Bleeding from the Bunghole

Old subthreads
justinvacula
.
.
Posts: 1748
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20521

Post by justinvacula » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:11 am

Council candidate ‘done’ with county politics
Michael Giamber said he was advised to avoid discussing specific issues during campaign


http://timesleader.com/news/local-news/ ... y-politics

After his second attempt to get on Luzerne County Council failed Tuesday, Michael Giamber destroyed his boxes and files of county records in a bonfire at his Fairmount Township property Wednesday morning.

Giamber said his election loss will probably add years to his life because he would have obsessively devoted most of his time the next four years to implementing changes in county government.

“I’m done. I won’t be involved in county government at any level anymore,” said Giamber, who got active supporting the county’s 2012 switch to home rule government and attending county meetings after he retired from a management position with the federal government and returned to the area.


Only if the usual suspects would follow his lead and stick the flounce...

windy
.
.
Posts: 2130
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:41 am
Location: Tom of Finland-land
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20522

Post by windy » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:18 am

BarnOwl wrote: I don't know where to begin to parse the stupid, so I'll just ask why it's relevant that she's going to be "gorgeous"? It's quite obvious, from all of the many groping/harassment/RAEP stories that have been presented as blog posts, comments, #ripplesoftweetwoe, TAM talks, etc etc, that being "gorgeous" is not a prerequisite for being a target. Being a scientist or being "brilliant" at maths and physics isn't a requirement either. So why is that even part of the dialogue? If they're so disgusted with oppressive white patriarchoindustrialcomplex notions of beauty, why do they constantly conform to them and refer to dominant paradigms of physical attractiveness?
To quote from Pamela Gay's TAM speech again...

"I could move to another university – I could change which reality I’m in – but that would leave behind a university devoid of women role models who are capable in physics and computer science, the two fields that my students come from. I stay, and I try to be the example of a woman doing things that matter. I try to say Brains, Body, Both – it is possible even in computational astrophysics."

The link is to a George Hrab song, with lyrics like:

She can make my wick stick out my candle
she knows which one’s Haydn and which one is Handel
so put on a dress that barely fits
then shake your ass and show me your wits


Um, what does that have to do with studying astrophysics? :?

And speaking of George Hrab, is he still on good terms with the Skeptic Anti-sex League?

Aneris
.
.
Posts: 3198
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:36 am
Location: /°\
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20523

Post by Aneris » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:19 am

Why come the sexism issues out now, and not in the middle of Elevatorgate? What is different now? To me it looks it like “stuff happened” at those parties, conferences and gatherings and people sometimes had a bit of a remorse afterwards when sober, when it escalated too much. However, they quickly moved on and it wasn't an issue. But now, as “sides” have emerged, and friendships have fallen apar, or it is no longer beneficial to curry favour with someone, those stories are perfect ammunition.

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6780
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Slavehole

#20524

Post by Tigzy » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:22 am

Southern wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:
Southern wrote:When my brother was telling me all this crap, I started to wonder why the higher-ups couldn't see the obvious flaws in their amazing plans (giving free stuff for nothing = bad, expecting tech people to act as sellers = bad, changing ERP software withour exhaustive testing = DOUPLE PLUS UNGOOD JUJU!), but it always amount to what you're saying: "I know what I'm doing because I'm risking my money and that somehow makes me special and smart, so shut up and do as I say or else I'll put you out of your misery and then you can see how hard it is to run a company". Well, you're not smart because you have money to invest in a company; you may be, but that doesn't make you an authority in every aspect of your business. MAH MONEY MAH RULEZ may work when you're raising children, but not when you have to raise adults.
Boy, have I triggered an avalanche of self-pity with that post!?
FYI: When I started My Company, I was in secondary school year 10, with nary a brass razoo to my name.
READ: NO MONEY TO INVEST.
I had to gain cash-flow via delivering the goods to my clients.

But with a drive and vision.

You are spouting nonsense.

So you can cut-out that bullshit guilt-trip.
I had negative money to invest, yet raised a child and employed whinging fuckers like you.
And paid their superannuation.
Fucking wage-slaves bitching about how they "could do it better than their employers', yet studiously avoiding taking that action annoy me, potentially more, than Rebecca Watson.
Whatever, doc. If you want to hear from the whining fucker that oh God you're so special, the here you have it: "Gee, Mr. Gray, you're so special! I wish one day I could grow to be just like you!". I'm a helper.
Nice one Southern - I was gonna respond MKG's typical 'know-it-all' bollocks meself, but you ninja'd me in fine style there.

It's just that that the silly old fart's spiel about 'well, why don't you try and start a business of your own then!' was exactly the same kind of crap an ex-boss of mine used to come out with. Of course, he didn't have to remortgage a house or take out any loans - he got a big payoff from his days as a wage-slave, after having been injured at work. Good for him that he used it to start a business - pity he didn't recommend what kind of serious injuries we whinging plebs should give ourselves in order to start one up. :lol:

Jesus, you must be one tiresome cunt of a boss to work for, MKG, if you're anything like IRL as you are on here - where you've achieved the rare distinction of actually being even more tedious than Steersman, but in fewer words.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20525

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:26 am

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Pamela Gay is a scientist, yet her description of an event is a muddled, confusing hash of innuendo and feelings, padded with reenactments of scenes from BEACHES. Not until the 6th paragraph does she finally -- though fleetingly -- reveal the source of her angst: an attempted boob-grab at a party full of drunks. Until then, all we get is turgid bathos about unspecified bumps with the glass ceiling over her career.

It has already garnered the inevitable 'we empathize with your lived experience, sister' responses. But to persuade this skeptic as to the veracity of her story, Gay will have to do a better job telling it. So long as she uses the narrative style associated with claims of woo, I will lend it as much credence as claims of woo.
I have no doubt that in cases of harassment, reporting them can and does cause problems for the reporters. The documentation on this is pretty irrefutable and goes across decades. But, if you want to change behaviors, that's the risk you take. You have to ask yourself, "what's more important?"

If shermer groped her, (and regardless of personal opinion of anyone involved, grabbing someone's tits uninvited is assault. So's grabbing their arm for that matter. That aspect is pretty clear-cut) and she didn't call him a fuckstick because of his "power" then she made a decision: Shermer's imaginary chokehold over the skeptic movement was more important to her at that moment than her right to not be grabbed. She didn't want to risk being on the 'outs' and maybe not being invited back to TAM or whatever.

Okay, so she made that choice, and now regrets it.

Or maybe she just didn't think it was that bad. We don't know the context, we don't know anything other than hand a grabbed breast b. It may have been in malice, it may have been in bad comedy. At the time she decided "whatever".

Okay, so she made that choice and now regrets it.

But what's supposed to happen now? There's no fucking evidence other than she says yes and he says no. There does seem to be a building list of claims that indicate when Shermer gets too drunk, he turns into an asshole, but he's hardly unique there. There's an obvious way to mitigate that problem, but no one will spine up and do it.

EBW has pointed out that she's been on the end of years-long harassment/whisper campaigns that are remarkably similar to what is happening with Shermer, and that no, smoke does not always lead to fire, which is why she's such a hardass about evidence. That's a valid point to consider.

I don't think Pamela Gay is wrong for changing her mind about things, but I think her insistence that she's helpless because of power structure shows that while she'd like for things to be different, she's not going to take the risks to change them herself. I guess that's someone else's job? But whose?

At some point, you have to make a decision that the risks and dangers of changing things are less awful than things staying as they are. Clearly, that's not the case for her yet. But if you're not willing to take those risks, if you're not willing to walk up to someone and say "Last night, when you were drunk, you did some things that deeply offended me, and I would, at the very least, like an apology for them, and perhaps you should consider the way you behave when drunk as a reason to not get so drunk in the future." then don't get fucking mad when no one else will either.

If you are not going to stand up for your rights, even when there's a risk, why the fuck should anyone else.

To use a trope the SJW idiots love...if MLK and Malcom X had said "no, we have to wait for those in power to change things on their own, we're powerless", the Civil Rights movement would have had no results at all.

Tribble
.
.
Posts: 5102
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 4:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20526

Post by Tribble » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:28 am

Remick wrote: I know the civ series well, it is one of my fav's. I had a harder time beating Xcom Ironman impossible though.

I still don't see the point in criticizing her for playing video games. It comes off as petty and seems a little crazy to be honest. You can take jabs whenever she posts a shitty article or someone puts up a youtube vid of a shitty talk she gave. You could even reference videogames then. Something like, Hours spent on Civ 5:230, hours spent researching evo psych: 1/3 of plane ride to con.

Point out that she is lazy when her work shows it, shouldn't be to hard. But simply lashing out for her playing video games is stupid, and doesn't help.

It is like going after Setar because he plays video games. Him playing video games is not the issue.... I started to type out 'the' issue with setar, but that seems impossible.

zzzzzzzzzzzz Tone trolling is boring.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20527

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:30 am

ERV wrote:Oh, hey, since the skeptical community is once again talking about how sexism 'is part of what it means to be a woman in science'-- I realized that I forgot to mention that the Godfather of Retrovirology I accused of 'artistically arranging data' during the XMRV fiasco 'retired' last month.

TYPICAL OLD-BOYS CLUB! DAMN YOU PATRIARCHY!!!!!
HOW DARE YOU FLAUNT YOUR WILLING TO TAKE RISKS TO DO THE RIGHT THING PRIVILEGE!

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20528

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:33 am

Brive1987 wrote:
Aneris wrote:Not taking sides with the Harris' profiling issue, but to my mind the only reasonable way to deal with that matter is from a systemic perspective, which came through partially in some arguments. There is a system designed to spot some people and it might apply some sort of heuristic. However the very moment it does, the suspects will dynamically react to the heuristic and evade it. It is almost like an evolutionary pressure. Therefore, any static approach won't work at all, as long as the suspects have means to adapt.

It must be viewed as an arms race and the interesting questions lie, in my opinion, somewhere in that area. There are costs for the search/profiling to adapt, and there are costs for the would-be-terrorists to adapt to whatever method is used at the moment.

Suppose (fictional example) terrorists are million times to one more likely middle aged men with arabian complexion, then it could be argued that a system that works with such a profile is good enough to prevent nearly all cases and indeed a waste of time to look for other people. However, real terrorism seems to fall into “black swan” events. It seems not the case that hundreds of terrorists run against the system, but very few, very planned attempts are made. The likelihoods above aren't very useful as the terrorist just can spent time looking for the right person that would most likely get through.

Therefore a totally random heuristic (or controlling everyone) seems to be the best strategy. But that crashes the moment terrorist start brute force (i.e. hundreds try to get through). Therefore, the best approach would be two layered and dynamic. Profilling to whatever is likely + total random control. The weight (which gets more resources) I would call impossible to determine from an arm-chair postion, but tells me enough for the discussion that This-Or-That and static approaches won't succeed.
If its a practical outcome we want then we are screwed. They will just *do something else* - bridges, buildings, power plants, cement trucks etc. who saw 911 coming?

Airport security is really there for three reasons - discourage the impulsive amateur and secondly reassure the public/cover-asses. Getting lucky and taking down a well planned effort is a distant, almost invisible third objective.

Both initial major imperatives are covered by targeting the most recent suspects. Given you can't ESP the future it also has the benefit of being the most rational approach given available evidence.
The irony is, by overly concentrating their efforts in a small area, they've created a target. Think of the screening areas in most major U.S. airports say, the day before thanksgiving or december 23rd. Small area, packed with people, still outside the security zone.

that is a terrifyingly target-rich environment. I'm more nervous about the security area than I am about the plane.

German LurkBoatsman

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20529

Post by German LurkBoatsman » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:41 am

windy wrote:Dumbass edited her own quote, when the original is publicly available!

I guess she's found that random groping accusations have a much more receptive audience in skepticism than in astronomy. "A good story improves in the telling"
No, that's not exactly true. In the 2012 talk she just separated both accounts. She goes first with "had my ass slapped etc as an astronomer" and in a later part adds: also had my ass slapped, tits groped in this community (but, important, not at this TAM / not at TAM). So the stuff was all there in the 2012 telling.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20530

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:42 am

John D wrote:
German LurkBoatsman wrote:Pamela Gay's 2012 TAM talk she writes about is here:

[youtube]8WSNGCD3PJE[/youtube]
Oh My. I guess Gay didn't see what her speech would do. She specifically claimed, in public, that she was being sexually harassed at work. She claimed that this harassment was affecting her career. She left her bosses very little wiggle room.

I have managed people in a professional environment for more than 12 years. As a manager there are certain requirements I must adhere to. If I hear anyone in the organization claim they were harassed I must report it to Human Resources and my management. I am obliged to do this or I will risk my job and my career. This is very typical of employment in a professional setting.

So, Gay outs here fellow employees in public. Her management and the Human Resources department MUST take action. She has forced this. Apparently, she had very few witnesses who supported her claim. I am not saying her claim is not true, but I am saying she had her opportunity to be heard. Her management either had to take action against those harassing her, or they had to cast doubt on her story. They needed a resolution. She took the fall in this case. Very ugly all around.

The right approach is to bring any issues with harassment up to your HR department at the first sign of trouble. Usually, HR can put the harassers on notice and everyone will fix their behavior. I have seen this work many times. Many organizations have been sued and have lost millions over harassment. There are process safeguards in place to prevent this sort of problem from getting out of hand.

Ms. Gay - you really did a disservice to others. You need to help reinforce the right kind of behavior in the work environment. Take action to stop harassment immediately. Don't go public and cry about your problems to the world without first trying to fix it on a local level. Document any problems in writing. Take your complaint to management. Accept the apology of others and move on.
I so rarely agree with JD here that this may be a noteworthy event, but he is in fact, absolutely right. If you are being harassed in the workplace, THAT is where you need to deal with it. If you do not feel comfortable in going to your supervisor, GO TO HR. THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS HR IS FOR. If the behavior is not reported to them, there is literally nothing they can do about it.

The simpler version: If you don't tell the mechanic your car is broke, how the fuck are they supposed to fix it?

No, you may not get the resolution you want, but there will now be data. If the same person gets reported again, the chances of them being disciplined go up because of your report. Even if you "lose", you still "win". But you have to accept that you may not get your desired outcome if you report. However, (as I've said over and over) if you don't report, I guarantee you won't. If the harassment continues or gets worse because you reported, you have a remarkably wide array of legal options available to you.

Dr. Gay's meme of "I'm powerless" is simply bollocks. It's not easy to report, but that's not the same as powerless.

What got me about her session is that if that's the first time she even tried to report the problem, it shows she needs to work somewhere else, and quickly, because it's really clear she's working in an environment where she cannot trust anyone she works with or for. That may be the case, often people are assholes, and they run the company, and the company is an asshole factory. But even then, give it a shot. Report the behavior.

You are only as powerless as you choose to be.

Trophy
.
.
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:17 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20531

Post by Trophy » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:43 am

TedDahlberg wrote:

"I reassure the tweeting twerps that I know the rules all too well." Tweeting twerps... every time I risk forgetting why I like Dawkins, he reminds me. And this:
What is it that renders some people incapable of conceiving how a person might be motivated not by narrow self-interest but by a public-spirited concern for the common weal?
I think that perfectly sums up FTB, Skepchick and others. An ironic lack of empathy, an inability or unwillingness to understand the motivations of others.
That was extremely well-written. I admit I giggled at some of those Dawkins jokes (I'm a sucker for any shoop joke that is mildly amusing) but I'll have to hang my head low in shame after reading this paragraph:
Richard Dawkins wrote:On another occasion, in 2009, I was commissioned by Prospect Magazine to fill its regular slot on "If I ruled the world". I wrote it on a plane, and began with an incident I'd just witnessed at Heathrow security. A young mother was distraught that the tub of ointment she needed for her child's eczema had been seized. ...
my motive was public-spirited, and now there was no question of self-interest because the fated ointment wasn't mine. The woman's experience had been a particular peg on which to hang a general point. Unfortunately, when I returned to make a similar point on Twitter this week, I foolishly chose a peg that was vulnerable to misinterpretation as self-interested. And the result was a puerile display of sniggering frivolity such as only Twitter can serve up.

ReneeHendricks
.
.
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:48 am
Location: Kent, WA
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20532

Post by ReneeHendricks » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:44 am

feralandproud wrote:http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... /#comments

Svan proving once again that if you look for something to be offended by, you'll probably find it. Comments are the usual circlejerk...
I heard about this yesterday. What has me scratching my head is this - if she was searching for tweets regarding her husband's photography, exactly how did those tweets by Jack Rayner and LazySavant show? I did a quick Twitter search for "Ben Zvan" and then "#benzvan" and *neither* of those tweets showed up. It only works if she's searching for "Zvan". But even more curious is that she says she has (I assume) LazySavant blocked so his tweet would not have shown up in a search. Unless, of course, she decided to log out of her account and do a search. Which then indicates to me she was actually looking for shit being said about her.

Cry me a fucking river, SVanity.

German LurkBoatsmans

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20533

Post by German LurkBoatsmans » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:46 am

BarnOwl wrote:I don't know where to begin to parse the stupid, so I'll just ask why it's relevant that she's going to be "gorgeous"?
I wouldn't count out that what he means is his daughters inner gorgeousness. Which is a big step up from the usual FCn's inner gorgonness, so to speak.

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20534

Post by Dick Strawkins » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:47 am

welch wrote:
The irony is, by overly concentrating their efforts in a small area, they've created a target. Think of the screening areas in most major U.S. airports say, the day before thanksgiving or december 23rd. Small area, packed with people, still outside the security zone.

that is a terrifyingly target-rich environment. I'm more nervous about the security area than I am about the plane.
There was one attempt, in Glasgow I think, by a couple of terrorists with a home made car bomb that they tried (and failed) to drive through the doors of one of the terminals.

Southern
.
.
Posts: 3464
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:28 pm
Location: Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20535

Post by Southern » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:48 am

Remick wrote: I know the civ series well, it is one of my fav's. I had a harder time beating Xcom Ironman impossible though.

I still don't see the point in criticizing her for playing video games. It comes off as petty and seems a little crazy to be honest. You can take jabs whenever she posts a shitty article or someone puts up a youtube vid of a shitty talk she gave. You could even reference videogames then. Something like, Hours spent on Civ 5:230, hours spent researching evo psych: 1/3 of plane ride to con.

Point out that she is lazy when her work shows it, shouldn't be to hard. But simply lashing out for her playing video games is stupid, and doesn't help.

It is like going after Setar because he plays video games. Him playing video games is not the issue.... I started to type out 'the' issue with setar, but that seems impossible.
What I got from that wasn't that people here were criticizing her for playing videogames. Hell, some Pitter (including myself) are gamers, "hardcore" or not, whatever.

The problem arises when you do that after begging for money on the internet, I think. You're begging people to solve your financial problems while not doing anything yourself about them. That's a lot of chutzpah, even if her "patrons" don't mind (I'm sure The Amazing Foshaulg doesn't care a bit).

Besides, isn't one of the main points of opposing religion that some religious douches con people on giving money while not doing anything of value for it? If it's suddenly not a problem anymore, why bother going after those Pentecostal types, or quacks? Their audience is just giving them their own money on their own volition. What is good for the Twatson is good for the Robertson.

German LurkBoatsman

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20536

Post by German LurkBoatsman » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:51 am

pogsurf wrote:Tricky one, Amsterdam is not a capital city and Beijing is not in Europe.
Amsterdam is the capital, just not the seat of government ;)

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20537

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:55 am

Pogsurf wrote:
Jan Steen wrote:"Trigger warning for ableism, bullying, repeated ignoring of people with disabilities, and hostility to accessibility."

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 085#p97085

Thanks for warning me for "hostility to accessibility". I don't think I could have handled the shock of encountering such hostility without advance warning. I'm better prepared now; I have the spoons for it as you people say. But what if I'm triggered by trigger warnings?

Trigger warning: trigger warning

Nah, that wouldn't work.

Fuck, I need a trigger warning for PC language.
True story. A little while back PZ Myers e-mailled me and told me to fuck off. I thought I would respect the message of his communication whilst entirely ignoring the spirit. I tried to devise a way of annoying him that did not involve contacting him directly.

Atheist Ireland were hosting Empowering Women Through Secularism and Myers was on the panel to speak. I devised a quiz about the anal rape culture that Myers' blog used to be so happy to expouse and sent it off to all the other panelists.

A few of the panelists did get back in touch with me, including one who felt that my material should include a trigger warning. I wrote back with my honest answer which was that I didn't know how to construct one and that if she could offer assistance I would try to write one. She asked me not to contact her again, so the matter was dropped.

Seeing Jan's comment above reminded to try to look up where the phrase "Trigger warning" has come from. Presumably with all these skeptics bandying it around as best practice it is backed up by tons of research and lots of trial data as to how to make the best one. I found the only site willing to give a definition was that well known peer reviewed journal 'Urban Dictionary'.

As a serious question, is anyone aware of how or where the term "trigger warning" came into existence? Is it just a piece of SJW mythology, or has someone actually offered this up as a proper response to a real problem?
Like everything, the trigger warning started out as a good idea and was turned to shit.

For example, if you're going to do a discussion of say...Ted Bundy, and you're going to be going into detail on his crimes, and have various kinds of morbid pictures of his victims or what have you, then the idea was, you warn people that you're going to be talking about and showing some pretty heavy stuff, so if that kind of thing really bothers them, they'd be forewarned and could then take the action they felt was appropriate for them.

Reasonable right? Give people a warning about stuff that most could see as potentially causing some bad reactions.

Fast forward, and now, you basically can't talk about anything without a fucking trigger warning, and it has no goddamned meaning anymore.

Southern
.
.
Posts: 3464
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:28 pm
Location: Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20538

Post by Southern » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:55 am

Trophy wrote:
TedDahlberg wrote:

"I reassure the tweeting twerps that I know the rules all too well." Tweeting twerps... every time I risk forgetting why I like Dawkins, he reminds me. And this:
What is it that renders some people incapable of conceiving how a person might be motivated not by narrow self-interest but by a public-spirited concern for the common weal?
I think that perfectly sums up FTB, Skepchick and others. An ironic lack of empathy, an inability or unwillingness to understand the motivations of others.
That was extremely well-written. I admit I giggled at some of those Dawkins jokes (I'm a sucker for any shoop joke that is mildly amusing) but I'll have to hang my head low in shame after reading this paragraph:
Richard Dawkins wrote:On another occasion, in 2009, I was commissioned by Prospect Magazine to fill its regular slot on "If I ruled the world". I wrote it on a plane, and began with an incident I'd just witnessed at Heathrow security. A young mother was distraught that the tub of ointment she needed for her child's eczema had been seized. ...
my motive was public-spirited, and now there was no question of self-interest because the fated ointment wasn't mine. The woman's experience had been a particular peg on which to hang a general point. Unfortunately, when I returned to make a similar point on Twitter this week, I foolishly chose a peg that was vulnerable to misinterpretation as self-interested. And the result was a puerile display of sniggering frivolity such as only Twitter can serve up.
You know, I still can't believe that anyone couldn't honestly see the point Dawkins was making: When even a jar of honey has to be discarded because of security concerns, you are so crapping your pants in terror that you can say that the terrorists had won. Seriously, how can someone misinterpret what he said, if not just to bitch about Richard Dawkins?

And I'm not even a native English speaker. Hell, I never had formal English training, I lerned it by playing videogames and looking at the evil dictionaries. Maybe that's the problem? Maybe I didn't get something because I couldn't grasp something in his phrasing? Then again, I don't understand the appeal of Twitter, either...

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am
Contact:

Oh No! Now I've Done It. Again

#20539

Post by Mykeru » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:57 am

And this is what happens when you let your guard down:

You end up feeding the manatee.

On behalf of Lazy Savant and I, allow me to apologize profusely for giving that mean-spirited poo-bag ephemeral purpose.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20540

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:59 am

BarnOwl wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:It's a fascinating yet simultaneously mundane story, that underlies the latest episode in the ongoing skeptic soap opera.
Pamela Gay's post seems to (intentionaly?) conflate a work related harassment investigation that has recently concluded, and a seperate incident from 2008 that she claims involves some famous skeptic trying to grope her. I'm pretty certain I've narrowed the possibilities of the latter incident to DragonCon 2008, and specifically to a party on Thurday night, the 30th of August.
On that night Phil Plait, the then head of the JREF, bumped into the SF author Scott Sigler, who invited him to a party.
Plait said he had 12 friends - No problem! Bring them along too!
The party was a themed event, namely 'Pimps and Ho's' (yes, another prostitute themed event) which explains many of the costumes you see in the photos I've posted already.
The party was being hosted by podcaster Evo Terra/Travis Unwin (the guy ogling Pamela Gay's left breast in this photo)
<snip>
There are a lot of photos of this event online and it's clear that there was copious amounts of alcohol consumed, lots of touching/hugging/groping going on. I'm guessing that there was a lot of play-acting happening (which explains the many silly photos of people mugging up to Scott Sigler in his pimp costume.)
At some stage something happened, it appears, between Pamela Gay and Michael Shermer.
We have photos of them together, posing for photos, with Shermer's arm around her.
<snip>
She claims he tried to grope her, but he says he didn't.
Others who were there seem to think he was very drunk and they seperated him from her and took him away.
I think it's safe to say he was probably drunk and acting the dick - although it is questionable whether he did anything (or tried to to anything) worse than was already happening at the party - or whether he just tried to give her a hug that was misinterpreted.
I wasn't there so I can't say what happened but I find it hard to make a firm pronouncement on the matter when no actual contact was made. Nearly groping someone, when no contact is made, can be very similar to nearly hugging them - and it's clear there was a lot of hugging going on at that party. Shermer is the only one who knows what he intended to do. Perhaps he intended to grab a breast in each hand, give them a squeeze and go "Waheeeyy!"
Or perhaps not.
<snip>
My cynical outsider's take on the above?

They're all a bunch of privileged, self-involved, toxically vain, bigoted, obnoxious twats with the impulse control of developmentally delayed juvenile chimpanzees. All of them.
I can't really disagree with that.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20541

Post by Pitchguest » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:01 am

Hehe, I noticed this comment on the NSC thread on Pharyngula:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-715304

Perfectly illustrates, I think, that NSC is not the paragon of objectivity he likes to think he is.

Also, the way they completely hail down on NSC in that thread to boot is hilarious - it almost makes me feel sorry for the guy. Almost. But hey, all the nutcases just exist on the anti-FtB side, right? Right. :whistle:

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Slavehole

#20542

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:02 am

Michael K Gray wrote:
Southern wrote:When my brother was telling me all this crap, I started to wonder why the higher-ups couldn't see the obvious flaws in their amazing plans (giving free stuff for nothing = bad, expecting tech people to act as sellers = bad, changing ERP software withour exhaustive testing = DOUPLE PLUS UNGOOD JUJU!), but it always amount to what you're saying: "I know what I'm doing because I'm risking my money and that somehow makes me special and smart, so shut up and do as I say or else I'll put you out of your misery and then you can see how hard it is to run a company". Well, you're not smart because you have money to invest in a company; you may be, but that doesn't make you an authority in every aspect of your business. MAH MONEY MAH RULEZ may work when you're raising children, but not when you have to raise adults.
Boy, have I triggered an avalanche of self-pity with that post!?
FYI: When I started My Company, I was in secondary school year 10, with nary a brass razoo to my name.
READ: NO MONEY TO INVEST.
I had to gain cash-flow via delivering the goods to my clients.

But with a drive and vision.

You are spouting nonsense.

So you can cut-out that bullshit guilt-trip.
I had negative money to invest, yet raised a child and employed whinging fuckers like you.
And paid their superannuation.
Fucking wage-slaves bitching about how they "could do it better than their employers', yet studiously avoiding taking that action annoy me, potentially more, than Rebecca Watson.
Right. Because all companies are the same, all industries are the same and your company and your model is the only one anyone needs regardless of industry or product or service.

Of course, you have yet to detail your industry, your company, your product/service, etc. So we have no fucking data to go on. But by god, it worked for you, IT WILL THEREFORE WORK FOR ALL.

Okay grampy.

Jan Steen
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 3061
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 3:18 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20543

Post by Jan Steen » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:05 am

jet_lagg wrote:The book teaches actual mathematics.
No it doesn't. It drops some formulas and tells you how to plug in numbers in them. That's not teaching mathematics. In mathematics you learn to understand what the formulas actually mean and where they come from. The reader of this book will have no clue. Bayes' Theorem is here treated like some kind of incantation.

The misleading title should already be a red flag: Proving History. You don’t ‘prove’ history. It’s in typically swollen Carrier fashion a flag that doesn’t cover the contents by even a wide stretch of the imagination.
jet_lagg wrote:Considering his book was peer reviewed by a professional mathematician specializing in bayes[*], and the two mathematicians he was discussing this with didn't fall over laughing, your point is obviously refuted.
Considering that none of the mathematicians addressed the ludicrous remark I quoted it is evident that my point is not at all refuted. Carrier's modus operandi is to counter every objection with a wall of text which in nine cases out of ten consists of hand waving and the repeated assertion that he has already addressed the objection elsewhere (with pointers to his peer reviewed book chapter/article/blog post where he supposedly did so). It's no wonder that not every morsel of Carrier's nonsense was dealt with.

You really seem to believe that Carrier has refuted the criticisms, while my impression is that he doesn’t even understand many of them. I leave you with this snippet of dialogue between Carrier and an actual mathematician (Ian), which seems to confirm my impression:
Richard Carrier wrote:But in regard to your comment above, I actually discuss these kinds of problems all over Proving History. So I don’t know why you say I didn’t. Page numbers are provided in the linked comment above (and in the comment it links to in turn). I talk about these kinds of problems most especially all throughout my discussion of reference classes in chapter six, but not only there.
Ian wrote:
So I don’t know why you say I didn’t.
Or, put the other way: I don’t know why you think your arguments address these issues.

I suspect that puzzlement is probably very significant to making progress!
http://irrco.wordpress.com/2012/10/11/t ... s-theorem/

Anyway, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, so we will have to wait and see if Carrier will be able to use his Bayesian ideas to add anything of value to the debate about the existence of Jesus. My guess is that he won't. I expect that he will come up with a wide range of probabilities that on closer analysis will turn out to be just as reliable as anything propounded by William Lane Craig. As I said before, garbage in - garbage out.

*Are you sure about that? Carrier mentioned somewhere that it was reviewed by a professor of mathematics, but I don't recall that he or she was said to be a specialist in Bayesian theory.

Southern
.
.
Posts: 3464
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:28 pm
Location: Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Contact:

Re: Oh No! Now I've Done It. Again

#20544

Post by Southern » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:08 am

Mykeru wrote:And this is what happens when you let your guard down:

You end up feeding the manatee.

On behalf of Lazy Savant and I, allow me to apologize profusely for giving that mean-spirited poo-bag ephemeral purpose.
Nobody said it yet? Well, excuse me then:

MYYYYYKEEEEERUUUUU! WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!

But could someone please tell Swazan that if she wants someone to offend her, I could do that for free, in large ammounts and being as mean spirited as she would possibly want? Give me five minutes for inspiration.

I used to play DotA on the Battle.net (no moderation or punishment for trashtalking outside ladder playing, yay!), so I got a lot of experience in insults about sexuality, virginity (and the lack of, specifically the oral and anal ones), fatness, nationality, penile size (male AND female penises), and mom issues.

German LurkBoatsman

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20545

Post by German LurkBoatsman » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:09 am

Southern wrote:The problem arises when you do that after begging for money on the internet, I think. You're begging people to solve your financial problems while not doing anything yourself about them. That's a lot of chutzpah, even if her "patrons" don't mind (I'm sure The Amazing Foshaulg doesn't care a bit).
Well, I hold to the view that everyone who gives Watson money at this point is basically incapable of making financial decision for themselves. Which makes RW a purse rapist, in my book. And no, her intent is not magic, so don't even try that defense.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Oh No! Now I've Done It. Again

#20546

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:11 am

Southern wrote:
Mykeru wrote:And this is what happens when you let your guard down:

You end up feeding the manatee.

On behalf of Lazy Savant and I, allow me to apologize profusely for giving that mean-spirited poo-bag ephemeral purpose.
Nobody said it yet? Well, excuse me then:

MYYYYYKEEEEERUUUUU! WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!

But could someone please tell Swazan that if she wants someone to offend her, I could do that for free, in large ammounts and being as mean spirited as she would possibly want? Give me five minutes for inspiration.

I used to play DotA on the Battle.net (no moderation or punishment for trashtalking outside ladder playing, yay!), so I got a lot of experience in insults about sexuality, virginity (and the lack of, specifically the oral and anal ones), fatness, nationality, penile size (male AND female penises), and mom issues.
Simply by existing and not kowtowing on both knees to her, you offend her. No real effort needed.

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20547

Post by Dick Strawkins » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:23 am

BarnOwl wrote:Over on Ophelia's version of the Pamela Gay drama (on which she bestows a title similar to those for her preceding posts on FGM), a commenter writes:
brucegee1962
November 6, 2013 at 9:44 pm (UTC -8) Link to this comment
My young daughter is going to be gorgeous, and she loves math. I tell her every day how proud I am of her, and how great it would be if she decides to go into engineering or science.

Posts like this make me wonder if I’m doing the right thing as a dad. Maybe I should be encouraging her to study languages or English Lit, where the balance is a lot closer to 50-50.

That makes me SO ANGRY on her behalf, and the behalf of all the current and future woman scientists.

ARGH!
I don't know where to begin to parse the stupid, so I'll just ask why it's relevant that she's going to be "gorgeous"? It's quite obvious, from all of the many groping/harassment/RAEP stories that have been presented as blog posts, comments, #ripplesoftweetwoe, TAM talks, etc etc, that being "gorgeous" is not a prerequisite for being a target. Being a scientist or being "brilliant" at maths and physics isn't a requirement either. So why is that even part of the dialogue? If they're so disgusted with oppressive white patriarchoindustrialcomplex notions of beauty, why do they constantly conform to them and refer to dominant paradigms of physical attractiveness?
I've mentioned about situations in my own experience involving sexual harassment in academia and that my in opinion they are symptoms of a larger issue - the power differential between senior adacemics and people starting their careers. If you have a system whereby there is no blowback for acting like a tyrant then people who do so will stay in those positions for longer.

I recall an incident from my first research job that might illustrate the point.
I got a job in a lab in the early 1990s, looking for genes involved in certain types of leukemia. The group worked in collaboration with a team in Oxford who were much more experienced in the field, and I was sent to work in the Oxford lab for a few months to learn the necessary techniques and bring them back to our lab.
The head of the Oxford group, I was warned, had a bit of a reputation for his temper, so best not try to antagonize him while I was there.
Things went OK for a couple of months until one day I got into an argument with one of the senior scientists in the group. She decided she wanted to use me as a technician for the group, washing bottles, preparing buffers and cataloguing patient sample, rather than teaching me the techniques I had been sent there to acquire and when I pointed out that I was being paid by another group to learn the techniques she stormed off to complain to the group leader.
I was called into a meeting with the two of them and he, the group leader, proceeded to threaten to physically kill me if I didn't do exactly what I was told to do by the senior scientist.
This didn't come our of the blue to me at that point. I'd seen other scientists and medics (he was a consultant haematologist at the hospital and in a position of considerable power in regards both scientists and physicians) called into his office and come out shaking a few minutes later, and one of them had told me about the threats of violence made to him.
But, the thing was, I come from a fairly tough environment. Threats of violence are something I regularly experienced when growing up and I learned that they are almost always a sign of weakness - an attempt at bullying the other person into submission.
So my response was to laugh in his face and tell him not to wait - go ahead and kill me.
I presumed it was all a bluff and so it was - he freaked out for a few minutes, threatened to end my scientific career there and then (I laughed again - this was my first job in research, there was no 'career' to kill). He then told me to vacate the lab and said he was going to phone up my home lab and get them to fire me!
So I go home and the next morning I turn up in the other lab - the group who are actually paying me and who expected me to be trained in Oxford - wondering whether I had a job there at all. I was met by the senior scientist of the lab who tells me, through peals of laughter, that the Oxford group leader had indeed rang up insisting that I be fired, and when he was asked to explain WHY he started to threaten violence again - except this time on the other group leader (a prominent leukemia researcher and also a consultant haematologist.) The quote I remember was that the Oxford group leader threatened to "drive down to rip off his head and kick it around the floor".
I had been working in that lab for a few months and had seen about three of these incidents and I presume it was a regular event and yet the guy never suffered any repercussions for this behavior in the decades he worked in that post. He was also having an affair with a PhD student in the group at the time I was there.
And as for me?
Not even PTSD. :violin:

Remick
.
.
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20548

Post by Remick » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:30 am

Tribble wrote:
Remick wrote: I know the civ series well, it is one of my fav's. I had a harder time beating Xcom Ironman impossible though.

I still don't see the point in criticizing her for playing video games. It comes off as petty and seems a little crazy to be honest. You can take jabs whenever she posts a shitty article or someone puts up a youtube vid of a shitty talk she gave. You could even reference videogames then. Something like, Hours spent on Civ 5:230, hours spent researching evo psych: 1/3 of plane ride to con.

Point out that she is lazy when her work shows it, shouldn't be to hard. But simply lashing out for her playing video games is stupid, and doesn't help.

It is like going after Setar because he plays video games. Him playing video games is not the issue.... I started to type out 'the' issue with setar, but that seems impossible.

zzzzzzzzzzzz Tone trolling is boring.
Has nothing to do with tone but actually hitting the target fuckface.

John D
.
.
Posts: 4538
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20549

Post by John D » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:34 am

welch wrote:
John D wrote:
Ms. Gay - you really did a disservice to others. You need to help reinforce the right kind of behavior in the work environment. Take action to stop harassment immediately. Don't go public and cry about your problems to the world without first trying to fix it on a local level. Document any problems in writing. Take your complaint to management. Accept the apology of others and move on.
I so rarely agree with JD here that this may be a noteworthy event, but he is in fact, absolutely right. If you are being harassed in the workplace, THAT is where you need to deal with it. If you do not feel comfortable in going to your supervisor, GO TO HR. THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS HR IS FOR. If the behavior is not reported to them, there is literally nothing they can do about it.
Well..... If Welch and I agree with each other (an event of exceptional scarcity), then we must be right!

Remick
.
.
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20550

Post by Remick » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:34 am

Southern wrote:
Remick wrote: I know the civ series well, it is one of my fav's. I had a harder time beating Xcom Ironman impossible though.

I still don't see the point in criticizing her for playing video games. It comes off as petty and seems a little crazy to be honest. You can take jabs whenever she posts a shitty article or someone puts up a youtube vid of a shitty talk she gave. You could even reference videogames then. Something like, Hours spent on Civ 5:230, hours spent researching evo psych: 1/3 of plane ride to con.

Point out that she is lazy when her work shows it, shouldn't be to hard. But simply lashing out for her playing video games is stupid, and doesn't help.

It is like going after Setar because he plays video games. Him playing video games is not the issue.... I started to type out 'the' issue with setar, but that seems impossible.
What I got from that wasn't that people here were criticizing her for playing videogames. Hell, some Pitter (including myself) are gamers, "hardcore" or not, whatever.

The problem arises when you do that after begging for money on the internet, I think. You're begging people to solve your financial problems while not doing anything yourself about them. That's a lot of chutzpah, even if her "patrons" don't mind (I'm sure The Amazing Foshaulg doesn't care a bit).

Besides, isn't one of the main points of opposing religion that some religious douches con people on giving money while not doing anything of value for it? If it's suddenly not a problem anymore, why bother going after those Pentecostal types, or quacks? Their audience is just giving them their own money on their own volition. What is good for the Twatson is good for the Robertson.
You and I agree. I just don't see the point in critizing a pentecostal type for playing golf sometimes. Go after him for conning people.

Same with Watson. Go after her, just don't be stupid about it.

Remick
.
.
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Slavehole

#20551

Post by Remick » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:37 am

welch wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:
Southern wrote:When my brother was telling me all this crap, I started to wonder why the higher-ups couldn't see the obvious flaws in their amazing plans (giving free stuff for nothing = bad, expecting tech people to act as sellers = bad, changing ERP software withour exhaustive testing = DOUPLE PLUS UNGOOD JUJU!), but it always amount to what you're saying: "I know what I'm doing because I'm risking my money and that somehow makes me special and smart, so shut up and do as I say or else I'll put you out of your misery and then you can see how hard it is to run a company". Well, you're not smart because you have money to invest in a company; you may be, but that doesn't make you an authority in every aspect of your business. MAH MONEY MAH RULEZ may work when you're raising children, but not when you have to raise adults.
Boy, have I triggered an avalanche of self-pity with that post!?
FYI: When I started My Company, I was in secondary school year 10, with nary a brass razoo to my name.
READ: NO MONEY TO INVEST.
I had to gain cash-flow via delivering the goods to my clients.

But with a drive and vision.

You are spouting nonsense.

So you can cut-out that bullshit guilt-trip.
I had negative money to invest, yet raised a child and employed whinging fuckers like you.
And paid their superannuation.
Fucking wage-slaves bitching about how they "could do it better than their employers', yet studiously avoiding taking that action annoy me, potentially more, than Rebecca Watson.
Right. Because all companies are the same, all industries are the same and your company and your model is the only one anyone needs regardless of industry or product or service.

Of course, you have yet to detail your industry, your company, your product/service, etc. So we have no fucking data to go on. But by god, it worked for you, IT WILL THEREFORE WORK FOR ALL.

Okay grampy.
Hey, Gramps only succeeded because he is better than all of us. There was not luck involved ever, at any points. Just hard work and being better than all us 'wage slave' fools.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20552

Post by Pitchguest » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:41 am

I'm starting to think Google's mission for YouTube is to find a new power source, namely to increase the frustration levels of its users to near destructive proportions so they can harness the screams for fuel.

I'm genuinely confused as to what they're trying to accomplish with this update. The default "share this on Google+" tick aside, you're unable to respond to old comments (and some new ones), you can't access the context of the comments you're responding to without opening up a new window, and they removed the 400 character cap marking the return of spam spam spam, lovely spam! From a business perspective, they are shooting themselves in the foot, spilling precious milk while biting the hand that feeds. What.

Tapir
.
.
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 2:59 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20553

Post by Tapir » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:51 am

http://i.imgur.com/kfGAhR0.jpg

I hope Zvan doesn't have a pace-maker.

John D
.
.
Posts: 4538
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20554

Post by John D » Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:56 am

Dick Strawkins wrote:
I recall an incident from my first research job that might illustrate the point.
I got a job in a lab in the early 1990s, looking for genes involved in certain types of leukemia.
In my opinion things have changed quite a bit since the early 90s regarding office behavior. I work in the auto industry and I have seen tremendous change. Sometimes it is a bit odd to me. I am in my 50s and have worked for some of the best screaming lunatic bosses in the country. Part of the challenge to making a successful career was how you managed these loons. I was pretty good at it and learned how to scream with the best of them.

Flash forward to 2013 and I can barely raise my voice without someone crying and asking me to apologize. Haha. I have learned how to use a tool (anger), and now the world has changed so much I can't even deploy it. I guess the good thing is that I have such a thick skin that I am not easily flustered.

I think much of the change has been driven by "feminism" and lawsuits. In the 90s we used to go to lunch with suppliers that included lap dances at the local topless bar. That stopped abruptly after there was a lawsuit and a bunch of firings at GM. I guess I am happy to work in an environment where I don't ever yell at anyone. It is also nice to not have to play the game of "entertaining" customers with trips to the topless bar. It is hard for me to deal with people crying at work however. There is still more for me to learn when that happens.

and to wrap up. There was a particularly vile and aggressive plant manager in the mid 1990s. He had honed his skill at dishing out abuse to a fine art. An amazing man. He yelled at an engineer with such force and skill that the poor victim of the abuse fainted in his chair. BAM! Out like a lite. Few people on earth can yell with that much skill.... haha.

ReneeHendricks
.
.
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:48 am
Location: Kent, WA
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20555

Post by ReneeHendricks » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:00 am

Tapir wrote:http://i.imgur.com/kfGAhR0.jpg

I hope Zvan doesn't have a pace-maker.
Wait. That whole bit on televisions shutting off has to do with pacemakers? I have a pacemaker and have had one for almost 20 years. The *only* thing I've had happen is store security alarms being tripped. I'm around oodles of electronics daily that have never, ever been affected by my pacemaker. What a load of shit if Caine is suggesting they interfere with tvs.

mikelf
.
.
Posts: 315
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 2:34 am
Contact:

Re: Oh No! Now I've Done It. Again

#20556

Post by mikelf » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:03 am

Southern wrote: But could someone please tell Swazan that if she wants someone to offend her, I could do that for free, in large ammounts and being as mean spirited as she would possibly want? Give me five minutes for inspiration.

I used to play DotA on the Battle.net (no moderation or punishment for trashtalking outside ladder playing, yay!), so I got a lot of experience in insults about sexuality, virginity (and the lack of, specifically the oral and anal ones), fatness, nationality, penile size (male AND female penises), and mom issues.
Gee, Mr. Southern, you're so special! I wish one day I could grow to be just like you!"

Tapir
.
.
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 2:59 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20557

Post by Tapir » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:06 am

ReneeHendricks wrote:
Tapir wrote:http://i.imgur.com/kfGAhR0.jpg

I hope Zvan doesn't have a pace-maker.
Wait. That whole bit on televisions shutting off has to do with pacemakers? I have a pacemaker and have had one for almost 20 years. The *only* thing I've had happen is store security alarms being tripped. I'm around oodles of electronics daily that have never, ever been affected by my pacemaker. What a load of shit if Caine is suggesting they interfere with tvs.
No....I was referring to Caine's not-woo-at-all ability to fuck with electrical equipment using the power of her....fuck knows. Rage? Shaking?

halophilic
.
.
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 8:48 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20558

Post by halophilic » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:15 am

My (completely unoriginal) problem with the concept of trigger warnings is that if you are that sensitive then the word "trigger warning: rape" will itself be a triggering event. Trigger warnings are not for people who are triggered. Those people know how to avoid triggers if they really want to.

Trigger warnings are for fucks who want to feel like they're making a difference without doing anything. They're prayer.

ReneeHendricks
.
.
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:48 am
Location: Kent, WA
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20559

Post by ReneeHendricks » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:19 am

Tapir wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:
Tapir wrote:http://i.imgur.com/kfGAhR0.jpg

I hope Zvan doesn't have a pace-maker.
Wait. That whole bit on televisions shutting off has to do with pacemakers? I have a pacemaker and have had one for almost 20 years. The *only* thing I've had happen is store security alarms being tripped. I'm around oodles of electronics daily that have never, ever been affected by my pacemaker. What a load of shit if Caine is suggesting they interfere with tvs.
No....I was referring to Caine's not-woo-at-all ability to fuck with electrical equipment using the power of her....fuck knows. Rage? Shaking?
Ah, ok. That's even more pathetic and very woo-y.

Guest

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20560

Post by Guest » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:20 am

welch wrote:To use a trope the SJW idiots love...if MLK and Malcom X had said "no, we have to wait for those in power to change things on their own, we're powerless", the Civil Rights movement would have had no results at all.
but speaking truth to power has risks and can cause problems for the reporters! you didnt see mlk or malcom x take any risks and suffer any problems, did you???

goddamn 'nym
.
.
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20561

Post by goddamn 'nym » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:21 am

Pitchguest wrote:I'm starting to think Google's mission for YouTube is to find a new power source, namely to increase the frustration levels of its users to near destructive proportions so they can harness the screams for fuel.

I'm genuinely confused as to what they're trying to accomplish with this update. The default "share this on Google+" tick aside, you're unable to respond to old comments (and some new ones), you can't access the context of the comments you're responding to without opening up a new window, and they removed the 400 character cap marking the return of spam spam spam, lovely spam! From a business perspective, they are shooting themselves in the foot, spilling precious milk while biting the hand that feeds. What.
The overall level of discourse on G+ seems far more sane than on YouTube, so perhaps they hope some of that rubs off?

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20562

Post by Dick Strawkins » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:21 am

ReneeHendricks wrote:
Tapir wrote:
Wait. That whole bit on televisions shutting off has to do with pacemakers? I have a pacemaker and have had one for almost 20 years. The *only* thing I've had happen is store security alarms being tripped. I'm around oodles of electronics daily that have never, ever been affected by my pacemaker. What a load of shit if Caine is suggesting they interfere with tvs.
No....I was referring to Caine's not-woo-at-all ability to fuck with electrical equipment using the power of her....fuck knows. Rage? Shaking?
Ah, ok. That's even more pathetic and very woo-y.[/quote]

It makes it sound like Caine is 'Carrie', all grown up.

Aneris
.
.
Posts: 3198
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:36 am
Location: /°\
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20563

Post by Aneris » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:21 am

To whom it may help. I use chrome and heavily rely on the quick search function which started to act up a while ago. Normally, it should instantly switch to the search engine when I type in the keywords / letters. I always had to press TAB and other shenaningans. After investigating, I found a solution to the problem:

just put this into the address bar in chrome:

Code: Select all

chrome://flags/
CTRL+F "instant" (Instant Extended API)
And deactivate that. Hit restart below. Fixed.

Software geekery and all that isn't exactly my realm of expertise, so I have no clue what else it does. But it works for me.

ERV
Arnie Loves Me!
Arnie Loves Me!
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20564

Post by ERV » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:22 am

This is how I imagine a normal day in FfTB world:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jessicamisener/ ... t-yourself

It seems like life is just so hard for them...

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 10289
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20565

Post by free thoughtpolice » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:25 am

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Who saw 9/11 coming? Condi Rice did, in the FBI report warning that al qaeda planned on using passenger a/c as weapons. She lied about the PDB. The neocons had long craved a "Pearl Harbor Moment" to justify their agenda of wars in the Middle East.
After 9/11 the chant was "no one could have foreseen someone using airplanes as weapons". Aside from the kamikaze pilots of WW2 there was an incident where a disgruntled employee tried to crash a (Fed-ex?) jet into their main sorting facility a few years before 9/11. Then there was the warning from the flight school and the FBI agent in Minnesota.

ReneeHendricks
.
.
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:48 am
Location: Kent, WA
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20566

Post by ReneeHendricks » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:28 am

ERV wrote:This is how I imagine a normal day in FfTB world:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jessicamisener/ ... t-yourself

It seems like life is just so hard for them...
This is how I imagine they all start their days:
stuart_smalley_web2-745x380.jpg
(53.93 KiB) Downloaded 319 times

Ericb
.
.
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:20 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20567

Post by Ericb » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:28 am

ERV wrote:This is how I imagine a normal day in FfTB world:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jessicamisener/ ... t-yourself

It seems like life is just so hard for them...


Tribble
.
.
Posts: 5102
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 4:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20568

Post by Tribble » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:41 am

Remick wrote:
Tribble wrote:
Remick wrote: I know the civ series well, it is one of my fav's. I had a harder time beating Xcom Ironman impossible though.

I still don't see the point in criticizing her for playing video games. It comes off as petty and seems a little crazy to be honest. You can take jabs whenever she posts a shitty article or someone puts up a youtube vid of a shitty talk she gave. You could even reference videogames then. Something like, Hours spent on Civ 5:230, hours spent researching evo psych: 1/3 of plane ride to con.

Point out that she is lazy when her work shows it, shouldn't be to hard. But simply lashing out for her playing video games is stupid, and doesn't help.

It is like going after Setar because he plays video games. Him playing video games is not the issue.... I started to type out 'the' issue with setar, but that seems impossible.

zzzzzzzzzzzz Tone trolling is boring.
Has nothing to do with tone but actually hitting the target fuckface.
Actually, you're right. It was CONCERN TROLLING. My bad.
concern troll
A person who lurks, then posts, on a site or blog, expressing concern for policies, comments, attitudes of others on the site. It is viewed as insincere, manipulative, condescending.
Unless, of course, you're going to use the FTB special dictionary.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12302
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20569

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:42 am

Pogsurf wrote:
Trigger warning: trigger warning

As a serious question, is anyone aware of how or where the term "trigger warning" came into existence? Is it just a piece of SJW mythology, or has someone actually offered this up as a proper response to a real problem?
Issuing trigger warnings assumes that every person who ever suffered some traumatic event will, upon the mere mention of that genre of event, be reduced to a pathetic, hyperventilating wreck cowering in the back of the closet for three days.

As I've seen trigger warnings used almost exclusively by feminists, we have YA example of the feminist trope that women are weak.


From a psych/behavior perspective, I doubt that TW's even work. (Certainly not when Ophelia Benson places them one carriage return above the traumatizing material!) First, the warning is too vague. Do all mentions of ableism cause me, little person, to curl into a fetal position, or just caricatures of dwarfs? Why do Disneyland ads have no trigger warning!

Second, over time, the PTSD or whatever will be transferred from the content to the mere warning itself. ''A trigger warning! What if they mention meanies wearing t-shirts at cons?!! Whaaa!' And next thing you know, you're reading Shakesville all day long from behind your shoe rack.

Of course there are people out there who get PTSD when the subject of their trauma comes up. But PTSD is treatable, and should lessen over time if treated. These professional victims want to keep it around as an excuse, and to further their thought police action against ever offending anyone evah.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12302
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20570

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:44 am

ERV wrote:This is how I imagine a normal day in FfTB world:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jessicamisener/ ... t-yourself

It seems like life is just so hard for them...

What is it about "sixteen on center" that chicks just don't get?

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 10587
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20571

Post by Lsuoma » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:44 am

Dick Strawkins wrote:
welch wrote:
The irony is, by overly concentrating their efforts in a small area, they've created a target. Think of the screening areas in most major U.S. airports say, the day before thanksgiving or december 23rd. Small area, packed with people, still outside the security zone.

that is a terrifyingly target-rich environment. I'm more nervous about the security area than I am about the plane.
There was one attempt, in Glasgow I think, by a couple of terrorists with a home made car bomb that they tried (and failed) to drive through the doors of one of the terminals.
Propane cylinders:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Glasg ... ort_attack

Karmakin
.
.
Posts: 1437
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 6:49 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20572

Post by Karmakin » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:51 am

free thoughtpolice wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Who saw 9/11 coming? Condi Rice did, in the FBI report warning that al qaeda planned on using passenger a/c as weapons. She lied about the PDB. The neocons had long craved a "Pearl Harbor Moment" to justify their agenda of wars in the Middle East.
After 9/11 the chant was "no one could have foreseen someone using airplanes as weapons". Aside from the kamikaze pilots of WW2 there was an incident where a disgruntled employee tried to crash a (Fed-ex?) jet into their main sorting facility a few years before 9/11. Then there was the warning from the flight school and the FBI agent in Minnesota.
The actual "conspiracy" was that before 9/11 the Bush administration didn't take terrorism seriously because it was seen as a "Clinton" thing. Was there something that could have been done? I dunno.

That's all. Although at the same time, I think that's pretty fucking important. See, it was nothing more than tribalism. What was seen to be something that was important to the other tribe (and anti-terrorism efforts WERE important to the Clinton admin) can't be something important to you otherwise you're saying that the other tribe is right about something.

Source: I was actually a terrorism hawk before 9/11. I actually thought the big attack was going to come on Y2K. That doesn't mean that I support bombing the shit out of other countries or even the security theater. But I do think that more resources should be put into investigation.

On a side note, that's why a lot of the whole NSA scandal pisses me off. It's not that I reject the notion of privacy...it's just that what does it mean? Does it mean that if a computer program is scanning your e-mail looking for certain words, is that a violation of your privacy? See, I value privacy...but what that means to me isn't that you just stop collecting all data. It means you firewall it. You make sure that information DOES NOT under any circumstances get used in any other way. Anonymize everything, then once you get judicial approval (and I understand why this has to be secret, but I think that the compromise is that you put on the bench some serious civil libertarians..not meaning extreme but meaning actually serious) you can un-anonymize it.

But the second that information is used for any other purpose, that's when you encourage whistleblowers and heavily reward them, and heavily punish those responsible.

Remick
.
.
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20573

Post by Remick » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:58 am

Tribble wrote:
Actually, you're right. It was CONCERN TROLLING. My bad.
concern troll
A person who lurks, then posts, on a site or blog, expressing concern for policies, comments, attitudes of others on the site. It is viewed as insincere, manipulative, condescending.
Unless, of course, you're going to use the FTB special dictionary.

/cry, I am not able to post as often as you, so what I say is less valid. Maybe you an Steers can go have post count party.

Sulman
.
.
Posts: 1995
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 6:13 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20574

Post by Sulman » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:58 am

John D wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:
I recall an incident from my first research job that might illustrate the point.
I got a job in a lab in the early 1990s, looking for genes involved in certain types of leukemia.
In my opinion things have changed quite a bit since the early 90s regarding office behavior. I work in the auto industry and I have seen tremendous change. Sometimes it is a bit odd to me. I am in my 50s and have worked for some of the best screaming lunatic bosses in the country. Part of the challenge to making a successful career was how you managed these loons. I was pretty good at it and learned how to scream with the best of them.

Flash forward to 2013 and I can barely raise my voice without someone crying and asking me to apologize. Haha. I have learned how to use a tool (anger), and now the world has changed so much I can't even deploy it. I guess the good thing is that I have such a thick skin that I am not easily flustered.

I think much of the change has been driven by "feminism" and lawsuits. In the 90s we used to go to lunch with suppliers that included lap dances at the local topless bar. That stopped abruptly after there was a lawsuit and a bunch of firings at GM. I guess I am happy to work in an environment where I don't ever yell at anyone. It is also nice to not have to play the game of "entertaining" customers with trips to the topless bar. It is hard for me to deal with people crying at work however. There is still more for me to learn when that happens.

and to wrap up. There was a particularly vile and aggressive plant manager in the mid 1990s. He had honed his skill at dishing out abuse to a fine art. An amazing man. He yelled at an engineer with such force and skill that the poor victim of the abuse fainted in his chair. BAM! Out like a lite. Few people on earth can yell with that much skill.... haha.
Times do change. The workplace in particular isn't as robust as it was. My old man worked on Fleet Street when journalists would have legendary alcohol-fuelled lunches, and some of the aggressive behaviour was legendary. It's all gone now.

If you shout at anyone or even display the slightest bit of aggression, you can get into real trouble.

SPACKlick
.
.
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:45 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20575

Post by SPACKlick » Thu Nov 07, 2013 9:16 am

Pogsurf wrote:Interesting fact:
oolon
November 4, 2013 at 3:54 am (UTC -8) Link to this comment
@Matt Cavanaugh, utter tripe, hilarious as well.

the majority of content at the ‘Pit has little or nothing to do with A-plussers

Of course not dear…
“site:slymepit[dot]com atheismplus” … 184,000 results
“site:atheismplus[dot]com slymepit” …. 223 results

...
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ent-784764

Another interesting fact:

At the time of writing there have been 140,428 posts on the Slymepit.

Therefore "atheismplus" is being mentioned an average of 1.31 times in every Slymepit post.

Oolon has proved that the Slymepit is harassing A+ QED.
Another interesting fact, searching the slympit for +"Atheism Plus" only gets 1112 posts. and atheismplus 2090

Searcing for one without the [ulr=search.php?keywords=%2B%22atheism+plus% ... ismplus%22+]other[/url] reveals an overlap of between 168 and 483. Taking the smallest of those there are 3034 posts in the pyt referring to atheism plus by name. Out of 140631 posts or to put it another way, Atheism Plus is mentioned, on average once every 46 posts.

Since posts come in at a rate of roughly one every 5 minutes since the forum began back in july 2012 it means that A+ is mentioned on average once every 4 hours.

The more you know...

goddamn 'nym
.
.
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20576

Post by goddamn 'nym » Thu Nov 07, 2013 9:18 am

Karmakin wrote:See, I value privacy...but what that means to me isn't that you just stop collecting all data. It means you firewall it. You make sure that information DOES NOT under any circumstances get used in any other way. Anonymize everything, then once you get judicial approval (and I understand why this has to be secret, but I think that the compromise is that you put on the bench some serious civil libertarians..not meaning extreme but meaning actually serious) you can un-anonymize it.
Information is power. The people in power will not let silly firewalls get between them and their Precious.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12302
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20577

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Thu Nov 07, 2013 9:22 am

Tribble wrote:
Actually, you're right. It was CONCERN TROLLING. My bad.
concern troll
A person who lurks, then posts, on a site or blog, expressing concern for policies, comments, attitudes of others on the site. It is viewed as insincere, manipulative, condescending.
Unless, of course, you're going to use the FTB special dictionary.
Try these on for size:
yeswecan2008 wrote: Hey, I also was a huge Hillary Clinton supporter from the start. But she lost fair and square, so we all need to rally around Barack Obama.
cankles4mccain wrote: I'm a life-long democrat and post-menopausal woman just like you all, so it broke my heart when Hillary conceded. But Sarah Palin is a woman, too, so it makes sense we start voting republican.
john_galt296 wrote: I'm a liberal who voted twice for Barack Hussein Obama. I'm unemployed and on food stamps. I have a stutter. But let's face it, the keynesian policies of socialist big government have failed. Next time, we should support Ron Paul.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20578

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 9:26 am

Dick Strawkins wrote:
BarnOwl wrote:Over on Ophelia's version of the Pamela Gay drama (on which she bestows a title similar to those for her preceding posts on FGM), a commenter writes:
brucegee1962
November 6, 2013 at 9:44 pm (UTC -8) Link to this comment
My young daughter is going to be gorgeous, and she loves math. I tell her every day how proud I am of her, and how great it would be if she decides to go into engineering or science.

Posts like this make me wonder if I’m doing the right thing as a dad. Maybe I should be encouraging her to study languages or English Lit, where the balance is a lot closer to 50-50.

That makes me SO ANGRY on her behalf, and the behalf of all the current and future woman scientists.

ARGH!
I don't know where to begin to parse the stupid, so I'll just ask why it's relevant that she's going to be "gorgeous"? It's quite obvious, from all of the many groping/harassment/RAEP stories that have been presented as blog posts, comments, #ripplesoftweetwoe, TAM talks, etc etc, that being "gorgeous" is not a prerequisite for being a target. Being a scientist or being "brilliant" at maths and physics isn't a requirement either. So why is that even part of the dialogue? If they're so disgusted with oppressive white patriarchoindustrialcomplex notions of beauty, why do they constantly conform to them and refer to dominant paradigms of physical attractiveness?
I've mentioned about situations in my own experience involving sexual harassment in academia and that my in opinion they are symptoms of a larger issue - the power differential between senior adacemics and people starting their careers. If you have a system whereby there is no blowback for acting like a tyrant then people who do so will stay in those positions for longer.

I recall an incident from my first research job that might illustrate the point.
I got a job in a lab in the early 1990s, looking for genes involved in certain types of leukemia. The group worked in collaboration with a team in Oxford who were much more experienced in the field, and I was sent to work in the Oxford lab for a few months to learn the necessary techniques and bring them back to our lab.
The head of the Oxford group, I was warned, had a bit of a reputation for his temper, so best not try to antagonize him while I was there.
Things went OK for a couple of months until one day I got into an argument with one of the senior scientists in the group. She decided she wanted to use me as a technician for the group, washing bottles, preparing buffers and cataloguing patient sample, rather than teaching me the techniques I had been sent there to acquire and when I pointed out that I was being paid by another group to learn the techniques she stormed off to complain to the group leader.
I was called into a meeting with the two of them and he, the group leader, proceeded to threaten to physically kill me if I didn't do exactly what I was told to do by the senior scientist.
This didn't come our of the blue to me at that point. I'd seen other scientists and medics (he was a consultant haematologist at the hospital and in a position of considerable power in regards both scientists and physicians) called into his office and come out shaking a few minutes later, and one of them had told me about the threats of violence made to him.
But, the thing was, I come from a fairly tough environment. Threats of violence are something I regularly experienced when growing up and I learned that they are almost always a sign of weakness - an attempt at bullying the other person into submission.
So my response was to laugh in his face and tell him not to wait - go ahead and kill me.
I presumed it was all a bluff and so it was - he freaked out for a few minutes, threatened to end my scientific career there and then (I laughed again - this was my first job in research, there was no 'career' to kill). He then told me to vacate the lab and said he was going to phone up my home lab and get them to fire me!
So I go home and the next morning I turn up in the other lab - the group who are actually paying me and who expected me to be trained in Oxford - wondering whether I had a job there at all. I was met by the senior scientist of the lab who tells me, through peals of laughter, that the Oxford group leader had indeed rang up insisting that I be fired, and when he was asked to explain WHY he started to threaten violence again - except this time on the other group leader (a prominent leukemia researcher and also a consultant haematologist.) The quote I remember was that the Oxford group leader threatened to "drive down to rip off his head and kick it around the floor".
I had been working in that lab for a few months and had seen about three of these incidents and I presume it was a regular event and yet the guy never suffered any repercussions for this behavior in the decades he worked in that post. He was also having an affair with a PhD student in the group at the time I was there.
And as for me?
Not even PTSD. :violin:
Bingo.

I also still don't understand something. And I ask in all sincerity for someone to explain it to me:

What fucking "Power" does shermer have? I mean, everyone talks about it as a reason to not cross him. Like if you piss him off he'll....I don't know, but it's fucking bad I suppose.

So can someone who is a part of the "skeptics" movement explain his power to me? Because it sounds like utter bullshit, and completely based on...nothing.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5439
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20579

Post by Gumby » Thu Nov 07, 2013 9:29 am

Tigzy wrote: Nice one Southern - I was gonna respond MKG's typical 'know-it-all' bollocks meself, but you ninja'd me in fine style there.
I noticed a long time ago that when that self-aggrandizing colossal prick MKG delivers an opinion, it is all too often couched in a manner deliberately designed to show utter imperious snooty disdain for the person he is responding to in order to pridefully boast about how fucking awesome he thinks himself to be. MKG is a weapons-grade twat in my book, and it's a pity that the 'ignore' feature does not include quotes included in replies.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#20580

Post by welch » Thu Nov 07, 2013 9:30 am

John D wrote:
welch wrote:
John D wrote:
Ms. Gay - you really did a disservice to others. You need to help reinforce the right kind of behavior in the work environment. Take action to stop harassment immediately. Don't go public and cry about your problems to the world without first trying to fix it on a local level. Document any problems in writing. Take your complaint to management. Accept the apology of others and move on.
I so rarely agree with JD here that this may be a noteworthy event, but he is in fact, absolutely right. If you are being harassed in the workplace, THAT is where you need to deal with it. If you do not feel comfortable in going to your supervisor, GO TO HR. THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS HR IS FOR. If the behavior is not reported to them, there is literally nothing they can do about it.
Well..... If Welch and I agree with each other (an event of exceptional scarcity), then we must be right!
Or more wrong than that word has ever described.

Locked