What flavour is it?Humphrey_Hedgehog wrote:And another cute fluffy dog...
http://i1285.photobucket.com/albums/a60 ... b62c4b.jpg
This is Charlie at about 8 months old.
Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
-
- .
- Posts: 2480
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
- Location: Adelaide, South Australia
- Contact:
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Except CFI repeatedly invites them into bed as speakers and has hired one (that I know of).Mykeru wrote: More to the point, as Mikelf notes, they have no clue that this dysfunctional guilt-tripping relationship model simply doesn't work in an organizations setting and either no insight into their limitation or are just stuck trying to hammer in nails with a screwdriver and crying about it.
CFI helped create the monster.
An excerpt from my keyboard warrioring email:
"The consequence resulting from the Center for Inquiry's actions in promoting these individuals into positions of power within your organization and conferences is what is before not only your organization but the entire community. You have given them power, and they are using it to force their beliefs onto Mr. Lindsay, your organization, and then onto the rest of the population.
I am in vehement opposition to their belief systems. I find them tyrannical. If you capitulate, you will give them more power and entrench them further into their dogmatism, giving them more fuel and righteousness with which to attack with impunity anyone who questions, or makes fun of, their beliefs."
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
I still think it would help and I suspect you would write a good letter.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I would write a short mail to CFI, but being from oversea, I'm not sure it would be quite meaningful.
You know, for a foreigner. :rimshot:
Really, write a letter, numbers have weight. Thanks!
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
I don't know about fascist tits, but here's some fascist pussy:KiwiInOz wrote:Really? I for one missed the nuance.Git wrote:She is, but she's just a random kitteh on the web with (almost) the same name as you. It was a feeble attempt at a pussy joke.sacha wrote:Git wrote:
<snip>
(check the image filename)
she's gorgeous. did you give her that name?
(Nah. Just kidding before you go all Mykeru on my fascist tits)
http://www.catsthatlooklikehitler.com/k ... er1927.jpg
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Meh. I'd never be able to fap to Seven of Nine again if I did that :lol:Gefan wrote:Since I'm sure at least one of you is already hard at work on this - before you post a photoshop of the Stephalump in the actual Seven on Nine costume, I have two words for you: Trigger Warning.bovarchist wrote:I am now forever referring to Svan as "Svan of Lyin'"
-
- .
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Shifting focus a bit, I left a comment here: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/wh ... of-shezow/ - I don't know if it's in moderation, or just gone, or what. I've added quote tags to make it more readable, but all the text is the same.
This is only a criticism if the show was written by people who complain about gender ratios. Does anyone have any reason to think that? In fact, since so many villains are male, I'd say that's evidence that the writers are *not* those people. If they were, most of the characters,"You’ll note that the heroine’s opponents/villains total 10…a full eight are male; that’s 80%.
So what happened to Equal Opportunity (to be “badâ€) on the way to all that Workplace/Personal Empowerment, eh?"
good or bad, would be women, with men being all-around absent. Most of the villains in almost every movie/tv show are males.
Yes, so what? This is a common trope. See also: Batman and Spiderman. Both have law enforcement characters that hate the hero vigilantes. This is not a patriarchal quality.""“Boxter,†the twins’ father: he’s an opponent, not a “villain†per se; but consider his bio. It states he literally hates SheZow because she routinely interferes with his police work (read: men’s work).""
Because it's a kid's show. Many characters in kid shows have high-pitched voices.""[You’ll notice the writers have a “thing†for males with high-pitched voices. To make them more girl-friendly, or just plain “girly,†I wonder?]""
Jealousy is a very common theme for a villain character. See also: The Lion King. Once again, par for the course.""this old broad is a former friend of the twins’ dead aunt. She resented the other’s popularity and now feels “forgotten and bitter.†Tara once was a super-heroine, though now she’s “intent on destroying SheZow.â€""
For fuck's sake, it's just a TV show. There's a lot of motive-attributing here, but not much substance. You sound like Anita Sarkeesian.""But even if this blatant poke-fun-at-the-everyguy show flops, the moustache-twirling Feminist apparatchiks will be ba-a-a-ack. Like Snidley Whiplash before them, they, too, will happily tie the little Nells – and the little Neils – to the train tracks, sacrificing even “the children’s†Saturday mornings to their loco-female supremacist-motives.""
-
- .
- Posts: 2480
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
- Location: Adelaide, South Australia
- Contact:
Re: Ophelia the Zookeeper Made Me Do It
Hang on a mo'.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Meanwhile, I'm being caninvaded:
Is that a racist hat which I see before me?
The brim toward my hand? Come, let me clutch thee.
I have thee not, and yet I see thee still.
Art thou not, fatal vision, sensible
To feeling as to sight? or art thou but
A hat of the mind, a false creation,
Proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain?
I see thee yet, in form as palpable
As this which now I drool.
-
- .
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 1:08 am
Re: Ophelia the Zookeeper Made Me Do It
As for the Warner sister Dot…Michael K Gray wrote:Are you trying to tell me that the Brothers Warner may have lied to me?Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Thanks for that video, and yes, they're 'cute'. 'insanely cute' would be even more accurate.
Shame on them.
I had assumed that the Bugs Bunny Show was an Oscar-winning documentary, and that the "Butterfly Effect" was misnamed.Very clever con-cat-enation there, sir.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Meanwhile, I'm being caninvaded:
To the Canary Islands hence, with Thee!
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6532225792/h904B5C66/
-
- .
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:08 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
I believe he's a variation of this lot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Cocker_Spaniel.Michael K Gray wrote:What flavour is it?Humphrey_Hedgehog wrote:And another cute fluffy dog...
http://i1285.photobucket.com/albums/a60 ... b62c4b.jpg
This is Charlie at about 8 months old.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Snerk.Edina Monsoon wrote:I'm generally content to lurk but after the lovely AbFab video posted earlier today I'll peek out for just a moment to say High. :)
Have sent my Lindsay supporting letters to CFI, one right after WIS2, another after SkepTickle's doxxing. Rec'd a friendly reply from Tom Flynn, just an acknowledgement of the emails, and they'll take them and everyone else's into account in their meeting next week.
From the 13 Speakers Letter:If they got many more letters like mine they know that what's making the secular movement unsafe for women ain't Ron Lindsay, and they have plenty of examples with links.The CEO of CFI used the Women in Secularism conference to his own ends in ways that support those who are working to drive many women out of the secular movement.
Am I correct in remembering that Melody Hensley welcomed(Out of deference to those who are already dealing with a difficult situation and potential conflicts of interest, we have not given Melody Hensley, Lauren Becker, Debbie Goddard, or Elizabeth Cornwell an opportunity to sign this letter though they spoke at the conference.)JustinThe Harrasser, and Debbie Goddard was friendly to him and Karla? How about the others on that list? Just curious.
/lurk
Cornwell is on the CFI Board. Im pretty sure she will be free to give her own opinion.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Staffy Inzaney adhoc justification that doxxing isn't doxxing when she or her friends doxx can be boiled down to this
[youtube]ejvyDn1TPr8[/youtube]
[youtube]ejvyDn1TPr8[/youtube]
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Yes, that's something that should be included into letters to CFI. Just because the carpet-bagging SJWs and Dysfunction Feminists have bitten CFI on the ass, doesn't mean Lindsay and the board gets a pass for enabling up to the point where they became inconvenient.zenbabe wrote:Except CFI repeatedly invites them into bed as speakers and has hired one (that I know of).Mykeru wrote: More to the point, as Mikelf notes, they have no clue that this dysfunctional guilt-tripping relationship model simply doesn't work in an organizations setting and either no insight into their limitation or are just stuck trying to hammer in nails with a screwdriver and crying about it.
CFI helped create the monster.
An excerpt from my keyboard warrioring email:
"The consequence resulting from the Center for Inquiry's actions in promoting these individuals into positions of power within your organization and conferences is what is before not only your organization but the entire community. You have given them power, and they are using it to force their beliefs onto Mr. Lindsay, your organization, and then onto the rest of the population.
I am in vehement opposition to their belief systems. I find them tyrannical. If you capitulate, you will give them more power and entrench them further into their dogmatism, giving them more fuel and righteousness with which to attack with impunity anyone who questions, or makes fun of, their beliefs."
Maybe, like the Gotham City crime lords, they invited in The Joker without fully understanding what they were dealing with. The do now, and I suspect they knew when the people who arrived late to the atheist and skeptical party and announced "hi, we're here, you'll be doing our agenda now whatever it is you used to do" they didn't give much of a shit either. I don't think that's mendacity, just laziness and cowardice.
-
- .
- Posts: 5859
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
She's a political operator.Za-zen wrote:Staffy Inzaney adhoc justification that doxxing isn't doxxing when she or her friends doxx can be boiled down to this
[youtube]ejvyDn1TPr8
http://i.imgur.com/zgLO97P.jpg
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Who should I head it to? CFI Board Commitee? And what email address should I send it to?Zenspace wrote:I still think it would help and I suspect you would write a good letter.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I would write a short mail to CFI, but being from oversea, I'm not sure it would be quite meaningful.
You know, for a foreigner. :rimshot:
Really, write a letter, numbers have weight. Thanks!
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Exactly where did Karl Rove go after the 2012 election?
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
mm.. such a good movie. Bit of Dark Knight now on the viewing schedule.Mykeru wrote: Yes, that's something that should be included into letters to CFI. Just because the carpet-bagging SJWs and Dysfunction Feminists have bitten CFI on the ass, doesn't mean Lindsay and the board gets a pass for enabling up to the point where they became inconvenient.
Maybe, like the Gotham City crime lords, they invited in The Joker without fully understanding what they were dealing with. The do now, and I suspect they knew when the people who arrived late to the atheist and skeptical party and announced "hi, we're here, you'll be doing our agenda now whatever it is you used to do" they didn't give much of a shit either. I don't think that's mendacity, just laziness and cowardice.
But yeah, while I hope CFI has woken up to the character of these people, considering their own culpability in reinforcing and building them up is something I hope they also see, and work to remedy. The wee little part of Lindsay's speech which attempted to check them has resulted in this entire brouhaha. It will take oomph and integrity to stand up to them further, because the tantrum will intensify.
To date though, CFI's mostly been the indulgent parent who gives the screaming child the candy. From what I've gathered, it isn't as if the tactics haven't been clear for a few years now.
But who knows. Maybe they will be reasonable and act as an organization should, as you and others give reason to hope.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Phil, I used these:
Zenspace wrote:bovarchist wrote:Anybody have the email address of Tom Flynn handy? I feel like dropping a short note of support for Ron.
tflynn@centerforinquiry.net
rlindsay@centerforinquiry.net
Go for it. I already sent mine. I encourage as many of you who can to do the same.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Hunt wrote:Exactly where did Karl Rove go after the 2012 election?
He's running some Super PAC that's trying to keep the Tea Party types from getting GOP nominations.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
The thing that gets me is the petulant demand for capitulation. Not discussion, not clarification, but contrition, capitulation, resignation. There can be no debate about the righteousness of their cause. The only resounding note is that Lindsay said something that posed ideological questions, and that is unforgivable. The question everyone should be asking themselves, and let's hope to hell the CFI board is asking itself, it just what type of people hold to that kind of philosophy? Imagine the oddness of any other convention being so discomfited over a mere introductory talk that broached certain queries, even if they weren't on the official agenda, and then spent the better part of a month afterward agitating for the professional obliteration of the offending party and you get a very clear idea of just how bizarre and pathological these people are.zenbabe wrote: To date though, CFI's mostly been the indulgent parent who gives the screaming child the candy. From what I've gathered, it isn't as if the tactics haven't been clear for a few years now.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Honestly, I think CFI has "woken up (or will) only to the extent that it hurts their bottom line.zenbabe wrote:mm.. such a good movie. Bit of Dark Knight now on the viewing schedule.Mykeru wrote: Yes, that's something that should be included into letters to CFI. Just because the carpet-bagging SJWs and Dysfunction Feminists have bitten CFI on the ass, doesn't mean Lindsay and the board gets a pass for enabling up to the point where they became inconvenient.
Maybe, like the Gotham City crime lords, they invited in The Joker without fully understanding what they were dealing with. The do now, and I suspect they knew when the people who arrived late to the atheist and skeptical party and announced "hi, we're here, you'll be doing our agenda now whatever it is you used to do" they didn't give much of a shit either. I don't think that's mendacity, just laziness and cowardice.
But yeah, while I hope CFI has woken up to the character of these people, considering their own culpability in reinforcing and building them up is something I hope they also see, and work to remedy. The wee little part of Lindsay's speech which attempted to check them has resulted in this entire brouhaha. It will take oomph and integrity to stand up to them further, because the tantrum will intensify.
To date though, CFI's mostly been the indulgent parent who gives the screaming child the candy. From what I've gathered, it isn't as if the tactics haven't been clear for a few years now.
But who knows. Maybe they will be reasonable and act as an organization should, as you and others give reason to hope.
-
- .
- Posts: 496
- Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:15 pm
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
How amazing would it be if the Center For Inquiry fired the CEO for asking questions.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Urk. The Decider's decider is in our midst again.
From the other flank, watch for a Zenu infiltration:
http://i.imgur.com/hx7LCvi.jpg
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Hi, I logged in to objectify sacha by saying "damn woman, dat ass!".
Regards,
Another chill girl
Regards,
Another chill girl
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
If you'd spent somewhere around 350 million dollars belonging to assorted neo-fascist billionaires and delivered exactly jack squat to them in return, you'd be keeping a low profile too.Hunt wrote:Exactly where did Karl Rove go after the 2012 election?
Now, where's the last place anyone would think of looking for an arch-conservative?
Hmmmmmm..... :think:
-
- .
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 1:08 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Fixed that for you.Ericb wrote:Hunt wrote:Exactly where did Karl Rove go after the 2012 election?
He's runningsome Super PAC that's trying to keep the Tea Party types from getting GOP nominations.his estate in his native Hell, where he harvests the tears of sinners which he bottles and sells.
-
- .
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 1:08 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
It is nice, but Welch's is starting to grow on me too.codelette wrote:Hi, I logged in to objectify sacha by saying "damn woman, dat ass!".
Regards,
Another chill girl
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
It would be amazing. I doubt it'll happen. They'll probably push him into some sort of contrived "outreach" and reconciliation.EdwardGemmer wrote:How amazing would it be if the Center For Inquiry fired the CEO for asking questions.
I wonder if it's occurred to any of the squalling brats that the CFI's drama magnet DC director might catch a reprimand or demotion from this.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Amazing, but also, IMO, actually disastrous for the FtB lot. Talk about a PR disaster. At some point it really becomes a matter not just of Ron Lindsay's career, but saving FtBs from themselves, not that I particularly care if they go down in a ball of flames. But a responsible leadership would never allow a fringe continent to self immolate quite that spectacularly, even if they secretly think they dearly deserve it.EdwardGemmer wrote:How amazing would it be if the Center For Inquiry fired the CEO for asking questions.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Ape+lust wrote:It would be amazing. I doubt it'll happen. They'll probably push him into some sort of contrived "outreach" and reconciliation.EdwardGemmer wrote:How amazing would it be if the Center For Inquiry fired the CEO for asking questions.
I wonder if it's occurred to any of the squalling brats that the CFI's drama magnet DC director might catch a reprimand or demotion from this.
I wonder if the main players really give a shit about her. How much amity and real friendship is there with that crowd?
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Stop objectifying Welch!TedDahlberg wrote:It is nice, but Welch's is starting to grow on me too.codelette wrote:Hi, I logged in to objectify sacha by saying "damn woman, dat ass!".
Regards,
Another chill girl
-
- .
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 1:08 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
It struck me that I've seen his ass but never his face. Doesn't get much more objectifyin' than that, I think.codelette wrote:Stop objectifying Welch!TedDahlberg wrote:It is nice, but Welch's is starting to grow on me too.codelette wrote:Hi, I logged in to objectify sacha by saying "damn woman, dat ass!".
Regards,
Another chill girl
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Because Gurder's moderating as heavily as Ophie ever did:
Ariel, you say:
Should they be even attempting to comment? Well, I don't know, but I can understand why they would. When you have PZ slagging, (and that is the only word for it) everyone who doesn't agree lockstep with *his* version of feminism, and Ophelia allowing people in her commentariat to:
1) Threaten people with violence if a "bad" word is used, specifically Julian's "if you call me a spic, I'll snap your neck". That one not getting any kind of a reaction other than 'tut-tut' is especially hypocritical given Ophelia's multi-year freakout over Franc Hoggles VERY similar comment.
2) Offer to dox people so they can vandalize their property as part of an intimidation campaign, aka the 'maybe if they start seeing blue butterflies spray-painted on their driveway, they'll back off' schtick.
3) Compare members of the pit, in all seriousness, with serial killers.
I can see why someone might wish to defend themselves. I'm not among that group, I have no more hope for any form of dialogue with Ophelia et al that doesn't involve everyone bowing and scraping to her than I do an in-depth discussion of various computer programming topics with my cat. It's a fun mental 'what if' exercise, but in real life? Not happening.
Secondly, there are actually a lot of people in the pit who don't engage them directly. We don't @-message them on twitter, we don't send them email, we don't try to sneak in comments. What is our "great crime", the one that even you talk about? We sometimes read her blog posts, (although I've stopped even that. Outside of Ally Fogg and Aron Ra, there's no one at FTB doing anything I'd classify as "thought" of any kind. Reactions, yes. Responses, occasionally), and we make comments on a web site or web sites that she is perfectly able to *not read*. In fact, that's one of the refrains from FTB: don't like what we say, *don't read our site*.
Again, why does that advice never apply to them? Ophelia complains about being "monitored" when it's pathetically obvious that she is monitoring the HELL out of the 'pit and various people's public twitter and FB accounts. She's not the only one mind you, but there are days when the time between a comment in the 'pit and a post on FTB is measured in hours. Not days. Not weeks. Hours.
If she wishes to complain about monitoring, perhaps she should do less of it herself. But then, applying their own rules to their own behavior is not something they're real good at.
And given how much Zvan demonizes all the SPs in the 'pit, i'd say that asking people to not demonize her is weak. If she dislikes demonization, she should cease doing it herself. Heck, fairly recently, she and the Canuck once *again* took it on themselves to slag Justin Griffith for publicizing Laden's threats against him, because he clearly "missed the point" that greg was trying to "patton slap" him back into proper thinking. Justin's crime? He refused to demonize Abbie Smith.
I have little concern for Zvan's feelings about demonizing people when she so gleefully and enthusiastically does so herself. It's actually quite black and white. If you don't like being demonized, don't demonize others.
Many people find rape, or even rape fantasies extremely triggering. Would you support them banning Greta from their sites solely because she's written books that contain rape fantasy? I kind of doubt you would. You might *understand* it, but you wouldn't *support* it. So why do you support Greta's similar behavior? Do forgive me if my impression of her intellectual and ethical standards is somewhat less than yours.
I think I am safe in saying 99% of the 'pit's objections to the FTB core crowd/Skepchicks/et al is based on two things:
1) The *massive* zero sum thinking they not only engage in themselves, (THERE IS ONLY ONE CORRECT OPINION), but *require* everyone else to engage in.
2) Their continual hypocrisy in demanding standards of behavior from others that they refuse to impose upon themselves.
Until they start dealing with those two issues themselves, actual communication with them is impossible. you can't dialogue with people who operate like that.
Ariel, you say:
However, that's kind of a strawman. First, almost no one amongst the "antis", or possibly "SPs", unless they start making fake IDs, is commenting on Ophelia's site. She actively moderates and bans people, as do Pz, Greta, and the rest of that core group. So the number of people successfully commenting on Ophelia's site from the SPs is quite low.As I see it, the issue is not disagreement, but *focus*. A person X writes a (reasonable and normal) comment disagreeing with a person Y. Fine. Then X writes the second, third … eleventh comment disagreeing with Y. Hmmm, also fine. Then X writes hundreds of comments – a mixture of (reasonable and normal) criticism, taunting and photoshopping, a huge series, which betrays X’s concentration on Y and his constant monitoring of Y’s activities. Is it also fine? How should one treat it, especially given the information that Y finds it awful and asks X to stop? And what if it’s not just a single X, but a whole group engaged in such a behavior? Eliza, in this context “disagreement†is really a red herring. It’s not about disagreement and criticism, even if many comments contain just that; even if many of them – taken individually – can be assessed as reasonable. It’s about focus. It’s about the pattern. I don’t really mind criticism, but I must say that I understand Ophelia. I wouldn’t want to have X monitoring me. It would probably end very badly for my state of mind. I don’t know how I could stand it. How about you?
Should they be even attempting to comment? Well, I don't know, but I can understand why they would. When you have PZ slagging, (and that is the only word for it) everyone who doesn't agree lockstep with *his* version of feminism, and Ophelia allowing people in her commentariat to:
1) Threaten people with violence if a "bad" word is used, specifically Julian's "if you call me a spic, I'll snap your neck". That one not getting any kind of a reaction other than 'tut-tut' is especially hypocritical given Ophelia's multi-year freakout over Franc Hoggles VERY similar comment.
2) Offer to dox people so they can vandalize their property as part of an intimidation campaign, aka the 'maybe if they start seeing blue butterflies spray-painted on their driveway, they'll back off' schtick.
3) Compare members of the pit, in all seriousness, with serial killers.
I can see why someone might wish to defend themselves. I'm not among that group, I have no more hope for any form of dialogue with Ophelia et al that doesn't involve everyone bowing and scraping to her than I do an in-depth discussion of various computer programming topics with my cat. It's a fun mental 'what if' exercise, but in real life? Not happening.
Secondly, there are actually a lot of people in the pit who don't engage them directly. We don't @-message them on twitter, we don't send them email, we don't try to sneak in comments. What is our "great crime", the one that even you talk about? We sometimes read her blog posts, (although I've stopped even that. Outside of Ally Fogg and Aron Ra, there's no one at FTB doing anything I'd classify as "thought" of any kind. Reactions, yes. Responses, occasionally), and we make comments on a web site or web sites that she is perfectly able to *not read*. In fact, that's one of the refrains from FTB: don't like what we say, *don't read our site*.
Again, why does that advice never apply to them? Ophelia complains about being "monitored" when it's pathetically obvious that she is monitoring the HELL out of the 'pit and various people's public twitter and FB accounts. She's not the only one mind you, but there are days when the time between a comment in the 'pit and a post on FTB is measured in hours. Not days. Not weeks. Hours.
If she wishes to complain about monitoring, perhaps she should do less of it herself. But then, applying their own rules to their own behavior is not something they're real good at.
Of course they ban the person. Because if they don't, there's a chance that person might turn out not to be the demonized other image they have created of them. There's a lot of othering going on at FTB.I have mixed feelings about (3). If your complaint is that the pitters are banned, then you should take into consideration that the bloggers reject not so much your comments (because, disagreement!), as *you*. See my answer to (1). But I find your story about Atheism+ forum troublesome, hence the mixed feelings. I have never commented there and I don’t really know this forum. Seeing the citations you provided, I don’t know why they banned you.
Wait, so now we are responsible for zvan's regular commentariat behavior? That if allowed to actually defend ourselves, THEY might react poorly? Oh dear lord. That's exactly like arguments against equal rights for {insert minority group here} being a bad idea because those racists over there would get upset, and then we'd have a problem.As for (4), yeah, demonization happens. And Setar’s comment was inflammatory, sure. I participated in those threads on Stephanie’s blog and I remember it well. It seems to me that I made even some remark about Setar. But please, if you can, don’t demonize Stephanie. It’s just too easy. Her situation was quite difficult. There was a strong opposition criticizing her for participating in the dialogue (yes Eliza, opposition on FtB!); there were also fears that admitting the pitters’ comments on her threads will radicalize the regular commenters (Stephanie wrote this somewhere quite explicitly. I say this from memory, but I can find the link if needed.) Starting a melee about an inflammatory comment in such a context? Sure, and good luck to everybody! As I see it, it’s not a black and white story. Please, don’t try to make it look as such.
And given how much Zvan demonizes all the SPs in the 'pit, i'd say that asking people to not demonize her is weak. If she dislikes demonization, she should cease doing it herself. Heck, fairly recently, she and the Canuck once *again* took it on themselves to slag Justin Griffith for publicizing Laden's threats against him, because he clearly "missed the point" that greg was trying to "patton slap" him back into proper thinking. Justin's crime? He refused to demonize Abbie Smith.
I have little concern for Zvan's feelings about demonizing people when she so gleefully and enthusiastically does so herself. It's actually quite black and white. If you don't like being demonized, don't demonize others.
One time, I made a single comment that was actually something of a defense of another FTB blogger on greta's site. It took less than ten minutes for her commentariat to tell on me to mom that I was a big mean poopyhead on other sites and so I was banned. Not for my comment on Greta's site, but for my comments on other sites.Ok, before I say something about (5), a few remarks. In my opinion (1)-(4), as reasons for not giving people a break, are very weak. Just to make you understand my perspective: as it happens, *the place* for me on FtB is Greta’s blog. It’s the first I found; it’s the first I usually check. And my “criminal record†on this blog is quite extensive. Quite often I have disagreed or even quarreled with Greta. She hasn’t banned me for this (yet! ) and I must say that I like both her and her blog. Now: if she bans me tomorrow for mere dissent (unrealistic given the past, but let’s assume it), I will be upset. Since I’m not an angel, I could indeed go to some other place crying havoc, making angry, snarky or taunting remarks. But that’s it. After that, finished. I wouldn’t become her shadow, I wouldn’t take a mission of criticizing and ridiculing her on a regular basis. The very idea seems outlandish to me and that's the reason why I find your war difficult to understand. Unless … yeah, unless I had a very strong reason. And this brings us to (5) at last.
Many people find rape, or even rape fantasies extremely triggering. Would you support them banning Greta from their sites solely because she's written books that contain rape fantasy? I kind of doubt you would. You might *understand* it, but you wouldn't *support* it. So why do you support Greta's similar behavior? Do forgive me if my impression of her intellectual and ethical standards is somewhat less than yours.
I think I am safe in saying 99% of the 'pit's objections to the FTB core crowd/Skepchicks/et al is based on two things:
1) The *massive* zero sum thinking they not only engage in themselves, (THERE IS ONLY ONE CORRECT OPINION), but *require* everyone else to engage in.
2) Their continual hypocrisy in demanding standards of behavior from others that they refuse to impose upon themselves.
Until they start dealing with those two issues themselves, actual communication with them is impossible. you can't dialogue with people who operate like that.
-
- .
- Posts: 2181
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Could you not see Lindsay's cautionary note as a more watered down form of Vacula Must Denounce? It's not as if he directly accused anyone right of the bat. Rank hypocrisy. I don't think Lindsay even went as far as posing ideological questions. The 'boons are incapable of tolerating the mere suggestion that anyone of their allies could be in error.Hunt wrote:The thing that gets me is the petulant demand for capitulation. Not discussion, not clarification, but contrition, capitulation, resignation. There can be no debate about the righteousness of their cause. The only resounding note is that Lindsay said something that posed ideological questions, and that is unforgivable. The question everyone should be asking themselves, and let's hope to hell the CFI board is asking itself, it just what type of people hold to that kind of philosophy? Imagine the oddness of any other convention being so discomfited over a mere introductory talk that broached certain queries, even if they weren't on the official agenda, and then spent the better part of a month afterward agitating for the professional obliteration of the offending party and you get a very clear idea of just how bizarre and pathological these people are.zenbabe wrote: To date though, CFI's mostly been the indulgent parent who gives the screaming child the candy. From what I've gathered, it isn't as if the tactics haven't been clear for a few years now.
-
- .
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
At first, I viewed his "posting rules" simply as an attempt to keep things professional and semi-official. But after seeing some of the comments he's not let through (including one of my own), I'm starting to think otherwise.welch wrote:Because Gurder's moderating as heavily as Ophie ever did:
*comment snip*
-
- .
- Posts: 3222
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
I would be grateful if people posted those here. It is a shame to lose a good post.Metalogic42 wrote:At first, I viewed his "posting rules" simply as an attempt to keep things professional and semi-official. But after seeing some of the comments he's not let through (including one of my own), I'm starting to think otherwise.welch wrote:Because Gurder's moderating as heavily as Ophie ever did:
*comment snip*
-
- .
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Yes, Gurdur refused to approve one of my comments because it contained the indirect phrase "behaving like little shits" that wasn't directed at anyone in particular, just the practices of Freethought Bullies, particularly doxing.welch wrote:Because Gurder's moderating as heavily as Ophie ever did:
He, however, thought that was "name-calling".
He gave me several options of capitulation, mostly involving editing my comments so no one's pink bunny rabbit asshole fee-fees were hurt.
I went with my own option, which was telling him to fuck off. In the future I will take extra pause before I retweet or promote any of his opinions.
People who think the purpose of your opinion is to validate their pre-conceived notions of what that opinion should be, make me sad.
-
- .
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
My comment was not approved because I used "Ophie" three times. One was merely a mention of "nicknames are harassment" comment, so really, I only called her "Ophie" twice.Mykeru wrote:Yes, Gurdur refused to approve one of my comments because it contained the indirect phrase "behaving like little shits" that wasn't directed at anyone in particular, just the practices of Freethought Bullies, particularly doxing.welch wrote:Because Gurder's moderating as heavily as Ophie ever did:
He, however, thought that was "name-calling".
He gave me several options of capitulation, mostly involving editing my comments so no one's pink bunny rabbit asshole fee-fees were hurt.
I went with my own option, which was telling him to fuck off. In the future I will take extra pause before I retweet or promote any of his opinions.
People who think the purpose of your opinion is to validate their pre-conceived notions of what that opinion should be, make me sad.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
He may be a toolbag, more likely he's the pontificating retired guy in a tilly hat and socks and sandals seen at local skeptical groups that I love to go on about.Metalogic42 wrote:
My comment was not approved because I used "Ophie" three times. One was merely a mention of "nicknames are harassment" comment, so really, I only called her "Ophie" twice.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
My response to the WiSC propaganda letter:
Dear Mr. Flynn and the CFI Board,
This letter is being written in response to the June 13, 2013 letter sent to your attention by One Ms. Zvan claiming offense by the WiSC speech delivered by Ron Lindsay. Sadly, rather than take the opportunity to embrace the conversation that could have been opened by Mr. Lindsay's much needed statements, the letter instead offers a model example of propaganda built upon half truths in an effort to forward an increasingly clear ideological agenda. Time constraints prevent me from going into great detail, but this matter is important enough to the skeptical community and quite possibly the future of CFI itself that I am making the time to address the more egregious misrepresentations in Ms. Zvan's letter.
The first, and most glaringly obvious matter is that of the signatories. I find it most curious that, in her public posting of the letter, Ms. Zvan failed to list the actual thirteen signatories. This is most telling. While I do not have access to the 'signed' letter, I will make a prediction: the majority of those signing are either active FtB/Skepchick bloggers or their close allies. Those who refused to sign have no such incestuous relationship with the letters (likely) primary author and do not agree with the letter’s conflations. Further, of the four not given the opportunity to sign, it is certain that these four were singled out for clear conflict of interest issues, as in the case of Ms. Hensley and Ms. Cromwell, but the other two were almost certainly going to refuse to sign it in any case. One is known to have engaged Mr. Vacula at the conference in a pleasant and friendly manner, going so far as the be photographed with Justin, and clearly recognizes the blatant falsehoods in the ongoing FtB/Skepchick slander against him. Clearly, the strength of Ms. Zvan's letter must be weighted by those who refused to sign as those who did. The conclusion is clear.
The claims of poor moral within the CFI staff at WiSC is likely partially true, but I posit that the statement alludes to a single individual: Melody Hensley. Ms. Hensley, due to her close relations with the Secular Woman and FtB/Skepchick groups has found herself in the unenviable position of betting on the wrong horse. It is very predictable she would be upset and almost certainly participated in the 4:00 am Sunday meeting of the FtB/Skepchick speakers when the real import of Mr. Lindsay's speech had begun to register with them.
Of particular note in the letter is its reference to the presence of the so-called 'harasser' who was permitted to attend the WiSC conference. While not named in the letter, there can be no doubt as to whom the reference targets: Justin Vacula. While I have my own issues with some of the things that Mr. Vacula does, mostly related to his youthful naivete, the ongoing efforts to slander him are a particularly egregious example of the FtB/Skepchick crowds willingness to stretch the truth beyond all recognition to silence a critic. The fact that Mr. Lindsay made the effort to personally welcome Mr. Vacula to the conference speaks very well of Mr. Lindsay's character and hints at an understanding of the ongoing slander program emanating from FtB/Skepchick against an individual who does not deserve it.
The real upshot of the harassment/victim narrative that this group promotes is illustrated in the tweets provided within the letter as examples of 'harassment'. While one example is clearly rude and in poor taste, it is telling that, of the hundreds of tweets likely made from and relating to the conference, these are the worst examples that could be found. Very telling indeed. Over time, it has become increasingly clear that this particular group of persons, represented by the likes of FtB, Skepchick and Secular Woman have taken it upon themselves to redefine the term 'harassment' to include any material, substantive disagreement or critique of their positions. As with the expanded and over-used term 'privilege', the term 'harassment' has been expanded and overused to silence critics. This is in direct opposition of everything that a skeptical organization such as CFI stands for. The threat to the integrity of CFI's mission represented by these groups is abundantly clear.
In closing, It is necessary for me to highlight a recent event that speaks to the lack of integrity of these groups in general, but certain FtB bloggers in particular, one of whom is the likely author of the letter that initiated this response. Rather than expound on the details of the event myself, I will refer you to an article written by Tim Skellett who did a far more thorough analysis and commentary on the unfortunate matter than I likely could have done myself. Of note is the fact that Mr. Skellett has remained largely outside and apart from much of the recent controversy within the atheist/skeptical community. As a neutral party, his comments become all the more pertinent as it is free from the inherent biases that another author might bring to the matter. Please visit his well researched and supported blog post here:
http://heathen-hub.com/blog.php?b=1712
Like myself, Mr. Skellett was finally moved to act by the increasingly open and destructive nature of the words and actions emanating from FtB. I am certain that CFI has received considerable interaction relating to the above and it is my understanding that the CFI Board will be meeting in June to discuss these events. It is my fervent hope that reason and skepticism will prevail in the face of this ideological and skeptical onslaught from FtB/Skepchick/Secular Woman and that CFI will remain true to its stated mission.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Mykeru wrote:Honestly, I think CFI has "woken up (or will) only to the extent that it hurts their bottom line.zenbabe wrote:mm.. such a good movie. Bit of Dark Knight now on the viewing schedule.Mykeru wrote: Yes, that's something that should be included into letters to CFI. Just because the carpet-bagging SJWs and Dysfunction Feminists have bitten CFI on the ass, doesn't mean Lindsay and the board gets a pass for enabling up to the point where they became inconvenient.
Maybe, like the Gotham City crime lords, they invited in The Joker without fully understanding what they were dealing with. The do now, and I suspect they knew when the people who arrived late to the atheist and skeptical party and announced "hi, we're here, you'll be doing our agenda now whatever it is you used to do" they didn't give much of a shit either. I don't think that's mendacity, just laziness and cowardice.
But yeah, while I hope CFI has woken up to the character of these people, considering their own culpability in reinforcing and building them up is something I hope they also see, and work to remedy. The wee little part of Lindsay's speech which attempted to check them has resulted in this entire brouhaha. It will take oomph and integrity to stand up to them further, because the tantrum will intensify.
To date though, CFI's mostly been the indulgent parent who gives the screaming child the candy. From what I've gathered, it isn't as if the tactics haven't been clear for a few years now.
But who knows. Maybe they will be reasonable and act as an organization should, as you and others give reason to hope.
Bingo! What was supposed to be a conference discussing women's issues has now come down to, according to Lindsay, "200 words out of a 2400 word speech".
I really don't think that CFI wants this kind of "bad press" in the A/S community. And it's being drummed up by a few that always demand their way. I repeat: their 15 minutes is about up.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
We have already seen that clearly with Ellen Beth Wachs, as the most prominent example. As long as you are toeing the line, or at least keeping your mouth shut, you are besties. But if you start thinking and worst of all speaking independently, you quickly become the new witch-of-the-week. Did this crowd ever mentally leave highschool?Ericb wrote:I wonder if the main players really give a shit about her. How much amity and real friendship is there with that crowd?
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
I would agree with him. Name-calling not of a specific person, but demonization of a different side. He clearly spelled out what he considered acceptable and what is not acceptable for comments on his blog. You are an intelligent person Mykeru. I know you are perfectly capable of describing bad behavior without resorting to calling people little shits. Your decision not to do so under certain circumstances is completely your choice.Mykeru wrote:Yes, Gurdur refused to approve one of my comments because it contained the indirect phrase "behaving like little shits" that wasn't directed at anyone in particular, just the practices of Freethought Bullies, particularly doxing.welch wrote:Because Gurder's moderating as heavily as Ophie ever did:
He, however, thought that was "name-calling".
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Christ. I just saw RW's double in town, coloured hair, specs, goofy face, everything! Still shaking and crying. Do I set up a tip jar or just ask for Fluvogs? Maybe I'll join A+ to get support....
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
So, IF you want your comment to go through, resubmit using her full first name. Playground rules don't apply everywhere. I fully appreciate moderation rules that are clearly spelled out and applied in an even handed manner.Metalogic42 wrote:My comment was not approved because I used "Ophie" three times. One was merely a mention of "nicknames are harassment" comment, so really, I only called her "Ophie" twice.
-
- .
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Gurdur states: " Note: the comments thread here underneath will be strictly off-limits to any empty name-calling."deLurch wrote:So, IF you want your comment to go through, resubmit using her full first name. Playground rules don't apply everywhere. I fully appreciate moderation rules that are clearly spelled out and applied in an even handed manner.Metalogic42 wrote:My comment was not approved because I used "Ophie" three times. One was merely a mention of "nicknames are harassment" comment, so really, I only called her "Ophie" twice.
I do not think "Ophie" falls under this. Should have been clearer about that.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
None. They'll turn on each other for badthink in a heartbeat. Ask Justin Griffith, who, more than anyone else on that site, has actually achieved real, measurable change for the better for atheists in this country.Ericb wrote:Ape+lust wrote:It would be amazing. I doubt it'll happen. They'll probably push him into some sort of contrived "outreach" and reconciliation.EdwardGemmer wrote:How amazing would it be if the Center For Inquiry fired the CEO for asking questions.
I wonder if it's occurred to any of the squalling brats that the CFI's drama magnet DC director might catch a reprimand or demotion from this.
I wonder if the main players really give a shit about her. How much amity and real friendship is there with that crowd?
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Fuck that shit, objectify the fuck out of me. Objectify me like the dirty slut I am! I DON'T WANT TO BE RESCUED!codelette wrote:Stop objectifying Welch!TedDahlberg wrote:It is nice, but Welch's is starting to grow on me too.codelette wrote:Hi, I logged in to objectify sacha by saying "damn woman, dat ass!".
Regards,
Another chill girl
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
What "leadership" at FTB are you referring to? Yes, this entire debacle, started by Watson BTW, is a PR disaster for not only FTB/Skepchick, but also for CFI. Will the CFI board fire Lindsay? Probably not. Will they ask him to make some sort of statement of contrition/apology for his "200 words"? Doubtful.Hunt wrote:Amazing, but also, IMO, actually disastrous for the FtB lot. Talk about a PR disaster. At some point it really becomes a matter not just of Ron Lindsay's career, but saving FtBs from themselves, not that I particularly care if they go down in a ball of flames. But a responsible leadership would never allow a fringe continent to self immolate quite that spectacularly, even if they secretly think they dearly deserve it.EdwardGemmer wrote:How amazing would it be if the Center For Inquiry fired the CEO for asking questions.
Firing Lindsay over a "non incident" would be an unmitigated disaster for CFI. We've already seen here and in other venues (e.g., twitter) that people would be running away so fast from CFI that a vaccuum would be created in it's place.
Also, I cannot imagine Lindsay agreeing to making any form of apology. If asked, or they attempt to force him, he should just resign. Again, another gigantic PR disaster for CFI.
There would only be one single positive, if I may use that word: no other secular organization in it's right mind would ever invite anyone from FTB (the "core") or Skepchick to either speak or be a panel member at their event.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
The difference is smaller than you'd think. My face has more hair and more holes.TedDahlberg wrote:It struck me that I've seen his ass but never his face. Doesn't get much more objectifyin' than that, I think.codelette wrote:Stop objectifying Welch!TedDahlberg wrote:It is nice, but Welch's is starting to grow on me too.codelette wrote:Hi, I logged in to objectify sacha by saying "damn woman, dat ass!".
Regards,
Another chill girl
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
OK. He wasn't as clear to you as he wanted to be. This guy is clearly shooting for civil discourse. And quite frankly, I find it a breath of fresh air. I know many of you consider civil discourse with the FtB crowd a lost cause, and that is probably true. But being able to describe your position in a more professional manor is important for effectively communicating with the middle ground crowd. Treat it like you would writing a letter to the CFI board.Metalogic42 wrote:Gurdur states: " Note: the comments thread here underneath will be strictly off-limits to any empty name-calling."
I do not think "Ophie" falls under this. Should have been clearer about that.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
The "discourse" you refer to though, is just a lot of people from this forum.deLurch wrote:OK. He wasn't as clear to you as he wanted to be. This guy is clearly shooting for civil discourse. And quite frankly, I find it a breath of fresh air. I know many of you consider civil discourse with the FtB crowd a lost cause, and that is probably true. But being able to describe your position in a more professional manor is important for effectively communicating with the middle ground crowd. Treat it like you would writing a letter to the CFI board.Metalogic42 wrote:Gurdur states: " Note: the comments thread here underneath will be strictly off-limits to any empty name-calling."
I do not think "Ophie" falls under this. Should have been clearer about that.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
You're a big poopy-head.deLurch wrote:I would agree with him. Name-calling not of a specific person, but demonization of a different side. He clearly spelled out what he considered acceptable and what is not acceptable for comments on his blog. You are an intelligent person Mykeru. I know you are perfectly capable of describing bad behavior without resorting to calling people little shits. Your decision not to do so under certain circumstances is completely your choice.Mykeru wrote:Yes, Gurdur refused to approve one of my comments because it contained the indirect phrase "behaving like little shits" that wasn't directed at anyone in particular, just the practices of Freethought Bullies, particularly doxing.welch wrote:Because Gurder's moderating as heavily as Ophie ever did:
He, however, thought that was "name-calling".
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
And you wear doo-doo pants!Mykeru wrote:
You're a big poopy-head.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
<converstationus interruptus>
I would have got him a sammich.
[youtube]-WNxrZRhdPE[/youtube]
<conversatinus returnus>
I would have got him a sammich.
[youtube]-WNxrZRhdPE[/youtube]
<conversatinus returnus>
-
- .
- Posts: 3222
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
In my opinion they should:Outwest wrote:What "leadership" at FTB are you referring to? Yes, this entire debacle, started by Watson BTW, is a PR disaster for not only FTB/Skepchick, but also for CFI. Will the CFI board fire Lindsay? Probably not. Will they ask him to make some sort of statement of contrition/apology for his "200 words"? Doubtful.Hunt wrote:Amazing, but also, IMO, actually disastrous for the FtB lot. Talk about a PR disaster. At some point it really becomes a matter not just of Ron Lindsay's career, but saving FtBs from themselves, not that I particularly care if they go down in a ball of flames. But a responsible leadership would never allow a fringe continent to self immolate quite that spectacularly, even if they secretly think they dearly deserve it.EdwardGemmer wrote:How amazing would it be if the Center For Inquiry fired the CEO for asking questions.
Firing Lindsay over a "non incident" would be an unmitigated disaster for CFI. We've already seen here and in other venues (e.g., twitter) that people would be running away so fast from CFI that a vaccuum would be created in it's place.
Also, I cannot imagine Lindsay agreeing to making any form of apology. If asked, or they attempt to force him, he should just resign. Again, another gigantic PR disaster for CFI.
There would only be one single positive, if I may use that word: no other secular organization in it's right mind would ever invite anyone from FTB (the "core") or Skepchick to either speak or be a panel member at their event.
1. Say nothing or produce a statement of support for Lindsay restating their commitment to skeptisism as required under their mandate.
2. Do a WIS3 but not invite the trouble makers. That way is may actually be about what matters and not the fake drama.
3. Stop appointing people who's core aims are inconsistent with theirs just because they like to seem 'modern' and 'with it'
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Because the LARGER WORLD will think it's a play on "oaf" or "oafie". Just ask gurder, he's absolutely unanimous in that.Metalogic42 wrote:Gurdur states: " Note: the comments thread here underneath will be strictly off-limits to any empty name-calling."deLurch wrote:So, IF you want your comment to go through, resubmit using her full first name. Playground rules don't apply everywhere. I fully appreciate moderation rules that are clearly spelled out and applied in an even handed manner.Metalogic42 wrote:My comment was not approved because I used "Ophie" three times. One was merely a mention of "nicknames are harassment" comment, so really, I only called her "Ophie" twice.
I do not think "Ophie" falls under this. Should have been clearer about that.
-
- .
- Posts: 2181
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
Agree. Her name is Ophelia and there's no reason not to use it. There is nothing stopping people from clearly spelling out Benson's crimes without resorting to 'nicknames'. If Gurdur wants to focus on issues without the silly distractions then that's his right and it's not his issue if anyone doesn't like it. He doesn't ask anyone to change the substance of their posts. This is exactly what I was referring to earlier about anti-authoritarian puritanism where a reasonable request for self-restraint and moderation is seen as unacceptably censorious.Metalogic42 wrote:Gurdur states: " Note: the comments thread here underneath will be strictly off-limits to any empty name-calling."deLurch wrote:So, IF you want your comment to go through, resubmit using her full first name. Playground rules don't apply everywhere. I fully appreciate moderation rules that are clearly spelled out and applied in an even handed manner.Metalogic42 wrote:My comment was not approved because I used "Ophie" three times. One was merely a mention of "nicknames are harassment" comment, so really, I only called her "Ophie" twice.
I do not think "Ophie" falls under this. Should have been clearer about that.
-
- .
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
I should have been clearer. Gurdur contacted me on Twitter about the post in question, and was very clear what his stance was - that the general public will see "Ophie" and think of it not as short for "Ophelia", but as a derogatory term reminiscent of "Oaf". Frankly, that's bullshit. If I had said "Oafie", he would have a point, but I did not.deLurch wrote:OK. He wasn't as clear to you as he wanted to be. This guy is clearly shooting for civil discourse. And quite frankly, I find it a breath of fresh air. I know many of you consider civil discourse with the FtB crowd a lost cause, and that is probably true. But being able to describe your position in a more professional manor is important for effectively communicating with the middle ground crowd. Treat it like you would writing a letter to the CFI board.Metalogic42 wrote:Gurdur states: " Note: the comments thread here underneath will be strictly off-limits to any empty name-calling."
I do not think "Ophie" falls under this. Should have been clearer about that.
But anyway, I agree about treating it like a letter to the CFI board. However, given the circumstances surrounding such a letter, I think that at least some mildly strong language would be excusable. Not "fuck Batshit Benson, that fucking piece of shit fuck fuck fuck", but people are angry over recent events, and rightly so. Letters to CFI should reflect this.
Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It
I'm mildly surprised. I wasn't particularly nice, even though I avoided "bad werds". I did have to undo the TypeIt4Me macro that autoconverts "PZ" to PeeZus a few times.
I also refuse to register just to put comments up, and I forget to put my name. Oh well.