Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#241

Seriously, it's useless using that anyway. What will the bitches do when I turn 18 (which is coming up pretty soon... tick tock.)? What will they pick at then? Find some new material.

#242

decius wrote:
Eucliwood wrote:
So, someone can make an orgy thread, but I can't jokingly ask for dick pictures?
Exactly. It's called the fucking law.

Is the fucking law different from the actual law?

#243

Eucliwood wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:
Perhaps there needs to be an adult consent checkbox when making a new user account.
So, someone can make an orgy thread, but I can't jokingly ask for dick pictures? Suddenly my recent posts in general are a solicitation for porn? Get the fuck out of here. This is an act - you're pretending like you didn't jump on the bandwagon long ago. "Oh, I didn't dislike her before, but now that she did the normal activity of asking for pictures, I'm going to pretend two joke posts is a big deal and request - let's make this forum 18+! It's a LOLITA!"

Fuck off, especially using "sexual morals" as an excuse.

Factually, if you look back at the "Eucliwood Affair", you'll find I stayed mostly silent and if anything I was supportive of you.

Asking for a dick picture in a public forum when you claim to be an underage is stupid, and anyone responding could easily be targeted for whatever charges there are for distributing porn to a minor.

But then you went further and explicitly mentioned that maybe you would talk to the police about whatever you think you can claim.

So now I think you need to be banned, because you are abusive of the forum and have stated an intention and ability to act in ways to harm it, and almost certainly its administrator as well, if not the entire membership.

And worse, when I bring this up, I am suddenly a "foe" to be ignored.

So fine, then, I think the only reasonable action to take is to ban you for asking as a minor for dick pictures.

#244

EdwardGemmer wrote:[spoiler]
decius wrote:
Exactly. It's called the fucking law.
[/spoiler]

Is the fucking law different from the actual law?

Last time I checked people can't be arrested for jokingly asking for dick pictures. Is this guy one of those sexuality police morons, who tell minors not to watch porn? Because I do that, too. And I don't joke when I watch my porn. "*SIRENS* INTERNET POLICE. INTERNET POLICE. I NOW HAVE A REASON TO BEAR DOWN ON YOU. YOU TRIED TO JOKINGLY ASK FOR SEXUAL PICTURES OF THE HUMAN BODY, AND YOU AREN'T 18 YET. YOU HAVE NO FREEDOM TO DO THAT." Fuck off and mind your own business.

Did you really have to quote his post like that, Edward? You could've put a spoil warning on it so I wouldn't see it, get pissed off, and have to reply.

#245

Eucliwood wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote: . Their idea of activism was to squirt glue into the locks of the ROTC lockers.
LOL, squirting glue into locks? That's the sound of giving up on making people see anything about themselves and launching an offensive assault. But it would be funny if they deserved it, I guess. Did they do any actual activism?

I actually don't know if they did anything effective. After I heard about the glue incident I never had any contact with them. I had friends in ROTC, and even though I disagreed with some of the policies at the time(eg. gay ban) they didn't deserve having a stupid prank pulled on them.

#246

And worse, when I bring this up, I am suddenly a "foe" to be ignored.

Heh. That's a very odd "And worse", but I would suggest not ignoring people on forums in general, and not ignoring people trying to explain that your behavior is borderline illegal and quite likely will cause enormous issues for the forum.

#247

Eucliwood wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:
Perhaps there needs to be an adult consent checkbox when making a new user account.
So, someone can make an orgy thread, but I can't jokingly ask for dick pictures? Suddenly my recent posts in general are a solicitation for porn? Get the fuck out of here. This is an act - you're pretending like you didn't jump on the bandwagon long ago. "Oh, I didn't dislike her before, but now that she did the normal activity of asking for pictures, I'm going to pretend two joke posts is a big deal and request - let's make this forum 18+! It's a LOLITA!"

Fuck off, especially using "sexual morals" as an excuse.

The fact you took the title of the latest thread as seriously as you seem to have tells us all we need to know about your emotional state far more than your date of birth does.

Maybe you should make some offline friends.

#248

EdwardGemmer wrote:
decius wrote:
Eucliwood wrote:
So, someone can make an orgy thread, but I can't jokingly ask for dick pictures?
Exactly. It's called the fucking law.
Is the fucking law different from the actual law?

Yes, inasmuch as you wish it were not the actual law.

#249

Eucliwood wrote:Seriously, it's useless using that anyway. What will the bitches do when I turn 18 (which is coming up pretty soon... tick tock.)? What will they pick at then? Find some new material.

Your horrible writing
Your over-emotional reactions to everything
Your inability to make sense except by accident

There's a rather long list of things to bag on you about.

#250

I'm sure there are a dozen tumblr sites full of dick pictures. And a lot of them actually do turn up when you google search them.

#251

I say... again... what happens when I'm 18, rofl? That magic line. Suddenly, it's all good! No invisible consequences (excluding the law) to jokingly asking for pictures of... of... someone's WEEWEE. "It's okay now, you turned 18 a minute ago!... but I can still complain about the facct that someone as squicky as you thought she was worthy of even jokingly asking for male slymepitter weewee."

Participating in the war on minors seeing porn image, even just as a weapon, is pretty fucking lame. If it's not a weapon, then it's even worse - they're probably part of that moronic group who supported the SOPA like law cos "protects minors from themselves."

#252

decius wrote:
EdwardGemmer wrote:
decius wrote:
Eucliwood wrote:
So, someone can make an orgy thread, but I can't jokingly ask for dick pictures?
Exactly. It's called the fucking law.
Is the fucking law different from the actual law?
Yes, inasmuch as you wish it were not the actual law.

I don't know. I've done a lot of research on this fucking law lately, and as far as I can tell, fucking is still legal in most states.

#253

Forgive my ignorance, but can someone give me a quick recap with all the shit going on with Vacula right now?

Also feel free to use this anyway you please:

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

#254

Trophy wrote:I'm sure there are a dozen tumblr sites full of dick pictures. And a lot of them actually do turn up when you google search them.

Yes, it's very easy to see pictures of any human body part, including things like dicks, breasts, etc. People need to get the fuck over it.
rofl.
"No, miss, you may see an arm... a leg... a torso, even... a head... a knee... BUT NOT THE WEEWEE. IT WILL DAMAGE YOUR BRAIN. AREN'T YOU GLAD THAT THE HUMAN RACE HAS DEVELOPED TO MAKE THE HUMAN BODY TABOOOO? BEFORE, PEOPLE UNDER 18 IN AMERICA HAD TO GO ON... SEEING THE WEEWEE! WITHOUT ANYONE TO BE CONCERNED FOAR THEM."

#255

Speaking of dramatic readings does anybody have the link or the screenshot of Simpleflower's "Hug Gate" flounce post on A+? I think I could muster up a dramatic Youtube reading of that.

#256

Eucliwood wrote:I say... again... what happens when I'm 18, rofl? That magic line. Suddenly, it's all good! No invisible consequences (excluding the law) to jokingly asking for pictures of... of... someone's WEEWEE. "It's okay now, you turned 18 a minute ago!... but I can still complain about the facct that someone as squicky as you thought she was worthy of even jokingly asking for male slymepitter weewee."

Participating in the war on minors seeing porn image, even just as a weapon, is pretty fucking lame. If it's not a weapon, then it's even worse - they're probably part of that moronic group who supported the SOPA like law cos "protects minors from themselves."

I think it's still legal for you to see someone's wee wee or hoo hoo, but your wee and/or hoo hoo are quite off limits. But someone sending you pictures of their wee wee and or hoo hoo could possibly be illegal, so people are rightfully getting uppity about it.

#257

Tony Parsehole wrote:Speaking of dramatic readings does anybody have the link or the screenshot of Simpleflower's "Hug Gate" flounce post on A+? I think I could muster up a dramatic Youtube reading of that.

Oh fuck yes please, dramatic readings, sir. Hurry up. Find it yourself if you have to. Meanwhile, I'm going to go rummaging for ~~wine coolers~~kiddie drinks.

Kidding.

#258

Eucliwood wrote:I say... again... what happens when I'm 18, rofl? That magic line. Suddenly, it's all good!

Maybe you should come back when you are 18, then there will be no problem.

#259

Eucliwood wrote:
Trophy wrote:I'm sure there are a dozen tumblr sites full of dick pictures. And a lot of them actually do turn up when you google search them.
Yes, it's very easy to see pictures of any human body part, including things like dicks, breasts, etc. People need to get the fuck over it.
rofl.
"No, miss, you may see an arm... a leg... a torso, even... a head... a knee... BUT NOT THE WEEWEE. IT WILL DAMAGE YOUR BRAIN. AREN'T YOU GLAD THAT THE HUMAN RACE HAS DEVELOPED TO MAKE THE HUMAN BODY TABOOOO? BEFORE, PEOPLE UNDER 18 IN AMERICA HAD TO GO ON... SEEING THE WEEWEE! WITHOUT ANYONE TO BE CONCERNED FOAR THEM."

Eucliwood. Posts like that make me think you are either 2 different people using the same account or just neurodiverse. Sometimes you can be so rational and succinct and other times you rant on like a mad cabbage.

#260

Great. Because of this discussion I spent the last 15 minutes checking out peenus pictures on tumblr.

#261

VickyCaramel wrote:
Eucliwood wrote:I say... again... what happens when I'm 18, rofl? That magic line. Suddenly, it's all good!
Maybe you should come back when you are 18, then there will be no problem.

Nah, people will forget that I dared mentioned anything to do with porn as a minor. I'm not waiting til then. Plus, it'll do them bad - they'll be used to the relief of a Eucli free space, and then get mad when I come back,.. PLUS the ability to badger people for pictures (because I'd do that, just to rub in that I'm no minor)? So close.. yet so far... :P

#262

Eucliwood wrote:I say... again... what happens when I'm 18, rofl? That magic line. Suddenly, it's all good! No invisible consequences (excluding the law) to jokingly asking for pictures of... of... someone's WEEWEE. "It's okay now, you turned 18 a minute ago!... but I can still complain about the facct that someone as squicky as you thought she was worthy of even jokingly asking for male slymepitter weewee."

Participating in the war on minors seeing porn image, even just as a weapon, is pretty fucking lame. If it's not a weapon, then it's even worse - they're probably part of that moronic group who supported the SOPA like law cos "protects minors from themselves."

Your opinion of the law(s) matters not at all. It is what it is, and breaking it, or even being seen as coming close to breaking it has real, permanent consequences, consequences you are not even in the same universe as worthy of risking.

#263

Tony Parsehole wrote:Speaking of dramatic readings does anybody have the link or the screenshot of Simpleflower's "Hug Gate" flounce post on A+? I think I could muster up a dramatic Youtube reading of that.

That thread was deleted IIRC. Apparently there's some things so embarrassing that even A+ is ashamed of them.

#264

Eucliwood is now moderated.

I'll let through all posts that I don't think may create legal liability for me.

Well done, darlin'!

#265

VickyCaramel wrote:
Eucliwood wrote:I say... again... what happens when I'm 18, rofl? That magic line. Suddenly, it's all good!
Maybe you should come back when you are 18, then there will be no problem.

I'm hoping for 81, but yeah. Or, accept one's legal age affects what one can do, and stop acting as though "I don't like it" changes anything.

#266

welch wrote:
Eucliwood wrote:I say... again... what happens when I'm 18, rofl? That magic line. Suddenly, it's all good! No invisible consequences (excluding the law) to jokingly asking for pictures of... of... someone's WEEWEE. "It's okay now, you turned 18 a minute ago!... but I can still complain about the facct that someone as squicky as you thought she was worthy of even jokingly asking for male slymepitter weewee."

Participating in the war on minors seeing porn image, even just as a weapon, is pretty fucking lame. If it's not a weapon, then it's even worse - they're probably part of that moronic group who supported the SOPA like law cos "protects minors from themselves."
Your opinion of the law(s) matters not at all. It is what it is, and breaking it, or even being seen as coming close to breaking it has real, permanent consequences, consequences you are not even in the same universe as worthy of risking.

Neither does yours. She's not breaking the law by asking for dick pics, somebody stupid enough to send them knowing she's 17 and joking might be.

#267

Tony Parsehole wrote: Eucliwood. Posts like that make me think you are either 2 different people using the same account or just neurodiverse. Sometimes you can be so rational and succinct and other times you rant on like a mad cabbage.

No, it's just a dramatic imitation of the way people like that think. And yay... I'm on moderation, which is pretty much equivalent to a ban. Expect people to see my posts two days later, if at all. Fuck this "18 means your a little kid and we have to watch you when you cross the street" excuse shit. If there's another forum that criticizes the baffoons that won't find an excuse to ban me (especially a disgusting old-fashioned bible thumping/otherkindofmoralitylamo excuse to do with age), someone can point it out to me. It will only benefit you there - I'd be able to post there on the subject of baffoons, and not (less?) here.

#268

Lsuoma wrote:Eucliwood is now moderated.

I'll let through all posts that I don't think may create legal liability for me.

Well done, darlin'!

Well done. And I think you should be diligent in checking s/h/it's pending post list to approve new posts. You know, once a month or so. ;)

#269

Lsuoma wrote:Eucliwood is now moderated.

I'll let through all posts that I don't think may create legal liability for me.

Well done, darlin'!

Sigh. One reason I have no blog, or forum, or whatever, is I can't imagine the time it takes to weed through moderation queues.

Thank you for your time.

#270

Tony Parsehole wrote:Hang on a second. If PoC does mean "person of colour" then wouldn't a "half Indian" person be likely to fit that description anyway?

I'm a person of color...technically the color is white, but it is a color.

#271

agarybuseychristmas wrote:Forgive my ignorance, but can someone give me a quick recap with all the shit going on with Vacula right now?

Short version - I started a fundraiser to send him to WiS2, for reasons stated here. It has been fairly successful so far, albeit with the usual hysterical overreactions from the usual suspects.

Longer version - http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... ularism-2/ (Share and enjoy!)

#272

Gumby wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote:Speaking of dramatic readings does anybody have the link or the screenshot of Simpleflower's "Hug Gate" flounce post on A+? I think I could muster up a dramatic Youtube reading of that.
That thread was deleted IIRC. Apparently there's some things so embarrassing that even A+ is ashamed of them.

Crap.
I tried finding it on here using the search but to no avail.
Ah well. It was just a thought. I'd have to go rooting for my microphone anyway.

#273

Eucliwood's name now being green makes her look like a moderator.

Which is funny.

#274

comslave wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote:Hang on a second. If PoC does mean "person of colour" then wouldn't a "half Indian" person be likely to fit that description anyway?
I'm a person of color...technically the color is white, but it is a color.

I'm also a person of colour. I think the technical term for my hue is Corned-beef-moonlight.

#275

cunt wrote:
Neither does yours. She's not breaking the law by asking for dick pics, somebody stupid enough to send them knowing she's 17 and joking might be.

Oh look, it's welch-cunt, standing on the homefront for the law. Lost all respect for the guy. "It's wrong cos the lawwww omg. People on this forum would TOTALLY post dick pictures here where MINORS CAN SEE THEM BECAUSE EUCLISQUICK, WHO IS DISLIKED BY MOST OF THE MALE POPULATION HERE JOKINGLY ASKED AND THAT ALSO USUALLY RESULTS IN PEOPLE GIVING A FUCK AND ARRESTING EVERYONE FOR ALLOWING PICTURES WHERE MINORS GOO... USUALLY PEOPLE TREAT THE FORUM LIKE SOME KIND OF PORN SITE AND INSTILL 18+ LAWS JUST SO PEOPLE CAN POST NSFW PICTURES!" Government boot kissers and patriotards annoy me. They're not the same thing, exacctly, but they have the same flavor.

I expect you guys to see this post like a month from now, where it will be irrelevant. Then, a shitstorm of complaints about "necro posts" will come up, saying it's my fault because I *made* Lsuoma do it.

#276

Eucliwood wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote: I'm on moderation, which is pretty much equivalent to a ban. Expect people to see my posts two days later, if at all. Fuck this "18 means your a little kid and we have to watch you when you cross the street" excuse shit.

I think you should go to your room young lady, and have a good hard thing about what you have done. You may come down when you apologize.

See what i wrote earlier about self-censorship, taking responsibility and having respect for other people on the forum.

#277

Eucliwood wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote: Eucliwood. Posts like that make me think you are either 2 different people using the same account or just neurodiverse. Sometimes you can be so rational and succinct and other times you rant on like a mad cabbage.
No, it's just a dramatic imitation of the way people like that think. And yay... I'm on moderation, which is pretty much equivalent to a ban. Expect people to see my posts two days later, if at all. Fuck this "18 means your a little kid and we have to watch you when you cross the street" excuse shit. If there's another forum that criticizes the baffoons that won't find an excuse to ban me (especially a disgusting old-fashioned bible thumping/otherkindofmoralitylamo excuse to do with age), someone can point it out to me. It will only benefit you there - I'd be able to post there on the subject of baffoons, and not (less?) here.

4chan probably has the free-est of speech on the net, except that:

http://i.imgur.com/10F6vDh.jpg

You aren't even allowed at 4chan.

I fail to see a reason the Slymepit should pay less attention to legalities than 4chan.

#278

This is ridiculous. As cunt says, a minor asking for dick pictures is not breaking the law; an adult who sends her picture of his (or someone else's junk) is. The moderation is bullshit.

#279

Question: If we have a minor on the board, can we no longer give and receive hugs?

#280

How about just asking her to stop asking for wee wee or hoo hoo pictures. I think we are pretty much on the same page now.

#281

Apples wrote:[spoiler]Rebecca decides not to push back further against PZ on his blog. Although she is EXHAUSTED, she is able to drag herself back over to Skepchick. Regarding PZ's statement that the Richard Dawkins Foundation should not be considered an "enemy":

Rebecca Watson wrote:I could not disagree more, obviously. When discussing whether or not an organization supports petty, resentful snipers, itâ€™s worth asking whether it keeps any on staff or whether the organization is named after one. Richard Dawkinsâ€™ comments have been the very definition of petty and resentful, including those he has continued posting on Twitter. Whether heâ€™s retweeting victim blaming trash or coming up with his very own passive aggressive ways to denigrate a free vaccine program because Skepchick runs it, he has not only failed to stop the torrent of abuse aimed at me and other women in this movement but he has actively participated in it himself. And Paula Kirby of RDFUK has spent months defending her point that those of us asking for atheist conferences to be safer spaces for women are literally like Nazis and the Stasi.

Regardless of what RDF does for science (and Iâ€™m not sure what that is, exactly, though I do know that they donate substantial amounts of money to other organizations that do actually do things), they are not to be counted among organizations that discourage harassment of women.

and, having forgotten to get her ReGretaVirus vaccination (probably because Richard Dawkins):

The harassment Marcotte and other feminists experience is non-stop and at times overwhelming. Hell, I havenâ€™t written a substantial blog post in ages, mostly because I have 800 tabs open filled with anti-woman bile and bitter hatred that I feel deserves to be exposed, but thereâ€™s just too much, and focusing on all of it long enough to write a post is exhausting.
http://skepchick.org/2013/01/on-optimism/

http://www.freezepage.com/1358701185KIMMTDJAPD[/spoiler]

Hmmm. Could this finally be a sign of a lesion in the shared Becky/Peezee umbilicus? Well I, for one, fuckin hope so. I don't think it likely, however - Becky is clearly not pleased at Peezee letting the RDF off the hook like that. Next conference, she'll freeze him out, barely suppressing her contempt behind those unblinking Himmler eyes should she chance the barest glance at him, and Peez'll feel all guilty and privileged, and grovel accordingly

Not that Becky'll care - she's movin on up with her celeb friends like, er, Jon Ronson, and Peez's usefulness to her is all but over, I reckon. I think there was something very telling about the fact that she referred to Pharyngula as 'a friend's blog' in that Slate article.

#282

EdwardGemmer wrote:
I don't know. I've done a lot of research on this fucking law lately, and as far as I can tell, fucking is still legal in most states.

It depends on whom you're fucking, mate. I find your laws very restrictive compared to ours, in Germany. There's no such thing as statutory rape, for instance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_co ... pe#Germany

#283

I'll have to add, while I'm not an expert on legal stuff, there are basically two possibilities: 1) either these forums should be kept as a place suitable for minors, in which case she should be allowed to post and the moderation lifted or 2) this place should be considered an adult environment in which case she should be banned. Either way, moderation is bullshit and it will not accomplish anything.

#284

Trophy wrote:This is ridiculous. As cunt says, a minor asking for dick pictures is not breaking the law; an adult who sends her picture of his (or someone else's junk) is. The moderation is bullshit.

Making requests or suggestions that somebody break the law is ok now? The implications of that are something to think about. Even if not falling foul of the law, then by giving ammunition to those people who have suggested that his forum is the pits.

#285

katamari Damassi wrote:Question: If we have a minor on the board, can we no longer give and receive hugs?

Add a trigger warning beforehand.

#286

Trophy wrote:This is ridiculous. As cunt says, a minor asking for dick pictures is not breaking the law; an adult who sends her picture of his (or someone else's junk) is. The moderation is bullshit.

A minor asking for dick pictures in a forum where not everyone readily understands she is a minor is asking for trouble for the entire forum, especially when that minor has previously sent unsolicited erotic fantasies to others and when that minor shows an ability to recognize the problems involved but no ability to act responsibly towards them.

If/when she turns 18, I think she is welcome to prove that to the site administrators and have the moderation lifted.

#287

nippletwister wrote:Jan Steen:[spoiler]
Louis didn't get it. He thinks itâ€™s about arguments. No, ultimately itâ€™s not. What bugs us, or makes us laugh, is the lying, the bullying, the slandering, the misrepresentation, the intellectual dishonesty, the flawed scepticism, in short, the cult-like behaviour, that is on display by the likes of PZ Myers, Ophelia Benson, Rebecca Watson and many members of their commentariat. That's what keeps us going.
Ding ding ding, we have a winner!

Although I'll go one further...these idiots (most of FTB, Skepchicks, A+ supporters) could lie and cry and be the idiots they love being, if they weren't also engaged in a fairly obvious campaign to slander and misrepresent everyone who disagrees with them, and more or less control the conference scene and who gets to speak at them, and who can be employed by secularist organizations. As it stands, their idiocy and hatred is starting to do damage to causes that I have supported for years, and turning it into nothing but a walled off group of idiot utopians who shit on everyone who doesn't share the glorious vision.

The modern internet versions of feminism and social justice activism are nothing short of hate groups filled with the most privileged, spoiled, rage-loving children I can imagine, and used by cynical people to gather up their own privilege and status. It's fucking obscene. But I would still leave them alone, if only they weren't shitting in the fucking living room, then having the nerve to demand praise and power for it.[/spoiler]

Damn. Go have a life for 24 hours and look what happens to the joint.

OK, did a fairly quick skim and I see that the bulk of the activity was precipitated by a visit from the Horde. First, props to Louis for taking the time to pay us a visit. Unfortunately, it was not a constructive one. Predictably, the bulk of the responsibility for that result falls upon Louis himself. This is not an opinion based on a desire to stereotype a member of the FtB, bu trather an examination of his posts. Part of the fault does lie within our own membership, if for no other reason that in the apparent desire to be nice to Louis, the first responders missed his actual game. The good news is, as the dust settled and things quited down, more of the membership clearly realize the mechanisms in play with Louis. I will add to that just a bit, as I think it is necessary for us to be absolutely clear as to what we are dealing with here and to use that experience to be better prepared should Louis decide to post again, or another Horde member pay us a visit.

First, I've seen no-one recognize, or at least name the most obvious and pertinent factor present: Louis is an acolyte.

acolyte [ËˆÃ¦kÉ™ËŒlaÉªt]
n
1. a follower or attendant
2. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) Christianity an officer who attends or assists a priest
[via Old French and Medieval Latin from Greek akolouthos a follower]

He would likely protest this characterization, but he signs are all over his posts. As such, his mind was made up long before he came over to the pyt and, contrary to his claims of 'curiousity', dealing with 'reality' and 'data' in this regard, he is operating from a deeply pre-disposed position, to the extent he willfully ignores the evidence even when placed firmly in front of him. In the most glaring example:

Louis posted:

â€œWell thanks for your unbiased views. I'll be intellectually dishonest, lacking in integrity, ignoring of honesty fairness and... oh I give up, wanna know what's boring, the endless whinging about FTB or PZ or Pharyngla or whatever, haven't you got anything better to do. Like I said, I'm not here to defend them (and yes, for the record, that thread with BubbaRich was on the pathetic side And?).â€

Well precisely: AND? He goes on (and on) about how their time is far to valuable to spend on responding to each and every endless inquiry from the unwashed masses, yet never addresses the simple fact that this simple question, which lies at the very root of much of th eFtB game and which got BubbaRich added to the ever growing list of banned visitors, has never, ever been answered.

Louis posted:

â€œI'm picking the side which doesn't think dehumanisation of women is okay.â€

Thereby exercising the standard and tactic of utterly sidestepping the question while putting himself automatically into the 'holier than thou' position of authority, later admitting that he has seen no evidence of this at the pyt (lately, mind you!) while leaving the unspoken implication hanging.

Louis posted:

â€œThe PZ deleting tactics, not sure what you're referring to, so whether it's okay or not I can't say, but it strikes me that this is one of those free speech areas that might be worth chatting about.â€

â€œAgain, I'm not responsible for PZ, FTB commenters, or for you.â€

â€œI spend zero time over on the A+ forums, so I have no idea what's going on over there. The initial concept attracts me for a variety of reasons.â€

Here we see the repeated application of the SEPF (Somebody Else's Problem Field). When an actual example of the dysfunction within FtB/A+ is presented, that particualr thing is outside his responsibility or knowledge. Interesting that he confirms his selective ignorance of A+ when even Myers has reluctantly admitted the forum has become a spectacular clusterfuck.

Louis posted:

â€œBut then I don't have to pick a fucking side. This is not a team game. This is about reality. It's about data, and science, and reason. It's about the ethics of the Enlightenment. Can I demonstrate my claims or not, can I support my arguments or not, can I act in such a way as to avoid the maximum amount of damage to others for the minimum inconvenience, can I recognise the value of the person in front of me irrespective of their social status, are their arguments good etc? It's not hard!â€

I'll close my observation with this quote. It is doubly interesting, because in spite of Louis' disclaimer about picking sides, he clearly has picked one and will willfully ignore anything that might penetrate that position. The irony lies within the last three word sentence. No, it's not hard. In fact, the pyt gives you a place for one-stop-shopping to find the truth, with screencaps and shared reports and links to various other sources and references, all of which have been created to point out the deep hypocrisy that lies at the center of FtB.

Of course, doing so requires a desire and interest to learn. You know, being 'curious'.

#288

Trophy wrote:This is ridiculous. As cunt says, a minor asking for dick pictures is not breaking the law; an adult who sends her picture of his (or someone else's junk) is. The moderation is bullshit.

Fuck that. There's a law against soliciting pornographic material from a minor. How about a minor taking responsibility, as well? She wants to be treated like an adult, then she should behave like one.

#289

katamari Damassi wrote:Question: If we have a minor on the board, can we no longer give and receive hugs?

More to the point: can we steal hugs?

#290

..., I finally open up a quote of yours and it's about insulting me? If you want to play the paranoia-minor card, how about you leave me alone? You look kind of creepy insulting a minor whenever you can. What's that about? I'm scared.

Did I mention that I've been in contact with agents before? They're very minor-shield happy... I can find her card somewhere... if not, I'll just walk down to the department. Policemen also run in the family.

I'm not kidding about having to be in the presence of FBI workers before. I'm tired of your shit, though, so it might be worth it to wail victim and actually embrace it. YOU'RE the only one in any danger of landing in trouble, using honey pot insults against me. That is so old.

I think Eucliwood is joking here, but I cannot be certain. I think she has shown terrible judgment in the recent past.
I read this as a threat (and far more likely to occur than anything Conlon said) that deserves either moderation or banning.

The entire form of this quote from her reads as a classic case of how a false accusation is justified by its perpetrator.

#291

A minor asking for dick pictures might not be against the law, but I live in the US where you don't have to be breaking the law for your life to get fucked over by mob justice.

The UK isn't immune, either: anyone remember the [url[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/901723.stm]paediatrician in Wales who got hounded out of her house by morons[/url]?

My board, my rules. Just remember how very few of them there really are, OK?

#292

Fuck it - borked the link, but you can copy and paste the URL.

#293

decius wrote:
Trophy wrote:This is ridiculous. As cunt says, a minor asking for dick pictures is not breaking the law; an adult who sends her picture of his (or someone else's junk) is. The moderation is bullshit.
Fuck that. There's a law against soliciting pornographic material from a minor. How about a minor taking responsibility, as well? She wants to be treated like an adult, then she should behave like one.

I think it is worth adding a little context. According to some people, criticizing their bullshit is equivalent to inciting stalkers to throw acid in their faces.

The question is, what if somebody had posted a photo of their dick for the lulz and nobody had asked for the photo?

#294

I find it quite amusing to see both Richard Carrier and Louis nonchalantly say that they haven't seen much, if anything, of the A+ boards. I think we're going to see a bit of trend emerge from the FTB crowd in this respect.

"What's that you say? A fucking big elephant shitting all over the lounge carpet? Erm, wouldn't know about that cos I haven't looked..."

#295

Lsuoma. Maybe the Pit needs an adult content disclaimer?* Just to cover your back.

*If it has just tell me to fuck off.

#296

VickyCaramel wrote:The question is, what if somebody had posted a photo of their dick for the lulz and nobody had asked for the photo?

Yeah, that's a good point. We need a fucking legal expert!

#297

What happened Vicky?

What did your boobs doooooo~?

#298

If Vicky's rack has successfully managed to bounce Eucliwood into moderation then they've done more for this forum than I've ever managed to.

#299

decius wrote:
Trophy wrote:This is ridiculous. As cunt says, a minor asking for dick pictures is not breaking the law; an adult who sends her picture of his (or someone else's junk) is. The moderation is bullshit.
Fuck that. There's a law against soliciting pornographic material from a minor. How about a minor taking responsibility, as well? She wants to be treated like an adult, then she should behave like one.

How about a minor being treated as an adult? You've lost the plot.

#300

Tigzy wrote:I find it quite amusing to see both Richard Carrier and Louis nonchalantly say that they haven't seen much, if anything, of the A+ boards. I think we're going to see a bit of trend emerge from the FTB crowd in this respect.

"What's that you say? A fucking big elephant shitting all over the lounge carpet? Erm, wouldn't know about that cos I haven't looked..."

I find it hard to believe they have never once looked at the forum OR have never heard, even from their own side, what a shit-pile the place is.
Are they telling us that Matt Dillahunty's foray into the A+ badlands passed them by too?