Periodic Table of Swearing

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Me on the far left in a Deadland last year:

http://i391.photobucket.com/albums/oo35 ... /south.jpg

Same week-end, left again:

http://i391.photobucket.com/albums/oo35 ... atling.jpg

And an old one from 2008 (AD&D, I think):

http://i391.photobucket.com/albums/oo35 ... l/Lars.jpg

[Trophy]

Of course nobody has been banned from Slymepit unlike FTB but that's not the only point on which slyme pitters have been criticising FTB. One of our biggest criticism was/is that labels such as MRA are thrown at random people without any justification or without any evidence. If person X has criticised FTB on this latter point and then later person X throws a random accusation without evidence, then of course I am allowed to bring the charges of hypocricy. And I acknowledge that on FTB many times people got bannded because of such accusations which is definitely not the case here. And I also acknowledge that this is the nature of online discussions. Also, I don't think it's reasonable to expect that people should always behave unhypocritically all the time because that's quite unrealistic. That means it is nice to have someone who shouts "HYPOCRISY!" at the right time. And again, this also means that if you feel I've been a hypocrite at times, then you can shout at me too. I might kick back for a bit but hopefully I can later acknowledge that :D.

[TedDahlberg]

Me on the far left in a Deadland last year:

[old time-y looking picture]

Same week-end, left again:

[old time-y looking picture]

And an old one from 2008 (AD&D, I think):

[picture]

Admit it, those aren't pictures from LARPs, you're just immortal.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Of course nobody has been banned from Slymepit unlike FTB but that's not the only point on which slyme pitters have been criticising FTB. One of our biggest criticism was/is that labels such as MRA are thrown at random people without any justification or without any evidence. If person X has criticised FTB on this latter point and then later person X throws a random accusation without evidence, then of course I am allowed to bring the charges of hypocricy. And I acknowledge that on FTB many times people got bannded because of such accusations which is definitely not the case here. And I also acknowledge that this is the nature of online discussions. Also, I don't think it's reasonable to expect that people should always behave unhypocritically all the time because that's quite unrealistic. That means it is nice to have someone who shouts "HYPOCRISY!" at the right time. And again, this also means that if you feel I've been a hypocrite at times, then you can shout at me too. I might kick back for a bit but hopefully I can later acknowledge that :D.

The thing is, I am, by my own self, perdsuaded there is ni hypocrisy here, since I don't remember anyone claiming the high ground on morals, civility and social justice in these parts. We could be the most rotten, vulgarn aggressive bunch ever, and still it wouldn't match FTB's 'hollier than thou' attitude. That's all I'm saying. We're a bunch of people sharing ideas, in civil or uncivil manners. So be it. Call us out on whatever fuck ups we may be guilty off, and I almost guarantee it will be welcome (by me at least, I don't spek for other posters), as long as it's legitimate.

Ted: *whispers* shhhhhhh. Don't tell anyone, there can be only one.

[TedDahlberg]

Of course nobody has been banned from Slymepit unlike FTB but that's not the only point on which slyme pitters have been criticising FTB. One of our biggest criticism was/is that labels such as MRA are thrown at random people without any justification or without any evidence. If person X has criticised FTB on this latter point and then later person X throws a random accusation without evidence, then of course I am allowed to bring the charges of hypocricy. And I acknowledge that on FTB many times people got bannded because of such accusations which is definitely not the case here. And I also acknowledge that this is the nature of online discussions. Also, I don't think it's reasonable to expect that people should always behave unhypocritically all the time because that's quite unrealistic. That means it is nice to have someone who shouts "HYPOCRISY!" at the right time. And again, this also means that if you feel I've been a hypocrite at times, then you can shout at me too. I might kick back for a bit but hopefully I can later acknowledge that :D.

One can but nod in agreement. There has been the odd harsh comment lately that has made me frown (not for the tone, mind, but because they seemed based on knee-jerk reaction that the target of the comment was some kind of "enemy"), and the occasional discussion about people, say Steersman as if they weren't here has made me cringe a bit. I mean I've got a couple of people's comments blocked, but that's just a personal preference. Discussing if they should be here seems like taking a step in a direction we wouldn't want to go, even if it is just idle chatter.

The above, though, are really very mild complaints, and I don't think there's any chance for the foreseeable future that this place would devolve into the kind of place FTB is these days. I'm slightly amazed (and very pleased) to see how well we seem to self-regulate our interactions.

[TedDahlberg]

Ted: *whispers* shhhhhhh. Don't tell anyone, there can be only one.

Oh, I won't tell anyone, I promise. *sharpens sword*

[Trophy]

The thing is, I am, by my own self, perdsuaded there is ni hypocrisy here, since I don't remember anyone claiming the high ground on morals, civility and social justice in these parts. We could be the most rotten, vulgarn aggressive bunch ever, and still it wouldn't match FTB's 'hollier than thou' attitude. That's all I'm saying. We're a bunch of people sharing ideas, in civil or uncivil manners. So be it. Call us out on whatever fuck ups we may be guilty off, and I almost guarantee it will be welcome (by me at least, I don't spek for other posters), as long as it's legitimate.

Okay, I think I understand what you say. So maybe we can distinguish between "soft hypocrites" and "hard hypocrites". A soft hypocrite is like a smoker doctor who tries very hard to spread the word that smoking is unhealthy and that people should stop smoking if they want a happy and long life; he's not a hard hypocrite because he never said that he wants 'a happy and long life' but he is a soft hypocrite because he is not following his own advice. A hard hypocrite is like a Catholic priest who claims all pedophiles should be punished but then he overlooks a few of them in his own church.

Does this make you happy? :D

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

The thing is, I am, by my own self, perdsuaded there is ni hypocrisy here, since I don't remember anyone claiming the high ground on morals, civility and social justice in these parts. We could be the most rotten, vulgarn aggressive bunch ever, and still it wouldn't match FTB's 'hollier than thou' attitude. That's all I'm saying. We're a bunch of people sharing ideas, in civil or uncivil manners. So be it. Call us out on whatever fuck ups we may be guilty off, and I almost guarantee it will be welcome (by me at least, I don't spek for other posters), as long as it's legitimate.

Okay, I think I understand what you say. So maybe we can distinguish between "soft hypocrites" and "hard hypocrites". A soft hypocrite is like a smoker doctor who tries very hard to spread the word that smoking is unhealthy and that people should stop smoking if they want a happy and long life; he's not a hard hypocrite because he never said that he wants 'a happy and long life' but he is a soft hypocrite because he is not following his own advice. A hard hypocrite is like a Catholic priest who claims all pedophiles should be punished but then he overlooks a few of them in his own church.

Does this make you happy? :D

Not really. What makes me happy is a nice glass of wine while watching a good movie with my significant other. But if you're going to quantify levels of hypocrisy, where would the Pit rate? And where would FTB, Skepchick, Surly Amy rate? Actually, I don't really care. The doctor telling you to quit smoking while chain-smoking at the samez time doesn't bother me. I know my smoking and drinking habits will get me sooner than later, but I am no physician, so I have no say in this.

Wait, what was the point? I lost track while typing.

[Scented Nectar]

Has anybody contacted Target or other appropriate party about White Zvan woman's trademark infringement? Is it worth it?

Leave it to the Baboons to stoop to DMCAing, and also leaking people's personal information gleaned from DMCA counternotices.

We are better than them.

Target'll probably figure it out on their own when they look at their stats and find her article url there. I know I clicked the Target link in the comments a couple of times to compare size thickness of the rings in the design, so I'm guessing that others probably have too in order to compare them. No need to report her even if anyone actually wanted to. A company that size most certainly has a marketing dept and looks at their stats to see where customers are coming from.

The logo is registered in its base graphic form, the target pic without any words. Stefunny seems to think that putting some of her own words on top of someone else's registered logo makes it ok. I disagree, and although I'm not a lawyer, I think that's how the law goes too.

What would you bet that the comment gets flushed down the memory hole as soon as Steffy reads this?
http://www.scentednectar.com/sneerfacto ... ash-01.gif

[Scented Nectar]

Coffee? Ted, don't do that
Tea, maybe, if you are lucky!

Now I'm wondering… if coffee is sex, what is tea?

Foreplay without the happy ending. That's all tea is. Coffee though, always satisfies, as long as it's not been castrated decaffeinated, that is.

[TedDahlberg]

Coffee? Ted, don't do that
Tea, maybe, if you are lucky!

Now I'm wondering… if coffee is sex, what is tea?

Foreplay without the happy ending. That's all tea is. Coffee though, always satisfies, as long as it's not been castrated decaffeinated, that is.

Frankly I prefer cola myself. I'll leave it up to the reader to decide exactly which perversion this represents.

[Dick Strawkins]

This place is turning into a FTB. ConcentratedH2O Accusing random posters without any linked evidence, people name calling steerman just because of some disagreements, all are really interesting and lolzy incidents. Hypocrites.

At the risk of being labelled a concern troll, I would say that I am also concerned at the apparent morphing of the Pit.

Your concern is noted.
Have a cookie, cupcake, and do you see that old rusty porcupine over there?
:twisted:


Wait a second... :think:

I hope I'm not provoking tears of rage!

:shock:

[SPACKlick]

[quote="Scented Nectar"The logo is registered in its base graphic form, the target pic without any words. Stefunny seems to think that putting some of her own words on top of someone else's registered logo makes it ok. [/quote]

I'm not sure about whether they are breaching here. As SteffyZvan pointed out, the Target logo is 3 rings, equal sized red-white-red (central ring is a circle). The feminist on teh interwebz log is 4 rings, thin white - red-white-red, seperated by black lines and not of equal width (i think the white is thinner than the red). The button also would not likely confuse a viewer that it was associated with target.

:orcs-whip: This horse may be dead, put the whip down. :teasing-poke: poke it with a stick once to be sure.

[Philip of Tealand]

Coffee? Ted, don't do that
Tea, maybe, if you are lucky!

Now I'm wondering… if coffee is sex, what is tea?

Foreplay without the happy ending. That's all tea is. Coffee though, always satisfies, as long as it's not been castrated decaffeinated, that is.

Ye gods and pixies, umbrage has been taken I tell you!

Coffee always satisfies? Oh really?

Even the stuff that comes out of either end of a Cambodian Weasel?

Sure, you'll get quality sex from a drinker of that coffee

Must have been what Elevator Guy drank before he chatted Watson up.

[Scented Nectar]

Frankly I prefer cola myself. I'll leave it up to the reader to decide exactly which perversion this represents.

It's something pretty kinky, I'm sure. I'm a little shocked, personally. :D

[BarnOwl]

There's a SuperTarget store near my house - I shop there occasionally (they actually have a decent selection of organic foods and products made from recycled materials, so I'm not being a total eco-hypocrite :mrgreen: ), and I think that Zvan's "design" looks a lot like their logo. From a short distance, the differences are negligible.

I think it's a bit funny and mildly ironic, because Zvan is probably way too upmarket and snobbish to shop at Target, so their logo is off her cultural radar ... even though the company started in Minnesota and likely has several stores in her area. The company also uses a reverse-color target logo, seen here on their mascot Bullseye.

Maybe I'll pop some organic Target popcorn later today. :popcorn:

[TedDahlberg]

Coffee? Ted, don't do that
Tea, maybe, if you are lucky!

Now I'm wondering… if coffee is sex, what is tea?

Foreplay without the happy ending. That's all tea is. Coffee though, always satisfies, as long as it's not been castrated decaffeinated, that is.

Ye gods and pixies, umbrage has been taken I tell you!

Coffee always satisfies? Oh really?

Even the stuff that comes out of either end of a Cambodian Weasel?

Sure, you'll get quality sex from a drinker of that coffee

Must have been what Elevator Guy drank before he chatted Watson up.

And you said there were no heretics here… :whistle:

[Scented Nectar]

The logo is registered in its base graphic form, the target pic without any words. Stefunny seems to think that putting some of her own words on top of someone else's registered logo makes it ok.

I'm not sure about whether they are breaching here. As SteffyZvan pointed out, the Target logo is 3 rings, equal sized red-white-red (central ring is a circle). The feminist on teh interwebz log is 4 rings, thin white - red-white-red, seperated by black lines and not of equal width (i think the white is thinner than the red). The button also would not likely confuse a viewer that it was associated with target.

:orcs-whip: This horse may be dead, put the whip down. :teasing-poke: poke it with a stick once to be sure.

Possibly. I'm no lawyer. I can see it both ways, where the outer white is just background and not counting towards changing the logo, in the same way as Target's logo on their page has a white background, OR like you said and the outer part is considered one of the rings (although, it just looks to me like background showing).

Doesn't matter anyways though. It's not up to us. If Target even does bother to check out her article and Zazzle store, it's up to them to decide whether or not they consider it a stolen logo. If they think it is, they will file a dmca, at which point Ste.Funny can decide whether to fight it by appealing it, or whether she will agree and take down the article and the store items.

[franc]

This place is turning into a FTB. ConcentratedH2O Accusing random posters without any linked evidence, people name calling steerman just because of some disagreements, all are really interesting and lolzy incidents. Hypocrites.

At the risk of being labelled a concern troll, I would say that I am also concerned at the apparent morphing of the Pit.

I'm getting pretty fucking tired of the pointless accusations and insinuations that serve little purpose other than to smear the individuals being pointed out. The hyperbolisation of trivia; the pronunciations of guilt without allowing any case for defense; the refusal to get facts straight PRIOR to fingerpointing.

If folks have problems, get your FACTS RIGHT BEFORE SMEARING and state your case in CLEAR, PLAIN ENGLISH rather than repeating cryptic hints and whispers. I have been on the receiving end of so much of this shit that it takes something exceptional for me to even notice it anymore, but this idiocy has been spreading to accusations of others for similar non-issues and shit that relies on little more tha mean girls high school gossip. If people want to holier-than-thou, the onus is on THEM to make the case - the onus IS NOT on the target to have to prove their innocence over malicious NON-INFORMATION.

The cunts that do this know full well who they are - and doing it via "guest" and then making excuses like "I forgot to login" just don't cut it. You slimy cunts.

[AnonymousCowherd]

PNAS article won't DL so can't judge the findings. Patriarchy strikes again.

Thanks for that Trophy. It may be an issue with my PDF reader, because I used the iPad to DL the study and - voila! - no problem.

I can see why the study appears to be better than rhetoric and it may actually be so, but I don't think it shows what the authors claim. I alwys focus on the stuff they scrape off their shoes when looking at these studies - the methods section - because it tells you (if your lucky) what they actually did. In this case they did a lot of things that such studies normally do and, as a result, are as wrong as such studies normally are.

I could write a screed as long as the article setting out the problems with the data and the statistical analysis, but that would bore everyone to tears and I'm not even being paid for it. Long story short, the rating scale indices they use are only ordinal scale measurement and that doesn't allow for the kind of arithmetic and statistical analyses they performed. Everyone does it, everyone shouldn't, because it imputes more into the data than is actually there by treating it as interval scale or more and it just isn't. The authors themselves say the effects they found are small, but make great play of their statistical significance, yet it exactly that significance which their data precludes.

Even if the data was up to it measurment wise, they analysed the living daylights out of it statistically and in ways that paid little regard to the independence of the hypotheses tested or the logic of the test (e.g. they ran a 2-way ANOVA, found significant differences, then tested some specific contrasts and found them significant. Once again, everyne does it and some stats books recommend it, but it violates the assuptions of the tests of the planned contrasts. There is more to all that, but basta!).

All that goes to whether or not they demonstrate a difference in the dependent variable, and they then go on to yet more (likely non-independent) analysis to show that the claimed difference is due to the various differences in the factors of interest to them. I think it could have been done better, and more simply, but what do I know? And let's not even start on the claimed validity of the scales they used.

The phenomenon they are trying to demonstrate (actually, they assume it is there and want to measure it, which isn't quite right either) may well exist at some level. I wouldn't be surprised to find that women are treated in different ways to men in some degree (or degrees - ha!), or some of the time. But I don't think they demonstrate it, nor measure it, anything like as well as they seem to believe. I also can't quite shake the feeling that they really want a particular result and will be pleased to run with whatever findings they have, I suspect well in advance of their data.

And no, I'm not dissing the paper because I don't like it's findings (of course, I would say that though, wouldn't I). Most of these problems are endemic in social science research and I'd bring up the same issues in any similar paper. The usual response is "well we have to do it that way or we'd never get anything done". To which I'd respond the way my old supervisor did. Taking out several sheets of random numbers from his desk drawer, he'd throw them across and say "well, if getting something done is the problem, just use those. It will save you the bother of actually running the experiment as well".

There. Aren't you glad you asked?

[Tristan]

This place is turning into a FTB. ConcentratedH2O Accusing random posters without any linked evidence, people name calling steerman just because of some disagreements, all are really interesting and lolzy incidents. Hypocrites.

At the risk of being labelled a concern troll, I would say that I am also concerned at the apparent morphing of the Pit.

I'm getting pretty fucking tired of the pointless accusations and insinuations that serve little purpose other than to smear the individuals being pointed out. The hyperbolisation of trivia; the pronunciations of guilt without allowing any case for defense; the refusal to get facts straight PRIOR to fingerpointing.

If folks have problems, get your FACTS RIGHT BEFORE SMEARING and state your case in CLEAR, PLAIN ENGLISH rather than repeating cryptic hints and whispers. I have been on the receiving end of so much of this shit that it takes something exceptional for me to even notice it anymore, but this idiocy has been spreading to accusations of others for similar non-issues and shit that relies on little more tha mean girls high school gossip. If people want to holier-than-thou, the onus is on THEM to make the case - the onus IS NOT on the target to have to prove their innocence over malicious NON-INFORMATION.

The cunts that do this know full well who they are - and doing it via "guest" and then making excuses like "I forgot to login" just don't cut it. You slimy cunts.

:whistle:

[Scented Nectar]

Ye gods and pixies, umbrage has been taken I tell you!

Coffee always satisfies? Oh really?

Even the stuff that comes out of either end of a Cambodian Weasel?

Sure, you'll get quality sex from a drinker of that coffee

Must have been what Elevator Guy drank before he chatted Watson up.

No, only REAL Scotsmen coffee counts. And EGuy's problem was that Watson didn't drink the coffee. In those cases, best to move on and find someone who will. And politely move on he did. Why won't femtheists acknowledge that part of it? EGuy did exactly what women have been wanting; he took "no" for an answer. Totally took it and didn't harass. We'd have heard about it if he had harassed, like if he pestily tried to talk her into changing her mind, or if he had gotten angry, or even worse assaulted or raped her. We'd have heard about it louder than the "guys don't do that".

A while back, in what must have been PZ's most stupidly ironic day of all, he posted a comic strip called something like Feminist Fantasy or something similar. The idea being that what happened in the comic is sadly only a fantasy and never happens for real. So, in the comic, a man asks a women out. She says "no", and he accepts it and goes away.

That blew my mind. That PZ did not see how EGuy did exactly what the Feminist Fantasy comic did, blew my mind. Has he developed dementia? How can he pretend that EG was any different than the comic's feminist's dreamworld, for fuck's sake?

[Philip of Tealand]

No, only REAL Scotsmen coffee counts. And EGuy's problem was that Watson didn't drink the coffee. In those cases, best to move on and find someone who will. And politely move on he did. Why won't femtheists acknowledge that part of it? EGuy did exactly what women have been wanting; he took "no" for an answer. Totally took it and didn't harass. We'd have heard about it if he had harassed, like if he pestily tried to talk her into changing her mind, or if he had gotten angry, or even worse assaulted or raped her. We'd have heard about it louder than the "guys don't do that".

A while back, in what must have been PZ's most stupidly ironic day of all, he posted a comic strip called something like Feminist Fantasy or something similar. The idea being that what happened in the comic is sadly only a fantasy and never happens for real. So, in the comic, a man asks a women out. She says "no", and he accepts it and goes away.

That blew my mind. That PZ did not see how EGuy did exactly what the Feminist Fantasy comic did, blew my mind. Has he developed dementia? How can he pretend that EG was any different than the comic's feminist's dreamworld, for fuck's sake?

I rather think that EGuy is a RadFeminist Fantasy - not enough evidence to be credible, but I completely agree that saying no and walking away is the correct way to go about it.

I'm quite staggered too at the reaction. All this howling and mewling about a story of someone getting told no and leaving it right there.

But then again, reading the Zvan "Schrodinger's Rapist" drivel, is it hardly surprising that saying no and walking away is just as bad a crime as actually doing the rape.

All True Tea Drinkers would never do this of course!

[Scented Nectar]

I found the article I referred to above:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... e-fantasy/

And in case he memoryholes the article, the original comic strip is at:
http://is.gd/63QavT
I used a shortener on the above url since the anony thing sometimes drops off stuff at the extra stuff at the end of the page name, which this url looked like it had. This shortening would also be good on specific comment urls so that the comment number won't get dropped.

EGuy did EXACTLY as the fantasy guy in the comic did. That the baboons don't see that is astounding. Zero bad. They only don't see it because they don't want to. They are enjoying the sympathy their persecution complex drums up.

[Scented Nectar]

I rather think that EGuy is a RadFeminist Fantasy - not enough evidence to be credible, but I completely agree that saying no and walking away is the correct way to go about it.

I'm quite staggered too at the reaction. All this howling and mewling about a story of someone getting told no and leaving it right there.

But then again, reading the Zvan "Schrodinger's Rapist" drivel, is it hardly surprising that saying no and walking away is just as bad a crime as actually doing the rape.

All True Tea Drinkers would never do this of course!

I think both True Coffee Drinkersâ„¢ and True Tea Drinkersâ„¢ can agree on that. http://www.scentednectar.com/sneerfacto ... fee-03.gif

[Philip of Tealand]

I rather think that EGuy is a RadFeminist Fantasy - not enough evidence to be credible, but I completely agree that saying no and walking away is the correct way to go about it.

I'm quite staggered too at the reaction. All this howling and mewling about a story of someone getting told no and leaving it right there.

But then again, reading the Zvan "Schrodinger's Rapist" drivel, is it hardly surprising that saying no and walking away is just as bad a crime as actually doing the rape.

All True Tea Drinkers would never do this of course!

I think both True Coffee Drinkersâ„¢ and True Tea Drinkersâ„¢ can agree on that. http://www.scentednectar.com/sneerfacto ... fee-03.gif

I've no idea what Trophy was on about earlier! :D

Cheeeeeeeers! [img]http://www.scentednectar.com/sneerfacto ... fee-03.gif[/img

[Philip of Tealand]

I rather think that EGuy is a RadFeminist Fantasy - not enough evidence to be credible, but I completely agree that saying no and walking away is the correct way to go about it.

I'm quite staggered too at the reaction. All this howling and mewling about a story of someone getting told no and leaving it right there.

But then again, reading the Zvan "Schrodinger's Rapist" drivel, is it hardly surprising that saying no and walking away is just as bad a crime as actually doing the rape.

All True Tea Drinkers would never do this of course!

I think both True Coffee Drinkersâ„¢ and True Tea Drinkersâ„¢ can agree on that. http://www.scentednectar.com/sneerfacto ... fee-03.gif

I've no idea what Trophy was on about earlier! :D

Cheeeeeeeers! [img]http://www.scentednectar.com/sneerfacto ... fee-03.gif[/img

Bugger.

All I needed was one more ]

I coulda been a contenda! I coulda been some body!

[img]http://www.scentednectar.com/sneerfacto ... fee-03.gif]

[Philip of Tealand]

Bugger.

All I needed was one more ]

I coulda been a contenda! I coulda been some body!

[img]http://www.scentednectar.com/sneerfacto ... fee-03.gif]

I'm going to stop now.

[Tigzy]

Going back to Becky's post on those ungrateful harridans who apparently didn't write her an essay after all she did for them: http://skepchick.org/2012/09/please-sto ... calendars/

Did they go home and get involved in their local skeptical group? I have no idea. I asked many of them to write me an essay on how they benefited from the scholarship they got, and I don’t recall ever actually getting one.

Oh, look:

In 2006, a Skepchick scholarship permitted me to come to my first TAM. I got to meet and shake hands with the first other black woman who called herself “Atheist,” as I did.

I stood in a corridor stuck while a banquet room was constructed out of fold able walls with Christopher Hitchens for 20 minutes while he talked with me another person who remains a dear friend to this day.

I love you and support your evolution, Rebecca.

BUT- that essay you asked for, I actually gave to you and you published it. (Twice if I recall!)

It’s hard to evidence a full accounting of lives you’ve impacted and perhaps improved through the years. But do know, I am proof positive that because of you and your work, the atheist world may claim me as an unabashed member.

Jamila

http://skepchick.org/2012/09/please-sto ... ent-158569

It must have been something pretty harrowing to leave Becky with such rage blindness she forgot all about receiving Jamila's essay and publishing it twice.

[ERV]

I thought we already established that Twatson cant remember anything done by non-famous people.

[Scented Nectar]

If anyone is still using scentednectar@rogers.com, I'm retiring it, and will be changing its name soon too. There are 200 or 300 spams everyday that I receive on that one. All in Portuguese too, and I don't even speak that language. Use me@scentednectar.com instead. I've fixed the sending problem I had a while back, so no need to use the other address anyways.

[Dick Strawkins]

Going back to Becky's post on those ungrateful harridans who apparently didn't write her an essay after all she did for them: http://skepchick.org/2012/09/please-sto ... calendars/

Did they go home and get involved in their local skeptical group? I have no idea. I asked many of them to write me an essay on how they benefited from the scholarship they got, and I don’t recall ever actually getting one.

Oh, look:

In 2006, a Skepchick scholarship permitted me to come to my first TAM. I got to meet and shake hands with the first other black woman who called herself “Atheist,” as I did.

I stood in a corridor stuck while a banquet room was constructed out of fold able walls with Christopher Hitchens for 20 minutes while he talked with me another person who remains a dear friend to this day.

I love you and support your evolution, Rebecca.

BUT- that essay you asked for, I actually gave to you and you published it. (Twice if I recall!)

It’s hard to evidence a full accounting of lives you’ve impacted and perhaps improved through the years. But do know, I am proof positive that because of you and your work, the atheist world may claim me as an unabashed member.

Jamila

http://skepchick.org/2012/09/please-sto ... ent-158569

It must have been something pretty harrowing to leave Becky with such rage blindness she forgot all about receiving Jamila's essay and publishing it twice.

There's another funny comment on that page from Lauren Lane, co-founder and organizer of Skepticon.
They have a fundraising calender this year.
Considering Watson's 'born again' commitment to avoiding objectifying such as appearing on such demeaning things like wall calenders we can be sure that Rebecca has nothing to do with this disgraceful sexist item.

Can you guess guess who is Miss September?

I actually have my Skepticon 2012 Calendar up on my wall right now. Funnily enough Rebecca you are actually Ms. September. Go figure.

http://i.imgur.com/7Ji6D.jpg

[LMU]

I remember that comic too SN :? I have had experiences with people who behave as though their own emotions change reality. For example someone whose account of an act of intercourse changes between consensual sex to an act of rape depending on the mood they are in when asked. I think some fraction of PZ et al are like this. They aren't reacting to an objective description of events but to how it makes them feel. They can do whatever they like because their own behavior doesn't give them an icky feeling, but if anyone else does...

[Scented Nectar]

I remember that comic too SN :? I have had experiences with people who behave as though their own emotions change reality. For example someone whose account of an act of intercourse changes between consensual sex to an act of rape depending on the mood they are in when asked. I think some fraction of PZ et al are like this. They aren't reacting to an objective description of events but to how it makes them feel. They can do whatever they like because their own behavior doesn't give them an icky feeling, but if anyone else does...

Exactly. If I were a man (a straight or bi one, that is), I would keep a huge distance from these perpetual victims. Next day regret causes them to not want to acknowledge that they did indeed consent. They change it into a rape. The 1 or 2 glasses of wine they willingly drank are suddenly thought of as knockout drops, even if the man was drunker than they were.

[LMU]

I'd like to respond to an older crommunist post about how people reacted negatively to him because he was black. In the post (IIRC) he was going door to door for a survey and he said that people reacted better if he stood back. The implication was that if he had no problem making allowances for other people's (racist) prejudices then people like EG shouldn't have a problem making allowances for other people's (sexist) prejudices either.

The issue I take is that the EG wasn't just accused of having a poor strategy, he was accused of being *sexist*, and that is what I didnt agree with. Crommunist's initial approach didn't work so he changed it to have a better chance of achieving his goals, this is fine. But was crommunist's initial approach *racist* and is he therefore a racist himself for failing to properly anticipate other people's (racist) prejudices? No I don't think he is, just like I don't think EG (if he exists) is sexist for not knowing in advance that RW wouldn't respond favorably.

A different scenario: An Arab-looking young man is wearing a political t-shirt as he goes to board a plane. The pilot of the plane sees the t-shirt and is made uncomfortable and refuses to allow the young man to board. Is the young man racist? He failed to properly account for the (racist) prejudices of others, he probably should have known better. He had a bad strategy, but I don't think he was racist.

In the cases above crommunist, EG, and the young man might be racist/sexist if they knew how people would react and behaved that way specifically to bother them, but if they went into the situations with the reasonable expectation that they wouldn't be judged by their race/gender, then they weren't.

TL;DR: bad strategy /= racism/sexism

[JAB]

I thought we already established that Twatson cant remember anything done by non-famous people.

But she is trying her best to become famous enough that she remembers what she herself does/says. I guess she's not there yet. Or maybe she doesn't remember stuff she did before she was famous enough. Does infamy count?

[Scented Nectar]

Does anyone remember the name of PZ's soldier son? This probably isn't his son, but the last name Myers makes me have to ask. Over at http://jonathanturley.org/2012/09/26/su ... f-hiccups/ it says:

Sure Fire Cure For Hiccups: Soldier In Texas Charged With Killing Friend In Effort To Scare Him Out Of Hiccups
http://jonathanturley.files.wordpress.c ... .jpg?w=500
Pfc. Patrick Edward Myers, 27, was charged this week with manslaughter after he came up with a unique way to ridding his friend, Pfc. Isaac Lawrence Young, 22, of hiccups. He pulled a gun and shot Young in the face.

Shortly after 10 pm, Myers pulled the gun which accidentally discharged in the face of his friend. Presumably there were witnesses or some other way that the police ruled out an intentional act that would warrant a higher charge.

Manslaughter fits the alleged crime, if proven. It would not seem to leave much for a defense absent a denial of being the shooter. This is the type of case that is generally pleaded out with a request for leniency.

Source: CNN

[Dick Strawkins]

Does anyone remember the name of PZ's soldier son? This probably isn't his son, but the last name Myers makes me have to ask. Over at http://jonathanturley.org/2012/09/26/su ... f-hiccups/ it says:

Sure Fire Cure For Hiccups: Soldier In Texas Charged With Killing Friend In Effort To Scare Him Out Of Hiccups
http://jonathanturley.files.wordpress.c ... .jpg?w=500
Pfc. Patrick Edward Myers, 27, was charged this week with manslaughter after he came up with a unique way to ridding his friend, Pfc. Isaac Lawrence Young, 22, of hiccups. He pulled a gun and shot Young in the face.

Shortly after 10 pm, Myers pulled the gun which accidentally discharged in the face of his friend. Presumably there were witnesses or some other way that the police ruled out an intentional act that would warrant a higher charge.

Manslaughter fits the alleged crime, if proven. It would not seem to leave much for a defense absent a denial of being the shooter. This is the type of case that is generally pleaded out with a request for leniency.

Source: CNN

He's too old to be PZs son.

[bhoytony]

There's a SuperTarget store near my house - I shop there occasionally (they actually have a decent selection of organic foods and products made from recycled materials....)

Jesus Christ! What sort of recycled materials do they make that organic food from?

And people call me disgusting for eating black pudding.

[Scented Nectar]

He's too old to be PZs son.

I'm not so sure. He might be young enough since PZ is somewhere in his 50s, and he says that he married his highschool girlfriend, so they might have started popping out kids in their early 20s.

[Steersman]

Yeah I haven't seen much change in the Slimepit. Lots of yelling, people fighting all the time, arguments, no one agreeing, people telling people to fuck right off, people telling them to fuck right off right back.

Exactly. And graphically too … :-)

http://i48.tinypic.com/23jmvch.jpg

Frequently the last resort of those with nothing left to stand on ….

[cunt]

Does anyone remember the name of PZ's soldier son? This probably isn't his son, but the last name Myers makes me have to ask. Over at http://jonathanturley.org/2012/09/26/su ... f-hiccups/ it says:

Sure Fire Cure For Hiccups: Soldier In Texas Charged With Killing Friend In Effort To Scare Him Out Of Hiccups
http://jonathanturley.files.wordpress.c ... .jpg?w=500
Pfc. Patrick Edward Myers, 27, was charged this week with manslaughter after he came up with a unique way to ridding his friend, Pfc. Isaac Lawrence Young, 22, of hiccups. He pulled a gun and shot Young in the face.

Shortly after 10 pm, Myers pulled the gun which accidentally discharged in the face of his friend. Presumably there were witnesses or some other way that the police ruled out an intentional act that would warrant a higher charge.

Manslaughter fits the alleged crime, if proven. It would not seem to leave much for a defense absent a denial of being the shooter. This is the type of case that is generally pleaded out with a request for leniency.

Source: CNN

Mansplainering leads to manslaughtering.

[TFJ]

Pip o' Tea:

Trophy wrote:
This place is turning into a FTB. ConcentratedH2O Accusing random posters without any linked evidence, people name calling steerman just because of some disagreements, all are really interesting and lolzy incidents. Hypocrites.


BANNED FOR LIFE!!

As far as I know, people are allowed to speak their minds here, sometimes it is not going to be pretty.

This is nothing like the FTB - people are allowed to disagree here in their own way. From my own humble view, Steersman seems to be quite happy to retort to all those who think he is wrong, I doubt he'd come back here if he really didn't like it but I don't want to speak for him - if I am wrong, please correct me.

The posters here are a heck of a lot more honest.

Can you even imagine having a conversation like this on Butterflies and Wheels or Pharyngula?

I've seen no DELETE HIM - PURGE THE HERETIC behaviour here, only normal internet behaviour

Quite. This is not a blog. There's no uber chimp to come down on one side of a spat and enforce. The only way the Pit can morph into an FTBalike is if one faction in an argument allow themselves to be intimidated (or disgusted) and flounce en masse.

[Steersman]

Pip o' Tea:

Trophy wrote:
This place is turning into a FTB. ConcentratedH2O Accusing random posters without any linked evidence, people name calling [Steersman] just because of some disagreements, all are really interesting and lolzy incidents. Hypocrites.

I've seen no DELETE HIM - PURGE THE HERETIC behaviour here, only normal internet behaviour

Quite. This is not a blog. There's no uber chimp to come down on one side of a spat and enforce. The only way the Pit can morph into an FTBalike is if one faction in an argument allow themselves to be intimidated (or disgusted) and flounce en masse.

Freethought Blogs and Drama School ....

Somewhat of a shame though as there are some interesting arguments and perspectives over there ...

[JackRayner]

Ok, random question: Has "The True Pooka" always been such a retard, or am I being the retard here? I saw one of the people I'm subscribed to leave a comment with incorrect information about Marine Corps physical requirements for males and females, so I chimed in to correct him, prefacing it with "I'm a veteran Marine." Anyways, the following ensued:

(I'll start with the comment I was responding...)

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... rd0001.png
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard002.png

(I'm going to just link from here, I don't know how to do the scroll bar thingy, but anyone is free to fix it for me...)

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard003.png
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard004.png
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard005.png
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard006.png
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard007.png
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard008.png

I'm not feeling masochistic enough to go see if he's replied some more at the moment. Anyways, rip away! Aside from my appeal to authority (which I will argue is not fallacious), what exactly am I stating that is so fucking disagreeable? The standards I stated are factual, it's not esoteric knowledge, and you don't need to be some cunt whose spent the last decade and a half in service to know this.

FML, how can someone be this stupid!? :doh:

[JackRayner]

I'm the cunt named "palerider1911", by the way...

[JackRayner]

What the fucking fuck?!

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard009.png

Now he's telling me I'm wrong for assuming that his 15 year expert will agree with my "analysis"? WHAT "ANALYSIS"?! :x The requirements for males and females are different, and obviously lower for females! Females are given 3 extra minutes to complete the 3 mile run, and female Marines themselves will tell you the flexed arm hang is a joke compared to dead hang pull ups! 1 month or 35 years spent as a Marine will not make your interpretation different! Seriously? What the fuck is wrong with this kid?

[Steersman]

What the fucking fuck?!

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard009.png

Now he's telling me I'm wrong for assuming that his 15 year expert will agree with my "analysis"? WHAT "ANALYSIS"?! :x The requirements for males and females are different, and obviously lower for females! Females are given 3 extra minutes to complete the 3 mile run, and female Marines themselves will tell you the flexed arm hang is a joke compared to dead hang pull ups! 1 month or 35 years spent as a Marine will not make your interpretation different! Seriously? What the fuck is wrong with this kid?

You wouldn’t happen to have a link to the blog you’re commenting on, would you? Or is that a twitter “conversation”?

Seems to me that you’re both, more or less, arguing in favour of the same point that there are different standards for men and women.

Although it’s curious that the GAO seems to be rather mealy-mouthed about it:

There’s a widespread perception that the existence of lower physical fitness standards for women amounts to a “double standard”. .... Consequently, DOD officials and experts agree that it is appropriate to adjust the standards for physiological differences among service members by age and gender”. [pookaRetard003.png]

Seems to me that “standard” is being used in two different ways: in an absolute sense – so many minutes for a specific task, regardless of gender (which “favours” males) – and in a relative sense – relative to what a “fit” member of a gender “should” be capable of.

Maybe looking at the issue from the opposite ends of the telescope ....

[lost control]

Fuck, there was a time, when I stumbled over to FTB on my internet journeys, and I actually clicked on some articles, but by now....

I hope that Stefanelli and Namazie just leave that shithole. Yeah, I read bothe of 'em befire they even showed up on there.


I guess Namazie hoped to get more views, cause she definitely deserves them, even though I may not always agree with her, but she was always at least worhtwhile to read. But it fucking sucks that she gets so few comments. I haven't checked her old location if she didn't get more comments there...

And Stefanell, I still remember his UAF times, even though I live on a fucking different continent.

The only thing that's currently kinda satisfying is Laden's comment count on SB. No wonder he still tries to whore his blog out.
(and no, if any dipshit wants to insinuate that I use whore in a bad way - whores are fine by me, but whoring once's blog out isn't)

Yep I'm somewhat drunk when posting - as usual. But fuck it, have you seen Laden's postcount on SB? He's basically posting his blog posts for himself, no wonder he's so desparate for attention...

[disumbrationist]

Long story short, the rating scale indices they use are only ordinal scale measurement and that doesn't allow for the kind of arithmetic and statistical analyses they performed. Everyone does it, everyone shouldn't, because it imputes more into the data than is actually there by treating it as interval scale or more and it just isn't. The authors themselves say the effects they found are small, but make great play of their statistical significance, yet it exactly that significance which their data precludes.

Of course, this criticism doesn't apply to the difference in starting salary, right? So they are correct in saying there is a statistically significant difference in initial salary offered.
The criticism of reliance on statistical significance instead of magnitude is spot on, and is actually a problem throughout sociology, economics, and medicine.
See two papers on the subject:
The Earth is round (p < .05)
The Cult of Statistical Significance.

[JackRayner]

What the fucking fuck?!

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... ard009.png

Now he's telling me I'm wrong for assuming that his 15 year expert will agree with my "analysis"? WHAT "ANALYSIS"?! :x The requirements for males and females are different, and obviously lower for females! Females are given 3 extra minutes to complete the 3 mile run, and female Marines themselves will tell you the flexed arm hang is a joke compared to dead hang pull ups! 1 month or 35 years spent as a Marine will not make your interpretation different! Seriously? What the fuck is wrong with this kid?

You wouldn’t happen to have a link to the blog you’re commenting on, would you? Or is that a twitter “conversation”?

Seems to me that you’re both, more or less, arguing in favour of the same point that there are different standards for men and women.

It's here, in the comments: (FYI, Comments seem to be in the process of being memory holed. Our last 3 exchanges are already gone, and I forgot to screen cap them. :doh: )

Although it’s curious that the GAO seems to be rather mealy-mouthed about it:

There’s a widespread perception that the existence of lower physical fitness standards for women amounts to a “double standard”. .... Consequently, DOD officials and experts agree that it is appropriate to adjust the standards for physiological differences among service members by age and gender”. [pookaRetard003.png]

Seems to me that “standard” is being used in two different ways: in an absolute sense – so many minutes for a specific task, regardless of gender (which “favours” males) – and in a relative sense – relative to what a “fit” member of a gender “should” be capable of.

Maybe looking at the issue from the opposite ends of the telescope ....

I think the "GAO" statement is basically saying "The different standards are not really 'double standards', we just accept that men and women (and different age groups, to a lesser extent) have differing biology, and we factor this in." Anyone with a basic understanding of the physiological differences between the average male and the average female could tell you as much, though. Of course, there are females which break this generalization in a big way, (Had one in my last unit! Could have easily bested me in most physical feats, I'd wager...) but she was far from the norm, even among the few females (6% of the total force) that serve as U.S. Marines. (Probably injecting steroids, from the look of her, but who am I to judge? :whistle: )

[Saint N.]

Ok, random question: Has "The True Pooka" always been such a retard

Yes, yes he has. For as long as he's been on youtube Pooka's had this annoying shtick of presenting himself as being 'above the conversation'. Meaning that he says some retarded shit, people call him out on it, and he acts as if all the people pointing out his stupidity are just not up to speed with his great intellect. Eventually, after enough people keep pointing out his stupidity, he declares how he is 'above all this' and forgets that he was the one the brought up the stupid discussion to begin with. I don't want to dissuade you from arguing with him (because a lot of times it's good for lurkers to see the dimwit getting pwnd on his own videos) just don't expect him to own up to the fact that he doesn't have a leg to stand on in the argument.

[JackRayner]

Ok, random question: Has "The True Pooka" always been such a retard

Yes, yes he has. For as long as he's been on youtube Pooka's had this annoying shtick of presenting himself as being 'above the conversation'. Meaning that he says some retarded shit, people call him out on it, and he acts as if all the people pointing out his stupidity are just not up to speed with his great intellect. Eventually, after enough people keep pointing out his stupidity, he declares how he is 'above all this' and forgets that he was the one the brought up the stupid discussion to begin with. I don't want to dissuade you from arguing with him (because a lot of times it's good for lurkers to see the dimwit getting pwnd on his own videos) just don't expect him to own up to the fact that he doesn't have a leg to stand on in the argument.

Well, the comments I mentioned getting erased by him, in my response to Steersman, were essentially the ones that had the "gotcha" moment.

He was trying to say that his objection was to my anecdote about the females falling out of the 10 mile, 80lbs in our back packs hike. I pointed out that I brought this up in agreeance to his statement about there being more females who fail at these tasks. So he said that no, I said this before his "GAO" statement, so I went and took a screen cap showing my reply following his "GAO" statement, and by the time I returned to reply, the relevant comments, and then some, were gone.

If that's how he plays, I can't say that I'm all that interested in returning...

[Steersman]

...It's here, in the comments: http://anonym.to?http://www.youtube.com ... 5FpqegMiM8 (FYI, Comments seem to be in the process of being memory holed. Our last 3 exchanges are already gone, and I forgot to screen cap them.)

Thanks.

I realized after that last post of mine that I had mistaken the HTArcade for the True Pooka; mea culpa.

Although I still don’t see what his basic thesis is – would help if YouTubers made an explicit statement of such at the outset and in text ....

Or his objections to your arguments .... maybe he’s arguing just for the sake of it ....

[JackRayner]

...It's here, in the comments: http://anonym.to?http://www.youtube.com ... 5FpqegMiM8 (FYI, Comments seem to be in the process of being memory holed. Our last 3 exchanges are already gone, and I forgot to screen cap them.)

Thanks.

I realized after that last post of mine that I had mistaken the HTArcade for the True Pooka; mea culpa.

Although I still don’t see what his basic thesis is – would help if YouTubers made an explicit statement of such at the outset and in text ....

Or his objections to your arguments .... maybe he’s arguing just for the sake of it ....

What it came down to is that he was objecting to my anecdote...which came as I "I know" only after his own reply about what the GAO and DOD say about the differing standards, as adjusted by sex. (And age, which I'm not interested in addressing.) When I pointed this out to him, my comment, and a few others [to include his own replies] disappeared. Meh.

[Scented Nectar]

Double check by doing a ctrl-f search of your youtube name on all three of the comment pages. When there are more than 500(?) comments it splits into pages. He has 3 comment pages on that video since there are 1400+ comments. Youtube auto splitting sucks and frequently breaks up subthreads where people are replying back and forth to each other.

[KiwiInOz]

This place is turning into a FTB. ConcentratedH2O Accusing random posters without any linked evidence, people name calling steerman just because of some disagreements, all are really interesting and lolzy incidents. Hypocrites.

At the risk of being labelled a concern troll, I would say that I am also concerned at the apparent morphing of the Pit.

Your concern is noted.
Have a cookie, cupcake, and do you see that old rusty porcupine over there?
:twisted:


Wait a second... :think:

I hope I'm not provoking tears of rage!

:shock:

Yes. From the corners of my eyes no less.

[KiwiInOz]

The US medical system really staggers me. Here in Australia (or NZ) the woman in the link (to follow) would be treated in the Public Health System for free, or in the Private Health System if she paid ~$1000 per year.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3001471/how- ... newsletter

Anyways, her brother is crowd sourcing for funds to assist in the treatment. If a bullied bus attendant can get $700k, surely this woman can get $65k.

[Tristan]

Rebecca Watson doc drops.

[KiwiInOz]

Assange - Enemy of the State - http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political ... 26m7s.html