Periodic Table of Swearing
-
- .
- Posts: 4969
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
TRIGGER WARNING FOR GROSS LOSS OF APPETITE AND THINGS THAT CANNOT BE UNSEEN/UNHEARD!!!!!1111!!111!!!!
[youtube]7FCoC7EXM1o[/youtube]
[youtube]7FCoC7EXM1o[/youtube]
-
- .
- Posts: 1505
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:59 am
- Location: In a band of brigands.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
And more to the point, those who oppose them are 'evil' and this is 'war' and there can be 'no mercy'.tachikoma wrote:They think they're the good guys and will never be considered bad guys.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Well, you do have a bit of a shrill tone at times.sacha wrote: MOST women are like that. YES, this is why we call ourselves Gender Traitors. I AGREE! Fuck, after over a year, I have to explain that?
I also agree that MOST women are overly emotional.
My "nice try" was in regards to the fact that he said he "played" me (and assumed I reacted hysterically).
If you knew me at all, you would realise how funny that is.
I am now moving on. I have Merkin Cowboy blocked from view, and I am finished responding to anything in regards to him.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v373/ ... banana.gif
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Another user pretending to be Everyman, or Everyman trying to get past sacha's block? Either way, not cool.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
That was me having the last word in a funny way. Lighten up, Francis. I bet franc thought it was funny.tachikoma wrote:Another user pretending to be Everyman, or Everyman trying to get past sacha's block? Either way, not cool.
Or I guess you could go baboonaballistic and label me an Evil Computer Hacker and ban me. Which is fine.
-
- .
- Posts: 3744
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Ah. There we have it again. The BIG LIE. The FALSE NARRATIVE. The notion that people only got angry when Rebecca complained, completely ignoring a whole other bunch of shit that went on. Lying liars lying again.There is a community of people who believe that women are human beings and should be treated with respect and consideration when they say things like “guys don’t do thatâ€, and there is another community of people who apparently do not.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-428350
The Baboons still think that any disagreement with them means that you are a sexist, racist, miosgynist, abelist, privileged, evil Adolf Hitler worshipper, who likes to go round punching babies in the face. The lying fucking shitstains.
Contrary to what they think and state, nobody opposing them from the a/s movements "hate women", or are "against anti-harassment policies", etc. We do question the motives behind these ideas because we see it as cover-up for an agenda. That agenda has become crystal clear over the last month, with the toppling of Osama Greg Laden, FfTB getting slapped in the face by the majority of people at TAM2012, the reveal of their hypocrisy and lies, and the slow, beautiful disintegration of PZ Myers' reputation.
The evidence is out there. The Baboon community have repeatedly shown that they DO NOT respect certain women as human beings, especially if they have an opinion they don't like. They have shown they are willing to "shun" women who they disagree with. Yeah, you can take your "respecting women" hypocritical bullshit and shove it.
I know you and your acolytes read this PZ. So suck it up. We are winning. You are exposed.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I don't quite understand how they reconcile the idea that women are on the Slime-side...
Oh wait, I do. Because girls on the Slime side are "chill girls" who just want to act like they're one of the guys for some dick.
My bad, just answered my own question.
Oh wait, I do. Because girls on the Slime side are "chill girls" who just want to act like they're one of the guys for some dick.
My bad, just answered my own question.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Which still doesn't make sense. The theory goes: chill girls are okay with "sexism" because they want male approval and friendship. Abbie and the women here lost the approval and friendship of Myers and all the guys who are pro-FTB. If Abbie really wanted to stay friends with Myers et al she would not dare to disagree with him about this subject.rayshul wrote:I don't quite understand how they reconcile the idea that women are on the Slime-side...
Oh wait, I do. Because girls on the Slime side are "chill girls" who just want to act like they're one of the guys for some dick.
My bad, just answered my own question.
Conclusion: They don't think Myers and guys who are pro-FTB count as male.
-
- .
- Posts: 859
- Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 8:10 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
They dont. Youll get a citation for operating an unlicensed vagina. :naughty:rayshul wrote:I don't quite understand how they reconcile the idea that women are on the Slime-side...
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Maybe these so-called chill girls just don't give that much of a shit about sexism, and that male approval and friendship has nothing to do with it. A women has every right not to give a damn if she chooses; a pity that certain amongst feminist circles seem bent on decrying this right.tachikoma wrote: The theory goes: chill girls are okay with "sexism" because they want male approval and friendship.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I kind of think it quite crucial to be clear on which groups or segments of the class “women†you are referring to. That SOME women are overly emotional you have already conceded, in effect, with your “wailywailers like Amyâ€.rayshul wrote: Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:36 pm
Hah, I definitely disagree that women are more emotional than men. I don't think the wailywailers like Amy are even SLIGHTLY representative of the average woman.
/ANECDOTE
Whether that justifies concluding that ALL women are more emotional than ALL men is probably not a credible or tenable argument at all. But saying MORE women are MORE emotional than MOST men is at least a credible premise, although I tend to think it a stretch – not least because of the difficulties in coming up with a suitable measuring stick, not to mention a suitable definition for “average†...
But I would argue that there’s probably just as large of percentage of men as of women who are “overly emotionalâ€, largely on the basis that commitment to various dogmas, mostly religious but not exclusively, is, I think, mostly a question of egregiously “overly†emotional responses ...
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I have to say that the "chill girl" thing is a lovely way to demonise women who get on better with guys. GO BACK TO THE SISTERHOOD!!!
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
The Administrator agrees with tachikoma. This was posted from EveryMan's IP.tachikoma wrote:Another user pretending to be Everyman, or Everyman trying to get past sacha's block? Either way, not cool.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
SteveW68 wrote:Dammit! That last quoted post went completely FUBAR! This is what it should have looked like:
Publicly available information Sir! All there for the world to see.... :twisted:real horrorshow wrote:You are a very bad man. I'd give you a stern lecture on ethics, if I could stop laughing.SteveW68 wrote:http://whois.domaintools.com/freethoughtblogs.com
"Ed" neglected to register with privacy enabled - Lists his address, real name and phone number - hosted by bluehost.com
If you then go on to reverse lookup, it seems that he also held (and apparently let lapse) the domain name "FEELINLUCKYTATTOO.COM".
He has 4 other currently held domains, but getting their info requires payment.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Oh deffo. I've never met a woman like Amy before but her existence pretty much disproves anyone trying to say that women are ALL not emotional. But TBH I reckon that any research into emotions is going to be fraught with weird-arse variables based on people's life experiences. I did see an interesting study once about how men and women put monetary values on life experiences... buggered if I can find it again, but it was interesting to see differences there.Steersman wrote:I kind of think it quite crucial to be clear on which groups or segments of the class “women†you are referring to. That SOME women are overly emotional you have already conceded, in effect, with your “wailywailers like Amyâ€.rayshul wrote: Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:36 pm
Hah, I definitely disagree that women are more emotional than men. I don't think the wailywailers like Amy are even SLIGHTLY representative of the average woman.
/ANECDOTE
Whether that justifies concluding that ALL women are more emotional than ALL men is probably not a credible or tenable argument at all. But saying MORE women are MORE emotional than MOST men is at least a credible premise, although I tend to think it a stretch – not least because of the difficulties in coming up with a suitable measuring stick, not to mention a suitable definition for “average†...
But I would argue that there’s probably just as large of percentage of men as of women who are “overly emotionalâ€, largely on the basis that commitment to various dogmas, mostly religious but not exclusively, is, I think, mostly a question of egregiously “overly†emotional responses ...
I mentioned roadrage on the Everyman thread as a good way of judging someone's control over their emotions as it's something men and women seem to experience at similar levels but men are more likely to lose their everloving shit, which'd support the "women have more emotional intelligence" thing. anyway the everyman thread is i think where the convo is continuning...
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
It's also a bit of a stretch to reference "Guys, don't do that" as the difference between the two groups.
I didn't care one bit about her dramatics regarding the elevator incident, it was when she and her cohorts went ballistic over anyone that dared question the narrative that this whole ugly ball got rolling. It wasn't rational nor was it in line with skepticism.
So I guess what I'm saying is, they're just chicks. :)
I didn't care one bit about her dramatics regarding the elevator incident, it was when she and her cohorts went ballistic over anyone that dared question the narrative that this whole ugly ball got rolling. It wasn't rational nor was it in line with skepticism.
So I guess what I'm saying is, they're just chicks. :)
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
During one of these conversations I saw a reference to a study that while women are more likely to initiate domestic violence, men are more likely to escalate it and are responsible more most of the severe assaults and homicides.rayshul wrote: I mentioned roadrage on the Everyman thread as a good way of judging someone's control over their emotions as it's something men and women seem to experience at similar levels but men are more likely to lose their everloving shit, which'd support the "women have more emotional intelligence" thing. anyway the everyman thread is i think where the convo is continuning...
Ophelia's Recent Post
A recent post from Ophelia:
That’s all fine and dandy. But if you want to crucify some guy, regardless of whether he was guilty or not which I’ll concede is an open question, and by extension a whole bunch of others, for having been walking around with a standard-issue piece of camera equipment, then “beyond a reasonable doubt†should be at least a minimum requirement.
Some questionable logic there to conflate those two very different kettles of fish. Something that religious fundamentalists seem to exhibit to a distressing degree – as when they assert that atheism is a religion as well – but which really doesn’t have any place in a skeptic community ...
Here’s a thought for you Ophelia, since you’ve banned me from your site for having had the temerity to call another woman on an entirely different site (a FTB one, I might add) a cunt:Ophelia Benson wrote: Ok this is a good one. From a comment on Jen's post on blunderfoot.
“Freethought†means you use reason and logic to come to a conclusion, and not believing everything anyone says — even a close friend — at face value.
Hahahahahahahahaha yes right that's what freethought means. A close friend tells you she has a headache and you interrogate her for an hour trying to get her to demonstrate that fact beyond a reasonable doubt.
That’s all fine and dandy. But if you want to crucify some guy, regardless of whether he was guilty or not which I’ll concede is an open question, and by extension a whole bunch of others, for having been walking around with a standard-issue piece of camera equipment, then “beyond a reasonable doubt†should be at least a minimum requirement.
Some questionable logic there to conflate those two very different kettles of fish. Something that religious fundamentalists seem to exhibit to a distressing degree – as when they assert that atheism is a religion as well – but which really doesn’t have any place in a skeptic community ...
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Is there such a thing as transcendent stupidity? Cos I think Ophelia's achieved it with her latest post: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... -it-means/
Hahahahahahahah no, that's not what 'everything' means. 'Simple English Comprehension For Dummocks 101': 'everything' does not mean the same thing as 'anything', Ophelia, you tiresome little stem cell.What you think it means
August 11, 2012 at 3:49 pm Ophelia Benson
Ok this is a good one. From a comment on Jen’s post on blunderfoot.
Hahahahahahahahaha yes right that’s what freethought means. A close friend tells you she has a headache and you interrogate her for an hour trying to get her to demonstrate that fact beyond a reasonable doubt.“Freethought†means you use reason and logic to come to a conclusion, and not believing everything anyone says — even a close friend — at face value.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Once upon a time...DownThunder wrote:They dont. Youll get a citation for operating an unlicensed vagina. :naughty:rayshul wrote:I don't quite understand how they reconcile the idea that women are on the Slime-side...
[quote=" ERV in "Bad Form, Rebecca Watson" on July 1, 2011"]One of these days, theyre going to come for my Vagina License.[/quote]
(you can download the thread here)
That linked to an even earlier blog article, Atheists with vaginas which is still up. Some of the stuff written there are both hilarious and sad at the same time.
ERV on November 20, 2009 wrote:PZ is awesome.
PZ on November 30, 2009 wrote:But yeah, you ought to be invited to join more of these atheist conferences. I need more fellow science geeks standing up there with me.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Oh, Ophelia's responded to me, after I pointed out the glaring obviously flaw in her reading comprehesion:
As futile as it is writing anything (see, Feelya? - it's distinctly different from 'everything') on the obscurantist drivel that passes for her Freethoughtblog, it does at least make up for it in belly laughs.
:lol: and you'd be the expert on sanity, right Ophelia?Ophelia Benson says:
August 11, 2012 at 4:11 pm
tigzy – well that could be a point.
But in that case it’s still a ridiculous definition, but for a different reason. It’s not “freethought†that doesn’t believe everything no matter what, it’s just sanity.
As futile as it is writing anything (see, Feelya? - it's distinctly different from 'everything') on the obscurantist drivel that passes for her Freethoughtblog, it does at least make up for it in belly laughs.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
That kind fits with my understanding of what emotional intelligence is too - just makes you more able to evaluate and moderate your emotional responses logically/rationally in a stressful situation.EveryMan wrote:During one of these conversations I saw a reference to a study that while women are more likely to initiate domestic violence, men are more likely to escalate it and are responsible more most of the severe assaults and homicides.rayshul wrote: I mentioned roadrage on the Everyman thread as a good way of judging someone's control over their emotions as it's something men and women seem to experience at similar levels but men are more likely to lose their everloving shit, which'd support the "women have more emotional intelligence" thing. anyway the everyman thread is i think where the convo is continuning...
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Found this while looking for something else. Brilliant how topical it is.
[youtube]m2a5-RrwWZ8[/youtube]
[youtube]m2a5-RrwWZ8[/youtube]
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
(Replying to rayshul's post from the Everyman thread since it's about FTB/Skepchick. Whee!)rayshul wrote:That's also from steersman but thinking that over, I may be being unfair to Amy...
That chick was hyped up like motherfuck from all her Skepchick friends telling her to watch out for harrassment and basically ramped up into hysteria probably before she even got there. Maybe she just had a wee breakdown as the result of all the shit that was going on.
I suspect some of it has to do with guilt too. See how badly she treated Sharon Hill before TAM? So then when someone at TAM shows up with parody ceramics parroting the line she threw at Sharon: "you should be embarassed" ...she has to deflect her feelings of guilt by accusing everyone else of harassment and spin her story for maximal sympathy from skepchick supporters.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Although I would agree with OB (I can't believe I just typed that) that that is a horrible definition of free thought. I would have thought that closer to the definition for skepticism.Tigzy wrote:Oh, Ophelia's responded to me, after I pointed out the glaring obviously flaw in her reading comprehesion:
:lol: and you'd be the expert on sanity, right Ophelia?Ophelia Benson says:
August 11, 2012 at 4:11 pm
tigzy – well that could be a point.
But in that case it’s still a ridiculous definition, but for a different reason. It’s not “freethought†that doesn’t believe everything no matter what, it’s just sanity.
As futile as it is writing anything (see, Feelya? - it's distinctly different from 'everything') on the obscurantist drivel that passes for her Freethoughtblog, it does at least make up for it in belly laughs.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I'll buy that.tachikoma wrote:(Replying to rayshul's post from the Everyman thread since it's about FTB/Skepchick. Whee!)rayshul wrote:That's also from steersman but thinking that over, I may be being unfair to Amy...
That chick was hyped up like motherfuck from all her Skepchick friends telling her to watch out for harrassment and basically ramped up into hysteria probably before she even got there. Maybe she just had a wee breakdown as the result of all the shit that was going on.
I suspect some of it has to do with guilt too. See how badly she treated Sharon Hill before TAM? So then when someone at TAM shows up with parody ceramics parroting the line she threw at Sharon: "you should be embarassed" ...she has to deflect her feelings of guilt by accusing everyone else of harassment and spin her story for maximal sympathy from skepchick supporters.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
On my short list of Things Every American Needs To Understand; a big one is that "Freedom of speech does not imply freedom from accountability." Which is what these people want, basically to say stupid shit and not have anyone ever call them out on it.tachikoma wrote: I suspect some of it has to do with guilt too. See how badly she treated Sharon Hill before TAM? So then when someone at TAM shows up with parody ceramics parroting the line she threw at Sharon: "you should be embarassed" ...she has to deflect her feelings of guilt by accusing everyone else of harassment and spin her story for maximal sympathy from skepchick supporters.
This gets dangerous because it's apparently not enough for them to have their own "safe" spaces. It's very specifically about controlling ours.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I wouldn't say so much a horrible definition as a cursory one. From the cesspit:JAB wrote:Although I would agree with OB (I can't believe I just typed that) that that is a horrible definition of free thought. I would have thought that closer to the definition for skepticism.Tigzy wrote:Oh, Ophelia's responded to me, after I pointed out the glaring obviously flaw in her reading comprehesion:
:lol: and you'd be the expert on sanity, right Ophelia?Ophelia Benson says:
August 11, 2012 at 4:11 pm
tigzy – well that could be a point.
But in that case it’s still a ridiculous definition, but for a different reason. It’s not “freethought†that doesn’t believe everything no matter what, it’s just sanity.
As futile as it is writing anything (see, Feelya? - it's distinctly different from 'everything') on the obscurantist drivel that passes for her Freethoughtblog, it does at least make up for it in belly laughs.
In any case, it certainly wasn't something that warranted a blog post from Ophelia - unless she wished to make herself look clever at the expense of some nobody on the internetz. Course, the result turned out to be quite the opposite. :lol:Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of logic, reason and science and not authority, tradition, or other dogmas.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
You would probably be amazed at the tenacity, if not rudeness, of some of the Pharyngulites – some of whom have flounced out of there due to the “new rules†– over at Camels with Hammers over their desire to be able to use various epithets while anathematizing others. Not happy with wallowing in hypocrisy at their own watering hole they want to promulgate that FTB-wide, if not worldwide.EveryMan wrote:On my short list of Things Every American Needs To Understand; a big one is that "Freedom of speech does not imply freedom from accountability." Which is what these people want, basically to say stupid shit and not have anyone ever call them out on it.tachikoma wrote: I suspect some of it has to do with guilt too. See how badly she treated Sharon Hill before TAM? So then when someone at TAM shows up with parody ceramics parroting the line she threw at Sharon: "you should be embarassed" ...she has to deflect her feelings of guilt by accusing everyone else of harassment and spin her story for maximal sympathy from skepchick supporters.
This gets dangerous because it's apparently not enough for them to have their own "safe" spaces. It's very specifically about controlling ours.
Dangerously deluded, I would say ....
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
that's why I'm here. Just for the cock(s)rayshul wrote:I don't quite understand how they reconcile the idea that women are on the Slime-side...
Oh wait, I do. Because girls on the Slime side are "chill girls" who just want to act like they're one of the guys for some dick.
My bad, just answered my own question.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I've lived in the US too long. I almost forget what it's like on the other side of the pond.rayshul wrote:Hah, I definitely disagree that women are more emotional than men. I don't think the wailywailers like Amy are even SLIGHTLY representative of the average woman.
/ANECDOTE
Never been to Canada...
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
After my encounter with Greg Laden I would not be amazed at any bad behavior by these people.Steersman wrote: You would probably be amazed at the tenacity, if not rudeness, of some of the Pharyngulites – some of whom have flounced out of there due to the “new rules†– over at Camels with Hammers over their desire to be able to use various epithets while anathematizing others. Not happy with wallowing in hypocrisy at their own watering hole they want to promulgate that FTB-wide, if not worldwide.
Dangerously deluded, I would say ....
The only thing that has amazed me recently was how easily they were able to whip folks into a frenzy on one of their witch hunts (the Mr. MonoPole incident). I didn't think they had that many supporters. Or that the ones they did have would be so quick to burn a heretic at the stake.
It reminds me of one of those books they made us read in high school, like "Lord of the Flies".
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
It'd be an achievement for Amy if she even managed to get to being average.sacha wrote:I've lived in the US too long. I almost forget what it's like on the other side of the pond.rayshul wrote:Hah, I definitely disagree that women are more emotional than men. I don't think the wailywailers like Amy are even SLIGHTLY representative of the average woman.
/ANECDOTE
Never been to Canada...
#MenCanBeBitchyToo
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Commenter 'Acathode' sums it up well on TF00t's blog.
Responding to another commenter who says "“If you want a community that licks your arse and never disagrees with you then Pharyngula is definitely not the place – sceptical communities in general will not tolerate dumb-asses.", Acathode says:
I like this part of Athacode's comment: "What most of the critics seem to want is a community and place where you can have civil, intelligent discussions and arguments, even if people have very different views and opinions."
Funny how the Slymepit fits that definition to a "T", and the Baboon boards don't even come close.
Responding to another commenter who says "“If you want a community that licks your arse and never disagrees with you then Pharyngula is definitely not the place – sceptical communities in general will not tolerate dumb-asses.", Acathode says:
I wonder if the Horde is still saying that all dissent is still limited to "Stangroom, Kirby, and the Slymepitters".From what I’ve seen, Pharyngula seems just the place if you want a community that licks your arse and never disagrees with you. You just have to stick to the Myers & Co party-line, and everyone will love you.
What most of the critics seem to want is a community and place where you can have civil, intelligent discussions and arguments, even if people have very different views and opinions. At least that’s something that I personally value, and actively sought when I first was made aware of this “movementâ€.
Unfortunately, this is not possible withing the FTB community, and even worse, the FTB community with Myers & Co in the front is actively working against this sort of atmosphere outside of their own site and smaller community.
Going after Payton, effectively trying to silence him by targeting his job and his position withing the community because he simply does not find the content on FTB to be good is a prime example of the sort of message FTB is sending – You either agree with us, or we will do our darnedest to get you expunged from the community, even if we have to use underhand methods.
This just reeks of political party purging, the kind you would see in Soviet, or inquisitors and witch hunters “cleansing the landâ€, and reminds me very little of a skeptical, free-thinking community.
I like this part of Athacode's comment: "What most of the critics seem to want is a community and place where you can have civil, intelligent discussions and arguments, even if people have very different views and opinions."
Funny how the Slymepit fits that definition to a "T", and the Baboon boards don't even come close.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Oops forgot the link to Acathode's comment.
http://thunderf00tdotorg.wordpress.com/ ... mment-5779
http://thunderf00tdotorg.wordpress.com/ ... mment-5779
-
- .
- Posts: 3744
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
They do remind me of the Islamists who demonise (and threaten) any Muslim who dares to appreciate anything of the decadent West, or outside cultures/faiths. Know your place and put your niqab on, sister!!! Perhaps more frightening is that sentiment sometimes comes across from Western feminists. Anne Marie Walters wrote all about that shambles a bit ago, and Maryam frequently writes about the issue.rayshul wrote:I have to say that the "chill girl" thing is a lovely way to demonise women who get on better with guys. GO BACK TO THE SISTERHOOD!!!
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
As I mentioned in the other thread, a manifestation of group-think that may yet be the death of us all. That “Lord of the Flies†is probably as good an example as any, but I think Abbie has made reference recently to another one, The Crucible:EveryMan wrote: Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:13 pm
After my encounter with Greg Laden I would not be amazed at any bad behavior by these people.Steersman wrote: You would probably be amazed at the tenacity, if not rudeness, of some of the Pharyngulites – some of whom have flounced out of there due to the “new rules†– over at Camels with Hammers over their desire to be able to use various epithets while anathematizing others. Not happy with wallowing in hypocrisy at their own watering hole they want to promulgate that FTB-wide, if not worldwide.
Dangerously deluded, I would say ....
The only thing that has amazed me recently was how easily they were able to whip folks into a frenzy on one of their witch hunts (the Mr. MonoPole incident). I didn't think they had that many supporters. Or that the ones they did have would be so quick to burn a heretic at the stake.
It reminds me of one of those books they made us read in high school, like "Lord of the Flies".
Same sort of unthinking hysteria – would be interesting to know the physiological precursors ....The Crucible is a 1952 play by the American playwright Arthur Miller. It is a dramatization of the Salem witch trials that took place in the Province of Massachusetts Bay during 1692 and 1693. Miller wrote the play as an allegory of McCarthyism, when the U.S. government blacklisted accused communists.
-
- .
- Posts: 1505
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:59 am
- Location: In a band of brigands.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I don't think any of us would be surprised. I mean aside from our wealth of personal experience. It only takes a brief visit to any of the core FTB blogs to see what the commentariat is like: A legion of Web warriors. They're not interested in thought, or debate. They come home from a hard day of getting wedgies and having their heads flushed down the toilet. And it's pay back time! They can form their gang, hand out a virtual kicking, and enjoy that warm glow of (self) righteous satisfaction.Steersman wrote:You would probably be amazed at the tenacity, if not rudeness, of some of the Pharyngulites – some of whom have flounced out of there due to the “new rules†– over at Camels with Hammers over their desire to be able to use various epithets while anathematizing others. Not happy with wallowing in hypocrisy at their own watering hole they want to promulgate that FTB-wide, if not worldwide.
Dangerously deluded, I would say ....
How come you get all the breaks over at FTB Tigzy? Still not banned from Offies place. Still posting at Blag Hag after I was banned. They slam the door on me so fast you'd think they were my family. Why not you?Tigzy wrote:Is there such a thing as transcendent stupidity? Cos I think Ophelia's achieved it with her latest post:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
:lol: - I dunno, maybe they just think I'm a good chew-toy, or something. That said, I was thrown into PZs dungeon pretty sharpish - and those were my first ever posts on Blag Hag.real horrorshow wrote: How come you get all the breaks over at FTB Tigzy? Still not banned from Offies place. Still posting at Blag Hag after I was banned. They slam the door on me so fast you'd think they were my family. Why not you?
Still, I'd rather have been banned by Ophelia than having her agree with me that one time :o That was fuckin horrible!
Re: Ophelia's Recent Post
Steersman wrote:
That’s all fine and dandy. But if you want to crucify some guy, regardless of whether he was guilty or not which I’ll concede is an open question...
actually he was proven innocent, there was a long discussion right here on the thread, are you sure you do not want to go back and read before you comment?
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
OMFG! I just got this fucking laptop! It is five days old. Now the fucking thing has coffee all over the fucking screen and keyboard!sacha wrote:that's why I'm here. Just for the cock(s)rayshul wrote:I don't quite understand how they reconcile the idea that women are on the Slime-side...
Oh wait, I do. Because girls on the Slime side are "chill girls" who just want to act like they're one of the guys for some dick.
My bad, just answered my own question.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
coffee is trouble, Andrew. You should know that.AndrewV69 wrote:OMFG! I just got this fucking laptop! It is five days old. Now the fucking thing has coffee all over the fucking screen and keyboard!sacha wrote:that's why I'm here. Just for the cock(s)rayshul wrote:I don't quite understand how they reconcile the idea that women are on the Slime-side...
Oh wait, I do. Because girls on the Slime side are "chill girls" who just want to act like they're one of the guys for some dick.
My bad, just answered my own question.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Bingo! A point I painfully tried to make very clear some time ago.Gumby wrote:Commenter 'Acathode' sums it up well on TF00t's blog.
Responding to another commenter who says "“If you want a community that licks your arse and never disagrees with you then Pharyngula is definitely not the place – sceptical communities in general will not tolerate dumb-asses.", Acathode says:
I wonder if the Horde is still saying that all dissent is still limited to "Stangroom, Kirby, and the Slymepitters".From what I’ve seen, Pharyngula seems just the place if you want a community that licks your arse and never disagrees with you. You just have to stick to the Myers & Co party-line, and everyone will love you.
What most of the critics seem to want is a community and place where you can have civil, intelligent discussions and arguments, even if people have very different views and opinions. At least that’s something that I personally value, and actively sought when I first was made aware of this “movementâ€.
Unfortunately, this is not possible withing the FTB community, and even worse, the FTB community with Myers & Co in the front is actively working against this sort of atmosphere outside of their own site and smaller community.
Going after Payton, effectively trying to silence him by targeting his job and his position withing the community because he simply does not find the content on FTB to be good is a prime example of the sort of message FTB is sending – You either agree with us, or we will do our darnedest to get you expunged from the community, even if we have to use underhand methods.
This just reeks of political party purging, the kind you would see in Soviet, or inquisitors and witch hunters “cleansing the landâ€, and reminds me very little of a skeptical, free-thinking community.
I like this part of Athacode's comment: "What most of the critics seem to want is a community and place where you can have civil, intelligent discussions and arguments, even if people have very different views and opinions."
Funny how the Slymepit fits that definition to a "T", and the Baboon boards don't even come close.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
What I'd post in response to that blog, if I ever posted outside the safety of the Slimepit, would be...tachikoma wrote:http://synapses.co.za/unstoppable-tide-trolls/
There's another issue you're not touching on here, and that's the attempts to ruin people's lives outside of the internet. Commenting on an issue on some blogs (or even on your own blog) can result in you having your real life identity outed and/or witch hunts. See what happened to ERV for a clear example.
You will not get a safe space for discussion unless you address this.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Really, that blog was nice and all, but it's like people don't get the fucking problem or something.
It's not about people being civil on motherfucking blogs.
We're not civil here and discussions happen just fine.
The real problem is about people fucking hounding out people and publically shaming them, attempting to ruin their lives. It started with Stef and it escalated with ERV, continued with Franc, surged again with DJ, and if Dr Hall had retaliated I'm betting they'd have gone for her, too. These people target others and do what they can to ruin them in order to stamp out opposition.
Interestingly this has been my overwhelming experience of anyone caught up in social justice bullshit.
It's not about people being civil on motherfucking blogs.
We're not civil here and discussions happen just fine.
The real problem is about people fucking hounding out people and publically shaming them, attempting to ruin their lives. It started with Stef and it escalated with ERV, continued with Franc, surged again with DJ, and if Dr Hall had retaliated I'm betting they'd have gone for her, too. These people target others and do what they can to ruin them in order to stamp out opposition.
Interestingly this has been my overwhelming experience of anyone caught up in social justice bullshit.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
1-- God, this shit started a LONG time ago, didnt it? Even their shit-stirring with DJ Grothe.tachikoma wrote:That linked to an even earlier blog article, Atheists with vaginas which is still up. Some of the stuff written there are both hilarious and sad at the same time.
ERV on November 20, 2009 wrote:PZ is awesome.PZ on November 30, 2009 wrote:But yeah, you ought to be invited to join more of these atheist conferences. I need more fellow science geeks standing up there with me.
2-- I stand by the stuff I previously wrote, and am glad to see current/former Pit Crew there also making sense.
3-- Note this:
Even me 3 years ago wanted everyone to be clear that I was speaking for myself as a w00mynz, not that I was speaking for all teh w00mynz. I know opinions and such change, but Im glad I wasnt a complete retard in 2009 (I, at one point, a long time ago, mistook Zuska for a role-model *shudder*).Note– WOOMYNZ opinions offered on ERV might differ from your local WOOMYNZ, so please consult and react accordingly.
Good times :?
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Also, I just got back from Missouri, and though I am not a 'drinker' (since we are talking about alcohol), I brought home a TON of local peach wine. ITS SO YUMMY! Missouri peach wine is as yummy as FTBers are fucking stupid, thats how yummy this stuff is.
YUMMY!!!
YUMMY!!!
Re: Ophelia's Recent Post
Actually I read and followed the contretemps in some detail, mostly over at The Skeptical Abyss. My impression from all of that was that all that could be said was that there was no evidence of him having taken any up-skirt photos. Apparently no one confronted him and demanded to see the contents of his camera or any logs of photos having been taken, sent and deleted. That to me would be the only credible evidence capable of actually proving him innocent or guilty of that crime.sacha wrote: Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:50 pm
actually he was proven innocent, there was a long discussion right here on the thread, are you sure you do not want to go back and read before you comment?Steersman wrote:
That’s all fine and dandy. But if you want to crucify some guy, regardless of whether he was guilty or not which I’ll concede is an open question...
However, it seems that even John C. Welch concedes or argues that he had been guilty of some serious harassment. All of which I summarized on a related thread:
But if you have a link to that thread you are referring to or other related evidence justifying your contention then I would appreciate the information and would certainly take a look at it.Good points and some clarification in this rather turbid if not turgid contretemps. But I wonder: is it still not true that acts of harassment took place?
For instance, you quote Lee’s points 5 through 7 while 1 through 4, and 7, clearly indicate, apparently, a fairly persistent level of harassment even if, as Lee has maintained all along (apparently), the “crime†did not actually take place. Which, I might also mention, John C. Welch – apparently no particular friend of the complainant – also provides some justification for viewing it as.
monopod man
Okay, I'm a cunt. As soon as I responded with that, I thought, "fuck, sacha (yes, third person, I'm blond) that was cuntish" You deserve an apology for that one.Steersman wrote:Actually I read and followed the contretemps in some detail, mostly over at The Skeptical Abyss. My impression from all of that was that all that could be said was that there was no evidence of him having taken any up-skirt photos. Apparently no one confronted him and demanded to see the contents of his camera or any logs of photos having been taken, sent and deleted. That to me would be the only credible evidence capable of actually proving him innocent or guilty of that crime.sacha wrote: Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:50 pm
actually he was proven innocent, there was a long discussion right here on the thread, are you sure you do not want to go back and read before you comment?Steersman wrote:
That’s all fine and dandy. But if you want to crucify some guy, regardless of whether he was guilty or not which I’ll concede is an open question...
However, it seems that even John C. Welch concedes or argues that he had been guilty of some serious harassment. All of which I summarized on a related thread:
But if you have a link to that thread you are referring to or other related evidence justifying your contention then I would appreciate the information and would certainly take a look at it.Good points and some clarification in this rather turbid if not turgid contretemps. But I wonder: is it still not true that acts of harassment took place?
For instance, you quote Lee’s points 5 through 7 while 1 through 4, and 7, clearly indicate, apparently, a fairly persistent level of harassment even if, as Lee has maintained all along (apparently), the “crime†did not actually take place. Which, I might also mention, John C. Welch – apparently no particular friend of the complainant – also provides some justification for viewing it as.
I read that his film was looked over by the JREF and cleared of any "inappropriate" photographs. I should have posted the link immediately. I will find it again and post it here.
I have empathy for "Monopod Man". I believe he is just socially inept, and meant no harm. They accused, convicted, and outed him, and he received real threats, many of them.
Apparently besides his name and email, his address, and phone number were also made public, and he was frightened enough to stay away from TAM this year, even though he had already purchased a ticket and hotel room.
I wrote a long post here about him, when someone mentioned that he was one of the three "harassers". It can be a bit frustrating to have new members repeat the same things we sorted a month ago. I'm not excusing my response to you, just attempting to explain. Most of us have been here (and at Abbie's prior to that) for over a year, and when the same group of people get together, it's easy to begin to form a "old timer" camaraderie, and have little patience to get someone new, up to date with the thread.
A lot of things have been repeated by newer commenters here, some things as if they came up with the analogy, or conclusion on their own, when someone else said the same thing six months ago. I don't know why some people have joined the thread fairly recently, and seem to have been here the entire time, and others do not.
I'll look for the link, and meanwhile, if you just search the thread for "Monopod Man" you will find a discussion about him, including my posts. Would you link to JCW's comment that you reference above, please.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I now see you linked to JCW's comment in your linked comment.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
this is why I asked for the JCW link: http://www.skepticalabyss.com/?p=31#comment-114
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Might be where he registered it. It's actually hosted here -SteveW68 wrote:http://whois.domaintools.com/freethoughtblogs.com
"Ed" neglected to register with privacy enabled - Lists his address, real name and phone number - hosted by bluehost.com
http://www.whoishostingthis.com/freethoughtblogs.com
Cloudflare. It's mentioned above. Friendly towards people that have "accountability" issues.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
What makes you presume stuff about me? You have to earn the privilege to make fun of Sacha - until then, it's just mindless personal one-upmanship or dick waving with no actual purpose.EveryMan wrote:That was me having the last word in a funny way. Lighten up, Francis. I bet franc thought it was funny.tachikoma wrote:Another user pretending to be Everyman, or Everyman trying to get past sacha's block? Either way, not cool.
-
- .
- Posts: 3744
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
:lol:ERV on November 20, 2009 wrote:PZ is awesome.
Yeah, there was a time when I was quite fond of PZ, when he was actually writing mildly interesting stuff and bashing stupid theists. However, the mask then began to slip...and what we have seen behind the mask is really ugly. Perhaps a certain Miss Watson had a considerable influence on him...
Re: Ophelia's Recent Post
"Parallel logic"Steersman wrote:A recent post from Ophelia:
Some questionable logic there to conflate those two very different kettles of fish. Something that religious fundamentalists seem to exhibit to a distressing degree – as when they assert that atheism is a religion as well – but which really doesn’t have any place in a skeptic community ...Ophelia Benson wrote: Ok this is a good one. From a comment on Jen's post on blunderfoot.
“Freethought†means you use reason and logic to come to a conclusion, and not believing everything anyone says — even a close friend — at face value.
Hahahahahahahahaha yes right that's what freethought means. A close friend tells you she has a headache and you interrogate her for an hour trying to get her to demonstrate that fact beyond a reasonable doubt.
Re: monopod man
sacha wrote: Sat Aug 11, 2012 8:17 pm
Okay, I'm a cunt. As soon as I responded with that, I thought, "fuck, sacha (yes, third person, I'm blond) that was cuntish"Steersman wrote: .....
But if you have a link to that thread you are referring to or other related evidence justifying your contention then I would appreciate the information and would certainly take a look at it.
No, I wouldn’t go that far: :-)
Mildly exasperating, but that’s it. :-)cunt n Taboo
3. Offensive slang a mean or obnoxious person
De nada ... but thanks ...You deserve an apology for that one.
Hadn’t read anything about that and I would have thought that The Skeptical Atheist would have mentioned it, although it is a little difficult to follow the trail. And that event might have happened after the complaint which was the basis for that post of his. Thanks if you can find the link or even for looking ...I read that his film was looked over by the JREF and cleared of any "inappropriate" photographs. I should have posted the link immediately. I will find it again and post it here.
Likewise. That’s why I used the word “crucify†in my “post†to Ophelia. Not one of “skepticism’s finest hoursâ€, I think ....I have empathy for "Monopod Man". I believe he is just socially inept, and meant no harm.
I can sympathize as I’ve been in similar situations. I sort of look on it as a “teaching momentâ€, although not everyone is cut out for that role.... it's easy to begin to form a "old timer" camaraderie, and have little patience to get someone new, up to date with the thread.
But, FWIW and in passing and to-whom-it-may-concern, as it is sort of a hobby horse of mine or a minor cause celebre, I think it would help if the blog had numbered posts or if the link to a post that was being responded to was included automatically. While I generally like the format here, not to mention the more even-keel posting, finding out context or history can be a little difficult – and the things I mentioned tend to be quite helpful in that regard on other blogs.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
EveryMan's just a wanker who loves the sound of his own typing. I've blocked his post because they're so fucking navel-gazing. He reminds me of the boring cunt I was myself when I was a teenager.franc wrote:What makes you presume stuff about me? You have to earn the privilege to make fun of Sacha - until then, it's just mindless personal one-upmanship or dick waving with no actual purpose.EveryMan wrote:That was me having the last word in a funny way. Lighten up, Francis. I bet franc thought it was funny.tachikoma wrote:Another user pretending to be Everyman, or Everyman trying to get past sacha's block? Either way, not cool.
Just another internet tool...
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Maybe the wiki needs a post that clarifies the entire response to things rather than expecting everyone to read through the thread.
It's much easier not to read and just say "these people think women are worthless"...
Not volunteering to do it tho... eheheh. Not really the most thoughtful-thinky person around and obvs forget a lot of shit.
It's much easier not to read and just say "these people think women are worthless"...
Not volunteering to do it tho... eheheh. Not really the most thoughtful-thinky person around and obvs forget a lot of shit.