The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

Old subthreads
another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5461

Post by another lurker »

EdgePenguin wrote:Did you guys spot this gem at A+? Apparently alcoholics don't have problems even remotely comparable with those experienced by the professional victims of that forum:

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3605
Which is ironic, b/c a couple of weeks ago someone was having a meltdown on Pharyngula about how everyone else's problems were not remotely comparable to those of an alcoholic...

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5462

Post by Louis »

Apples wrote:
Louis wrote:Pharyngula IS intimidating. Deliberately. This is a feature, not a bug. It's not for everyone. Just like I don't necessarily want to post at Place X because their environment doesn't suit me (for example I'd be fucked if there were a no swearing policy. I loves me a swear I do), I don't expect that Pharyngula gets everyone's juices flowing either. Why would I? Different strokes for different folks. It's not wrong to like or dislike the posting environment there, it just is a matter of personal preference.

As for the "you have to dot every i and cross every t" thing, again I disagree. Yes there are intemperate people who will jump on any error, I'm occasionally one of them if I've had a bad day and want to spread the joy around! ;-) But there is more nuance there than you suspect. What there isn't, at this current time (and this has been the case for a while now) is a lot of tolerance for leading people through the basics on certain subjects. It's not about disagreement, it's about having to explain the same damned thing a million times to a large number of rather clueless shitheads.
Intimidating? Maybe in the same way changing a shitty diaper is intimidating. There are some bright commenters at Pharyngula who have some well-rehearsed arguments against creationists. But the arguments -- if only you could call them "arguments" instead of flame-fests or struggle sessions -- about "social justice" and "misogyny" are fucking amateur-hour. Yes, Pharyngula is "not for everyone." For example, it's not for people who have a lot of intellectual integrity or have a really deep interest in honesty, fairness, and critical thinking -- especially when it comes to engaging those who are just as bright and well-informed as you are, but who are questioning things you may take for granted, for good or bad reasons.

Do you think BubbaRich was intimidated in this recent thread?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... /#comments

Or do you think PZ called him a "fucking moron" and banned him because he was articulately asking for evidence of any real attempt to limit diversity in the atheist/skeptical movement? BubbaRich is, obviously, like NoelPlum, ERV, and many others, smarter than your average Pharyngulite. Not really an intimidating environment, just an infuriating and mediocre one if you're not giving pathetic PZ Myers a pass because he's an old friend from Talk Origins.

This isn't about PZ's being mean -- it's about his being smug, sloppy, intellectually-bigoted, and lazy when it comes to anything outside his narrow range of biological expertise, and managing his blog accordingly. It makes Pharyngula repulsive, and, what is worse, boring.

Well thanks for your unbiased views. I'll be intellectually dishonest, lacking in integrity, ignoring of honesty fairness and... oh I give up, wanna know what's boring, the endless whinging about FTB or PZ or Pharyngla or whatever, haven't you got anything better to do. Like I said, I'm not here to defend them (and yes, for the record, that thread with BubbaRich was on the pathetic side And?).

This is getting much more boring much faster than even I suspected, and I confess I had my suspicions. Isn't there anything more interesting than whinging about PZ/whatever? I'm reading big talk about arguments, tell you what, give me a killer shot, just one really great argument against some claim you think is made at Pharyngula and I'll go and post it over there with full credit, all the disclaimers anything you want. Fair? If PZ bans me, he bans me. He won't, and if it's a good argument, I bet it'll get a good treatment, of not well won't I have to eat humble pie, eh? Come on help me out, you're making me feel bad! I wish I did have an agenda now, it would have been so much easier than actually being curious.

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5463

Post by Louis »

Za-zen wrote:Just incase louis thinks he's chased off my dick carrier grade intellect, i'm off to bec.
Dear fuck why would I think that? I'm not here to compare cock sizes. I wanted and want to satisfy my own curiosity. I honestly don't think for a second that people are monsters generally, so I'd like to see this much vaunted objection to...well whatever it is. I'm not sure it's anything substantial yet.

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5464

Post by Michael K Gray »

Meanwhile, back at A+Theism, julian may be coming to his senses at last:
by julian » Sat Jan 19, 2013 6:50 pm

Happy to leave, flew. But one last note, you all, with your open and unashamed hostility to strangers, your willingness to be purposefully hurtful, your refusal to treat even the well intentioned ignorant people who come looking for help, are exactly why everyone hates A+. This place deserves the reputation it has, it deserves to be mocked and it deserves to be used derisiviley by everyone from actual sj workers and activists to atheist orgs and blogs.

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5465

Post by somedumbguy »

Svan has called Benson's open and raised.

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5466

Post by Louis »

nippletwister wrote:
Louis wrote:
cunt wrote:
<snip>

Obviously though you have some other point to make or you wouldn't be here. Don't keep us guessing. I'm taking your avoidance of the Nerd question as a "yes".
Point? Can't a bloke simply be curious?

And on the Nerd thing: It's not avoidance, I just don't care to play this silly game. Feel free to project all you want though. I'm sure it helps...something.

Uh, not to jump in here if I don't belong, but asking your honest opinion of a prominent, prolific, and fairly rabid commenter on a site you frequent isn't much of a "game" ...but I'm sure you feeling superior is important. Keep projecting!
Bullshit. Trying to get people to "dish dirt" on others is playing HA GOTCHA at it's finest. It's playground wank. You know it I know, my opinion of Nerd or PZ or you or anyone is meaningless to anything other than ongoing interblog rivalry and soap opera. Fun if you like that sort of thing. I don't.

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5467

Post by Louis »

I'm off. Too much time spent already. Have fun folks.

nippletwister
.
.
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:17 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5468

Post by nippletwister »

nippletwister wrote:
Louis wrote:
cunt wrote:
<snip>

Obviously though you have some other point to make or you wouldn't be here. Don't keep us guessing. I'm taking your avoidance of the Nerd question as a "yes".
Point? Can't a bloke simply be curious?

And on the Nerd thing: It's not avoidance, I just don't care to play this silly game. Feel free to project all you want though. I'm sure it helps...something.

Uh, not to jump in here if I don't belong, but asking your honest opinion of a prominent, prolific, and fairly rabid commenter on a site you frequent isn't much of a "game" ...but I'm sure you feeling superior is important. Keep projecting!

Ok, that was mean of me, and not even a good use of 'projecting". Apologies, Louis. If you don't want to talk about others that's fine, but it seems a little weird to not talk about popular commenters on a blog, as they are a good part of the life of the blog. Peace.

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5469

Post by somedumbguy »

Louis wrote:
Apples wrote:
Louis wrote:Pharyngula IS intimidating. Deliberately. This is a feature, not a bug. It's not for everyone. Just like I don't necessarily want to post at Place X because their environment doesn't suit me (for example I'd be fucked if there were a no swearing policy. I loves me a swear I do), I don't expect that Pharyngula gets everyone's juices flowing either. Why would I? Different strokes for different folks. It's not wrong to like or dislike the posting environment there, it just is a matter of personal preference.

As for the "you have to dot every i and cross every t" thing, again I disagree. Yes there are intemperate people who will jump on any error, I'm occasionally one of them if I've had a bad day and want to spread the joy around! ;-) But there is more nuance there than you suspect. What there isn't, at this current time (and this has been the case for a while now) is a lot of tolerance for leading people through the basics on certain subjects. It's not about disagreement, it's about having to explain the same damned thing a million times to a large number of rather clueless shitheads.
Intimidating? Maybe in the same way changing a shitty diaper is intimidating. There are some bright commenters at Pharyngula who have some well-rehearsed arguments against creationists. But the arguments -- if only you could call them "arguments" instead of flame-fests or struggle sessions -- about "social justice" and "misogyny" are fucking amateur-hour. Yes, Pharyngula is "not for everyone." For example, it's not for people who have a lot of intellectual integrity or have a really deep interest in honesty, fairness, and critical thinking -- especially when it comes to engaging those who are just as bright and well-informed as you are, but who are questioning things you may take for granted, for good or bad reasons.

Do you think BubbaRich was intimidated in this recent thread?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... /#comments

Or do you think PZ called him a "fucking moron" and banned him because he was articulately asking for evidence of any real attempt to limit diversity in the atheist/skeptical movement? BubbaRich is, obviously, like NoelPlum, ERV, and many others, smarter than your average Pharyngulite. Not really an intimidating environment, just an infuriating and mediocre one if you're not giving pathetic PZ Myers a pass because he's an old friend from Talk Origins.

This isn't about PZ's being mean -- it's about his being smug, sloppy, intellectually-bigoted, and lazy when it comes to anything outside his narrow range of biological expertise, and managing his blog accordingly. It makes Pharyngula repulsive, and, what is worse, boring.

Well thanks for your unbiased views. I'll be intellectually dishonest, lacking in integrity, ignoring of honesty fairness and... oh I give up, wanna know what's boring, the endless whinging about FTB or PZ or Pharyngla or whatever, haven't you got anything better to do. Like I said, I'm not here to defend them (and yes, for the record, that thread with BubbaRich was on the pathetic side And?).

This is getting much more boring much faster than even I suspected, and I confess I had my suspicions. Isn't there anything more interesting than whinging about PZ/whatever? I'm reading big talk about arguments, tell you what, give me a killer shot, just one really great argument against some claim you think is made at Pharyngula and I'll go and post it over there with full credit, all the disclaimers anything you want. Fair? If PZ bans me, he bans me. He won't, and if it's a good argument, I bet it'll get a good treatment, of not well won't I have to eat humble pie, eh? Come on help me out, you're making me feel bad! I wish I did have an agenda now, it would have been so much easier than actually being curious.
I understand atheismplus.com has a brand new opening for a brand new attention whore.

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5470

Post by somedumbguy »

Louis wrote:
Apples wrote:
Louis wrote:Pharyngula IS intimidating. Deliberately. This is a feature, not a bug. It's not for everyone. Just like I don't necessarily want to post at Place X because their environment doesn't suit me (for example I'd be fucked if there were a no swearing policy. I loves me a swear I do), I don't expect that Pharyngula gets everyone's juices flowing either. Why would I? Different strokes for different folks. It's not wrong to like or dislike the posting environment there, it just is a matter of personal preference.

As for the "you have to dot every i and cross every t" thing, again I disagree. Yes there are intemperate people who will jump on any error, I'm occasionally one of them if I've had a bad day and want to spread the joy around! ;-) But there is more nuance there than you suspect. What there isn't, at this current time (and this has been the case for a while now) is a lot of tolerance for leading people through the basics on certain subjects. It's not about disagreement, it's about having to explain the same damned thing a million times to a large number of rather clueless shitheads.
Intimidating? Maybe in the same way changing a shitty diaper is intimidating. There are some bright commenters at Pharyngula who have some well-rehearsed arguments against creationists. But the arguments -- if only you could call them "arguments" instead of flame-fests or struggle sessions -- about "social justice" and "misogyny" are fucking amateur-hour. Yes, Pharyngula is "not for everyone." For example, it's not for people who have a lot of intellectual integrity or have a really deep interest in honesty, fairness, and critical thinking -- especially when it comes to engaging those who are just as bright and well-informed as you are, but who are questioning things you may take for granted, for good or bad reasons.

Do you think BubbaRich was intimidated in this recent thread?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... /#comments

Or do you think PZ called him a "fucking moron" and banned him because he was articulately asking for evidence of any real attempt to limit diversity in the atheist/skeptical movement? BubbaRich is, obviously, like NoelPlum, ERV, and many others, smarter than your average Pharyngulite. Not really an intimidating environment, just an infuriating and mediocre one if you're not giving pathetic PZ Myers a pass because he's an old friend from Talk Origins.

This isn't about PZ's being mean -- it's about his being smug, sloppy, intellectually-bigoted, and lazy when it comes to anything outside his narrow range of biological expertise, and managing his blog accordingly. It makes Pharyngula repulsive, and, what is worse, boring.

Well thanks for your unbiased views. I'll be intellectually dishonest, lacking in integrity, ignoring of honesty fairness and... oh I give up, wanna know what's boring, the endless whinging about FTB or PZ or Pharyngla or whatever, haven't you got anything better to do. Like I said, I'm not here to defend them (and yes, for the record, that thread with BubbaRich was on the pathetic side And?).

This is getting much more boring much faster than even I suspected, and I confess I had my suspicions. Isn't there anything more interesting than whinging about PZ/whatever? I'm reading big talk about arguments, tell you what, give me a killer shot, just one really great argument against some claim you think is made at Pharyngula and I'll go and post it over there with full credit, all the disclaimers anything you want. Fair? If PZ bans me, he bans me. He won't, and if it's a good argument, I bet it'll get a good treatment, of not well won't I have to eat humble pie, eh? Come on help me out, you're making me feel bad! I wish I did have an agenda now, it would have been so much easier than actually being curious.
I understand atheismplus.com has a brand new opening for a brand new attention whore.

Apples
.
.
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5471

Post by Apples »

Louis wrote:Isn't there anything more interesting than whinging about PZ/whatever? I'm reading big talk about arguments, tell you what, give me a killer shot, just one really great argument against some claim you think is made at Pharyngula and I'll go and post it over there with full credit, all the disclaimers anything you want. Fair? If PZ bans me, he bans me. He won't, and if it's a good argument, I bet it'll get a good treatment, of not well won't I have to eat humble pie, eh? Come on help me out, you're making me feel bad! I wish I did have an agenda now, it would have been so much easier than actually being curious.
Um, okay. Go and explain to PZ et al why it was "on the pathetic side" to call BubbaRich a fucking moron and ban him. I'll check Thunderdome after dinner.

Reap
.
.
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:27 pm
Location: Reno Nevada
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5472

Post by Reap »

Cunning Punt wrote:
16bitheretic wrote:So Seth Andrews, after having Michael Shermer on his podcast a few weeks ago, is now posting the video of a presentation by Abbie Smith?

Uh oh, somebody better make the professional victims at FTB who are scheduled to speak at the same American Atheists 50th Anniversary convention that Seth is in a few months aware that they need to target him next in their witch hunts! We don't want them to feel unsafe, he might still have Abbie and Shermer contamination! Worse yet, he might still be a... a... fiscal conservative, and a gun owner! According to my A+ manual, this means he is immoral and hateful, and something...something... um, rape, privilege, patriarchy, stop harassing us!
He'll be next. I'd like to see how that goes - he has built up quite an online community of loyal friends. I don't agree with everything he says, but he seems like a genuinely nice person who believes we should all be able to talk to each other regardless of our differences.

Seth is my next guest on The Angry Atheist podcast

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5473

Post by somedumbguy »

Hmm. Double post after retrying on an error message from the server.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5474

Post by Lsuoma »

Michael K Gray wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:Here's a thought that just struck me, which is, I think, very telling.

We are seeing a CONSTANT stream of people saying, in effect:

"I was a babboollie, but gradually got fed up with what I was seeing and hearing. I heard terrible things about Teh Pitters, but when I came over here to take a look I found that the FC(n) had completely misrepresented you. Sure, it's crude, and you need a thick skin, but Pitters seem to be honest, and adult."

I have not heard of a single instance of reverse Pitflow, so to speak. (Fucking Pitmagnets, how do they work, eh?).

Can anyone name an example? (colon doesn't count, of course - s/h/it was pure wank from the get go.)
Justicar, for a while at least.
No, Justicar never posted here, t least not under his own name.

justinvacula
.
.
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5475

Post by justinvacula »

Thanks for the support Richard Reed!?

http://richardreed84.wordpress.com/2013 ... ularism-2/
May 17th 2013 sees the Women in Secularism conference come to Washington DC. The speaker list is largely identical to what it was last year, but that hasn’t deterred Justin Vacula from wanting to attend!

Justin Vacula is an outspoken atheist and a board member of the NEPA Freethought Society. His atheist activism will make him a very worthwhile attendee of WIS so if you want to contribute to his travel fund you can do so here.

On top of that, 20% of all donations will go to Operation Smile, a very worthwhile charity! So, I would encourage people to contribute to Justin’s fund!

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5476

Post by Lsuoma »

Badger3k wrote:
Za-zen wrote:Just incase louis thinks he's chased off my dick carrier grade intellect, i'm off to bec.
You're off to bec? Does this mean you're going to die your hair and wear hipster glasses? Maybe get sloshed and go into elevators? Claim to be threatened and victimized and smirk when you tell people how scared you are? :lol:
http://slymepit.com/staticimgs/tbec.jpg

nippletwister
.
.
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:17 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5477

Post by nippletwister »

Louis wrote:
nippletwister wrote:
Louis wrote:
cunt wrote:
<snip>

Obviously though you have some other point to make or you wouldn't be here. Don't keep us guessing. I'm taking your avoidance of the Nerd question as a "yes".
Point? Can't a bloke simply be curious?

And on the Nerd thing: It's not avoidance, I just don't care to play this silly game. Feel free to project all you want though. I'm sure it helps...something.

Uh, not to jump in here if I don't belong, but asking your honest opinion of a prominent, prolific, and fairly rabid commenter on a site you frequent isn't much of a "game" ...but I'm sure you feeling superior is important. Keep projecting!
Bullshit. Trying to get people to "dish dirt" on others is playing HA GOTCHA at it's finest. It's playground wank. You know it I know, my opinion of Nerd or PZ or you or anyone is meaningless to anything other than ongoing interblog rivalry and soap opera. Fun if you like that sort of thing. I don't.
I think the problem you're missing, Louis (if you're still around), is that PZ, along with several others, is using the influence he has built up to exercise some control over the larger scene in a dishonest manner...conferences, who can be employed by secular orgs, etc. They are shoehorning their politics in skepticism but with no debate allowed, and encouraging that behavior in those who agree with him. He, along with others, have been running a fairly dishonest campaign against anyone who dissents from their views on skeptical grounds.

These actions have real consequences for the future of the atheist, skeptical, and secularist movements, and a lot of good people are being shit on to make way for a handful of liberals who can't even support their own positions without slander and well-poisoning.

THAT is why there is a problem with PZ (and others), at least in my book. They're running personality cults, while trying to influence the skeptical movement. THAT's why he gets brought up.

If all this is news to you....you must be being honest about how bored you are, and must not pay much attention to anything.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5478

Post by Badger3k »

Louis wrote: I'm reading big talk about arguments, tell you what, give me a killer shot, just one really great argument against some claim you think is made at Pharyngula and I'll go and post it over there with full credit, all the disclaimers anything you want.
Kinda like that killer argument against God, or that killer argument against evolution, or even the killer argument for evolution? Meh. Really, why should anybody bother with that? It's been tried before. Someone may take you up on that, but if you want a debate, why not start by defining terms? I have a friend coming over to play Borderlands 2, so I won't be on for a few hours, but the suggestion might lead somewhere. What is a misogynistic term, or argument, or anything? Before any meaningful conversation can start, you need a common language.

Is saying "all women are bitches" misogynistic?

Is saying "Rebecca Watson is a bitch" misogynistic?

Is the term "Twat" sexist or misogynistic? Would you call out someone who says it? (this is a point, as some people, like Ophelia; say it is sexist every time, but when Rebecca Watson uses it numerous times in the SGU podcast, she stays remarkably silent and doesn't say a thing)

Are rape jokes misogynistic? Were (and are) George Carlin and Tim Minchin sexists? Were they misogynists?

Is it better, worse, or no different to make a joke about rape or to make a joke about a mass murder? Does context matter? Can we call jokes stupid, without saying they are misogynistic?

Just a (very) few of the issues about the hypocrisy of certain people over at FTB/etc that have been raised here in the Pit, and elsewhere. Can you comment on any of these so I (and others) can see what you think? Then maybe there can be a discussion where we see if there can be agreement or disagreement, or even if discussion is possible. If we can get to some kind of understanding, then maybe - maybe, you can try the "go to PZ's site and present the argument" thing if you want. I don't think that any argument can be presented fairly without there being that common language thing, and right now, I don't see it happening. Of course, that's just my opinion, and I tend to prefer to remain on the sidelines and laugh a bit (or just shake my head) so my personal involvement isn't that great. Too many things in real life I have to deal with that makes these internet dramatics a hobby like watching Soap Operas.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5479

Post by Badger3k »

Lsuoma wrote:
Badger3k wrote:
Za-zen wrote:Just incase louis thinks he's chased off my dick carrier grade intellect, i'm off to bec.
You're off to bec? Does this mean you're going to die your hair and wear hipster glasses? Maybe get sloshed and go into elevators? Claim to be threatened and victimized and smirk when you tell people how scared you are? :lol:
http://slymepit.com/staticimgs/tbec.jpg
"tootine bec" = gah! And this is just after watching the South Park episode on Farts and Quiffing on Netflix!

Sleeper
.
.
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5480

Post by Sleeper »

I don't know if this is obvious to anyone else but... IMHO on a structural basis alone, this the worst forum I have ever participated in.

Who thought that basically one ubber long thread that encompassing all topics was the way to go here?
Frankly, it is unwieldy, difficult to navigate, and impossible to stay current on. I am fully convinced that I miss 95% of what is said and yet I could not imagine trying to wade thru this monstrosity to find a particular reference or discussion.
The glaring omission is the START A NEW TOPIC button. How are we supposed to help keep this forum manageable without being able to start new topics? All forums I have participated in have this capacity so that topics can be separate and easily accessed.
So why is it done this way?

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5481

Post by Badger3k »

Louis wrote:I'm off. Too much time spent already. Have fun folks.
Well, I'll give an 8.5 on the flounce. If you come back, maybe you can try to answer the questions I asked, if you really want a discussion.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5482

Post by welch »

VickyCaramel wrote:
cunt wrote:
VickyCaramel wrote:Excuse my guys, I think I might be lost.

I heard that you chaps were responsible for all the evil in the world. Could somebody please direct me to the threads where you plot your diabolical schemes?
Sure, first you have to post me your tits via PM. I will judge them, and make a decision to divulge the secret password. Good luck.
http://www.picpaste.com/extpics/tits-niuKWP8C.jpg
There ya go!
You'll fit in just fine

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5483

Post by Badger3k »

Sleeper wrote:I don't know if this is obvious to anyone else but... IMHO on a structural basis alone, this the worst forum I have ever participated in.

Who thought that basically one ubber long thread that encompassing all topics was the way to go here?
Frankly, it is unwieldy, difficult to navigate, and impossible to stay current on. I am fully convinced that I miss 95% of what is said and yet I could not imagine trying to wade thru this monstrosity to find a particular reference or discussion.
The glaring omission is the START A NEW TOPIC button. How are we supposed to help keep this forum manageable without being able to start new topics? All forums I have participated in have this capacity so that topics can be separate and easily accessed.
So why is it done this way?
This was the way it originated. As a thread on a post at a blog. I think people like it this way because you can literally see everything on the main thread, and you don't have to go looking for things in multiple places. If things get a bit too much on one topic, people usually make a thread about it, but most don't have a hard time following things here. This is a bit more like a party in one room, instead of a library where you have different rooms for everything.

Can the next thread be the "Slymepit Orgy"? :dance:

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5484

Post by Metalogic42 »

@Louis, here's my response, as promised.
Again, I'm not responsible for PZ, FTB commenters, or for you. It might shock you that I don't base any of my opinion of slymepitters on what PZ or anyone allied says, I base it on what I see of the few slympitters that have come to Pharyngula. In other words, my opinion of them, thus far, has been low, this is a place that houses them. That's all I know. Does that mean ZOMG ALL SLYMEPITTERS ARE DAMNED BY ASSOCIATION? Nope, well not to me. As I said, PZ and others are free to set their own limits.
I agree - you're only responsible for yourself. But PZ, and many others, disagree with this. What concerns me here is where you (until recently) got your opinion of slymepitters from, because our content on FTB is *not* an accurate representation of us - specifically because of PZ's tactics. You're not at fault here, PZ is. But it's also important to note that your "data in" from FTB is skewed. Here's one example:

[spoiler]http://24.media.tumblr.com/78eb352f6c3e ... 1_1280.png[/spoiler]

Your opinion of Renee might (or might not) be pretty low - but if it is, it's because you probably don't have the whole story (because PZ bans us immediately, regardless of what we say). Does your opinion of her change at all after seeing this? If not, please type "operation smile" into the search bar here, read a few posts, and then ask yourself again.

Which other slymepitters do you have a low opinion of? How sure are you that you have the whole story on those people?
But this is again drifting rapidly into "PZ has done X. You must condemn X or defend PZ" territory. Doesn't seem very...what's the word...nuanced to me.
Not at all. No one here has the time to comment on everything. However, it is generally good practice to defend those things you agree with, and critique those you disagree with, when you have the time. Keeps the mind sharp and what not.
PZ's a human being, I'd put money on him doing a huge number of fucking dumb things in his life. Haven't you?
The dumb things I've done could probably fill a book. But when I make a mistake, especially in my thinking, I own up to it. PZ does not.

I think there might be some confusion here, actually. I'm not viewing this as me vs. you, I'm viewing it as me vs. PZ. What I'm doing here is defending my stance on PZ's behavior, to you. I actually like you, and I just want you to be aware of the opposition to "zomg evil slymepitter!!!" that surrounds you on FTB.
Really? So you are the arbiter of what is proper scepticism? Crikey! Pleased to meet you! PZ can argue with who he wants, how he wants, it just doesn't bother me. There are finite hours in the day, why he chooses to respond to this critic rather than that critic (and he does, just go and look at the posts about any number of religious fruitcakes he makes to take one example) is his business. Your complaint is "Waaaaah he won't address me, I'm important too". Great. So what? He's free to run his blog his way, it doesn't impinge on your ability to rebut his arguments. Nothing he does is stopping you arguing with him. He might not reply, he might not want you to do it on his blog if you've been a pain in the arse (his definition not anyone else's), but really, are you truly complaining that someone cannot decide how they are going to spend their own time? Have you any idea of the number of people that must berate that poor sod on a daily basis? Comment moderation? Fuck if it was my blog and I had to manage it, you'd see worse! Hell, the man has a public email address, write a decent rebuttal of what he has said that you disagree with, mention that you'll publish it and any response, and then publish it on your own website. If you make a quality argument and he doesn't reply, well there you go, either he can't because you've outfoxed him, or he can't because he hasn't the time, or he can't because he didn't see it or something. Why get so bent out of shape over one guy? Seriously, when I first "met" him we were just two people battering creationists for fun and profit on Talk Origins. His blogging efforts and notoriety are due to his efforts. Want to present a dissenting voice? Who's stopping you? Not me. Not PZ. Get out there. Speak freely and loudly. More power to you!
Ok, so imagine you're back on Talk Origins, and someone links to a creationist blog. The most recent blog post is this:

"Hey everyone, evolution is fucking stupid, and anyone who believes it is a nazi! Someone sent me a video about evolution yesterday, and I didn't watch it. But I know everything in it is wrong, because a website I don't like said it was good."

So then, someone from Talk Origins comes in and says this:

"Hey creationist, I don't think that's really fair. Being a nazi and accepting evolution are mutually exclusive, and besides, just because that other website likes the video doesn't mean that it's wrong. If you don't want to watch the video, that's fine, but if not, then you shouldn't say anything about it."

This person is promptly banned because he's from Talk Origins.

What would you think of this guy? Probably not much. You'd probably make lots of sarcastic jokes about how fucking stupid he's being. Now, he's got a right to behave this way, no one disputes that. But it's disingenuous as fuck. And that's why I don't like PZ; he behaves exactly like this. And no, it's not "one guy". It's PZ, it's OB, it's RW, it's the A+ mods, it's GC, it's Josh, it's Caine, it's Nerd. And many others. If it was one guy, we wouldn't give a shit. But all of these people together have power to influence perception of atheism, both internally and externally. And *that* is why we're so harsh on them. It's not about the things you might agree with them on, like patriarchy or rape culture. It's the tactics. He doesn't want to respond to critiques? Fine. But if not, he should shut the fuck up about the people doing the critiquing.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5485

Post by welch »

John Greg wrote:Louis (http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 937#p51937) said:
I'd really be very, very surprised if PZ banned me for a handful of posts here. He just isn't that sort of person....
Well, that largely points to either a myopic personal bias in favour of PeeZus or, more likely, a fairly major lack of awareness of PeeZus's actual actions.

PeeZus has enDungeonated several people who post here; people who never even posted at Pharyngula or, so far as I am aware, any other FfTB blog. His reasons for doing so, and he stated it as such, were because by posting at the Pyt, regardless of what the post content was, they proved themselves to be sexist, misogynist, anti-feminist MRA assholes who are actual Marc Lepine style mass murderers-in-waiting.

How you missed that is rather beyond me.
I think the only person he banned by name sans posting comments there was Franc. But I may be wrong. I fall under the blanket 'pit ban. Of course, since the last time I commented on his site was during pepsigate, for which I was called a Pepsi plant since I was on the wrong side, it's not exactly an effective punishment. About on the same level as taking away the keys to the Ferrari I don't own.

Cunning Punt
.
.
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:50 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5486

Post by Cunning Punt »

Lsuoma wrote:
Cunning Punt wrote: Thank you for your words, Louis. I may or may not respond later but I have shit to do right now.
Greta?
Damn. The secret's out.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5487

Post by Pitchguest »

To Phil:

[spoiler]
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:
Louis wrote:
I did something I very, VERY rarely do (because I’m not super interested in the hate campaign stuff, that is a reflection of my privilege I realise), I went over to the Slymepit for a look. I read a few pages of their new version of the endless ERV inspired thread (1 to 6, 20 to 30, and 68/69 IIRC) just to get a flavour of what they were about.

Okay, well not too many surprises, few more uses of certain words than would fly here, but that really is by the by, they’re not open to being convinced that language has the power it does, fine (unpleasant, but you know, in the grand scheme of things not the most serious crime ever). We know that already. I was pleased to note the general tone of reaction to this Jerry Conlon tweet (even though he was a very minor and rare slymepit poster who no one remembered, ostensibly at least) was disgust. Good on them for that.

Should I emphasise that last part so passing pitters note that an evil Pharynguloid credits them with some actual humanity?

I was less pleased to note the pretty standard rantings of Reap and people like that, the venom is impressive and well tolerated, even supported. That’s a bit sad really. The hate directed at PZ/Rebecca/Jen/Greta/Ophelia etc is pretty disgusting, can’t excuse it. I was really unimpressed by crowing over claimed profound “logical victories” which, in the couple of instances I saw linked to and subsequently read weren’t anything of the type, just more point missing, question begging, assumption laden crap. Which is dull. Voltaire’s “prayer” applies again I think.

I was actually shocked to see the minimising and point missing that went along with the condemnation of this tweet. A fair amount of “not-condemnation” went on, i.e. “this is disgusting, BUT it’s obviously only a joke” or “this is disgusting, BUT it’s just playing into Ophelia’s hands as a professional victim” and so on.

It’s all a bit disappointing really. I can’t muster enormous outrage because I don’t know these people, they just seem a bit crap. They don’t seem like the folks I’ve met at atheist/sceptic meet ups and what not, they don’t seem like any of my colleagues or friends. I guess I’m just lucky that I tend not to meet people who obsessively hatefap over the internet over mean women who won’t fuck them and mean people who won’t tolerate their bullshit. Hell, if I hated everyone who hadn’t tolerated my bullshit over the years I’d have no time for anything else!

Granted for PZ/Rebecca/Jen/Greta/Ophelia etc it’s an entirely different kettle of fish, and those people obviously have my sympathy. I find it really, really, REALLY hard to credit that this all kicked off pretty much just because some woman on the internet said “Guys, don’t do that”. Really? Seriously, really? THIS is what energises these people?

{sigh}

I have a tendency towards comic hyperbole. I love a good joke, me. I’m fond of over the top extreme comic pseudo threats like “I’ll tear your arm off and beat you to death with the wet end”. I’m just puerile enough to find them funny in the right context. And there, again, is the fucking cluebat. Context. It matters. I’ll tell you the wrong context, the context where it is really easily misunderstood: when there are lots of people pouring hate filled missives at someone and you are an additional unknown/pseudonymous person adding to the cacophony. THEN those sorts of “jokes” take a different sheen, an entirely different tenor. How the hell is Ophelia to know if this person is mucking about or unhinged? She’s not. Granted it’s more likely he’s being an obnoxious moron than anything else, and the likelihood of anything nasty actually happening is tiny, but really how can anyone tell?

And this is where I *can* muster some genuine outrage. I don’t know Ophelia, I’m pretty sure we’ve never met, I read her blog rarely and comment even more rarely. I’m sure someone will claim I (and people like me) are White Knighting, but really, we’re not. Ophelia’s sex is only relevant in the sense that women do get acid chucked in their face for being “uppity” in various ways. And many other things besides. This is not a context free comment. This tweet does not exist in a vacuum. It exists as part, a particularly obnoxious part, of a large amount of vitriol directed at Ophelia for a variety of reasons. Not the sexist comment about her looks, note the slymepitters referring to her by a looks based insult on their site on a regular basis. Is this the best they can do?

Fuck it, I’ve done similar things in my past (comments about Denyse O’Leary for example) and I feel like a knobhead for having made them (and I was!). My dumb comments about Denyse O’Leary’s looks weren’t a substitute for actually engaging with her IDCist arguments. I never wanted her to shut up and go away, in fact, just like I want with the slymepitters, I wanted her to keep talking. That way I never needed to lift a finger to make her look a fool. I would never consider hounding the poor woman with derogatory comments on her Twitter feed (if she even has one) I don’t in fact even give two shits about the dozy git! Her dozy arguments are the fun bit. Low bar cracks about her looks aren’t great wit. The idea that I’d make threats to her, or make comments that could reasonably be interpreted as threats, is laughable. Just who does that?

Oh wait, sexist shitheads do that. Right. Gotcha.

Sorry for the teal deer ramblings but urgh. Sorry.

Louis
Link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-539384

I've bolded certain parts of this comment that don't toe the party line. Anyone want to bet on how long it takes before he's memory holed?

Also, gonna requote one line in particular:
Should I emphasise that last part so passing pitters note that an evil Pharynguloid credits them with some actual humanity?
Yes, you should emphasize that last part - but direct it at your FTB "colleagues". They like to paint us as a hivemind, and in total opposition to them on everything. As you've seen, this isn't the case.

Louis, check out what someone said a few posts below yours:
juliewms wrote:PZ and other FtBloggers… it’s time to disengage from these people (Slymepitters, Reap Paden, Stefanelli, the haters, the negative posters, etc.) completely before someone is physically hurt because of the continuous arguing and posting online. It is obviously escalating, with the latest threat of an acid attack, and you all need to involve the authorities (law) at this point.
Think again about what you've read here. Can you really imagine us wanting to physically hurt the FTBers? If you've read as much of this thread as you claim, I bet not. This is why we're so (verbally) harsh toward PZ, OB, et al. Because they spread lies like this.
Sorry, Louis is out of bound for me. He is a IRL friend, and probably the only member of the A/S web community I ever met IRL. Spent a lovely day with Ali, him and his family couple of years ago. He is, and I shall emphasize this, nothing like the usual suspects. he's a very peaceful friendly guy, and doesn't play by "internet balls". Whatever he says on a forum, he will not hesitate to say it to your face. Of all the shit that has gone downward with this rift, Louis is probably the poster and friend I miss the most (because I don't live close to his place anymore, and he doesn't really post much these days, except where I am banned).

Anyway, I just wanted to take a stand for him, because he is one hell of a cool guy. And he agrees to disagree. Often. I wish he would come here to discuss, but since that would mean instaban from Pharyngula, I guess I'll have to resign myself to reading his contributions there.
[/spoiler]

Friend or not, he just made a blanket statement of the entire Slymepit membership. Maybe when you see him the next time, you should slap him upside the head and talk some sense into him. I'm a pretty new face here, but that doesn't mean I take too kindly to getting broadly swept onto one side. And if he's your friend -- truly your friend -- then if he knows you're a regular here, and he knows how you are, it would behoove him to keep an open mind.

Otherwise he, like the rest, can piss off as far as I am concerned. Regardless of the commentariat at Pharyngula, Almost Diamonds, Lousy Canuck, B&W, et al., I'm not about to make sweeping generalisations about the entire FTB network. I know better than that. You should tell him that, too, and for the record I couldn't give a shit what he thinks about us. Tell him he's being a condescending twat.

Mr Danksworth
.
.
Posts: 398
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 10:30 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5488

Post by Mr Danksworth »


somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5489

Post by somedumbguy »

Badger3k wrote:
Sleeper wrote:I don't know if this is obvious to anyone else but... IMHO on a structural basis alone, this the worst forum I have ever participated in.

Who thought that basically one ubber long thread that encompassing all topics was the way to go here?
Frankly, it is unwieldy, difficult to navigate, and impossible to stay current on. I am fully convinced that I miss 95% of what is said and yet I could not imagine trying to wade thru this monstrosity to find a particular reference or discussion.
The glaring omission is the START A NEW TOPIC button. How are we supposed to help keep this forum manageable without being able to start new topics? All forums I have participated in have this capacity so that topics can be separate and easily accessed.
So why is it done this way?
This was the way it originated. As a thread on a post at a blog. I think people like it this way because you can literally see everything on the main thread, and you don't have to go looking for things in multiple places. If things get a bit too much on one topic, people usually make a thread about it, but most don't have a hard time following things here. This is a bit more like a party in one room, instead of a library where you have different rooms for everything.

Can the next thread be the "Slymepit Orgy"? :dance:
phpbb is the problem, the neverending thread is the solution.

Hint: don't catch up on the neverending thread. don't even read the neverending thread.

Surf the neverending thread. Gestalt the neverending thread. Tickle the tail of the neverending thread. Stand close to the neverending thread and observe the patterns in its spray, but don't interrupt the flow.

This is the path to grokking the neverending thread.

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5490

Post by another lurker »

Badger3k wrote:
Sleeper wrote:I don't know if this is obvious to anyone else but... IMHO on a structural basis alone, this the worst forum I have ever participated in.

Who thought that basically one ubber long thread that encompassing all topics was the way to go here?
Frankly, it is unwieldy, difficult to navigate, and impossible to stay current on. I am fully convinced that I miss 95% of what is said and yet I could not imagine trying to wade thru this monstrosity to find a particular reference or discussion.
The glaring omission is the START A NEW TOPIC button. How are we supposed to help keep this forum manageable without being able to start new topics? All forums I have participated in have this capacity so that topics can be separate and easily accessed.
So why is it done this way?
This was the way it originated. As a thread on a post at a blog. I think people like it this way because you can literally see everything on the main thread, and you don't have to go looking for things in multiple places. If things get a bit too much on one topic, people usually make a thread about it, but most don't have a hard time following things here. This is a bit more like a party in one room, instead of a library where you have different rooms for everything.

Can the next thread be the "Slymepit Orgy"? :dance:
Speaking of that, I was thinking of starting, or asking, that a topic thread be created where people can recommend their favourite books/movies etc. I am especially interested in reading whatever the fuck people recommend. I thirst for knowledge, and will read *anything* (well, within reason). I have tried to jot down the names of books where I can, but there are just *so many* posts to slog through.

Would people be interested in recommending their favourite books/movies/websites/ etc if such a topic thread was created?

AbsurdWalls
.
.
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5491

Post by AbsurdWalls »

Louis wrote:I'm off. Too much time spent already. Have fun folks.
Bye! Congratulations on never honestly addressing my response to you.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5492

Post by welch »

Metalogic42 wrote:
Louis wrote:Metalogic42: Hi! Cheers for the welcome. No punching bag? But how will I get my Victim Points? {Sigh} I guess I'll have to settle for conversation. I'll refrain from calling you any kind of annoyed anal ape until so proven to my satisfaction. Fair? ;-)

As for the other FTB posters coming here, why would they? What they, we, see isn't massively inspiring. I'm not trolling you guys, hell, why would I bother? I think I would be out-trolled in a second anyway. That's actually a compliment btw! I just like to test out my own preconceptions. Maybe I'm feeling silly this evening. No idea. Let's see how it turns out.
What many FTB commentors see is often completely made up. Case in point, the recent acid-throwing brouhaha. You can't believe anything PZ or OB say about us, because they hate us collectively. For them, it's not about what each individual person here is saying, it's what the slymepit as a concept is saying. Except, the slymepit doesn't say anything. Only its members do.

If FTB commentors would actually come here more often, and be uninspired by what each individual (as opposed to the nonexistent collective) is saying, that's fine. For a good example of what I mean, check one of my posts from earlier today, where I quoted several FTB comments individually, and responded to each. Does PZ ever quote slymepit comments like this? No, he just vaguely alludes to something the ephemeral slymepit collective said.
The PZ deleting tactics, not sure what you're referring to, so whether it's okay or not I can't say, but it strikes me that this is one of those free speech areas that might be worth chatting about. It's probably the least likely to inflame the passions! I hope! ;-)
Well, it's not even about the deleting per se. Rather, it's that he never engages with criticism, anywhere. If he was prone to come here and address criticisms, then his strict moderation on his own blog would be fine. That's not how one does proper skepticism.
And his rank cowardice. For example, he talks shit about Abbie on his site, but then refuses to go to a conference she's going to be at. He refuses to even talk to the gelato guy, but once home, comes on like a wannabe Thor in terms of vitriol against the guy.

The hypocrisy would take a long time to fully list, but there's even more evidence of it.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5493

Post by Metalogic42 »

Aww, I typed up a long response to Louis, and he left :(

@another lurker: I'd love that, I have lots of recommendations.

EdwardGemmer
.
.
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:15 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5494

Post by EdwardGemmer »

Louis wrote:

Now this I can get behind a bit more. Not entirely but more. There is a lot of noise to signal at Pharyngula. There is a lot of noise to signal, as you note, all over the web. What can I say, you get used to it...perhaps! Getting good quality intellectual debate on the internet, or anywhere, is tough.

Your last sentence interests me, atheism prided itself on moving on from the idea that having slightly different beliefs is a good reason to hate someone? I never got that memo. And me, the President of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy (I fucking am, don't believe anyone who tells you different ;-) ).

I'd argue that, properly understood, that would be an Atheism+ position. But I imagine I'd get murdered! I spend zero time over on the A+ forums, so I have no idea what's going on over there. The initial concept attracts me for a variety of reasons.
Well I admit it is more of my own position, but it something attractive about atheism (at least in theory). But really, while rejecting religion and the worship of the supernatural is the basis of atheism, the wholesale rejection of a major area of human classification seems to invtie a lot of skepticism about all areas of human classification. This is what A+ seems to be about, but it does seem that instead a lot of people double down on classification, making up classes that I had never even heard of.

Anyways, I know later you asked for one argument. What I was trying to develop on Pharyngula before I was banned, and discuss, is the following.

Let's assume that the idea of male privilege is true. Why is it that men commit and are imprisoned for crime at far higher rates than women in all societies everywhere for all history (as far as we know). This would seem to have an evolutionary basis given the consistency, but many people think that idea is wrong and even sexist. Why is this? And if we do believe there is an evolutionary basis to it, what does that mean for the criminals and what does that mean for society?

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5495

Post by BarnOwl »

I lived in Tooting for one of the three years I was in London (Clapham/Battersea for the other two). In the summer we'd cycle over to the Tooting Bec Lido for a swim - it is awesome, highly recommended! I remember reading somewhere that "Bec" refers to a small brook or stream.

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5496

Post by bhoytony »

Thanks for inviting your friend over Phil. I wish I could be just like him, wise, only interested in REAL issues not the trivial nonsense that we waste our time on, in fact just all round superior to everyone here and at FTB. Truly he is a king among men.

AbsurdWalls
.
.
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5497

Post by AbsurdWalls »

Setar just keeps delivering:
Setar wrote:Yes, julian, do fuck off. As can you, wind.

You seriously don't know why we might need a secret place? Why we might be a bit "harsh" in comparison to most spaces? GEE, I DUNNO, LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING TO GRETA AND OPHELIA AND JEN AND NATALIE AND OTHERS. Are you seriously fucking BLIND? Oh, wait, we do things that offend your precious sensibilities to protect ourselves, so I guess that's permission to be blind, or something.

Sick sick sick sick sick and more sick of this bullshit by the second. The pitizens get their pit, the politicians and corporate suits their back rooms, but the minute we the people, and for that matter people who are oppressed and abused, try to make our own safe space all the non-oppressed and non-abused from all walks of life have to throw up a goddamn protest and march around out front spouting all sorts of bullshit about how evil we are, plus some people digging in our trash to find personal information of people who work or go here, plus the odd person (like MFD) who decides to sneak in and plant a firebomb or shoot someone who works there. It's literally like being a North American abortion clinic dealing with anti-choice bigots.

Why? Apparently, because we're progressive, support progressive causes, and will in fact die on that fucking hill. Like, REALLY die on that fucking hill, the hill of smiting privilege and creating a just society. Not only is dying on that hill wrong, even apparently going up the hill is too much for most people and every step up we take we suddenly get people turning around and complaining that the hill is too steep even though we're all tied together (and yet, the complainers sometimes utterly refuse to cut the rope tying them to the rest of us, even when they make the motions of sawing away).

It's as if being progressive at some point becomes a capital crime, and that point is only defined by how regressive individual people are willing to be =/
Because the rapidly dwindling number of A+ members represent the only people in the world who have ever been abused or oppressed. It's not like they have a terrible track record of attacking and banning abused and oppressed people there. Not at all.

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5498

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

welch wrote:
VickyCaramel wrote:
cunt wrote:
VickyCaramel wrote:Excuse my guys, I think I might be lost.

I heard that you chaps were responsible for all the evil in the world. Could somebody please direct me to the threads where you plot your diabolical schemes?
Sure, first you have to post me your tits via PM. I will judge them, and make a decision to divulge the secret password. Good luck.
http://www.picpaste.com/extpics/tits-niuKWP8C.jpg
There ya go!
You'll fit in just fine
I don't think we're going to her from AndrewV69 for several days now.

http://i.imgur.com/rrYn4pO.png?1

AbsurdWalls
.
.
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5499

Post by AbsurdWalls »

Woah, how did I not highlight the worst bit:
some people digging in our trash to find personal information of people who work or go here, plus the odd person (like MFD) who decides to sneak in and plant a firebomb or shoot someone who works there. It's literally like being a North American abortion clinic dealing with anti-choice bigots.
Poor Matt Dillahunty. I bet he didn't even know he's literally the same as someone who blows up abortion clinics.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5500

Post by Lsuoma »

Badger3k wrote:
Sleeper wrote:I don't know if this is obvious to anyone else but... IMHO on a structural basis alone, this the worst forum I have ever participated in.

Who thought that basically one ubber long thread that encompassing all topics was the way to go here?
Frankly, it is unwieldy, difficult to navigate, and impossible to stay current on. I am fully convinced that I miss 95% of what is said and yet I could not imagine trying to wade thru this monstrosity to find a particular reference or discussion.
The glaring omission is the START A NEW TOPIC button. How are we supposed to help keep this forum manageable without being able to start new topics? All forums I have participated in have this capacity so that topics can be separate and easily accessed.
So why is it done this way?
This was the way it originated. As a thread on a post at a blog. I think people like it this way because you can literally see everything on the main thread, and you don't have to go looking for things in multiple places. If things get a bit too much on one topic, people usually make a thread about it, but most don't have a hard time following things here. This is a bit more like a party in one room, instead of a library where you have different rooms for everything.
Registered users can start threads in other forums here.
Can the next thread be the "Slymepit Orgy"? :dance:
Yes. Yes it can.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5501

Post by Metalogic42 »

Setar wrote:The pitizens get their pit
He's welcome to join us if he feels left out :evil:

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5502

Post by another lurker »

Setar wrote:
Like, REALLY die on that fucking hill, the hill of smiting privilege and creating a just society. Not only is dying on that hill wrong, even apparently going up the hill is too much for most people and every step up we take we suddenly get people turning around and complaining that the hill is too steep
If he is willing to REALLY FUCKING DIE then you think that someone with such massive cajones wouldn't need a super safe space on the interwebz no? That fucking BRAVEHEART here could take a little criticism on the internet? Maybe? Just maybe?

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5503

Post by Lsuoma »

another lurker wrote: Speaking of that, I was thinking of starting, or asking, that a topic thread be created where people can recommend their favourite books/movies etc. I am especially interested in reading whatever the fuck people recommend. I thirst for knowledge, and will read *anything* (well, within reason). I have tried to jot down the names of books where I can, but there are just *so many* posts to slog through.

Would people be interested in recommending their favourite books/movies/websites/ etc if such a topic thread was created?
I refer the Honourable Pitter to to previous answer.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5504

Post by Lsuoma »

bhoytony wrote:Thanks for inviting your friend over Phil. I wish I could be just like him, wise, only interested in REAL issues not the trivial nonsense that we waste our time on, in fact just all round superior to everyone here and at FTB. Truly he is a king among men.
http://gumbercules.com/Lovethispost.jpg

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5505

Post by bhoytony »

Sleeper wrote:I don't know if this is obvious to anyone else but... IMHO on a structural basis alone, this the worst forum I have ever participated in.

Who thought that basically one ubber long thread that encompassing all topics was the way to go here?
Frankly, it is unwieldy, difficult to navigate, and impossible to stay current on. I am fully convinced that I miss 95% of what is said and yet I could not imagine trying to wade thru this monstrosity to find a particular reference or discussion.
The glaring omission is the START A NEW TOPIC button. How are we supposed to help keep this forum manageable without being able to start new topics? All forums I have participated in have this capacity so that topics can be separate and easily accessed.
So why is it done this way?
Go and start your own thread, nothing is stopping you. Just be aware that nobody will read or post on it though.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5506

Post by Lsuoma »

bhoytony wrote:
Sleeper wrote:I don't know if this is obvious to anyone else but... IMHO on a structural basis alone, this the worst forum I have ever participated in.

Who thought that basically one ubber long thread that encompassing all topics was the way to go here?
Frankly, it is unwieldy, difficult to navigate, and impossible to stay current on. I am fully convinced that I miss 95% of what is said and yet I could not imagine trying to wade thru this monstrosity to find a particular reference or discussion.
The glaring omission is the START A NEW TOPIC button. How are we supposed to help keep this forum manageable without being able to start new topics? All forums I have participated in have this capacity so that topics can be separate and easily accessed.
So why is it done this way?
Go and start your own thread, nothing is stopping you. Just be aware that nobody will read or post on it though.
S/h/it might even had tried looking around the Pit first, too.

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5507

Post by Tigzy »

Louis wrote:There is a lot of noise to signal at Pharyngula. There is a lot of noise to signal, as you note, all over the web. What can I say, you get used to it...perhaps! Getting good quality intellectual debate on the internet, or anywhere, is tough.
You wouldn't think it'd be quite so tough on a heavily moderated, ostensibly rationalist blog network called FreeThought Blogs though, would ya? :lol:

justinvacula
.
.
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5508

Post by justinvacula »

I applied for a Surly Grant to attend Women in Secularism 2 as per Surly Amy's invitation on twitter.

http://i.imgur.com/P3bjIDx.jpg

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5509

Post by another lurker »

Lsuoma wrote:
bhoytony wrote:
Sleeper wrote:I don't know if this is obvious to anyone else but... IMHO on a structural basis alone, this the worst forum I have ever participated in.

Who thought that basically one ubber long thread that encompassing all topics was the way to go here?
Frankly, it is unwieldy, difficult to navigate, and impossible to stay current on. I am fully convinced that I miss 95% of what is said and yet I could not imagine trying to wade thru this monstrosity to find a particular reference or discussion.
The glaring omission is the START A NEW TOPIC button. How are we supposed to help keep this forum manageable without being able to start new topics? All forums I have participated in have this capacity so that topics can be separate and easily accessed.
So why is it done this way?
Go and start your own thread, nothing is stopping you. Just be aware that nobody will read or post on it though.
S/h/it might even had tried looking around the Pit first, too.

If that was directed at me, Lsuoma, I noticed that thread is more for specific, less well known works:P I just want to know what people recommend, in general! Be it fiction, nonfiction, even documentaries, etc. Not sure what to name said topic thread though...perhaps what I am after is too broad a subject;( I duno!

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5510

Post by Metalogic42 »

irkthepurists wrote:I've no idea if there's a secret forum or not, but the only thing that vaguely bugs me is why so few of the mods have posted on the Introduce Yourself section. (Alright, I haven't either, to be fair.) I can't be the only one who wonders who exactly the 'seniors' are, where they've come from, and why they're considered experts on social justice.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5511

Post by welch »

Louis wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:
Louis wrote:Metalogic42: Hi! Cheers for the welcome. No punching bag? But how will I get my Victim Points? {Sigh} I guess I'll have to settle for conversation. I'll refrain from calling you any kind of annoyed anal ape until so proven to my satisfaction. Fair? ;-)

As for the other FTB posters coming here, why would they? What they, we, see isn't massively inspiring. I'm not trolling you guys, hell, why would I bother? I think I would be out-trolled in a second anyway. That's actually a compliment btw! I just like to test out my own preconceptions. Maybe I'm feeling silly this evening. No idea. Let's see how it turns out.
What many FTB commentors see is often completely made up. Case in point, the recent acid-throwing brouhaha. You can't believe anything PZ or OB say about us, because they hate us collectively. For them, it's not about what each individual person here is saying, it's what the slymepit as a concept is saying. Except, the slymepit doesn't say anything. Only its members do.

If FTB commentors would actually come here more often, and be uninspired by what each individual (as opposed to the nonexistent collective) is saying, that's fine. For a good example of what I mean, check one of my posts from earlier today, where I quoted several FTB comments individually, and responded to each. Does PZ ever quote slymepit comments like this? No, he just vaguely alludes to something the ephemeral slymepit collective said.
Again, I'm not responsible for PZ, FTB commenters, or for you. It might shock you that I don't base any of my opinion of slymepitters on what PZ or anyone allied says, I base it on what I see of the few slympitters that have come to Pharyngula. In other words, my opinion of them, thus far, has been low, this is a place that houses them. That's all I know. Does that mean ZOMG ALL SLYMEPITTERS ARE DAMNED BY ASSOCIATION? Nope, well not to me. As I said, PZ and others are free to set their own limits.

But this is again drifting rapidly into "PZ has done X. You must condemn X or defend PZ" territory. Doesn't seem very...what's the word...nuanced to me. PZ's a human being, I'd put money on him doing a huge number of fucking dumb things in his life. Haven't you? So? The quality of the arguments he makes about certain subjects, and how well they mesh with the data I have been exposed to, are why I agree with him about those subjects. Period. You can claim it's anything else all you want. Won't make it true. If I had to worship everyone I agreed with about some topic I'd either have to agree with no one or spend my entire life propitiating a plethora of demiurges.
Metalogic42 wrote:
The PZ deleting tactics, not sure what you're referring to, so whether it's okay or not I can't say, but it strikes me that this is one of those free speech areas that might be worth chatting about. It's probably the least likely to inflame the passions! I hope! ;-)
Well, it's not even about the deleting per se. Rather, it's that he never engages with criticism, anywhere. If he was prone to come here and address criticisms, then his strict moderation on his own blog would be fine. That's not how one does proper skepticism.
Really? So you are the arbiter of what is proper scepticism? Crikey! Pleased to meet you! PZ can argue with who he wants, how he wants, it just doesn't bother me. There are finite hours in the day, why he chooses to respond to this critic rather than that critic (and he does, just go and look at the posts about any number of religious fruitcakes he makes to take one example) is his business. Your complaint is "Waaaaah he won't address me, I'm important too". Great. So what? He's free to run his blog his way, it doesn't impinge on your ability to rebut his arguments. Nothing he does is stopping you arguing with him. He might not reply, he might not want you to do it on his blog if you've been a pain in the arse (his definition not anyone else's), but really, are you truly complaining that someone cannot decide how they are going to spend their own time? Have you any idea of the number of people that must berate that poor sod on a daily basis? Comment moderation? Fuck if it was my blog and I had to manage it, you'd see worse! Hell, the man has a public email address, write a decent rebuttal of what he has said that you disagree with, mention that you'll publish it and any response, and then publish it on your own website. If you make a quality argument and he doesn't reply, well there you go, either he can't because you've outfoxed him, or he can't because he hasn't the time, or he can't because he didn't see it or something. Why get so bent out of shape over one guy? Seriously, when I first "met" him we were just two people battering creationists for fun and profit on Talk Origins. His blogging efforts and notoriety are due to his efforts. Want to present a dissenting voice? Who's stopping you? Not me. Not PZ. Get out there. Speak freely and loudly. More power to you!
Soooo, your response to anything we say in terms of what our complaints with PZ and FTB are will be "hey, not my problem, talk to PZ if. You've a problem with him."

Right, so how exactly? He's blanket banned everyone here on his blog so that's out. Sure, we can post things on other sites, but since he refuses to engage in any online situation he doesn't control, that's not really talking, that's yelling real loud and hoping he hears it. If you directly email him, he's shown, repeatedly, that he has no problem quote mining emails, nor is he above creatively editing them for your (his commentariat, of which you are a part) amusement. So email is kind of a lost venture. Given past statements about how he refuses to attend any conference of which certain people are a part, even face - to - face stops being an option.

So Louis, since you seem to enjoy making such marvelously facile suggestions, do you have one that might actually be of use? Because short of skywriting or actually traveling to Morris, and getting up in his face, I don't see a method that would actually work.

So let us end the pretense that anyone from her is actually able to talk to PZ. He won't do so unless it's a forum he completely controls. Which is handy for him, since he is so blatantly lying and being misleading about the people here. If he can't control the conversations, well, they might become inconvenient.

Also, given his penchant for comment editing, how do you know the comments from pitters there are anything close to the original?

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5512

Post by Mykeru »

justinvacula wrote:
codelette wrote:Going to that Women in Secusomething conference seems like a waste of time/money, Justin. They will not let you go past the hotel doors.
"Unless someone has been previously banned for harassment from CFI (please see our harassment policy), they may attend any CFI event or conference.

Best regards,


--
Melody Hensley
Executive Director, Center for Inquiry-Washington, DC
Organizer, Women in Secularism
Certified Secular Celebrant"
'
Yeah, sure. The rules are the rules, but maybe you should read this:

Skeptics Censor Skepticism of Paul Offit's Book

Melody can and will give you the boot if she feels "uncomfortable".

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5513

Post by welch »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
Louis wrote:

I'm picking the side which doesn't think dehumanisation of women is okay
Errr, that was, how to say, more than awkward. Nobody here thinks dehumanising women is okay. I know you don't pick sides, but honestly, who are these people who actually dehumanise women? Are they posting here? I don't get this.
He's not here to take sides? Funny, he seems to be doing a fine job.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5514

Post by Lsuoma »

another lurker wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
S/h/it might even had tried looking around the Pit first, too.

If that was directed at me, Lsuoma, I noticed that thread is more for specific, less well known works:P I just want to know what people recommend, in general! Be it fiction, nonfiction, even documentaries, etc. Not sure what to name said topic thread though...perhaps what I am after is too broad a subject;( I duno!
Yes it was.

Nobody is going to tell you what to call your thread and what to put in it. Just go and do it. It will live or die by how interesting it is to people here.

That is all.

Tristan
.
.
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:29 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5515

Post by Tristan »

Louis wrote:Again, I'm not responsible for PZ, FTB commenters, or for you. It might shock you that I don't base any of my opinion of slymepitters on what PZ or anyone allied says, I base it on what I see of the few slympitters that have come to Pharyngula. In other words, my opinion of them, thus far, has been low, this is a place that houses them. That's all I know. Does that mean ZOMG ALL SLYMEPITTERS ARE DAMNED BY ASSOCIATION? Nope, well not to me. As I said, PZ and others are free to set their own limits.
No, you base it on the comments of the few "slymepitters" you've seen on Pharyngula. Many (a majority?) of the people here have first-hand experience (and many have screenshots) of their calm, rational posts at FTB blogs being either memory-holed or never let through in the first place, at the same time as stuff from truly nasty and/or easily shot down shit is let stand. This has happened far to often, and to far too many people to be an accident: PZ, Ophelia, Greta and Thibeault (at least) actively filter the comments of their opposition to ensure that people such as yourself end up with exactly the impression they want you to have.

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5516

Post by another lurker »

Lsuoma wrote:
another lurker wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
S/h/it might even had tried looking around the Pit first, too.

If that was directed at me, Lsuoma, I noticed that thread is more for specific, less well known works:P I just want to know what people recommend, in general! Be it fiction, nonfiction, even documentaries, etc. Not sure what to name said topic thread though...perhaps what I am after is too broad a subject;( I duno!
Yes it was.

Nobody is going to tell you what to call your thread and what to put in it. Just go and do it. It will live or die by how interesting it is to people here.

That is all.
I'm just shy, that's all:P But I'll give it a try, thanks!

Tristan
.
.
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:29 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5517

Post by Tristan »

Louis wrote:I'm picking the side which doesn't think dehumanisation of women is okay.
Dude: neither side thinks dehumanisation of women is OK. One side paints the other side as thinking dehumanisation of women is OK. That's the whole fucking point.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5518

Post by welch »

Louis wrote:Re: the picking sides and dehumanisation thing, you've all (so far) missed my point! It was contained in the bit UNDER the bit Phil quoted!

Do I think all 'pitters are raving misogynists etc? No of course I bloody don't, said that already, keep up. I've already said I don't think this is about "sides", it's about facts and ethics etc. Here it is again:
But then I don't have to pick a fucking side. This is not a team game. This is about reality. It's about data, and science, and reason. It's about the ethics of the Enlightenment. Can I demonstrate my claims or not, can I support my arguments or not, can I act in such a way as to avoid the maximum amount of damage to others for the minimum inconvenience, can I recognise the value of the person in front of me irrespective of their social status, are their arguments good etc? It's not hard!
Speaking purely for myself, the only "problem" I have with the Slymepit (isn't it obvious yet I don't have a problem with some fictional collective?) extends only to the people I have seen post at Pharyngula who self identified as people from here.

I do have one real problem though. I've invested a bit of my Saturday night posting here, and thus far the majority of the {ahem} discussion has been about Teh Meeness (TM) of PZ/FTB/Whoever. I just don't care. It's an irrelevance. It's bread and fucking circuses. You are distracting yourselves for some reason, or you are being distracted. What matters, and I hope what will happen when Metalogic42 and Za-zen demolish my feeble feminist brain with their AWESUM, are the matters of substance. Is claim X true, not is whoever said claim X an arsehole. What consequences does this have etc. You know the interesting stuff. Thus far too much "Defend PZ or be damned" nonsense. I speak for ME. Period. End of story. I like PZ, I also like Phil. I disagree with them both about different things.. Oh my lack of god that looks almost like nuance. Fuck me deftly there it is.

Oh by the way, Phil should have warned you I am a sarcastic fucker and my tolerance limit is almost zero. ;-)
Oh bless your heart. So all that counts is how well you can prove your claims. Fine. PZ recently claimed we are all against feminism, that we are all against the "radical idea that women are people."

What, pray tell us, what "proof" did he present for that claim?

justinvacula
.
.
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5519

Post by justinvacula »

Thanks for the support so far to help send me to Women in Secularism 2!

$251 so far donated...and Damion will be 'dressing me' for Friday :o
Which t-shirt will he be selecting?

http://www.rockethub.com/projects/13633 ... cularism-2

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5520

Post by Lsuoma »

another lurker wrote: Nobody is going to tell you what to call your thread and what to put in it. Just go and do it. It will live or die by how interesting it is to people here.

That is all.
I'm just shy, that's all:P But I'll give it a try, thanks![/quote]
NP. There are precious, precious few rules on this place. Obvious spamming will get you banned, as will being Mabus. Posting kiddie porn, likewise. Pretty much anything else goes both in terms of content and tone.

People will probably let you know if they don't like what you're saying, and that's their right. Piss off people enough and you'll end up on their foe list, and they won't see your posts - you'll feel like you're shouting into the Grand Canyon.

Three posters have gotten on the foe list more than a quarter of active members here, one of whom was a slimy troll and fucked off. The other two still post here.

Anyways, have fun.

Locked