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

bhoytony wrote:

bovarchist wrote:New post from Damien makes the Pit out as just like FTB, just...I dunno. You read it, see what you think.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... ck-a-side/

What I want to know is, who are the "opinion leaders" here? Because I'd like to know who I'm supposed to agree with.

Damien has always considered himself above everyone on both sides and likes to point out all our faults and mistakes. Oh, if only we could be just like him we would be awesome. I will resist posting the tediously obvious xkcd feel-superior-to-both strip.
I don't really give a fuck what some snottery nosed sweetie wife thinks about me.

real horrorshow wrote:

bhoytony wrote:

bovarchist wrote:New post from Damien makes the Pit out as just like FTB, just...I dunno. You read it, see what you think.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... ck-a-side/

What I want to know is, who are the "opinion leaders" here? Because I'd like to know who I'm supposed to agree with.

Damien has always considered himself above everyone on both sides and likes to point out all our faults and mistakes. Oh, if only we could be just like him we would be awesome. I will resist posting the tediously obvious xkcd feel-superior-to-both strip.
I don't really give a fuck what some snottery nosed sweetie wife thinks about me.

Too slow Chicken Marengo! Too slow for this cat!

Also, it's "Damion", cos I know you care.

VAXherd wrote: Now that you mention it, I have heard Karen Straughan / Girl Writes What say something like "feminism tells us what we thought we already knew."

About the article: Is it possible to have a recursive fractal headache?

There are several things I think are good points:

• People start having sexual interests much earlier than we want to remember that we did thantheyusedto. Ten years old; fifth, sixth grade.
• I've seen things about pornography invading the general culture in other places too. It was always obvious to me that porn was "for entertainment purposes only," not relationship advice. Maybe Dan Savage knows what's up but I don't.
• It's very refreshing that in the study being cited "Steiner-Adair doesn’t see these boys as predators. Rather, she says, their emotional needs have been neglected." But the first correlation I would check for is fatherlessness. Perhaps the study did, but it's not mentioned.

There is, however, an elephant in the room. I see scarcely a word about why the girls are participating. Plenty about how awful the boys' behavior is, but nothing about the girls' motivation. They are depicted as devoid of agency. If that issue was left out of the original study that's an appalling oversight, and for Walsh to offer advice without understanding the full problem is doubtful.

VAXherd wrote: You remember that recursive headache? Walsh writes this salcious thing about wild teen nookie, and excuses it by saying how unpleasant it all is. With girls who are participating in unseemly ribaldry, and excusing it by saying how unpleasant it all is.

VAXherd wrote: A few more items:

The girl described the conversation as “a stupid, disgusting exchange,” adding that it was “typical for the boys at our school.” Still, the girl became intrigued when the boy revealed in a subsequent note that he liked her.

Exchange? Subsequent note?

VAXherd wrote:

[A]pparently whipping out one’s johnson (figuratively and literally) is the new “Come here often?”

That was filthy and I don't believe it.

VAXherd wrote:

Kristy shared a story about a different kind of coercion. She had been making out with a guy at his house, not sure how far she wanted to go, when he stood up and told her, “Get down on your knees.”

Sounds like someone's been reading grandma's romance novels.

VAXherd wrote:

I have never in my life watched a man pull out his own penis…

How old is this Susan Walsh? If she's out of college that's sad.

VAXherd wrote:

When a man grabs your hand and places it on his penis without your consent, he is committing sexual assault by compelling you to touch him. Full stop. […] Consent need not be verbal, by the way.

Ye gods! Misunderstanding mine field dead ahead! You might as well declare the whole planet a prison.

VAXherd wrote:

The only way men will learn that this behavior is inappropriate and illegal is if women demonstrate that this is not “goofing around” or “flirting,” much less courting.

Or if their fathers explain it to them when told "There's this girl I like, but I don't know how to talk to her."

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:

Guest wrote: I take all my info on string theory from Peter Woit. His observation is that ST is on the way out in terms of new people starting in the field. But of course he might be tainted by confirmation bias.

I have a thing or two to say about Woit, but I'm not going to engage someone who won't use a goddamn 'nym.

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:@Tribble-- yeah, those two extremes. The real number, as you note, must fall somewhere in between. But that's inconvenient for the narrative.

NB: Somebody noted above that it's important to distinguish between false accusations of someone (victim actually raped but IDs wrong person) and false claims by someone (no rape actually occurred.)

bovarchist wrote:New post from Damien makes the Pit out as just like FTB, just...I dunno. You read it, see what you think.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... ck-a-side/

What I want to know is, who are the "opinion leaders" here? Because I'd like to know who I'm supposed to agree with.

Ä uest wrote:

real horrorshow wrote:

bovarchist wrote:New post from Damien makes the Pit out as just like FTB, just...I dunno. You read it, see what you think.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... ck-a-side/

What I want to know is, who are the "opinion leaders" here? Because I'd like to know who I'm supposed to agree with.

xkcd meme. Do I have to find it and post the actual cartoon? Thought not.

I think the pit has some opinion leaders/opinion creators and it's at times hard to buck up against them. But it's nowhere like what happens at the FTB where the blogger often acts and encourages the hoder to mass gang up on the pit.

And since rationality does seem to still be appreciated here (as opposed to there), most times, mere bullying is not enough to sway an argument, it needs to include actual winning logic.

That plus the mostly free speech attitude around here seems to make the issue mostly trivial and largely self-correcting.

Rope apologist wrote:If there were no PZ Myers, it would be necessary to invent him.

Seriously, what's with all of you bozos paying taxes and voting money for a justice system, when there are only two rules that we need to follow? 1. If a woman accuses a man of rape, he did it. 2. If PZ Myers has no reason to lie about something, he is for all intents and purposes 100% right (theoretically he could be wrong, you just can't question his claim).

But you think you need investigations, cross-examination, to discover evidence, the weighing of evidence, and protection against malicious slander and libel. The truth is that Shermer will positively benefit from charges of rape in this rape culture, for only the SJWs are even really opposed to rape, while the rest of us only pretend to be, secretly celebrating it.

real horrorshow wrote:

mordacious1 wrote:

bovarchist wrote:New post from Damien makes the Pit out as just like FTB, just...I dunno. You read it, see what you think.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... ck-a-side/

What I want to know is, who are the "opinion leaders" here? Because I'd like to know who I'm supposed to agree with.

If the FTB/A+ crowd show up at his blog, he will certainly get grief for having two male gunslingers, one black (evil?), one white (goodness?) at the top of his blog. There is so much inherently wrong with that illustration...racism, violence, sexisms, misogynistic hats, gun culture, old west stereotypes, etc...from their perspective.

Nah, they'll let him off all that, because he said the Pit is as bad as they are, which is as close to a complement as they can get these days, outside of their own little on-line biscuit game.

(Oh, and should anyone else need to know, the person you have to agree with is me.)

Stunt Whisper wrote:

Ape+lust wrote:

Gefan wrote:
Holy shit - genuinely humbling praise. Especially from one of the Maestros of the Photoshop. :)
As for quitting, I've actually been semi-retired for almost five months and what my SO feared has started to come to pass - I'm spending far too much time causing trouble on the internet.

GIMP, sirrah, GIMP. Photoshop is for the indolent bourgeoise who have money :D

Thanks for the compliment, friend. And while you're measuring for maestros, consider that Gumby's preferred tool is a software version of a kid's trike. He's building furniture with a pocketknife, but you'd never know it.

Photoshop CS2 is absolutely free and will do most of the things people want: https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/entitleme ... _downloads

mordacious1 wrote:

bhoytony wrote:You have to say the resemblance is uncanny

http://www.annotatedmst.com/episodes/cr ... a_hoss.jpg

According to my TV Guide, McWrong is actually playing "Chub" (you have to really know your Bonanza to get that reference).

welch wrote:

mordacious1 wrote:

bovarchist wrote:New post from Damien makes the Pit out as just like FTB, just...I dunno. You read it, see what you think.

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... ck-a-side/

What I want to know is, who are the "opinion leaders" here? Because I'd like to know who I'm supposed to agree with.

If the FTB/A+ crowd show up at his blog, he will certainly get grief for having two male gunslingers, one black (evil?), one white (goodness?) at the top of his blog. There is so much inherently wrong with that illustration...racism, violence, sexisms, misogynistic hats, gun culture, old west stereotypes, etc...from their perspective.

I disagree. It's Cunt.

EdwardGemmer wrote:I think Damion is spot on. These imaginary sides don't really accomplish anything. The skeptic movement is about promoting critical thinking over things like loyalty and emotion, so saying you are on imaginary side against another imaginary side accomplishes nothing.

Parody Accountant wrote:I think we all know how Clownfall is going to end.



mark II

Badger3k wrote:

Rope apologist wrote:If there were no PZ Myers, it would be necessary to invent him.

Seriously, what's with all of you bozos paying taxes and voting money for a justice system, when there are only two rules that we need to follow? 1. If a woman accuses a man of rape, he did it. 2. If PZ Myers has no reason to lie about something, he is for all intents and purposes 100% right (theoretically he could be wrong, you just can't question his claim).

But you think you need investigations, cross-examination, to discover evidence, the weighing of evidence, and protection against malicious slander and libel. The truth is that Shermer will positively benefit from charges of rape in this rape culture, for only the SJWs are even really opposed to rape, while the rest of us only pretend to be, secretly celebrating it.

That thought just struck me reading yours - if there is a rape culture, and we excuse (or celebrate) the men who do it, then what do they think when people like Shermer take action against such allegations? Are they doing it just to keep up the fiction that society (ie Patriarchy) despises rape? I really can't wrap my head around what they might be thinking (and that assumes they are instead of just reacting emotionally), and that may be a good thing.

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:

Parody Accountant wrote:I think we all know how Clownfall is going to end.



mark II

I still don't understand it, but better.

In future, when posting stuff based on anime memes, or whatever the fuck that was, please tag it as [Meta] so I know I'm not supposed to understand it. :D

Maybe we need to think harder about going to a subscription model here.

Rope apologist wrote:From Peezus' latest:

Maybe we need to think harder about going to a subscription model here.

Dammit, Kookaid isn't free!

zenbabe wrote:I didn't interpret that clip as "I don't understand it, therefore it's wrong."
I interpreted it as Feynman showing a great skeptical attitude about the general kinds of conclusions he hears from an average social scientist (and probably, VAX, judging the worst, though perhaps more vocal, of the field).

zenbabe wrote:I see that I'm late to the party, and apparently there's a metric mukkton of youtubes of Feynman talking, but that was the first time I've seen that guy as a human, in the flesh, so to speak, and not merely text in a book. He was one of those rare ones who is just as I imagined he would be.

Rope apologist wrote:From Peezus' latest:

Maybe we need to think harder about going to a subscription model here.

Dammit, Kookaid isn't free!

Gumby wrote:

Jan Steen wrote:I like to think that each time Peezus posts something as idiotic as this SkepticDoctor piece he loses a few commenters who are smart enough to see through the demagoguery and dishonesty. But I'm probably way too optimistic.

PZ said a long time ago that the comments were getting out of hand, and he was worried that soon only the most psychotic commenters would be left. Truest thing he ever said. The sane people have long gone, so I'm thinking whoever had the sense to run screaming from that asylum left quite some time ago.

Let’s live like that, shall we? Whenever a friend is unhappy about something – demand evidence of the unhappiness! Then demand an airtight logical argument for the unhappiness. Then give a lecture on how to develop a backbone and (use a lot of anger in the voice and facial expression here) personal responsibility. Then ask for money.

Aneris wrote:

Gumby wrote:

Jan Steen wrote:I like to think that each time Peezus posts something as idiotic as this SkepticDoctor piece he loses a few commenters who are smart enough to see through the demagoguery and dishonesty. But I'm probably way too optimistic.

PZ said a long time ago that the comments were getting out of hand, and he was worried that soon only the most psychotic commenters would be left. Truest thing he ever said. The sane people have long gone, so I'm thinking whoever had the sense to run screaming from that asylum left quite some time ago.

Chris Clarke observed the same one or two times that I noticed. Since his suicide-themed thread (prior to Shmeargate) he's strangely absent, which sounds a bit gloomy actually. But he had to close it due to comments that weren't helpful. Wait, that sounded even gloomier. Well, it was a somewhat normal discussion but the comment sucked too much or something so he shut down commenting. If he's gone, I hope he just flounced, though. Anyway, wondering. While we are at, where's Phil? I hope he's too busy with his cat, that came back to him... :/

I saw Phil on the list browsing this forum today.

Parody Accountant wrote:haha... I'm just dicking around in my new skillset (animated gif's). I'm saying that PZ is going to have a heart attack, also I'm like 20 or 30 animated shoops away from really honing my craft. I'll refrain from showing most publicly, but I do appreciate the feedback here.

[/meta]

Badger3k wrote:

Rope apologist wrote:From Peezus' latest:

Maybe we need to think harder about going to a subscription model here.

Dammit, Kookaid isn't free!

Does he mean that people will have to pay for his posts? If they won't pay for his book, what makes him think they'll pay for posts? Or is he thinking of subscribing to some advertising service?

Guest wrote:Of course I doubt that anyone cares at this point but my attempt to fit The Happy Atheist Amazon bestseller rank to a power law to determine just how many copies PeeZus is moving per week is quite probably faulty. The log-log plot of the numbers from here was not straight, but bulged away from the origin:

http://dogearpublishing.net/wordpress/i ... ublishing/

What matters is that his book has just debuted and is, as far as I can tell, not selling more than a dozen copies per day. Unless they're going "print on demand", it's most likely a fiasco for the publisher.

screwtape wrote:Entirely correct - I have had too much wine whilst waiting for account approval. My apologies.

C.

Badger3k wrote:Does he mean that people will have to pay for his posts? If they won't pay for his book, what makes him think they'll pay for posts?

Badger3k wrote:Nanny McFeeFee is being the dutiful follower, and posts PZ's delusions of skepticism approvingly.

Let’s live like that, shall we? Whenever a friend is unhappy about something – demand evidence of the unhappiness! Then demand an airtight logical argument for the unhappiness. Then give a lecture on how to develop a backbone and (use a lot of anger in the voice and facial expression here) personal responsibility. Then ask for money.

I'm not sure there's enough straw to keep them in business. Intentionally clueless or just clueless?

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:

Guest wrote:Of course I doubt that anyone cares at this point but my attempt to fit The Happy Atheist Amazon bestseller rank to a power law to determine just how many copies PeeZus is moving per week is quite probably faulty. The log-log plot of the numbers from here was not straight, but bulged away from the origin:

http://dogearpublishing.net/wordpress/i ... ublishing/

What matters is that his book has just debuted and is, as far as I can tell, not selling more than a dozen copies per day. Unless they're going "print on demand", it's most likely a fiasco for the publisher.

Well it's great that you think you can judge the sales of Meyers's book based on Amazon stats, and other "facts".

But you are forgetting that the guy is on a whirlwind tour of Bookmarts, remainder stores and Dollar Generals within the MSP metro area. He's probably adding a good 5, maybe 6 per day with this method.

So, you suck.

katamari Damassi wrote:

screwtape wrote:Entirely correct - I have had too much wine whilst waiting for account approval. My apologies.

C.

Too much wine? Is Shermer in the house with you?

Ä uest wrote:
He's not seriously contemplating going to a subscription model. He's making a reasonable point about how SEO is fucking over the net.

Yes, PZ Myers is a jackass, but sometimes it is recommended to read the primary source....

Ä uest wrote:

Badger3k wrote:

Rope apologist wrote:From Peezus' latest:

....

Dammit, Kookaid isn't free!

Does he mean that people will have to pay for his posts? If they won't pay for his book, what makes him think they'll pay for posts? Or is he thinking of subscribing to some advertising service?

He's not seriously contemplating going to a subscription model. He's making a reasonable point about how SEO is fucking over the net.

Yes, PZ Myers is a jackass, but sometimes it is recommended to read the primary source....

Badger3k wrote:Nanny McFeeFee is being the dutiful follower, and posts PZ's delusions of skepticism approvingly.

Let’s live like that, shall we? Whenever a friend is unhappy about something – demand evidence of the unhappiness! Then demand an airtight logical argument for the unhappiness. Then give a lecture on how to develop a backbone and (use a lot of anger in the voice and facial expression here) personal responsibility. Then ask for money.

I'm not sure there's enough straw to keep them in business. Intentionally clueless or just clueless?

It’s hard for me to accept that the manosphere is well on its way to becoming a match.com for old people who hate blacks.

Don’t read the writings of men who don’t get laid. If a man can’t solve the challenge of getting his dick wet, he’s a poseur and internet warrior. He’s a bloviator, a troll. Don’t read the writings of men who don’t know how to walk up to a woman and start a conversation. Don’t read the writings of men who lavish attention on female commenters, because if he was getting laid in real life, he wouldn’t even notice them

At risk of sounding dramatic, I’m stepping away from the manosphere. I don’t want to be associated with a community I’m finding increasingly hard to identify with. I can’t control what other people do on their sites, but I can control what happens here, on the forum, and on ROK. I will gleefully ban all women, keyboard jockeys, and whiny divorced men.

Now this is the epitome of a girl who is a genuine, 100% USDA certified "bitch." Her behavior was unacceptable, arrogant, cocky, and demeaning to everybody else to think she could just drop off her garbage at any ole table. She deserves to be called a "bitch" (and many other derogatory words).

However, this is ONE person. A SINGLE girl who may represent a sub-group of people, BUT NOT ALL WOMEN. And it's high time this be pointed out to a significant percentage of readers in The Manosphere.

I've instituted a new policy on comment approval - I'm no longer approving posts that call women in general names and other derogatory terms.

muede wrote:I think there argument as to why posting the allegation was justified
goes something like this:

i. PZ is a reliable source.

ii. Rape allegations are likely to be true.

iii. Making a previously unknown, likely rapist known to the public
likely results in less rapes.

iv. Tainting one privileged man's reputation is justified, if it
likely prevents rapes.

From PZ's article and i. and ii. we get that there likely was a rape.
Making this and the rapist known, likely results in less rape (iii.).
Therefore posting the allegation was justified (iv.).

Seems reasonable...

muede

• Reporting to the police and reporting to a blog, what could possibly prevent more rape, if the allegations were true?
• Since in gossip another name came up as the worst, which was quickly overshadowed by Shmeargate, why do they go after Shermer and not famous Atheist? I just question the internal consistency.
• What does warning actually mean in practice? Like drinking responsibly?
• How many readers actually really do party with Shermer?

Rope apologist wrote:

Ä uest wrote:[quote="Badger3k"

Does he mean that people will have to pay for his posts? If they won't pay for his book, what makes him think they'll pay for posts? Or is he thinking of subscribing to some advertising service?

He's not seriously contemplating going to a subscription model. He's making a reasonable point about how SEO is fucking over the net.

Yes, PZ Myers is a jackass, but sometimes it is recommended to read the primary source....

Guest wrote:

Rope apologist wrote:

Ä uest wrote:
He's not seriously contemplating going to a subscription model. He's making a reasonable point about how SEO is fucking over the net.

Yes, PZ Myers is a jackass, but sometimes it is recommended to read the primary source....

Why are at least half of the comments about paying for a subscription to Pharyngula, moron?

Actually, it's recommended that you read with comprehension. The Zed admits that there's shit in his own ads as well.

Subscriptions would rather cool this place down, FWIW. I'm not paying him anything--and I certainly wasn't one who took ad block off in appreciation of Fearless Leader when I still did comment there.

Because it's a circlejerk where lots of people tell PZ how wonderful his shit tastes by promising to pay for a subscription. But like the Happy Atheist, IRL, no one will be buying.

If you want to participate in a circlejerk, feel free to go back there.

Ä uest wrote:

Guest wrote:

Rope apologist wrote: Why are at least half of the comments about paying for a subscription to Pharyngula, moron?

Actually, it's recommended that you read with comprehension. The Zed admits that there's shit in his own ads as well.

Subscriptions would rather cool this place down, FWIW. I'm not paying him anything--and I certainly wasn't one who took ad block off in appreciation of Fearless Leader when I still did comment there.

Because it's a circlejerk where lots of people tell PZ how wonderful his shit tastes by promising to pay for a subscription. But like the Happy Atheist, IRL, no one will be buying.

If you want to participate in a circlejerk, feel free to go back there.

Now with less sucky quoting.

JackRayner wrote:"Dallas" is at it again. Here's a screen of a comment that just popped up on Thunderf00t's latest video:

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... 2bef0f.png

And here's the freezepage to the tumblr post.

Rope apologist wrote:

Ä uest wrote:

Guest wrote: Because it's a circlejerk where lots of people tell PZ how wonderful his shit tastes by promising to pay for a subscription. But like the Happy Atheist, IRL, no one will be buying.

If you want to participate in a circlejerk, feel free to go back there.

Now with less sucky quoting.

Yet with all of your stupidity and assholery.

Plonk wrote:

JackRayner wrote:"Dallas" is at it again. Here's a screen of a comment that just popped up on Thunderf00t's latest video:

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... 2bef0f.png

And here's the freezepage to the tumblr post.

Shouldn't he be under medical supervision or something? The youtube comment section on a video like that is the last place he needs to be, given his fragile state.

I AM SAFE NOW. THIS IS AN EVENT WHICH HAPPENED IN THE PAST. THIS IS NOT A NOTE ABOUT A CURRENT SUICIDE. IT HAS BEEN POSTED PURELY FOR REFERENCE AND IS NOT A STATEMENT ABOUT MY CURRENT INTENTIONS.

katamari Damassi wrote:

screwtape wrote:Entirely correct - I have had too much wine whilst waiting for account approval. My apologies.

C.

Too much wine? Is Shermer in the house with you?