Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

#3706

Cfi is a joke.

Fidago got henpecked on twatter a couple of weeks ago, for daring to agree with someone who refused to swallow the koolaid. Humpty dumpty rebuked him for not being an ally, as there were bigger things at stake..... Yeah that's a cfi ED, oh the lolz.

#3707

Michael K Gray wrote:Frankie Boyle:
"A merry-go-round is a just a Sushi-bar for PÃ¦dophiles"

:lol:

#3708

Violence wishes/fantasies -- obviously out of bounds (regardless of Lsuoma's actions). Bad PR, inhumane, bad skepticism, not interested. Fat-shaming of public figures who are brittle, privileged, anti-skeptical hypocrites: bad PR, poor taste, juvenile, mean, still think it's funny.

untitled5.JPG: (17.61 KiB) Downloaded 201 times

#3709

A friend of mine needs some Pit help. She's a very talented singer, whose career will immensely benefit if her advantage in this poll could be restored.
She has been ahead for days, but not it appears that results are being pharyngulated and she's suddenly down.

Please cast your vote for Anna Haas.

http://nashville.thedelimagazine.com/snacks

#3710

c) Rebecca's page of hate, as you correctly identify, has no examples of real threats, just hate speech, trolling, abuse, etc

I did an analysis of the page of hate a few weeks ago:

The hyperlink to the page of hate was the word "hundreds" sandwiched between harassment from and atheists.

There were at the time 325 comments total.

268 of the comments were authored by the four "stalkers" 325-268=57 57 +4 (stalkers) = 61 people

Of the remaining 57 comments 39 were terrible hate speech type comments. 8 were personal comments ( I think you're ugly, i don't like your hair, etc)

2 were reasonable disagreement ( one by Mykeru).

One saying she was the Ann Coulter of the left.
One I can't even figure out.

Even granting all the comments I found reasonable that's only 61 individuals.

#3711

Jan Steen wrote:Deeply disappointed that Stephanie Zvan failed to include my photoshop of her:

If you look closely you will see that it's her face. It's a still from The Wicker Man, a thriller about a radfem society :) . She'll have to admit that I didn't make her look bad; not physically, at least.

None of mine did either...:(
and I gave her SPECIAL POWERS
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-V0SEYyeEkws/U ... sychic.png she should be thanking me

I think we hit too close to home....at least I did with the hair

#3712

So, I'm not sure what happened, but apparently SDG posted something that crossed a line. Guys, don't do that! (for realz this time)

Dick Strawkins wrote:I recognized the allusion - and I was going to complain to you about it.
Even though it's from the remake, the character you've painted as Svan is, I think, the same as the character called 'Willow' in the original 1973 movie, where she was played by the incredibly sexy Britt Eckland.
The dance scene in the pub bedroom is one of the most erotic scenes ever in a mainstream movie.
Well it was, until you done that photoshop.
Now I'll never be able to watch it again without thinking of Svan.
:twisted:

No, the face paint lady is the equivalent of Lord Summerisle ("Sister Summersisle" in the remake) and is played by Ellen Burstyn. Your wank material should be safe.

And no photoshop could not possibly insult the original as much as the incredibly shitty remake did, so no need for apologies, Jan Steen- using a scene from the remake was a nice touch IMO.

[youtube]e6i2WRreARo[/youtube]

#3713

Reap wrote:I think we hit too close to home....at least I did with the hair

And of course creative caricatures that satire the hypocrisy/craziness without relying on juvenile insult are a sure win. "Crucifixion Plus (Restored)" is pure genius. "Crazy Cunt Lady" is more borderline but reminds me so much of Ophelia that I can't even think about it without giggling. Jan's "Wicker Man" shoop is subtle but effective.

#3714

decius wrote:A friend of mine needs some Pit help. She's a very talented singer, whose career will immensely benefit if her advantage in this poll could be restored.
She has been ahead for days, but not it appears that results are being pharyngulated and she's suddenly down.

Please cast your vote for Anna Haas.

http://nashville.thedelimagazine.com/snacks

Since I've never heard of Anna Haas, I'm not sure it's fair for me to cast my vote. But she needs little over 20 votes to surpass the other one. The poll ends today.

#3715

Pitchguest wrote: http://nashville.thedelimagazine.com/snacks

Since I've never heard of Anna Haas, I'm not sure it's fair for me to cast my vote. But she needs little over 20 votes to surpass the other one. The poll ends today.[/quote]

Try this sung tribute to her grandma. She's good.

[youtube]5eKo-sVd4mc[/youtube]

#3716

decius wrote: Try this sung tribute to her grandma. She's good.

Indeed, she is. However, the fact that Della Mae has only gotten 16 votes in that poll is an absolute crime.

And reinforces my decision to eschew the Nashville country/bluegrass music scene in favor of those in Austin, Boston, Chicago, and Seattle.

#3717

Apples wrote:
Reap wrote:I think we hit too close to home....at least I did with the hair
And of course creative caricatures that satire the hypocrisy/craziness without relying on juvenile insult are a sure win. "Crucifixion Plus (Restored)" is pure genius. "Crazy Cunt Lady" is more borderline but reminds me so much of Ophelia that I can't even think about it without giggling. Jan's "Wicker Man" shoop is subtle but effective.

I still think this is the best one yet:

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

#3718

DeepInsideYourMind wrote:
16bitheretic wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:As has been pointed out, some people deserve death. So the people don't deserve death is bullshit. (Bin Laden, Hitler, Stalin, Taliban at Bamiyan)
Those were all wartime enemy combatants and leaders of hostile enemy armies. We generally don't in any civilized society condone most killing, but in times of war and military conflicts we make exemptions because of the nature of organized armed conflict. But even in times of war we tend to think that rape and torture of captured enemies is a human rights violation, because we are part of cultures that have moved beyond primitive barbarism.

So don't police my speech and don't put words in my mouth, other wise, I will tell you to get fucked and die.
Criticizing what you've posted here is not policing your speech, it's also an exercise of free speech in an open forum. You know, marketplace of ideas and all that.
America has the death penalty, so do many countries in the world ... who doesn't condone killing?

The death penalty can be contextualized as the state or society killing in self defense. Morally I have no problem with that, though I am against capital punishment only because the justice system(at least in my country)is so seriously flawed that I wouldn't trust it to accurately determine guilt.
NOBODY deserves torture or rape. That sort of eye for an eye thing is the province of religion and isn't that what we want to get away from?

#3719

windy wrote:So, I'm not sure what happened, but apparently SDG posted something that crossed a line. Guys, don't do that! (for realz this time)

Dick Strawkins wrote:I recognized the allusion - and I was going to complain to you about it.
Even though it's from the remake, the character you've painted as Svan is, I think, the same as the character called 'Willow' in the original 1973 movie, where she was played by the incredibly sexy Britt Eckland.
The dance scene in the pub bedroom is one of the most erotic scenes ever in a mainstream movie.
Well it was, until you done that photoshop.
Now I'll never be able to watch it again without thinking of Svan.
:twisted:
No, the face paint lady is the equivalent of Lord Summerisle ("Sister Summersisle" in the remake) and is played by Ellen Burstyn. Your wank material should be safe.

It's too late!
I've already made the connection in my head!
I can't take the risk!
Damn you, brain, you were meant to be my friend!

:doh:

#3720

Gumby wrote:
Apples wrote:
Reap wrote:I think we hit too close to home....at least I did with the hair
And of course creative caricatures that satire the hypocrisy/craziness without relying on juvenile insult are a sure win. "Crucifixion Plus (Restored)" is pure genius. "Crazy Cunt Lady" is more borderline but reminds me so much of Ophelia that I can't even think about it without giggling. Jan's "Wicker Man" shoop is subtle but effective.
I still think this is the best one yet:

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

I think of it every time PZ climbs on a pair of soapboxes to say "We're winning - there are no American tanks in Baghdad" or nips at the heels of another skeptic or public figure who dwarfs him in influence/integrity.

#3721

AndrewV69 wrote:
Git wrote: Similar levels of brainwashing involved too.
Hi Git,

At the risk of dogpiling I would like to suggest that sometimes, if you do not have much more than a feeling about something, then it may be worthwhile to examine what underlies that opinion.

Don't worry, I change my mind all the time - on trade unions for example (I now think they're a necessary bulwark for part of a civil society, and a la Adam Smith (PBUH) that they're a counterbalance of the power of bosses), or on the death penalty (now cautiously against on the grounds that I don't like the state having that power, even though many fuckers deserve to be hung). But when it comes to the veil, the various objections raised to my point I don't really think add up - and I'll tell you why it is a symbol akin to a slave's leg iron (i.e. on the same continuum) - it a mark of ownership of a muslim women to a muslim man, that the woman has to cover up to avoid exciting the man.

And at the end of the day, the pit is like a pub. Everyone has a drink, shoots off opinions and stuff, and goes home happy afterwards.

#3722

nippletwister wrote:No one deserves to be raped, tortured or killed.

I think I can get behind that, and not just so I can hump it.

I can has my bannination now?

Even I'd agree with that.

:rimshot:

#3723

Jan Steen wrote:
decius wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:
Part of the reason I post here is because I found it the one place in the online atheist community where people were taking seriously the problem of hypocrisy.
There is a line to be drawn in the sand here.
Bad taste jokes about someone being a fatty are juvinile and silly.
Calling for people to be raped is so far over the line that I am seriously wondering whether we have been set up.
The alternative, and probably closer to the truth is that we have some crossover with the MRA community who don't seem to take this sort of shit seriously.
I suggest we do take it seriously.
I couldn't agree more.
Seconded.

Thirdered.

#3724

katamari Damassi wrote: The death penalty can be contextualized as the state or society killing in self defense. Morally I have no problem with that, though I am against capital punishment only because the justice system(at least in my country)is so seriously flawed that I wouldn't trust it to accurately determine guilt.
NOBODY deserves torture or rape. That sort of eye for an eye thing is the province of religion and isn't that what we want to get away from?

Except the state doesn't need to kill the convicted person to protect itself, it has prisons. It turns the state into a murderer. I don't see a lot of difference between the state's hangman and a hit man. The only difference is how many people recognize the legitimacy of the powers ordering the killing, as far as I can tell.

#3725

@Phil_Giordana_FCD
JAQ of the day for me. Are you a WoW fan?
I haven't played it but some of your album lyrics suggest you might be.
Fuck me if i'm wrong.

#3726

Great comment from a few weeks ago on Brayton's Shermer post:

Iamcuriousblue wrote:Iâ€™m just going to say my peace and let the inevitable insults and bashing take their course -

The point that those of us who find this corner of the atheist movement to be increasingly authoritarian or totalitarian is not that you have anything close to the power of a Fascist or Stalinist government. But that your movement, as manifest in the kind of extreme ideological feminism* so often on display here, it looks like many historical authoritarian movements that were not in power and which still are very damaging. I look at the kind of creepy Marxist entryism that all manner of liberation movements of the past have experienced and see quite a few parallels with the social justice warrior/ultra-feminist contingent of the atheist movement. The destruction of the 60s anti-war movement into squabbling little cults after an organized takeover of SDS by the Marxist cult Progressive Labor Party strikes me as having a whole lot of parallels with whatâ€™s going on now. (I might also add that the PLP were the ones who assaulted E.O. Wilson for advocating an early form of evolutionary psychology, an action Iâ€™m sure would win the hearts of more than a few Aplussers.)

I think there are some pretty clear parallels with Scientology as well, with itâ€™s nasty ingroup-outgroup dynamic, itâ€™s delusions of being a righteous but persecuted group battling to save the world, and its nasty campaigns against its critics.

So calling you a bunch of crypto-totalitarians in the sense of creating a nontheistic cult where religion is simply replaced by an uncritical embrace of a narrow political ideology? I say, yâ€™all resemble that accusation. Calling you the equivalent of the Stalinism? No, not really â€“ that would take the perfect storm of atheism, hard-line ideology, and state power, and the third ingredient is thankfully missing. But itâ€™s why so many of us donâ€™t want people like you anywhere *near* political power, and donâ€™t want any part of a â€œsecularâ€ movement thatâ€™s going to help that along.

*(which, from where Iâ€™m sitting, looks like the worst kind of 70s radical feminism, minus the transphobia, and maybe with the occasional pretense of being â€œsex positiveâ€)

http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/ ... ent-212581

#3727

UnbelieveSteve wrote:@Phil_Giordana_FCD
JAQ of the day for me. Are you a WoW fan?
I haven't played it but some of your album lyrics suggest you might be.
Fuck me if i'm wrong.

Horde, Argent-Dawn EU here.

#3728

Dick Strawkins wrote: You list a set of rules (and despite what people might think of free speech or moderation, it is implicit in the running of a site like this that there must be some rules.)
Is it too much to ask to include a couple of extra rules that have, over time, developed into the norm for behavior on this forum. These are:
Don't make threats of violence against people - including the sort of youtube comment style 'threats' that Watson relies on - which is exactly what SDG did.
Don't doxx people (meaning giving out personal information that is not easily googled, and even if it is, doesnt contain home or work addresses).

For me is IS too much. The required minuteness of the definitions would be too much work.

You said you think of this place like a pub. So do I, a pretty rough one. There are going to be incidents from time to time, and we'll deal them, but we can't anticipate or legislate proactively for every situation.

Rules against what SDG posted wouldn't have stopped him, and their presence is a two-edged sword: "Look, they have rules, but only for show: nobody adheres to them."

For now, it's "Unsteady as she goes!"

#3729

Dick Strawkins wrote: You list a set of rules (and despite what people might think of free speech or moderation, it is implicit in the running of a site like this that there must be some rules.)
Is it too much to ask to include a couple of extra rules that have, over time, developed into the norm for behavior on this forum. These are:
Don't make threats of violence against people - including the sort of youtube comment style 'threats' that Watson relies on - which is exactly what SDG did.
Don't doxx people (meaning giving out personal information that is not easily googled, and even if it is, doesnt contain home or work addresses).

For me is IS too much. The required minuteness of the definitions would be too much work.

You said you think of this place like a pub. So do I, a pretty rough one. There are going to be incidents from time to time, and we'll deal them, but we can't anticipate or legislate proactively for every situation.

Rules against what SDG posted wouldn't have stopped him, and their presence is a two-edged sword: "Look, they have rules, but only for show: nobody adheres to them."

For now, it's "Unsteady as she goes!"

#3730

Since the FTBorg people hate photoshops so much (because they don't do humour), I have now put most of mine in the Baboonapalooza thread, just to annoy the androids.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=10&start=75

Some of you had already copied a few there; thanks for that.

#3731

rocko2466 wrote:
Jan Steen wrote:
decius wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:
Part of the reason I post here is because I found it the one place in the online atheist community where people were taking seriously the problem of hypocrisy.
There is a line to be drawn in the sand here.
Bad taste jokes about someone being a fatty are juvinile and silly.
Calling for people to be raped is so far over the line that I am seriously wondering whether we have been set up.
The alternative, and probably closer to the truth is that we have some crossover with the MRA community who don't seem to take this sort of shit seriously.
I suggest we do take it seriously.
I couldn't agree more.
Seconded.
Thirdered.

Fourthed...

#3732

Jan Steen wrote:Since the FTBorg people hate photoshops so much (because they don't do humour), I have now put most of mine in the Baboonapalooza thread, just to annoy the androids.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=10&start=75

Some of you had already copied a few there; thanks for that.

Thanks. I noticed you posting like a hamster on meth.

#3733

Vargonian does some yeoman's work in PZ's thread from yesterday about the G+/Concordance discussion on trolling. Ends up focusing on Shermer and to a lesser extent Thunderf00t. The kind of calm, reasonable performance that has in recent weeks earned bans from PZ, but vargonian appears to have emerged unscathed.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... self-into/
http://www.freezepage.com/1359907924WAOVFTVZUA

#3734

Dick Strawkins wrote:
Part of the reason I post here is because I found it the one place in the online atheist community where people were taking seriously the problem of hypocrisy.
There is a line to be drawn in the sand here.
Bad taste jokes about someone being a fatty are juvinile and silly.
Calling for people to be raped is so far over the line that I am seriously wondering whether we have been set up.
The alternative, and probably closer to the truth is that we have some crossover with the MRA community who don't seem to take this sort of shit seriously.
I suggest we do take it seriously.

Fifthed.

Wishing rape/torture upon people who write disagreeable words ranks right up there with Wowbagger's fantasies of burning people to death, that kneecapper guy, and PZ's bizarre wish to find Gelato Guy and fuck him to the ground. Sick, twisted violent fantasies should remain the purview of the Horde, not the Pit.

#3735

AtheismPlus is all inclusive and shit, right Lord Setar?

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

Oh, and this one is for Paden and Hoggle.
http://storify.com/OpheIiaBenson/paden- ... red-to-a-w
:lol:

#3736

Reap wrote:
Jan Steen wrote:Deeply disappointed that Stephanie Zvan failed to include my photoshop of her:

If you look closely you will see that it's her face. It's a still from The Wicker Man, a thriller about a radfem society :) . She'll have to admit that I didn't make her look bad; not physically, at least.
None of mine did either...:(
and I gave her SPECIAL POWERS
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-V0SEYyeEkws/U ... sychic.png she should be thanking me

I think we hit too close to home....at least I did with the hair

Even when she selects images from the 'Pit she can't stop quote mining. Zvan also failed to include this one I made (she's not the bat on the right, but the one in the middle, next to Orwellia):

http://i.imgur.com/S7shv.jpg

#3737

Lsuoma wrote:
Jan Steen wrote:Since the FTBorg people hate photoshops so much (because they don't do humour), I have now put most of mine in the Baboonapalooza thread, just to annoy the androids.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=10&start=75

Some of you had already copied a few there; thanks for that.
Thanks. I noticed you posting like a hamster on meth.

Yeah, I need a rest now.

#3738

Dick Strawkins wrote:
Part of the reason I post here is because I found it the one place in the online atheist community where people were taking seriously the problem of hypocrisy.
There is a line to be drawn in the sand here.
Bad taste jokes about someone being a fatty are juvinile and silly.
Calling for people to be raped is so far over the line that I am seriously wondering whether we have been set up.
The alternative, and probably closer to the truth is that we have some crossover with the MRA community who don't seem to take this sort of shit seriously.
I suggest we do take it seriously.

Having now caught up on the latest drama:

Sixth.

#3739

Seventhed.

#3740

LMU wrote:
Gumby wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Utoh. Looks like Stephie-pookins is not pleased :D

http://www.freezepage.com/1359839261CBYUSOIJFR
Haha. Who was it that asked if we should put ads on FTB? Why would we? They're giving us all sorts of exposure for free.
I still crack up at "Oh the Huge Svanity!"

StaphInfection still makes me giggle. :lol:

#3741

UnbelieveSteve wrote:AtheismPlus is all inclusive and shit, right Lord Setar?

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

Setar, quit lying.

The word "backchannel" implies a private communications channel for blog administrators etc. to discuss site business.

What you have is a secret forum where all the self-proclaimed "cool kids" hang out, gossip about people not invited to the secret forum, and act all emo and shit.

Quit pretending it's anything but what it is, you lying little fuck.

#3742

Lurky McLurk wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:No one else has any hilarious nicknames for me? I am disappoint, you guys are horrible at being hateful.
Anyone who owns the Male Git Co. shouldn't expect any better, you hatefully male exploiter of the proletariat.

Here is my pick of possible anagram nicknames, some flattering, some not so much! :D
Got Malice
Coital Gem
Atomic Gel
Atomic Leg
Legit Coma
Team Logic
Gloat Mice
I Got Camel
Ma Got Lice

#3743

Lsuoma wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote: You list a set of rules (and despite what people might think of free speech or moderation, it is implicit in the running of a site like this that there must be some rules.)
Is it too much to ask to include a couple of extra rules that have, over time, developed into the norm for behavior on this forum. These are:
Don't make threats of violence against people - including the sort of youtube comment style 'threats' that Watson relies on - which is exactly what SDG did.
Don't doxx people (meaning giving out personal information that is not easily googled, and even if it is, doesnt contain home or work addresses).
For me is IS too much. The required minuteness of the definitions would be too much work.

You said you think of this place like a pub. So do I, a pretty rough one. There are going to be incidents from time to time, and we'll deal them, but we can't anticipate or legislate proactively for every situation.

Rules against what SDG posted wouldn't have stopped him, and their presence is a two-edged sword: "Look, they have rules, but only for show: nobody adheres to them."

For now, it's "Unsteady as she goes!"

I don't expect anything is going to stop someone who is determined to post that sort of shit in the first place. The important question to me is what do we do IF such material is posted.
Yes, it's a little like a rough pub. If you can't abide bad taste jokes then it's probably best avoid this site altogether. But even the roughest pub won't permit people to openly flout the law in such a way that the entire business operation is put in danger.
I simply suggest something along the lines of "Advocating violence or supporting violence against others is not permitted on this site".

#3744

Metalogic42 wrote: And here's some great ones for...other names:
Pensionable Ho
Ascertain Girth
Antichrist Rage
Lowlife Sperm
Ye Murk
La Sumo
Cetacean Brows (someone PLEASE photoshop this!)
Densely Homely

I'm good at finding anagrams using a generator, but I'm not so good at reversing them back into names (the generator doesn't look for name-words unless you tell it a specific one to look for). I'll make you a deal, if you pm me the list of who each of these are (I only know the first one due to also looking for anagrams for her), then I will make you a custom animation of the letters of whoever is the original name is, moving in animation to become Cetacean Brows.

#3745

AndrewV69 wrote:And now, something completely different:
(so you think you have issues?)

Why, aged 29, I have decided I'll NEVER have sex again
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... again.html
Lisa Smith, from Buckinghamshire, finds sex 'repellent'
Has had three lovers, and lived with two of them
Wants to find a man with whom she can have a celibate relationship
Will adopt children if she ever decides she wants them
And the followup:

'I'm destined to be a crazy cat lady!' Asexual, 29, who said she'd never have sex again is looking for a man... but admits a celibate relationship is a 'tall order'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... order.html
Vegan Lisa, 29, from Buckinghamshire, who doesn't want kids, hopes to find a man who will embrace her asexuality
Says she wants potential partner to accept cuddling as extent of intimacy
If the man of her dreams wanted sex she would say no. 'I'd feel like I was compromising myself and I would detest them for it'
Since writing for the Mail Lisa has heard from other asexuals but also had spiteful comments like: 'You can't get a man and this is how you cover it up'

Looking at her pictures, i suspect body dismorphia is the real issue.

#3746

somedumbguy wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
somedumbguy wrote: Marcotte is a cunt that after the Duke Students are declared innocent, not not guilty, but innocent, moves to post statements inciting racial and gender warfare. Moves to declare the innocent as guilty. Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her on her cheeks.
This is the limit. Any more posts of this sort which could be construed by a reasonable person as a threat (there is no attempt at humour that I can detect) and I will ban you permanently.

This is your last warning.
You're right Lsuoma, that statement should be condemned and you are right to do so.

I must have missed something while sleepily skimming. I didn't get to see the threat or even follow the argument well. But speaking of threats, unconnected to this argument here, is a post coming up next about me getting death threats from a youtube separatist feminist. Ones that are worse than the wishful thinking wannabe threats Watson ocassionally gets. I will call my 'threatener's bluff (she wants me to stop mentioning that little band of separatists) by posting them here in my next post. :D

#3747

http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/01/fiv ... unnoticed/

I really hope this page is a joke, but I don't think it is...

Apparently, women with 'exposed necks' who pose for magazine covers are contributing to rape culture? Really? So much for 'her body, her choice, huh?'

The exposed necks of the models, the women of color in animal prints, the headless womenâ€™s bodies, all of these images contribute to rape culture. This objectification of women reduces women to their bodies and makes their bodies available for visual consumption. Itâ€™s easy to see why so many people objectify womenâ€™s bodies when itâ€™s so normalized in our media.

#3748

Oh, also PZ, as usual you're a fucking liar as well:

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... c7bf91.jpg

Aratina is not pushing the #blocksaturday hashtag in order to get s/h/it's cronies to block people. S/h/it's using it to get people to report those on the FTB enemies list as spam tweeters. THAT is what gets people's accounts suspended. But of course, you sidestepped that fact and hoped no one would notice. Wrong again! :naughty:

#3749

justinvacula wrote:http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/01/fiv ... unnoticed/

I really hope this page is a joke, but I don't think it is...

Apparently, women with 'exposed necks' who pose for magazine covers are contributing to rape culture? Really? So much for 'her body, her choice, huh?'

The exposed necks of the models, the women of color in animal prints, the headless womenâ€™s bodies, all of these images contribute to rape culture. This objectification of women reduces women to their bodies and makes their bodies available for visual consumption. Itâ€™s easy to see why so many people objectify womenâ€™s bodies when itâ€™s so normalized in our media.

Henceforth, all models are now required to wear burquas.

#3750

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

#3751

Dick Strawkins wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote: You list a set of rules (and despite what people might think of free speech or moderation, it is implicit in the running of a site like this that there must be some rules.)
Is it too much to ask to include a couple of extra rules that have, over time, developed into the norm for behavior on this forum. These are:
Don't make threats of violence against people - including the sort of youtube comment style 'threats' that Watson relies on - which is exactly what SDG did.
Don't doxx people (meaning giving out personal information that is not easily googled, and even if it is, doesnt contain home or work addresses).
For me is IS too much. The required minuteness of the definitions would be too much work.

You said you think of this place like a pub. So do I, a pretty rough one. There are going to be incidents from time to time, and we'll deal them, but we can't anticipate or legislate proactively for every situation.

Rules against what SDG posted wouldn't have stopped him, and their presence is a two-edged sword: "Look, they have rules, but only for show: nobody adheres to them."

For now, it's "Unsteady as she goes!"
I don't expect anything is going to stop someone who is determined to post that sort of shit in the first place. The important question to me is what do we do IF such material is posted.
Yes, it's a little like a rough pub. If you can't abide bad taste jokes then it's probably best avoid this site altogether. But even the roughest pub won't permit people to openly flout the law in such a way that the entire business operation is put in danger.
I simply suggest something along the lines of "Advocating violence or supporting violence against others is not permitted on this site".

I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.

#3752

A separatist has sent me 'death' threats (good old internet bravado 'threats') and mentions the Pit too. So, might as well post this all here, partly to show Watson what a threat is and what it is not.

Here's a death threat (screen caps below) that is way more real sounding than the "you deserve..." or "I wish... happens to you" types that Watson gets once in a while. And notice how, even though it's more real sounding than Watson's page of hate 'threats', one can see that this is very likely just an internet bravado attempt to scare someone. It's very unlikely that they mean it.

I wasn't going to post all this, because I thought at the time that this person below was actually just a sock of the radical separatist, "Femitheist" (yes, she stole my word and altered it), trying to reverse psych me into writing about her. Turns out her fan who wrote me the threats is all upset that I thought she's a sock. So, without giving her idol much attention, let me introduce you to a lesser known YouTube separatist feminist, who sometimes calls herself Luci Lynn.

http://www.youtube.com/user/GoreyMiss

[youtube]cxTx9kP-ZAE[/youtube]

Even though in her short little ramble of talking, she doesn't say much, in her video description, she originally wrote that she made it to show her face and prove me wrong about her being a sock. Fair enough. She was right about that. She's not a sock of Femitheist (who is known for her plan to castrate all males, and then killing them except for 10% kept for breeding purposes, and then killing those too when parthenogenisis is figured out). She's just a fan of hers.

She starts off with 'real' (read bravado LOLthreat) threats. Hunting me down and tearing me apart, vowing that she'll even die for her idol, Femitheist, and then saying "Maak ons slachten u niet" which google translate says is Dutch for "Make us not slaughter you".

Having not much to do this lazy Sunday morning, I'll call her bravado bluff. Remember everyone, be very, very scared. They've got eyes in the Slymepit. Boo! Also, note that she ends by changing her 'threat' into the even weaker type that Watson ocassionally gets, the "hopefully you'll die soon" type.

Her to me:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-01.png
Me to her:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-02.png
Her to me:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-03.png
Me to her:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-04.png
Her to me:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-05.png

#3753

Ninth - as a person who has experienced rape yet can easily joke about it, I'm *not* cool with suggestions of rape here. There is definitely a line that decent people don't cross. MHO.

#3754

Lsuoma wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:3. Posting stuff that you have been explicitly asked/told not to. I MAY listen to communications here, but I may choose not to respond. If I tell you not to post stuff, the minimum reason is that I don't want you to.
You were kidding about Eddie, right?
"From ze day he was born,
He was trouble.
He was ze thorn
In his mutter's side."

Now I can't get this out of my head... :D

[youtube]SMoTSltdShA[/youtube]

#3755

Scented Nectar wrote:A separatist has sent me 'death' threats (good old internet bravado 'threats') and mentions the Pit too. So, might as well post this all here, partly to show Watson what a threat is and what it is not.

Here's a death threat (screen caps below) that is way more real sounding than the "you deserve..." or "I wish... happens to you" types that Watson gets once in a while. And notice how, even though it's more real sounding than Watson's page of hate 'threats', one can see that this is very likely just an internet bravado attempt to scare someone. It's very unlikely that they mean it.

I wasn't going to post all this, because I thought at the time that this person below was actually just a sock of the radical separatist, "Femitheist" (yes, she stole my word and altered it), trying to reverse psych me into writing about her. Turns out her fan who wrote me the threats is all upset that I thought she's a sock. So, without giving her idol much attention, let me introduce you to a lesser known YouTube separatist feminist, who sometimes calls herself Luci Lynn.

http://www.youtube.com/user/GoreyMiss

[youtube]cxTx9kP-ZAE[/youtube]

Even though in her short little ramble of talking, she doesn't say much, in her video description, she originally wrote that she made it to show her face and prove me wrong about her being a sock. Fair enough. She was right about that. She's not a sock of Femitheist (who is known for her plan to castrate all males, and then killing them except for 10% kept for breeding purposes, and then killing those too when parthenogenisis is figured out). She's just a fan of hers.

She starts off with 'real' (read bravado LOLthreat) threats. Hunting me down and tearing me apart, vowing that she'll even die for her idol, Femitheist, and then saying "Maak ons slachten u niet" which google translate says is Dutch for "Make us not slaughter you".

Having not much to do this lazy Sunday morning, I'll call her bravado bluff. Remember everyone, be very, very scared. They've got eyes in the Slymepit. Boo! Also, note that she ends by changing her 'threat' into the even weaker type that Watson ocassionally gets, the "hopefully you'll die soon" type.

Her to me:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-01.png
Me to her:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-02.png
Her to me:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-03.png
Me to her:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-04.png
Her to me:
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/00009-05.png

The depths of human depravity, seemingly at its nadir, refuses to be held in check by the buoyancy of reason and plummets ever deeper.

#3756

Lsuoma wrote: I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.

The suggestion "Advocating violence or supporting violence against others is not permitted on this site" is a good one. Although I'd rephrase it "Those who advocate violence or support violence against others will be viciously raped and beaten". But hey, that's just me.

But seriously, I like the idea. I think it's worth your consideration, as well as formalizing a general "no illegal behavior" rule for the pit. If you do these things there should be a stickied thread somewhere outlining what disclaimers you wish to add.

#3757

Tenth...obviously.

I'm not sure how I feel about such a given rule or something like that. But something tells me that there should be SOME sort of reaction, or at least a preemptive strike against this sort of thing. Maybe like a "manifesto" of communication/community guidelines. Things like no threats, no doxxing, that we believe that public statements should be open to criticism/rebuttal, etc.

#3758

Apples wrote:Vargonian does some yeoman's work in PZ's thread from yesterday about the G+/Concordance discussion on trolling. Ends up focusing on Shermer and to a lesser extent Thunderf00t. The kind of calm, reasonable performance that has in recent weeks earned bans from PZ, but vargonian appears to have emerged unscathed.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... self-into/
http://www.freezepage.com/1359907924WAOVFTVZUA

*shrug*

He is pretty much "negotiating with terrorists" from what I see.

The only value in doing so I suppose, is if you realize that you are talking for the benefit of the audience. It is pretty much a given that no hostages will be freed.

#3759

Lsuoma wrote: I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.

I would too. Telepathy would be soooo cool!

Oh yeah, actionable threats should result in banning. (Temp or perm up to admin discretion)

#3760

Lsuoma wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote: You list a set of rules (and despite what people might think of free speech or moderation, it is implicit in the running of a site like this that there must be some rules.)
Is it too much to ask to include a couple of extra rules that have, over time, developed into the norm for behavior on this forum. These are:
Don't make threats of violence against people - including the sort of youtube comment style 'threats' that Watson relies on - which is exactly what SDG did.
Don't doxx people (meaning giving out personal information that is not easily googled, and even if it is, doesnt contain home or work addresses).
For me is IS too much. The required minuteness of the definitions would be too much work.

You said you think of this place like a pub. So do I, a pretty rough one. There are going to be incidents from time to time, and we'll deal them, but we can't anticipate or legislate proactively for every situation.

Rules against what SDG posted wouldn't have stopped him, and their presence is a two-edged sword: "Look, they have rules, but only for show: nobody adheres to them."

For now, it's "Unsteady as she goes!"
I don't expect anything is going to stop someone who is determined to post that sort of shit in the first place. The important question to me is what do we do IF such material is posted.
Yes, it's a little like a rough pub. If you can't abide bad taste jokes then it's probably best avoid this site altogether. But even the roughest pub won't permit people to openly flout the law in such a way that the entire business operation is put in danger.
I simply suggest something along the lines of "Advocating violence or supporting violence against others is not permitted on this site".
I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.

As most everyone here knows, I run my shit unmoderated. Blog, YouTube channel, Social Networking, etc. However, unmoderated does not mean 'everything goes.' It means I let people speak their mind, whether or not they agree with me, like me, etc. I let almost everything go, even insults levied toward me.

With that said...

I do not allow the advocating or direct threats of violence; including death, rape, torture, etc., stand. Nor doxxing.

#3761

Hm. Ever since the Secret Forum meltdown, A+ has become ...... boring. Most of the crazy has presumably retreated into the super-safe underground bunker, and the Capricious Mods thread is post-free and off the bestsellers list. There's even some scraps of rational discussion scattered here and there, with a noticeable and refreshing absence of Ceepolk and Flewellyn (I'm guessing hyperdeath told them to lighten up in the wake of the 'wind'-storm). On the other hand, hyperdeath is busily starting threads like "Most overrated movie" and "Which everyday technology impresses you the most?," like a nervous host at an awkward party offering stale cookies and cocktail weenies. Atheism Plus: where social justice goes to curl up in a ball and play dead.

#3762

Scented Nectar wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote: And here's some great ones for...other names:
Pensionable Ho
Ascertain Girth
Antichrist Rage
Lowlife Sperm
Ye Murk
La Sumo
Cetacean Brows (someone PLEASE photoshop this!)
Densely Homely
I'm good at finding anagrams using a generator, but I'm not so good at reversing them back into names (the generator doesn't look for name-words unless you tell it a specific one to look for). I'll make you a deal, if you pm me the list of who each of these are (I only know the first one due to also looking for anagrams for her), then I will make you a custom animation of the letters of whoever is the original name is, moving in animation to become Cetacean Brows.

Sent. Prepare for lulz.

#3763

http://www.alstefanelli.com/payup.jpg

#3764

Submariner wrote:The depths of human depravity, seemingly at its nadir, refuses to be held in check by the buoyancy of reason and plummets ever deeper.

That little group of youtube separatists (the ones that cluster around Krista/Femitheist) are some of the most baffling, insane cases of truth being stranger than fiction that I've ever seen. They've recently aligned themselves with the separatists at radfemhub (the ones Agent Orange exposed), but even though they share the same elimination of men dream, the youtube ones are incredibly more incoherent and stupid or something. More childish maybe.

#3765

To clarify for those who weren't here - the rape thing was just the cheeriest part of it. LSuoma has cleaned up quite a lot.
Please, don't ask. Let's just move on and keep a united front against the indefensible.