If thou gazest long into the Pit, the Pit will also gaze into thee

Steersman wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:Svan attacks the slymepit again:

I guess her doxxing action is beginning to hit home.

I am ever so helpfully informed sometimes that I shouldn’t complain about the kind of crap that gets posted about me at the slime pit. After all, these self-described rational people say, I don’t have to go there to see it.
<snip>
*Okay, one more funny story. Did you know that I my name is a pseudonym? You can totally tell it’s true by the fact that two first-time commenters showed up in the last couple of days to suggest I’d never say what I say if I were using my real name. Or you can go over to the pit and see the idea be proposed, rejected, and retconned into the shape it showed up here. Cute, huh?

http://www.freezepage.com/1370416649BAYKMKAMHR

I think she has a point – there have been more than a few dickhead statements made here, that “fat fucking cunt” probably being a credible example (my own expression of that being in response to a direct provocation, i.e., “asshole”). And I expect that there are more than a few who pass through here who are only looking for ammunition and aren’t too particular whether what they pick up carries any weight or not.

However, where I think she goes badly wrong [“hello Stephanie. Too bad you don’t have enough ‘courage-of-your-convictions’ to either pull up a chair and join the conversation here or to allow a real one on your own blog”] is in failing to notice that it is hardly a case of all of us agreeing with such comments or with the actions and comments of all who post here as well as on Twitter or on various FTB sites. Really a case, I think, of deliberate obtuseness if not one of egregious demagoguery in trying to tar us all with the same rather questionable brush.

In addition, she seems to be rather disingenuous – being charitable as per Michael Nugent’s suggestion – in failing to note, among many similar cases, some rather egregious comments on her own blog – Setar’s for example – which are even more so since she obviously exercises editorial control – such as it is – over what sees the light of day and so has to accept some responsibility for them.

See where i bolded above. Replace with fat cunt.

And just for you staffy duck, outrage crumbs, you need them, and so you are given them. Keep on feeding.

"They drop Doxxs on people, but they won't let us write fat cunt on our blogs" Acuntalypse Now

Gefan wrote:

Mykeru wrote: GOD DAMN IT! As far as I know there's only one person who consistently refers to Ophelia Benson as "Oafie" on Twitter, and that person is ME.

Fuck, once again, I'm leading the way in being a truly reprehensible human being and someone else gets all the credit. It's Reap's photoshops all over again.

This is really beginning to porcupine my stink-hole.

Hey, at least you're getting named as a harasser on twitter. I just suggested we'd all get turned on by the image of Rebecca Watson on fire and haven't gotten a fucking peep out of those miserable bastards.

Currently my hypothesis is along these lines:

Individual's prominence (and potential of their name to generate publicity) x seriousness of their "offense" = Baboon Batshit Freakout (BBF - measured in Surlyamys per hour)

Examples:
Ron Lyndsay (Head of CFI) x Brief, mild suggestion that dogmatic feminism should be subject to skepticism by self-described skeptics = attempted public lynching
Mykeru (Slymepit's Adam Curtis impersonator and Twitter ninja) x Calling Ophelia Benson names = mention in dispatches from Baboon GHQ
Gefan (who?) x suggesting the Slymepit would attain a collective hard-on / wide-on at the image of Rebecca Watson of in flames = sound of crickets.

[Shakes fist] I'm not quitting you fuckers!

If at first you don't succeed,

http://www.freeflashpoker.net/arcade/im ... i-hand.png

That is all.

Dick Strawkins wrote:The safest way to figure out the safest way to interact with Ophelia Benson is to ask yourself:

"What would Justin Vacula do?"

Give her a moustache ride?

...and then do the fucking opposite.

Oh, sorry. Should have read to the end.

I had a really good laugh at the idea that OB would sign that petition. I also had a really good laugh that anyone would not see that Ophilia F. Benson = Ophelia Fucking Benson.

Of course I would probably do myself an injury, by way of rupturing several internal organs due to a giggle fit if I am wrong.

That is all.

Nice catch, Za-zen. :)

Baker was pretty privileged given she had like, a jaguar covered in diamonds and shit like that*. Also she made money displaying her hot bod for mad $$, thus promoting the sexualisation of women. I'm pretty sure she's a class A gender traitor.

Have a good reference of how I talk, too - with less of an accent:

[youtube]JZHwabNaJFQ[/youtube]

I don't know how you can be a social justice warrior in Australia, I just don't fucking get it.



*Almost true

Mykeru wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:The safest way to figure out the safest way to interact with Ophelia Benson is to ask yourself:

"What would Justin Vacula do?"

Give her a moustache ride?

...and then do the fucking opposite.

Oh, sorry. Should have read to the end.

I was going to say something about clams and chowder but I accidentally a pluperfect and lost the proposition.

Whatever man. Fuck. And so to bed. G'night all, wayyyyyy past my bedtime.

That's a funny one:

"Check your privilege quizz"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/quiz/ ... ilege-quiz

Just going to leave this here:

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 3060570924

Ok Jonathan, seems we're aligned...

Oh, I would like to thank Sacha for the very valuable infos she gave me about managing a young, almost untrained dog.

Cheers!

Za-zen wrote:

Steersman wrote: I think she has a point – there have been more than a few dickhead statements made here, that “fat fucking cunt” probably being a credible example (my own expression of that being in response to a direct provocation, i.e., “asshole”). And I expect that there are more than a few who pass through here who are only looking for ammunition and aren’t too particular whether what they pick up carries any weight or not.
<snip>

See where i bolded above. Replace with fat cunt.

And just for you staffy duck, outrage crumbs, you need them, and so you are given them. Keep on feeding.

"They drop Doxxs on people, but they won't let us write fat cunt on our blogs" Acuntalypse Now

Hardly outraged. If you think that the PR of the Pit is helped by making gratuitous insults without justification or context then go big, fill your boots. But don’t be surprised if others think that kind of a dickhead move ….

Opelia:

It gets crazier every day. You would think it couldn’t, but it does.

You know, Ophelia, in your case we would think it could.

http://www.freezepage.com/1370428535KOUZBJDCCY

Apparently Ophelia has started to write to the President of Seattle Atheists to complain about Skep Tickle - or more specifically to try a bit of guilt-by-association using some crude insults about Ophelia made on the slymepit. :snooty:

Steersman wrote:

Za-zen wrote:

Steersman wrote: I think she has a point – there have been more than a few dickhead statements made here, that “fat fucking cunt” probably being a credible example (my own expression of that being in response to a direct provocation, i.e., “asshole”). And I expect that there are more than a few who pass through here who are only looking for ammunition and aren’t too particular whether what they pick up carries any weight or not.
<snip>

See where i bolded above. Replace with fat cunt.

And just for you staffy duck, outrage crumbs, you need them, and so you are given them. Keep on feeding.

"They drop Doxxs on people, but they won't let us write fat cunt on our blogs" Acuntalypse Now

Hardly outraged. If you think that the PR of the Pit is helped by making gratuitous insults without justification or context then go big, fill your boots. But don’t be surprised if others think that kind of a dickhead move ….

With respect Steersman old chum, but I don't think "justification" comes into the picture at all.
Your own insult thrown at Svan will be portrayed exactly the same way that any trolls out of the blue expletive is portrayed.

In other words, you are dealing with people who are fishing for things to be offended by. They are not thinking of justification of others remarks.
At the moment they are calling Skep tickle the most vile insults and yet any retaliation will be seen as undeserved.
At least that's how they will react.
I am under the impression that Svan is, as she has said herself, acting as their personal thug in this argument. I think she knows she's acting like a petty highschool bully - but she thinks the ends justify the means, even if the means involve a lot of viciousness towards undeserving victims. It's all for a good cause - making sure that the correct group, the 'good people', herself and the Minnesota mafia, remain in power.

Dick Strawkins wrote:Opelia:

It gets crazier every day. You would think it couldn’t, but it does.

You know, Ophelia, in your case we would think it could.

http://www.freezepage.com/1370428535KOUZBJDCCY

Apparently Ophelia has started to write to the President of Seattle Atheists to complain about Skep Tickle - or more specifically to try a bit of guilt-by-association using some crude insults about Ophelia made on the slymepit. :snooty:

Oh look, I got a mention. Hi Ophie! :dance:

treestump wrote:

bovarchist wrote:If I ever refer to Ophelia Benson as Ophie, I assure you that yes, my purpose is to insult her. Without stating an opinion on whether Gurdur is right to block name-callers, I think he is right to consider 'Ophie' an example of such.

yep, "Ophie" is an "insult" for sure from me also (yes, that's right Ophie: it's not harassment, or abuse, or any imagined threat, it's an "insult"). Just in case you are reading this Ophie (and I'm sure you do as you are such an out-of-control narcissist) here is a reminder of exactly WHY you are so deserving of constant ridicule http://goo.gl/qUGx8 . That's right, it's not out of malice that you are mocked, but just out of a sense of fairness; it's just a well-reasoned and ethical response. Obviously, you are fully aware of all of your deliberate lies, deceitful twisting of others words, professional victimhood, repulsive censorship, aggressive doxxing, hate-filled denialism, and world-class nutbaggery are (or if it is at all possible that you are forgot; again, please study the above link to learn more), but then again, I suspect you do all of this for attention as it's hard to believe that even the dumbest village idiot would do or say the things that you do.

pretty much.

RE: Zvan and doxxing:


[youtube]mgP9gBTqEs8[/youtube]

Dick Strawkins wrote:Opelia:

It gets crazier every day. You would think it couldn’t, but it does.

You know, Ophelia, in your case we would think it could.

http://www.freezepage.com/1370428535KOUZBJDCCY

Apparently Ophelia has started to write to the President of Seattle Atheists to complain about Skep Tickle - or more specifically to try a bit of guilt-by-association using some crude insults about Ophelia made on the slymepit. :snooty:

Why can't she leave Skep Tickle alone? Her own actions regarding Skep made her look bad, but instead of letting up she continues to attack until everyone agrees to deem her guilty by association.
Ironically, I think this has to do with Skep being a woman. She's not hated by all of us, who just must be misogynists, so she must be an uncle tom a chill girl because otherwise Ms. Benson's problems just might be about Ms. Benson.

I just noticed that Cristina Rad has escaped from Freethought Blogs - she's not listed in the FTB blog list any more.
She hadn't posted anything since November and that was after a break of about two months from her previous contribution.

Come on Cristina, now's the time to make a video about those fuckers!
:)

Dick Strawkins wrote:

Steersman wrote:

Za-zen wrote:

Steersman wrote: I think she has a point – there have been more than a few dickhead statements made here, that “fat fucking cunt” probably being a credible example (my own expression of that being in response to a direct provocation, i.e., “asshole”). And I expect that there are more than a few who pass through here who are only looking for ammunition and aren’t too particular whether what they pick up carries any weight or not.
<snip>

See where i bolded above. Replace with fat cunt.

And just for you staffy duck, outrage crumbs, you need them, and so you are given them. Keep on feeding.

"They drop Doxxs on people, but they won't let us write fat cunt on our blogs" Acuntalypse Now

Hardly outraged. If you think that the PR of the Pit is helped by making gratuitous insults without justification or context then go big, fill your boots. But don’t be surprised if others think that kind of a dickhead move ….

With respect Steersman old chum, but I don't think "justification" comes into the picture at all.
Your own insult thrown at Svan will be portrayed exactly the same way that any trolls out of the blue expletive is portrayed.

In other words, you are dealing with people who are fishing for things to be offended by. They are not thinking of justification of others remarks.
At the moment they are calling Skep tickle the most vile insults and yet any retaliation will be seen as undeserved.
At least that's how they will react.
I am under the impression that Svan is, as she has said herself, acting as their personal thug in this argument. I think she knows she's acting like a petty highschool bully - but she thinks the ends justify the means, even if the means involve a lot of viciousness towards undeserving victims. It's all for a good cause - making sure that the correct group, the 'good people', herself and the Minnesota mafia, remain in power.

The strategy they are using is often referred to as "gaming the ref", apparently taken from sports where, if you bitch about the ref's calls enough, the ref will start calling it your way. Of course, should the ref do that, the gaming doesn't stop, rather, the threshold for bitching gets adjusted downward and maybe the ref, sufficiently rattled, will start making egregiously bad calls in your favor.

Conservatives in the United States have been quite successful in this tactic, complaining about the (so-called) "liberal media" enough to push the line of where moderation lies decidedly to the right. Of course, even when the media self-censors, or just abdicate their responsibility completely and presents " X said this and Y said that" stenography without any facts or analysis entering into it, the GOP will just find even more minutiae to complain about because to them the only responsible journalism consists of shilling for them.

As we see with Svan complaining that my referring to her and hers as "carpet-bagger" constitutes harassment, or especially with Skep Tickle's use of indefinite articles parsed to find offense, the point isn't offensive speech, or even silencing people. Silence is not sufficient. Neutrality is suspect. The only thing that will satisfy them is complete submission and validation of their position regardless of how crazy, hypocritical or even nasty it is. It's not a matter of acquiescing to their arguments, what they are, but accepting their authority, without question, to dictate reality.

Without the window dressing, what Svan and company does is basically little more than nagging. She wants you to take out her garbage not only without being told, but without any conscious thought or volition. In fact, you can see the worst of dysfunctional feminism and SJW identity politics as just ideological cover for being a bunch of dissatisfied, entitled whiny bitches.

If that's the case, and it is, the last thing you want to do is let them start shifting the line by giving in to their demands, regardless of how initially reasonable they may seem.

You have to look to their end game. I mean, go ahead, give into them, even just a little bit, see where that gets you.

Metalogic42 wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:Opelia:

It gets crazier every day. You would think it couldn’t, but it does.

You know, Ophelia, in your case we would think it could.

http://www.freezepage.com/1370428535KOUZBJDCCY

Apparently Ophelia has started to write to the President of Seattle Atheists to complain about Skep Tickle - or more specifically to try a bit of guilt-by-association using some crude insults about Ophelia made on the slymepit. :snooty:

Oh look, I got a mention. Hi Ophie! :dance:

Yeah?
Well, fuck you too.
I've done everything to get noticed short of walking around in front of Zvan, dressed as a box of donuts.

Not one, stinking mention.

My baboon-fu sucks.

Kareem wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:Opelia:

It gets crazier every day. You would think it couldn’t, but it does.

You know, Ophelia, in your case we would think it could.

http://www.freezepage.com/1370428535KOUZBJDCCY

Apparently Ophelia has started to write to the President of Seattle Atheists to complain about Skep Tickle - or more specifically to try a bit of guilt-by-association using some crude insults about Ophelia made on the slymepit. :snooty:

Why can't she leave Skep Tickle alone? Her own actions regarding Skep made her look bad, but instead of letting up she continues to attack until everyone agrees to deem her guilty by association.
Ironically, I think this has to do with Skep being a woman. She's not hated by all of us, who just must be misogynists, so she must be an uncle tom a chill girl because otherwise Ms. Benson's problems just might be about Ms. Benson.

Look at who they have targeted:

Steff McGraw,
Abbie Smith,
Mallorie Nasrallah,
Harriet Hall,
Sarah Mayhew,
Wooly Bumblebee,
Zenbuffy,

as well as several of the regulars here at the slymepit.

And now Skep tickle.
If anything the treatment meeted out to women they oppose is far more vindictive and nasty than that faced by men.
Its high school bully gangs dejavu

Cristina might have been sent away to a re-education camp. She always was a little bit outspoken.

Submariner wrote:RE: Zvan and doxxing:


[youtube]mgP9gBTqEs8[/youtube]

Excellent analysis, which will be totally overlooked by FTB when they become fixated on claiming that breaching sub looks like it's ass-raping the sky.

Gefan wrote:
Oh look, I got a mention. Hi Ophie! :dance:

Yeah?
Well, fuck you too.
I've done everything to get noticed short of walking around in front of Zvan, dressed as a box of donuts.

Not one, stinking mention.

My baboon-fu sucks.[/quote]

Almost sounds like a sports discipline now. What shall we call it, Freethoughtblolympics?

Ophie links to this post, which now has an update:

http://westcoastatheist.wordpress.com/2 ... -straight/

Update, 5 June, 2013:
To those coming from B&W:
I’ve looked over Tim Skellet’s letter and have found no mention of what occurred between me and Ophelia. If you can find it, feel free to point it out and I’ll correct Tim if he did indeed misrepresent what transpired.

It’s hard to believe Ophelia would say that about Tim’s letter and link to me without linking to this post where I throw my full support behind Tim Skellet and against the doxxing of Skep Tickle, so I’ve provided the link for your convenience.

I would also like Ophelia to know I don’t despise her. That’s silly. I despise her tactics, her hyperbole, her attacks on others’ characters and her threat narrative that paints people who criticize her as “harassers.” I am more than willing to attack her arguments while leaving her person alone.

I can’t and won’t answer for the people who have made fun of her looks because I have never done so and don’t condone it. I want that to be clear. Ask me to answer for my own behavior and I’ll happily oblige.

Now that that’s done, have a lovely day, all.

Sincerely,

Katie Graham

Dick Strawkins wrote:I just noticed that Cristina Rad has escaped from Freethought Blogs - she's not listed in the FTB blog list any more.
She hadn't posted anything since November and that was after a break of about two months from her previous contribution.

Come on Cristina, now's the time to make a video about those fuckers!
:)

PZMandius,
http://atomictoasters.com/wp-content/up ... andias.jpg

I met a traveler from an Slymepit land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of lard
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the retard,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is PZmandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level FtB stretch far away.

- "Percy" Pissed Shelley

Kareem wrote:Why can't she leave Skep Tickle alone? Her own actions regarding Skep made her look bad, but instead of letting up she continues to attack until everyone agrees to deem her guilty by association.

It's her nature, she can't help it. Most people burn white hot for a day or two, then start to cool down. Ophelia takes weeks. Afterward it lingers like a low grade rash, ready to erupt anytime she gets rubbed the wrong way. She's always been prickly, saving up resentments like cash money and blowing them out in full social media assaults -- blogging, facebooking, tweeting, foruming, and probably shouting out her window too.

Ape+lust wrote:

Kareem wrote:Why can't she leave Skep Tickle alone? Her own actions regarding Skep made her look bad, but instead of letting up she continues to attack until everyone agrees to deem her guilty by association.

It's her nature, she can't help it. Most people burn white hot for a day or two, then start to cool down. Ophelia takes weeks. Afterward it lingers like a low grade rash, ready to erupt anytime she gets rubbed the wrong way. She's always been prickly, saving up resentments like cash money and blowing them out in full social media assaults -- blogging, facebooking, tweeting, foruming, and probably shouting out her window too.

I suspect attacking women on the internet is probably the most exciting part of her life.

rayshul wrote:

Ape+lust wrote:I suspect attacking women on the internet is probably the most exciting part of her life.

The Sibyl should acquire a Sybian.

rayshul wrote:Cristina might have been sent away to a re-education camp. She always was a little bit outspoken.

She's probably being charged with "making big trouble for Moose and Squirrel".

Michael K Gray wrote:

rayshul wrote:

Ape+lust wrote:I suspect attacking women on the internet is probably the most exciting part of her life.

The Sibyl should acquire a Sybian.

The Charybdis should acquire a Scylla.

(Sorry, don't know why, this just popped out)

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote:

rayshul wrote:

Ape+lust wrote:I suspect attacking women on the internet is probably the most exciting part of her life.

The Sibyl should acquire a Sybian.

The Charybdis should acquire a Scylla.

(Sorry, don't know why, this just popped out)

Quite possibly more profound than one consciously knows.
Yin/Yang.
All of them have ancients roots.

Steersman wrote:

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Steersman wrote:

However, where I think she goes badly wrong [“hello Stephanie. Too bad you don’t have enough ‘courage-of-your-convictions’ to either pull up a chair and join the conversation here or to allow a real one on your own blog”] is in failing to notice that it is hardly a case of all of us agreeing with such comments or with the actions and comments of all who post here as well as on Twitter or on various FTB sites. Really a case, I think, of deliberate obtuseness if not one of egregious demagoguery in trying to tar us all with the same rather questionable brush.

The problem is not wether we agree or not with some stupid statement posted here, the problem is we don't actively condemn them. I've brushed the subject somewhere else (either at Nugent's or at Lindsay's, can't bother to remember).

If I were to start condemning every comment I find stupid or offensive on the internet, I wouldn't have time to eat, sleep, well...do anything.

Yes, I agree. Although the fault still lies with Zvan in assuming that if we don't "actively condemn them" then we must - perforce!, indubitably! (so to speak) - agree entirely with them. :doh: :naughty:

As I said, tarring us all with that brush; hardly the actions and perspectives of anyone I would call a skeptic ....

Or an adult. Especially given how they cry, so very loudly, about how they aren't a hive mind, and it's unfair to refer to them as such.

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:That's a funny one:

"Check your privilege quizz"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/quiz/ ... ilege-quiz

"3. Which of the following best suits the definition of a “first world problem”?
.. My African-sounding name is invariably spelled wrong on my latte."
Stop triggering me, Guardian :(

In other news, there's a battle for Nugent's very SOUL! *cue thunder and lightning*
http://furiouspurpose.me/the-fight-for- ... ents-soul/

Michael K Gray wrote:

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote:

rayshul wrote:

Ape+lust wrote:I suspect attacking women on the internet is probably the most exciting part of her life.

The Sibyl should acquire a Sybian.

The Charybdis should acquire a Scylla.

(Sorry, don't know why, this just popped out)

Quite possibly more profound than one consciously knows.
Yin/Yang.
All of them have ancients roots.

I've always thought of "from Charybdis to Scylla" meaning going from bad to worse. I may have been mistaken, but I don't think so.

I have to be honest here, I'm not so familiar with the concept of yin/yang. I'm not a huge fan of oriental philosophy. I just thought it meant some kind of ballance. Which the two sirens of Gibraltar surely don't personify.

Mykeru wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:

Steersman wrote:

Za-zen wrote:

Steersman wrote: I think she has a point – there have been more than a few dickhead statements made here, that “fat fucking cunt” probably being a credible example (my own expression of that being in response to a direct provocation, i.e., “asshole”). And I expect that there are more than a few who pass through here who are only looking for ammunition and aren’t too particular whether what they pick up carries any weight or not.
<snip>

See where i bolded above. Replace with fat cunt.

And just for you staffy duck, outrage crumbs, you need them, and so you are given them. Keep on feeding.

"They drop Doxxs on people, but they won't let us write fat cunt on our blogs" Acuntalypse Now

Hardly outraged. If you think that the PR of the Pit is helped by making gratuitous insults without justification or context then go big, fill your boots. But don’t be surprised if others think that kind of a dickhead move ….

With respect Steersman old chum, but I don't think "justification" comes into the picture at all.
Your own insult thrown at Svan will be portrayed exactly the same way that any trolls out of the blue expletive is portrayed.

In other words, you are dealing with people who are fishing for things to be offended by. They are not thinking of justification of others remarks.
At the moment they are calling Skep tickle the most vile insults and yet any retaliation will be seen as undeserved.
At least that's how they will react.
I am under the impression that Svan is, as she has said herself, acting as their personal thug in this argument. I think she knows she's acting like a petty highschool bully - but she thinks the ends justify the means, even if the means involve a lot of viciousness towards undeserving victims. It's all for a good cause - making sure that the correct group, the 'good people', herself and the Minnesota mafia, remain in power.

The strategy they are using is often referred to as "gaming the ref", apparently taken from sports where, if you bitch about the ref's calls enough, the ref will start calling it your way. Of course, should the ref do that, the gaming doesn't stop, rather, the threshold for bitching gets adjusted downward and maybe the ref, sufficiently rattled, will start making egregiously bad calls in your favor.

Conservatives in the United States have been quite successful in this tactic, complaining about the (so-called) "liberal media" enough to push the line of where moderation lies decidedly to the right. Of course, even when the media self-censors, or just abdicate their responsibility completely and presents " X said this and Y said that" stenography without any facts or analysis entering into it, the GOP will just find even more minutiae to complain about because to them the only responsible journalism consists of shilling for them.

As we see with Svan complaining that my referring to her and hers as "carpet-bagger" constitutes harassment, or especially with Skep Tickle's use of indefinite articles parsed to find offense, the point isn't offensive speech, or even silencing people. Silence is not sufficient. Neutrality is suspect. The only thing that will satisfy them is complete submission and validation of their position regardless of how crazy, hypocritical or even nasty it is. It's not a matter of acquiescing to their arguments, what they are, but accepting their authority, without question, to dictate reality.

Without the window dressing, what Svan and company does is basically little more than nagging. She wants you to take out her garbage not only without being told, but without any conscious thought or volition. In fact, you can see the worst of dysfunctional feminism and SJW identity politics as just ideological cover for being a bunch of dissatisfied, entitled whiny bitches.

If that's the case, and it is, the last thing you want to do is let them start shifting the line by giving in to their demands, regardless of how initially reasonable they may seem.

You have to look to their end game. I mean, go ahead, give into them, even just a little bit, see where that gets you.

See, this is why I'm of two minds of all the stuff that's been happening here lately. On one hand, I think in terms of the skeptical community and being skeptics, ideally we could keep things at an intellectual level, as that generally is what the skeptical community stands for in the first place. Rationalism is the best tool we have so we should strive to use it as much as possible.

On the other hand, what we're dealing here is a case of privilege claiming. This, actually is my major complaint about religion in our culture. I actually don't really give a fuck about some group of pagans who dance around campfires at night and by day they're just like anybody else. What I give a fuck about is people thinking that because they have these beliefs, they're suddenly better people and have the right to boss us around according to some pretty arbitrary thinking.

Pulling the rug out from under blowhards is a long recognized effective method of marginalizing that bad behavior. And that's the goal here. It's to get neutral people to stop giving these people what they want when it's going to cause very real pain and harm to other people. I don't mind well written effective anti-harassment policies for conventions, as an example. I DO mind when they're written in a way to be administered arbitrarily and in a way that can be used to bully people around.

I think presenting everything in terms of a threat narrative hurts people. Both the people they're slandering and the people who are listening to them who internalize that threat narrative. These are things that NEED to be pushed back against. And yes, sometimes insults...that the emperor in fact, is NOT wearing any clothes, is an effective way of doing this.

Not the way I'd like in this situation, but if I were to condemn it entirely I'd be a hypocrite, and being a hypocrite is a form of privilege claiming. I'm better than that.

Ape+lust wrote:

Kareem wrote:Why can't she leave Skep Tickle alone? Her own actions regarding Skep made her look bad, but instead of letting up she continues to attack until everyone agrees to deem her guilty by association.

It's her nature, she can't help it. Most people burn white hot for a day or two, then start to cool down. Ophelia takes weeks. Afterward it lingers like a low grade rash, ready to erupt anytime she gets rubbed the wrong way. She's always been prickly, saving up resentments like cash money and blowing them out in full social media assaults -- blogging, facebooking, tweeting, foruming, and probably shouting out her window too.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KYeGSxcgWWQ/T ... 0/frog.jpg

Ophelia Benson joins the movement.

Karmakin wrote:
See, this is why I'm of two minds of all the stuff that's been happening here lately. On one hand, I think in terms of the skeptical community and being skeptics, ideally we could keep things at an intellectual level, as that generally is what the skeptical community stands for in the first place. Rationalism is the best tool we have so we should strive to use it as much as possible.

On the other hand, what we're dealing here is a case of privilege claiming. This, actually is my major complaint about religion in our culture. I actually don't really give a fuck about some group of pagans who dance around campfires at night and by day they're just like anybody else. What I give a fuck about is people thinking that because they have these beliefs, they're suddenly better people and have the right to boss us around according to some pretty arbitrary thinking.

Pulling the rug out from under blowhards is a long recognized effective method of marginalizing that bad behavior. And that's the goal here. It's to get neutral people to stop giving these people what they want when it's going to cause very real pain and harm to other people. I don't mind well written effective anti-harassment policies for conventions, as an example. I DO mind when they're written in a way to be administered arbitrarily and in a way that can be used to bully people around.

I think presenting everything in terms of a threat narrative hurts people. Both the people they're slandering and the people who are listening to them who internalize that threat narrative. These are things that NEED to be pushed back against. And yes, sometimes insults...that the emperor in fact, is NOT wearing any clothes, is an effective way of doing this.

Not the way I'd like in this situation, but if I were to condemn it entirely I'd be a hypocrite, and being a hypocrite is a form of privilege claiming. I'm better than that.

An excellent point in there: The thing they want most of all, more than anything else really, perhaps more than abject submission to their bullshit, is to be taken seriously. In fact, taking them seriously, engaging them as if they are fair agents playing by the same rules of logic and empiricism, is a necessary prerequisite for abject submission to their bullshit.

That's why I revel in being a "fuck you" kind of satirist, as many people who find a home in The Pit tend to be. The jester can tell the king he's full of shit in front of the court. And once your first condition of engaging with these assholes is "I reserve the right to refuse to take you seriously", you've immediately sapped much of their power.

If you want an example, they tried to dox the fuck out of me. Rather than get traction it went nowhere because I refused to take them at all seriously. THreats and harassment was just more grist for the lulz mill. When you get upset and outraged with them in any sense that can be construed as taking them seriously, they get the power rush all bullies live for.

Which is why when one of the perennial plodding and unimaginative douches appear (self-aggrandizement as a motive aside) as if they are the only adult in the room and posture as if they can broker a deal if only everyone plays by Roberts Rules of Order, the only response I can make is "Gee, they really just don't get it, do they?"

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote:

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote:

rayshul wrote:I suspect attacking women on the internet is probably the most exciting part of her life.

The Sibyl should acquire a Sybian.

The Charybdis should acquire a Scylla.

(Sorry, don't know why, this just popped out)

Quite possibly more profound than one consciously knows.
Yin/Yang.
All of them have ancients roots.

I've always thought of "from Charybdis to Scylla" meaning going from bad to worse. I may have been mistaken, but I don't think so.

I have to be honest here, I'm not so familiar with the concept of yin/yang. I'm not a huge fan of oriental philosophy. I just thought it meant some kind of ballance. Which the two sirens of Gibraltar surely don't personify.

You are, of course, quite correct. Proximally correct. But distally off-the-mark, as it were.
But, as any Cybernaut (steersman) will inform you, navigating between a rock and hard place, Charybdis & Scylla, a sailor-eating monster and an all-engulfing whirlpool is a balancing art. Much as is Yin/Yang a balancing art.
Steer the middle course and one avoids either catastrophic extreme.
Much as you seem to post here.
Cricket.

Michael K Gray wrote: You are, of course, quite correct. Proximally correct. But distally off-the-mark, as it were.
But, as any Cybernaut (steersman) will inform you, navigating between a rock and hard place, Charybdis & Scylla, a sailor-eating monster and an all-engulfing whirlpool is a balancing art. Much as is Yin/Yang a balancing art.
Steer the middle course and one avoids either catastrophic extreme.
Much as you seem to post here.
Cricket.

Yeah, I remember my first paper bag and can of spray paint.

windy wrote:
In other news, there's a battle for Nugent's very SOUL! *cue thunder and lightning*
http://furiouspurpose.me/the-fight-for- ... ents-soul/

http://i.imgur.com/ay3ebo9.jpg

Michael K Gray wrote: You are, of course, quite correct. Proximally correct. But distally off-the-mark, as it were.
But, as any Cybernaut (steersman) will inform you, navigating between a rock and hard place, Charybdis & Scylla, a sailor-eating monster and an all-engulfing whirlpool is a balancing art. Much as is Yin/Yang a balancing art.
Steer the middle course and one avoids either catastrophic extreme.
Much as you seem to post here.
Cricket.

Oh, yeah, I see it now. I still have a lot more to learn. Thanks Michael!

Mykeru wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote: You are, of course, quite correct. Proximally correct. But distally off-the-mark, as it were.
But, as any Cybernaut (steersman) will inform you, navigating between a rock and hard place, Charybdis & Scylla, a sailor-eating monster and an all-engulfing whirlpool is a balancing art. Much as is Yin/Yang a balancing art.
Steer the middle course and one avoids either catastrophic extreme.
Much as you seem to post here.
Cricket.

Yeah, I remember my first paper bag and can of spray paint.

Why didn't you use a sock, like any other person would?

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Mykeru wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote: You are, of course, quite correct. Proximally correct. But distally off-the-mark, as it were.
But, as any Cybernaut (steersman) will inform you, navigating between a rock and hard place, Charybdis & Scylla, a sailor-eating monster and an all-engulfing whirlpool is a balancing art. Much as is Yin/Yang a balancing art.
Steer the middle course and one avoids either catastrophic extreme.
Much as you seem to post here.
Cricket.

Yeah, I remember my first paper bag and can of spray paint.

Why didn't you use a sock, like any other person would?

I suspect that Mykeru is wholly unfamiliar with the classics, such as the Odyssey, Iliad, & cetera, and thusly may have interpreted the above as novel gibberish.

windy wrote: In other news, there's a battle for Nugent's very SOUL! *cue thunder and lightning*
http://furiouspurpose.me/the-fight-for- ... ents-soul/

Martin wrote:Skep Tickle, Gurdur and whatever those people’s pseudonyms may be, are not interested in contributing to our causes, their only interest lies in harassing these individuals and to ideally get them disinvited from conferences.

Wow. I thought part of Skep Tickle's doxxing was the revelation that she does contribute to the atheist and skeptic cause. And with all this talk of harassment from her, why hasn't anyone been able to show a single example?

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:

deLurch wrote:

Dave wrote:If you are going to spend time whining that people are not living up to your rules, I would think you could spend more than four words to specify what they are.

In his defense, he is specifying what in posts crosses his line and allowing people to resubmit with what is inside his lines. By voicing decent, this guy has a tiger by the tail and he knows it. He is doing everything he can to voice decent while trying to prevent the people he is criticizing from having ammo to smear him with. He isn't worried about us. He is worried about them.

Also, when it comes to moderation, sometimes stating less about the rules is more effective. I wish I could find the post, but it is many years back.

In other words, he prefers his commentariat to consist of adults able to discern the spirit of the place without having a 1000 page policy and not so egotistical that they bridle and go all "but he did it too" when corrected. It's not difficult to discern the difference between clearly stating why you disrespect someone and using belittling names. If you are the kind of person that needs that spelled out then I think you'd still be trying to push the boundaries with a library of policy documents.

When an adult sees a problem, he attempts to correct it, not simply whine about it. Its not the length of his policy by itself, he could announce his policy as, "Be Excellent to Each Other" for all I care. And good on him for contacting the posters who cross the line and offering to let them re-submit. That certainly helps those individuals understand the line. What annoys me is his commenting on the blog that he has had to block posts or he let one through, but is not sure he should have, without explanation of the problems. If he feels the need to complain to the larger community that people are not following his rules, he can spend part of that effort clarifying the rules. If he feels the rules are clear enough, then WTF is the point of whinging at large that there are those that dont follow -- there will always be idjits. While the policy he is attempting to enforce may be adult, his approach of announcing-at-large that the rules have been broken but not saying how strikes me as rather passive-aggressive.

Dave wrote:

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:

deLurch wrote:

Dave wrote:If you are going to spend time whining that people are not living up to your rules, I would think you could spend more than four words to specify what they are.

In his defense, he is specifying what in posts crosses his line and allowing people to resubmit with what is inside his lines. By voicing decent, this guy has a tiger by the tail and he knows it. He is doing everything he can to voice decent while trying to prevent the people he is criticizing from having ammo to smear him with. He isn't worried about us. He is worried about them.

Also, when it comes to moderation, sometimes stating less about the rules is more effective. I wish I could find the post, but it is many years back.

In other words, he prefers his commentariat to consist of adults able to discern the spirit of the place without having a 1000 page policy and not so egotistical that they bridle and go all "but he did it too" when corrected. It's not difficult to discern the difference between clearly stating why you disrespect someone and using belittling names. If you are the kind of person that needs that spelled out then I think you'd still be trying to push the boundaries with a library of policy documents.

When an adult sees a problem, he attempts to correct it, not simply whine about it. Its not the length of his policy by itself, he could announce his policy as, "Be Excellent to Each Other" for all I care. And good on him for contacting the posters who cross the line and offering to let them re-submit. That certainly helps those individuals understand the line. What annoys me is his commenting on the blog that he has had to block posts or he let one through, but is not sure he should have, without explanation of the problems. If he feels the need to complain to the larger community that people are not following his rules, he can spend part of that effort clarifying the rules. If he feels the rules are clear enough, then WTF is the point of whinging at large that there are those that dont follow -- there will always be idjits. While the policy he is attempting to enforce may be adult, his approach of announcing-at-large that the rules have been broken but not saying how strikes me as rather passive-aggressive.

What pisses me off is his patronizing "the adults are here now" attitude, and his hypocrisy wherein anyone disagreeing with him is slagged off as emo, (and there's no good use of that, either abbreviation or other), in a completely dismissive fashion, but OMG, you use a diminutive of someone's name, and you're a bad fucking person.

Oh, and his claim that he is "getting results". Oddly, he has yet to show said results.

I fail to really see how he's being even-handed or particularly mature.

Michael K Gray wrote:

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Mykeru wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote: You are, of course, quite correct. Proximally correct. But distally off-the-mark, as it were.
But, as any Cybernaut (steersman) will inform you, navigating between a rock and hard place, Charybdis & Scylla, a sailor-eating monster and an all-engulfing whirlpool is a balancing art. Much as is Yin/Yang a balancing art.
Steer the middle course and one avoids either catastrophic extreme.
Much as you seem to post here.
Cricket.

Yeah, I remember my first paper bag and can of spray paint.

Why didn't you use a sock, like any other person would?

I suspect that Mykeru is wholly unfamiliar with the classics, such as the Odyssey, Iliad, & cetera, and thusly may have interpreted the above as novel gibberish.

For your pleasure:

[youtube]MaN3pwBsRf8[/youtube]

It is to be noted that although metal-heads are pictured as stupid thugs (mostly in movies and comics), they tend to have more knowledge in history, mythologie and musical structures than your 'average' person. Not bragging, just bragging. Rock and a hard place indeed...

Dave wrote:...While the policy he is attempting to enforce may be adult, his approach of announcing-at-large that the rules have been broken but not saying how strikes me as rather passive-aggressive.

I became an hopeful member of the Heathen Hub several Ice Ages ago.
In the strained hope that it might permit a form of free speech.
I ceased posting after exactly 42milliseconds, when it became obvious that anything less than oh-so-polite Jane Austen-style interaction would be frowned upon by Mister Darcy.
Except when it came to him, of course.
Heathen-Hub? A✝Theism-Lite

Dick Strawkins wrote:Opelia:

It gets crazier every day. You would think it couldn’t, but it does.

You know, Ophelia, in your case we would think it could.

http://www.freezepage.com/1370428535KOUZBJDCCY

Apparently Ophelia has started to write to the President of Seattle Atheists to complain about Skep Tickle - or more specifically to try a bit of guilt-by-association using some crude insults about Ophelia made on the slymepit. :snooty:

Whoo-effing-whoo!!! First time ol' Lsuoma gets a Nanny Feefle call-out, IIRC.

Bow down and worship me, bitches, for I have ARRIVED!!!

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: For your pleasure:
MaN3pwBsRf8

It is to be noted that although metal-heads are pictured as stupid thugs (mostly in movies and comics), they tend to have more knowledge in history, mythologie and musical structures than your 'average' person. Not bragging, just bragging. Rock and a hard place indeed...

Thnakyou for that link. I watched 2 minutes of it only to realise that it well worth a more immersive listening environment than my laptop at nearly 11pm!
I shall watch it tomorrow in more salubrious studio sound.
PS: Bought a 88 key professional midi keyboard today.

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote:

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Mykeru wrote:

Michael K Gray wrote: You are, of course, quite correct. Proximally correct. But distally off-the-mark, as it were.
But, as any Cybernaut (steersman) will inform you, navigating between a rock and hard place, Charybdis & Scylla, a sailor-eating monster and an all-engulfing whirlpool is a balancing art. Much as is Yin/Yang a balancing art.
Steer the middle course and one avoids either catastrophic extreme.
Much as you seem to post here.
Cricket.

Yeah, I remember my first paper bag and can of spray paint.

Why didn't you use a sock, like any other person would?

I suspect that Mykeru is wholly unfamiliar with the classics, such as the Odyssey, Iliad, & cetera, and thusly may have interpreted the above as novel gibberish.

For your pleasure:

[youtube]MaN3pwBsRf8[/youtube]

It is to be noted that although metal-heads are pictured as stupid thugs (mostly in movies and comics), they tend to have more knowledge in history, mythologie and musical structures than your 'average' person. Not bragging, just bragging. Rock and a hard place indeed...

Before you listen to that, listen to this. Gotta keep the story in order.

[youtube]zjAxCx95mO8[/youtube]

Lsuoma wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:Opelia:

It gets crazier every day. You would think it couldn’t, but it does.

You know, Ophelia, in your case we would think it could.

http://www.freezepage.com/1370428535KOUZBJDCCY

Apparently Ophelia has started to write to the President of Seattle Atheists to complain about Skep Tickle - or more specifically to try a bit of guilt-by-association using some crude insults about Ophelia made on the slymepit. :snooty:

Whoo-effing-whoo!!! First time ol' Lsuoma gets a Nanny Feefle call-out, IIRC.

Bow down and worship me, bitches, for I have ARRIVED!!!

Oh, and Nanny Benson, since I know you'll be reading this, if you can find ANYWHERE that Skeppers "incited" anyone to insult you, your imagination is greater than that of Baron Munchhausen: there's no need for anyone else to incite people to insult you - you, oh dear Nanny, do it so much better than anyone else ever could.

Posting idiotic things like you did is just one of a million* examples.

* Number possibly exaggerated for effect - may not actually be a million.

Given Black Svan's defence of Ophelia's "doxxing", it would be unfortunate it Svan's real name was revealed.

Wouldn't it?

Dick Strawkins wrote:http://i.imgur.com/9IwYT53.jpg

Some Class at last!

(If only PZ's students could say the same)

Lsuoma wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:Opelia:

It gets crazier every day. You would think it couldn’t, but it does.

You know, Ophelia, in your case we would think it could.

http://www.freezepage.com/1370428535KOUZBJDCCY

Apparently Ophelia has started to write to the President of Seattle Atheists to complain about Skep Tickle - or more specifically to try a bit of guilt-by-association using some crude insults about Ophelia made on the slymepit. :snooty:

Whoo-effing-whoo!!! First time ol' Lsuoma gets a Nanny Feefle call-out, IIRC.

Bow down and worship me, bitches, for I have ARRIVED!!!

I got an Ophelia call-out last year.
I was curious how she would do it - with my name.
I thought, 'Is she really going to use my name?
Dick?'

She didn't!
She called me 'Richard Strawkins'!

welch wrote:

Dave wrote:

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:

deLurch wrote:

Dave wrote:If you are going to spend time whining that people are not living up to your rules, I would think you could spend more than four words to specify what they are.

In his defense, he is specifying what in posts crosses his line and allowing people to resubmit with what is inside his lines. By voicing decent, this guy has a tiger by the tail and he knows it. He is doing everything he can to voice decent while trying to prevent the people he is criticizing from having ammo to smear him with. He isn't worried about us. He is worried about them.

Also, when it comes to moderation, sometimes stating less about the rules is more effective. I wish I could find the post, but it is many years back.

In other words, he prefers his commentariat to consist of adults able to discern the spirit of the place without having a 1000 page policy and not so egotistical that they bridle and go all "but he did it too" when corrected. It's not difficult to discern the difference between clearly stating why you disrespect someone and using belittling names. If you are the kind of person that needs that spelled out then I think you'd still be trying to push the boundaries with a library of policy documents.

When an adult sees a problem, he attempts to correct it, not simply whine about it. Its not the length of his policy by itself, he could announce his policy as, "Be Excellent to Each Other" for all I care. And good on him for contacting the posters who cross the line and offering to let them re-submit. That certainly helps those individuals understand the line. What annoys me is his commenting on the blog that he has had to block posts or he let one through, but is not sure he should have, without explanation of the problems. If he feels the need to complain to the larger community that people are not following his rules, he can spend part of that effort clarifying the rules. If he feels the rules are clear enough, then WTF is the point of whinging at large that there are those that dont follow -- there will always be idjits. While the policy he is attempting to enforce may be adult, his approach of announcing-at-large that the rules have been broken but not saying how strikes me as rather passive-aggressive.

What pisses me off is his patronizing "the adults are here now" attitude, and his hypocrisy wherein anyone disagreeing with him is slagged off as emo, (and there's no good use of that, either abbreviation or other), in a completely dismissive fashion, but OMG, you use a diminutive of someone's name, and you're a bad fucking person.

Oh, and his claim that he is "getting results". Oddly, he has yet to show said results.

I fail to really see how he's being even-handed or particularly mature.

I don't know about his attitude, but as far results go, well, you have to start somewhere.

By the way, Ophelia, when you are recognized universally as a loser blogger, languishing in well deserved obscurity and cramming your pie- hole with treats in an attempt to assuage your inevitable grief at losing your unwarranted influence and perceived relevance, you can't point to the doxxing of Skep tickle as the point where the rest of the world began to recognize you for the charlatan and bully you really are.

Jes' sayin'

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Steersman wrote:

However, where I think she goes badly wrong [“hello Stephanie. Too bad you don’t have enough ‘courage-of-your-convictions’ to either pull up a chair and join the conversation here or to allow a real one on your own blog”] is in failing to notice that it is hardly a case of all of us agreeing with such comments or with the actions and comments of all who post here as well as on Twitter or on various FTB sites. Really a case, I think, of deliberate obtuseness if not one of egregious demagoguery in trying to tar us all with the same rather questionable brush.

The problem is not wether we agree or not with some stupid statement posted here, the problem is we don't actively condemn them. I've brushed the subject somewhere else (either at Nugent's or at Lindsay's, can't bother to remember).

If I were to start condemning every comment I find stupid or offensive on the internet, I wouldn't have time to eat, sleep, well...do anything.

Thank you and exactly! Every time I see that old chestnut "you don't condemn this, that, or the other" I think exactly that!