Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

[Cunning Punt]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

[Karmakin]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

Which is why i think that a community-based manifesto or code of conduct is better than a "rule".

[UnbelieveSteve]

Hm. Ever since the Secret Forum meltdown, A+ has become ...... boring. Most of the crazy has presumably retreated into the super-safe underground bunker, and the Capricious Mods thread is post-free and off the bestsellers list. There's even some scraps of rational discussion scattered here and there, with a noticeable and refreshing absence of Ceepolk and Flewellyn (I'm guessing hyperdeath told them to lighten up in the wake of the 'wind'-storm). On the other hand, hyperdeath is busily starting threads like "Most overrated movie" and "Which everyday technology impresses you the most?," like a nervous host at an awkward party offering stale cookies and cocktail weenies. Atheism Plus: where social justice goes to curl up in a ball and play dead.

The past 56 hours and 30 minutes Atheism Plus has increased its membership by 3.
Fuck off i'm not stalking. :shifty:

[Gefan]

...I had to trawl through months of slympit threads to find those pictures.
We simply don't post such stuff that often...

I joined the Pit in mid-December and was lurking for maybe a couple of months before that. I vist most days and try to keep up and yet probably half of the nick-names and photoshops in the Stefalump's list were news to me (so, thanks Stefalump, for catching me up on laughs I had missed).
Imagine the time and effort spent cataloging each insult. She probably has a file of the stuff. Imagine her beady eyes in the glow of the screen scrolling, scrolling, reaching for another donut, more scrolling.
I don't know where she finds the time to dress up in that cow costume.

Ask yourselves which would be worse: being trapped in a room with that much bitterness and resentment, or being trapped in a mind with it?

[sacha]

Sex is *always* good :animals-bunny:

Not with me, it's not...

Even bad sex is good, in as far as cardio stuff goes :D

bad sex is never good. mediocre sex isn't even good. fuck the cardio aspect. can one fuck a cardio aspect?

[Jan Steen]

Credible physical threats or serious wishes of violence as well as unauthorized disclosure of personal details could be grounds for editing or removing the comment, at the discretion of the moderator. Offenders may be banned temporarily or permanently.

Something along these lines would be good to have in place explicitly, if only to discredit those hysterical baboons who claim that the 'Pit is a den of dangerous misogynists who spend most of their time sending rape-threats.

[sacha]

Hahahahahahaha

"What do you think about freethought blogs?"

*pause*

Clever Bot: "They make me fall asleep."

hahaha

RW.jpg

fun with clever bot!

It asked if I had a boyfriend, I said no
girlfriend? no
boyfriend? no
are you a boy or a girl? woman
how old are you? ancient
is it dead?

hahaha

[AbsurdWalls]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

Which is why i think that a community-based manifesto or code of conduct is better than a "rule".

We could go "We do not stand for that, this is what we do stand for..." but I don't need a particularly long memory to know that getting an agreement from the community on what is acceptable will be difficult.

I mean, we could try, something like:

"We, as members of the Slymepit, are motivated by concern for the future of our movement. Under no circumstances do we approve of using threats of physical violence or any other intimidation to silence other people. We have done none of these things in the past, and will not support anyone who has done so. We assert our right to be treated as individuals, responsible only for the things that we ourselves say or publicly agree with."

and see how many people want to stick their names under it. You could make it longer and include no doxing, no sexism, no racism, no fat-jokes, etc. though I imagine you would reach a point where other people would start saying "Eh, I don't want to sign up to that."

[ReneeHendricks]

Sex is *always* good :animals-bunny:

Not with me, it's not...

Even bad sex is good, in as far as cardio stuff goes :D

bad sex is never good. mediocre sex isn't even good. fuck the cardio aspect. can one fuck a cardio aspect?

Having had bad, mediocre, good, and fucking excellent sex, I've always found the cardio bit good :D Then again, I'm an eternal optimist.

[sacha]

Hi, TheMudbrooker here.
I'm a Laborer by trade, that means I've done about everything related to construction at one time or another, but mainly I lay pipe on a water and sewer crew. The trouble is work has been slow these last few years and I kinda miss spending my days knee-deep in raw sewage. So when that guy over in Minnesota, whatshisname...that fella that kills all those little fish, said The Slymepit was a cesspit of unspeakable filth I thought to myself "Fuck yeah, sign me up! It'll be like old home week".

You know what I found when I got here?

Nary a floating turd, used tampon or whiff of hydrogen sulfide.

What a fucking rip-off. Of course it's my own damned fault, I know better than to listen to anybody that lives on the wrong side of the crick. :doh:

I know I'm far behind, but fuck off, MudBroker. funny stuff

[sacha]

Welcome to the Pit Mudbrooker! So, you like to "lay pipe" do you?

fascination is a slut

[sacha]

starts here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-524239
ends here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-524312

They're confusing wind with Windy. Silly billies.[/quote]

no, they are speaking of windy, not wind

[sacha]

[quote="Apples"]
Mudbrooker here's a welcome basket -
http://farm1.staticflickr.com/126/36664 ... 074415.jpg

gorgeous!

Phil Giordana will appreciate that as well

[sacha]

love the new tagline

[sacha]

Welcome to the Pit Mudbrooker! So, you like to "lay pipe" do you?

Oh my yes. It's dirty as hell and it gets pretty physical at times, but it's really a fairly simple procedure. First, you install a rubber and lube it up good. Then you carefully line up the spigot end of your pipe so the rubber doesn't roll out and cause a leak. After that, you grab your five-foot Johnson bar, stab it in the ground a few times to get a good bite, take your bar in both hands, put a little ass behind it and slam the pipe home till it bottoms out. I'll save explaining the proper use a a whacker for another time.
The wages and benefits are good, but mostly I do it for the double entendres.

okay now I'm wet

[sacha]

The Slymepit ends up becoming the real Safe Place instead of A+ ?!?!?! That is really, really going to screw with someone's narrative! :lol:

*sigh*

I am already self censoring.

For example I cancelled a post where I joked and said stuff like:

Oh do not worry about being stalked. If you do get concerned all you have to do is go to a window and say something. I am right outside.

*gloomy*

noooooooooo

do not self-censor! fuck.

[sacha]

Welcome to the Pit Mudbrooker! So, you like to "lay pipe" do you?

Oh my yes. It's dirty as hell and it gets pretty physical at times, but it's really a fairly simple procedure. First, you install a rubber and lube it up good. Then you carefully line up the spigot end of your pipe so the rubber doesn't roll out and cause a leak. After that, you grab your five-foot Johnson bar, stab it in the ground a few times to get a good bite, take your bar in both hands, put a little ass behind it and slam the pipe home till it bottoms out. I'll save explaining the proper use a a whacker for another time.
The wages and benefits are good, but mostly I do it for the double entendres.

My panties are soaked ;)

fascination wears "panties"

[Metalogic42]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

Which is why i think that a community-based manifesto or code of conduct is better than a "rule".

We could go "We do not stand for that, this is what we do stand for..." but I don't need a particularly long memory to know that getting an agreement from the community on what is acceptable will be difficult.

I mean, we could try, something like:

"We, as members of the Slymepit, are motivated by concern for the future of our movement. Under no circumstances do we approve of using threats of physical violence or any other intimidation to silence other people. We have done none of these things in the past, and will not support anyone who has done so. We assert our right to be treated as individuals, responsible only for the things that we ourselves say or publicly agree with."

and see how many people want to stick their names under it. You could make it longer and include no doxing, no sexism, no racism, no fat-jokes, etc. though I imagine you would reach a point where other people would start saying "Eh, I don't want to sign up to that."

I'm not sure about this, as I wouldn't agree to it unless it was extremely specific. I'm not sure how many people are aware of this, but a few days back someone on twitter said something about attacking men's testicles with a pickaxe. I tweeted back that if I am attacked, I will defend myself. Does that count as a threat of violence? Maybe, maybe not. Although, I definitely wouldn't use *anything* to silence people. I'm opposed to silencing people regardless of the method.

The sexism part also bothers me; not because I'm sexist, but because the SJWs think I am. So if I sign this, then say "cunt", they would retort with "See??? He's breaking the rules he agreed to!!!"

I'm also completely in favor of jokes on any and all subject matter. "No ____ jokes" is something I absolutely will not agree to, regardless of what you stick in the blank.

[AndrewV69]

In other news:

Pussy Riot's Nadezhda Tolokonnikova transferred to prison hospital
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... n-hospital

Prison authorities are, however, likely to take special care of celebrity prisoners. "They are probably very frightened of something happening to Tolokonnikova," Rimmer said. "There would be a big scandal."

[sacha]

Incidentally, whilst one can stop being a religious Jew, one is still a ethnic Jew. Hence Jewish atheists, for example.

not always. I know "Jewish" people who are atheists and their parents were atheists, and they have no ties to Jewish culture/ethnicity. They see that "ethnic Jew" thing as offensive. Like PoC.

Git is correct. Mark Chu-Carroll wrote about this on his blog Good Math, Bad Math a couple of years back. There's even a wikipedia entry for it, here.

*shrug* Thought it was common knowledge.

First Post!

'Sup pit... Fuck Off.

did you even read what I wrote?

"not always. I know "Jewish" people who are atheists and their parents were atheists, and they have no ties to Jewish culture/ethnicity. They see that "ethnic Jew" thing as offensive. Like PoC."

[Lsuoma]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

Which is why i think that a community-based manifesto or code of conduct is better than a "rule".

Yep, this is what I thought too. Also, when some knobhead DOES post something bad, idiots will scream that the (unenforceable, without 100% moderation) rules are being ignored. Plus one also has to get watertight definitions of where the lines are to be drawn. I tend towards Potter Stewart's attitude towards pornography.

I think that the balance here is actually very good: I definitely don't want to rein in the anarchy.

I still think the rules I posted last night are enough, combined with good community engagement and policing.

[sacha]

Lol. I'd do that, but let's be clear: I'd do it in full-on asshole mode the entire time. We all know they have no integrity, and zero desire to have this end. But if I could spool them up until they were screaming profanities and yanking their mic cords out of their computers so hard they broke them?

That would be GLORIOUS.

So yeah, I'd do that. Because that's the only reason to talk to them at all.

oooh I want to join you. I could be the token cunt on the panel

[decius]

fascination is a slut

I hope so.

[comslave]

Sex is *always* good :animals-bunny:

Not with me, it's not...

Even bad sex is good, in as far as cardio stuff goes :D

bad sex is never good. mediocre sex isn't even good. fuck the cardio aspect. can one fuck a cardio aspect?

Having had bad, mediocre, good, and fucking excellent sex, I've always found the cardio bit good :D Then again, I'm an eternal optimist.

That depends on how far you can run before he catches you. :rimshot:
(that one was for Ophelia)

[AbsurdWalls]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

Which is why i think that a community-based manifesto or code of conduct is better than a "rule".

We could go "We do not stand for that, this is what we do stand for..." but I don't need a particularly long memory to know that getting an agreement from the community on what is acceptable will be difficult.

I mean, we could try, something like:

"We, as members of the Slymepit, are motivated by concern for the future of our movement. Under no circumstances do we approve of using threats of physical violence or any other intimidation to silence other people. We have done none of these things in the past, and will not support anyone who has done so. We assert our right to be treated as individuals, responsible only for the things that we ourselves say or publicly agree with."

and see how many people want to stick their names under it. You could make it longer and include no doxing, no sexism, no racism, no fat-jokes, etc. though I imagine you would reach a point where other people would start saying "Eh, I don't want to sign up to that."

I'm not sure about this, as I wouldn't agree to it unless it was extremely specific. I'm not sure how many people are aware of this, but a few days back someone on twitter said something about attacking men's testicles with a pickaxe. I tweeted back that if I am attacked, I will defend myself. Does that count as a threat of violence? Maybe, maybe not. Although, I definitely wouldn't use *anything* to silence people. I'm opposed to silencing people regardless of the method.

The sexism part also bothers me; not because I'm sexist, but because the SJWs think I am. So if I sign this, then say "cunt", they would retort with "See??? He's breaking the rules he agreed to!!!"

I'm also completely in favor of jokes on any and all subject matter. "No ____ jokes" is something I absolutely will not agree to, regardless of what you stick in the blank.

I wouldn't say a promise to defend oneself if attacked constitutes a threat. RE: Sexism, I would say that is a non-issue. Think about it this way: if you were to be judged by 12 [persons] good and true, would they find it sexist? I would not worry about the claims of people who think a man disagreeing with a woman is sexism.

There are some cases that would be an issue, for example if we have "no doxing" on there and include the "never done it" line then some members here would be accused of lying if they signed it. In that case there are a few options:
1) Don't have a "no doxing" clause
2) Do have a "no doxing" clause but drop the "never done it" line
3) Accept that some members do not live up to that manifesto and should not sign it
4) Allow those signatories to defend themselves against accusations of hypocrisy/lying
5) Have two versions, with and without the "never done it" line

This should go without saying, but I feel the need to clarify that I am not proposing this be something that is binding on members of the pit or is intended to be signed by all members or anything. My point is that I think most members could agree on a set of shared principles that might be worth articulating as a response to the accusations usually levelled against this forum.

[Metalogic42]

RE: Sexism, I would say that is a non-issue. Think about it this way: if you were to be judged by 12 [persons] good and true, would they find it sexist? I would not worry about the claims of people who think a man disagreeing with a woman is sexism.

It's not that I'm worried about those people, it's that it gives them even more fuel for the fire. Which seems to run counter to the purpose of the manifesto in the first place. In a way, it would be helping them continue their bullshit smear campaigns against the pit.

[Lsuoma]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

Which is why i think that a community-based manifesto or code of conduct is better than a "rule".

Yep, this is what I thought too. Also, when some knobhead DOES post something bad, idiots will scream that the (unenforceable, without 100% moderation) rules are being ignored. Plus one also has to get watertight definitions of where the lines are to be drawn. I tend towards Potter Stewart's attitude towards pornography.

I think that the balance here is actually very good: I definitely don't want to rein in the anarchy.

I still think the rules I posted last night are enough, combined with good community engagement and policing.

I.e. they will stay in place until someone convinces me they need to be changed. Threats of violence are covered under the illegal stuff. Condoning threats of violence is covered under the "what Lsuoma likes" stuff. Anyone is free to agree or disagree, stay or go, at their discretion if they don't like what I like. Hell, loads of people already disagree with me and insult me. So what? Fuck 'em. But they don't get banned or sanctioned.

The earlier posts that have said we need to say that CP is unacceptable are wrong, I believe, to suggest that I put in place specific rules already covered by general ones. Or irrelevant rules, such as stupid open container laws: drunk driving is illegal. Having a rule against an open bevy in a car dies nothing to change that. It adds nothing, and prevents passengers drinking.

If someone can point me to something specific not covered by the rules, please do.

[decius]

Although the overstepping of certain boundaries irk me to no end, I'm not sure about formalising an ethos we already share through a bureaucratic process.

We're at risk of repeating one of the basic error of our antagonists - namely, something akin to drafting an "anti-harassment policy.

There's the law and there's the individual responsibility that comes with unbridled free speech. If anyone needs to be reminded is either in bad faith, or a criminal, or a complete idiot.

[Lsuoma]

Oh, and thanks for the big donation from Oz. New Spewfrogs, here I come!

[Al Stefanelli]

An 8-year-old choir boy catches the priest masturbating.

He said, "What are you doing father?"

"It's called masturbating," the priest replied. "You'll be doing this soon."

"Why father?" he asked.

"Because my wrist is killing me," the priest replied.

[decius]

I.e. they will stay in place until someone convinces me they need to be changed. Threats of violence are covered under the illegal stuff. Condoning threats of violence is covered under the "what Lsuoma likes" stuff. Anyone is free to agree or disagree, stay or go, at their discretion if they don't like what I like. Hell, loads of people already disagree with me and insult me. So what? Fuck 'em. But they don't get banned or sanctioned.

The earlier posts that have said we need to say that CP is unacceptable are wrong, I believe, to suggest that I put in place specific rules already covered by general ones. Or irrelevant rules, such as stupid open container laws: drunk driving is illegal. Having a rule against an open bevy in a car dies nothing to change that. It adds nothing, and prevents passengers drinking.

If someone can point me to something specific not covered by the rules, please do.

I agree. It should really be sufficient.

[Lsuoma]

Although the overstepping of certain boundaries irk me to no end, I'm not sure about formalising an ethos we already share through a bureaucratic process.

We're at risk of repeating one of the basic error of our antagonists - namely, something akin to drafting an "anti-harassment policy.

There's the law and there's the individual responsibility that comes with unbridled free speech. If anyone needs to be reminded is either in bad faith, or a criminal, or a complete idiot.

Yes, and we can deal with those types as they arise, as we have already done on several occasions.

[ReneeHendricks]

Oh, and thanks for the big donation from Oz. New Spewfrogs, here I come!

LOL! Spewfrogs :)

Speaking of donations, you did receive the one I made like a week or two ago, right?

[Lsuoma]

A woman and a young boy are walking through the woods late at night, and the boy says "I'm scared!"

The woman turns to him and says "You're scared? I'm the one who's going to be walking back on my own!"

[Casual Nemesis]

I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.

Xth. Threats of violence are unacceptable. Resorting to them in a conflict of ideas just shows the weakness of the person’s position and/or character, and creates potential legal issues for the site.

[Lsuoma]

Oh, and thanks for the big donation from Oz. New Spewfrogs, here I come!

LOL! Spewfrogs :)

Speaking of donations, you did receive the one I made like a week or two ago, right?

Yes, I did: many, many thanks.

I thought I'd mentioned all if them, but if not: "Thank ALL the Pitters!"

[AndrewV69]

I admit up front that I do not know who started this "freeze peach" business but once you go down that road I have no sympathy for you.

So, go ahead, ban someone like Ann Coulter and the like, and eventually you wind up with this kind of situation, where the shoe is on the other foot.

Brooklyn College's academic freedom increasingly threatened over Israel event
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... dershowitz

The above, in the end is what "freeze peach" gets you.

(pretty simplistic I agree, no idea who started it, but once you get on the slippery slope, do not be surprised it it turns into a razor blade)

[ReneeHendricks]

Oh, and thanks for the big donation from Oz. New Spewfrogs, here I come!

LOL! Spewfrogs :)

Speaking of donations, you did receive the one I made like a week or two ago, right?

Yes, I did: many, many thanks.

I thought I'd mentioned all if them, but if not: "Thank ALL the Pitters!"

Ok, just making sure :) 'Twasn't much but I wanted to show some support since everyone here let's me off-topic vent on occasion.

[welch]

Utoh. Looks like Stephie-pookins is not pleased :D

http://www.freezepage.com/1359839261CBYUSOIJFR

I find it hilarious that Svan spent ages defending Surly Amy's dodgy DMCA claims with the argument that you cannot simply take photos from one persons website and reuse them on your own without permission - especially if you will be making money from it through ad revenue.

Now, of course, that argument is out the window.

Hey Svan, stop stealing our artwork! :twisted:

Lsuoma, you should DMCA her ass. :D


I guess we'll get a few more FTB visitors now.

Good.

Welcome to the Slymepit!

Unlike Stephanie Zvan we, here at the slymepit, don't defend threats of violence against women.

Anything you would like to add to your contributions here, Steff? :)
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2010/ ... -too-sexy/

:popcorn:

Unless you're surly amy, and reusing Namco's IP for profit. then it's totes okey-dokey.

[sacha]

@Sacha and Rayshul You've both made me feel better. I just found out recently that I'm going to have to have another C section. My first pregnancy was an emergency c section and because of the way that went down this one will have to be a scheduled c section. I was hoping to have a vaginal birth this time. I really didn't want to have to have major abdominal surgery again. A minor thing was I didn't want a second scar or a bigger scar. I have a really good OB and my first scar is tiny. But fuck it, it's a minor thing. The doctor says it should be small anyway. Plus, there's two beautiful women here that say scars are sexy! :D

sexyscar.png

(116.93 KiB) Downloaded 142 times

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/ ... attraction

monroe 2.png

(137.33 KiB) Downloaded 150 times

I like scars.

[Git]

bad sex is never good. mediocre sex isn't even good. fuck the cardio aspect. can one fuck a cardio aspect?

With great effort.

[welch]

Utoh. Looks like Stephie-pookins is not pleased :D

http://www.freezepage.com/1359839261CBYUSOIJFR

:lol: - Damn, that review of Steffy's history on the pit is a hoot. There has been some seriously funny shit posted here about her.

Course, there's vitriol, too. And were Steffy a more honest, consistent and downright less vindictive commentator, I would have some sympathy for her.

Well, she added links, which is a lot more of what the FTB bloggers and commenters usually do.

And yes, I can imagine she doesn't like reading/seeing those things about her, but guess what, Steffany, I don't fucking like being told that I'm a brain damaged female, or that I have a rape switch, or that I'm a rape enabler, or that testosterone fucks up the brain.

People with glass houses and all that.

well, if the things said here upset her so, she could always stop reading this site.

[sacha]

Welcome to the Pit Mudbrooker! So, you like to "lay pipe" do you?

You beat me to it :D

Mudbrooker here's a welcome basket -
http://farm1.staticflickr.com/126/36664 ... 074415.jpg

CORN SNAAAAAKE!!!

<3 <3 <3

and... I was correct

[sacha]

He must be a Septic.

Hahaha. I don't know what a "Septic" is, but I assume it's an oh- so- clever wordplay of "Skeptic"/"septic"(as in sewer).

septic tank - yank

[welch]

Looks like some of you have provided Stephanie Zvan with plenty of ammo to give her an easy job of getting moderates to hate this place. Nice one!

The fact that I'd hardly seen any of it just shows how much I skim over that kind of nonsense.

Yes, I know they're hypocritical but for God's sake - rise above it! Lots of people here claim to oppose the SJW witch-hunters but I'm sorry to say that some of you have been an invaluable asset to them. I said this (along with a few others) near the end of the old 'slime pit' on ERV and I haven't changed my opinion.

If I bought the guilt-by-association argument, which I don't, I'd have already renounced this place.

No.

Not just no, but go fuck yourself. I am tired, so heartily tired of this moronic meme that we should somehow meet some higher standard of behavior and that if we do, we'll "win" or "do better" or what.

Bullshit, and you can't even come close to proving that on any level. Prove to me, show me one fucking scintilla of proof that if we, right the fuck now, behaved as they, or you wish us to, that anything, any. fucking. thing. would change one goddamned iota.

you can't, and you know it. And spare me the fucking "OMG JOO GIVE THEM AMMO". We have seen, we have proof, over and over, that they will deliberately take reasonable statements, and twist them to mean whatever it takes to give them the "ammo" they want. What, Shermer's statement was some kind of profanity-laden screed? Give me a fucking break, look at what PeeZus did to Novella, who was reasonable down to the punctuation.

You sound like every stupid tit who claimed that calling software a steaming pile of shit, even with extensive examples, would get me nowhere. They got real fucking quiet when it helped get results.

I can point to real-world examples of the efficacy of smacking someone upside the head in print or verbally to get their fucking attention to fix a problem. What the fuck do you have to a) prove that didn't happen, and b) that your method is so fucking much better?

[sacha]

I'm up for free childcare at conventions. I wouldn't demand it or consider it as a "YAY WOMENZZZZ WIN" thing (it wouldn't benefit me any) but it's a "nice to have".

And it is intended to benefit PARENTS, for fux sake, not just XX chromosome breeders.
It is for Dad's and Grandparent's and Foster carers.

Originally, when the subject first came up, I admit it took me a few minutes to parse why free childcare would be a "woman's" issue as most women I know with sproggins are, like me, not the primary caregiver - but that does seem to have been the narrative around it. Women get childcare so they don't have to stay home! Yay! Feminism.

it's really surreal how they see the world in terms of the 1950's and prior

[TheMudbrooker]

Welcome to the Pit Mudbrooker! So, you like to "lay pipe" do you?

Oh my yes. It's dirty as hell and it gets pretty physical at times, but it's really a fairly simple procedure. First, you install a rubber and lube it up good. Then you carefully line up the spigot end of your pipe so the rubber doesn't roll out and cause a leak. After that, you grab your five-foot Johnson bar, stab it in the ground a few times to get a good bite, take your bar in both hands, put a little ass behind it and slam the pipe home till it bottoms out. I'll save explaining the proper use a a whacker for another time.
The wages and benefits are good, but mostly I do it for the double entendres.

okay now I'm wet

Someday when I'm good and liquored up I'll tell ya what the topman and bottomman are getting up to while I'm busy laying pipe. :shock:

[Tigzy]

Utoh. Looks like Stephie-pookins is not pleased :D

http://www.freezepage.com/1359839261CBYUSOIJFR

:lol: - Damn, that review of Steffy's history on the pit is a hoot. There has been some seriously funny shit posted here about her.

Course, there's vitriol, too. And were Steffy a more honest, consistent and downright less vindictive commentator, I would have some sympathy for her.

Well, she added links, which is a lot more of what the FTB bloggers and commenters usually do.

And yes, I can imagine she doesn't like reading/seeing those things about her, but guess what, Steffany, I don't fucking like being told that I'm a brain damaged female, or that I have a rape switch, or that I'm a rape enabler, or that testosterone fucks up the brain.

People with glass houses and all that.

well, if the things said here upset her so, she could always stop reading this site.

I have a strong feeling that there's a core of baboons who find the Slymepit a guilty pleasure. I'm pretty sure Oolon does - can hardly let a post go by without mentioning this place. He's like a repressed gay who keeps on saying how much he hates gays.

That post by Steffy is still giving me the lulz - 'look how mean they are being about meeeee!'. Peez has recently put a post out in support of it - surprise, surprise - though his latest one is about taking a guy to task because he has made up some bullshit that women on the pill have a lot of dead babies in their wombs. http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... interwebs/

Yeah, making up a load of old shit - Like that the slymepit is an anti-feminist site - is reprehensible, Peez, I'd agree with you there.

I'm pretty sure Peez's one redeeming quality as that he'd actually look quite good in lederhosen.

[Gefan]

sex is never good. mediocre sex isn't even good. fuck the cardio aspect. can one fuck a cardio aspect?

Only if there is enthusiastic consent.

[EdwardGemmer]

I'm up for free childcare at conventions. I wouldn't demand it or consider it as a "YAY WOMENZZZZ WIN" thing (it wouldn't benefit me any) but it's a "nice to have".

And it is intended to benefit PARENTS, for fux sake, not just XX chromosome breeders.
It is for Dad's and Grandparent's and Foster carers.

Originally, when the subject first came up, I admit it took me a few minutes to parse why free childcare would be a "woman's" issue as most women I know with sproggins are, like me, not the primary caregiver - but that does seem to have been the narrative around it. Women get childcare so they don't have to stay home! Yay! Feminism.

it's really surreal how they see the world in terms of the 1950's and prior

It really is like they took a bunch of random thoughts, shook them out, and declared everyone who doesn't believe in them is a sexist. Also, why are they so obsessed with conferences?

[EdwardGemmer]

sex is never good. mediocre sex isn't even good. fuck the cardio aspect. can one fuck a cardio aspect?

Only if there is enthusiastic consent.

LOL.

[sacha]

Have I mentioned that I love doing that reversal of the sexes thing on situations, to see how the reaction would differ? It often reveals so much! :)

love that game.

[justinvacula]

Brave Hero Karla Porter:

Women - Do you know of any social or economic pressures that make wearing high heels necessary for women to advance in their careers, or that give women who do wear high heels a career advantage over women who don’t (And not just fashion)?

[UnbelieveSteve]

Looks like the latest #blocksaturday was a failure.
LOL @ the last tweet.
So much for railing the troops for a frontal assault on the slyme via mass tweet blocking. Aratina, you don't have as many friends as you think you have. :lol:

[sacha]

Place your bets.

Shave off the 'stache. Then they won't recognise you.

actually, grow a full beard.

[welch]

I don't give a fuck!

I know, which is why I don't say this more often. I just usually facepalm to myself, and try to work out why people who seem to hate FTB etc. so much would go to such lengths to help them.

if this place so offends your sensibilities, by all means, there are other places on the internet you may go. Please, do go there.

I imagine you spend just as much time tut-tutting at the FTB lot...oh wait, no you fucking don't, certainly not on your site.

let's see, posts wherein Notung has directly opposed FTB using the tools he feels we should limit ourselves to:

Since 24 Aug. 2012, you've done this TWICE. Once about "DrunkenRapeGate" and once about A+. The rest of it is naught but philosophy theory with the occasional petition request. So it's pretty clear you aren't about to sully your hands pointing out the problem with FTB/A+ et al.

If you are unwilling to do the work yourself, then shut the fuck up about how the people who ARE doing the work fill their toolbox.

[welch]

It gave me pause too, for a moment.

The only way you're not going to get that stuff is if we have moderation against things which are hurtful, crude, or offensive. As soon as you have that, you have to determine what crosses that threshold and who makes that judgement. I don't trust anyone to decide for me what I should see and read.

So I could set up my own forum, try to tempt you all over, and then engage in the thankless job of deleting crass content whilst scaring you all off back here. Or I can face up to the fact that only a moron would judge me for the things that bhoytony or whoever say, and relax again.

Maybe even laugh at a few of those excerpted posts.

The first part is a fair point, and I know that any unmoderated place is going to get like that. So rather than blaming the forum itself (I don't) I blame the individuals involved - many of whom I do find amusing sometimes.

I also agree that only someone dishonest or stupid would try to judge someone by the fact they post/visit here. But so what? It still gives them rhetorical ammo to use against 'Slymepitters', and helps discredit the only place hosting a free and continuous discussion on these issues.

Yes. I'm sure we are quite convenient for you.

[welch]

So I just watched the Google hangout with PZ, C0nc0rdance, TruePooka and SkepticalHeretic, and wow, PZ flat out lied throughout the whole thing. When pressed by C0nc0rdance and SkepticalHeretic about his banning policies and even about this very site and Abbie Smith, he either deflected like crazy, claimed he didn't ban anyone except those who failed to coherently argue a point, and that he didn't build a wall within his blog. He also claimed that plenty of dissenting views are expressed on Pharyngula. WTF, is there a 3rd magical Pharyngula somewhere that doesn't feature the auto-bans just for being a member of a site like this and where people whose comments which are not in line with the majority opinion aren't deleted, altered or never seen after the majority of users deem them unnaceptable for being contrary to popular viewpoints?

[youtube]1Q7PprXJ-h8[/youtube]

I take nothing PeeZus says seriously unless he says it to my face.

[decius]

Bullshit, and you can't even come close to proving that on any level. Prove to me, show me one fucking scintilla of proof that if we, right the fuck now, behaved as they, or you wish us to, that anything, any. fucking. thing. would change one goddamned iota.

I respectfully disagree. There are high-profile atheists who would have otherwise contributed but have been positively put off. You might argue that it's their loss and I would be tempted to agree to some extent. But knowing a few of them, I can assure that heir intellectual prowess would be a formidable asset. You'd agree that low-brow shit isn't for everyone.

[jimthepleb]

I am pretty sure we can continue to self-regulate as we have done in the past. Last night was an excellent example of someone not being tolerated when the unspoken boundaries were crossed. There was unequivocal condemnation of his behaviour, and within the ensuing conversation he even rowed back himself given a little time for retrospection. Lsuoma has given us a list of what he will not tolerate and as owner of the board he is the final arbiter of what is, and is not permissible. I do wonder what would have happened had Lsuoma not been active at the time of the posting. A lag in dealing with this kind of crap could be extremely risky, as it leaves the potential for a rogue comment to lie unedited for several hours, giving vindictive lurkers the ability to make hay while the issue is not addressed.
Perhaps it would be an idea to give some (limited) ops to some of the more established commenters just to cover your (large) arse? Although it's a job i wouldn't want in a month of Sundays. Just throwing it out there.