Periodic Table of Swearing

[Tony Parsehole]

Sorry. that video of Matt I posted has nothing to do with what happened last night on the forum. It said so in the description.

Pull the trigger before seeing this. My B.

By the by, is the forum going really slow for anyone else? Every other tab I've got opened is running just fine, but even just attempting to move the scroll bar here makes it feel like the whole thing is gonna crash at any moment.

The music thread was doing exactly the same thing. Couldn't scroll down at all and it froze for ages. Thought it was my steam-powered laptop.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Oh, by the way Phil, did you agree to go on the Angry Atheist podcast? I listened to Spacklick(or however he spells it) from the Slyme pit on it and it was pretty interesting.

Yes, it's in the planning. Just a few odd time schedules to work out, but Reap is being very courtuous about it. He's got live shows at the moment, and I've got live being sick and puke all day long as well. I'll let him decide the time and subjects he cares to adress.

Re Matt: he looks a bit like one of my best friends, so it's hard for me to condemn him straight away. And here lies my bias. I am guilty of what I reject. Interesting, on a psyhological level, though...

[bhoytony]

Yes, it's in the planning. Just a few odd time schedules to work out, but Reap is being very courtuous about it. He's got live shows at the moment, and I've got live being sick and puke all day long as well.

You really should leave the Buckfast alone

[JackRayner]

Sorry. that video of Matt I posted has nothing to do with what happened last night on the forum. It said so in the description.

Pull the trigger before seeing this. My B.

By the by, is the forum going really slow for anyone else? Every other tab I've got opened is running just fine, but even just attempting to move the scroll bar here makes it feel like the whole thing is gonna crash at any moment.

The music thread was doing exactly the same thing. Couldn't scroll down at all and it froze for ages. Thought it was my steam-powered laptop.

It's fine now that it's on a newt page....

^What I would have said, until I got to the reply entry page and everything slowed down again...

[cunt]

Oh, by the way Phil, did you agree to go on the Angry Atheist podcast? I listened to Spacklick(or however he spells it) from the Slyme pit on it and it was pretty interesting.

Re Matt: he looks a bit like one of my best friends, so it's hard for me to condemn him straight away. And here lies my bias. I am guilty of what I reject. Interesting, on a psyhological level, though...

Yeah, it's the halo effect. Dillahunty briefly tries to explain it at the start of his video as if he's thought up some new concept. Human beings are prone to irrational thought, what else is new.

[Tony Parsehole]

Re Matt: he looks a bit like one of my best friends, so it's hard for me to condemn him straight away. And here lies my bias. I am guilty of what I reject. Interesting, on a psyhological level, though...

I still have a guilty moment when I slag him off. I was such a big fan of TAE and the Non-Prophets (until they started being so inconsistent with their attitude towards troublesome "facts" reared their collective ugly heads) that I still see a glimmer of hope for his salvation. Unlike PZ who has always been a knob.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Yes, it's in the planning. Just a few odd time schedules to work out, but Reap is being very courtuous about it. He's got live shows at the moment, and I've got live being sick and puke all day long as well.

You really should leave the Buckfast alone

If only, if only....

[rayshul]

Oh, come on! Who cares?

While I didn't comment on the original point, I have zero issue with it all. It's all about the hypocrisy. In my past online life I was very involved in a fat positive forum and community (I like fat guys, heh.). Which also had a bit of a problem with people who preached "be fat positive and happy about your body" and then went off to slag off someone else for their body (whatever type of body it was). They were called out, in a - how the fuck can you bitch about other people mmaking fun of you and turn around and do the same thing - and usually shut up. Same thing here.

This marks one of the few times I'm on the fuck RW side of the argument.

[SPACKlick]

Oh, by the way Phil, did you agree to go on the Angry Atheist podcast? I listened to Spacklick(or however he spells it) from the Slyme pit on it and it was pretty interesting.

Spelt perfectly, and thank you for saying so, haven't had time to listen as yet.

[SPACKlick]

This marks one of the few times I'm on the fuck RW side of the argument.

I never want to be on the fucking RW side of the argument, She might give me her crazy.

[real horrorshow]

And look, I think Stuffy likes me now. She sent me an email!

You have betrayed your gender treachery. You are a gender-traitor-traitor! Report to the Agony Booth!

No! Twas my Evil Twin who signed that nasty thing. I'm the one who signed the GOOD petition pro-Vacula. But, if I run into her, I'll tell her to report to the Agony Booth. I don't even want to know what goes on there.

Something of an SF meme. "The agony booth is a most effective means of discipline."

I'm not holding out hope for Dillahunty...
Even so, he had a wake-up? So what?

For the lulz. Always for the lulz. The only thing that comes close to worrying me about the Baboons is that if they continue to get exponentially more ridiculous it may cause a tear in the fabric of reality. Parody? At this point I don't think I could even imitate them without having my frontal lobes removed with an ice cream scoop!

Speaking of ice cream:

Oh, come on! Who cares?

For all I know Watson, Zvan or Amy could be shaped like a bottle of Coke.

Or they could be the most somking hot women in the world.

Doesn't change the fact that they're full of shit.

Moving on?

It does however effect the quantity of shit which they can contain

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Oh, come on! Who cares?

While I didn't comment on the original point, I have zero issue with it all. It's all about the hypocrisy. In my past online life I was very involved in a fat positive forum and community (I like fat guys, heh.). Which also had a bit of a problem with people who preached "be fat positive and happy about your body" and then went off to slag off someone else for their body (whatever type of body it was). They were called out, in a - how the fuck can you bitch about other people mmaking fun of you and turn around and do the same thing - and usually shut up. Same thing here.

This marks one of the few times I'm on the fuck RW side of the argument.

Oh, Rayshul, I know what you mean:

[youtube]wxYg151urLo[/youtube]

I am the same. Now, let Alicja shoot me in the head. Still, I stand by my statement.

[Saint N.]

Even so, he had a wake-up? So what? The rest of us in the reality-based community knew that Atheism Plus was, at best irrelevant to the work of atheism and skepticism and, at worst, a cynical take-over by second and third-rate bloggers whose form of activism is being ideology-spouting assholes on the internet.

Agreed. Pickles has had plenty of time to see exactly what he experienced, and a lot worse, being done to others on FTB, even if he has not been following A+ forums. Colour me unimpressesd at his epiphany. How did he rationalise the dogpiling and banning on FTB before? What makes him such a special flower that his reasonable questions deserve more respect than those of people he was (and maybe still is) willing to see to called trolls and harassers before?

Matt explains his position on free speech and banning

[youtube]CGGjdZYu4dE[/youtube]

He says some reasonable and some silly things here (IMO), but his constant repetition of "you have no right to be offended" is maddening because that's exactly what we have been saying to FTB/skepchick/A+ for well over a year now.

[Saint N.]

CORRECTION: that should read "no right not to be offended"

[Badger3k]

CORRECTION: that should read "no right not to be offended"

You left off the "except when you are on our side, then it is a natural right"

[Badger3k]

Sorry - no edit button - the bit I added was supposed to go to what Matt was saying. Just for anyone I confused through sloppy writing.

[real horrorshow]

@Tony Parsehole
BTW - what's wrong with Tony Parsons? I do have some sympathy for the guy, considering he probably had to shag Julie Birchill at least once.

Aie yi yi, what a thought! Even Dillahunty may not have it that bad. (It's a close call.)

Considering the trend for making South Park related pictures of familiar faces has anyone slapped a Mr Hat onto that picture of Greg yet? That picture screams Mr. Garrison.

Pre or post op?

Isn't post op the one where he gets his chutney shunted by Dawkins? I'd pay to see that. Mind you, I'd also like to be ringside for the time Laden attempts to make good on his threat to kick Justin Griffith's "fucking ass". The trouble is, I don't see Laden being able to complete both performances in one lifetime.

[Gumby]

The Dillahunty thread continues. Ah, now I know what Dillahunty did wrong.

(To Dillahunty)

I don't think you are a villian. I do think you are unwilling to admit you have contributed to the animosity by not approaching the community here in a friendly manner. Jumping into criticism without at least a 'high guys, love the place' first post, is, at best, borderline trolling.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 305#p22305

Ok, so what I've learned today from of this whole ordeal is that in order to be able to proffer a contrary opinion on the A+Theism forum, one must:

1) Be one of the "cool kids" who is on the pre-approved list of the FTB-o-sphere hoi polloi, and not just one of the insignificant anonymous overwhelming majority rabble that, you know, the forum was ostensibly created for in the first place

2) Approach the altar of the comment box by repeatedly bowing, genuflecting and showering praise upon the mighty A+ forum before offering said opinion.

Thus, and only thus, shall the priests of AtheismPlus be appeased.

What a bunch of fucking tools. I am so glad I ditched that mob of overweening pretentious wankers.

[oolon**]

If you bother to follow the thread when Justin posted that information you will notice that many of us were not fine with the idea.

Yeah sorry again for lumping you *all* in with some statements - again I mean *some*.... I know many here were anti it.

Tell you what, oolon. If you agree that any incidence of doxing automatically excludes you from a position of moral authority in atheism/skepticism, then I'll admit that you are being consistent here.
If not then I'll conclude you are being selective and saying that doxing is only a crime if the opposing side does it, but is completely fair when your side does it and follows through with the personal vendetta (trying to fuck up peoples careers in real life.)

Can't take you up on that as in my comment I made it clear, I thought, that if JV (even him!) backs down and apologises for things that are obviously wrong then he can plainly take a position of moral authority. I agree with Emilys post that JV linked to - as a humanist I have to be soft and squishy and accept that people can change - shunning for all eternity is obviously not rational especially over relatively minor offences (Compared to criminal ones for example). I have problems with the tone on Pharyngula where it is often not clear that the 'Witch of the Week' as you lot put it or the person getting flamed is not in the shithouse for all eternity. People make mistakes and they can be redeemed if they apologise or even accept they made mistakes. It is one of the best things about the atheist-sceptical community - if we are wrong we can say so and move on as we are not held accountable to any 'absolute truth' or 'greater morality' that taint us. Seems one of the worst aspects of this polarising and 'taking sides' as people cannot do it as it sticks in the craw when apologising to your enemy.

... If I'm allowed .... A Question ....
Something struck me about the Slymepit that I have not seen an explanation for. I didn't bring it up as it is obviously a contentious subject and it has probably been discussed to death on here (I couldn't see it tho - maybe the old thread). But reading a few posts from Crommunist and Josh the Spokesgay's comments on gay slurs made me wonder all the more. A lot of people have major issues with the Slymepit due to the use of language here - you are all characterised as saying "Free speech! Its only werds bro!". For example someone above says

... that fucking Crommunist...

in much the same way as I see on here

... that cunt Rebecca/Ophelia/Zvan...

same with Twatson, bint, bitch. Even...

... that faggot Josh...

so why do I never see anything like

...that nigger Crommunist...

I ask because Josh and others have made some pretty good arguments that slurs like faggot are pretty analogous especially given the level of hate and violence associated with the term. Cunt you may argue is different due to different usages but plenty of women will see it in the same way. But here in the land of words are just words, intent is king... Racial slurs seem to be absent. (Or at least a Google shows lot of "niggers" but they are all in scare quotes - I realise I've not been reading much here so this could be my error) Are you all self censoring for ethnic slurs when you justify misogynistic and homophobic slurs as only being words? (You/All = the subset that use/defend the use of slurs)

To be clear I don't use any such slurs if I can help it as they can offend, annoy and upset by merely being in the sentence. I'm happy to offend, annoy and upset but achieving that through just using a contentious word to degrade a person seems like a self defeating exercise. It is attacking the irrelevant attributes of person when the ideas should be the target IMO.

[Badger3k]

The Dillahunty thread continues. Ah, now I know what Dillahunty did wrong.

(To Dillahunty)

I don't think you are a villian. I do think you are unwilling to admit you have contributed to the animosity by not approaching the community here in a friendly manner. Jumping into criticism without at least a 'high guys, love the place' first post, is, at best, borderline trolling.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 305#p22305

Ok, so what I've learned today from of this whole ordeal is that in order to be able to proffer a contrary opinion on the A+Theism forum, one must:

1) Be one of the "cool kids" who is on the pre-approved list of the FTB-o-sphere hoi polloi, and not just one of the insignificant anonymous overwhelming majority rabble that, you know, the forum was ostensibly created for in the first place

2) Approach the altar of the comment box by repeatedly bowing, genuflecting and showering praise upon the mighty A+ forum before offering said opinion.

Thus, and only thus, shall the priests of AtheismPlus be appeased.

What a bunch of fucking tools. I am so glad I ditched that mob of overweening pretentious wankers.

I'm reading one of the Warhammer novels with Thanquol - the skaven. Anyone who's read those books will recognize the behavior - the Ape Lust people are skaven!

Oolon - the point is that we here in the slyme pit don't really care about language - we're adults. We don't make it a habit of writing blog posts about how horrible it is that someone called someone else a cunt or something, and then go and use the same words (or same type of words) against their enemies - it's the hypocrisy again.

[Tony Parsehole]

To be clear I don't use any such slurs if I can help it as they can offend, annoy and upset by merely being in the sentence. I'm happy to offend, annoy and upset but achieving that through just using a contentious word to degrade a person seems like a self defeating exercise. It is attacking the irrelevant attributes of person when the ideas should be the target IMO.

I don't see cunt, twat and bitch as being misogynist or offensive to the vast majority of women in general. If somebody calls someone else a dick i wouldn't say (or think) the person a misandrist for doing so. Where I live cunt and twat means a bastard . No gender specifics. For instance I could say "Jimmy Savile appears to be a cunt and the people who suspected him of being a pedophile but never spoke out are twats".

Nigger and faggot are words I doubt I'd use as I believe they have universal connotations of racism and homophobia. However Crommunist is a cunt and Spokesknob is a twat IMO.

[John Greg]

oolon (http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 400#p16951) asks:

Are you all self censoring for ethnic slurs when you justify misogynistic and homophobic slurs as only being words?

To be fair to you, and us, you need to be more specific, because the definition/specification for racist slurs tends to be fairly clear, whereas the definition/specification for what is considered to be a mysocinstic or homophobic slur is all over the map, both literally and figuratively speaking.

So, if you want a reaslistic answer, I think you need to ask the question word-per-word.

Aslo, using the term "self-censoring" is both inaccurate and loaded. It implies that we would use the "bad-werd" if we had our preferences, but in order to avoid conflict, or keep people happy, or whatever, we are censoring ourselves and not using a word we might ordinarily like to use.

I never ever use the words nigger, or faggot, except in expository or explicatory discourse. That's not self-censorship, it is because those are words I just do not use; they are not part of my everyday vocabulary.

[Tkmlac]

Oh boy. I went looking for a quote from PZ or RW during my little exchange with them and couldn't find it. Too long didn't write: I was nasty about it on twitter, PZ answered me. I apologized for MY behavior and he blocked me. The guy has no integrity.

To be on topic, though, I don't think Matt is going to distance from A+ over this forum thing. He'll chalk it up to a few bad apples and continue on his merry, clueless feminist way.

[AndrewV69]

... If I'm allowed .... A Question ....
Are you all self censoring for ethnic slurs when you justify misogynistic and homophobic slurs as only being words? (You/All = the subset that use/defend the use of slurs)

oolon,

A bit of self reflection would show you that no one here is actually racist, misogynistic or homophobic (to the best of my knowledge anyway).

The question you should be asking yourself is why you see mysogny and homophobia. You should also be asking yourself why you felt it necessary to search for racism.

The above is a clue oolon as to why I enjoy your posts. I have successfully avoided making fun of you in the past, but the earnest lack of clue on your part is so entertaining it has me in stiches.

[rayshul]

The ERV slimepit had multiple conversations about the word nigger and other racial epithets, which I'm sure you could trawl back through the archives to find. From memory the conversation was pretty extensive. Generally I think there was some agreement that intent was what mattered in the use of any word.

[Gumby]

100 posts into the Dillahunty thread, and they still are trying to excuse themselves and make Dillahunty out to be the bad guy. He has to step in and try to explain the fucking obvious to them yet again.
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 331#p22331

Some excerpts (emphasis mine):

I did not hide my identity looking for a 'gotcha' moment. My intent was to show the detractors (people outside of the forum who claim that reasonable objections are not accepted here) that their criticisms of this forum were incorrect. My intent was to show them exactly how to present a fair, reasonable objection by dealing with the facts and offering suggestions on how to handle these issues in the future. Everything in the original post was absolutely sincere and honest (I do have reservations about that particular ban).

My intent was to prove those people wrong. They're not wrong. They're not entirely right, either. Their complaints are often exaggerated, just as people's perceptions of Curious were.

What's annoying is that instead of acknowledging the problem (some have, and some are fixing these problems), some folks are making excuses, rationalizing, trying to paint me as the attacker they wrongly presumed that I was.

Even now, after the facts have been expressed several times, you've incorrectly claim that I admit to having hid my identity in order to push for a 'gotcha' moment. That's not what happened. You've got it exactly backward.[/quote]

Ah, Matt, now that you've been made a target yourself, you can glimpse what so many of the Baboons' victims have gone through for years now. You're finally seeing the M.O. of these people. You are now seeing the desperate and endless twisting these people will go through in order to always be right, never be wrong, and always paint their target as the transgressor. They exaggerate, they lie, they smear and they defame. You're one of their fucking heroes or something, so you are only getting the barest whiff of the lengths these assholes that you have cast your lot with will go to in order to cast themselves in a holy light.

Can you see this at all Matt? Can you finally start to fucking understand why so many people (and not just the Slimepit) are so utterly contemptuous of these morons? Argumentum ad populum fallacy, yeah yeah I know, acknowledged in advance, but when so many people are so disgusted and dismayed by the FTB/AtheismPlus/Skepchick people, don't you think it's time to put on your skeptic's hat and give a deep ponder as to why? After all, if a not-insignificant portion of the atheist/skeptic communities are calling you a raging asshole, could it be, just maybe, that you actually are a raging asshole?

Come on, man, look at what this is for what it really is: apologetics. That thread, (and the whole AtheismPlus forum, and most of Freethoughtblogs, and Skepchick) you're involved in might as well be full of Christian fundies trying to excuse their own awful behavior by saying that they're "saved" and it's all your fault because you "hate God". You've been guilty of the same "right at all costs" style of argumentation as well. Ever debate fundies online? Sure you have. That's why this surely seems so familiar to you.

Wake up, Dill-man, before it's too late. Be a fan of A+ and FTB, whatever. But at least show you've still got some skeptic stones and call this bullshit out for what it is. Quit pussyfooting around, because right now you look awful fucking weak.

[oolon**]

... If I'm allowed .... A Question ....
Are you all self censoring for ethnic slurs when you justify misogynistic and homophobic slurs as only being words? (You/All = the subset that use/defend the use of slurs)

oolon,

A bit of self reflection would show you that no one here is actually racist, misogynistic or homophobic (to the best of my knowledge anyway).

The question you should be asking yourself is why you see mysogny and homophobia. You should also be asking yourself why you felt it necessary to search for racism.

The above is a clue oolon as to why I enjoy your posts. I have successfully avoided making fun of you in the past, but the earnest lack of clue on your part is so entertaining it has me in stiches.

Hehe glad to make you laugh... You really think I'm fishing for racism though? I don't think use of words is proof of misogyny or racism, but I think the FtB'ers have a point that it can be pretty indicative. Like some above I'd not be comfortable with people using the word 'faggot' to describe a gay man so why do you let that happen here with no complaint? Just wondering why the same never occurs for racist terms (use or complaint however) -- is it easier to ignore homophobic and misogynist language (not intent) than racist for you - hence the 'self-censoring' part.

I'm glad your Clouseau 'clue' is that you have got me 'pegged' as I was wondering if you had some nutty conspiracy theory about me like sacha.

[Tony Parsehole]

Loving this comment from the "Dillahunty sees the truth of A+" thread:
"I don't listen to criticism from complete strangers. You want me to believe you have our best interests at heart? Then hang out, post some food porn, indulge in some conversation, be sympathetic to someone in the support forum, whatever, but attempt to be one of us."

So...Just post some pics of tasty dinner and say you "feel the pain" of any whinging mong who posts a thread up and you are on board with A+! Do all that and they will listen to you. Until then you are a troll and don't you fucking dare claim otherwise.

Has anyone else notice in that thread how they "banned " the user Curious for being a sockpuppet but Matt Dillahunty is still not banned EVEN THOUGH HE ADMITTED he was the Curious sockpuppet? What the fuck is the point in banning the sockpuppet if the actual member is still allowed to post?

[Saint N.]

Scented, someone's been cruising through your Gender Traitor talking points,

[youtube]7ylZmsV_Ok4[/youtube]

Putting the theism into A+theism

[youtube]kmwNo0_xz7M[/youtube]

[Tony Parsehole]

100 posts into the Dillahunty thread, and they still are trying to excuse themselves and make Dillahunty out to be the bad guy. He has to step in and try to explain the fucking obvious to them yet again.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/styles/pr ... target.gif

Prospective Aplusser "Jess" is turned off by the forums attitude to new members and explains why in an articulate fashion. Shame the replies don't afford her the same courtesy.

[John Greg]

oolon, you are dishonest and disingenuous in these discussions.

For example, I explained in simple terms why your use of such qualifiers as "self-censorship" is dishonest, inaccurate, and manipulative, yet you persist in misrepresenting the dialogue.

There are several other instances where you reshape, restructure, and misrepresent the words, terms, phrases, and entire arguments of others in an attempt to force a conclusion that satisfies your bias.

In a sense, all of your arguments present or structure themselves as a sort of extended version of "When did you stop beating your wife".

And that's really despicable manipulation of the conversation.

[Tony Parsehole]

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... =75#p22200

Sorry! Link fail. Yes I am a retard.

[Tony Parsehole]

Sorry for the spam but I'm going to bed soon so meh. This from the Matt Dillahunty A+ thread :-
"Related to that is (as Pteryxx phrased it) the notion of Schroedinger's Troll. If we accept that we don't necessarily have the privilege of offering "good faith", we're in a similar position where, for the safety of those here, mods and users have to assume (until evidence is received to the contrary) that any new user is a potential troll and act accordingly. The actions "Curious" took (a new user, zero posts, challenging moderators, disputing a ban, etc.) provided no such evidence of "good faith" and, instead, could easily be construed as troll-type behavior."


ARRRRGGGHHH.... Schrodingers Troll!!!?? What the fuck! Can they twist Schrodinger's thought experiment any more? they are basically using it to say "Well you can never know anything, EVER, so always assume the worst...." Wow. So humanist.

[Scented Nectar]

Scented, someone's been cruising through your Gender Traitor talking points,

7ylZmsV_Ok4

Putting the theism into A+theism

kmwNo0_xz7M

I enjoyed those, and I subscribed to the youtuber as well. Is that you?

[Gumby]

100 posts into the Dillahunty thread, and they still are trying to excuse themselves and make Dillahunty out to be the bad guy. He has to step in and try to explain the fucking obvious to them yet again.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/styles/pr ... target.gif

Prospective Aplusser "Jess" is turned off by the forums attitude to new members and explains why in an articulate fashion. Shame the replies don't afford her the same courtesy.

Here's the link, you broke it:
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 200#p22200

Jess did do very well, and got fairly shat on for his/her trouble.

[Badger3k]

Sorry 'bout that - I wanted to comment on the one post and skimmed oolon's and misread it - I didn't realize it until a few minutes later when I stopped for gas (I posted right before I left work). Not sure of an answer on his question - I tend not to use them because they have connotations that the other words don't have. If the baboons want to use "dick" but "twat" is bad - that's hypocrisy. I think, from six years teaching in a public high school in a lower income area, that "nigger" is going the way of "gay" - I hear it more used in so many different ways it was like when I joined the army and found out "fuck" was used in a million different ways and lost the "ooh - bad word" effect. It just became another word. Maybe when the current generation has died out, or even two or three, words like "nigger" will have lost the hate-filled connotations of those who lived through the civil rights era. Unless we keep telling people that the words are bad (and even then, even when explaining, it doesn't sink in to the kids, because they haven't known it only as bad - to them, it's just another word) and they accept that, the meanings will change, along with the connotations, as so many other words have done.

Languages change over time. No big deal.

[real horrorshow]

100 posts into the Dillahunty thread, and they still are trying to excuse themselves and make Dillahunty out to be the bad guy.

Now locked for the night so they can all have a hot chocolate and sleepy time to recover.

One Richard_Austin bleats

Discussing this with Pteryxx elsewhere, a couple of related concepts came up that are really relevant here.

The first is about good faith. The notion that "good faith" should be assumed is a privileged position: it assumes that one is safe and secure enough to take the risk that is inherent in such an assumption. Some people don't have that safety and security - and the history of the forums here proves that this is one such place were "good faith" is extremely costly, given the huge amount of trolling that takes place.

Related to that is (as Pteryxx phrased it) the notion of Schroedinger's Troll. If we accept that we don't necessarily have the privilege of offering "good faith", we're in a similar position where, for the safety of those here, mods and users have to assume (until evidence is received to the contrary) that any new user is a potential troll and act accordingly. The actions "Curious" took (a new user, zero posts, challenging moderators, disputing a ban, etc.) provided no such evidence of "good faith" and, instead, could easily be construed as troll-type behavior.

Such delicate little blossoms! They lack the privilege-power to rise from their fainting couch and do someone the courtesy of assuming – until proven otherwise – that they're not a troll. It's too 'costly' to their 'safety'. Really? What's being expended? What's at risk? They're only burbling to each other on the Web, yet they talk as if they're fighting for their lives.

So, assume everyone is the enemy and get your retaliation in first. Good luck with that as the foundation of your 'movement'. Oh, and 'Schroedinger's Troll', has that been sighted before or is it a new one for the Bestiary? Poor old Erwin, spinning in his grave I expect.

[Tristan]

Poor old Erwin, spinning in his grave I expect.

This is, of course, incorrect. The current contretemps has instead put him into a superposition of face-up and face-down in his grave.

[Saint N.]

Scented, someone's been cruising through your Gender Traitor talking points,

[youtube]7ylZmsV_Ok4[/youtube]

Putting the theism into A+theism

kmwNo0_xz7M

I enjoyed those, and I subscribed to the youtuber as well. Is that you?

No, it's not me. I just casually stumbled upon the videos and thought some others here would enjoy it as well. I have to say the widescale rejection of A+theism by youtube atheists has brought my attention to a number of vloggers I hadn't heard of before that are definitely worth checking out for their thoughts on other topics too.

[rayshul]

Ee, that made me grin, Badger. I still believe pretty firmly that words are not bad and that banning a word gives it a power it doesn't deserve. Yay for the next generation.

[real horrorshow]

Bugger, Parsehole ninja'd me.
Still, at least I can take comfort in the fact that I'm not 'ableist' and oolon wont sniff at me...

any whinging mong...

But wait...

Yes I am a retard.

Oh noes! Caught weilding my non-retard privilege.
Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa.
(How do the baboons keep this up?)

[Badger3k]

Ee, that made me grin, Badger. I still believe pretty firmly that words are not bad and that banning a word gives it a power it doesn't deserve. Yay for the next generation.

Yeah - we are the only ones who can give words power. When you try to tell a kid that a word he uses has meanings he really doesn't associate with it, and expect them to feel it and take it to heart....not smart.

To be fair, there are also a lot of writing, such as Churchill's speech, or FDR's Pearl Harbor, or even a lot of talks I hear nowadays, that resonate with us emotionally and have that kind of power too, so it goes both ways.

[Steersman]

Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:20 pm
.....
It is one of the best things about the atheist-sceptical community - if we are wrong we can say so and move on as we are not held accountable to any 'absolute truth' or 'greater morality' that taint us. Seems one of the worst aspects of this polarising and 'taking sides' as people cannot do it as it sticks in the craw when apologising to your enemy.

Good points there oolon, particularly about the sticking in the craw, the degree of which seems directly proportional to the extent to which one has invested emotional capital into a particular position. However I have to ask you when we might expect an apology from PZ Myers and Greg Laden for tarring all MRAs with the same brush, for these decidedly categorical statements from them:

The question of whether or not MRAs are sexist misogynist jerks that need not be taken seriously was settled a long time ago.

Why do I despise MRAs? PZ Myers
Because they are narcissistic clueless psychopaths, that’s why.

And that in spite of the semi-retraction by the Southern Poverty Law Centre that there is some justification for some MRA arguments:

It should be mentioned that the SPLC did not label MRAs as members of a hate movement; nor did our article claim that the grievances they air on their websites – false rape accusations, ruinous divorce settlements and the like – are all without merit.

Particularly in light of Jason Thibeault’s self-identification as a “real MRA” and his support for one of the same causes – reduction of prison rape, mostly of men – espoused by Paul Elam of A Voice for Men. My gosh, if that is not a prima facie case of “guilt by association” - at least as bad as if not worse than Justin Vacula posting on AVfM - then I can’t possibly think of a better one ....

So then oolon, what do you think of the odds of those forthcoming apologies? When pigs fly? On the Second Coming of Christ? ....

[Saint N.]

Such delicate little blossoms! They lack the privilege-power to rise from their fainting couch and do someone the courtesy of assuming – until proven otherwise – that they're not a troll. It's too 'costly' to their 'safety'. Really? What's being expended? What's at risk? They're only burbling to each other on the Web, yet they talk as if they're fighting for their lives.

The problem with all of them using the "we're constantly being attacked by trolls, so we can't afford to take even the mildest form of criticism in good faith" line, is that Matt's venture into their forum as 'Curious' gives validity to the argument that their tolerance level for what is and isn't to be considered appropriate is pretty low to begin with. So how do we know that all of these other supposed 'trolls' weren't as equally sincere as Matt in their comments and unjustifiably got the boot from a bunch of oversensitive mods? We don't, we just have to take their word on good faith. A generosity they're not willing to extend to anyone else outside of their established circle of insiders.

As far as the sockpuppetry charge goes, Matt should have know that 'Radial Tire' is the only A+ approved forum nym available.

[John Greg]

... there are also a lot of writing, such as Churchill's speech, or FDR's Pearl Harbor, or even a lot of talks I hear nowadays, that resonate with us emotionally and have that kind of power too, so it goes both ways.

No, it doesn't really go both ways. What you are reacting to is not the individual words, possibly not even the individual short phrases. You are reacting to the context, the intent, the circumstance, and the careful construction of the whole.

And that is what these lily pads at Skepchick and FfTB so willfully ignore.

[Tony Parsehole]

(How do the baboons keep this up?)

You are either a baboon or you ain't and if you have to ask....You ain't.

[Gumby]

100 posts into the Dillahunty thread, and they still are trying to excuse themselves and make Dillahunty out to be the bad guy.

Now locked for the night so they can all have a hot chocolate and sleepy time to recover.

One Richard_Austin bleats

Discussing this with Pteryxx elsewhere, a couple of related concepts came up that are really relevant here.

The first is about good faith. The notion that "good faith" should be assumed is a privileged position: it assumes that one is safe and secure enough to take the risk that is inherent in such an assumption. Some people don't have that safety and security - and the history of the forums here proves that this is one such place were "good faith" is extremely costly, given the huge amount of trolling that takes place.

Related to that is (as Pteryxx phrased it) the notion of Schroedinger's Troll. If we accept that we don't necessarily have the privilege of offering "good faith", we're in a similar position where, for the safety of those here, mods and users have to assume (until evidence is received to the contrary) that any new user is a potential troll and act accordingly. The actions "Curious" took (a new user, zero posts, challenging moderators, disputing a ban, etc.) provided no such evidence of "good faith" and, instead, could easily be construed as troll-type behavior.

Such delicate little blossoms! They lack the privilege-power to rise from their fainting couch and do someone the courtesy of assuming – until proven otherwise – that they're not a troll. It's too 'costly' to their 'safety'. Really? What's being expended? What's at risk? They're only burbling to each other on the Web, yet they talk as if they're fighting for their lives.

So, assume everyone is the enemy and get your retaliation in first. Good luck with that as the foundation of your 'movement'. Oh, and 'Schroedinger's Troll', has that been sighted before or is it a new one for the Bestiary? Poor old Erwin, spinning in his grave I expect.

For all the vitriol and bluster these morons sling, they're just too delicate to be on the internet. Go figure.

[Gumby]

(How do the baboons keep this up?)

You are either a baboon Christian or you ain't and if you have to ask....You ain't.

Same thing. Fucking cults, how do they work?

[Badger3k]

... there are also a lot of writing, such as Churchill's speech, or FDR's Pearl Harbor, or even a lot of talks I hear nowadays, that resonate with us emotionally and have that kind of power too, so it goes both ways.

No, it doesn't really go both ways. What you are reacting to is not the individual words, possibly not even the individual short phrases. You are reacting to the context, the intent, the circumstance, and the careful construction of the whole.

And that is what these lily pads at Skepchick and FfTB so willfully ignore.

True, but I could have been clearer - what I meant was that words have power that we give them, and that power could be for good or bad, depending on all those things you said. I agree, It really isn't the same thing, but I think there are elements that are shared - for some people, the emotional reaction to the words gives them the power they think they have - but they expect others to have the same reaction. Someone who grew up in the South in the 60s-70s (or before) definitely will have different reactions (and emotions, etc) to the word "nigger" than my students today. I just don't think it right to try to force those kids to have the same reaction that I might have - especially since within (hopefully) 50+ years, I'll be gone and they'll be shaping the world (or their kids or grandkids will), and they'll go in the direction they will. I can try to influence it, but in the end it will be up to them, the same as it was for us and everyone else.

Sorry to get a bit longwinded - we had professional development today, and while that wasn't covered, it did come up earlier in the day so it's been on my mind.

[John Greg]

This is a must-see. Someone named Pricsilla Parker is claiming that Greg Laden was completely within his rights to attack Justin Griffith because Justin Griffith deserved it. And they go no to say that Griffith is facing criminal charges for cyberstalking!

link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... ent-126055

Greg Laden was thrown off ftb because he had the audacity to confronted Justin Griffith about his immature and insulting behavior. He was provoked into responding the way he did. Justin Griffith plays the victim time and again and it’s high time he stops being coddled and called on his derisive and harassing tactics. He attacked me, deliberately, on August 26th in a blog that was removed from ftb the same day and then was reposted on rock beyond beliefs website. He is now facing criminal charges for cyberbullying and harassment because after being given several warnings, he refuses to simply remove the blog.

Stephanie, you and others did the right thing defending Mr. Laden. I hope FTB reassess what happened with that situation in light of this. His presence at FTB should be considered an insult to the rest of the bloggers, especially the woman. He is not welcomed in the local atheist community around Fort Bragg because of his behavior and he his presence here should be reconsidered.

Fascinating stuff; endlessly fascinating stuff.

[sacha]

Apparent indefensible rape apologist & chill girl here -- questioned Rebecca Watson... After she called me a twit, I called her a bitch... Glad to be here.

Welcome.

Post a bit more and I'll send you an invitation to join GTI.

[Badger3k]

100 posts into the Dillahunty thread, and they still are trying to excuse themselves and make Dillahunty out to be the bad guy.

Now locked for the night so they can all have a hot chocolate and sleepy time to recover.

One Richard_Austin bleats

Discussing this with Pteryxx elsewhere, a couple of related concepts came up that are really relevant here.

The first is about good faith. The notion that "good faith" should be assumed is a privileged position: it assumes that one is safe and secure enough to take the risk that is inherent in such an assumption. Some people don't have that safety and security - and the history of the forums here proves that this is one such place were "good faith" is extremely costly, given the huge amount of trolling that takes place.

Related to that is (as Pteryxx phrased it) the notion of Schroedinger's Troll. If we accept that we don't necessarily have the privilege of offering "good faith", we're in a similar position where, for the safety of those here, mods and users have to assume (until evidence is received to the contrary) that any new user is a potential troll and act accordingly. The actions "Curious" took (a new user, zero posts, challenging moderators, disputing a ban, etc.) provided no such evidence of "good faith" and, instead, could easily be construed as troll-type behavior.

Such delicate little blossoms! They lack the privilege-power to rise from their fainting couch and do someone the courtesy of assuming – until proven otherwise – that they're not a troll. It's too 'costly' to their 'safety'. Really? What's being expended? What's at risk? They're only burbling to each other on the Web, yet they talk as if they're fighting for their lives.

So, assume everyone is the enemy and get your retaliation in first. Good luck with that as the foundation of your 'movement'. Oh, and 'Schroedinger's Troll', has that been sighted before or is it a new one for the Bestiary? Poor old Erwin, spinning in his grave I expect.

For all the vitriol and bluster these morons sling, they're just too delicate to be on the internet. Go figure.

Listening to Reap on his "angry atheist" podcast, he mentioned internet dramas (this was an older one, not the newest), but as I said before, I used to get so caught up in the forum "scene" that I let it take over my life, and spent hours online, and conflicts online bled over into real life. So I took a break - just stopped posting anywhere, and just got on with my life. Now I'm better and while I still like these things, I try not to take anything with me (except funny stories, things the baboons provide in spades). The A+ forum seems to be a haven for the deranged and damaged, the delicate little snowflakes that are too special to face the Wild West of the internet. It is amazing how their "inclusive" movement is so distrustful of those not already in.

[Tony Parsehole]

This is a must-see. Someone named Pricsilla Parker is claiming that Greg Laden was completely within his rights to attack Justin Griffith because Justin Griffith deserved it. And they go no to say that Griffith is facing criminal charges for cyberstalking!

link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... ent-126055

Greg Laden was thrown off ftb because he had the audacity to confronted Justin Griffith about his immature and insulting behavior. He was provoked into responding the way he did. Justin Griffith plays the victim time and again and it’s high time he stops being coddled and called on his derisive and harassing tactics. He attacked me, deliberately, on August 26th in a blog that was removed from ftb the same day and then was reposted on rock beyond beliefs website. He is now facing criminal charges for cyberbullying and harassment because after being given several warnings, he refuses to simply remove the blog.

Stephanie, you and others did the right thing defending Mr. Laden. I hope FTB reassess what happened with that situation in light of this. His presence at FTB should be considered an insult to the rest of the bloggers, especially the woman. He is not welcomed in the local atheist community around Fort Bragg because of his behavior and he his presence here should be reconsidered.

Fascinating stuff; endlessly fascinating stuff.

This smells like Poe to me.....A bit too enthusiastic maybe? Is the poster a regular? I

[AndrewV69]

Hehe glad to make you laugh... You really think I'm fishing for racism though?

I think you need to reread how you phrased your original query and the basis for it. The trap is that no matter how impeccable the logic, if the basic premise is off the mark, the likelyhood for a conclusion congruent with reality is improbable.

In short, Answers are easy. It is the questions that are hard.

I don't think use of words is proof of misogyny or racism, but I think the FtB'ers have a point that it can be pretty indicative. Like some above I'd not be comfortable with people using the word 'faggot' to describe a gay man so why do you let that happen here with no complaint? Just wondering why the same never occurs for racist terms (use or complaint however) -- is it easier to ignore homophobic and misogynist language (not intent) than racist for you - hence the 'self-censoring' part.

Speaking for myself, and only for myself, most of the faggots I know refer to themselves as faggots, and have no objection to my using the term either.

As for the word "nigger" or suchlike, most of the blacks I know happen to be Nigerian, and they never use that term (of course they are all elitist, the least educated one has only a BSc) and neither do I, because it simply is not part of our vocabulary.

My Hakka in-laws on the other hand are generally amused every time I refer to myself as a gweilo.

But I can be offensive when I want to be simply for the amusement value. The expressions on people faces when I refer to Obama as Bush in black-face are priceless:

George_obama.png

(241.69 KiB) Downloaded 262 times

I'm glad your Clouseau 'clue' is that you have got me 'pegged' as I was wondering if you had some nutty conspiracy theory about me like sacha.

No no no. I have not thought about you often enough to form any theories about you. I just accept you as you appear to be.

[rayshul]

This smells like Poe to me.....A bit too enthusiastic maybe? Is the poster a regular? I

Priscilla Parker is making my Poe-radar beep too, especially as Laden is slutting around the fringes of society again. (I picture him leaving a thread of oozy gunk behind him.) Not suggesting sock puppetry but possibly some form of puppetry. ^_^

[Tony Parsehole]

This smells like Poe to me.....A bit too enthusiastic maybe? Is the poster a regular? I

Priscilla Parker is making my Poe-radar beep too, especially as Laden is slutting around the fringes of society again. (I picture him leaving a thread of oozy gunk behind him.) Not suggesting sock puppetry but possibly some form of puppetry. ^_^

Just a friendly troll getting his/her lulz for the day. Can't say I blame 'em.

[Badger3k]

This is a must-see. Someone named Pricsilla Parker is claiming that Greg Laden was completely within his rights to attack Justin Griffith because Justin Griffith deserved it. And they go no to say that Griffith is facing criminal charges for cyberstalking!

link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... ent-126055

Greg Laden was thrown off ftb because he had the audacity to confronted Justin Griffith about his immature and insulting behavior. He was provoked into responding the way he did. Justin Griffith plays the victim time and again and it’s high time he stops being coddled and called on his derisive and harassing tactics. He attacked me, deliberately, on August 26th in a blog that was removed from ftb the same day and then was reposted on rock beyond beliefs website. He is now facing criminal charges for cyberbullying and harassment because after being given several warnings, he refuses to simply remove the blog.

Stephanie, you and others did the right thing defending Mr. Laden. I hope FTB reassess what happened with that situation in light of this. His presence at FTB should be considered an insult to the rest of the bloggers, especially the woman. He is not welcomed in the local atheist community around Fort Bragg because of his behavior and he his presence here should be reconsidered.

Fascinating stuff; endlessly fascinating stuff.

A while back, there was a post - from an atheist soldier - about a woman he had an affair with (he got drunk, one thing led to another) and this led to harassment and stalking by her - and I thought for sure it was Justin. The soldier was married, and I thought there was something about recruiting in there as well. Not sure what Justin is doing now. It was a pretty weird post, and I pretty much ignored it, but if it was Justin, then it is gone now. If, and that is a huge if, since my memory may be completely faulty, it was JG, then I could see this as the person who was stalking him. But, as I said, I could be completely full of it since I didn't save the post or any link to it in my feed, and if it was at Rock Beyond Belief it is gone, but if anyone else remembers reading such a post chime in - this stirred my memory and it won't go away now. If the woman is referring to the same post I am, then it is gone now.

OK - never mind - it has been moved and I've was right. It is the same woman. Just look in the archives for that day.

[Badger3k]

The post has moved but the comments are still there.

[Steersman]

Ee, that made me grin, Badger. I still believe pretty firmly that words are not bad and that banning a word gives it a power it doesn't deserve. Yay for the next generation.

Yeah - we are the only ones who can give words power. When you try to tell a kid that a word he uses has meanings he really doesn't associate with it, and expect them to feel it and take it to heart....not smart.

To be fair, there are also a lot of writing, such as Churchill's speech, or FDR's Pearl Harbor, or even a lot of talks I hear nowadays, that resonate with us emotionally and have that kind of power too, so it goes both ways.

Agreed.

Apropos of which, my earlier comment to rayshul which includes a link to a routine by the comedian Lenny Bruce on the topic of the power we invest in words:

... I'm personally against banning words and I think James Onen has a sweet post on Rational Ugandan about use of swearwords/whether or not they are good/what's to be done... etc...

Generally I agree with you on the banning – I definitely tend to think that that only tends to make the words more vicious; kind of silly in a way, school-yardish, the more they’re whispered about, the more power they have to shock and wound. You might be interested, if you haven’t run across it before, in a routine by an old, now dead, comedian, Lenny Bruce on the topic.

And similarly, a comment on James Onen’s post noted above:

Denying the gods does not allow one to escape rampant human bias. Theism is merely one symptom of our mostly non-rational and irrational primate brains – there are many other symptoms that atheists rarely escape. We, too, are often dogmatic. We, too, abandon reason and evidence to support opinions that just “feel right” to us.

AtheismPlus writ large, although unfortunately not exclusive to them ….

[AndrewV69]

This smells like Poe to me.....A bit too enthusiastic maybe? Is the poster a regular? I

Priscilla Parker is making my Poe-radar beep too, especially as Laden is slutting around the fringes of society again. (I picture him leaving a thread of oozy gunk behind him.) Not suggesting sock puppetry but possibly some form of puppetry. ^_^

Hmmmm.... the puppetry of the penis?