Periodic Table of Swearing

Continuation of the post at Abbie Smith's ERV blog (http://scienceblogs.com/erv/)

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby CommanderTuvok » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:43 pm  •  [Post 20701]

AKAHorace wrote:Oolong may have been wrong about some things but meant well, tried to defend us on PZ's site and got banned because of it.

Is he a variety of tea? We all know the shit that can develop with references to tea and coffee!!!
User avatar
CommanderTuvok
.
.
 
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby rayshul » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:43 pm  •  [Post 20702]

AKAHorace wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Seriously. Why the fuck would I want to burn my eyes and perform fellatio on my brain by reading something from Oolong if I *know* it's going to be double dipped in shit? It seems to me that the most reasonable option is to place them in the "foe" list and not read their constant stream of diarrhea. Fairly simple, right?


This is a bit like the mentality of the Pharyngulites. You sound like Sally Strange when you write like this.

Oolong may have been wrong about some things but meant well, tried to defend us on PZ's site and got banned because of it.


No, the Pharyngulites want to stop you commenting. That's the important difference.

I've mentioned my feelings on this before, in relation to Oolon, if you don't think you are willing to engage with someone because you find the way they act unpleasant and feel to do so is going to piss you off... then you don't have to. There's nothing about free speech that says you have to read everything or engage with everything. Do what's comfortable for you, but don't impose on what anyone else wants to do/who they want to interact with.
"My hyper-important vagina is offended, appease it at once!" - Philip of Tealand
User avatar
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 2291
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Dilurk » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:47 pm  •  [Post 20703]

rayshul wrote:
AKAHorace wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Seriously. Why the fuck would I want to burn my eyes and perform fellatio on my brain by reading something from Oolong if I *know* it's going to be double dipped in shit? It seems to me that the most reasonable option is to place them in the "foe" list and not read their constant stream of diarrhea. Fairly simple, right?


This is a bit like the mentality of the Pharyngulites. You sound like Sally Strange when you write like this.

Oolong may have been wrong about some things but meant well, tried to defend us on PZ's site and got banned because of it.


No, the Pharyngulites want to stop you commenting. That's the important difference.

I've mentioned my feelings on this before, in relation to Oolon, if you don't think you are willing to engage with someone because you find the way they act unpleasant and feel to do so is going to piss you off... then you don't have to. There's nothing about free speech that says you have to read everything or engage with everything. Do what's comfortable for you, but don't impose on what anyone else wants to do/who they want to interact with.


And I have made the suggestion it not be further done on this thread. Oolon is a waste of a supernova.
User avatar
Dilurk
.
.
 
Posts: 1215
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:04 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:48 pm  •  [Post 20704]

rayshul wrote:
I've mentioned my feelings on this before, in relation to Oolon, if you don't think you are willing to engage with someone because you find the way they act unpleasant and feel to do so is going to piss you off... then you don't have to. There's nothing about free speech that says you have to read everything or engage with everything. Do what's comfortable for you, but don't impose on what anyone else wants to do/who they want to interact with.


Yup, spot on.
"It is science we are talking about here. It doesn't matter if you like the person making the argument. Sometimes the evidence supports the nice people and sometimes complete bastards are on the correct side of a scientific argument." -Strawkins
User avatar
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 6345
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:56 pm
Location: Nice, France

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby CommanderTuvok » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:52 pm  •  [Post 20705]

Re: Oolon crying.

He can't really complain when people choose NOT to read his tripe, especially as he didn't raise the issue (AFAIK) about moderation and censorship over at Baboon Central.

The Pit is a space where you don't get censored - something increasingly rare in the Atheist/Skeptic community.
User avatar
CommanderTuvok
.
.
 
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:53 pm  •  [Post 20706]

Dilurk wrote:
And I have made the suggestion it not be further done on this thread. Oolon is a waste of a supernova.


And I do not agree with you here. When it comes to snakes, music, bicycles and sexuality, other threads can be open easily. Oolon, while being a pain in the ass at times, seems to kinda stick to the main topics of this thread (FC5/6/7 and A+). I see no reasons so far to send s/h/i/t to another thread. Just skip the posts, easy as pie.
"It is science we are talking about here. It doesn't matter if you like the person making the argument. Sometimes the evidence supports the nice people and sometimes complete bastards are on the correct side of a scientific argument." -Strawkins
User avatar
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 6345
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:56 pm
Location: Nice, France

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:55 pm  •  [Post 20707]

CommanderTuvok wrote:Re: Oolon crying.

He can't really complain when people choose NOT to read his tripe, especially as he didn't raise the issue (AFAIK) about moderation and censorship over at Baboon Central.

The Pit is a space where you don't get censored - something increasingly rare in the Atheist/Skeptic community.


Mostly my point.
"It is science we are talking about here. It doesn't matter if you like the person making the argument. Sometimes the evidence supports the nice people and sometimes complete bastards are on the correct side of a scientific argument." -Strawkins
User avatar
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 6345
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:56 pm
Location: Nice, France

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:16 pm  •  [Post 20708]

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Mines would be :

Image

Image

Pretty basic, I know.


ain't nothing wrong with dose, all four of them.
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby franc » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:18 pm  •  [Post 20709]

acathode wrote:You have more or less the same reaction when you try to point out the problems with their Schrödinger's Rapist shtick, assuming they can't banhammer your ass and instead keep up the discussion, they always seem to end up with insisting that 1) all the problems you list are null and void, because you don't simply didn't understand SR, and 2) it's not at all meant as a insult or a way to just shut down any discussion.
An excuse that quickly fall apart when you look at the way the A+ers actually use SR, basically throwing it at anyone "who just doesn't get it".


This is always hilarious, especially when the Talking Prune is involved. From her B&W "about" -

Fighting fashionable nonsense

At the beginning it focused mainly on various kinds of pseudoscience and epistemic relativism, aka postmodernism. The latter prompted an increasing focus on moral or cultural relativism and a defense of universalism and human rights.


I just wish cobweb cunt would clarify, her wording is ambiguous. Does she fight this stuff (which is being dishonest) or use it as a business model (which makes everything make sense)?
smilies are for reetards | reason is overrated | "Home is where the floor is." -- X | “The citizen's job is to be rude - to pierce the comfort of professional intercourse by boorish expressions of doubt” -- John Ralston Saul
User avatar
franc
.
.
 
Posts: 1770
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:03 pm
Location: Kosmopolites

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:37 pm  •  [Post 20710]

I'll try to clarify my position before hitting the pillow:

JCW: Agreed, nothing wrong at all. I was 9 at the time, so with inflation it would be 7 boobs by now, if my math isn't too fucked up.

As for Oolon, I think as long as they get answers from commenters here, they cannot claim censorship or banning. They can say whatever they want anywhere else, but the fact that people here adress them, on the main thread, even, is proff there is no censorship. And to do it politely is even more potent. Feel free to disagree, that's just my stance.

Pillow, head, meet you after toothbrush.

G'night all!
"It is science we are talking about here. It doesn't matter if you like the person making the argument. Sometimes the evidence supports the nice people and sometimes complete bastards are on the correct side of a scientific argument." -Strawkins
User avatar
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 6345
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:56 pm
Location: Nice, France

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby TheMan » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:37 pm  •  [Post 20711]

welch wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Mines would be :

Image

Image

Pretty basic, I know.


ain't nothing wrong with dose, all four of them.



I had a self reflecting giggle at my paranoia this morning catching up on the pit on tapatalk in a crowded bus.
It wasn't me....
User avatar
TheMan
.
.
 
Posts: 666
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:56 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Dilurk » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:44 pm  •  [Post 20712]

Image
User avatar
Dilurk
.
.
 
Posts: 1215
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:04 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:51 pm  •  [Post 20713]

TheMan wrote:



I had a self reflecting giggle at my paranoia this morning catching up on the pit on tapatalk in a crowded bus.



Maybe you are not familiar with French newspaper kiosques:

https://www.google.com/search?num=100&h ... 0AWYooDIDw

(sorry for the long URL, heading to bed).

We here don't really care about images of naked or semi-naked women. Porn magazines (and I'm not talking Play Boy here) are very common on public displays. Make of that what you will.

Ok, pillow!
"It is science we are talking about here. It doesn't matter if you like the person making the argument. Sometimes the evidence supports the nice people and sometimes complete bastards are on the correct side of a scientific argument." -Strawkins
User avatar
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 6345
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:56 pm
Location: Nice, France

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Steersman » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:53 pm  •  [Post 20714]

ReneeHendricks wrote:
Steersman wrote:….
But you still haven’t addressed the fact that, at least from my perspective, Dilurk’s accusation against him – “argumentum ad populum” is apparently wrong. Maybe you’ll take my word for it and maybe you’ll take Dilurk’s. But if I’m right and in the latter case then you’re going to be wrong but thinking you’re right – somewhat problematic to say the least and not really consistent with being a skeptic ….


My point - you can read a shit ton of stuff I've put out over the years as Renee Hendricks and as Susanne Bullo. If you find it to be a giant heap of crap, you can opt not to read future stuff by me. If, in the future, my particular "bent" changes to something you'd be more inclined to engage, then you can opt to read my crap once again. That is my point. Simple. Straight to the point. I won't read absolute shit by the Westboro Baptist Church because I know the particular "bent" they have. Does that clarify things?


Sort of. But how will I know if your particular “bent” has changed if I don’t periodically check the waters? And I would say that WBC is an extreme case as their premises are largely based on fictions and wishful thinking if not outright delusions. Not cricket to tar everyone with that brush as otherwise I would never read any of your stuff if I’d ever thought any of it was crap.

Seriously. Why the fuck would I want to burn my eyes and perform fellatio on my brain by reading something from [Oolon] if I *know* it's going to be double dipped in shit? …. Fairly simple, right?


Not really as I would say that qualifies as a very serious logical fallacy or error – sort like saying that all swans are white just because all of the swans you’ve seen are white. You might take a look at the Wikipedia article on the topic which describes the generalized problem in more detail.

However, you should definitely take a close look at the following video from Justicar/IntegralMath which might clarify my point. As he says, “In order to critique a particular work you do actually have to have read the work”. And saying something is “double dipped in shit” even though you haven’t actually read the article just isn’t going to cut it.

User avatar
Steersman
.
.
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:58 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:55 pm  •  [Post 20715]

oolon, slimy turd wrote:
So the ‘evidence’ for a general statement of not well received is a bit lacking in terms of raw numbers. Not well received by a small number of people, some of which then engaged in an unpleasant campaign to ridicule her for having an idea, would be a more accurate statement.


I was not saying A+ are in any sense 'correct' about anything because they have more numbers than the slymepit or anywhere else, just that the numbers show that the statement that it 'was not well received' is to be considered pretty dodgy. Especially given this place has been going for years promoting itself as the 'alternative' to the horrible hegemony of FtBs and has managed no where near the number on the A+ forum. So I know which side of the argument has been 'well received'... Please tell me how I should frame that argument to miss your logical fallacy Dilurk! Derp!

Massive failure from Derpity Dilurk, especially given I'm sure I've littered the internet with bad arguments and you choose one which is clearly not what you paint it as... Try harder :doh:


and your sole evidence that the statement is not well-received is based on the numbers on A+ being larger than here. That's exactly "arguing from popularity", aka, A+ has more people, therefore, our points that their points are not that popular are wrong. Were people here to create 5000 sockpuppet accounts, would you then reverse your statement? Don't answer, we already know you wouldn't. Instead, you'd start on about how numbers mean nothing, blah, blahdy, blah. Because that's what you do. Really, you're positively Romneyesque in how continuously fluid any stand you take is.

You cannot be as stupid as you wish us to believe you are. The fact you can type words, even if the way you use them is moronic, shows that.
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:56 pm  •  [Post 20716]

bhoytony wrote:and yet again Mission Accomplished.



and yet we didn't start crying about your fucking bicycle argument. Now its your ox's turn to get gored. Deal.
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:57 pm  •  [Post 20717]

ReneeHendricks wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:At the risk of sounding really snarky, I have to admit that I like seeing "Oolon's" posts showing as not viewable unless I want to :D

Watch out - the little turdbox has claimed that ignoring his whines are tantamount to banning. You'll be accused of censorship next!


LOL So, walking away from the asshat is censorship? Love it ;)


It gives him a sad in his teeny peeny.
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:01 pm  •  [Post 20718]

CommanderTuvok wrote:Is Oolon still butthurt? What's up? Missing PZ's cock?

:lol:


is he ever not? (on either count)
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:02 pm  •  [Post 20719]

ReneeHendricks wrote:Seriously. Why the fuck would I want to burn my eyes and perform fellatio on my brain by reading something from Oolong if I *know* it's going to be double dipped in shit? It seems to me that the most reasonable option is to place them in the "foe" list and not read their constant stream of diarrhea. Fairly simple, right?


OMG WHY JOO SO CENSORING!!!!!!
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:04 pm  •  [Post 20720]

AKAHorace wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Seriously. Why the fuck would I want to burn my eyes and perform fellatio on my brain by reading something from Oolong if I *know* it's going to be double dipped in shit? It seems to me that the most reasonable option is to place them in the "foe" list and not read their constant stream of diarrhea. Fairly simple, right?


This is a bit like the mentality of the Pharyngulites. You sound like Sally Strange when you write like this.

Oolong may have been wrong about some things but meant well, tried to defend us on PZ's site and got banned because of it.


If that's how Oolong "defends" people, i'd rather be attacked. Given his incompetence, there's far less likely chance of injury to me.
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby ReneeHendricks » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:10 pm  •  [Post 20721]

AKAHorace wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Seriously. Why the fuck would I want to burn my eyes and perform fellatio on my brain by reading something from Oolong if I *know* it's going to be double dipped in shit? It seems to me that the most reasonable option is to place them in the "foe" list and not read their constant stream of diarrhea. Fairly simple, right?


This is a bit like the mentality of the Pharyngulites. You sound like Sally Strange when you write like this.

Oolong may have been wrong about some things but meant well, tried to defend us on PZ's site and got banned because of it.


He meant well? Please. He rides the fence for the LOLs and nothing else. He's a floater in the toilet of life.
Renee Kelly
----
Wine - when you're over 40 and tequila shots have kicked your ass.
User avatar
ReneeHendricks
.
.
 
Posts: 2204
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am
Location: Kent, WA

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby ReneeHendricks » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:13 pm  •  [Post 20722]

welch wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:At the risk of sounding really snarky, I have to admit that I like seeing "Oolon's" posts showing as not viewable unless I want to :D

Watch out - the little turdbox has claimed that ignoring his whines are tantamount to banning. You'll be accused of censorship next!


LOL So, walking away from the asshat is censorship? Love it ;)


It gives him a sad in his teeny peeny.


If his teeny peeny is sad, all the better.
Renee Kelly
----
Wine - when you're over 40 and tequila shots have kicked your ass.
User avatar
ReneeHendricks
.
.
 
Posts: 2204
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am
Location: Kent, WA

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby ReneeHendricks » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:14 pm  •  [Post 20723]

welch wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Seriously. Why the fuck would I want to burn my eyes and perform fellatio on my brain by reading something from Oolong if I *know* it's going to be double dipped in shit? It seems to me that the most reasonable option is to place them in the "foe" list and not read their constant stream of diarrhea. Fairly simple, right?


OMG WHY JOO SO CENSORING!!!!!!


'Cuz that's how I roll, homies :D
Renee Kelly
----
Wine - when you're over 40 and tequila shots have kicked your ass.
User avatar
ReneeHendricks
.
.
 
Posts: 2204
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am
Location: Kent, WA

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Steersman » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:30 pm  •  [Post 20724]

welch wrote:
oolon, slimy turd wrote:...
I was not saying A+ are in any sense 'correct' about anything because they have more numbers than the slymepit or anywhere else, just that the numbers show that the statement that it 'was not well received' is to be considered pretty dodgy. ....


and your sole evidence that the statement is not well-received is based on the numbers on A+ being larger than here. That's exactly "arguing from popularity", aka, A+ has more people, therefore, our points that their points are not that popular are wrong. Were people here to create 5000 sockpuppet accounts, would you then reverse your statement? Don't answer, we already know you wouldn't. Instead, you'd start on about how numbers mean nothing, blah, blahdy, blah. Because that's what you do. Really, you're positively Romneyesque in how continuously fluid any stand you take is. ....

I think you’re missing the point. The question isn’t which side is right – using the “argumentum ad populum”, but which side is the most popular. And a definition of popular is “widely liked or appreciated” by which the numbers quoted proves the point: Jen’s “new idea” was in fact “well received” by the majority [approx 2000/2300 (population of A+/(pop A+ plus pop SlymePit)].

Although I'll concede that those numbers - 2000 & 2300 - are only a small sample and anything but random. But that was, I expect, the reason for Oolon's "dodgy" ….
User avatar
Steersman
.
.
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:58 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby real horrorshow » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:34 pm  •  [Post 20725]

bhoytony wrote:I'm surprised that, as we seem to be involved in an episode of I Love 1975 crossed with a road safety campaign against Dangerous Drivers, nobody has brought up that most cliched shorthand for the '70s, the Raleigh Chopper. Come, on some original thinker must mention it.

I will see your Chopper (fnarr fnarr) and raise you a Chopper Sprint:

Image
I actually had one just like that - Fire Bronze - for a short while. They were always rare and apparently are quite valuable now. I'm glad to trade being a Sprint owner now though for something worth far more: Having been a Sprint owner as a child and not being dead!

Head down, arse up, centre of gravity who knows where. If you hit a matchstickon that thing at any speed, you were straight over the bars. Think the bike's ugly? Wait 'til you see what it makes of your face!

I just noticed in the pic: The bars are a maximum height, the seat at minimum. Someone's tried to make that thing safe to ride. wont work. Looks like a genuine 70s carpet too!
“Let’s not just insult each other and cut off all discussion because we rationalists have somehow wandered into a land where emotion is king.” - Richard Dawkins
User avatar
real horrorshow
.
.
 
Posts: 1505
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 10:59 am
Location: In a band of brigands.


Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby franc » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:47 pm  •  [Post 20727]

Lsuoma wrote:
bhoytony wrote:With all this masturbating over Sally James and Pan's People, I'm pretty sure that the Slymepit is surrounded by an angry mob of baboons preparing to burn it to the ground.
Personally I was more of a Janet Ellis wanker.

If it raises Baboollie Blood Pressure, I'm all for it. Fuck 'em.

And though I was too young for The Avengers with Diana Rigg, I found her Emma Peel (M Appeal, geddit?) to be the epitome of teh sexy when I got older. From "A Touch of Brimstone":

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4tby ... o1_500.jpg
Snake picture chosen for Phil's benefit...


There's only one Elvira -

Image
smilies are for reetards | reason is overrated | "Home is where the floor is." -- X | “The citizen's job is to be rude - to pierce the comfort of professional intercourse by boorish expressions of doubt” -- John Ralston Saul
User avatar
franc
.
.
 
Posts: 1770
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:03 pm
Location: Kosmopolites

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby BarnOwl » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:55 pm  •  [Post 20728]

PeeZus and his disciples seem to think that Austin doesn't count as part of Texas, and therefore it's an acceptable place to visit and one might find a receptive audience there. Why might that be? Let's look at some 2010 Census-based demographics for the largest Texas cities, shall we?

AUSTIN
Non-Hispanic White = 48.7%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) = 35.1
Black or African-American = 8.1%
Asian = 6.3%

SAN ANTONIO (BarnOwl calls this home now)
Non-Hispanic White = 26.6%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) = 63.2%
Black or African-American = 6.9%
Asian = 2.4%

HOUSTON (BarnOwl was a nestling and undergrad fledgling here)
Non-Hispanic White = 26%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) = 44%
Black or African-American = 24%
Asian = 6%

DALLAS (BarnOwl called this home for three years)
Non-Hispanic White = 28.8%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) = 42.4%
Black or African-American = 25%
Asian = 2.9%

Setting aside the fact that I don't really accept the concept of "race" as applied to humans, there is indeed something different about Austin. It's the only one of the four cities listed above that I've never called home, so perhaps I'm no judge, but the 2010 Census data seem to indicate that it's not the same as other Texas cities. And Austin, apparently, is an acceptable city to visit for a convention, because it's "not really part of Texas." Any thoughts on why Austin is OK and why it's not really part of Texas?
User avatar
BarnOwl
.
.
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby franc » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:03 pm  •  [Post 20729]

rayshul wrote:Quick question - did WB crunch the numbers on the A+ forums?


Can't remember who did. Here -

http://pastebin.com/Zy8G9x9J

Slimy Turd is doing what's called "creative accounting" - he's treating A+ forum use the way Rupert Murdoch treats NewsCorp tax deductions. The reality is a few% of the membership generates virtually all of the noise. The reality has been screencapped in real time and often -

Image
Image
smilies are for reetards | reason is overrated | "Home is where the floor is." -- X | “The citizen's job is to be rude - to pierce the comfort of professional intercourse by boorish expressions of doubt” -- John Ralston Saul
User avatar
franc
.
.
 
Posts: 1770
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:03 pm
Location: Kosmopolites

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby BarnOwl » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:06 pm  •  [Post 20730]

My 1970s ride was very much like this:

Image

Except that my dad cut my board from a sheet of aluminum, and I decorated it with dolphin and butterfly stickers.
User avatar
BarnOwl
.
.
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby peterb » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:09 pm  •  [Post 20731]

BarnOwl wrote:PeeZus and his disciples seem to think that Austin doesn't count as part of Texas, and therefore it's an acceptable place to visit and one might find a receptive audience there. Why might that be? Let's look at some 2010 Census-based demographics for the largest Texas

Snip

Setting aside the fact that I don't really accept the concept of "race" as applied to humans, there is indeed something different about Austin. It's the only one of the four cities listed above that I've never called home, so perhaps I'm no judge, but the 2010 Census data seem to indicate that it's not the same as other Texas cities. And Austin, apparently, is an acceptable city to visit for a convention, because it's "not really part of Texas." Any thoughts on why Austin is OK and why it's not really part of Texas?


Exquisitely understated barn owl. Well played.
User avatar
peterb
.
.
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 8:33 pm
Location: Aptos, California

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby franc » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:14 pm  •  [Post 20732]

franc wrote:
rayshul wrote:Quick question - did WB crunch the numbers on the A+ forums?


Slimy Turd is doing what's called "creative accounting" -


What shithead also deliberately ignores is this place is not exclusively anti-A+. There are specific anti-A+ 'tardbook groups, probably ones on Google too. What he could do to add substance to his propaganda is point us to places that are pro-A+, other than the various baboon boards. Except he won't because he can't because there aren't any. A+ has gone many steps beyond even FfFTB - mentioning it anywhere outside of its protectively cocooned and censored "safe" zones elicits nothing other than snickers and derision. There is no support. Anywhere. Reality is pretty grim and cruel - it does not want to submit to Pollyanna delusion.
smilies are for reetards | reason is overrated | "Home is where the floor is." -- X | “The citizen's job is to be rude - to pierce the comfort of professional intercourse by boorish expressions of doubt” -- John Ralston Saul
User avatar
franc
.
.
 
Posts: 1770
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:03 pm
Location: Kosmopolites

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby cunt » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:23 pm  •  [Post 20733]

BarnOwl wrote:PeeZus and his disciples seem to think that Austin doesn't count as part of Texas, and therefore it's an acceptable place to visit and one might find a receptive audience there. Why might that be? Let's look at some 2010 Census-based demographics for the largest Texas cities, shall we?

AUSTIN
Non-Hispanic White = 48.7%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) = 35.1
Black or African-American = 8.1%
Asian = 6.3%

SAN ANTONIO (BarnOwl calls this home now)
Non-Hispanic White = 26.6%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) = 63.2%
Black or African-American = 6.9%
Asian = 2.4%

HOUSTON (BarnOwl was a nestling and undergrad fledgling here)
Non-Hispanic White = 26%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) = 44%
Black or African-American = 24%
Asian = 6%

DALLAS (BarnOwl called this home for three years)
Non-Hispanic White = 28.8%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) = 42.4%
Black or African-American = 25%
Asian = 2.9%

Setting aside the fact that I don't really accept the concept of "race" as applied to humans, there is indeed something different about Austin. It's the only one of the four cities listed above that I've never called home, so perhaps I'm no judge, but the 2010 Census data seem to indicate that it's not the same as other Texas cities. And Austin, apparently, is an acceptable city to visit for a convention, because it's "not really part of Texas." Any thoughts on why Austin is OK and why it's not really part of Texas?


HIS-panics. Gendered pronouns are NOT acceptable. Not even as part of longer words... They like Austin because it's a democrat stronghold and it has the SXSW festival.
You are a bad person. You say horrible things and you should feel bad about yourself.
User avatar
cunt
TheMudbrooker's Bitch
 
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Lsuoma » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:26 pm  •  [Post 20734]

And in the '70s, when my fellow school students went motorized it was on the classic sports mopeds, the Honda SS50, the Yamaha FS1-E and the Suzuki AP50. I'm sure Kawasaki had an offering too, but I don't remember what that one was.

I never go one of those, since I was living in kids homes, my family having split when I was 11. And I never ever had a Chopper, either. All I ever had was a Raleigh RSW 15:

Image

That was pre-Noel Edmonds advertising for Raleigh, IIRC.
Call me old-fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating.
User avatar
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 6:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Lsuoma » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:27 pm  •  [Post 20735]

Actually it was an RSW 11, as pictured, not the 15.
Call me old-fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating.
User avatar
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 6:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby BarnOwl » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:33 pm  •  [Post 20736]

peterb wrote:Exquisitely understated barn owl. Well played.


Thanks, peterb.

Nice Rothko avatar, btw. Have you been to the Rothko Chapel in Houston?

@ cunt -

Bzzzzttt. San Antonio and Houston are also Democrat strongholds. I don't know what the fuck is wrong with Dallas ... must be something in the water.
User avatar
BarnOwl
.
.
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby cunt » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:42 pm  •  [Post 20737]

Do they also have the SXSW festival?
You are a bad person. You say horrible things and you should feel bad about yourself.
User avatar
cunt
TheMudbrooker's Bitch
 
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:44 pm  •  [Post 20738]

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Mines would be :

Image

Image

Pretty basic, I know.


Joe Walsh Agrees.
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby welch » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:51 pm  •  [Post 20739]

Steersman wrote:
welch wrote:
oolon, slimy turd wrote:...
I was not saying A+ are in any sense 'correct' about anything because they have more numbers than the slymepit or anywhere else, just that the numbers show that the statement that it 'was not well received' is to be considered pretty dodgy. ....


and your sole evidence that the statement is not well-received is based on the numbers on A+ being larger than here. That's exactly "arguing from popularity", aka, A+ has more people, therefore, our points that their points are not that popular are wrong. Were people here to create 5000 sockpuppet accounts, would you then reverse your statement? Don't answer, we already know you wouldn't. Instead, you'd start on about how numbers mean nothing, blah, blahdy, blah. Because that's what you do. Really, you're positively Romneyesque in how continuously fluid any stand you take is. ....

I think you’re missing the point. The question isn’t which side is right – using the “argumentum ad populum”, but which side is the most popular. And a definition of popular is “widely liked or appreciated” by which the numbers quoted proves the point: Jen’s “new idea” was in fact “well received” by the majority [approx 2000/2300 (population of A+/(pop A+ plus pop SlymePit)].

Although I'll concede that those numbers - 2000 & 2300 - are only a small sample and anything but random. But that was, I expect, the reason for Oolon's "dodgy" ….


But that's not what he was saying. He was saying, based *solely* on numbers, that our point of the A+ point "not being well received" is pretty dodgy. Really, it's right there at the top. Had he said "Based on these numbers, A+ is more popular than the Slymepit", that's a valid comparison. It's one that you can use those numbers for, and it's ONLY talking about "which is more popular".

But he was using those numbers to say our point that A+'s points are not being well-received is incorrect, or "dodgy". That is, based on the superior popularity of the A+ website, we're wrong.

There's no way you can say the A+ message is or is not well-received based on the fucking membership numbers of two web sites. Holy fuckoley. Of course, then Oolon goes to say this site markets itself as the "alternative to FTB and A+" once again, showing he's a lying sack of shit.

But that aside, what he said was not "who's more popular". He was using popularity to say our points about A+ are wrong. THAT'S the part people have a problem with.
If you're going to ignore me, then actually do it. But that does require some work. So you probably won't do it right. Also, if the worst thing that happens in my day is you not talking to me anymore? Fuck yeah!
User avatar
welch
.
.
 
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby rayshul » Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:53 pm  •  [Post 20740]

Thanks for the stats link Franc

BarnOwl wrote:Setting aside the fact that I don't really accept the concept of "race" as applied to humans, there is indeed something different about Austin. It's the only one of the four cities listed above that I've never called home, so perhaps I'm no judge, but the 2010 Census data seem to indicate that it's not the same as other Texas cities. And Austin, apparently, is an acceptable city to visit for a convention, because it's "not really part of Texas." Any thoughts on why Austin is OK and why it's not really part of Texas?


Oh, that's fascinating. :D
"My hyper-important vagina is offended, appease it at once!" - Philip of Tealand
User avatar
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 2291
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby franc » Sun Oct 21, 2012 8:01 pm  •  [Post 20741]

rayshul wrote:Thanks for the stats link Franc


Found it. Thank Gooby - viewtopic.php?p=21242#p21242
smilies are for reetards | reason is overrated | "Home is where the floor is." -- X | “The citizen's job is to be rude - to pierce the comfort of professional intercourse by boorish expressions of doubt” -- John Ralston Saul
User avatar
franc
.
.
 
Posts: 1770
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:03 pm
Location: Kosmopolites

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby CommanderTuvok » Sun Oct 21, 2012 8:16 pm  •  [Post 20742]

With regards to bikes, this is Greg Laden's bike - assembled from the trailer park garbage dump.

Image
User avatar
CommanderTuvok
.
.
 
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby BarnOwl » Sun Oct 21, 2012 8:18 pm  •  [Post 20743]

cunt wrote:Do they also have the SXSW festival?


I'll grant you that only Austin has SXSW, but that's in March.

It's October now, right? I had this weird experience on my recent trip, in which three of us were dropped off after a late dinner, at a hotel of the same chain, but in a town 10 miles away from our actual hotel. It was very dark and raining, and none of us was familiar with the area. The layout of the hotels was identical, but there were some superficial differences, like the font for the room numbers on the doors. I couldn't figure out why my card key wouldn't open my room. Another colleague had the same experience with her card key and room. The third person stayed in the lobby to print out boarding passes, and was the first to realize the taxi driver's mistake ... when I came back down to the lobby, his explanation dispelled my fears of early-onset dementia.

Whew!
User avatar
BarnOwl
.
.
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Reap » Sun Oct 21, 2012 8:30 pm  •  [Post 20744]

PZ Myers wants to ask YOU a QUESTION!!

http://godlessradionet.ipage.com/haveyoupartiedwithRW.mp3

My first response is shock. No wonder people are going around asking her out in elevators. PZ has been making her sound like a floozy!! SHAME ON HIM! FOR SHAME PZ MYERS...FOR SHAME! :naughty:
You aren't a complete idiot..some pieces are missing

If you were offended.. I take full responsibility, especially if it makes you cry
User avatar
Reap
.
.
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:27 pm
Location: Fremont CA

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby JackRayner » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:15 pm  •  [Post 20745]

Maybe Mykery hasn't posted this here because he feels like he's pimping his stuff too often, [or maybe he's sleeping because he's got an early day tomorrow...like I do] so I'll do it for him:



Seriously though. This is fucking uncanny. Like, I know she had already shown herself to be a bit on the crazy side when she told John the Other that he hated women, only to act as if she never said anything other than "don't talk to me" an instant later, but....wow. IRL Creepy Bitter Grrl is fucking crazy. :?
User avatar
JackRayner
.
.
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby JackRayner » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:17 pm  •  [Post 20746]

Mykeru, I meant... :x
User avatar
JackRayner
.
.
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Pitchguest » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:24 pm  •  [Post 20747]

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2116

An effort to 'reclaim the image' of A+ gets the author pounced upon, drawn and quartered, for first mistakenly double posting and then for using 'language that can be misinterpreted'. The usual suspects, ceepolk and LeftSidePositive is in there in full swing (and someone called The_Laughing_Coyote. Crazy bitch.). Like walking on fucking eggshells.

They also seem to be very terse about members NOT advertising the forum since it would attract all manner of trolls, apparently. Which is ironic considering that it was first announced on Jen's blog on FTB, a site that receives more than its fair share of visitors, and that the forum at its inception was posted on various blogs and published in some newspapers. But I thought it was supposed to be a safe space? Isn't it contradictory to say the purpose of the forum is for people who're sick of, quote, "harassment, sexism and misogyny" elsewhere "within the atheist community" and therefore the need for A+? Or have they scrapped that idea altogether and decided the place is their own personal playground and screw everyone else?

Seriously, though. The users are a ticking time bomb that can go off at any second, for any reason, for what they consider to be a "lack of good faith" or "using language that can be misinterpreted" or whatever the fuck they can think of. Walking on eggshells. Most threads I've looked at have either the commentariat in a fuss, moderators overly zealous and unnecessarily quick to exercise their modding rights, or both. If the rumour of the mod mole is true, though, overly zealous wouldn't be surprising. My bet is on SubMor. I'm also guessing that ceepolk is a Poe, because if not then my good wishes go out to the people in her presence. That goes double for the people around LeftSidePositive, Grimalkin, cipher, Josh the Spokesgay and now that I've noted another big player in the A+theism roster, The_Laughing_Coyote. If they're not Poes, which I hope but very much doubt, there is something very wrong with these people.
User avatar
Pitchguest
.
.
 
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:44 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby aweraw » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:43 pm  •  [Post 20748]

So, creepybittergrrl is a professional victim who is angry at men as a proxy for the resentment she has for her estranged father.

Image

If I didn't know any better, I might assume these clowns were copying the traits and trying to embody the most stereotypical charicatures of the hippys I grew up around, and trolling the world en mass.
Give me ambiguity, or give me something else!
User avatar
aweraw
.
.
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 2:15 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby KiwiInOz » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:50 pm  •  [Post 20749]

JackRayner wrote:Maybe Mykery hasn't posted this here because he feels like he's pimping his stuff too often, [or maybe he's sleeping because he's got an early day tomorrow...like I do] so I'll do it for him:



Seriously though. This is fucking uncanny. Like, I know she had already shown herself to be a bit on the crazy side when she told John the Other that he hated women, only to act as if she never said anything other than "don't talk to me" an instant later, but....wow. IRL Creepy Bitter Grrl is fucking crazy. :?


She's a schoolteacher? I wouldn't let her anywhere near my kids. Crazy, self righteous, person of the xie persuasion.
User avatar
KiwiInOz
.
.
 
Posts: 2023
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby John Greg » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:56 pm  •  [Post 20750]

Jesus, the world is a crazy train.

/bangs angry head on wall

....

Sasha ought to be introduced, face-to-face, in a room of eloquent design, to sacha.

Either education, or thermal nuclear war, would ensue.
What shirt is s/h/it wearing?

Radical feminism is the radical notion that those who criticize it aren’t human. —— Kirbmarc
John Greg
.
.
 
Posts: 1953
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby aweraw » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:01 pm  •  [Post 20751]

KiwiInOz wrote:She's a schoolteacher? I wouldn't let her anywhere near my kids. Crazy, self righteous, person of the xie persuasion.


It's a bit saddening to think that there might be young boys in her care who might be turned off school completely by her behavior towards them. I might be impugning her unfairly, but I suspect she's the type to carry her emotional baggage with her into the class room.
Give me ambiguity, or give me something else!
User avatar
aweraw
.
.
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 2:15 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby John Greg » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:01 pm  •  [Post 20752]

Ah, and I meant to add, yes, if true, it is truly frightening to think that Sasha Wiley might be a school teacher.

Jesus, let's bring on Ilsa She Wolf for a bit of tea biscuit calm to educate our youngins.

Sasha Wiley, I know you do not know the Slyme Pit, but I live in your city -- well, almost -- and I most whole heartedly request that you just fuck off and disappear; please stop polluting the culturesphere with your hate.
What shirt is s/h/it wearing?

Radical feminism is the radical notion that those who criticize it aren’t human. —— Kirbmarc
John Greg
.
.
 
Posts: 1953
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby aweraw » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:02 pm  •  [Post 20753]

Mighty
Give me ambiguity, or give me something else!
User avatar
aweraw
.
.
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 2:15 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby DownThunder » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:43 pm  •  [Post 20754]

John Greg wrote:Jesus, the world is a crazy train.

/bangs angry head on wall

....

Sasha ought to be introduced, face-to-face, in a room of eloquent design, to sacha.

Either education, or thermal nuclear war, would ensue.


Or one of those strange videos where a mouse is fed to some frightening Amazonian creature.
DownThunder
.
.
 
Posts: 843
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:10 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Michael J » Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:45 pm  •  [Post 20755]

Steersman wrote:
welch wrote:
oolon, slimy turd wrote:...
I was not saying A+ are in any sense 'correct' about anything because they have more numbers than the slymepit or anywhere else, just that the numbers show that the statement that it 'was not well received' is to be considered pretty dodgy. ....


and your sole evidence that the statement is not well-received is based on the numbers on A+ being larger than here. That's exactly "arguing from popularity", aka, A+ has more people, therefore, our points that their points are not that popular are wrong. Were people here to create 5000 sockpuppet accounts, would you then reverse your statement? Don't answer, we already know you wouldn't. Instead, you'd start on about how numbers mean nothing, blah, blahdy, blah. Because that's what you do. Really, you're positively Romneyesque in how continuously fluid any stand you take is. ....

I think you’re missing the point. The question isn’t which side is right – using the “argumentum ad populum”, but which side is the most popular. And a definition of popular is “widely liked or appreciated” by which the numbers quoted proves the point: Jen’s “new idea” was in fact “well received” by the majority [approx 2000/2300 (population of A+/(pop A+ plus pop SlymePit)].

Although I'll concede that those numbers - 2000 & 2300 - are only a small sample and anything but random. But that was, I expect, the reason for Oolon's "dodgy" ….


Delurking to make a comment. Isn't it a false dichotomy to compare A+ to here. Shouldn't they compare A+ to the total population that reads the various Atheist blogs? I once did a back of the envelope calculation for PZ site a few years ago and I think that his readership was much larger than 2000.

So I think that 2000 is a good number but how many members does JREF have?
User avatar
Michael J
.
.
 
Posts: 393
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:42 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby peterb » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:00 am  •  [Post 20756]

BarnOwl wrote:
peterb wrote:Exquisitely understated barn owl. Well played.


Thanks, peterb.

Nice Rothko avatar, btw. Have you been to the Rothko Chapel
r.


No. There was a recent Rothko show in Portland (where he grew up) that I went to but I haven't made it to Houston yet. It's on my list.
User avatar
peterb
.
.
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 8:33 pm
Location: Aptos, California

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Pinker » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:18 am  •  [Post 20757]

The Jref thread on Atheismplus is indistinguishable from this one. How many of you post there too?

It's good to see that The_Laughing_Coyote's insanity hasn't gone unnoticed. A member like that will poison a forum more than any troll ever will.
User avatar
Pinker
.
.
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 12:13 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Darren » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:24 am  •  [Post 20758]

Michael J wrote:So I think that 2000 is a good number but how many members does JREF have?


JREF has a lot of inactive members, so you'd have to go by the active membership... good luck trying to figure that out!

Besides, I think most baboolies consider the JREF forums only one step removed from the 'pit.
Image
User avatar
Darren
.
.
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 11:40 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Steersman » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:27 am  •  [Post 20759]

welch wrote:
Steersman wrote:...I think you’re missing the point. The question isn’t which side is right – using the “argumentum ad populum”, but which side is the most popular. And a definition of popular is “widely liked or appreciated” by which the numbers quoted proves the point: Jen’s “new idea” was in fact “well received” by the majority [approx 2000/2300 (population of A+/(pop A+ plus pop SlymePit)]. ….

But that's not what he was saying. He was saying, based *solely* on numbers, that our point of the A+ point "not being well received" is pretty dodgy.

Well actually, it was The Coffee Loving Skeptic [CLS] who had said that:
Where does it say in the charter than I can’t criticize Jen McCreight for storming off the Internet in a huff when her new idea wasn’t well received?

Maybe your “our” is intended to imply that the entire SlymePit as a body is behind that CLS statement.
===
welch wrote:Really, it's right there at the top. Had he said "Based on these numbers, A+ is more popular than the Slymepit", that's a valid comparison. It's one that you can use those numbers for, and it's ONLY talking about "which is more popular".

That’s basically all Oolon said on that point:
… but I see there are 1600+ members – which is something you could only dream about. By way of contrast the slymepit has 200+ members. So the ‘evidence’ for a general statement of not well received is a bit lacking in terms of raw numbers.

And from those numbers he inferred – from a somewhat questionable sample but still a less dodgy one that that provided by CLS – that Jen’s idea was in fact “well received”:
Not well received by a small number of people [i.e., some on the SlymePit?], some of which then engaged in an unpleasant campaign to ridicule her for having an idea ...

Maybe a tenuous conclusion since, as mentioned, the membership numbers of two groups probably doesn’t constitute much in the way of a credible “random sample”, but, arguably, far better evidence than anything offered by CLS.
===
welch wrote:There's no way you can say the A+ message is or is not well-received based on the fucking membership numbers of two web sites.

Admittedly, a bit of a stretch. But it was the claim of CLS that that idea “wasn’t well received”; it was their obligation to provide the evidence. All Oolon really had to do to call that claim into question was to provide a set of numbers – the membership counts of two supposedly central players in the drama – that suggested, quite credibly I think, that that claim was rather dodgy.
===
welch wrote:Holy fuckoley. Of course, then Oolon goes to say this site markets itself as the "alternative to FTB and A+" once again, showing he's a lying sack of shit.

Considering that more than a few people here have touted any number of aspects of The Pit in contradistinction to FTB/A+, that characterization doesn’t seem all that much of a stretch. Although I’ll agree he was somewhat out-to-lunch with his “Especially given this place has been going for years …”: while he’s partially wrong in the sense that the SlymePit, as hosted by phpBB, has only been about for about 4 months, he’s correct in the sense that the Slime Pit, as a thread on Science Blogs, has probably been going for several years. However, I wonder whether you called WBB and Dick Strawkins and mordacious “lying sacks of shit” for their transgressions ….
===
welch wrote:But that aside, what he said was not "who's more popular". He was using popularity to say our points about A+ are wrong. THAT'S the part people have a problem with.

I think you need to take a much closer look at what he actually said as I don’t see that at all; matter of fact, I see something almost the exact opposite:
I was not saying A+ are in any sense 'correct' about anything because they have more numbers than the slymepit or anywhere else, just that the numbers show that the statement that it 'was not well received' is to be considered pretty dodgy.

===
Changing gears here, just out of curiousity, or as a point of reference, are you John C.?
User avatar
Steersman
.
.
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:58 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Dick Strawkins » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:28 am  •  [Post 20760]

Regarding the numbers question and the comparison of the slymepit with Atheismplus, I think it's worth remembering the different reasons behind both messageboards.
Atheismplus is meant to be the main site for a 'movement' designed to promote social justice from an atheist perspective (or, depending on how you see it, sideline and exclude those atheists who are not in the correct political camp.)

The slymepit, on the other hand is more of an information resource, collating the instances of embarrassing hypocrisy perpetrated by the FTB hierarchy and thus limiting the effect of their self promoting dishonesty.
In fact the slymepit need have only one member to be of use.
People do not need to be members here, they just need to read it - and I'm pretty sure we have many more readers than official members.

Image
PZ Myers: "Hypocrisy is a bitch, isn't it?"
User avatar
Dick Strawkins
.
.
 
Posts: 5141
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:34 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Skep tickle » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:30 am  •  [Post 20761]

Just to mix it up a bit, let's add some testosterone:

Image
User avatar
Skep tickle
.
.
 
Posts: 3610
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:04 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Couch » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:41 am  •  [Post 20762]

StyxMaker wrote:
Tigzy wrote:Kate Bush just used to scare the shit out of me.

In a similar vein, I was too young to appreciate Sally James from Tiswas. I can appreciate her now, though. And fully understand why she so frequently had buckets of water thrown over her:

Image


It was Anette on the original Mickey Mouse Club show for me. Yeah, I'm old.

I once rubbed one out as a 13-year old sitting on the lounge with a blanket draped over my lap, ogling Barbara Eden, the titular Jeannie, I dream thereof.

It is very hard for me to type the following words: There was another family member in the room practicing piano. Eeeeew. I still remember just managing to check my barely pubescent privilege into a handful of hastily snatched paper napkins.
I once touched my knob with my lips. More than once actually. - Tony Parshole
User avatar
Couch
.
.
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 8:59 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Steersman » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:43 am  •  [Post 20763]

Michael J wrote:
Steersman wrote:....
I think you’re missing the point. The question isn’t which side is right – using the “argumentum ad populum”, but which side is the most popular. And a definition of popular is “widely liked or appreciated” by which the numbers quoted proves the point: Jen’s “new idea” was in fact “well received” by the majority [approx 2000/2300 (population of A+/(pop A+ plus pop SlymePit)].

Although I'll concede that those numbers - 2000 & 2300 - are only a small sample and anything but random. But that was, I expect, the reason for Oolon's "dodgy" ….


Delurking to make a comment. Isn't it a false dichotomy to compare A+ to here. Shouldn't they compare A+ to the total population that reads the various Atheist blogs? I once did a back of the envelope calculation for PZ site a few years ago and I think that his readership was much larger than 2000.

So I think that 2000 is a good number but how many members does JREF have?

Good questions, although I don’t think it qualifies as a false dichotomy as I doubt that Oolon was trying to argue that the AtheismPlus and SlymePit forums encompass all who might have an opinion on the former.

Although it is of course a moot question as to what percentage of those having an opinion are actually members of those forums. But I would think it might be a fairly representative sample. However the statistics for the urban dictionary definitions might at least tip the balance in the direction opposite to that suggested by those membership numbers.

Interesting question though ….

[Time to call it a day ….]
User avatar
Steersman
.
.
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:58 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby Tony Parsehole » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:48 am  •  [Post 20764]

Pinker wrote:
It's good to see that The_Laughing_Coyote's insanity hasn't gone unnoticed. A member like that will poison a forum more than any troll ever will.

100% true. Pure fucking rage in every single comment no matter the subject.
New member made a politically incorrect faux pas? Tears of righteous fury and piles of invective.
Genuine troll attempting to illicit a response? Tears of righteous fury and piles of invective.
Not only is it destructive it's fucking boring too. There is only so many times you can read "CHECK YOUR FUCKING PRIVILEGE YOU ASSHOLE. THIS IS A FUCKING SAFE SPACE AND WE DON'T FUCKING NEED SOME ASSHOLE COMING HERE AND MANSPLAINING TO US ABOUT X,Y,Z". before you end up tuning it out the instant you see the posters name.
"It wasn't long before the arse-featured animals were all vibrating frenziedly"
Image
User avatar
Tony Parsehole
.
.
 
Posts: 5414
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:16 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

Postby rayshul » Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:09 am  •  [Post 20765]

I'd like to propose a gaming thread in which we can only post a response if we explain how the previous person had privilege and needs to check it.

Steersman wrote:Considering that more than a few people here have touted any number of aspects of The Pit in contradistinction to FTB/A+, that characterization doesn’t seem all that much of a stretch. Although I’ll agree he was somewhat out-to-lunch with his “Especially given this place has been going for years …”: while he’s partially wrong in the sense that the SlymePit, as hosted by phpBB, has only been about for about 4 months, he’s correct in the sense that the Slime Pit, as a thread on Science Blogs, has probably been going for several years. However, I wonder whether you called WBB and Dick Strawkins and mordacious “lying sacks of shit” for their transgressions ….


I was pretty fucking pregnant when I posted on the first thread on ERV and now I have a 1 year old. Unless there's time travel involved the Slimepit hasn't been going for years. The split happened at Elevatorgate.

The 'pit is not an alternative and never has been. People point out the contradictions here because they want to point out some element of hypocrisy or contrast - for example people may say, "I made a mistake, I withdraw my opinion..." and then say that this would not be something you'd see often on FtB. That doesn't mean it's "the alternative". The 'pit is never going to be the alternative and I more commonly see participants on here on other blogs recommending people read histories on Pharwrongula rather than visiting the 'pit. Given all our bills are paid by the magnanimous Lsuoma there is no reason for the 'pit to be promoted.

The people who most actively promote the 'pit are FtB themselves, and most people who are new here normally talk like someone exiting a cult they didn't even know they'd entered. Really, we're more like a support and information group. :)
"My hyper-important vagina is offended, appease it at once!" - Philip of Tealand
User avatar
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 2291
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to Periodic Table of Swearing - The Undead Thread

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Badger3k, BoxNDox, comhcinc, Google [Bot], Guestus Aurelius and 10 guests