2 doing looks to me like futile pillow-pounding, although I have seen some efforts, like Gurdur's, to fight fire with fire.

From thread x:
Skep tickle wrote:I think many of them believe quite firmly that they're in the right; some are also be influenced by gaining & maintaining what passes for power & income & bennies* in the A/S blogosphere and conference circuit, and others have bought into the vilification of those who disagree without having really investigated the matter.
That's how it looks to me, too.

I see the competition for social and economic benefits as inevitable, but I'm not interested in discussions about how to play that game. What would interest me would be discussions about what you and have been doing, and what else we might do, to:
1. Help make social environments more friendly to more kinds of people.
2. Help reduce and counteract hatemongering on the Internet.
3. Help reduce and counteract adverse effects of online feuding on the initiatives, collaboration and morale of atheists in facing and counteracting religious aggression and oppression.

"You" being anyone who has been trying to do anything about any of that, besides finding fault with what other people are doing or not doing.

From this thread:
Skep tickle wrote:What has been tried, with emphasis on more recent stuff cuz that's what I'm more aware of (all quotes are my terms and may be paraphrasing or rephrasing):

1. People (including many Pitters) have tried posting what appear to be reasonable comments at FtB/etc.
That looks like a good will effort to me, but it also looks worse than futile to me, in terms of its consequences, and irrelevant to any issues that interest me.
2. People have tried participating in the dialogue process Michael Nugent proposed, set up, and was/is shepherding along.
I admire what I've seen of Michael very much, but that initiative looks to me like it's doomed to failure, and in any case irrelevant to any issues that interest me.
3. People (Justin Vacula, accompanied by Karla Porter) have tried specifically attending a conference sponsored by, planned by, and tailored to "the other side" albeit with an ostensibly broad purpose (Women in Secularism 2).
On the face of it, that looks to me like one good way to respond to the defamation against him. I have some doubts though, about its potential fruitfulness. Are there any signs that it has done anyone any good? I've been doing the same thing on the Internet for more than ten years, putting myself in the line of fire of prejudices and defamation campaigns, and I'm still not sure it has ever done anyone any good. On the other hand, I'm not sure it hasn't. Anyway, I'm considering giving it up.
4. Since Ron Lindsay's speech and WiS2 and the resultant flame war, people have donated to CFI (many for the first time) and have written letters to the CFI Board in support of Mr. Lindsay and opposing efforts to have him removed from his position as CEO of CFI.
That looks to me like one good way to respond to the defamation against him. Personally, what he did looks outrageous to me, and it looks to me like grandstanding for the benefit of CFI's MRA donors, but I don't see it as necessarily a reason to fire him, especially if it works. The public demand for an apology from Women in Secularism looks to me like a donor-gratifying performance also.
5. This statement was initiated by a woman who posts here and got input & feedback on it here
That looks to me like a good idea too. Not that I endorse everything in it.

Jim Habegger

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#28

Post by Jim Habegger »

"Thread x" above is Does The Undead Thread promote bullying?
windy wrote:
Jim Habegger wrote:You think that some people are actually taking all those theatrics seriously? I haven't seen any sign of that. Have you?
The comment sections of most popular FTB blogs? The number of people who've been convinced that Justin Vacula represents some kind of threat to women?
I mean people who actually take those theatrics seriously, as opposed to participating in them for self-serving purposes. I don't even see them taking their theatrics seriously, themselves.

I don't have any formal training in bullying and harassment, so what I'm saying is based only on my own research and personal experience. What I see members of the allegedly feminist faction associated with FtB doing, especially PZ, is the opposite of what I would do if I were seriously troubled by being harassed or bullied, or seeing someone I care about being harassed or bullied. What I see them doing is continually and needlessly inviting and inciting harassment, and I've never seen or heard of them doing what people are advised to do when they're being harassed or bullied. It's an open question to me whether it's intentional or not, but in any case what I see them doing doesn't look to me like taking their own theatrics seriously.

On the other hand, I want to say that I have seen them being seriously harassed, by multitudes of harassing hobbyists, and I don't see how it could *not* really hurt. I know that what I've seen would hurt and demoralize me terribly, if it happened to me. Some of their behavior does look to me like symptoms of being harassed. No matter how much I disapprove of some things I see them doing, I have a lot of sympathy for them. What I mean by "theatrics" is continually airing it in public, and demonizing everyone who objects to what they're doing.

windy
.
.
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:41 am
Location: Tom of Finland-land

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#29

Post by windy »

Jim Habegger wrote:That looks to me like one good way to respond to the defamation against him. Personally, what he did looks outrageous to me, and it looks to me like grandstanding for the benefit of CFI's MRA donors
"MRA donors"? :doh: Where did you see a reference to the men's rights movement in the speech?
Jim Habegger wrote:What I see them doing is continually and needlessly inviting and inciting harassment, and I've never seen or heard of them doing what people are advised to do when they're being harassed or bullied. It's an open question to me whether it's intentional or not, but in any case what I see them doing doesn't look to me like taking their own theatrics seriously.
I didn't say they are taking their own theatrics seriously, I implied that many commenters are taking the bloggers' theatrics seriously, ie. "falling for it".
Jim Habegger wrote:On the other hand, I want to say that I have seen them being seriously harassed, by multitudes of harassing hobbyists, and I don't see how it could *not* really hurt. I know that what I've seen would hurt and demoralize me terribly, if it happened to me.
Participation in an internet flame war also tends to hurt and demoralise, but I'm not sure if it's productive to label it "harassment".

ps. Have you considered signing up for an account- it would be easier to keep track of your replies.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#30

Post by jimhabegger »

Windy, the hyperbole over there is so blatant and transparent, that I'm questioning whether anyone could actually believe it. I see plenty of people propagating it, but I question whether any of them actually believe it, and whether The Undead Thread is any more useful than a thread devoted to proving that the earth is not flat, or that the moon is not made of cheese.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#31

Post by jimhabegger »

It seems to me that The Undead Thread plays right into their hands. In fact, now that I think of it, it looks to me like they're playing The Slymepit like a fiddle.

AnonymousCowherd
.
.
Posts: 1708
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:49 am
Location: The Penumbra of Doubt

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#32

Post by AnonymousCowherd »

jimhabegger wrote:It seems to me that The Undead Thread plays right into their hands. In fact, now that I think of it, it looks to me like they're playing The Slymepit like a fiddle.
Then "they" play the fiddle like Jack Benny.

I'm sure they dine out on some of the accusations they make about this place, but that's not the same thing. It's also costing them some dinners (like TAM) as they are forced into more and more ridiculous and anti-skeptic positions trying to defend themselves - and not just from the 'pit. Amusingly, they are so addicted to this place they start to see it everywhere they look.

Which is more damaging to the skeptic/atheist cause - robust disagreement + some mockery or earnest pamphleteering + attacks of the vapours?

windy
.
.
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:41 am
Location: Tom of Finland-land

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#33

Post by windy »

jimhabegger wrote:Windy, the hyperbole over there is so blatant and transparent, that I'm questioning whether anyone could actually believe it. I see plenty of people propagating it
Some people have privately expressed such beliefs to me (eg. concerns over the safety of certain bloggers).

I also submit to you the example of one Jim Habegger, who has apparently been convinced that a group of "MRAs" is somehow influential in skepticism to the extent that even the head of CFI defers to them, despite no evidence for such a relationship (the alternative is that he is knowingly propagating unsupported rumors which wouldn't be very nice of him, now would it?)

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#34

Post by jimhabegger »

windy, I wasn't talking about any group. Maybe I misused the "MRA" acronym. I thought it was a generic term for men's rights activists, not referring to any particular group. I didn't think it would be controversial to presume that some of the donors to CFI are men's rights activists.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#35

Post by jimhabegger »

Metalogic42, I owe you an apology. I've been hypothesizing again, and this time you might be right about the source. For example:
jimhabegger wrote:and it looks to me like grandstanding for the benefit of CFI's MRA donors

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#36

Post by jimhabegger »

From the thread Does The Undead Thread promote bullying?
Even the 'worst' of the ridicule here does not qualify as 'stalking', rape- or death threats, etc. as is claimed by the FtB'ers
I'll take that as rough summary of what I meant by "theatrics," in some of my posts in this thread. That comes under my issues #1, #3 and #4:
1. Competition for social and economic benefits.
3. An epidemic on the Internet of people depreciating other people and stirring up antagonism against them.
4. Adverse effects of all of the above on the initiatives, collaboration and morale of atheists in facing and counteracting religious aggression and oppression.

In view of the grief caused to some people by allegations against them of stalking, etc., I'll expand #4 now to:
4. Adverse effects of all of the above on the initiatives, collaboration, morale and *welfare* of atheists in facing and counteracting religious aggression and oppression.

My only interest in any of this is what you and I have been doing about it, and might do about it, "you" being anyone who has been trying to do something about it besides finding fault with what other people are doing or not doing.

I've already responded to Skep tickle's examples of what some people have been doing.

In post 21 of this thread, Metalogic42 wrote:
We could shine light on it, until everyone realizes what's going on and stops falling for it.
I still see The Undead Thread as more a part of the problem than part of the solution, in my issues #3 and #4, but I don't have any more to say about that, beyond what I've already said, so I'll set that aside, and "just ask questions" about "shining a light" on the theatrics.

I'm questioning:
1. How many people are actually "falling for it," as opposed to playing along with the theatrics for self-serving reasons.
2. The net impact of the discussions in The Undead Thread, in reducing the theatrics and counteracting their harmful effects.

1. How many people are actually "falling for it," as opposed to playing along with the theatrics for self-serving reasons.

I've seen people propagating the theatrics, but comparing what they do to widely known advice about how to respond to stalking, I haven't seen anyone who *acts* like they actually believe that the people they're accusing of stalking etc., are actually doing so. I see them doing just the opposite of what people are advised to do if they or someone they care about is being stalked. It seems much more plausible to me that they're only playing along, for self-serving reasons. If so, then "shining a light" on the theatrics will have no impact on their behavior, and might even encourage them, especially the ones who look to me like they're feuding for the sake of feuding, out of boredom or as a way of socializing for example.

2. The net impact of the discussions in The Undead Thread, in reducing the theatrics and counteracting their effects.

Rather than reducing the theatrics, it looks to me like The Undead Thread is actually feeding them, by continually producing props for them.

As for stopping people from falling for the theatrics, what matters is not how The Undead Thread looks to the choir. What matters is how it looks to people who might take the theatrics seriously, if anyone really does. Imagine someone who, unfathomably, takes that transparent hyperbole seriously, wondering if some of the alleged perpetrators might actually be stalking some of the performers, or whatever they're accused of doing. Imagine that person browsing through The Undead Thread. Speaking for myself, if I had ever taken the theatrics seriously, browsing through The Undead Thread would not have done anything to convince me otherwise. Likewise, the "satire" spinning out into the Internet from that thread would not have convinced me otherwise.

Besides that, none of what anyone has said here about the behavior of those performers was any news to me. I don't see how anyone could possibly miss it who isn't willfully blind to it, and impervious to any "light" that might be shining from The Undead Thread. Furthermore, how is the abominable behavior of some FtB bloggers and their allies relevant to whether their allegations are true or not? Even if they were pathological liars, that wouldn't prove that all of their allegations are false. Their behavior could even be seen as signs of the panic produced by being stalked.

What about people who might be wondering if there really is misogny, a hostile environment for women, etc. in the atheist community? Does anyone think that browsing through The Undead Thread will convince them otherwise? Does anyone think that any of the "satire" spinning out into the Internet from that thread will convince anyone but the choir?

Does anyone know of anyone who, unfathomably, started to actually believe those allegations, and changed their minds as a result of the "light" shining from The Undead Thread?

Skep tickle
.
.
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#37

Post by Skep tickle »

jimhabegger wrote:...Does anyone know of anyone who, unfathomably, started to actually believe those allegations, and changed their minds as a result of the "light" shining from The Undead Thread?
Yes. See this thread ("Why are you here") viewtopic.php?f=29&t=269 and also some of the comments that new members make when they join.

Seems also some that people read at FtB how horrifying it is over here, eventually come check it out for themselves, decide it's not as bad as portrayed, then become disillusioned with FtB and/or say something that gets them dogpiled or banned and/or get recognized by PZ as someone who has looked at the Pit and is therefore "a slymepitter" and get banned.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#38

Post by jimhabegger »

Skep tickle, thank you! I should have asked that question first, and saved myself the time and effort that I wasted in writing the rest of that post.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#39

Post by jimhabegger »

Skep tickle, I read that whole thread, and I didn't see any sign that anyone who was ever tempted to believe the propaganda of the FtBfem faction, saw through it by the "light" shining from The Undead Thread. Every explanation that I found there, of what turned people against that faction, has been the behavior of that faction's own members, and not ever, at all, the "light" shining from The Undead Thread.

"I joined the Slymepit because I was disgusted with the treatment D.J. Grothe was receiving in 2012."

"What got me to finally post was being lambasted and then banned on Skepchick.org."

"I was told to shove flaming porcupines and rusty knives (sideways) up my ass. I was called 'childmolester71'. I saw other thoughtful people making honest posts being told to "die in a fire" and called misogynists."

"I got here after being dogpiled for my first blog entry on the baboons"

"Anyways with my new affiliation with the Feminine Mystique site and the Traditional Women’s Rights Activists or TWRAs that the Feminine Mystique site is the headquarters of I decided to promote this group with its pro-patriarchy ideology and world view at this website to see if I could find any interested takers"

"My journey into slyme started with the episode of Skepitcs' Guide to the Universe where Rebecca Watson had a segment decrying the misogyny of the sceptics' movement (more or less, it's been a long time since I listened to it). What she said sounded so out of whack with my own experiences that I went looking for more information, which led me to the ERV threads."

"I'd read about Coffeegate from Mr Onen's excellent write up of it and T-Shirtgate managed to knock me over enough to comment on Butterflies and Wheels - I got utterly dogpiled with comments designed to shut me up and pillory me in the same way everyone else has experienced."

"When PZ posted this comic, describing it as reality, I got tired of it and started doing some searches about this male privilege thing, and reading blogs that discussed this concept."

"I'm here because any group/ideology that preaches equality for women while vocally holding the idea that being white and/or male is a reason to disregard someone is without a doubt inherently wrong."

"The idea of a woman being afraid of a man in an elevator and blaming *him* for daring to talk to her pretty much blew my brain and contracted virtually every notion I had about what feminism meant."

"I shook my head in disbelief at the loons and their rape narrative, which was starting to dominate and silence the conversation."

"But even back then, I think it was about 4 years ago, I thought Watson and PeeZus were a matched pair of hypocritical and deeply dishonest asses."

"I'm here because I came across this advert at Freethought Blogs:"

"Starting with the Thunderf00t removal for the awful crime of disagreeing with PZ, seeing just how pointless, vindictive and self-victimizing the narrative emanating from Skepchick had gotten and noticing the winds of very authoritarian groupthink and censorship beginning to swell in certain communities I began to separate myself from the whole thing."

"I came here after reading many blogs on the Elevatorgate/Skepchick/A+ drama and realised that all the supporters of A+ and Skepchick were acting like children with their shunning of other people whose views doesn't agree with their own views."

"Don't care much for the FTB side of things. I've only ever posted comments there twice and on one of those Josh the Gay guy came down like a ton of bricks but it was funny."

"Around November 2011, I saw the witch-hunts from the front row and was disgusted."

"I had clashed with Ophelia on the same, but different grounds, and was searching for an answer to how this once rational woman had lost her marbles"

"First post here. Originally, I thought that the FTB/A+ crowd was alright, but then I started reading the comments on the blog posts at that place and saw how they dealt with people that disagreed with them."

"I have read some of FTB bloggers such as Greta and PZmyer's blogs and at that they both rub me the wrong way."

"Once in a blue moon, I'd visit Pharyngula -- usually off an RDF link -- for some pretty octopus pix, and was surprised to discover what a major d-bag PZ actually is ..."

"The whole enterprise is just mean-spirited and nasty. No one there is having fun, it's just a shithole of angry ranting from PZ and the rest of the Hivemind."

"I came here after I found out this is where Schroedinger's rapists are supposed to go."

"I'm here primarily because I was horrified at Richard Carrier's video and blog post last month"

"I started lurking here several months ago, reading about this as a 'hate-site' on FtB. I wanted to see what the big fucking deal was."

"Someone on Reddit mentioned that this was the only remaining atheist forum free of SJW influence."

My question remains: Has the "light" shining from The Undead Thread ever helped anyone see through the propaganda, who was ever tempted to actually believe it in the first place?

kunda
.
.
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 3:03 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#40

Post by kunda »

Jimhabegger

'Has the 'light' shining from The Undead Thread ever....'
That's a good question and I feel that I can sort of answer 'yes' to that.

I read FtB for months then started getting the feeling that the 'oppositions' position was being mischaracterized and/or drastically overstated. Reading the Undead Thread has provided the important element of context, which, when not provided, paints a very skewed picture. So the 'light' shining was through a glass darkly, as a result of the FtB filter, but it did get through to me and eventually lead me to look closer at this place. Nor sure why I took so long to come here, i think I assumed it truly was an MRA site and in my limited experience those places have disappointed.

This may not really qualify as an example because it's hard to say to what degree I was 'tempted to actually believe it in the first place'.

Wait, on second thought, if by 'believe the FtB propaganda' you mean believe that the 'Pit was as it is characterized there, then yes, I did buy into that because of context-lacking, cherry-picking, behavior. As I saw supposed 'pitters come to FtB, raise reasonable objections, get dogpiled, get derailed by becoming defensive, and so on, the 'light' started to shine.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#41

Post by jimhabegger »

As I said in the thread Does The Undead Thread promote bullying?, I just realized that the behavior I'm denouncing in The Undead Thread is exactly what I've denounced in every other social forum I've ever seen on the Internet: stigmatizing some group or category of people, and nurturing antipathy against them, across some ideological divide. I also said that it's uncommon for people to do it so openly and blatantly, and to be so proud of it. It's even more uncommon, in my experience, to see a forum explicitly created for that purpose.

That raises a question in my mind, whether that makes it any more harmful to the participants than any other social forum. I'm not sure it does. The frankness of it might even make it less harmful. However that may be, it might be less harmful to other people and to society, because it's so clearly labeled, and so exaggerated. No one is lured into it by false pretenses, and as a parody of stigmatizing, scapegoating and demonizing people, it highlights the very issue that I've tried to raise.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#42

Post by jimhabegger »

In the thread Does The Undead Thread promote bullying?, someone asked about my purposes in posting. Here are some of my purposes that I'm aware of:
1. In the beginning, my purpose was to learn more about people's grievances against people associated with the FtBfem faction.
2. Then I decided to try to speak out against stigmatizing, scapegoating and demonizing people.
3. Then for a while I was responding to some comments and questions about my posts.
4. The last few posts have just been impulsively posting some new ideas that came to me, about my issues with The Undead Thread. I'm not sure they'll do anyone any good, but I'm not sure they won't.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#43

Post by jimhabegger »

I'm suddenly starting to see The Undead Thread in a much better light. It's the first forum I've seen where demonizing that's popular in the forum is not denied and does not go unchallenged.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#44

Post by jimhabegger »

kunda,

I'm sorry, I forgot to say thank you. What you posted was very helpful.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#45

Post by jimhabegger »

This is partly a response to Matt's post #37 in the thread "Does The Undead Thread promote bullying?"
Please refer back to my point 1) above: the majority of material here is considered legitimate satire on hypocrisy, lies, anti-social behavior, and irrational positions.

While some may engage in the ridicule just to amuse themselves, it is also important to expose & publicly condemn such behavior. You have done the same on your blog, though eschewing satire for another style.
In response to that, I said I would post in this thread on the subject of publicly condemning harmful behavior.

Now I've decided that all I want to do is try to clarify what I'm currently trying to learn to speak out against, and when, where and how.

What I'm currently trying to learn to speak out against is behavior that reinforces stereotyping and prejudices, when it looks popular to me in a group that I'm associating with. The biggest challenge for me currently is learning *how* to speak out against it, for example what precisely to say, and how to label the thread.

I don't see trying to expose and condemn other people's wrongdoings as a virtue in itself. I see that as far more often part of the problem than part of the solution. What I'm aiming for is to undermine the popularity of the behavior, in any group that I'm associating with. I don't think of it as "exposing" anything, because the behavior I'm denouncing is already out in the open for everyone to see. I'm just speaking out to point to that behavior and say that it's wrong. I'm denouncing the *behavior*, not any particular people or group of people. I'm not proclaiming it far and wide, only to the group that I'm associating with, where that behavior looks popular to me.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#46

Post by jimhabegger »

In case I haven't made it clear enough, my reason for singling out the immoral behavior I see here, is not because it looks any worse to me than any of the behavior I've seen in the FtBfem faction and its fans. It doesn't. It doesn't even look any worse to me than some things I sometimes do myself.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#47

Post by jimhabegger »

I just realized that I haven't followed my reason for posting here, about the harmful attitudes and practices I see here, to its logical conclusion. My reason for posting here, about the harmful attitudes and practices I see here, was because I saw a possibility that someone might actually take it seriously. In that case I should also post my ideas for what to do about it.

I'll list my ideas very briefly, and anyone who wants to know more can ask.
1. Practice fellowship across ideological divides.
2. Learn not to ever say or insinuate anything uncomplimentary about anyone's personality, character or motives.
3. Free myself from all ill will against anyone.
4. Speak out now and then, in groups that I associate with, against harmful attitudes and practices that seem to me to be popular in those groups.

In the last few months I've learned some techniques for freeing myself from ill will, that work very well for me. I was amazed by how easy it was to do, once I set my mind to it. Learning not to ever say or insinuate anything uncomplimentary has been much more of a challenge for me. I've been struggling with it for more than ten years, and I've made some progress, but I still fail continually to resist the temptation.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#48

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Jim,

I'm glad the whole maitri thing is working for you. I, too, have tried to be less caustic online, and self-doxxing has helped by removing one layer of anonymity behind which to hide. I try to focus my criticism on what a person has said or done, not the person themselves.

But is your purpose to come here as our spiritual guide and make us better netizens? I'm new here, but I detect a well-established Pit culture. I doubt a big Revival will sweep through this crowd.

Again, instead of broad condemnations or vague morality lectures, I suggest you respond to specific posts that you find "immoral", either directly on the Undead Thread, or open a new dedicated thread. You won't be banned; you might be ignored. If you're really lucky, you might be photoshopped.

While you're at it, try the same over at the FtB blogs.

*
Practice fellowship across ideological divides.
You'll need to define "fellowship" before I can take that under advisement. But let me say just a little about the ideologues we're up against. Pitters find them mostly amusing -- understandable, as they're prone to faux pas, non-sensical statements, and making fools of themselves in public. But I've encountered their kind -- gen fems, PoMo relativists, SJWs, professional victims -- before, in political & social advocacy movements. They infiltrate a group or org, attempt to enforce new rules (their rules) on behavior, speech, etc. An anti-litter campaign now has to be a queer-friendly anti-litter campaign that acknowledges in its mission statement that the kyriarchy assigns privilege to litterers.

I could go on and on, but everyone here knows their M.O. I watched as gen fems derailed once viable political movements. Now I find them threatening to ruin the entire A/S community. This isn't about ideology. I've made common cause with libertarians on atheism, with christians on civil liberties, and with conservatives & New Agers alike on animal welfare. I know how to bridge ideological divides.

The A-plussers are the fucking Borg. You either beat them back, or get assimilated.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#49

Post by jimhabegger »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:I try to focus my criticism on what a person has said or done, not the person themselves.
I like that.
I've made common cause with libertarians on atheism, with christians on civil liberties, and with conservatives & New Agers alike on animal welfare.
I like that.
Now I find them threatening to ruin the entire A/S community.
Are you open to the possibility that what you're doing does more harm than good to the community? Are you open to new ideas about what to do, if you really care about that community?

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#50

Post by jimhabegger »

Matt, your post #48 above gives an answer to the question I was trying to ask in my original post in this thread.
Now I find them threatening to ruin the entire A/S community.
I've seen other people saying that, as a reason for campaigning against the FtBfem faction. So far I haven't seen any sign here of anyone really trying to help the community, but I'll check again. I'll try starting a thread about what people have been doing for the welfare and progress of the community.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#51

Post by Lsuoma »

jimhabegger wrote:Matt, your post #48 above gives an answer to the question I was trying to ask in my original post in this thread.
Now I find them threatening to ruin the entire A/S community.
I've seen other people saying that, as a reason for campaigning against the FtBfem faction. So far I haven't seen any sign here of anyone really trying to help the community, but I'll check again. I'll try starting a thread about what people have been doing for the welfare and progress of the community.
Starting a thread for every sub-thought is dumb.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#52

Post by jimhabegger »

Lsuoma,

Thanks for a good laugh!

Like I said, I'm warming up more and more to everyone here!

Metalogic42
.
.
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#53

Post by Metalogic42 »

Lsuoma wrote:
jimhabegger wrote:Matt, your post #48 above gives an answer to the question I was trying to ask in my original post in this thread.
Now I find them threatening to ruin the entire A/S community.
I've seen other people saying that, as a reason for campaigning against the FtBfem faction. So far I haven't seen any sign here of anyone really trying to help the community, but I'll check again. I'll try starting a thread about what people have been doing for the welfare and progress of the community.
Starting a thread for every sub-thought is dumb.
I'm going to start a new thread to discuss that.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#54

Post by jimhabegger »

Metalogic, I'm glad to see that you're still following this thread!

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#55

Post by jimhabegger »

I'll recapitulate what I've tried to say about some behavior that I see as popular here, and wrong:
1. It looks to me like it's popular here, as it is in every other social forum I've seen on the Internet, to depreciate the personality, character and motives of some other people, and to project the faults of some members of a group or category of people onto everyone in it.
2. In my view, those behaviors are wrong, and nothing can make them right.

The reason I'm saying that is to try to undermine the popularity of those behaviors.

The most common response I've seen to that, is that what some other people are doing is worse. I don't see how that's relevant to what I'm saying. Can anyone explain to me how it's relevant?

----

I have some questions about people's reasons for what they're doing here, besides having fun, and venting. Here are some reasons I've seen:
1. To expose, condemn and document some people's wrongdoings, and hold them accountable.
2. To keep people from being fooled.
3. To stop some people from ruining the atheist community and/or movement.

Questions
1. What good does anyone think it can do to expose, condemn or document those people's wrongdoings? Has anyone seen any evidence for that?
2. Whatever it might mean for people posting here to "hold them accountable," what good does anyone think it can do? Has anyone seen any evidence for that?
3. Has anyone seen any evidence that what people are doing here has helped to keep anyone from being fooled, or has helped keep the atheist community and/or movement from being ruined?

Metalogic42
.
.
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#56

Post by Metalogic42 »

jimhabegger wrote:Metalogic, I'm glad to see that you're still following this thread!
That makes one of us.

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#57

Post by jimhabegger »

You guys are so much fun!

jimhabegger
.
.
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#58

Post by jimhabegger »

I'll try approaching this from a different angle.

There have been some campaigns depreciating white people and men, and promoting ill will against them. There have been some campaigns depreciating everyone who objected to those campaigns, and promoting ill will against them. There have been some campaigns depreciating some specific people, and promoting ill will against them, including Justin Vacula, Ron Lindsay and Skep tickle for example. Consider the role those campaigns of depreciation and ill will have played in the grief and harm that have been caused to some people.

Consider the role that depreciating gays, and promoting ill will against them, has played in cruelty and violence against gays. Consider the role that depreciating atheists, and promoting ill will against them, has played in cruelty and violence against atheists. Think of any systematic cruelty and violence in the world, and consider the role that depreciating some group or category of people, and promoting ill will against them, has played in that cruelty and violence.

As I see it, depreciating people, and nurturing ill will against them, is always wrong, no matter who does it or under what banner they do it, and nothing can ever make it right. Decorating it with satire and innocent fun only makes it worse, by camouflaging it and making it more appealing. As I see it, one of the most urgent needs in the world now is for people to make sustained and systematic efforts, first to stop doing that themselves, then to stop encouraging it in people around them, and try to convince as many people as possible in their circles of influence to do the same.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#59

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

jimhabegger wrote:Are you open to the possibility that what you're doing does more harm than good to the community?
I'm open. I said it was a question worth exploring. Now show me some evidence.

Questions
1. What good does anyone think it can do to expose, condemn or document those people's wrongdoings? Has anyone seen any evidence for that?
2. Whatever it might mean for people posting here to "hold them accountable," what good does anyone think it can do? Has anyone seen any evidence for that?
3. Has anyone seen any evidence that what people are doing here has helped to keep anyone from being fooled, or has helped keep the atheist community and/or movement from being ruined?
Those are good questions. What were the answers from the FtBs when you asked them?


I've seen other people saying that, as a reason for campaigning against the FtBfem faction. So far I haven't seen any sign here of anyone really trying to help the community, but I'll check again.
Define "helping". I define anything that undermines the A-plussers as helpful.

As I see it, depreciating people, and nurturing ill will against them, is always wrong
... did you mean
Deprecrate: to plead or protest against; earnest disapproval of

Yup.

Consider the role that depreciating gays, and promoting ill will against them, has played in cruelty and violence against gays.
A specious comparison.

The Pit lampoons specific people for specific statements, actions & patterns of behavior. Each of whom chose to open their stupid gobs in public. Now, if someone mocked their looks, b.o., weight, age, etc. then, yeah, that'd be gratuitously mean and counter-productive -- but still no comparison to Ftb attacks against their enemies list, much less to homophobia.

[the satire] looks to me like it's ... to depreciate the personality, character and motives of some other people, and to project the faults of some members of a group or category of people onto everyone in it.
Are you against satire in principle? If so, I suggest you avoid the works of Swift ... and South Park.

The bloggers & commentariat at Freethougtblogs, are everyone in the group. A+ was an half-baked idea burped up by the lovely & talentless Jen McCreight, then declared a revolutionary movement by the other FtBs. Dick Carrier ran a baysian equation proving that anyone who didn't accept A+ were Satan's spawn. In contrast, the response to A+ outside of North Korea their echo chamber has been a resounding 'meh.'

Please, please, show us one Ftb who has been wrongly scorned, whose behavior or words are not reflective of our portrayal of A-plussers. Give examples of posts here that unfairly satirize. Quote someone saying, 'since the Pitters are such slime, I'm warming up to A+'. Provide one single link to an Ftb commenter saying, 'hey peeps, aren't we being a little too harsh on the Slymepit? Surely there must be some decent people over there.'

Do that, Jim, before scolding us further.

John Greg
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 2669
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Comments and questions from the peanut gallery

#60

Post by John Greg »

You keep saying "depreciate". I don't think that is what you mean. When you buy a car, it begins to depreciate; people, not so much.

Please check your diction if you want meaningful dialogue.

Locked