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

aweraw wrote:I stole the WCOA silhouette for the subreddit header image. No DCMA's, please.

Also, anyone else getting intermittent 500 errors?

The WCoA approves :)

KiwiInOz wrote:

AbsurdWalls wrote:

franc wrote:
Bravo. Bet mom's proud. :suimouth:

Sorry, I was driving while I was posting that.

Psst. A quiet word to the wise. Don't ever apologise to franc. He can smell weakness a mile away.

Just say, "fuck you franc, those pixels bothered you as much as an internet kick up the jaxy".

I've got tendonitis in my wrist scrolling through these endless unedited comment replies. Now I can't wank. I'm going to have to hire a European backpacker chick to jerk me off whenever I feel the need. Preferably a Baltic one.

Everyone needs to give me money. Now. Thankyou.

Hey peeps, I have a general complaint in that the Slyme Pit thread moves soooo fast that I can't keep up. I'm also certain this has been discussed before so could someone link me to where that discussion took place?

Thanks

http://www.freezepage.com/1357535601YOYZKPZJXB

The FreezePage of the banning of Oliver Crangle by Greta Christina, not because he said anything libelous, spammy, threatening, profane, offensive, mainly because they couldn't refute his comments, and because banning people that dissent is what they do.

BannedAid wrote:

BrianAllenAptJ wrote:
that is probably the nastiest beer I have ever had .... I didn't know they made it in "40" form the only thing i have seen in stores here is 22s.

Oh, yes, it is horrible. That's why I felt pretty confident you wouldn't take me up on it. And, yes, they make 40's of it, and yes, if you drink one it will melt your intestines and give you diarrhea for 2 days.

Oh no I would still take you up on it, and post a cute pic of me enjoying it :)

leafs wrote:Hey peeps, I have a general complaint in that the Slyme Pit thread moves soooo fast that I can't keep up. I'm also certain this has been discussed before so could someone link me to where that discussion took place?

Thanks

The interesting thing is as far as I am concerned, that this problem while a problem of the SlymePit is actually a problem of the (no disrespect to you at all Lsuoma) phpBB which is by far the ugliest and crappiest and lousiest and least readable and least useful of all bulletin board systems, which is why, I guess, it is so popular.

Grrrr.

Pitchguest wrote:

rayshul wrote:Ed Brayton appears to be in a bit of trouble himself. GRETA has money. Why doesn't she donate the excess of that money to him?

That's actually a good point. Why is a very good question.

Well, we've seen the kind of possessive teeth-baring they get into over virtual hugs. You think she'd part with her Flooblebooble shoe money without drawing blood?

Mark Neil wrote:

Steersman wrote: [spoiler]

cunt wrote:

Steersman wrote:

cunt wrote: ...
None of this changes it from being an implicit threat to something else. I'm asking what else you think it might be, or whether you're just blowing smoke out your asshole. If melody thinks she's being harassed, is justified, and responds to it with an implicit threat to job security. Guess what she's still doing.

I didn’t say that it wasn’t an implicit threat – I said, or meant, that there were other possible implicit threats, i.e., to try charging Mykeru with harassment.

In that case it'd only be necessary to indicate knowledge of his name and possibly general location. Going on about "the government" is shorthand for "imma try fucking with your job, bitch". His job is irrelevant.

[/spoiler]
Have you any proof that Hensley knew that Mykeru works for the government? I assume that is the case since he has virtually confirmed that, but I really wasn’t aware of it, for certain in any case, so it’s a stretch to conclude that she would have known of it too. The thing is that Hensley said absolutely fuck all about his job; all she said was something about the government which could have been related to a question of harassment and getting some police involvement. Your inference of “fucking with your job” is what makes it an implicit threat which might reasonably be questioned – you know, the things that skeptics do, or are supposed to do – particularly when there are other hypotheses on the table.

When you first posted your question, I thought you were being even handed. This post demonstrates without a doubt that was not the case, as there is absolutely no need to defend melody's actions in order to demonstrate you belief that he too was in the wrong.

While I think your response is fairly even-handed too and also that I’ve dealt with some of your points in earlier comments, I thought there are still a few to be addressed or elaborated on. For starters, that some of Melody’s actions might have been in response to some of Mykeru’s which might have been in the wrong tends, I think, to provide both some justification and reasons for defending the former.

You could easily have conceded that she did, in fact, threaten him, and still argue that he was, in your view, committing hypocrisy... But that's not what you did... why?

I don’t know about “easily have conceded”, although I will now, as indicated above, concede that her references to “government” most probably qualify as a veiled threat as there doesn’t appear to be any definitions and examples of the word that justifies thinking that it could have referred to any part of the legal system. And for which she might reasonably be charged, at least in the court of public opinion, with some egregious harassment of her own that may or may not counterbalance that directed at her.

As for the reason, part of it was to give the accused the benefit of the doubt and part is a general tendency to balk at “conventional wisdom” – which frequently tends to have a flaw or two in it; rush to judgement and all that.

As to the outing of information itself... I need to ask, how can you honestly equate putting up two video's, both containing the same person, committing similar acts based on the same politics, in the same location, and pointing out they are the same person and one of those clips has a name... to being the same as finding a person who has actively attributed his politics to a moniker, can only get his real name through a business transaction, and somehow, unbeknownst to us, determining which {insert name found through business transaction} used the moniker, and where he worked and threatening them with that information?

The reason these are different is because creepybittergirl has publicly linked her likeness, name and politics together for all to see, as did one of those identified by AVfM (two of them do not have such links, and this is why I feel AVfM crossed the line with them. But that wasn't Mykeru.). Mykeru has not done this, and if they can find somewhere where he does, in fact, link these together, then by all means, go at it.

Actually, it seems that that is precisely what Mykeru has done, certainly that he has linked his real name with his Internet name:

http://i48.tinypic.com/raouu0.jpg
http://tinypic.com/r/35hg2zm/6

But I will also concede that the two cases are not exactly the same – in much the same way that a Volvo is not the same as a Volkswagen. However, the question is which are the salient aspects they share in common and which principles apply in each case.

Mark Neil wrote:

Steersman wrote: [spoiler]

cunt wrote:

Steersman wrote:

cunt wrote: ...
None of this changes it from being an implicit threat to something else. I'm asking what else you think it might be, or whether you're just blowing smoke out your asshole. If melody thinks she's being harassed, is justified, and responds to it with an implicit threat to job security. Guess what she's still doing.

I didn’t say that it wasn’t an implicit threat – I said, or meant, that there were other possible implicit threats, i.e., to try charging Mykeru with harassment.

In that case it'd only be necessary to indicate knowledge of his name and possibly general location. Going on about "the government" is shorthand for "imma try fucking with your job, bitch". His job is irrelevant.

[/spoiler]
Have you any proof that Hensley knew that Mykeru works for the government? I assume that is the case since he has virtually confirmed that, but I really wasn’t aware of it, for certain in any case, so it’s a stretch to conclude that she would have known of it too. The thing is that Hensley said absolutely fuck all about his job; all she said was something about the government which could have been related to a question of harassment and getting some police involvement. Your inference of “fucking with your job” is what makes it an implicit threat which might reasonably be questioned – you know, the things that skeptics do, or are supposed to do – particularly when there are other hypotheses on the table.

When you first posted your question, I thought you were being even handed. This post demonstrates without a doubt that was not the case, as there is absolutely no need to defend melody's actions in order to demonstrate you belief that he too was in the wrong.

While I think your response is fairly even-handed too and also that I’ve dealt with some of your points in earlier comments, I thought there are still a few to be addressed or elaborated on. For starters, that some of Melody’s actions might have been in response to some of Mykeru’s which might have been in the wrong tends, I think, to provide both some justification and reasons for defending the former.

You could easily have conceded that she did, in fact, threaten him, and still argue that he was, in your view, committing hypocrisy... But that's not what you did... why?

I don’t know about “easily have conceded”, although I will now, as indicated above, concede that her references to “government” most probably qualify as a veiled threat as there doesn’t appear to be any definitions and examples of the word that justifies thinking that it could have referred to any part of the legal system. And for which she might reasonably be charged, at least in the court of public opinion, with some egregious harassment of her own that may or may not counterbalance that directed at her.

As for the reason, part of it was to give the accused the benefit of the doubt and part is a general tendency to balk at “conventional wisdom” – which frequently tends to have a flaw or two in it; rush to judgement and all that.

As to the outing of information itself... I need to ask, how can you honestly equate putting up two video's, both containing the same person, committing similar acts based on the same politics, in the same location, and pointing out they are the same person and one of those clips has a name... to being the same as finding a person who has actively attributed his politics to a moniker, can only get his real name through a business transaction, and somehow, unbeknownst to us, determining which {insert name found through business transaction} used the moniker, and where he worked and threatening them with that information?

The reason these are different is because creepybittergirl has publicly linked her likeness, name and politics together for all to see, as did one of those identified by AVfM (two of them do not have such links, and this is why I feel AVfM crossed the line with them. But that wasn't Mykeru.). Mykeru has not done this, and if they can find somewhere where he does, in fact, link these together, then by all means, go at it.

Actually, it seems that that is precisely what Mykeru has done, certainly that he has linked his real name with his Internet name:

http://i48.tinypic.com/raouu0.jpg
http://tinypic.com/r/35hg2zm/6

But I will also concede that the two cases are not exactly the same – in much the same way that a Volvo is not the same as a Volkswagen. However, the question is which are the salient aspects they share in common and which principles apply in each case.

BrianAllenAptJ wrote: Oh no I would still take you up on it, and post a cute pic of me enjoying it :)

Shit, you called my bluff. Ok, next time I've got three fiddy to spare, you're on.

Mykeru wrote:
I suggest we spend 2013 having a laff-fest with these assholes.

I agree fully.

I'm getting a crazy sick make you jelly new machine up and running with CS6 at the moment, lulz vids are on the way.

There is so much material that it's making it hard to decide which way to go in my series.

Good work btw.

Sorry about the double post; got a "database error" warning when I posted the first time and assumed that it had not been posted so posted again.

somedumbguy wrote:

leafs wrote:Hey peeps, I have a general complaint in that the Slyme Pit thread moves soooo fast that I can't keep up. I'm also certain this has been discussed before so could someone link me to where that discussion took place?

Thanks

The interesting thing is as far as I am concerned, that this problem while a problem of the SlymePit is actually a problem of the (no disrespect to you at all Lsuoma) phpBB which is by far the ugliest and crappiest and lousiest and least readable and least useful of all bulletin board systems, which is why, I guess, it is so popular.

Grrrr.

I am in many hockey pools, etc where we use this message board system and I don't find it all that bad... not tech savvy in the least though. The biggest problem is it's one big thread... There is zero chance I would read that many pages as a newbie.

OK - thanks for the feed back my good peoples. I will keep at, and try to foster it as a good place to catch the highlights. Feel free to join in if the fancy takes you.

P.S. I am not a karma whore :-P

leafs wrote:

somedumbguy wrote:

leafs wrote:Hey peeps, I have a general complaint in that the Slyme Pit thread moves soooo fast that I can't keep up. I'm also certain this has been discussed before so could someone link me to where that discussion took place?

Thanks

The interesting thing is as far as I am concerned, that this problem while a problem of the SlymePit is actually a problem of the (no disrespect to you at all Lsuoma) phpBB which is by far the ugliest and crappiest and lousiest and least readable and least useful of all bulletin board systems, which is why, I guess, it is so popular.

Grrrr.

I am in many hockey pools, etc where we use this message board system and I don't find it all that bad... not tech savvy in the least though. The biggest problem is it's one big thread... There is zero chance I would read that many pages as a newbie.

I honestly don't think it's the one thread, the problem is this bboard wastes tons of space with headers and signatures and smilies and avatars AND the bboard makes it very difficult to navigate. It responds with links with anchors to the wrong places, it doesn't place links to a quoted spot, it makes it difficult to trim quotes and trivial to copy and paste enormous chunks of text.

All in all, it's abysmal crap. PhpBB that is, not the Slymepit.

A reddit board IS nicer in many ways, especially if you can collapse posts and if people use RES with it.

HOWEVER, a reddit board breaks one rule that seems fundamentally important to the pit, that is the NO EDIT BUTTON. Though with FreezePage maybe that will be okay.

I'm not a true pitter, I am an MRA that is annoyed, amused and somewhat frightened by the Septic Feminists like PeeZus and Rebecca and Ophie and Zvan. Their antics and the antics at atheismplus just convince me over and over to have nothing to do with organized atheism.

Anyway, phpBB sucks ass.

Pitchguest wrote:

rayshul wrote:Ed Brayton appears to be in a bit of trouble himself. GRETA has money. Why doesn't she donate the excess of that money to him?

That's actually a good point. Why is a very good question.

Can we start a campaign for her to do that?

In other news, I told them they shouldn't have built FreeThoughtBlogs under a mobile phone tower.

Anyone posted this yet?

[youtube][/youtube]

Made me chuckle.

rocko2466 wrote:

Pitchguest wrote:

rayshul wrote:Ed Brayton appears to be in a bit of trouble himself. GRETA has money. Why doesn't she donate the excess of that money to him?

That's actually a good point. Why is a very good question.

Can we start a campaign for her to do that?

In other news, I told them they shouldn't have built FreeThoughtBlogs under a mobile phone tower.

It's disappointing that that isn't what happened, really. I'd say go for a campaign but really... :/ They aren't very giving people anyway.

Re the "judging you by the company you keep" meme which FfTB (stupidly, it seems to me, given the acephalic majority of their commenters) keep alive: the person called "Rodney Nelson", commenting on Greta's notpology post about her new shoes, is a reincarnation of the proven plagiarist "'Tis Himself".

FYI.

leafs wrote:

somedumbguy wrote:

leafs wrote:Hey peeps, I have a general complaint in that the Slyme Pit thread moves soooo fast that I can't keep up. I'm also certain this has been discussed before so could someone link me to where that discussion took place?

Thanks

The interesting thing is as far as I am concerned, that this problem while a problem of the SlymePit is actually a problem of the (no disrespect to you at all Lsuoma) phpBB which is by far the ugliest and crappiest and lousiest and least readable and least useful of all bulletin board systems, which is why, I guess, it is so popular.

Grrrr.

I am in many hockey pools, etc where we use this message board system and I don't find it all that bad... not tech savvy in the least though. The biggest problem is it's one big thread... There is zero chance I would read that many pages as a newbie.

Best bet is to just jump right in. I'm a newbie myself.

Here's a recommended post for any newbie so it looks like you're up-to-date on the last 800-odd pages:

Hey guys, I'm new here. I was just wondering if anyone had heard of FreeThoughtBlogs, Atheism+ or Skepchick? They're dicks!

codelette wrote:Regarding Greta's shoes. As tacky as her move was, if the people that donated her money do not give a fuck...then, so be it.
I do have to say that those shoes are ugly as fuck, but then those fuckers are not known for having great taste in fashion.
Talking about expensive shoes, I spent 300+ bucks on a new pair of Frye boots (cause they are badass and I didn't have to troll for donations to get em.)
[spoiler]http://dsv72jclfpnu0.cloudfront.net/ima ... 1351791301[/spoiler]
...they match my racist fedora hat.

I can say this much, if Greta Christina had the money to buy $300 shoes and weren't recently the survivor of cancer (of very benign cancer granted, but still) then I wouldn't have given a fuck.

Since she didn't, though, and she is, and the money came from donations in the belief they would go to desperate medical bills, I do care.

(Sorry, codelette, don't mean to be a joykill. Love your racist boots.)

AbsurdWalls wrote:

justinvacula wrote: Oh, of course, add gender to the issue when it really has no significance here. The same complaints, I would wager, would be raised if Greta were a man and bought shoes.

I think that "nobody complains when men do it" thing is weird. I've rarely seen anyone care about how much men's clothes cost at all, possibly because cheap men's clothing looks a lot like expensive clothing unless you have an eye for it (which most people of both genders do not).

Personally I do think this shoe thing is making a fuss out of nothing and Greta's response to it is otherwise appropriate. Though, in my personal experience, expensive pairs of shoes seem to last no longer than cheap ones. I had a pair of £40 boots (made by Fender, when they did that) last 4 years. Since then I have bought a pair every winter costing £80-130 a time and none of them have lasted more than a few months.

you got hosed. Last pair of snow boots I bought were $110, and lasted me over ten years.

Pitchguest wrote:

codelette wrote:Regarding Greta's shoes. As tacky as her move was, if the people that donated her money do not give a fuck...then, so be it.
I do have to say that those shoes are ugly as fuck, but then those fuckers are not known for having great taste in fashion.
Talking about expensive shoes, I spent 300+ bucks on a new pair of Frye boots (cause they are badass and I didn't have to troll for donations to get em.)
[spoiler]http://dsv72jclfpnu0.cloudfront.net/ima ... 1351791301[/spoiler]
...they match my racist fedora hat.

I can say this much, if Greta Christina had the money to buy $300 shoes and weren't recently the survivor of cancer (of very benign cancer granted, but still) then I wouldn't have given a fuck.

Since she didn't, though, and she is, and the money came from donations in the belief they would go to desperate medical bills, I do care.

(Sorry, codelette, don't mean to be a joykill. Love your racist boots.)

Nonono, the shoes were part of her medical expenses. They were needed to patch up her bruised ego.

rocko2466 wrote:

leafs wrote:

somedumbguy wrote:

leafs wrote:Hey peeps, I have a general complaint in that the Slyme Pit thread moves soooo fast that I can't keep up. I'm also certain this has been discussed before so could someone link me to where that discussion took place?

Thanks

The interesting thing is as far as I am concerned, that this problem while a problem of the SlymePit is actually a problem of the (no disrespect to you at all Lsuoma) phpBB which is by far the ugliest and crappiest and lousiest and least readable and least useful of all bulletin board systems, which is why, I guess, it is so popular.

Grrrr.

I am in many hockey pools, etc where we use this message board system and I don't find it all that bad... not tech savvy in the least though. The biggest problem is it's one big thread... There is zero chance I would read that many pages as a newbie.

Best bet is to just jump right in. I'm a newbie myself.

Here's a recommended post for any newbie so it looks like you're up-to-date on the last 800-odd pages:

Hey guys, I'm new here. I was just wondering if anyone had heard of FreeThoughtBlogs, Atheism+ or Skepchick? They're dicks!

Or, in the words of Comradde Physioproffe: "they're dickes"

rocko2466 wrote:Oh, while I 100% agree with Mykeru, I'd suggest that if Melody Hensley is being crazy, just do her as a hashtag.

I wouldn't do her with franc's dick and mykeru pushing

I haven't laughed so hard in weeks. This person is actually for real. Enjoy!

[youtube]8LjosM45eLw[/youtube]

Enjoy!

[youtube]a1XW4HH1oLA[/youtube]

lurktard wrote:

Rystefn wrote:
Easy. Jackass on foot is standing still. Person in car drives appropriately to the situation. Who can change the situation faster? Asshole on feet. He steps in front of the car with a fraction of a second between the action and the potential impact. How is that on the driver not to be able to avoid the collision (which, because of the fucking laws of physics, it is NOT possible for the driver to avoid)? No. The pedestrian was an idiot, the impact is solely the fault of his idiocy, the driver is 0% responsible for what happened.

Again, stop pretending the driver has perfect control over the fucking vehicle, you disingenuous piece of shit. Inertia owns that fucking vehicle, the driver can influence things a bit, but is not ever actually in control. If the pedestrian chooses to act in a way that potentially puts him in the path of an oncoming vehicle closer than the drivers ability to influence the path of the vehicle out of the collision path, then the following impact is on the pedestrian, not the driver. If the paths intersect in a way where either person is equally able to avoid it, then any impact that happens after is equally the fault of both.

Let me guess: you or some dumbass you know stepped into a road without looking and got hit, and now you're desperate to put the blame on the driver for not protecting useless shitheads from their own stupidity? Fuck that. If you're stupid enough to step into the fucking road without looking, then the human race would be better if you didn't survive the impact and risk passing your idiot genes on to the next generation. Next you'll be claiming it's the crocodile's fault for snatching morons at the water's edge, not the morons for ignoring the crocodile, right?

I undertsand the situation. But the driver is still responsible. A driver who didn't see that the pedestrian saw him, has to fucking slow down. Yes, a driver is defenseless, if a pedestrian is deliberately trying to jump into the front of his car. And in such a situation the driver's guilt aproaches zero. But I wouldn't call such an event an accident. If there is danger to do harm to other people you gotta be more careful. That is pretty much the the base for any reasonable safety measure ever.

English isn't my first language, so how do you define "responsibility"? It's clearly not the same as "guilt", but broader (I checked a dictionary.)
You seem to be talking about "guilt" all the time. "Guilt" is a different concept, but the "responsibilty" comes into play when determining guilt. Guilt easily shifts, depending on one's behaviour. Responsibiliy depends more on general circumstances and should influence one's behaviour. Someone who does behave more responsible loads less guilt unto himself in case of a fuck up than someone who behaves less responsible. Also fuck ups become less likely.

A pedestrian fucking up is not free of guilt in case of an accident. The more the pedestrian fucks up compared to the driver the more the guilt shifts towards the pedestrian. His initial responsibilty is much lower. Here in Germany accident guilt is usually shared to differing degrees based on behaviour and level of responsibilty. Let's say I ride a bicycle and drive closely behind a car. The car brakes for a proper reason (so other than deliberately provoking a crash with me) and I crash into the car. That's pretty much the only scenario the car driver gets away with 0 guilt and I carry a full 100%. His responsibility is making sure not to crash into others in front of him (including pedestrians), making sure those behind don't crash into him is not his responsibilty. (Except when driving backwards of course.) My responsibility was to not crash into him. I failed (in this hypothetical example).

Seriously you cannot tell me, that someone who drives slower in the area of playing kids behaves more responsible (read: in accordance with his responsibility) than someone who doesn't take them into account and goes strictly for the spped limit, or is that what you are trying to tell me? I heard driver's education is a joke in the USA compared to Germany. But such simple concepts are not even driving specific. It's the same on a shooting range, the one carrying a gun needs to be more responsible than one without. Or in a fricking swimming pool. The one jumping from the tower has more responsibility over the safety of the jump than people swimming down in the water. Some dude in a park throwing a diskus or a spear has more responsibilty than someone just walking along. It's really not fucking rocket science. And somehow i wonder why I have to explain that to multiple people and not one agreeing. Without any reasonable counter.

Instead you give me your retarded ad hominem fallacy at the end which isn't even remotely true. My only traffic accidents were bike accidents in which I fucked up on my own without any involvement of others (except one harmless slow speed bike on bike crash when I was a child, also my fault.)

I'll be assuming for the moment that you're arguing against things I didn't say because you fail to grasp the subtleties of the language. I never said anything about someone deliberately jumping in front of a car. I was talking only about a stupid person doing it because they weren't paying attention to the world around them. That difference is small, but it does matter. Still, in either case, if it happens at a closer distance than the ability of the driver to avoid the impact, then there is literally nothing the driver could to prevent it, therefore there is zero guilt and zero responsibility on the driver (unless the driver was going at a reckless speed, which you seem to be defining as any speed at which a driver cannot stop on a dime - a dime suddenly tossed out in front of the car at the last possible moment). What happened solely because of the pedestrian. No mistake was made by the driver at all. Again, unless you are suggesting that drivers should crawl around at inches per hour any time a pedestrian is anywhere near them, which is stupid and insane. Driving at a completely responsible speed will not allow you avoid an impact if someone steps into the road mere inches in front of your car. Again, the driver simply does not have that level of control.

See, you're assuming all things being equal, there's more onus on the driver to be sure he's not going to hit anything than there is on everyone around the driver to be sure they aren't going to be hit. You can pitch that case if you like, but fuck you, it's still not right. You're talking about the driver having more energy, more force, behind his decisions, and that makes him have more responsibility for the outcome, yes? I disagree entirely. As I keep pointing out: the driver doesn't actually have all that much control over the car. It's a pleasant fiction we tell ourselves so we can convince ourselves that it's a good idea to get inside the fucking things. Inertia owns that fucking car; the driver can whisper in its ear and hope it listens.The party with more control over position and direction is the pedestrian, by a large fucking margin. Therefore, the onus is on the pedestrian to avoid the car. Especially if the car is, as they almost invariable are, travelling in an easily predictable and well-marked direction.

Let's have a real-world example aside of cars, if that helps. Say you're on a boat on the open sea. No roads, no lanes, no curbs, no crosswalks, just wide open as fuck in all directions. Two boats are coming up on each other, and if neither changes course, they will collide. Which one has the right-of-way. There's a lot of rules on this, and yes size is one of the rules, but you know what comes before size? Method of propulsion. Not all else being equal, mind, but without exception, the rowboat has right-of-way over the sailboat. The sailboat has right-of-way over the motorboat. It trumps everything. Do you know why? Control. It's assumed that it will be easier for the motorboat to turn under power than for the sailboat to turn using fucking ropes and sheets of cloth. Does that make sense to you?

By the same principle, it is much easier for a pedestrian to choose whether or not step into the road at a given place and time than it is for drivers to react to that choice. It's also safer, since a pedestrian standing quietly at the side of the road waiting for a good time to cross is almost incapable of creating any danger by that act, but a car slowing and/or swerving to avoid a pedestrian can easily endanger anyone else on or near the road. The thing that is most likely to prevent injury to everyone in the area is for the goddamned pedestrian to stand quietly and wait until it's fucking clear. Therefore, the onus is on the fucking pedestrian to damned--well do so.

Is any part of that confusing to you?

justinvacula wrote:I haven't laughed so hard in weeks. This person is actually for real. Enjoy!

[youtube]8LjosM45eLw[/youtube]

You'll like this version ;)

[youtube]a1XW4HH1oLA[/youtube]

I could have saved her like $195 bucks with these two links

http://www.ehow.com/how_5061310_make-du ... shoes.html

And colors for all occasions

http://www.tapebrothers.com/Duct-Tape-s ... nQodyBoA_A

Darren wrote:

On her shitty blog, Greta wrote:Given that I am now working again, and am earning my own income again… at what point is it okay for me to start spending my money the way I want to?

You see, guise! I wasn't spending your money. It just turns out that after spending your money on the essentials, I had lots of my money left over to blow on useless shit and then brag about it.

Have some fuking shame, Greta.

Were she even slightly clued, she MIGHT figger out why people are annoyed. (I can't really be pissed that a hipster spent too much money on shoes. They're fucking dumbasses.) But she's not, so she won't.

]

justinvacula wrote:I haven't laughed so hard in weeks. This person is actually for real. Enjoy!

[youtube]8LjosM45eLw[/youtube]

FUCK!! Paste the wrong link. Meant you'll like this version ;)

[youtube]iTGkr6xnLVE[/youtube]

ReneeHendricks wrote:

Skep tickle wrote:Comment #31 at Ophelia's post on shoegate starts off with this:

Renee, you need to learn the meaning of “gift”.

a) Poison? (its meaning as a German word)

b) Whatever Renee wants it to mean? (according to at least one mod at Atheism+)

Yeah, you get online and beg for money. You can call it a "gift" and others can call that as well. We call it a "gift" when we stupidly give to televangelists. We'd still like to know where our money is going. And much like giving money to televangelists, giving it to people like Greta Christina only means you find out way after the fact that it's going to really 'bitching", expensive shoes (bitching is in quotes because personally I think they're ugly as fuck).

Even televangelists know not to brag about buying thirty whores in bangkok right after a fund drive.

justinvacula wrote:I haven't laughed so hard in weeks. This person is actually for real. Enjoy!

[youtube]8LjosM45eLw[/youtube]

I really wasn't able to hear what she has to say, I was too repulsed by the underlying sonics (bowel sounds? chest sounds? what the hell was that) that was playing in at least the first 40 seconds...

Skep tickle wrote:

Eucliwood wrote:

BannedAid wrote:Dear Greta -

Unless you play basketball professionally, $200 shoes are an extravagant expense. Even if you hadn't just recently plead poverty to get other people to pay your health expenses, I would raise an eyebrow at that. Btw, I'm a man. I have an exotic shoe-size and a shoestring (ha!) budget, and I can still manage to get a pair for $50. You're not catching flack over this because you're a woman -- of course that's you're first line of defense -- but because you're a materialistic fraud.

I wouldn't say that $200 shoes are an EXTRAVAGANT expense... probably something you'd get for christmas if you didnt want anything else big... the adults jst bought someone in the family 150 dollar stupid boots... But then again the adult who did it makes a nice amount of money? Nowhere near wealthy, but hm, 70-80k/year?

I make good money - less than most physicians, but more than most people.

My one pair of expensive professional shoes cost 60% of the Flugelhoofenshits Greta bought. (I have several lower-tier shoes I wear with orthotics for the kinds of foot issues Greta wrote about in explaining/excusing her purchase of those shoes. I paid for the orthotics out of pocket & they too cost less than Greta's shoes.)

I would never, ever consider paying $200 or more for shoes.

And WTF is this about her needing particularly comfy & nice shoes for her profession...isn't her profession writing (mostly on the internet)?

Oh, and giving talks to atheist & skeptic groups, maybe other "Cons". Which, as y'all know, have really high fashion expectations. :roll:

I have often been chided for my lack of stylish footwear at computer shows.

BarnOwl wrote:Why do Greta, Ophelia, Stephanie et al. even care what most 'Pytters think about their behavior? It's not as if most of us have any influence on their speaking and writing gigs. We may mock them here and point out their hypocrisy and arrogance, but when has that ever affected their ability to promote themselves or participate in A/S meetings?

If one were to view modern feminism, especially the censorious and dogmatic form preached by the church of FTB and Skepchick, then I think this quote from Anton LaVey says quite a bit:

"Satan is the best friend the Church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years."

If you look at the comments popularity of these writers on their blogs, when writing about how they are under assault and being harrassed by the likes of people here, or the writers/vloggers at AVfM or Thunderf00t and various other Youtube atheists/skeptics, they draw much, much higher numbers and activity than anything else they write about.

So, in a way the Slymepit, Thunderf00t, Skeptic Ink, A Voice for Men and all other manner of internet personalities and groups who would normally have nothing to do with each other get lumped together as this multi-headed evil hydra beast that is out to harass, rape and attack women, and they are the only defense against this nefarious patriarchal evil.

It's just like fucking religion.

codelette wrote: I do have to say that those shoes are ugly as fuck

They match the persona.

ReneeHendricks wrote:

justinvacula wrote:Greta Christina, 'shoegate,' and gender:

(YT)UcvxSBWd-60(/YT)

I caught that as well. It was very interesting that she decided to flip it all to a gender-based problem. I definitely would be just as outraged if a man had said he paid $260 for a pair of shoes that served no real purpose other than being really awesome all the while just coming off of a round of fundraising to pay for possible testicular cancer. Turn about - fair play - all that - gender doesn't fucking matter.

Dude, even when my gay friends, and I mean the motherfuckin' fashion queens spend too much on shoes, we rip on them too.

"Look at these new shoes, I spent like $200 on them"

"You got ripped off. Did you at least get a blowjob with them?"

"Maybe later, salesman's taking me out to dinner, W00T!!!!"

"If he didn't do you in the store, you still got ripped off"

"Yeah, but they're pretty"

"Ain't that pretty, but they do look nice on you. Hey, I gotta pair of socks here for Fitty bucks for you!"

"Put Louis Vuitton on them, and we'll talk. PUT THAT SHARPIE DOWN YOU STRAIGHT MOTHERFUCKER, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN."


(I hang out with fun gay people, not these miserable tits on A+ and FTB.)

xinit wrote:

rocko2466 wrote: $200 for one pair of women's shoes - particularly at American prices - is crazy.

My problem though is that she did the article. Maybe shoes are her secret splurge (i.e. maybe she doesn't go to the pub on the weekend, or doesn't buy DVDs or something). We wouldn't be criticising her if she spent $30 at the pub once or twice a week, but that quickly adds up.

But the article was in bad taste in the context. And the shoes were crazy expensive.

I think my last pair of boots from Fluevog ran $350. They are incredibly comfortable and I'm happy with them. They're well built and last nicely... they're a decent investment for someone who needs decent shoes that look nice and are comfortable. Look at some of the SALE prices they have listed now... http://www.fluevog.com/code/?w=sale

They're not exactly hand made, leather soled Italian shoes, but they're close to the quality for a fraction of the price.

The trouble is the timing looks shady. Had it been a matter of "My partner got me a pair of shoes for Christmas..." or phrased differently, I don't think anyone would have flinched.

Pretty much. You have to be pretty fucking stupid to not see the result of that shit.

Eucliwood wrote:

Skep tickle wrote: I make good money - less than most physicians, but more than most people.

Hey, dr... what is this disorientation in my head (esp when I move my head) and these palpitations that occur on and off? Should I be concerned or something?It's hard to think when it gets heavy.

Speaking as a pro in the field: you really, really suck at being a funny asshole. Tedious, yeah, that ya got down pat, but dude, you just aren't that funny. You ever consider maybe, stopping until you can at least be funny? Because you really are on the verge of moving down from tedious asshole to whiny tit. Don't be a whiny tit. No one likes those.

"Justin Vacuous: Have you Even Got 10 Rape Threats in Your Life?"

[youtube]bsNvh3BcnXA[/youtube]

Oh, gee, she made a response video to mine...

Lsuoma wrote:If anyone wants to send me money for Colombian Marching Powder, please use the PayPal donate buttons below. I promise I won't spend it on shoes: expensive camera gear is much more likely.

if you're not going to spend it on pornstars and booze, fuck off ya cooont.

Mykeru wrote:

Steersman wrote: But he might well have been pissed about that threat, although I’m finding that a little improbable.

For declaring, by fiat, that it's improbable that I'm pissed about being threatened and therefore I am "shedding crocodile tears" ….

Just a “pro-tip”: unless you’re planning on applying at the Ministry of Truth for a job, it generally helps to quote people properly and accurately. That “pissed about being threatened” was related to Melody’s reference to your government job; the bit about the crocodile tears was related, presumably, to her use of your name. Do try not to conflate different points and comments thereon.

In addition, I most emphatically did not “declare by fiat that it’s improbable that you’re pissed about being threatened”. I said “I’m finding that a little improbable. The only “fiat” involved is declaring that I’m “finding” which is quite subjective – not at all the same as declaring that something “is” which tends to be rather more objective.

… you just won the coveted second spot on my ignore list.

Awesome; I’m so flattered and so honoured.

You're an inexcusable piece of shit.

Awww, I love you too ….

Eucliwood wrote:

BannedAid wrote:

Eucliwood wrote: I wouldn't say that $200 shoes are an EXTRAVAGANT expense... probably something you'd get for christmas if you didnt want anything else big... the adults jst bought someone in the family 150 dollar stupid boots... But then again the adult who did it makes a nice amount of money? Nowhere near wealthy, but hm, 70-80k/year?

What's an average pair of women's shoes cost (I honestly don't know)? If it's much less than $200, then, yeah, she's treating herself pretty well. Which is cool, but don't fucking scoreboard over it. Does she know how many people are going to be hungry tonight? I bet they'd like her $200 shoes, although it would be an expensive dinner. It's just bad form.

There are plenty of tennis shoes here for 40-60 bucks that are in the expensive range, to me... I stick to 20..
As for dress shoes.. aren't those like 70-80 in the expensive range?

Hell, I wouldn't know too well. I only ever look at them for a few seconds.

depends on what you need them for. My workout shoes are around a hundred bucks, twice a year, and they're fucked for working out in at that point.

My "work" shoes are classic vans, and worn until my wife says "GO GET NEW ONES, YOU LOOK LIKE A HOMELESS."

codelette wrote:Regarding Greta's shoes. As tacky as her move was, if the people that donated her money do not give a fuck...then, so be it.
I do have to say that those shoes are ugly as fuck, but then those fuckers are not known for having great taste in fashion.
Talking about expensive shoes, I spent 300+ bucks on a new pair of Frye boots (cause they are badass and I didn't have to troll for donations to get em.)
http://dsv72jclfpnu0.cloudfront.net/ima ... 1351791301
...they match my racist fedora hat.

Nah, those aren't ugly shoes.

THESE are some awesome ugly shoes:

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos- ... 0078_n.jpg

Custom-made chucks. They're my "going to town" shoes. Sixty bucks, and greta wishes hers were as awesome as mine.

justinvacula wrote:I haven't laughed so hard in weeks. This person is actually for real. Enjoy!

If Amanda Marcotte ever needed an intern, this lady's the one. She's got Amanda's schtick down cold -- interrogating her own elaborate projection of what you're thinking, doing, and will do if you could get away with it.

leafs wrote:Hey peeps, I have a general complaint in that the Slyme Pit thread moves soooo fast that I can't keep up. I'm also certain this has been discussed before so could someone link me to where that discussion took place?

Thanks

page elebenty

welch wrote:

Eucliwood wrote:

BannedAid wrote:

Eucliwood wrote: I wouldn't say that $200 shoes are an EXTRAVAGANT expense... probably something you'd get for christmas if you didnt want anything else big... the adults jst bought someone in the family 150 dollar stupid boots... But then again the adult who did it makes a nice amount of money? Nowhere near wealthy, but hm, 70-80k/year?

What's an average pair of women's shoes cost (I honestly don't know)? If it's much less than $200, then, yeah, she's treating herself pretty well. Which is cool, but don't fucking scoreboard over it. Does she know how many people are going to be hungry tonight? I bet they'd like her $200 shoes, although it would be an expensive dinner. It's just bad form.

There are plenty of tennis shoes here for 40-60 bucks that are in the expensive range, to me... I stick to 20..
As for dress shoes.. aren't those like 70-80 in the expensive range?

Hell, I wouldn't know too well. I only ever look at them for a few seconds.

depends on what you need them for. My workout shoes are around a hundred bucks, twice a year, and they're fucked for working out in at that point.

My "work" shoes are classic vans, and worn until my wife says "GO GET NEW ONES, YOU LOOK LIKE A HOMELESS."

Yeah, I wear my shoes until they fall apart, and I've found that cheapass canvas jobs tend to last three or four times as long as those shoes people are always recommending me to get for day-to-day wear. Workout shoes... well that's whole pile of shit you have to be careful with. Depending on what your workouts look like, yeah, you can burn through fairly expensive shoes pretty quick and the only alternative is changing your workout or fucking you feet. Alternately, you can use the same shoes for years on end and no problems. Varies pretty dramatically. Dress shoes... well, I guess that depends on what you do in them. How much walking, how much on your feet, how much outdoors, how much it rains, all that kind of thing. Personally, when I need dress shoes, I do like whossname said above and shine up my boots real nice. Seems to work out well enough.

My boots have so far lasted thirteen years, and I haven't been nice to them. Fuck, when I worked at the plant, I melted asphalt off of them with a flamethrower - it fucked the shine, but other than that, they're fine. Wish I knew who made the damned things...

Sheogorath wrote:Anyone posted this yet?

[youtube][/youtube]

Made me chuckle.

Bitch, where's my wabbajack!

justinvacula wrote:I haven't laughed so hard in weeks. This person is actually for real. Enjoy!

[youtube]8LjosM45eLw[/youtube]

Hahaha I got to two minutes and stopped.

I must've missed the part when thunderf00t said there were no groups in society that are disadvantaged...

I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

Reed: @nataliereed84 Fuck. Fuck. More and more and more I think I seriously need to leave FTB... (12:59 p.m. Mon, Jan 7)

Looks like Natalie Reed left FtB. Tweeted the above, the tweeted that she just sent the email to make it efficient. Trying to parse, but it appears she received threats from somewhere that she refers to "inside." I won't speculate. She also bid adieu to atheism, or something.

Nat and I have had our differences, but I kinda like her blog.

Polterguest wrote:I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

Oh sure! Just leave your garbage lying around. :naughty:

Al Stefanelli wrote:

Reed: @nataliereed84 Fuck. Fuck. More and more and more I think I seriously need to leave FTB... (12:59 p.m. Mon, Jan 7)

Looks like Natalie Reed left FtB. Tweeted the above, the tweeted that she just sent the email to make it efficient. Trying to parse, but it appears she received threats from somewhere that she refers to "inside." I won't speculate. She also bid adieu to atheism, or something.

Nat and I have had our differences, but I kinda like her blog.

I don't have anything against her. She seems so sad and low in the self-esteem area all the time tho. Hope she's ok.

Polterguest wrote:I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

She had the audacity to get cancer and receive help from her closest friends...

Always with the self-serving embellishments.

Polterguest wrote:I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

RightSideNegative on January 7, 2013 at 6:03 am


Becca:


I just didn’t like the fact that my donation went to non-essentials without my knowledge or consent.

You are an over-entitled ASSHAT. Your BEHAVIOR is evil, terrible and bad. Do you SERIOUSLY think that we GIVE A DAMN about your over-privileged simplificated SHIT?! REALLY?! You are such an ASS that you fail to recognize that you are talking from a position of MALE PRIVILEGE. Are you really saying that you have no idea what you’re talking about? You know full well, your behavior is what is wrong here, your BLIND, PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC GARBAGE.

When will you people just learn to SHUT YOUR MOUTHS and stop being all like “ooh, my free speech is soooooooooo important, and intent is magic!”? INTENT IS NOT MAGIC, and you donated ‘apparently’ from the bottom of your heart. I’m so touched, really. NOT REALLY, I was being sarcastic!!! If you cared so much, why are you telling a cancer patient what she can spend her money on JUST BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN?! That’s a well-known sexist trope, if you didn’t realize, and you have been fully debunked by the skeptics in this thread. Learn to LISTEN and READ FOR COMPREHENSION so next time we don’t have to put up with your tone-trolling FUCKING SHIT! And yes, if you think I’m annoyed then you’re right. But that doesn’t mean I’m wrong, so STOP ATTACKING WOMEN who are sincerely offering their opinions. LISTEN TO WHAT WE ARE SAYING and take a moment to apologize for what you have done.

I’ve HAD IT with you people. Really, this should be obvious to anyone with the barest shred of basic fucking common human fucking human decency.

This lesson has been learnt many times. When people leave donations to large institutions, universities etc, there are usually long agreements as to how the money can be used.

Al Stefanelli wrote:

Polterguest wrote:I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

RightSideNegative on January 7, 2013 at 6:03 am


Becca:


I just didn’t like the fact that my donation went to non-essentials without my knowledge or consent.

You are an over-entitled ASSHAT. Your BEHAVIOR is evil, terrible and bad. Do you SERIOUSLY think that we GIVE A DAMN about your over-privileged simplificated SHIT?! REALLY?! You are such an ASS that you fail to recognize that you are talking from a position of MALE PRIVILEGE. Are you really saying that you have no idea what you’re talking about? You know full well, your behavior is what is wrong here, your BLIND, PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC GARBAGE.

When will you people just learn to SHUT YOUR MOUTHS and stop being all like “ooh, my free speech is soooooooooo important, and intent is magic!”? INTENT IS NOT MAGIC, and you donated ‘apparently’ from the bottom of your heart. I’m so touched, really. NOT REALLY, I was being sarcastic!!! If you cared so much, why are you telling a cancer patient what she can spend her money on JUST BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN?! That’s a well-known sexist trope, if you didn’t realize, and you have been fully debunked by the skeptics in this thread. Learn to LISTEN and READ FOR COMPREHENSION so next time we don’t have to put up with your tone-trolling FUCKING SHIT! And yes, if you think I’m annoyed then you’re right. But that doesn’t mean I’m wrong, so STOP ATTACKING WOMEN who are sincerely offering their opinions. LISTEN TO WHAT WE ARE SAYING and take a moment to apologize for what you have done.

I’ve HAD IT with you people. Really, this should be obvious to anyone with the barest shred of basic fucking common human fucking human decency.

All I could read here was 'yamma yamma yamma'. :lol:

Dick Strawkins wrote:

BannedAid wrote:In defense of Ulysses...

I could see putting it down after the first 150 pages. Dedalus is an off-putting character, the prose is equal parts narration and ultra-obscure literary in-jokes, and everybody speaks in this incomprehensible quasi-latin parody of academia. It's not gonna be for everybody. The book is organized in episodes, though, and the first one is probably the weakest (or the least accessible). Giving up on it after Dedalus is like throwing away a great rock album because the first track sucked.

It's also a consciously experimental work -- an exploration of the potential of language -- and tbh the experiments sometimes blow up in his face. After he wrote it, he supposedly said something like, "that ought to give the literature professors something to talk about." So I think some of it is a sort of bluff, too. Like he's daring people to try to read more into it than there is. I think the trick is to just read it without worrying about what any of it means. Your brain ends up making most of the connections without conscious effort, and it turns into an awesomely rewarding book.

If you can get it I'd recommend the audiobook version done by the Irish broadcasting company RTE. The prose is hard work to get through by yourself but that audio version (originally done for a 24 hour radio broadcast on the 100th anniversary of Joyce's birth) is much more accessible.

I read Ulysses and didn't much care for it - maybe the audio book would be better way to approach it. I certainly enjoyed the movie version of the The Dead a lot more than the story.

That said, I quite liked Finnegan's Wake and have reread various parts of it several times.

After reading The Crying of Lot 49 I figured Gravity's Rainbow would be great. What a letdown! After that I never bothered with V.

I thought The Broom of the System was OK but never made it through Infinite Jest. I have The Pale Horse but haven't read it yet.

I haven't seen anyone mention Don DeLillo or Steve Erickson yet. I liked Ratner's Star and Libra, but Tours of the Black Clock is one of my all time favorite novels.

I'm currently working on Gaddis' The Recognitions, but even with the online annotations I'm not optimistic I'm going to make it. It's possible it's even denser than Joyce.

Yeah, I admit have a bit of thing for this sort of literature.

Al Stefanelli wrote:

Polterguest wrote:I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

RightSideNegative on January 7, 2013 at 6:03 am


Becca:


I just didn’t like the fact that my donation went to non-essentials without my knowledge or consent.

You are an over-entitled ASSHAT. Your BEHAVIOR is evil, terrible and bad. Do you SERIOUSLY think that we GIVE A DAMN about your over-privileged simplificated SHIT?! REALLY?! You are such an ASS that you fail to recognize that you are talking from a position of MALE PRIVILEGE. Are you really saying that you have no idea what you’re talking about? You know full well, your behavior is what is wrong here, your BLIND, PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC GARBAGE.

When will you people just learn to SHUT YOUR MOUTHS and stop being all like “ooh, my free speech is soooooooooo important, and intent is magic!”? INTENT IS NOT MAGIC, and you donated ‘apparently’ from the bottom of your heart. I’m so touched, really. NOT REALLY, I was being sarcastic!!! If you cared so much, why are you telling a cancer patient what she can spend her money on JUST BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN?! That’s a well-known sexist trope, if you didn’t realize, and you have been fully debunked by the skeptics in this thread. Learn to LISTEN and READ FOR COMPREHENSION so next time we don’t have to put up with your tone-trolling FUCKING SHIT! And yes, if you think I’m annoyed then you’re right. But that doesn’t mean I’m wrong, so STOP ATTACKING WOMEN who are sincerely offering their opinions. LISTEN TO WHAT WE ARE SAYING and take a moment to apologize for what you have done.

I’ve HAD IT with you people. Really, this should be obvious to anyone with the barest shred of basic fucking common human fucking human decency.

Ummm... I've never encountered a man named Becca in my life. Just sayin'