If thou gazest long into the Pit, the Pit will also gaze into thee

Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

Don't sell yourself short - all three are pretty damn' fucking awesome.

"And then her eyes rolled back into her head..."

Love it!

dogen wrote:

Most of all, I'd like a follow-on to WiS2, demonstrating once again that when Justin Vacula attends a conference... absolutely nothing happens. I'm quite done with this Chicken-shit Little act of OB et al.

In any civilised place it's Chicken Licken, not Chicken Little, cunt!

A Random Guest wrote:Vacula -- when/if you get to that Irish thing, are you planning on getting some pictures or video footage of Watson's elevator of terror?

That elevator is literally a world-famous shrine to the religion of perpetual victimhood. Don't pass up the opportunity for lulz -- say, by offering limited edition prints of the Holy Elevator, attention whoring objectification be its name, for sale to the highest bidder.

Also, narrate the footage like Leonerd Nimoy in In Search Of... or Robert Stack from Unsolved Mysteries. Maybe throw in some James Burke Connections as well.

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

Zebra tits, I could tell by her responses today - including the use of your first name - that she's aching to out you. She's going to almost moisten her panties as soon as she can post any pointer to your identity online or offline.

As soon as you do what you're suggesting, the floosh from her vajayjay will be like a fricking tsunami of dust, so wear a mask, and also be prepared for ALL your details to be <*>accidentally<*> leaked to the webz.

But this is a place where you can post what you want...

-sniff- nobody wants to stalk me. I use my real name on Twitter and everything!

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

As far as I'm aware it's never illegal to post private emails publicly, except when they contain sensitive information (but I am not a lawyer). As for whether you should, I'd say it depends on content - are they something the public needs to see, or are you just trying to get under her skin? If it's the former, post away; if not, meh.

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

What? You mean that you aren't really Dr Tickle?

http://www.containsmoderateperil.com/wp ... Tickle.jpg

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

yes

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

From my reading of her recent blog posts, she's already started leaking what appears to be personal information about you. So, I call fair game (or should that be Fair Game?)

Lsuoma wrote:

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

Don't sell yourself short - all three are pretty damn' fucking awesome.

"And then her eyes rolled back into her head..."

Love it!

Herr, herr.

Lsuoma wrote:

dogen wrote:

Most of all, I'd like a follow-on to WiS2, demonstrating once again that when Justin Vacula attends a conference... absolutely nothing happens. I'm quite done with this Chicken-shit Little act of OB et al.

In any civilised place it's Chicken Licken, not Chicken Little, cunt!

I guess my privilege blinded me to the fact that Chicken Little is ableist.

dogen wrote:

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

From my reading of her recent blog posts, she's already started leaking what appears to be personal information about you. So, I call fair game (or should that be Fair Game?)

Yep, Skeppy Tits has pretty much been declared an SP.

Do it Skeppers...

As much as I'd like to see what the bullies say behind the scenes, I don't think you should do it because I think they will go after your job like they did with Abbie. Look at all the crazy that went on when Thunderf00t revealed some of his email... and Justin Griffith.

You have something to lose; they don't. (By the way, I think it's really nice to kickstart this trip for Justin-- especially since he's never even been on a plane.)

Guest wrote:As much as I'd like to see what the bullies say behind the scenes, I don't think you should do it because I think they will go after your job like they did with Abbie. Look at all the crazy that went on when Thunderf00t revealed some of his email... and Justin Griffith.

You have something to lose; they don't. (By the way, I think it's really nice to kickstart this trip for Justin-- especially since he's never even been on a plane.)

Please, in the name of Lsuoma, tell me this is the worst attempt ever at subterfuge. Is it Eucli?

Regarding Skep Tickle, I am too dense/do not read enough to have seen the alleged subtle outing of you already, but FUCK YEAH. EXPOSE THAT DRIED UP VAGINA TO THE WINDS OF TRUTH, AND WATCH THEM SCOUR AWAY THE DUST OF AGES.

Ahem. Or something.

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

IMO, if the content of the email is such that it's clearly a discussion of a private issue between the two of you, then it wouldn't be appropriate to post it. But if it was, for example, an attempt for her to be a dick without letting her others know she was doing so, then IMO it's fair game to publicize.

justinvacula wrote:Thanks everyone for the tremendous support, laughter, contributions to my #WIScfi fundraiser, and now the idea for a new fundraiser dubbed "Send Justin Vacula to Empowering Women Through Secularism conference in Dublin"



Any promotion, donations, and sharing of the fundraiser is much appreciated!
I hope to report, once again, and host Brave Hero Radio from a conference.

Who knows what will happen in Dublin? I will be there to capture it!

Is this correct: "...well-known intentional conference speakers." or did you mean to write international?

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

I would not and never have revealed the contents of any email without explicit permission with a couple of exceptions:

- spam
- threats (fwd to the relevant authority with full headers after I called the fucker on the phone).

Mind I am so "old school" about email that I once used a blank sheet of paper while looking at email headers (fuck u sendmail) to prevent myself from inadvertantly seeing the contents.

So in my book the answer is no.

Re paranoia: Just listened to Mykeru on The Angry Atheist. (LOL at the sealant analogy.) Mykeru, I shook a finger at you on twitter yesterday but now may be "helping" here, if inadvertently and reluctantly.

I'd like to point out that I did not bring up anything at Ophelia's about my background & whether it might add something to my impression about her reaction to the news about Justin planning to attend the Dublin conference. She alluded to knowing my profession, after which I said that maybe that helped explain my concern.

Re the email: It was mostly a repeat of the communication that occurred in public view on her blog, where she had the power of moderation (& approved my 1st 3 or so posts, then round-filed my last one). It looks like she basically micro-stalked me (found out my email address, apparently from some source other than my recent posts at her blog, and she initiated non-public contact with me) to insist that Justin going to 2 conferences means he really is stalking her? WTF. And looking at the time stamps, it seems that she sent this between my 2nd & 3rd posts on her site (all of which she let through). I hadn't seen the email till later, in part because (I kid you not) I was driving a lady with kidney failure to her dialysis appointment and taking dinner to a man with end-stage cancer. (Not my patients, just people I and others help out.)

Ophelia Benson, in unsolicited email commenting on blog posts she had let through moderation, wrote:Really? Really, Dr [Lastname]? You really want to go with that? Vacula gives me endless shit and goes to not one but two conferences where I'm a speaker? And you want to accuse ME of paranoia? Because what, I'm imagining all the endless shit Vacula gives me?

And why do you use a pseudonym to do all this? Is it to avoid the kind of shit I get?

It's contemptible.

Re Vacula & Dublin: I'm pretty sure I'd posted a line in one of my posts on her blog saying that he wasn't the one who proposed he go to Dublin. That might have been too subtle. I'll say it more plainly: I'm the one who proposed that Justin go to the conference in Dublin, and I didn't do it so that he could follow Ophelia Benson from conference to conference. (No offense to her or anyone, but I keep forgetting which speakers will be there.)

Re use of pseudonym: I'm not worried about losing my job. I use a pseudonym to stay low-ish key in public spaces online because there are patients who seem to assume that an atheist doctor = agent of Satan. It's in large part to assuage their angst in that regard, when they're feeling vulnerable, that I smile noncommittally and make reassuring sounds when religion comes up at work.

It seems unlikely that one atheist, or a group of atheists, would try to whip that aspect up into a frenzy, or if they did it would presumably only backfire against them. Picturing here a blog post about how awful it is that an atheist would be a doctor? That an atheist doctor would seek to reassure patients even if it means keeping an area of the doctor's life & beliefs private? That an atheist doctor would read much less post in (*gasp*) the Slyme pit?

Re references to Ms Benson: I don't like the way she (and others) are referred to here in a negative way by, or with emphasis on, body parts, as in some of the last couple of posts. I don't believe I've ever done that, and of course my behavior is the only behavior I control directly (not having mod powers here). I suspect that in part its use is a way people let off frustration, and of course one thing that's clear about the Pit is that we aren't responsible for each others' posts.

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

Not bad, not bad at all:

“We will all be forced to watch unicorn porn and recite ecosexual poetry!” Oh no! The horror! :-)

Skep tickle wrote:Re paranoia: Just listened to Mykeru on The Angry Atheist. (LOL at the sealant analogy.) Mykeru, I shook a finger at you on twitter yesterday but now may be "helping" here, if inadvertently and reluctantly.

I'd like to point out that I did not bring up anything at Ophelia's about my background & whether it might add something to my impression about her reaction to the news about Justin planning to attend the Dublin conference. She alluded to knowing my profession, after which I said that maybe that helped explain my concern.

Re the email: It was mostly a repeat of the communication that occurred in public view on her blog, where she had the power of moderation (& approved my 1st 3 or so posts, then round-filed my last one). It looks like she basically micro-stalked me (found out my email address, apparently from some source other than my recent posts at her blog, and she initiated non-public contact with me) to insist that Justin going to 2 conferences means he really is stalking her? WTF. And looking at the time stamps, it seems that she sent this between my 2nd & 3rd posts on her site (all of which she let through). I hadn't seen the email till later, in part because (I kid you not) I was driving a lady with kidney failure to her dialysis appointment and taking dinner to a man with end-stage cancer. (Not my patients, just people I and others help out.)

Ophelia Benson, in unsolicited email commenting on blog posts she had let through moderation, wrote:Really? Really, Dr [Lastname]? You really want to go with that? Vacula gives me endless shit and goes to not one but two conferences where I'm a speaker? And you want to accuse ME of paranoia? Because what, I'm imagining all the endless shit Vacula gives me?

And why do you use a pseudonym to do all this? Is it to avoid the kind of shit I get?

It's contemptible.

Re Vacula & Dublin: I'm pretty sure I'd posted a line in one of my posts on her blog saying that he wasn't the one who proposed he go to Dublin. That might have been too subtle. I'll say it more plainly: I'm the one who proposed that Justin go to the conference in Dublin, and I didn't do it so that he could follow Ophelia Benson from conference to conference. (No offense to her or anyone, but I keep forgetting which speakers will be there.)

Re use of pseudonym: I'm not worried about losing my job. I use a pseudonym to stay low-ish key in public spaces online because there are patients who seem to assume that an atheist doctor = agent of Satan. It's in large part to assuage their angst in that regard, when they're feeling vulnerable, that I smile noncommittally and make reassuring sounds when religion comes up at work.

It seems unlikely that one atheist, or a group of atheists, would try to whip that aspect up into a frenzy, or if they did it would presumably only backfire against them. Picturing here a blog post about how awful it is that an atheist would be a doctor? That an atheist doctor would seek to reassure patients even if it means keeping an area of the doctor's life & beliefs private? That an atheist doctor would read much less post in (*gasp*) the Slyme pit?

Re references to Ms Benson: I don't like the way she (and others) are referred to here in a negative way by, or with emphasis on, body parts, as in some of the last couple of posts. I don't believe I've ever done that, and of course my behavior is the only behavior I control directly (not having mod powers here). I suspect that in part its use is a way people let off frustration, and of course one thing that's clear about the Pit is that we aren't responsible for each others' posts.

It really does sound like she's trying to subtly intimidate you. Pretty fucking rich coming from the woman who claims to be the fragile little flower constantly suffering from stalking and harassment.

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

You and gumby and gefan have had me in tears for the third time today.

Steersman wrote:

Pitchguest wrote:

A Random Guest wrote:Vacula -- when/if you get to that Irish thing, are you planning on getting some pictures or video footage of Watson's elevator of terror?

That elevator is literally a world-famous shrine to the religion of perpetual victimhood. Don't pass up the opportunity for lulz -- say, by offering limited edition prints of the Holy Elevator, attention whoring objectification be its name, for sale to the highest bidder.

Yes! And be sure to bring a copy of that "8 seconds of terror" picture to tape it in there. (I can't remember whose daughter it was that made it, sorry!)

Renee Hendricks', if I'm not mistaken ....

Yep, my very own Middle Gal. I can repost it tomorrow, if needed :)

Skep tickle wrote:Re paranoia: Just listened to Mykeru on The Angry Atheist. (LOL at the sealant analogy.) Mykeru, I shook a finger at you on twitter yesterday but now may be "helping" here, if inadvertently and reluctantly.

I'd like to point out that I did not bring up anything at Ophelia's about my background & whether it might add something to my impression about her reaction to the news about Justin planning to attend the Dublin conference. She alluded to knowing my profession, after which I said that maybe that helped explain my concern.

Re the email: It was mostly a repeat of the communication that occurred in public view on her blog, where she had the power of moderation (& approved my 1st 3 or so posts, then round-filed my last one). It looks like she basically micro-stalked me (found out my email address, apparently from some source other than my recent posts at her blog, and she initiated non-public contact with me) to insist that Justin going to 2 conferences means he really is stalking her? WTF. And looking at the time stamps, it seems that she sent this between my 2nd & 3rd posts on her site (all of which she let through). I hadn't seen the email till later, in part because (I kid you not) I was driving a lady with kidney failure to her dialysis appointment and taking dinner to a man with end-stage cancer. (Not my patients, just people I and others help out.)

Ophelia Benson, in unsolicited email commenting on blog posts she had let through moderation, wrote:Really? Really, Dr [Lastname]? You really want to go with that? Vacula gives me endless shit and goes to not one but two conferences where I'm a speaker? And you want to accuse ME of paranoia? Because what, I'm imagining all the endless shit Vacula gives me?

And why do you use a pseudonym to do all this? Is it to avoid the kind of shit I get?

It's contemptible.

Re Vacula & Dublin: I'm pretty sure I'd posted a line in one of my posts on her blog saying that he wasn't the one who proposed he go to Dublin. That might have been too subtle. I'll say it more plainly: I'm the one who proposed that Justin go to the conference in Dublin, and I didn't do it so that he could follow Ophelia Benson from conference to conference. (No offense to her or anyone, but I keep forgetting which speakers will be there.)

Re use of pseudonym: I'm not worried about losing my job. I use a pseudonym to stay low-ish key in public spaces online because there are patients who seem to assume that an atheist doctor = agent of Satan. It's in large part to assuage their angst in that regard, when they're feeling vulnerable, that I smile noncommittally and make reassuring sounds when religion comes up at work.

It seems unlikely that one atheist, or a group of atheists, would try to whip that aspect up into a frenzy, or if they did it would presumably only backfire against them. Picturing here a blog post about how awful it is that an atheist would be a doctor? That an atheist doctor would seek to reassure patients even if it means keeping an area of the doctor's life & beliefs private? That an atheist doctor would read much less post in (*gasp*) the Slyme pit?

Re references to Ms Benson: I don't like the way she (and others) are referred to here in a negative way by, or with emphasis on, body parts, as in some of the last couple of posts. I don't believe I've ever done that, and of course my behavior is the only behavior I control directly (not having mod powers here). I suspect that in part its use is a way people let off frustration, and of course one thing that's clear about the Pit is that we aren't responsible for each others' posts.

:clap:

I want to say that it's unbelievable that Ophelia has contacted through, apparently, an address gained by some dubious circuitry. But it's not; instead, it seems to be quite within the standard behavior of this woman to harbor personal vendettas which go way beyond the internet norm (X posts shit about Y, and thenceforth every time X posts, Y responds with some variation on "X is an asshole") and quite clearly into legally (USA at least) dubious territory vis a vis stalking (the very crime she is so insistent is being acted out against herself).

She's a fucking nutbag, and I would suggest that those willing be ready to defend Skep tickle in real life, should this renegade or her online warriors move against xir.

Skep tickle wrote: Re use of pseudonym: I'm not worried about losing my job. I use a pseudonym to stay low-ish key in public spaces online because there are patients who seem to assume that an atheist doctor = agent of Satan. It's in large part to assuage their angst in that regard, when they're feeling vulnerable, that I smile noncommittally and make reassuring sounds when religion comes up at work.

The reality is that, with the internet and a few key words, it is possible to triangulate and identify most people using nyms. In fact I just typed fascist tit into Google and identified the person hidining behund the nym Lsuoma (see below):

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/files ... 8042c1.jpg

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

Fucking amazing!

LSUOMMMMAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Skep tickle wrote:Okay, so let's just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn't the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven't used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It's also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site...but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm... :lol:

Why would you need her permission? You're not her doctor, priest or therapist, nor anything resembling a close friend, she not telling you anything in confidence. Unless the content is sensitive or something like that, she has no reason* (legal or moral) whatsoever to expect you to keep anything she tell or send you private.

The question really is, is it necessary to post the actual mail? Is it relevant? Do we actually need to read it, or is it enough to just tell us that she's trying to bully you around by showing off that she know exactly who you are?

Though I'm curious, how come she know your name? Have you outed yourself, or is this another doxing in the making?

*Ok, sane reason. Considering Benson's meltdown and "harassment means just what I choose it to mean!" whackjobbery, she will probably go (more) nuts.

Metalogic42 wrote:Comment on OB's blog, went through right away:
<snip>

Interesting posts of yours on B&W, although I’m somewhat surprised that Ophelia has been letting your posts through. But several interesting responses too to those posts, notably the last one from Improbable Joe:

Metalogic42: “I fail to see” is the most useful and honest thing you’ve posted here. If you COULD or WOULD see, you’d be much less of a terrible person. Being a good person isn’t about figuring out the lines you can’t cross and then coming as close to them as possible without stepping over them. Good people leave other people alone when they ask. Shitty people like you play rules-lawyering games to show why it is OK to hurt people and violate their boundaries because there’s no law technically broken.

It is sort of like if I parked myself and my guitar rig right outside your house 24/7, and bought a decibel-meter so that I could crank my playing up to exactly one decibel below the city ordinance level for noise pollution… and then told you that if you’re bothered by the sound then you can easily buy earplugs and/or soundproof your house. You’d understand that I was being an asshole, right?

Which is, I think, not a bad analogy – in some dimensions in any case – as there is maybe some justification for thinking that Justin, at least, is just being a bit of an “asshole” in pestering Ophelia. Particularly since some of that seems to be motivated only by some butthurt.

However, where I think Improbable Joe’s analogy breaks down is discounting the possibility that, analogously, those inside that house might be engaged in some morally questionable and problematic activities. And if that was the case then of course there might be some justification for Joe to be playing his “guitar rig, 24/7”. Apropos of which is one of the items on Michael Nugent’s Agenda:

2. How we can balance the right to freedom of expression and robust debate about ideas and issues, with the desire to not unnecessarily hurt people who disagree with us about those ideas.

The question then seems to be whether there are any cogent, important, and seminal ideas that are hanging in the balance or not, the defense of which might justify some degree of “challenging”, at least, of Benson and company. Although it seems that Ophelia is trying to make Justin the scapegoat for all of the other rather questionable tweets and comments from many others ….

Ole Pineapple is letting you know she has your details.


Its the same as the tweet Melody sent to Mykuruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu cept OB has shown her cards so you know for sure she has them.

I would guess that Stephanie Zvan was Ophelia's source (but that's just a guess).

I'd used my full name in communications behind the scenes with Michael Nugent & Monette Richards for Nugent's atheist/skeptic dialogue site, and know that each of them communicated with Stephanie Zvan about various aspects of the process. I also posted maybe 2-3 times more than a year ago at Stephanie's site using my real first name and, I think, the email address Ophelia used. (The one I've used at FtB for posting since then is long-defunct; I confirmed that before posting her email above. And she didn't use the email address I'd used for the Nugent effort.)

Seems less likely to have come from remote other posts at FtB, or from PZ's interactions with the group I belong to that had him give a talk here a couple of months ago.

Rawrsome wrote:Ole Pineapple is letting you know she has your details.


Its the same as the tweet Melody sent to Mykuruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu cept OB has shown her cards so you know for sure she has them.

I only saw 3 cards. That's not a full deck. .....

Skep tickle wrote:

Rawrsome wrote:Ole Pineapple is letting you know she has your details.


Its the same as the tweet Melody sent to Mykuruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu cept OB has shown her cards so you know for sure she has them.

I only saw 3 cards. That's not a full deck. .....

Everyone knows OB isn't playing with a full deck ....

But, yes it definitely was a threat of "I know who you are and I can tell others who will harass you" - this is a perfect example of the kind of threat I would denounce from any Slymepitter (or anyone else)

AndrewV69 wrote:

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

You and gumby and gefan have had me in tears for the third time today.

Why the avatar change? (I thought for a minute Skep Sheik had joined.) This one's fine, but fwiw I thought your last one was interesting & unique.

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

You guys have to stop doing that. My neighbors are complaining about the fits of laughter.

Sacha, Renée, Justin, anything on that pay-by-phone I asked about?

Skep tickle wrote:

AndrewV69 wrote:

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

You and gumby and gefan have had me in tears for the third time today.

Why the avatar change? (I thought for a minute Skep Sheik had joined.) This one's fine, but fwiw I thought your last one was interesting & unique.

Because I thought it was time for a change. I have not been satisfied with the results(s) though and after two different ones I just reverted.

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

You guys have to stop doing that. My neighbors are complaining about the fits of laughter.

Try being out in public with both hands over your mouth to stifle the sounds you are making ... and it is not working ... people are staring at you.

Could have been worse I suppose.

If I had been at the library instead of McDonald ...

KiwiInOz wrote:

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Mykeru wrote:

Trophy wrote:
Oh, it was so very productive: people got to talk about JV. Peole make blog posts about JV. People tweeted things about JV. JV even got
to have MrSmartyPants MrAhteistPants to appear on his show. So as you can see, it was very productive, well, at least if
you are a JV. For all the non-Justin Vacula people, it was not productive at all.

Oh Jesus Fucking Christ. Let the boy have some fun.

Another way to look at it is if Justin went to WIS2 and then didn't follow up, it would prove the point previously made by the same people criticizing now that the first time it was a one-off stunt without purpose.

If you want to have an ambassador for burying the hatchet and proving the threat narrative people wrong, Justin is a good pick. First, he's so innocuous that he might not even have a blood type. Second, he paid his dues in the form of being harassed, targeted and generally fucking lied about by the same people in attendance at the conferences who are used to winning by forfeit. If these people are proven wrong about Justin's intentions or any intentions of a male taking interest, it's worth proving them wrong again.

You may claim nothing new was learned by Justin's live blogging, so in that case I would assume you are content to know what, if anything, happens as filtered by the usual cadre of ideologue scumbags because, as we know, people like Ophelia Benson, Rebecca Watson and Melody Hensley just scream "reliable narrator".

Is there some self promotion in what Justin is doing? Yes. That's how it's done. That's how you raise your profile, that's how you get things done, that's how you potentially displace the usual incestuous group of relentless self-promoters who are not only self-promoting but doing harm to the skeptical movement. If you are not capitalizing on a chance at self-promotion then you are probably like me, which means sadly lacking in the minimal level of ambition to succeed.

Stop tearing the man down because he's just not doing what you would do and, on that point, someone remind me what you have done lately.

There should be a slow golf clap there, somehow. I agree wholeheartfully, if that's an actual word.

I agree wholeartfully as well.

People can donate to whatever the flock they like. People can ask for sponsorship for whatever the fluck they like.

I agree completely too. If I wasn't utterly brassic, I'd donate to JV. He's doing a good job, all-in-all. As it is, I can only send good wishes and manly yet tender hugs.

Steersman wrote:Metalogic42: “I fail to see” is the most useful and honest thing you’ve posted here. If you COULD or WOULD see, you’d be much less of a terrible person. Being a good person isn’t about figuring out the lines you can’t cross and then coming as close to them as possible without stepping over them. Good people leave other people alone when they ask. Shitty people like you play rules-lawyering games to show why it is OK to hurt people and violate their boundaries because there’s no law technically broken.

It is sort of like if I parked myself and my guitar rig right outside your house 24/7, and bought a decibel-meter so that I could crank my playing up to exactly one decibel below the city ordinance level for noise pollution… and then told you that if you’re bothered by the sound then you can easily buy earplugs and/or soundproof your house. You’d understand that I was being an asshole, right?

Christ, all he said was that criticism comes with having a blog. That is not even remotely equivalent to parking outside someone's house and disrupting their life all the time. You might as well say that PZ is "harassing" creationist blogs or Vacula, or that Marcotte and Kilstein are "harassing" Ron Lindsay.

Oops! That quote should say "Improbable Joe." Sorry Steers.

Guest wrote:

Steersman wrote:Metalogic42: “I fail to see” is the most useful and honest thing you’ve posted here. If you COULD or WOULD see, you’d be much less of a terrible person. Being a good person isn’t about figuring out the lines you can’t cross and then coming as close to them as possible without stepping over them. Good people leave other people alone when they ask. Shitty people like you play rules-lawyering games to show why it is OK to hurt people and violate their boundaries because there’s no law technically broken.

It is sort of like if I parked myself and my guitar rig right outside your house 24/7, and bought a decibel-meter so that I could crank my playing up to exactly one decibel below the city ordinance level for noise pollution… and then told you that if you’re bothered by the sound then you can easily buy earplugs and/or soundproof your house. You’d understand that I was being an asshole, right?

Christ, all he said was that criticism comes with having a blog. That is not even remotely equivalent to parking outside someone's house and disrupting their life all the time. You might as well say that PZ is "harassing" creationist blogs or Vacula, or that Marcotte and Kilstein are "harassing" Ron Lindsay.

Why don't you make an account? It's super easy, I promise.

Metalogic42 wrote: Why don't you make an account? It's super easy, I promise.

Bit of a pansy, I'm afraid. Also I'm not the best and brightest commentator ever.

Damion thinks I'm a hate-monger.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... -910504905

http://i.imgur.com/l8wfCzu.png

Comes a time when benefit of doubt ceases.

franc wrote:Damion thinks I'm a hate-monger.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... -910504905

http://i.imgur.com/l8wfCzu.png

Comes a time when benefit of doubt ceases.

Er, yep, that's rather weird. Damion, any comments? Franc is a huge pain in the ass at times, and a bloody genius at others. But he's not a hate-monger. Well, not as far as I can tell, and I've been following the guy for almost two years.

Collected the links to the 3 videos in 1 post for quick reference:

Gefan’s

Gumby's

free thoughtpolice’s

New avatar/quote. I was bored.

Guest wrote:

Metalogic42 wrote: Why don't you make an account? It's super easy, I promise.

Bit of a pansy, I'm afraid. Also I'm not the best and brightest commentator ever.

I guess I'm totally brave and super smart because I made an account? Pfft, no way.

Guest wrote:Oops! That quote should say "Improbable Joe." Sorry Steers.

No problemo. :-)

But I think it is not a bad analogy from Improbable Joe, at least as far as it goes. Unfortunately, as I suggested above, the elements in the two cases aren’t as congruent as they could be so his conclusion doesn’t hold all that much water. But we’ll have to give him A for effort, particularly since many others, notably Ophelia herself with her analogy between TAM and Nazi Germany, also seem to have some difficulty with that quite useful technique.

Apropos of which, Crommunist had a quite reasonable and interesting summary of it not long ago:

Analogy is an excellent method of exposing inconsistencies in logic, which is an important component of refuting bad arguments.

However, I think it is important to be on the look-out for bad analogies as they can send the arguments off into the weeds pretty quickly.

Guest wrote:

Metalogic42 wrote: Why don't you make an account? It's super easy, I promise.

Bit of a pansy, I'm afraid. Also I'm not the best and brightest commentator ever.

“Practice makes perfect” and all that. I also encourage myself by quoting something from the 16th century English scientist, Francis Bacon:

Reading makes a full man, writing an exact one.

Steersman wrote:

Guest wrote:

Metalogic42 wrote: Why don't you make an account? It's super easy, I promise.

Bit of a pansy, I'm afraid. Also I'm not the best and brightest commentator ever.

“Practice makes perfect” and all that. I also encourage myself by quoting something from the 16th century English scientist, Francis Bacon:

Reading makes a full man, writing an exact one.

I guess that explains why your posts are often so long :lol:

Steersman wrote:

Guest wrote:

Metalogic42 wrote: Why don't you make an account? It's super easy, I promise.

Bit of a pansy, I'm afraid. Also I'm not the best and brightest commentator ever.

“Practice makes perfect” and all that.

No.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 163906.htm

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

You do yourself an injustice, Sir. I am in tears.

"SSlymepit" :clap:

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Steersman wrote:

Guest wrote:

Metalogic42 wrote: Why don't you make an account? It's super easy, I promise.

Bit of a pansy, I'm afraid. Also I'm not the best and brightest commentator ever.

“Practice makes perfect” and all that.

No.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 163906.htm

How's the weather in France? Must be quite Nice this time of year...

Metalogic42 wrote:

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Steersman wrote:

Guest wrote:

Metalogic42 wrote: Why don't you make an account? It's super easy, I promise.

Bit of a pansy, I'm afraid. Also I'm not the best and brightest commentator ever.

“Practice makes perfect” and all that.

No.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 163906.htm

How's the weather in France? Must be quite Nice this time of year...

Bloody nightmare. One of the coldest springs in years. Temps are around 15/18°C. I used to go scuba-diving at this time of year, and now I have to turn up the heater and carry a blanket around.

Maybe I'm just getting old(er).

(fake edit: I see what you did with the "quite Nice" stuff)

The latest from Ally Fogg is up. Some really good comments follow:

What could really be done to reduce rape
http://freethoughtblogs.com/hetpat/2013 ... duce-rape/

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

franc wrote:Damion thinks I'm a hate-monger.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... -910504905

Comes a time when benefit of doubt ceases.

Er, yep, that's rather weird. Damion, any comments? Franc is a huge pain in the ass at times, and a bloody genius at others. But he's not a hate-monger. Well, not as far as I can tell, and I've been following the guy for almost two years.

Same here. Actually Im a little irritated at the new-gnu-anti-gnu-new atheists (whatever we're up to now). Plenty of people (big names too) were locked in step when the slur of misogyny had an edge to it. Franc has done groundwork, and weathered a lot of the early shit slinging when others believed it. Calling him a blight is way out of line. People like him opened up the floor to more beige and sterile people to voice their disagreement. Plus the lulz in his writing are epic. Its the right blend of insight and shock language.

Of course Franc is not a hate-mongerer. He spreads love all the time. Specially when he posts shit like this:

franc wrote: Ophelia, I spit on your dried wheat sexless cunt. I ejaculate on your dried raisin ovaries. Zwan, your beached whale cunt is not even erotic to japanese. McCrate - even bestialists erections would wither. Fuck you cunts. Fuck you. Hell is too nice a place.

free thoughtpolice wrote:Not up to par with gefan's or Gumby's offerings, but roughly on the same topic:

This scene, once I finally see the movie, is forever ruined.

That was great, and with a twist at the end!

ranting!: "We will all be forced to watch unicorn porn and recite ecosexual poetry!"
next line, defeated tone: "We will have to make our own sandwiches"

And the woman, comforting the one in tears about no more footrubs. lol

So good

franc wrote:I want you Damion to provide one piece of evidence where I promoted "hatred" instead of arguing against it. Just one. No quote mining, actual referenced evidence. Failure to do so will confirm you are a hollow man, a bandwagon jumper, a no brain populist. Cough up my man. Or retract.

I'm guessing franc thinks chanting "cunt" counts as argument. Oh poor deluded little fuckface.

I'm guessing when he comes around to see this, he'll have a hissy fit and spread more love around, hahahaha.