Maybe Peezus finally grasped the concept of the Law of Unintended Consequences.HunnyBunny wrote:Interesting last paragraph to the Peezus article:
what happened to rapists? Is that no longer a thing? MN only shelters harassers now huh?Michael Nugent shelters and encourages harassers, and thinks the problem of sexism within atheism is purely American
Yes, he has changed the tone completely.HunnyBunny wrote:Interesting last paragraph to the Peezus article:
what happened to rapists? Is that no longer a thing? MN only shelters harassers now huh?Michael Nugent shelters and encourages harassers, and thinks the problem of sexism within atheism is purely American
FUN FACT! Did you know James Joyce was a fart fetishist?JackSkeptic wrote:Nugent was involved in a campaign to stop the demolition of Jame's Joyce's home. It's exciting snippets of information like that which make life worth living.fuzzy wrote:Quote fail above as I meant to reply to picture of Garlix' bread.
And my new avatar is James Joyce's father.
I'm just glad they didn't adopt a dog.Brive1987 wrote:At least Nugent's intervention has changed PZ's behaviour in one significant way.
It has sent him utterly insane.
http://i.imgur.com/E2DthvI.jpg
PZ Myers wrote:... some domesticated and intelligent animals seem to be willing to participate in sexual activity with humans — dolphins and dogs, for example. It is possible to find animals who demonstrate a willingness to participate in sex play. Within that narrow band of possibilities, I’d have to say that this criterion doesn’t provide an argument against sex with animals ....
Funny that they are charging her with "attempt to sexually assault." She had her mouth around his jones for fuck's sake. This is 2nd degree sexual assault. Would the cops charge a guy who crept into a girls room and started licking her cooch with "attempt?" Nope! He would get 2nd degree and go to prison for 15 years.Sulman wrote:[URL] http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6081888[ /URL] Meanwhile, in Texas...
Ah thanks for the reference; I've been meaning to look up these letters to and from Nora Barnacle. What a woman she must have been! ... He addle little fifie annie ugged his part inher ...katamari Damassi wrote:FUN FACT! Did you know James Joyce was a fart fetishist?JackSkeptic wrote:
Nugent was involved in a campaign to stop the demolition of Jame's Joyce's home. It's exciting snippets of information like that which make life worth living.
Sort of (or, maybe, close enough). At first, the plaintiff only needs to claim that the statements are false, but does have to show damage. If there's no damage, then the "truthiness" of the statements is pretty much irrelevant. But if the plaintiff was damaged (in the eyes of a reasonable person, blah, blah, blah), then the defendant can come back with a "but it's true" defense and, then, the plaintiff will need to be ready to demonstrate that, no, the statements are false. It's a fun process and much of it occurs before trial, which is why so many of these settle.JackSkeptic wrote:Being called a defender of rapists is enough. I doubt we would be called unless it is voluntary as a joint action. Myers has to prove his case, not the other way round. Therefore we can simply do nothing as there is an assumption of it being a false statement unless he can prove otherwise.
Don't you need a cult to be a cult leader? She has what, four regular commenters on her blog?jet_lagg wrote:So, I promised at Nugent's blog I'd come here and defend my claim that Zvan was being "shouted down" in the comments section. Before I get started on that I do want to clarify my position on Zvan.
She's a cult leader for all practical intents and purposes.
They do it on autopilot.HunnyBunny wrote:The comments....
http://i.imgur.com/HJxcQAX.png
On a post about smears and harassment, the horde choose to raise it to a whole new level of wilful fuckwittery
Wouldn't finding himself on the receiving end of the totalitarianism he so admires be the one thing which might show PZ the error of his ways?JackSkeptic wrote:Yes, he has changed the tone completely.HunnyBunny wrote:Interesting last paragraph to the Peezus article:
what happened to rapists? Is that no longer a thing? MN only shelters harassers now huh?Michael Nugent shelters and encourages harassers, and thinks the problem of sexism within atheism is purely American
In any event Myers is in the wrong as a matter of fact. It is for him to prove that Michael provides a haven for rapists and as it is impossible for him to do that then that is the end of it. He can't even show it is a reasonable statement and I suspect a barrister would find it trivial to show malicious intent. Redefining accepted word usage, trying to switch the argument or toning down the language later is useless.
All the bits about 'removing sexism in atheism' and related comments is irrelevant fluff. Myers post holds no substance at all in my opinion and will only be pursuasive to his deluded followers. It will also show, along with his other responses, a complete unwillingness to discuss the issue. Getting Zvan to do the talking for him was a big mistake.
Anyway, the above is just my opinion and ironically I wish Nugent would drop it, although it may be out of his hands. I suspect AI as a whole is supporting this for good reasons. There sorts of comments can seriously damage their efforts. But I think people should be able to make nasty comments without anything more than people responding to that. In the UK there is a government sponsored push to make it a 2 year jail term just for hurting someone's feelings. That is disgraceful and the road to the sort of totalitarianism Myers admires. I want no part of it.
Consider how tightly Myers moderates the comments he gets on his blog, and how quickly he will delete stuff he considers should be deleted.HunnyBunny wrote:The comments....
http://i.imgur.com/HJxcQAX.png
On a post about smears and harassment, the horde choose to raise it to a whole new level of wilful fuckwittery
She's a dung beetle feasting on gossip. She's too fucking dumb to be a leader of anything.jet_lagg wrote:So, I promised at Nugent's blog I'd come here and defend my claim that Zvan was being "shouted down" in the comments section. Before I get started on that I do want to clarify my position on Zvan....
She's a cult leader for all practical intents and purposes.
Svan is a distraction to decent people actually trying to get things accomplished. I want people to stop giving her the time of day.She's doing serious and real harm to people, and I want her to be stopped.
She's a nasty, vindictive piece of shit. You can quote me on that Steph, you nasty, vindictive piece of shit.I have zero faith in the possibility of her redemption (and very little faith in the possibility of redemption for any random individual among her followers).
I just reviewed the comment stream, and I don't see that at all. Everyone is being cogent, on topic, and restrained. Casual observers notice it, compare it to the bile and hated and outrageous lies coming from FTB. They then stop by here, see we are, at worst, juvenile & crude. And then they see Svan, Myers and all the rest of the Plussers for what they really are.I arrive at Nugent's blog, and I see this woman (who I have zero background knowledge of), being shouted down in the comments. I start to wonder if maybe she doesn't have a point, and just isn't being given the opportunity to express it (almost everyone online knows how difficult it is to hold your own when it's you debating a dozen others, even of those others are exceedingly patient and polite). Whereas, if i'm a newcomer to a thread like the ones Ariel particpates in, it quickly becomes apparent to me that the people on this side of the schism are eminently reasonable, and the others are borderline insane.
I've worked on the assumption that Nugent or AI has been damaged and that Nugent can show it was malicious. The 'but it's true' defense I can't see getting anywhere. I saw nothing which indicates the defendant has to prove a false claim, which could require proving a negative, but that the failure to prove a positive claim by the Plaintiff is sufficient (based on my very limited reading and I suspect you know a lot more about these things than me) But as you know there are numerous hurdles to cross for what may appear the simplest of points.BlueShiftRhino wrote:Sort of (or, maybe, close enough). At first, the plaintiff only needs to claim that the statements are false, but does have to show damage. If there's no damage, then the "truthiness" of the statements is pretty much irrelevant. But if the plaintiff was damaged (in the eyes of a reasonable person, blah, blah, blah), then the defendant can come back with a "but it's true" defense and, then, the plaintiff will need to be ready to demonstrate that, no, the statements are false. It's a fun process and much of it occurs before trial, which is why so many of these settle.JackSkeptic wrote:Being called a defender of rapists is enough. I doubt we would be called unless it is voluntary as a joint action. Myers has to prove his case, not the other way round. Therefore we can simply do nothing as there is an assumption of it being a false statement unless he can prove otherwise.
As to whether a 'Pitter could sue PZ in the US ... sure, you can sue anyone you want. But you ain't going to win. Not yet, at least. But MN has PZ absolutely over a barrel under Irish law. The only issue is how and where to sue someone who is not in Ireland. That's the only protection PZ has at this point.
I happen to agree with you, but would also not argue the point so strongly. If you can convince folks that giving her some slack will get her to come back (to MN's blog) and hang herself and PZ some more, then you are more likely to succeed, IMO. Trying to tell folks that it's simply wrong to "dog-pile" will not work, again, IMO.jet_lagg wrote:So, I promised at Nugent's blog I'd come here and defend my claim that Zvan was being "shouted down" in the comments section. Before I get started on that I do want to clarify my position on Zvan. [snipperoonie]
An incredibly low-performance cult leader then.katamari Damassi wrote:Don't you need a cult to be a cult leader? She has what, four regular commenters on her blog?jet_lagg wrote:So, I promised at Nugent's blog I'd come here and defend my claim that Zvan was being "shouted down" in the comments section. Before I get started on that I do want to clarify my position on Zvan.
She's a cult leader for all practical intents and purposes.
I don't think she'd have come back even if the response had been one or two immensely civil and well thought out responses. She's a coward, as is Myers, as are the lot of them. They fold under the slightest scrutiny and retreat to their dens. Unfortunately, I think the nature of the comments there now allows a newcomer to say, "hey, I'd have given up too", instead of recognizing Zvan her fear of being exposed as intellectually wanting.BlueShiftRhino wrote:I happen to agree with you, but would also not argue the point so strongly. If you can convince folks that giving her some slack will get her to come back (to MN's blog) and hang herself and PZ some more, then you are more likely to succeed, IMO. <snip>.jet_lagg wrote:So, I promised at Nugent's blog I'd come here and defend my claim that Zvan was being "shouted down" in the comments section. Before I get started on that I do want to clarify my position on Zvan. [snipperoonie]
Oops. I thought that you were referring to us.JackSkeptic wrote:I've worked on the assumption that Nugent or AI has been damaged and that Nugent can show it was malicious.
I think Phil has a possible case and he can also show this is not the first time his income may have been affected. Skeptickle too of course. I would not involve myself even if I could as It goes against what I believe in. But I could not anyway as I could not show any harm at all. Even my 'real name' is false, the one I have used on emails and such. I actually do not mind people knowing but I know those at FtB et al would use that knowledge to try and harm if they could. I will not take that risk.BlueShiftRhino wrote:I happen to agree with you, but would also not argue the point so strongly. If you can convince folks that giving her some slack will get her to come back (to MN's blog) and hang herself and PZ some more, then you are more likely to succeed, IMO. Trying to tell folks that it's simply wrong to "dog-pile" will not work, again, IMO.jet_lagg wrote:So, I promised at Nugent's blog I'd come here and defend my claim that Zvan was being "shouted down" in the comments section. Before I get started on that I do want to clarify my position on Zvan. [snipperoonie]
Vaguely relatedly ... I would be greatly amused if MN actually does sue PZ over a tweet in particular. Recall, dear Mykeru fans, that UMinn Morris boasted of PZ's tweeting. In fact, it would be hilarious if MN included UMinn-Morris as a defendant (at least, at first) and then subpoenaed their intranet logs to see if PZ was doing any of this on their system. But, again, I might be going #FullMykeru here.
Also, with regard to those of us "hiding" behind nyms being involved in a lawsuit ... clearly we could if we were defendants. If we were to try to be plaintiffs, we'd have to show that our actual persons were damaged, which I can see working if we have monetized our nyms. So you need to get out there and post some YouTubes soon if you want in. But, again, again, I might be going #FullMykeru here.
In the rest of his post he consistently cites Michael’s words between ‘Gumby quotes’. That will surely hurt Michael, someone who has dealt with the IRA and the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland. Right, Peezus?There has been a rather one-sided ‘conversation’ going on with Michael Nugent for the past month or so. It’s a little bit disturbing, and I provide here a chronology. If it’s too long for you, I’ll understand — I’ve found it hopelessly tedious — and the bottom line is that I won’t be talking to him again, and it ends here, as far as I’m concerned.
Poor Peezus & Co. They are being ‘harassed’ on an obscure website they don’t have to visit.Really, the commentariat on his blog consists almost exclusively of familiar names from the slymepit: people who have been harassing me, Rebecca Watson, Ophelia Benson, Melody Hensley, Stephanie Zvan, and others for years. That they have found a welcoming environment at Nugent’s place tells me all I need to know about his commitment to ending harassment within the atheist community.
Peezus is so predictable.So gosh, no, he won’t be getting a retraction or an apology. What he has gotten is blocked on Twitter and email, and a listing of his obsessive behavior.
But that shouldn't be too hard. All you have to do is claim you have PTSD from being called a rapist and misogynist.BlueShiftRhino wrote:jet_lagg wrote:So, I promised at Nugent's blog I'd come here and defend my claim that Zvan was being "shouted down" in the comments section. Before I get started on that I do want to clarify my position on Zvan. [snipperoonie]
Also, with regard to those of us "hiding" behind nyms being involved in a lawsuit ... clearly we could if we were defendants. If we were to try to be plaintiffs, we'd have to show that our actual persons were damaged
Oh, I figured that out a long time ago :lol:BlueShiftRhino wrote:I'm not at all criticizing your tactics or intent, JL, as I happen to agree and was trying to do the same with Ariel. I just happen to also believe that telling 'Pitters what to do is a great way to get them to do the opposite. #FullMykeru
She missed all the fun, she has to catch up somehow. All those outrage opportunities missed. Must be very upsetting.HunnyBunny wrote:http://i.imgur.com/nV91ppa.png
A thoughtful and nuanced response from under the blankets. Must be time for another flounce from twitter soon to raise her profile. she's letting the young crowd get ahead of her in the victim stakes.
Hensley? Crying uncontrollably under a blanket? It must be a day ending in the letter Y.HunnyBunny wrote:http://i.imgur.com/nV91ppa.png
A thoughtful and nuanced response from under the blankets. Must be time for another flounce from twitter soon to raise her profile. she's letting the young crowd get ahead of her in the victim stakes.
PZ concludes with "So gosh, no, he won’t be getting a retraction or an apology" which I here translate to the pithier "sue me."
Matchbox.Nec_V20 wrote:OK I can finally die. I have officially lived to experience the ultimate in the expression of "Big Brass Ones".
Never mind Benson, never mind Zvan, never mind PZ. They have proven themselves to be rank amateurs in comparison:
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/avy6x ... f-brothers
On a side note the guest on The Daily Show on November 4th will be Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee. If ever there were a case of nomen est omen this guy is it.
If you take all the vowels out of his name then you end up with "RNC PR BS".
Of course if you gave him an enema you could also fit him into a shoebox.
Everything is harassment for a SJW. Unless it's unconditional praise, pouncetugs and blind faith.Satire and well-evidenced criticism = harassment.
[youtube]kHmvkRoEowc[/youtube]HunnyBunny wrote:http://i.imgur.com/nV91ppa.png
A thoughtful and nuanced response from under the blankets. Must be time for another flounce from twitter soon to raise her profile. she's letting the young crowd get ahead of her in the victim stakes.
I'm pretty sure the report function on Twitter is like the 'close doors' button in an elevator. Strictly for show. I've never reported an account and gotten any reply other than 'yeah, we're not gonna do shit'.jet_lagg wrote:I'm sure I've been ninja'd as I've been gone for a week, but you can report accounts for harassment on twitter if they disagree with your opinion. That's the actual language twitter uses.
https://support.twitter.com/forms/abusiveuser
Shit, I've been infected by Volkisch ideology. I'm considering buying the game just because it has Europa in the title.JackSkeptic wrote:Anyone here got the latest EU4 DLC? IF so is it worth it?
Nec haxxord you, manlet.jet_lagg wrote:Who is responsible for this hilarity? Fascist Tit? Doxbloxxer?
My record sales have gone down these last few years. Who's to prove it wasn't due to Myers' lies and accusations?Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Anybody can sue anybody over anything. Winning the suit is another matter.
Any of us pitrapers would need to show how Peez' accusations tangibly harmed us -- our reputations, our ability to earn a living, etc. And ideally with a specific monetary figure attached.
Nugent, otoh (like Shermer and Radford), has a public reputation that could well be damaged by such accusations. AI's reputation is also a factor.
I hope Nugent fucks Peez into the ground, to borrow a Peezus colloquialism.
Nugent's next blog post about it will be interesting.Rekt wrote:PZ Myers: The end of the @micknugent saga: There has been a rather one-sided 'conversation' going on with Michael Nugent... bit.ly/1o0EJ8C
Michael Nugent: .@pzmyers "Now is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." - Winston Churchill.
You could also blame your accident on laughing so much at an Atheism Plus quote.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:My record sales have gone down these last few years. Who's to prove it wasn't due to Myers' lies and accusations?Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Anybody can sue anybody over anything. Winning the suit is another matter.
Any of us pitrapers would need to show how Peez' accusations tangibly harmed us -- our reputations, our ability to earn a living, etc. And ideally with a specific monetary figure attached.
Nugent, otoh (like Shermer and Radford), has a public reputation that could well be damaged by such accusations. AI's reputation is also a factor.
I hope Nugent fucks Peez into the ground, to borrow a Peezus colloquialism.
*evil grin*
Oh, come on,it would be a piece of piss to get him in their sights where they could pull the trigger. Do you really think Peezuz would be able to resist a free trip to talk at the Atheist Ireland con?BlueShiftRhino wrote:
As to whether a 'Pitter could sue PZ in the US ... sure, you can sue anyone you want. But you ain't going to win. Not yet, at least. But MN has PZ absolutely over a barrel under Irish law. The only issue is how and where to sue someone who is not in Ireland. That's the only protection PZ has at this point.
Peezus' new strategy for dispensing with a live hand grenade is apparently based on Letters From Iwo Jima.BlueShiftRhino wrote:PZ concludes with "So gosh, no, he won’t be getting a retraction or an apology" which I here translate to the pithier "sue me."
:popcorn:
As a public performer, Phil has some legitimacy wrt defamation. Skep tickle has tortious interference of somethingorother. I have copyright infringement for commercial gain. The rest of you KKK-lovin' pitrapists need to pony up for our defense funds.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: My record sales have gone down these last few years. Who's to prove it wasn't due to Myers' lies and accusations?
*evil grin*
Sweet, isn't it?jet_lagg wrote:Who is responsible for this hilarity? Fascist Tit? Doxbloxxer?
Or, if you want another film analogy it has to be:Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Peezus' new strategy for dispensing with a live hand grenade is apparently based on Letters From Iwo Jima.BlueShiftRhino wrote:PZ concludes with "So gosh, no, he won’t be getting a retraction or an apology" which I here translate to the pithier "sue me."
:popcorn:
[youtube]3l2NeCiP8b8[/youtube]
Ah, that explains the entirety of Finnegan's Wake.katamari Damassi wrote:FUN FACT! Did you know James Joyce was a fart fetishist?JackSkeptic wrote:Nugent was involved in a campaign to stop the demolition of Jame's Joyce's home. It's exciting snippets of information like that which make life worth living.fuzzy wrote:Quote fail above as I meant to reply to picture of Garlix' bread.
And my new avatar is James Joyce's father.
If empty, clueless lies can be called "blows."Brive1987 wrote:The blows keep raining down on the pit.
On Zvan's comment thread leftwingfox opines:
Idiot, monster, abuser. The choices appear very limited.Charitably. I think there’s probably a number there who are sexual abusers who are being willfully dishonest, but I tend to think idiots outnumber and amplify the actions of dedicated monsters.
And that's on a "charitable" day.
another lurker wrote:I prefer the pitogynist way of dealing with hand grenades...
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/ ... 7e2d68.jpg
I couldn't agree more with this comment, and with others you've made at Nugent's blog, Jan. When I read Nugent's posts on his wife's donation of her body for medical science and education (a decision for which I have boundless respect and gratitude, as a gross anatomy instructor) and the documentary about willed body donation, and then saw PZ Myers' continuing dishonest smears and doubling down, I decided that since I'd commented on the former, I would not comment on posts regarding the latter. I don't want to conflate the two in any possible realm - it makes me sick to think that Myers is proudly(!) lying about and slandering someone like Michael Nugent. What a despicable, self-involved turd Myers is.Jan Steen wrote:In moderation at Nugent's:
Myers finally responds.
In the rest of his post he consistently cites Michael’s words between ‘Gumby quotes’. That will surely hurt Michael, someone who has dealt with the IRA and the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland. Right, Peezus?There has been a rather one-sided ‘conversation’ going on with Michael Nugent for the past month or so. It’s a little bit disturbing, and I provide here a chronology. If it’s too long for you, I’ll understand — I’ve found it hopelessly tedious — and the bottom line is that I won’t be talking to him again, and it ends here, as far as I’m concerned.
What a pathetic, obnoxious little clown the man is.
Poor Peezus & Co. They are being ‘harassed’ on an obscure website they don’t have to visit.Really, the commentariat on his blog consists almost exclusively of familiar names from the slymepit: people who have been harassing me, Rebecca Watson, Ophelia Benson, Melody Hensley, Stephanie Zvan, and others for years. That they have found a welcoming environment at Nugent’s place tells me all I need to know about his commitment to ending harassment within the atheist community.
Satire and well-evidenced criticism = harassment.
Peezus is so predictable.So gosh, no, he won’t be getting a retraction or an apology. What he has gotten is blocked on Twitter and email, and a listing of his obsessive behavior.
But it’s heartening to see that he has to show tweets by the likes of Latsot, Rorschach (=clinteas) and even *shudder* oolon to be able to suggest that he still has supporters out there. A handful of creepy nobodies fighting for him in the cold are all he has left, while he is cowering in his bunker. Mit dem Angriff Steiners wird das alles in Ordnung kommen.
http://web.archive.org/web/201411011534 ... gent-saga/
I was invited to a party I was really looking forward to, and then about 2 hours before the party started I was no longer in the mood to go. I don't know why. Now I'm kicking myself for not going.bovarchist wrote:Happy Halloween all. So how many of us are actually out doing something, and how many are at home listening to the fireworks outside and contemplating all the ways we don't belong in this world?
