Periodic Table of Swearing

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Ha - thanks for that, but I should have included a winky or smiley.

science - YES! but no emoticons, please.

there are three of us who despise them.

Seems only two now. We haven't seen Franc here in days.

:cry:

[Tristan]

Ha - thanks for that, but I should have included a winky or smiley.

science - YES! but no emoticons, please.

there are three of us who despise them.

In the same way that banning the word "cunt" is pretty much the only way you'll ever get me to say the word "cunt" (cunt cunt cuntitty cunt)...

;)

[sacha]

Ha - thanks for that, but I should have included a winky or smiley.

science - YES! but no emoticons, please.

there are three of us who despise them.

Seems only two now. We haven't seen Franc here in days.

:cry:

he was being held against his will. he is now free. should see him here soon.

[Skep tickle]

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 275#p24435

In the post linked above, new A+ forum member EZRD offered this initial impression of that forum:

I used a term that I didn't know people found offensive. When correcting that, I used another term that I didn't know people found offensive. In attempting to correct that, I offended even more people. Atheism Plus now seems to me a den of people ready and willing to take offense at anything and everything.

I want to know how such retarded bullshit like this happens.

EZRD was subsequently lectured at for using "retarded'.

Later in that post he/she riffed off the "Welcome" page, which I've tried to unpackage a couple times as misleading and even hypocritical but no-one seems willing to consider that maybe it's part of their "troll problem" (since, duh, it explicitly states that skepticism and critical thinking about everything, including social justice are welcome there). EZRD suggests:

Your homepage ... should read:

“Atheism+ is a hostile space for people to get outraged at n00bs who don't know how to avoid our long list of sacred taboos. For more information, ignore our FAQ.

“If you would like to have our moderators berate you for innocent missteps, check out our forum.”

[rayshul]

"Free speech" is not something that's really compatible with rational discussion.

Pteryx praised Mr.Samsa for this line; Mr.Samsa blushed virtually and replied with

Although I fear the anti-atheism+ group will purposely misrepresent it to achieve their own ends: "Atheism+ member explicitly states that he hates free speech! Look how wrong they are! lol", or: "Atheism+ is literally Hitler because both hate free speech".

Mr. Samsa can see the future! Awesome.

I've found the entire opposite is true - floating a concept into an essentially free speech arena is the best way to find out what the fuck sucks about it.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 275#p24435

In the post linked above, new A+ forum member EZRD offered this initial impression of that forum:

I used a term that I didn't know people found offensive. When correcting that, I used another term that I didn't know people found offensive. In attempting to correct that, I offended even more people. Atheism Plus now seems to me a den of people ready and willing to take offense at anything and everything.

I want to know how such retarded bullshit like this happens.

EZRD was subsequently lectured at for using "retarded'.

Later in that post he/she riffed off the "Welcome" page, which I've tried to unpackage a couple times as misleading and even hypocritical but no-one seems willing to consider that maybe it's part of their "troll problem" (since, duh, it explicitly states that skepticism and critical thinking about everything, including social justice are welcome there). EZRD suggests:

Your homepage ... should read:

“Atheism+ is a hostile space for people to get outraged at n00bs who don't know how to avoid our long list of sacred taboos. For more information, ignore our FAQ.

“If you would like to have our moderators berate you for innocent missteps, check out our forum.”

I like that EZRD person! Maybe invite them to join here?

[rayshul]

Oh, beautiful. From that thread: EZRD:

I think I get it now. Apparently PC doesn't mean PC anymore, so I should have used a PC term for PC.

[Butters]

Also from the EZRD thread

The mods not really addressing the problems Westprog has of threads being moved/ended will nilly because they don't care about his take on the issue.

But the last comment from Ceepolk takes the cake. They refer to what Westprog is doing as harassment.
(Image of page was edited to remove extraneous comments), but here is the link to the full page of comments.


http://i.imgur.com/ErXc5.jpg


Link to full size image
http://i.imgur.com/ARDQZ.jpg

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I think I'm done with anyone using "harassment" in such vapid ways. I guess those who are really harassed must be thankful to these fuckwits for diminishing their experiences.

Wait, is that summer 2011 yet again?

[rayshul]

I think I'm done with anyone using "harassment" in such vapid ways. I guess those who are really harassed must be thankful to these fuckwits for diminishing their experiences.

Wait, is that summer 2011 yet again?

Yeah, RW must be real pissed. I hear harrassment is the number one issue in elevators. Why won't people think about that!!!

[Scented Nectar]

Actually, I wonder if he has. He has always leaned libertarian and, while he has always advocated for equal rights, he never seemed to give much quarter to the "poor, poor, pitiful me" types. Indeed, for the most part, he has seemed to steer clear of the whole drama; only wading in when his hand was forced.

My guess has always been that he sunk his own money into starting FTB. And, rather than take PZ on as an equity partner, Ed cut him a preferential deal as the headline content provider. So, now he has to tacitly support the band of loudmouths on the network because it is his main source of income/recouping his investment. This is all speculation on my part, to be sure.

That could very well be the case. They sure are stirred up over it being questioned. :)

[Scented Nectar]

Ed Brayton said:

Second, even if it were true that PZ had found some way to get more ads into his RSS feed, it would do nothing whatsoever to earn him any more money. The ad revenue for this site is divided up solely on the basis of total pageviews, not by how many clickthroughs a given blog gets. The revenue from the RSS feed ads just comes to me in one lump sum; I don’t even know which blog gets more clickthroughs, nor do I care. So even if PZ had discovered some mystical power, it would do him no good here. Another dark conspiracy shot to hell.

Does that make sense?

When I read that paragraph I interpret it to mean that the money coming in to FTB is divided up based on the number of pageviews each blogger gets.
Now considering that PZ is, by far, the most widely read blogger on FTB, it would seem that ANY increase in the ad revenues of FTB will benefit him more than any other blogger there.

PZ has said implied the same himself

All revenue from ads at FtB, without regard to their source, is put into a common pool and shared out to all blogs on the basis of their page views. If I were somehow gaming the system to bring in extra ad money, it would go into the pool and benefit everyone blogging here.

So if the RSS ads bring in an extra throusand dollars then PZ gets, say, 700 dollars and the other 33 bloggers share the remaining 300 dollars between them.

That sounds fair, doesn't it? :whistle:

Social justice in action.

As soon as dreams of average to big money are in the picture, all their sincerity is gone, in my opinion. The blogging baboons are just in it to get ad impression money, and to be hired for speaking gigs. Gigs that do fuck all in attaining any sort of social justice.

[Scented Nectar]

I am unable to get a full-on drunken state. I think I must have that gene that makes some people sick instead of drunk. I can drink to a warm-cheeked tipsy point that lasts maybe 15 or 20 minutes, but any attempt to drink more, and I get sick, and barf, and feel like shit. I've never had a hangover due to never being able to drink enough to have one.

[Scented Nectar]

I'm going to say this now...

Seriously, no one ever, EVER make a photoshop of Zvan and Laden.

I mean I'm really serious about this.

Don't do it. Don't even think about doing it. The world doesn't deserve that image.

I could do it, and it's tempting in theory, but I would have to look at the two uglies for far too long during the making of the pic or animation or whatever.

However, I do have 2 karaoke clips of both of them ready to use. Is there any song you don't want anyone to even think of them singing in duet *snicker*? At least with those simple singing clips, I won't have to see them doing anything with each other.

[DownThunder]

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 275#p24435

In the post linked above, new A+ forum member EZRD offered this initial impression of that forum:

I used a term that I didn't know people found offensive. When correcting that, I used another term that I didn't know people found offensive. In attempting to correct that, I offended even more people. Atheism Plus now seems to me a den of people ready and willing to take offense at anything and everything.

I want to know how such retarded bullshit like this happens.

EZRD was subsequently lectured at for using "retarded'.

Later in that post he/she riffed off the "Welcome" page, which I've tried to unpackage a couple times as misleading and even hypocritical but no-one seems willing to consider that maybe it's part of their "troll problem" (since, duh, it explicitly states that skepticism and critical thinking about everything, including social justice are welcome there). EZRD suggests:

Your homepage ... should read:

“Atheism+ is a hostile space for people to get outraged at n00bs who don't know how to avoid our long list of sacred taboos. For more information, ignore our FAQ.

“If you would like to have our moderators berate you for innocent missteps, check out our forum.”

With your experience of them, do people regularly censor words like retarded into r*t*rd*d like kassinine (whatever their name is), or is that just poe-ing?

I hope they censor s*mpr*n*

A cookie for who gets the reference.

[Lsuoma]

I hope they censor s*mpr*n*

A cookie for who gets the reference.

You're late to the party: try typing in the whole word (capital S).

[Guest]

Women need to eat red meat, not men.

My understanding is that a lot of people, men and women, need red meat in their diets to prevent certain types of health issues. Perhaps I'm misinformed, or misremembering (it's been a while), but I'm pretty sure I recall reading about that somewhere or other.

Propaganda.

No one "needs" red meat. No one.

I simply want to correct a fallacy. I will not discuss this further.

There are unhealthy vegetarians and vegans that do not know how to ensure they are getting enough nutrients and protein.

Centuries of vegetarian cultures have perfected the balance needed for good health. Eat traditional vegetarian Indian cuisine and there is absolutely no need to ever eat anything that is fish, poultry, or meat (or insect).

Those who are new to a veg diet, that come from Western countries and have no experience with "ethnic" vegetarian cuisine are most often the ones, who decide to give up meat without knowing what to replace it with. Many Western doctors will simply tell their patients that they need meat, because they also are not familiar with the ingredients and ways of cooking that have been perfected to ensure what humans need. There is absolutely nothing the body needs, that one can get from meat, that cannot be found from a non-meat source.

This conversation will begin to get ugly, it always does, and the aggressive aggression comes from both sides. Nothing positive will result from this discussion/debate/argument. I've seen it far too many times in my life.

I highly advise we change the subject.

No one needs to argue this here. If it is important to any of you, go to one of the millions of places online where this is discussed every single day.

"I wish to start a massive argument over this. I think I have figured out how to do so in the most efficient way possible"

Welch, who doesn't feel like digging up login creds for his iPad

[decius]

Argh. No healthist pseudo-morals, please.

There's nothing wrong with occasional heavy drinking, unless it becomes a habit or it interferes with one's ability to perform one's duties. I don't think it should be any of our fucking business how often Rebecca gets shitfaced. As far as I'm concerned, it's one of her few endearing qualities and haven't seen any evidence of it affecting the quality of her public appearances, which is generally quite low for different reasons.

And don't get me started with drug prohibition.

[dustbubble]

The part about that whole incident that makes no sense is how the testimony of someone who was up all night drinking .. is to be taken as gospel .. few have much in the power of recollection the next morning.

No problemo. She knows she's absolutely clear about the incident.
Because EG didn't exist until the next day (at least).
Honestly, I despair. How many times ..??
It's as plain as the face on her nose.

Welcome to your future, Watto. Soon come.
10 more years, tops, if you're strong to begin with.
And there's not a damn' thing you can do about it.
http://i47.tinypic.com/1ptslk.png http://i50.tinypic.com/j0kuur.png

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

A bit off topic, but a subject I hold close to heart:

http://listverse.com/2012/10/08/top-10- ... -aviation/

[dustbubble]

Yeah, RW must be real pissed.

My my, whatever gave you that impression? She's a veritable Socrates ..

[youtube]xQycQ8DABvc[/youtube]

[Philip of Tealand]

[quote="Butters"]Also from the EZRD thread

The mods not really addressing the problems Westprog has of threads being moved/ended will nilly because they don't care about his take on the issue.

But the last comment from Ceepolk takes the cake. They refer to what Westprog is doing as harassment.
(Image of page was edited to remove extraneous comments), but here is the link to the full page of comments.


HARRRAAAAAASSSSMENT!

Like rapist men, harassment is everywhere.

I wonder who is going to come up with a post about Schrodinger's Harasser?

"You are a nice person. You really are. You probably laugh and smile a lot and open doors for people, probably make some Tea now and then. But on the Internet, how do I know that what you are about to post is harassment? Until I know otherwise, everything you post is going to harass me.

Don't harass people!

[real horrorshow]

Another choice morsel from the "Are the moderators here censorious, capricious and biased?" featuring EZRD and one of the A+theists favourite phrases 'doubling down' (i.e. failing to immediately back down and grovel). Remeber, this is in response to a use of the term 'PC'

No one is jumping on somebody for using a problematic phrase*. However, if "the regulars" explain why a particular phrase is hurtful then the proper response is to say, "oh sorry, I didn't realize and I won't use it again here" (or maybe even start to educate outside these forums). It's only when the unintentionally offending poster doubles down or even quadruples down to explain why the term is somehow okay for them to use, because they're in England where cunt isn't a gendered slur, or that they once heard a woman use the term "male abortion" so it's totes cool to minimize the real fight that women are facing when it comes to abortion rights, and besides why should women be the only ones who get all the fun and frivolity of abortion? Men should be able to have abortions too, dammit, but not the icky invasive kind that involves medical procedures, screaming protesters with pictures of bloody fetuses, or a congressman saying you sluts wouldn't need one if only you made sure you were legitimately raped.

*Yes they are.
My bold.
I think someone needs a trip to The Total Perspective Vortex
How do you get from "PC" to that? Not through the universe I inhabit for sure.

[dustbubble]

A bit off topic, but a subject I hold close to heart:

http://listverse.com/2012/10/08/top-10- ... -aviation/

Oh how I dearly wish that ALL aviation involved dressing and looking like Mme de Laroche, and using aircraft that looked exactly like that ..
Certainly cut down on frivolous jet-setting, it would.

[Dick Strawkins]

I can think of one problem caused by drinking until 4 in the morning.

http://i.imgur.com/0481O.jpg

[ReneeHendricks]

After reading the pure crap posted on the A+theism forums this morning, I have come to the conclusion that I really need to start paying attention to the names of people therein. I would really hate to think I'm following any of these idiots on Twitter or other social media outlets. They make my brain weep.

[The Pelagic Argosy]

What I learned from this debaucle is that he's not a good fit for this movement because it requires teamwork, two way communication, cooperation, respect for the feelings and concerns of others, a willingness to learn, humility and a willingness to make amends when hurt or mistakes are made.

It's a good thing my current irony meter is one of those old Soviet-era cast iron models, because my old Tandy would have been vaporized.

Is it a Зенит (Zenit)? They say those were made out of decommissioned tanks—my friend has one of those and I had to help him move it once, so I can believe it. I hear the Tandy ones often self-destruct from the sheer irony of being designed in the USA. I have a Plessey, myself—manufactured in the early 60s and still going strong. Although these were designed for export, there is a noise filter you can adjust for use in the UK, otherwise it would be entirely useless here—a bit like a Geiger counter in Chernobyl.

[Tony Parsehole]

Another choice morsel from the "Are the moderators here censorious, capricious and biased?" featuring EZRD and one of the A+theists favourite phrases 'doubling down' (i.e. failing to immediately back down and grovel). Remeber, this is in response to a use of the term 'PC'

No one is jumping on somebody for using a problematic phrase*. However, if "the regulars" explain why a particular phrase is hurtful then the proper response is to say, "oh sorry, I didn't realize and I won't use it again here" (or maybe even start to educate outside these forums). It's only when the unintentionally offending poster doubles down or even quadruples down to explain why the term is somehow okay for them to use, because they're in England where cunt isn't a gendered slur, or that they once heard a woman use the term "male abortion" so it's totes cool to minimize the real fight that women are facing when it comes to abortion rights, and besides why should women be the only ones who get all the fun and frivolity of abortion? Men should be able to have abortions too, dammit, but not the icky invasive kind that involves medical procedures, screaming protesters with pictures of bloody fetuses, or a congressman saying you sluts wouldn't need one if only you made sure you were legitimately raped.

*Yes they are.
My bold.
I think someone needs a trip to The Total Perspective Vortex
How do you get from "PC" to that? Not through the universe I inhabit for sure.

What!? Somebody uses the harmless term "PC" and ends up getting a lecture on the fact that men can't have abortions and aCongressmen once said women are sluts? What the fuck is going on over there?

[windy]

"What is wrong with her?" She's a damn near gutter-level alcoholic who thinks getting falling-down shitfaced on a daily basis is "cute" and "fun". And all the douchebags she chooses to hang with enable the fuck out of her behavior. I I'm not even saying that to be mean, I say that because I was in that same predicament myself at one time in my life. She's in a mess o' trouble and she thinks it's all a game. Hope she has good medical insurance when her liver blows up.

I'm going to engage in some "hyperskepticism" here: are RW and some of the other Dear Leaders of the skeptical movement really such accomplished drinkers as they like to represent themselves as? If they only binge occasionally (=when they get it for free) and assume they can still drink the same amount as in their younger party-girl/boy days, no wonder they get sick afterwards.

I tend to agree with decius that it's not really anyone's business (not like these are real professional conferences), except if they do care so much about sexual mis-steps at conferences they probably shouldn't be promoting heavy alcohol use during them.

[real horrorshow]

Argh. No healthist pseudo-morals, please.

There's nothing wrong with occasional heavy drinking, unless it becomes a habit or it interferes with one's ability to perform one's duties.

And her 'duties' are?

I don't think it should be any of our fucking business how often Rebecca gets shitfaced.

Tell Rebecca that, she's the one who keeps announcing it on the Web.

As far as I'm concerned, it's one of her few endearing qualities and haven't seen any evidence of it affecting the quality of her public appearances, which is generally quite low for different reasons.

I do believe that she has admitted delivering at least one speech while still drunk from the night morning before. If she is going to insist on trying to make herself the public face of atheism, I'm going to take an interest in whether that face is still smeared with puke.

And don't get me started with drug prohibition.

Wouldn't dream of it. Nurse, time for Mr Decius' medication!

Meanwhile, somewhere in Cardiff. Can it be Rebecca and Amy?
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8462/8066 ... 6054dd.jpg

[Tony Parsehole]

After reading the pure crap posted on the A+theism forums this morning, I have come to the conclusion that I really need to start paying attention to the names of people therein. I would really hate to think I'm following any of these idiots on Twitter or other social media outlets. They make my brain weep.

I am crying as I write this. There is not a single Goddamn thing I can ever do to make Renee Hendricks know how much Zhe has hutr Zur. Please don't use the phrase "brain weep". As a person who knows a person, whose sister was the friend of somebody who had a brain tumour, I find the phrase grossly offensive. Don't "double down" and deny what you said is wrong, harmful and ableist,. Apologise immediately and without question and I may deign not to fly off the handle and hurl insult after insult after you whilst PM-ing the mods with requests to have you banned for trolling.

[Dick Strawkins]

"What is wrong with her?" She's a damn near gutter-level alcoholic who thinks getting falling-down shitfaced on a daily basis is "cute" and "fun". And all the douchebags she chooses to hang with enable the fuck out of her behavior. I I'm not even saying that to be mean, I say that because I was in that same predicament myself at one time in my life. She's in a mess o' trouble and she thinks it's all a game. Hope she has good medical insurance when her liver blows up.

I'm going to engage in some "hyperskepticism" here: are RW and some of the other Dear Leaders of the skeptical movement really such accomplished drinkers as they like to represent themselves as? If they only binge occasionally (=when they get it for free) and assume they can still drink the same amount as in their younger party-girl/boy days, no wonder they get sick afterwards.

I tend to agree with decius that it's not really anyone's business (not like these are real professional conferences), except if they do care so much about sexual mis-steps at conferences they probably shouldn't be promoting heavy alcohol use during them.

I tend to agree, although I always wince when she mentions in passing that she'd been drinking in the Dublin hotel bar for six hours.
Now kind of behavior is, to tell the truth, not a complete rarity in Irelands capital, but most of those who partake are at least honest enough to admit they aren't likely to be the best witnesses to events at the end of the evening.
I'm always surprised that interviewers don't say:
"Wait a second, you were drinking from 10 PM until 4 AM? I think that's your problem right there"

[decius]

Tell Rebecca that, she's the one who keeps announcing it on the Web.


I do believe that she has admitted delivering at least one speech while still drunk from the night morning before. If she is going to insist on trying to make herself the public face of atheism, I'm going to take an interest in whether that face is still smeared with puke.

Just substitute "Rebecca" with "Hitchens" and you'll immediately see that there might be some double standards at play, right there.

[ReneeHendricks]

I am crying as I write this. There is not a single Goddamn thing I can ever do to make Renee Hendricks know how much Zhe has hutr Zur. Please don't use the phrase "brain weep". As a person who knows a person, whose sister was the friend of somebody who had a brain tumour, I find the phrase grossly offensive. Don't "double down" and deny what you said is wrong, harmful and ableist,. Apologise immediately and without question and I may deign not to fly off the handle and hurl insult after insult after you whilst PM-ing the mods with requests to have you banned for trolling.

:D Thank you for the early morning giggle! I feel much better now.

[CommanderTuvok]

Tell Rebecca that, she's the one who keeps announcing it on the Web.


I do believe that she has admitted delivering at least one speech while still drunk from the night morning before. If she is going to insist on trying to make herself the public face of atheism, I'm going to take an interest in whether that face is still smeared with puke.

Just substitute "Rebecca" with "Hitchens" and you'll immediately see that there might be some double standards at play, right there.

Are you seriously comparing The Hitch with Queen Twat?

[decius]

Tell Rebecca that, she's the one who keeps announcing it on the Web.


I do believe that she has admitted delivering at least one speech while still drunk from the night morning before. If she is going to insist on trying to make herself the public face of atheism, I'm going to take an interest in whether that face is still smeared with puke.

Just substitute "Rebecca" with "Hitchens" and you'll immediately see that there might be some double standards at play, right there.

Are you seriously comparing The Hitch with Queen Twat?

If you decide to go after Rebecca for her heavy drinking and wanting to be a public face for atheism, then yes, for you wouldn't have dreamt to do that to Hitchens who was both a heavy drinker and a public figure for atheism.
That doesn't make their intellects remotely comparable, but I need to call out the pettiness and the double standards as I see them now.

[Dick Strawkins]

Tell Rebecca that, she's the one who keeps announcing it on the Web.


I do believe that she has admitted delivering at least one speech while still drunk from the night morning before. If she is going to insist on trying to make herself the public face of atheism, I'm going to take an interest in whether that face is still smeared with puke.

Just substitute "Rebecca" with "Hitchens" and you'll immediately see that there might be some double standards at play, right there.

I can remember quite a few occasions when Hitchen's performances, either on a debate or TV/radio appearance, were criticised for reasons of him appearing somewhat inebriated.

He, famously, was able to write brilliantly while drunk or hungover, but his live debating skills were not quite so impervious to the effects of alcoholic excess.

As for Rebecca?
I've only watched a couple of her speeches (on youtube) and in neither of them did she appear drunk (although she did seem fairly pissed on the SGU Dragoncon live panel in 2011 - the one where she called Bob Novella a "twat"!)

[real horrorshow]

Tell Rebecca that, she's the one who keeps announcing it on the Web.


I do believe that she has admitted delivering at least one speech while still drunk from the night morning before. If she is going to insist on trying to make herself the public face of atheism, I'm going to take an interest in whether that face is still smeared with puke.

Just substitute "Rebecca" with "Hitchens" and you'll immediately see that there might be some double standards at play, right there.

Right, because I've got 'totally uncritical fan of Hitch' tattooed on my forehead, haven't I? That said, if you're comparing Rebecca with Hitch in any respect other than the fact that they both drink/drank, then I think it's your standards gauge that's off.

[ReneeHendricks]

Trying to recall an instance of Hitchens publicly bitching about being asked back for coffee after a late-night drinkfest....

Nope.

[real horrorshow]

If you decide to go after Rebecca for her heavy drinking and wanting to be a public face for atheism, then yes, for you wouldn't have dreamt to do that to Hitchens who was both a heavy drinker and a public figure for atheism.

Who's said that they want Rebecca to be a public figure for atheism? I've said many times that I want her to return to the obscurity which she richly deserves. The fact that she treats the role as one long frat party is part of the reason for that, but it isn't the main one.

That doesn't make their intellects remotely comparable,

Oh, I'm so glad we've got that cleared up.[/sarcasm]

but I need to call out the pettiness and the double standards as I see them now.

What double standard? Hitch was clever, Beccy is stupid. Hitch drank a lot in private, Beccy gets shitfaced in public and posts about it on the Web.

[CommanderTuvok]

If you decide to go after Rebecca for her heavy drinking and wanting to be a public face for atheism, then yes, for you wouldn't have dreamt to do that to Hitchens who was both a heavy drinker and a public figure for atheism. That doesn't make their intellects remotely comparable, but I need to call out the pettiness and the double standards as I see them now.

It is not "heavy drinking" I'm particulary bothered about. I would quite happily criticise The Hitch for his heavy drinking if he hadn't delivered the goods at conferences, panels, interviews, books, etc. Watson is the complete opposite - she does fuck all except be divisive and snarky, and then get stone sloshed. If the most remarkable thing you do at a conference is get bladdered, then expect your alcohol intake to be questioned.

[Badger3k]

If you decide to go after Rebecca for her heavy drinking and wanting to be a public face for atheism, then yes, for you wouldn't have dreamt to do that to Hitchens who was both a heavy drinker and a public figure for atheism. That doesn't make their intellects remotely comparable, but I need to call out the pettiness and the double standards as I see them now.

It is not "heavy drinking" I'm particulary bothered about. I would quite happily criticise The Hitch for his heavy drinking if he hadn't delivered the goods at conferences, panels, interviews, books, etc. Watson is the complete opposite - she does fuck all except be divisive and snarky, and then get stone sloshed. If the most remarkable thing you do at a conference is get bladdered, then expect your alcohol intake to be questioned.

Agreed - and for the record, yeah, Hitch was a drunk. Not cool for a speaker, unless you're a comedian and actually funnier that way, but don't expect sympathy. For someone who seems to want to be seen as a professional, getting shitfaced before your speech isn't professional. If you want to get drunk afterwards, have at it - just be prepared for what you are getting paid for. The latest tweet is far from the first time we've seen unprofessional behavior from her, and should be called.

Since no one else said it directly....S******i !

[Dick Strawkins]

If you decide to go after Rebecca for her heavy drinking and wanting to be a public face for atheism, then yes, for you wouldn't have dreamt to do that to Hitchens who was both a heavy drinker and a public figure for atheism. That doesn't make their intellects remotely comparable, but I need to call out the pettiness and the double standards as I see them now.

It is not "heavy drinking" I'm particulary bothered about. I would quite happily criticise The Hitch for his heavy drinking if he hadn't delivered the goods at conferences, panels, interviews, books, etc. Watson is the complete opposite - she does fuck all except be divisive and snarky, and then get stone sloshed. If the most remarkable thing you do at a conference is get bladdered, then expect your alcohol intake to be questioned.

Well she does give important talks about how she doesn't like being asked out and reads out selective quotes from 12 year old youtube trolls.

I don't know about you but if I'm going to spend several hundred dollars of my money to attend an international atheist conference, I don't want to have to put up with the likes of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Laurence Krauss talking science, evidence and reason. Instead I want an uneducated Kruger Dunning candidate who thinks she's Ramona Flowers. [/sarcasm]

[Rystefn]

Re: Stefunny's defence of Laden - remember that "Jeff" analogy. Hilarious!

***TRIGGER WARNING***
Some people have put forward the theory that Black Svan and Osama Greg Laden are fuck buddies.

:o

Apparently neither of them are very good at it, then. Otherwise, they'd both be happier people.

Tell Rebecca that, she's the one who keeps announcing it on the Web.


I do believe that she has admitted delivering at least one speech while still drunk from the night morning before. If she is going to insist on trying to make herself the public face of atheism, I'm going to take an interest in whether that face is still smeared with puke.

Just substitute "Rebecca" with "Hitchens" and you'll immediately see that there might be some double standards at play, right there.

The issue isn't about the drinking, or the amount of drinking, it's about the ability to handle the drinking like a fucking professional, and either deliver the good while drunk/hungover, or to not drink at/before events. It's a pretty hypocrite I'd be to say something general about "people shouldn't drink so much" or the like, but fucking shit, man, some people shouldn't drink so much.

Also,

Bailey Jay really let herself go.

Not cool. Fucking James Cameron with a $100M budget couldn't make Bailey Jay look ugly enough to compare to that bitch.

[Butters]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

[Scented Nectar]

Well, isn't that funny. http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/ SillySoily(Privilegedtrustfundbrat?)Amy is now declaring pics of her "art" to be free to use under the ordinary creative commons thing. I notice that there is now something missing at her etsy shop. The PacMan necklace using someone else's copyrighted images! Now, she couldn't possibly read the Slimepit, could she? Maybe she just realized it on her own and didn't read about her own copyright infringement here. *guffaw!*

In her article, she lies again, since she never asked Justin to remove the image before DMCAing him:

When I originally asked for my images to be removed by the people who were treating me terribly...

[Scented Nectar]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

You beat me there by a minute! :)

[Butters]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

You beat me there by a minute! :)

I sure hope the people realize her magnanimous gesture of allowing people to display her "art" on their blogs (which would normally cost $100,000) and purchase more of it ASAP.

[Skep tickle]

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1786

Intro thread of new A+ forum member, who starts off by saying (emphasis added):

So when I made my nickname, I didn't realize that there was a hoard of morons that always seem to have "skeptic" in their names getting banned. So much so that it's becoming a running gag apparently.

[quotes Sun Countess and ceepolk from other threads]

I'll do my best to not be the joke of a forum member being described above. With that out of the way, hello and I'm looking forward to lurking the living crap out of this forum.

SubMor, Lovely, and Cipher have replied, welcoming Skeptic tank, including this:

Sadly there have been more than a couple of people who have put "skeptic" in their name, and, uh, turned out that was just wishful thinking on their part. *laugh*

If I'm not mistaken, SubMor & Lovely & Cipher have typically been quick on the draw to chastise some new-or-otherwise-soon-to-be-banned members against the use of slurs like "retarded" (see a few posts up, here). But when welcoming this kowtower, "morons" gets a pass. :think:

[real horrorshow]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

Thoughts? Well after the fact - and possibly after a knock on the head from one of those four law firms she consulted - Amy concedes that her DCMA against Justin was bullshit. Grown-ups knew this already, but Amy and her gang of emotional toddlers did not. Or at least, they pretended very hard they didn't. Now she'll be showered in praise by them for graciously 'permitting' what she had no right to forbid.

Oh, and check out the Peezus poster "The sooner you learn the better off you'll be" A nauseating combination of the patronising and the threatening in the best traditions of INGSOC. Who do they imagine they're going to win over with that? I'd punch anyone who said that to me!

[Dick Strawkins]

I notice that "Get off the rag" Laden immediately chimes in with advice.
I'm not sure the FTB/Skeptic crew realize how useful it was for the past few months with Laden keeping a low profile.
Now he's back we're going to have great fun dragging out his and Steffies hilarious misogynistic remarks!

Hey Steffie!
We know you read here.
Get ready for some of your old quotes to be dragged out of storage!
:D

[Tony Parsehole]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

What a dickhead. I thought she had consultations with crack teams of lawyers who decided she could sue for $100,000? How nice of you Amy to turn the money down and decide everybody is "allowed" to use your images (implying they couldn't be legally used before).

[Guest]

Oh, and check out the Peezus poster "The sooner you learn the better off you'll be" A nauseating combination of the patronising and the threatening in the best traditions of INGSOC. Who do they imagine they're going to win over with that? I'd punch anyone who said that to me!

It's Randi, but your point stands.

[Tony Parsehole]

I notice that "Get off the rag" Laden immediately chimes in with advice.

And a shiny new, surlyramic avatar just to prove his love and loyalty for her. Sycophant.

[Tony Parsehole]

Oh, and check out the Peezus poster "The sooner you learn the better off you'll be" A nauseating combination of the patronising and the threatening in the best traditions of INGSOC. Who do they imagine they're going to win over with that? I'd punch anyone who said that to me!

It's Randi, but your point stands.

Both wrong. It's Captain Birdseye.

[ReneeHendricks]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

My thoughts? I *still* won't buy her crap.

[Tony Parsehole]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

My thoughts? I *still* won't buy her crap.

I wish she would stop referring to it as her "art" like it's a Turner seascape or something. It's varnished clay on a string. My girlfriend used to make that sort of stuff on Etsy and thankfully never once called it her art.

[Saint N.]

I have decided to do something that I hope can set the stage, to not only make things right, but to make the internet a better place.

Really? How does taking part in a practice which everyone on the internet (except you) was already well aware of qualify as some kind of innovative milestone on your part?

This means you can even adapt the images to make new art. So you can photoshop, collage, use it as your avatar, print and hang on your wall, make art from the art, whatever you fancy. The only conditions that apply are you must attribute the work to either Amy Davis Roth, surlyramics.com or surly.etsy.com and if you make art from my art you must also release it under a creatives commons license.

Yeah, but everybody already knew this! Stop pretending like your doing something new, Amy, when you're just catching up with everybody else.

[Saint N.]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

My thoughts? I *still* won't buy her crap.

I wish she would stop referring to it as her "art" like it's a Turner seascape or something. It's varnished clay on a string. My girlfriend used to make that sort of stuff on Etsy and thankfully never once called it her art.

Have you by any chance seen this tweet by Y_U_NO_SKEPTIC. It summarizes things fairly well.

[ReneeHendricks]

Amy has decided NOW that anyone can use her images.
Thoughts please.

http://skepchick.org/2012/10/free-the-art/

My thoughts? I *still* won't buy her crap.

I wish she would stop referring to it as her "art" like it's a Turner seascape or something. It's varnished clay on a string. My girlfriend used to make that sort of stuff on Etsy and thankfully never once called it her art.

For some reason, I keep thinking of ShrinkieDinks.