Periodic Table of Swearing

Old subthreads
Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17746

Post by Scented Nectar »

KiwiInOz wrote:This a very interesting, just published, paper on Misinformation and its correction - http://psi.sagepub.com/content/13/3/106 ... teid=sppsi

And can someone tell me how to hyperlink to a word rather than the whole url?
Yep, use this format:

Code: Select all

[url=http://scentednectar.com]Click here[/url]
You can also make the word bold and/or underlined so that it will look more 'linky':
[url=http://scentednectar.com][b][u]Click here[/u][/b][/url]
Taken out of the code box, and put into this post the normal way, the above becomes:

Click here
You can also make the word bold and/or extra underlined, etc, so that it will look more 'linky':
Click here

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17747

Post by Scented Nectar »

aweraw wrote:As an aside, I notice a number of you seem to be redditors.
We are? Well, I learn something new every day, I guess. Reddit is hardly ever mentioned here, so that surprises me a bit.

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17748

Post by Scented Nectar »

Saint N. wrote:I don't want to embed this video here (because it's really painful to watch), but I've seen this guy popping up around youtube for the last few months, fervently defending a+theism,

His reasoning is so bizarre that I can't shake the feeling that he is just a very dedicated Poe. But with that crowd you can't really tell 100%. Does anyone know who he is and/or if he's serious.
That guy is totally insane. I've tried arguing/discussing things with him, and he's stupider than a cardboard box. He also is very fragmented/disconnected in thought, very similar to the way most of PZ's commenters are. He would fit right in. His thinking only goes one level deep. He often tries to be comedic and fails pathetically.

Oh, I see in this video that he's already found the baboons, and he feels quite welcome. He's found his true home, where he's not seen as retarded because they all are too. On youtube he is often considered 'slow'. A few videos were even made about it.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17749

Post by Mykeru »

sacha wrote:
Mykeru wrote:I'm editing through The Beaver's 2012 HFA keynote speech and JESUS FUCKING CHRIST, THIS IS A KEYNOTE SPEECH? My God, it's an hour of Watson bitching about trolls, mean girls and how people weren't nice to her on the internet. If she was a fat no-life neck beard guy no one would listen to her, but since she's a fat pink-haired no-life Skepchick suddenly arguing on the internet has global consequences.

She complains about someone threatening to put a bullet in her head (been there, princess) and not even ten minutes in, I'm begging for a bullet in the head.

Sacha, do tell.
I mentioned that I would be attending on the original Slime Pit. Asked if there were any requests, like a note.

Of course what bothers her the most is not getting attention, so I posted that in order to get under her skin, I planned to ignore her, and we had a laugh. I'll find the links.

PZ phoned the organiser, telling him someone named "sacha" on a hate forum was planning to attend and that I planned to "cause trouble" and I was a direct threat to Becci's safety.

PZ asked that I be removed from the list and asked that the organiser call Becci to let her know she did not have to worry about her safety, and that I was no longer attending. He called Becci, who wanted to make sure I would not be permitted to attend... blah blah blah

The organiser knew me prior to this, he emailed and told me what was said, asked if they had the wrong person, and wanted my side of things.
I told him about what I posted on the Slime Pit, and the plan was to ignore her, I told him it isn't any secret that I do not like Becci and PZ, and the thread was more about PZ than anyone else. I had no interest in engaging her, I had no interest in her at all. I was attending because of the the others. I offered to give him the links to my comments that PZ was referring to, and told him that I did not want him involved, and I did not need to attend. He thought it was all a bit ridiculous, and told me he has no problem with me attending, but asked if I would use the first name Sophia instead of sacha, like it is on my facebook page (yes, sacha is my real name). I told him that no one calls me Sophia, and Becci may hear numerous people refer to me as sacha. He said he did not care, I told him I did not want to be that close to her anyway, and he told me to go as planned, so I did.
name%20badge.jpg
Well, after watching Rebecca Watson's "Keynote Speech", or any of her pronouncements over the past few years, you get a sense of her rhythm, which is "death threats, rape threats, someone was mean to me" followed by how she cashed this in for more power, either to get someone fired, or removed from an event, or to strong-arm the organizers of an event, mostly based on someone's ill-thought hyperbolic speech, a nasty-gram from someone 1,000 miles away, or just the most uncharitable interpretation of someone's total exasperation with her. However, the sheer volume of death threats, rape threats and the use of the word "cunt" is, of course, a rough measure of Rebecca Watson's total importance. It seems that often porn is inaccessible on the internet due to the bandwidth used in threatening Rebecca Watson.

And all the while, while she's telling these horror stories, she's smiling and playing it for laughs at the same time, forcing her compliant audience into simultaneously holding the thought that this is all very terrifying and, at the same time, highly amusing. If you turn the sound off when Rebecca Watson is speaking, by just watching her you would think she was relating some amusing, but entirely trivial anecdote. I've never seen anyone with such a lack of emotional investment in her own terror.

So, when I got to the point that she was telling the umpteenth variation on a theme I was used to how completely mundane disagreements get filtered through Rebecca Watson's mental oppression conversion program, such as "a forum" (vague, so you can't check) that was "dedicated to hating her" (the whole damn thing, 24/7) had a person (no names, please) that was "going to accost her in some manner" (which covers everything from telling her she's full of shit to sticking an ice-pick in her ear) and how she was able to parlay victim-hood into some form of power. But being ignored as a form of confrontation? That's a new one.

At least, that's how she tells it. However, back in reality, it's just another case of the police, the organizers, her friends and her mother not believing the fucking SWAT team should be called out because someone was mean to Becca on the internet. However, the people in attendance at the supposed Humanist group ooh and ahh over what a very important victim Rebecca is.

If you can tune out Rebecca for a while, and who wouldn't, and just listen to the audience, it's revealing. I can hear one guy doing a sort of smug laugh. I know this guy. He's the older, low-level academic that goes to all the Skeptical Meetups at the public library, wears socks with sandals, has a closely cropped beard and wears a tilly hat like he's on permanent safari and basically holds court in his own mind. He's made in the same smug factory that squeezed out P.Z. Meyers. He's so used to his own sub-moronic minions that questioning him is out of the question. I could make a hobby out of pissing that guy off.

I had to stop watching because my brain was melting, but I have to watch the Q&A just to see if there was anyone brave enough to call bullshit. Not likely. A couple years ago I was at a CFI-DC thang with some guy speaking from the Smithsonian. I noted that the then new Human Origins exhibit at the museum has a big fucking thank you plaque to the Koch Brothers and I questioned taking Koch money, because they do that kind of philanthropic work to provide cover for the rest of their bullshit. The speaker totally smugged out and said "Well, if the Koch brothers want to give us money, we'll take it, heh-heh-heh". Which I interpreted as being a whore, even if you're a well-compensated whore. I thought Melody Hensley was giving me the stink-eye, but I might have just had a bad case of the Watsons.

My Godless, it's all so very fucking sad, isn't it?

mikelf
.
.
Posts: 315
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 2:34 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17750

Post by mikelf »

Mykeru wrote: So, when I got to the point that she was telling the umpteenth variation on a theme I was used to how completely mundane disagreements get filtered through Rebecca Watson's mental oppression conversion program, such as "a forum" (vague, so you can't check) that was "dedicated to hating her" (the whole damn thing, 24/7) had a person (no names, please) that was "going to accost her in some manner" (which covers everything from telling her she's full of shit to sticking an ice-pick in her ear) and how she was able to parlay victim-hood into some form of power. But being ignored as a form of confrontation? That's a new one.
http://cache.jezebel.com/assets/images/ ... adLibs.jpg

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17751

Post by rayshul »

I think that forum of hate is this place right here.

masakari2012
.
.
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:14 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17752

Post by masakari2012 »

It would be nice if someone did a point-by-point response to Rebecca Watson's video, nailing the points that Mykeru made, and others points: like RW was relaying stories which we have no evidence for. I'm not saying that she completely manufactured it (though it may be possible), but are we to believe the "threats" were made exactly as she stated it word for word. Also, it can be debated as to whether they are threats or not.

She said that other people didn't believe her stories, but then believed her afterwards. That sounds familiar. Sounds like when someone tell me that they saw a ghost, and then their friend said "I didn't believe it, but then I saw it for myself".

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17753

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Stefunny's joined Peezus and O for a 'Total Recall' remake! :D

http://i.imgur.com/4n9Cq.jpg

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17754

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

rayshul wrote:I think that forum of hate is this place right here.
Well, it's been demonstrated (not) that all Pitters, including women, hate women, so there's that (not, again).

I wish these shmuks would provide evidence for their claims. It's a bit like wishing the Moon was made of cheese, though...

Franc: nice to see you back!

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17755

Post by rayshul »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
rayshul wrote:I think that forum of hate is this place right here.
Well, it's been demonstrated (not) that all Pitters, including women, hate women, so there's that (not, again).

I wish these shmuks would provide evidence for their claims. It's a bit like wishing the Moon was made of cheese, though...
From what My posted I assumed she doesn't think we hate all women, but that this forum is completely dedicated to RW. And hating HER, specifically. I'm pretty sure we shit on lots of people, she shouldn't really feel that special.

Speaking of which...

This is a new great post about Jen's weird approach to the homeless that kind of covers the sort of natural wtf reaction people have had to it.

http://musingsbysoggymog.blogspot.co.uk ... y-its.html

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17756

Post by Dick Strawkins »

rayshul wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
rayshul wrote:I think that forum of hate is this place right here.
Well, it's been demonstrated (not) that all Pitters, including women, hate women, so there's that (not, again).

I wish these shmuks would provide evidence for their claims. It's a bit like wishing the Moon was made of cheese, though...
From what My posted I assumed she doesn't think we hate all women, but that this forum is completely dedicated to RW. And hating HER, specifically. I'm pretty sure we shit on lots of people, she shouldn't really feel that special.

Speaking of which...

This is a new great post about Jen's weird approach to the homeless that kind of covers the sort of natural wtf reaction people have had to it.

http://musingsbysoggymog.blogspot.co.uk ... y-its.html
I don't hate RW.

I just think she isn't qualified or has shown the ability, to do anything more difficult than appear as a comedy sidekick (as she did on the SGU).
When she appears all over the place giving keynote speeches my disgust is not with her, but with the sort of idiots that go along with this, promoting here abover her ability and keeping quiet when things are clearly not working.
Having the likes of RW, Jen and Stefunny giving 'expert' talks is a problem for the simple reason that there are people with real knowledge, ability and talent (many of them women) who are being denied the chance to take the stage because of the monopoly of speaking places by PZ and his close friends.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17757

Post by AnonymousCowherd »

sacha wrote: The "forum dedicated to hating her" is the Slime Pit. I'll post the rest of the story when I return.
Tell us more about ourselves, ma petite egoiste Becci.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17758

Post by Mykeru »

masakari2012 wrote:It would be nice if someone did a point-by-point response to Rebecca Watson's video, nailing the points that Mykeru made, and others points: like RW was relaying stories which we have no evidence for. I'm not saying that she completely manufactured it (though it may be possible), but are we to believe the "threats" were made exactly as she stated it word for word. Also, it can be debated as to whether they are threats or not.

She said that other people didn't believe her stories, but then believed her afterwards. That sounds familiar. Sounds like when someone tell me that they saw a ghost, and then their friend said "I didn't believe it, but then I saw it for myself".
I'm working on a Athiplus Ministry of Truth video and I would really, really like to be done with the damn thing. I've blocked out the last section to exactly that, pointing out some of the disparity between Rebecca's damsel in distress routine and what really happened. I wouldn't devote a whole video to Watson, but she is a major clown in the whole clown car.

I interpret Watson's "no one believes me" shtick as a variation on the conspiracy theorist's claim that lack of evidence for a conspiracy just shows how effective the conspiracy is. Or, in this case, that no one believes her oppression crap is just more evidence of her being oppressed.

I don't know if the people duped by Rebecca Watson are therefore victims of Watson herself, or just so fucking stupid that they deserve to be taken in.

I'd like to use an edited down version of Sacha's take on what happened with Watson, because the disparity between what actually happened and what gets fictionalized by the fearless keynote speaker, is too good not to use. Some shit just writes itself.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17759

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Mykeru wrote:
masakari2012 wrote:It would be nice if someone did a point-by-point response to Rebecca Watson's video, nailing the points that Mykeru made, and others points: like RW was relaying stories which we have no evidence for. I'm not saying that she completely manufactured it (though it may be possible), but are we to believe the "threats" were made exactly as she stated it word for word. Also, it can be debated as to whether they are threats or not.

She said that other people didn't believe her stories, but then believed her afterwards. That sounds familiar. Sounds like when someone tell me that they saw a ghost, and then their friend said "I didn't believe it, but then I saw it for myself".
I'm working on a Athiplus Ministry of Truth video and I would really, really like to be done with the damn thing. I've blocked out the last section to exactly that, pointing out some of the disparity between Rebecca's damsel in distress routine and what really happened. I wouldn't devote a whole video to Watson, but she is a major clown in the whole clown car.

I interpret Watson's "no one believes me" shtick as a variation on the conspiracy theorist's claim that lack of evidence for a conspiracy just shows how effective the conspiracy is. Or, in this case, that no one believes her oppression crap is just more evidence of her being oppressed.

I don't know if the people duped by Rebecca Watson are therefore victims of Watson herself, or just so fucking stupid that they deserve to be taken in.

I'd like to use an edited down version of Sacha's take on what happened with Watson, because the disparity between what actually happened and what gets fictionalized by the fearless keynote speaker, is too good not to use. Some shit just writes itself.
There is one thing about her actions that I do hate - although it is something that she is not alone in doing.
I've seen several people make exactly the same complaint that goes something like this:

'I tried to post something on Skepchick/Pharyngula for the first time - just a quick question asking for some evidence about the claim being asserted, but my post never when up and now I realize I've now been banned. However there is another post, which by the time stamps shows that it was made after my attempted post, that does show up and yet this post is purely nasty insults thrown at Rebecca/PZ.
Why would they reject my post but allow this trolls insults?"

I regard this type of manipulation to be absolutely dishonest. You either ban every post that is not on message or you select the polite ones that disagree with you - that, at least, would show some degree on integrity. Only allowing trolling insults is done with the intent to show that the only people who disagree with you are malicious.
It is completely dishonest and tantamount to lying.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17760

Post by AnonymousCowherd »

Sulaco wrote: Isn't that what Fundie Christians say? If you don't accept Jesus you will never be worthy no matter how many good deeds you do. At least Christianity offered a way to salvation. What the FfTB people preach is more like the Aztec religion (we were created from stolen god's blood and we can never redeem ourselves but we must make sacrifices because humans are nothing more than dirty thieves). Amazing how many tenets of fundamentalism they have adopted, not just Christian, but any religion or authoritarian secular ideologies.
Only if you weren't a Calvanist. We are all sinners, no good works can redeem us only Gawd's Grace, and the elect were chosen before you or anyone you know was even born and if you aren't one of them, you're fucked. In theory, you can't even know if you're one of the elect, but in practice some people have an awfully strong feeling about it. Certainly makes "good works" for the proles a hard sell though.

Not sure what Grace made of the whole thing either.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17761

Post by AnonymousCowherd »

codelette wrote:
ikonografer (@ikonografer) says:
October 11, 2012 at 4:51 am
ask yourself if you’d say the same thing about blacks or hispanics.

Stacy says:
October 11, 2012 at 5:39 pm
Men are not in the same position in society as blacks and hispanics.

(Ask yourself if you’d be all pissy about a similar thought experiment from the point of view of a black man dealing with whites.)
...cause blacks and hispanics are not "men".

:lol:
Subsets. How do they work?

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17762

Post by Tigzy »

Poor old 'Bob' Dobbs. Oolon is about as pink as you can get!

Sulaco
.
.
Posts: 158
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:54 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17763

Post by Sulaco »

Dick Strawkins wrote:Stefunny's joined Peezus and O for a 'Total Recall' remake! :D

http://i.imgur.com/4n9Cq.jpg
I thought Divine died decades ago? Who knew that he was still alive and blogging.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17764

Post by Dick Strawkins »


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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17765

Post by Mykeru »

Dick Strawkins wrote: 'I tried to post something on Skepchick/Pharyngula for the first time - just a quick question asking for some evidence about the claim being asserted, but my post never when up and now I realize I've now been banned. However there is another post, which by the time stamps shows that it was made after my attempted post, that does show up and yet this post is purely nasty insults thrown at Rebecca/PZ.
Why would they reject my post but allow this trolls insults?"

I regard this type of manipulation to be absolutely dishonest. You either ban every post that is not on message or you select the polite ones that disagree with you - that, at least, would show some degree on integrity. Only allowing trolling insults is done with the intent to show that the only people who disagree with you are malicious.
It is completely dishonest and tantamount to lying.
Ideologues need enemies. It's that "circling the wagons" that gives them a sense of cohesion. However, why have articulate enemies that point out your bullshit? It's the same reason televangelists are under attack by "the gay agenda" (whatever that is), because it gets Ma and Pa Dumbfuck off the recliner and writing checks.

To that extent, the A+ focus on invented boogeymen based on The Slyme Pit and A Voice for Men, as well as Rebecca's "poor me" speaking gigs, is the rhetorical equivalent of the old National Lampoon "Buy this magazine or we'll shoot this dog" cover.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17766

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Dick Strawkins wrote:
rayshul wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
rayshul wrote:I think that forum of hate is this place right here.
Well, it's been demonstrated (not) that all Pitters, including women, hate women, so there's that (not, again).

I wish these shmuks would provide evidence for their claims. It's a bit like wishing the Moon was made of cheese, though...
From what My posted I assumed she doesn't think we hate all women, but that this forum is completely dedicated to RW. And hating HER, specifically. I'm pretty sure we shit on lots of people, she shouldn't really feel that special.

Speaking of which...

This is a new great post about Jen's weird approach to the homeless that kind of covers the sort of natural wtf reaction people have had to it.

http://musingsbysoggymog.blogspot.co.uk ... y-its.html
I don't hate RW.

I just think she isn't qualified or has shown the ability, to do anything more difficult than appear as a comedy sidekick (as she did on the SGU).
When she appears all over the place giving keynote speeches my disgust is not with her, but with the sort of idiots that go along with this, promoting here abover her ability and keeping quiet when things are clearly not working.
Having the likes of RW, Jen and Stefunny giving 'expert' talks is a problem for the simple reason that there are people with real knowledge, ability and talent (many of them women) who are being denied the chance to take the stage because of the monopoly of speaking places by PZ and his close friends.
I totally agree with these sentiments. I hope it doesn't make the Pit look like an echo chamber.

RW is way bellow my radar range. I don't follow her tweets, I don't read her blog, and I don't watch her videos. I only hear of her through occasional stuff posted here or a random comment on other sites/forums/blogs. Maybe I should pay more attention to the event organizers who invite her for speaches.

Mykeru: If any evidence of actual, real life threats headed at Watson is ever provided, I'll give her my support and encourage her to contact whatever local authority has juridiction over these types of cases. Still waiting, as of now...

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17767

Post by AnonymousCowherd »

BarnOwl wrote:http://i1158.photobucket.com/albums/p60 ... f8bcc3.png

"no research needed" = promotion and tenure decision at certain universities
Yes colon, I believe PZ needs no research for most of his thoughts. I hear he thinks you're the last segment in The Human Centipede. But that's probably just something that's been passed along by others.

decius
.
.
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17768

Post by decius »

Mykeru wrote:
I don't know if the people duped by Rebecca Watson are therefore victims of Watson herself, or just so fucking stupid that they deserve to be taken in.
As with Peezus's minions, there's a strong element of herd mentality. They follow the leader without much questioning claims or independently checking the veracity thereof. Often there's no malice or stupidity involved, just inertia and misplaced trust. Eventually more and more people - who are self-described skeptics after all - will do their legwork and come to realise they've been deceived. This is already occurring, as testified by the constant stream of new members and by the dwindling ranks of Peezus & co.
A bloc of true-believers and ideologues impervious to evidence and reason does exist, however.

masakari2012
.
.
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:14 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17769

Post by masakari2012 »

Dick Strawkins wrote:'I tried to post something on Skepchick/Pharyngula for the first time - just a quick question asking for some evidence about the claim being asserted, but my post never when up and now I realize I've now been banned. However there is another post, which by the time stamps shows that it was made after my attempted post, that does show up and yet this post is purely nasty insults thrown at Rebecca/PZ.
Why would they reject my post but allow this trolls insults?"

I regard this type of manipulation to be absolutely dishonest. You either ban every post that is not on message or you select the polite ones that disagree with you - that, at least, would show some degree on integrity. Only allowing trolling insults is done with the intent to show that the only people who disagree with you are malicious.
It is completely dishonest and tantamount to lying.
That's one of the signs that they're a cult. They restrict information and facts.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17770

Post by Tigzy »

I see that our newest member is apparently one 'Al Stefanelli'.

Couldn't be...could it? :think:

Sulaco
.
.
Posts: 158
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:54 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17771

Post by Sulaco »

AnonymousCowherd wrote:
Sulaco wrote: Isn't that what Fundie Christians say? If you don't accept Jesus you will never be worthy no matter how many good deeds you do. At least Christianity offered a way to salvation. What the FfTB people preach is more like the Aztec religion (we were created from stolen god's blood and we can never redeem ourselves but we must make sacrifices because humans are nothing more than dirty thieves). Amazing how many tenets of fundamentalism they have adopted, not just Christian, but any religion or authoritarian secular ideologies.
Only if you weren't a Calvanist. We are all sinners, no good works can redeem us only Gawd's Grace, and the elect were chosen before you or anyone you know was even born and if you aren't one of them, you're fucked. In theory, you can't even know if you're one of the elect, but in practice some people have an awfully strong feeling about it. Certainly makes "good works" for the proles a hard sell though.

Not sure what Grace made of the whole thing either.
I forgot about good ol' Calvinism. Geez, under that sect might as well just have a beer and do what you want.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17772

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Tigzy wrote:I see that our newest member is apparently one 'Al Stefanelli'.

Couldn't be...could it? :think:
Don't post anything Al!
In fact it's best if you don't even read!
The slymepit is so evil that simply visiting here is enough to ruin any mortal man! :twisted:

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17773

Post by welch »

Oolon may not be posting anymore, but he sure is a lurky little fuck.
Wonder if he gets extra tea bags from PZ?

oolon, slimy turd
.
.
Posts: 133
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17774

Post by oolon, slimy turd »

Tigzy wrote: Poor old 'Bob' Dobbs. Oolon is about as pink as you can get!
Ha! I paid my dues so come X-day I'll be there on the intergalactic pleasure ships telling you not to say cunt in my presence!

Anyway I thought you lot would be proud of my heroic sticking up for you... I did say that equating the SammyBoals person to a generic slimepitter could be seen as insulting to you lot.

MKG didn't like it that I also said Renee is 'sticking up for...' the SammyBoals troll by saying it is not a slimepitter. Given the audience how else would I phrase it? From PZ's etc point of view that is definitely 'sticking up for it'... Takes a little bit of mental gymnastics but I'm sure you can see my point :-)

oolon, slimy turd
.
.
Posts: 133
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17775

Post by oolon, slimy turd »

welch wrote:Oolon may not be posting anymore, but he sure is a lurky little fuck.
Wonder if he gets extra tea bags from PZ?
Hehe fuck you

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17776

Post by AnonymousCowherd »

Sulaco wrote:
I forgot about good ol' Calvinism. Geez, under that sect might as well just have a beer and do what you want.
You'd think so, wouldn't you? But that would be sensible or, as the pros call it "Dawkins level theology". Several thousand pages of twisted logic have subsequently been written to convince you to lead a miserable fekkin' life - just - because.

See? Subtlety. Get your mind right, Luke. Then you can criticise, apparently.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17777

Post by AnonymousCowherd »

welch wrote:Oolon
Who?

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17778

Post by Tigzy »

oolon, slimy turd wrote:
Tigzy wrote: Poor old 'Bob' Dobbs. Oolon is about as pink as you can get!
Ha! I paid my dues so come X-day I'll be there on the intergalactic pleasure ships telling you not to say cunt in my presence!
:lol: That's probably one of the pinkest statements I've ever heard. The only dues you've paid are to the Bozo cult.

Keating

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17779

Post by Keating »

PZ doesn't like you any more Oolon:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... hat-again/

Doesn't like Scented Nectar's 'hypersceptisim' either.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17780

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

oolon, slimy turd wrote:
Tigzy wrote: Poor old 'Bob' Dobbs. Oolon is about as pink as you can get!
Ha! I paid my dues so come X-day I'll be there on the intergalactic pleasure ships telling you not to say cunt in my presence!

Anyway I thought you lot would be proud of my heroic sticking up for you... I did say that equating the SammyBoals person to a generic slimepitter could be seen as insulting to you lot.

MKG didn't like it that I also said Renee is 'sticking up for...' the SammyBoals troll by saying it is not a slimepitter. Given the audience how else would I phrase it? From PZ's etc point of view that is definitely 'sticking up for it'... Takes a little bit of mental gymnastics but I'm sure you can see my point :-)
I don't really like the "you lot" you use all the time here. There's no "us lot". For exemple, some think you're a tedious troll who needs being ignored, while others engage with you (some in a polite maner, so in a bit more rude fashion).

Now, as for the underlined section: there are probably hundreds of ways to phrase it that won't imply Renée is supporting the stupid fuck. As you may have noticed, Renée is a fairly recent addition to the Pit. Her saying Boals is not a Pitter is not sticking up for it, it's distancing the Pit from whatever that tedious troll posts. Because, until proven otherwise, Boals is not a Pitter.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17781

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Just for oolon: Jesus fuck, but I’m fed up with your pose of supposed objective neutrality everywhere I see you. Don’t comment on this thread, unless you want to discover that that fence you’re so happily straddling is electrified razor wire, because I’ll give you a yank so hard you’ll find yourself occupying two cells in the dungeon.
Oh yep, that one must hurt. Almost sounds like a threat of physical violence too (hyperbole, people, hyperbole). Oolon, if you get the kick, you have a home here. Not everyone will pay attention to you, but some will.

Cheers mate!

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17782

Post by Scented Nectar »

oolon, slimy turd wrote:MKG didn't like it that I also said Renee is 'sticking up for...' the SammyBoals troll by saying it is not a slimepitter. Given the audience how else would I phrase it? From PZ's etc point of view that is definitely 'sticking up for it'... Takes a little bit of mental gymnastics but I'm sure you can see my point :-)
That's not sticking up for it, that's repudiating it as not one of us. The fucking opposite of what you said. Why the fuck are you so stupid? And by you, I mean it in the plural if PZ has bought your twisted revision of what happened. You don't get to lie and then call it "mental gymnastics", fool-on.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17783

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »


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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17784

Post by Tigzy »

Keating wrote:PZ doesn't like you any more Oolon:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... hat-again/

Doesn't like Scented Nectar's 'hypersceptisim' either.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-470078
PZ Myers
12 October 2012 at 7:58 am

Just for oolon: Jesus fuck, but I’m fed up with your pose of supposed objective neutrality everywhere I see you. Don’t comment on this thread, unless you want to discover that that fence you’re so happily straddling is electrified razor wire, because I’ll give you a yank so hard you’ll find yourself occupying two cells in the dungeon.
Okay, I take it back about you being a pink, Oolon, given that the Bozo cult have put you on notice.

Welcome to the Slymepit, old chap!

oolon, slimy turd
.
.
Posts: 133
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17785

Post by oolon, slimy turd »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: I don't really like the "you lot" you use all the time here. There's no "us lot". For exemple, some think you're a tedious troll who needs being ignored, while others engage with you (some in a polite maner, so in a bit more rude fashion).
Help please, what is the slime-approved nomenclature for referring to the slimepit and its denizens in totality?

oolon, slimy turd
.
.
Posts: 133
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17786

Post by oolon, slimy turd »

CommanderTuvok wrote:After their harassment of Vacula succeeded, it has been a pretty good couple of days payback.
Not sure aiming for 'payback' is particularly admirable Tuvok, ultimately it was Justins decision to step down and I think on here he specifically asked for no 'payback'. Comments like this probably lead to the paranoia expressed by some people in FtBs about the slimepits 'campaign of hate'?

BTW SammyCoals tweeted 'she' was female so I took the easy route in gendering rather than being too sceptical on its truthfulness... So you need to look harder if you want to peg me as a sexist dinosaur. Here is a real one for your pleasure...
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/imag ... ZD2JKy_39F

decius
.
.
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17787

Post by decius »

As I tried to point out a few times already, the tabloid-like gossip and the high-school-level pseudo-satire focussing on physical defects greatly degrade the quality of the output of these boards. It also provides opportunistic ideologues Peezus with an endless supply of free ammo and with arguments very difficult to refute.

Good job, numbskulls.

Peezus:
Ahh, but the best part: the haters were all fired up because the video of Rebecca Watson speaking at HFA has just been released…and their response was to post photos of obese women in degrading situations. Over and over. Amplified and made worse because everyone quotes the original ‘witty’ photo, so you end up with a whole page of fat woman photos, with people tittering over them and speculating whether it’s a drunk Rebecca Watson or Stephanie Zvan, and somehow they start whining about Natalie Reed and Ophelia Watson. The whole impression is of a bargain-basement 4chan where all of their childish ire is aimed at women on freethoughtblogs.

real horrorshow
.
.
Posts: 1505
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:59 am
Location: In a band of brigands.

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17788

Post by real horrorshow »

AnonymousCowherd wrote:
Sulaco wrote:
I forgot about good ol' Calvinism. Geez, under that sect might as well just have a beer and do what you want.
You'd think so, wouldn't you? But that would be sensible or, as the pros call it "Dawkins level theology". Several thousand pages of twisted logic have subsequently been written to convince you to lead a miserable fekkin' life - just - because.

See? Subtlety. Get your mind right, Luke. Then you can criticise, apparently.
I think you may be looking at it backwards. See, if you're already a miserable bastard, what would be the type of religious belief most likely to appeal to you? One that says "go right on being a miserable bastard". In the words of the late great John Laurie: "We're aw doomed!"

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17789

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

oolon, slimy turd wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: I don't really like the "you lot" you use all the time here. There's no "us lot". For exemple, some think you're a tedious troll who needs being ignored, while others engage with you (some in a polite maner, so in a bit more rude fashion).
Help please, what is the slime-approved nomenclature for referring to the slimepit and its denizens in totality?
Pitters, Slymers, Slymepitters, [insert name of commenter here]. "You lot" just doesn't cut it, at least for me. Might be cultural...

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17790

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

decius wrote:As I tried to point out a few times already, the tabloid-like gossip and the high-school-level pseudo-satire focussing on physical defects greatly degrade the quality of the output of these boards. It also provides opportunistic ideologues Peezus with an endless supply of free ammo and with arguments very difficult to refute.

Good job, numbskulls.
On this, I agree 100%. (what's with me agreeing with everyone today? Wasn't it a couple days ago I was pissed off at everyone? Mood swings, I guess)

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17791

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
oolon, slimy turd wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: I don't really like the "you lot" you use all the time here. There's no "us lot". For exemple, some think you're a tedious troll who needs being ignored, while others engage with you (some in a polite maner, so in a bit more rude fashion).
Help please, what is the slime-approved nomenclature for referring to the slimepit and its denizens in totality?
Pitters, Slymers, Slymepitters, [insert name of commenter here]. "You lot" just doesn't cut it, at least for me. Might be cultural...
Ok, I dived right into it, didn't I? There is no "slime-approved" anything. You can call us whatever you want. Just don't espect everyone to like it. Don't expect to be censored or banned for doing so, though.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17792

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Looks like PZ's linking to us means we have an influx of guests.
Feel free to comment please!
We don't hate women - many of us are women (and not just on weekends)!
Only a few of the regulars are MRAs and those that are tend to keep away from that topic because the rest of us get bored.

Misogyny?
Yes it's not a thing to be encouraged and woman hating is a definite no-no on this site.
Those that make rape threats or threats of violence have never been tolerated here.
We do, however, have some disagreements over what constitutes misogyny.
Some say using certain words (bitch, cunt etc) means a person is misogynistic.
Others disagree.

Can posting certain images be misogynistic?
Certainly.

Try this one and then try to figure out which feminist hero posted it...
http://i.imgur.com/TqUdr.jpg

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17793

Post by Tigzy »

Peezus wrote:Ahh, but the best part: the haters were all fired up because the video of Rebecca Watson speaking at HFA has just been released…and their response was to post photos of obese women in degrading situations. Over and over. Amplified and made worse because everyone quotes the original ‘witty’ photo, so you end up with a whole page of fat woman photos, with people tittering over them and speculating whether it’s a drunk Rebecca Watson or Stephanie Zvan, and somehow they start whining about Natalie Reed and Ophelia Watson. The whole impression is of a bargain-basement 4chan where all of their childish ire is aimed at women on freethoughtblogs.
Well, PZ is quite wrong on this: 'The whole impression is of a bargain-basement 4chan where all of their childish ire is aimed at women on freethoughtblogs.'

As far as I can see, our childish ire is aimed at the men, too. Though if PZ subscribes to Laden's theory that men are just women with testosterone damaged brains, I guess he might have a point.

Also, isn't 'fat women' fatist? Someone call SGBM, quick...

I find the idea of PZ getting annoyed at a page of fat women photos really funny, for some reason...

Keating

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17794

Post by Keating »

decius wrote:As I tried to point out a few times already, the tabloid-like gossip and the high-school-level pseudo-satire focussing on physical defects greatly degrade the quality of the output of these boards. It also provides opportunistic ideologues Peezus with an endless supply of free ammo and with arguments very difficult to refute.
I'm with you here. I found those particular posts cheap humour, and ultimately very petty. As I said before, the pettiness that is often on display here is the only thing preventing me from registering instead of just lurking. That said, PZ's argument is like being flogged with warm lettuce. I suppose it means that all Pharyngula commentators often think about 'snapping necks', that all Australians are racist arseholes, and what ever the colourful commentary of the day is, now that 'porcupines' and 'dying in a fire' are off the table.. What a conga line of suck holes.

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17795

Post by Scented Nectar »

Keating wrote:PZ doesn't like you any more Oolon:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... hat-again/

Doesn't like Scented Nectar's 'hypersceptisim' either.
I still say it was a sock. And didn't I say on twitter that it was so that they could pull a couple of blogposts out of it? PZ went first. :)

Guest

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17796

Post by Guest »

oolon, slimy turd wrote: Comments like this probably lead to the paranoia expressed by some people in FtBs about the slimepits 'campaign of hate'?
Why do you keep getting hung up on this? Have you still not figured it out? Slymepit is to FtB what Comintern was in the imagination of Joseph McCarthy. There's no relationship between the bizarre paranoia on FtB and the actual Slymepit. A-plussers find pitters hiding in every corner much in the same way that John Birchers suddenly discover that their co-worker and neighbor of thirty years is a "secret Communist." PZ or anyone else denouncing some random critic (or more frequently denouncing someone noob whose crime was asking a question) as a slymepitter is almost as meaningful as Robert Welch denouncing Eisenhower as a communist. It's just paranoia. There's no rational basis to it.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17797

Post by Lsuoma »

Keating wrote:
decius wrote:As I tried to point out a few times already, the tabloid-like gossip and the high-school-level pseudo-satire focussing on physical defects greatly degrade the quality of the output of these boards. It also provides opportunistic ideologues Peezus with an endless supply of free ammo and with arguments very difficult to refute.
I'm with you here. I found those particular posts cheap humour, and ultimately very petty. As I said before, the pettiness that is often on display here is the only thing preventing me from registering instead of just lurking. That said, PZ's argument is like being flogged with warm lettuce. I suppose it means that all Pharyngula commentators often think about 'snapping necks', that all Australians are racist arseholes, and what ever the colourful commentary of the day is, now that 'porcupines' and 'dying in a fire' are off the table.. What a conga line of suck holes.
I don't particularly like it either, but early discussions showed that it's mgmt censorship or no mgmt censorship: some mgmt censorship wasn't an option, so it's none.

It doesn't matter anyway - the Beardy bastard would still be getting his arsehole torqued because we won't take what he says as gospel, and suck on the wet end of his tiny little pismire...

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17798

Post by LMU »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
oolon, slimy turd wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: I don't really like the "you lot" you use all the time here. There's no "us lot". For exemple, some think you're a tedious troll who needs being ignored, while others engage with you (some in a polite maner, so in a bit more rude fashion).
Help please, what is the slime-approved nomenclature for referring to the slimepit and its denizens in totality?
Pitters, Slymers, Slymepitters, [insert name of commenter here]. "You lot" just doesn't cut it, at least for me. Might be cultural...
Ah I thought you were objecting to "you lot" on the grounds that oolon is now forever tainted with slime and should be saying "us lot" or similar.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17799

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Lsuoma wrote:
Keating wrote:
decius wrote:As I tried to point out a few times already, the tabloid-like gossip and the high-school-level pseudo-satire focussing on physical defects greatly degrade the quality of the output of these boards. It also provides opportunistic ideologues Peezus with an endless supply of free ammo and with arguments very difficult to refute.
I'm with you here. I found those particular posts cheap humour, and ultimately very petty. As I said before, the pettiness that is often on display here is the only thing preventing me from registering instead of just lurking. That said, PZ's argument is like being flogged with warm lettuce. I suppose it means that all Pharyngula commentators often think about 'snapping necks', that all Australians are racist arseholes, and what ever the colourful commentary of the day is, now that 'porcupines' and 'dying in a fire' are off the table.. What a conga line of suck holes.
I don't particularly like it either, but early discussions showed that it's mgmt censorship or no mgmt censorship: some mgmt censorship wasn't an option, so it's none.

It doesn't matter anyway - the Beardy bastard would still be getting his arsehole torqued because we won't take what he says as gospel, and suck on the wet end of his tiny little pismire...
I agree. I hate jokes based on appearance (apart from the appearance of Greg Laden)
Still, it doesn't take much for PZ to load up his outrage blunderbuss and fire in our direction.
Even they think it is entirely possible that this was a pseudonym for one of their long term Watson/Myers haters.
Peezus Christ.

It's possible in the sense that it's possible that it is anybody. It could be Mrs Trophy wife getting jealous of the time her husband has been spending with a certain blue haired skepchick. It's almost certainly not but it's possible.

There has been no history of anybody on this forum making those kind of threats and many instances of people here condemning them.

Where was PZs concern for condemning violent threats against Justin Griffiths made by his friend Laden? :think:

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17800

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

LMU wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
oolon, slimy turd wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: I don't really like the "you lot" you use all the time here. There's no "us lot". For exemple, some think you're a tedious troll who needs being ignored, while others engage with you (some in a polite maner, so in a bit more rude fashion).
Help please, what is the slime-approved nomenclature for referring to the slimepit and its denizens in totality?
Pitters, Slymers, Slymepitters, [insert name of commenter here]. "You lot" just doesn't cut it, at least for me. Might be cultural...
Ah I thought you were objecting to "you lot" on the grounds that oolon is now forever tainted with slime and should be saying "us lot" or similar.
A very good point. Oolon, welcome in the big Slime family!

Za-zen
.
.
Posts: 2683
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:39 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17801

Post by Za-zen »

What the fftbers don't understand, is that everyone of is here, bar frank, and possibly Abbie, are POE's. we are not part of any inherent reality, and are actually playing the roles of misogynistic hate fappers.

well all, except for maybe Oolon, but since he is the forum token jewish robot gayfish, he doesn't count.

Keating

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17802

Post by Keating »

Lsuoma wrote:I don't particularly like it either, but early discussions showed that it's mgmt censorship or no mgmt censorship: some mgmt censorship wasn't an option, so it's none.
Don't get me wrong, I prefer no censorship too. I agree it's an important part of the way this place functions. The hardest part of fighting for 'free speech' is that it means you have to defend speech that is truly awful. I really don't like the idea of policing what people think. For the most part, what people write or draw should also be unpolicied, especially if it isn't intended for a public audience. For example, a politician who writes about their enjoyment of coprophilia in a private diary absolutely should not have that used against them should it be released without their consent.

I suppose I'm more disappointed that occasionally the discussion here doesn't always soar above the level of Greg Laden. If it was once a week, that'd be one thing, but it happens often enough that, despite the majority, it can often feel petty rather than great.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17803

Post by Tigzy »

decius wrote:As I tried to point out a few times already, the tabloid-like gossip and the high-school-level pseudo-satire focussing on physical defects greatly degrade the quality of the output of these boards. It also provides opportunistic ideologues Peezus with an endless supply of free ammo and with arguments very difficult to refute.

Good job, numbskulls.
Do you honestly think that if these boards were bastions of good taste - but still in opposition to the FfTB/Skepchick/A+ axis - that PZ et al wouldn't get mileage out of exaggerating the tinest nuances of any number of otherwise innocent Slymepit posts, or even just make up a load of old shit to use for ammo anyway? Hell, he's not shy of referring to the Pit as a mysoginist, woman-hating place anyway - even though it clearly isn't - so as far as PZ is concerned, this place is irredeemable no matter whether there are picture of fat women to get cross at or not.

Also, a good number of people - myself included - who are against the FfTB/Skepchick/A+ axis see humour and mockery as a viable way to undercut their self-righteousness and po-faced snootiness. After all, any ideology so sound would be capable of withstanding such mockery quite easily. The problem is, however, is that in an atmosphere of freedom, there will be missteps when it comes to the humor and mockery - and shit, I know I've made a few of them myself. But overall, I reckon it's far more desirable to have such a free atmosphere rather than an alternative where one has to cautiously tread on eggshells all the time for fear of offending the starchy parsons of a board. The odd misstep in humour hurts no-one other the the person making the bad joke. It's not a big deal.

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

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17804

Post by Dick Strawkins »

They don't realize that all the really juicy misogyny isn't here on the main thread but is kept for the secret slymepit backchannel (which, of course, is spelt "slimepit" - damn them for figuring that out! :x )

In fact it's just like FTB - all the real stuff goes on behind the scenes!

decius
.
.
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#17805

Post by decius »

Lsuoma wrote: don't particularly like it either, but early discussions showed that it's mgmt censorship or no mgmt censorship: some mgmt censorship wasn't an option, so it's none.

It doesn't matter anyway - the Beardy bastard would still be getting his arsehole torqued because we won't take what he says as gospel, and suck on the wet end of his tiny little pismire...
No censorship of course. All it takes is a little self-restraint and some discernment over the choice of weaponry.

Virtually every second of Watson's 'keynote speech' provides material for intelligent LULZ and/or for considered rebuttal within range of everyone's skeptical toolbox. What's the fucking point in making visual non-sequiturs and scouring the internet for repulsive material instead?

Locked