Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

Old subthreads
Skep tickle
.
.
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14641

Post by Skep tickle » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:23 pm

Have missed some stuff today. Did see Myers' concerns about @elevatorgate.

Whassup with @elevatorgate's twitter account? It's there, with history of 22K tweets, but 0 followers & 0 followed, but when I click "Follow" then go back to look at the account again it still has 0 followers....


FrankGrimes
.
.
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:55 am
Location: Below a Bowling Alley
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14643

Post by FrankGrimes » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:23 pm

GrapeGate?

socialcuntism
.
.
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:28 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14644

Post by socialcuntism » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:24 pm

Crazy Woman Thinks Mailman Is Stalking Her

[youtube]4CL298TO1pA[/youtube]


I had the same problem with Mr. Softee ice cream van.....
to this day i cant climax without that jingle playing and a popsicle up my ass

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

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14645

Post by welch » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:24 pm

Scalzi's an entitled tit who feels vaguely guilty about that.


bovarchist
.
.
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2013 6:07 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14647

Post by bovarchist » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:29 pm

AndrewV69 wrote:
LonLon wrote:They Are mongooses, they kill cobras.

Cobra vs. Mongoose [youtube]vdg9gkmWsEA[/youtube]
The Cobra is in deep shit and most likely dead with just one mongoose. Hiss asss is grasss with more than one. Hass no chance at all.
So the original meme would more accurately be about solitary reptiles with an over-inflated sense of how superior they are to the furry masses. Not unlike PZ.

BTW, I've heard that cobras are actually fairly slow strikers, as snakes go. Put a mongoose up against, say, a common rattlesnake, the rattler makes quick work of him.

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

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14648

Post by welch » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:30 pm

real horrorshow wrote:
welch wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
Dread Zeppelin (with Ed Zeppelin and Tortelvis) FTW!
Oh yeah, them. And Fred Zeppelin!
I favour Hayseed Dixie myself:

[youtube]pST4tHrc6Q4[/youtube]
That's kind of awesome

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

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14649

Post by Tribble » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:30 pm

Oh. ElevatorGATE has been banned or suspended from Twitter.

Cold
.
.
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14650

Post by Cold » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:31 pm

Tribble wrote:
Cold wrote:
Lol that's pretty spot on. He's Joe with tits.

Whatever happened to that mental case John Kwok? Does he still occasionally post his ramblings at PT?
Isn't Kwok the one who demands a camera for some reason? And is blabbing on about cameras? I went back there a few days ago and went through a couple of threads. I think he's still there with a new handle and is still demanding a camera.
Yeah I do remember him having some kind of camera fetish. Also his Amazon account was pretty lulzy, if I remember correctly he'd leave the strangest book reviews and he had an incessant love of namedropping important people who apparently had no idea who he was.


bovarchist
.
.
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2013 6:07 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14652

Post by bovarchist » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:34 pm

Cunning Punt wrote:


Nerd's a fucking idiot. Anyone knows that the best way to determine Shermer's guilt is to throw him in a pond. If he sinks, he's innocent. If he floats, he a fucking rapist. QED.
And if he starts furiously fucking the fish, he's PZ Myers.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14653

Post by AndrewV69 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:34 pm

Kareem wrote:Is she one of those FTBloggers who isn't really an Apluser? She makes too much sense for that group.
I am no fan of Maryam Namazie because she is a Marxist.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10154
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14654

Post by Steersman » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:34 pm

Gefan wrote:Denoument

Wherein:
Herr Meyer's hentai porn has trouble making it out of Berlin,.
There is trouble in the Intellectual Artillery Corps.
And we find out who's really responsible for the fall of National Social Justice-ism.


Okay, that's it for now. Partly, because I appear to have upset Skeptickle (who I admire) and partly because the SO has grown tired of hearing Bruno Ganz raving in the study.
:lol: :clap: Another one knocked out of the park:
General Carrier left [Ashley Muller] in charge when he had to suddenly leave for Argentina.”

We’re not going to be silenced! We’re going to be mocked into oblivion! We’re fucked!
Apropos of which is Vicky’s signature quote of Mark Twain: "Against the assault of laughter, nothing can stand."

Although somewhat of a shame in a way, I think. More than a few over there seem to defend some credible principles - unfortunately though many others, or maybe the same people, seem to have overdosed on self-righteousness. Tends to cloud the judgement.

Rystefn
.
.
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:03 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14655

Post by Rystefn » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:46 pm

rayshul wrote:
Garlic wrote:
Because he feels he was successful and made it on his own, then all white men should be successful and make it on their own.
Where in the article does he say anything remotely like that?

What he's saying is that, all other things equal, things would have been harder for him, or for pretty much anyone, to reach social success if he had been black or female. Hard to argue with that IMO.

From my own totally scientific WAG estimate, 99% of people who dismiss the concept of privilege misunderstand it.
IT'S SO HARD BEING BLACK AND FEMALE HAVE I MENTIONED THIS RECENTLY OMFG THE HARDSHIP

I fucking hate Scalzi, myself. :)
Scalzi is a douche canoe of the first order. The only thing separating him from the A+ assholes is that he lacks the courage of his convictions and puts on a (relatively) more reasonable public face, and quietly bans rather than trumpeting how great he is when he does it.

He's also a fantastic example of why I pretty much don't read sci-fi that's been written in the last 30 years. If his brand of drivel is the best they can come up with, I want nothing to do with it. I flush better sci-fi down the shitter every morning.

Cold
.
.
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14656

Post by Cold » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:46 pm

bovarchist wrote:
Cunning Punt wrote:


Nerd's a fucking idiot. Anyone knows that the best way to determine Shermer's guilt is to throw him in a pond. If he sinks, he's innocent. If he floats, he a fucking rapist. QED.
And if he starts furiously fucking the fish, he's PZ Myers.
I'm pretty sure PZ's affinity for the wet and slimy is limited to cephalopods. He's a fan of quantity over quality. The more appendages, the better!

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14657

Post by rayshul » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:47 pm

real horrorshow wrote:
rayshul wrote: IT'S SO HARD BEING BLACK AND FEMALE HAVE I MENTIONED THIS RECENTLY OMFG THE HARDSHIP

I fucking hate Scalzi, myself. :)
You 'shut and listen' rayshul! Having recently popped out your second and third white male off-spring, you are clearly not only a gender-traitor but a race-traitor as well!
I'm building a privilege army to wipe out the SJWs!!! Really though - class is what matters. And it's only ever been class - god bless those who try to convince the world otherwise. I remain amazed though that these SJW people are the SAME people who've seen the messages of occupy wall street (the 99%) and still think that your gender and your race mean diddly squat in the greater scheme of things.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14658

Post by rayshul » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:50 pm

Mean anything but diddly squat is what I meant to say there.

bovarchist
.
.
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2013 6:07 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14659

Post by bovarchist » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:50 pm

Cold wrote:
bovarchist wrote:
And if he starts furiously fucking the fish, he's PZ Myers.
I'm pretty sure PZ's affinity for the wet and slimy is limited to cephalopods. He's a fan of quantity over quality. The more appendages, the better!
THEN WHY IS HE TRYING TO BREED THEM IN CAPTIVITY? I TELL YOU, HE'S CREATING A HAREM!!!1!!1 :o :o :o

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10154
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14660

Post by Steersman » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:50 pm

AndrewV69 wrote:
Kareem wrote:Is she one of those FTBloggers who isn't really an Apluser? She makes too much sense for that group.
I am no fan of Maryam Namazie because she is a Marxist.
Indeed. Although she is not thereby without some insight. But isn't Ally Fogg of the same political stripe? In any case, I think that Massimo Pigliucci [biologist/philosopher] argued that communism and Freudian psychology qualified as pseudoscience - interesting hypotheses, but with too broad applicability and too little provability.

But, in passing, in view of your previous Canadian joke, you might enjoy this one that Jerry Coyne recently included in a post of his.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14661

Post by AndrewV69 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 5:54 pm

rayshul wrote: IT'S SO HARD BEING BLACK AND FEMALE HAVE I MENTIONED THIS RECENTLY OMFG THE HARDSHIP

I fucking hate Scalzi, myself. :)
Thats clearly because you are a "chill girl". A "sister punnisher" of the first water. You are also a racist, sexist, neo-colonialist imperialistic oppressor of the poor and down trodden who wants to bring back slavery.

Last but not least, your greatest crime against humanity is you do not think much of Nerd of Redhead.

Yours in PeeZuss Christ,

AndrewV69 (The compassionate).

Verklagekasper
.
.
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:08 am
Contact:

Love is a Battlefield

#14662

Post by Verklagekasper » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:00 pm

The reason why Twitter storifying raised the interest of PZ is this: White knight to the rescue: He does have a crush on her, doesn't he. If the FTB/Skepchick environment wasn't so sex-negative, they could have settled this with drunk monkey sex long time ago, and nothing of all the current hassle would have happened.

real horrorshow
.
.
Posts: 1505
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:59 am
Location: In a band of brigands.
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14663

Post by real horrorshow » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:06 pm

Oooh, it's a bumper harvest:

In which we learn that very powerful people (also old white & male, we can be sure) are, in fact, very scared. And bite people via Twitter or something. How scared then, should not very powerful be? Well even scarderer, obviously!
http://i.imgur.com/YPm0jyN.jpg

I thought this might be a Poe:
http://i.imgur.com/IObGEVr.jpg

Were it not followed by the rest of the post. In which we learn - if we hadn't already - that this person too, is not a lawyer.
http://i.imgur.com/CSL2qo5.jpg

Nor, I suspect is, y'know, this person:
http://i.imgur.com/BhI4UA5.jpg
I'm not sure what @elevatorGATE is doing has much to do with:
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances
Because, after all, it's not his speech he's archiving. But, in true baboon fashion, they can't pass up an opportunity to spit on the rights and freedoms many died to provide them with. FREEZE PEACH HURR!

http://i.imgur.com/geSegjB.jpg
Dudebro forum? What can s/h/it mean? Are you guys hiding porn from me?

http://i.imgur.com/Mrsqpik.jpg
Not a lawyer but, possibly, a Harvard MBA. Yes indeed, what Storify should do is to stop people from Storifying. That's the only sane and 'decent' business model for them.

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

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14664

Post by ERV » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:10 pm

Verklagekasper wrote:The reason why Twitter storifying raised the interest of PZ is this:
You know what I thought was scary, Rebecca? Having a real stalker.

Verklagekasper wrote:White knight to the rescue: He does have a crush on her, doesn't he. If the FTB/Skepchick environment wasn't so sex-negative, they could have settled this with drunk monkey sex long time ago, and nothing of all the current hassle would have happened.
I am big on trust in my relationships. I dont care if my partner goes out and parties with friends/family without me, or has scantly dressed women as fitness clients. I am either with someone I trust, or Im not with someone.

But the way Myers has been following Watson around the past few years, seeing him throw away relationships over her, risk his career and the financial security of his family for her, going to events she is at (that he isnt speaking at)-- I would have ended it with him a long time ago.

Its weird.

Ä uest

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14665

Post by Ä uest » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:10 pm

elevatorGate is accused of

* stalking by reading
* stalking by storifying
* harassment via notifications

It should be trivially seen that

* stalking by reading and/or storifying is neither stalking nor harassment

Right now Storify shoots off emails for:
http://i.imgur.com/cQR72g6.jpg

Storify should

* allow users to turn off notifications for the activities of specific other users.

Cold
.
.
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14666

Post by Cold » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:14 pm

Verklagekasper wrote:He does have a crush on her, doesn't he. If the FTB/Skepchick environment wasn't so sex-negative, they could have settled this with drunk monkey sex long time ago, and nothing of all the current hassle would have happened.
He's clearly too beta to ask her out.

Just buy her the bar, PZ, that's how the cool kids are doing it right? Deep down he just wants to be show those jocks like Shermer, Dawkins and Hitchens that he's a manly man too!

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 3799
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14667

Post by Pitchguest » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:18 pm

And I've been banned over at Scalzi's.

Wonderful. Basically all I asked for was evidence that EG had harassed and/or stalked women on Twitter, but John accused me of deliberately ignoring "patterns of intent" where EG had, apparently, explicitly stated that his purpose on Storify is to harass and/or stalk women on Twitter. When I questioned this and asked if he had any evidence himself to support this claim, Scalzi finally saw red and applied the aforementioned Malletâ„¢. Oh well.

You can read the beginning of my "conversation" here.

http://whatever.scalzi.com/2013/08/15/s ... ent-496715

It continues further down, with more condescension from Scalzi (and from the usual suspects). You'll also notice the ad-hominem tactic to avoid a discussion. (Yeah, as a note here, you don't think I know about your reputation as well? Didn't stop me from at least TRYING to have a debate, now did it? It seems ad-hominem tactics is only valid when they do it.)

I hope I didn't sound too unreasonable. (I began to get a bit annoyed at the end there.)

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

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14668

Post by Gumby » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:21 pm

welch wrote: I don't often troll, but when I do, I troll at high speed:
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 02254c.jpg

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14669

Post by AndrewV69 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:21 pm

Cold wrote:
Verklagekasper wrote:He does have a crush on her, doesn't he. If the FTB/Skepchick environment wasn't so sex-negative, they could have settled this with drunk monkey sex long time ago, and nothing of all the current hassle would have happened.
He's clearly too beta to ask her out.

Just buy her the bar, PZ, that's how the cool kids are doing it right? Deep down he just wants to be show those jocks like Shermer, Dawkins and Hitchens that he's a manly man too!
If any of the above is true I smell a false rape accusation in the making. Speaking of which:

Woman makes false rape claim, cop: 'We run into that all the time'
http://www.cotwa.info/2013/08/woman-mak ... e-run.html
An unlikely source, feminist gadfly Amanda Marcotte, once wrote that "the idea that it's shameful to just have sex because you want to" is "the reason that you have false rape accusations in the first place." Marcotte noted that "women who aren't ashamed of having sexual adventures like group sex-even ones that go bad-don't use rape accusations to cover up their choices. It's the women who are afraid they'll be called sluts if it gets out that make up these rape stories." Amanda Hess similarly talked about women who make false claims to defend their "femininity." There is much truth in what they say. Without excusing the false accuser (who, like the rapist, must be held accountable for her actions), false rape claims are largely culturally induced.
Whatever Man. Fuck (Die Antwoord).


Satan
.
.
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 12:32 am
Location: Hell
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14671

Post by Satan » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:32 pm

Something tells me Scalzi won't be in a hurry to denounce the Public Shaming tumblr for doing essentially what @elevatorgate did, except to people SJWs don't like, and to a much larger audience.

As usual, it's OK when the SJWs do it.

FlyingV
.
.
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 10:43 am
Contact:

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14672

Post by FlyingV » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:32 pm

ERV wrote:[The reason why Twitter storifying raised the interest of PZ is this:
You know what I thought was scary, Rebecca? Having a real stalker.[/quote]

"Stalker" sounds better than "Guy who can't stand me because I say stupid sh*t all the time, and he calls me out on it."

Have they ever stopped to think that maybe people don't like them not because they're women but because the best part of them ran down their mothers' legs?

Rystefn
.
.
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:03 am
Contact:

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14673

Post by Rystefn » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:37 pm

FlyingV wrote:
ERV wrote:The reason why Twitter storifying raised the interest of PZ is this:
You know what I thought was scary, Rebecca? Having a real stalker.
"Stalker" sounds better than "Guy who can't stand me because I say stupid sh*t all the time, and he calls me out on it."

Have they ever stopped to think that maybe people don't like them not because they're women but because the best part of them ran down their mothers' legs?[/quote]

Oh, Twatson knows perfectly well she's got no stalkers outside of the SJW camp, and she knows perfectly well why people don't like her... but why cop to that when you can just call criticism harassment and carry on drinking until the chick in the mirror looks like a hot 22-year old?

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14674

Post by AndrewV69 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:44 pm

Steersman wrote:
AndrewV69 wrote:
Kareem wrote:Is she one of those FTBloggers who isn't really an Apluser? She makes too much sense for that group.
I am no fan of Maryam Namazie because she is a Marxist.
Indeed. Although she is not thereby without some insight. But isn't Ally Fogg of the same political stripe? In any case, I think that Massimo Pigliucci [biologist/philosopher] argued that communism and Freudian psychology qualified as pseudoscience - interesting hypotheses, but with too broad applicability and too little provability.
I will look into that. If he has said so I may have missed it.

Steersman wrote: But, in passing, in view of your previous Canadian joke, you might enjoy this one that Jerry Coyne recently included in a post of his.
Ahahahaha! So fucking true!

FlyingV
.
.
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 10:43 am
Contact:

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14675

Post by FlyingV » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:48 pm

Rystefn wrote:Oh, Twatson knows perfectly well she's got no stalkers outside of the SJW camp, and she knows perfectly well why people don't like her... but why cop to that when you can just call criticism harassment and carry on drinking until the chick in the mirror looks like a hot 22-year old?
I'll admit that it's not a bad short-term strategy, but in a few years, there won't be enough alcohol to convince anyone, not even herself, that she's "still got it." Nobody likes the lonely, old woman at the bar crying into her beer and going home with the a guy that has an un-ironic mustache. Tick tock, Becky.

yomomma
.
.
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14676

Post by yomomma » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:51 pm

VickyCaramel wrote: I was shocked that people like this exist. I felt insulted as a woman that they try to speak for me, and as a mother... can you imagine what it is like to read all that rape theory shit and for me to look over at my 5 year old son, and think, they are labeling him a potential rapist. On some level I felt attacked.
Yep, Vicky. That's how I feel. As a mother of two sons, I fear for them. I fear that simply being themselves, just being decent human beings who happen to be boys, still makes them vulnerable to a sub-culture of women who wish them ill will and suffering through no fault of their own.

And maybe it's a wee bit paranoid, but I'm scared to death that one of my boys will be falsely accused if they piss off a girlfriend. I know I'm raising my boys with integrity and respect, and they have good role models who have definitely challenge the stereotypical gender roles in our household, but still...it's a real concern for me. I just hope that most women aren't like the radfem nut jobs I've found in the skeptic community.

didymos
.
.
Posts: 1458
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14677

Post by didymos » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:51 pm

Ä uest wrote: Storify should

* allow users to turn off notifications for the activities of specific other users.
Yes, it should, and in fact, they've already said they're working on it. In the meantime, these people should learn how to create a fucking email filter that auto-deletes notifications from EG's Storify account. It'd take a minute or two at the very most, and they won't miss notices from their pals. Of course, this advice will be unacceptable to them because it:

a. Requires them to do something other than complain at anyone they can get to listen and/or blog about it.
b. Places an unfair burden on the victims.
c. Can't erase the terrifying knowledge that somewhere...out there...Elevatorgate is still storifying their tweets which will lead to...something or other. Probably misogyny.

Satan
.
.
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 12:32 am
Location: Hell
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14678

Post by Satan » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:54 pm

@Elevatorgate should be suing.

It's very unfortunate that there's no anti-SJW organization with deep enough pockets to fund legal defenses for people who have been defamed by rabid feminists.

It's disgusting that SJWs have been able to silence critics of feminism by manipulating service providers, abusing the structures of society, and abusing the law with impunity because the only person who's had the resources to fight back, so far, is Shermer.

The hatred that these manipulative assholes spew is actionable and damaging to both individual reputations and to society at large. The longer they are allowed to act with impunity the more damage they will do because the more mainstream they will become and the more damage their demented ideas on acceptable forms of human interaction will cause.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5371
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14679

Post by katamari Damassi » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:56 pm

I haven't read any of Scalzi's novels so I'm not a fan, but I can understand why he's at least SJW friendly. A lot of geeks are SJW's and we know how fickle the SJW demographic can be, but geeks who oppose the nonsense of the SJW's are still going to read his stuff even if they disagree with his nonfiction, ideological writing, because nonSJW geeks will read pretty much any SF and fantasy.

Ä uest

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14680

Post by Ä uest » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:56 pm

didymos wrote:
Ä uest wrote: Storify should

* allow users to turn off notifications for the activities of specific other users.
Yes, it should, and in fact, they've already said they're working on it. In the meantime, these people should learn how to create a fucking email filter that auto-deletes notifications from EG's Storify account. It'd take a minute or two at the very most, and they won't miss notices from their pals. Of course, this advice will be unacceptable to them because it:

a. Requires them to do something other than complain at anyone they can get to listen and/or blog about it.
b. Places an unfair burden on the victims.
c. Can't erase the terrifying knowledge that somewhere...out there...Elevatorgate is still storifying their tweets which will lead to...something or other. Probably misogyny.
I'm honestly shocked (my own naivete) that any modern published author would have any sort of a problem with "scrapbooking", logging, storifying the public tweets of other people.

I have read maybe one or two Scalzi stories, but geez, if an author believes collecting/logging/scrapbooking/storifying other people's tweets is a form of harassment, then I do have to wonder if I awoke in another dimension or on some other planet.

I mean, that guy is fucking dangerous.

Cold
.
.
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14681

Post by Cold » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:03 pm

Interesting post from AtBC. Apparently they're discussing it over there albeit more slowly than over here.
The degree of skepticism should be proportional to the consequences of being wrong.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/Se ... e&x=38&y=4

Ä uest

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14682

Post by Ä uest » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:03 pm

http://whatever.scalzi.com/2013/08/15/s ... ent-496814

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


http://whatever.scalzi.com/2013/08/15/s ... ent-496817

http://i.imgur.com/9w2jDYX.jpg


After storify implements per user notification blocking, will Scalzi agree that EG is not a stalker?

And sadly I have to wonder, will storify implement per user notification blocking, or will they implement user reporting and banning?

Geist

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14683

Post by Geist » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:07 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/BUGGER
William Le Queux was a popular novelist in the early part of the twentieth century. He was half French, half British and he wrote books with wonderful titles like Strange Tales of a Nihilist.

Le Queux had started off as a journalist on the Daily Mail - but then had travelled around Europe getting to know lots of famous and infamous people. But as he did so he became convinced that many of the European countries, but most of all Germany, envied Britain and wanted to get their hands on the wealth of the Empire.

The trouble was that the British people didn't realise this. So Le Queux set out to warn them - above all by telling them that the Germans were sending spies to Britain to prepare for an invasion.

But the ruling classes in Britain laughed at Le Queux. They said it was just fiction - which it was. Plus he wasn't really British and he hadn't been to a proper school, he was far too vulgar and insistent in his patriotism. In short he was a bore.

So Le Queux did what anyone in their right mind would do in such a situation. He turned to the Daily Mail.

He wrote a gripping account of a future German invasion of Britain and took it to Lord Northcliffe who ran the Mail. It was called "The Invasion of 1910" and it described how the Germans landed in East Anglia and marched on London.

Northcliffe loved it - but the Mail's circulation department said that many of the towns on Le Queux's invasion route didn't have many actual or potential Daily Mail readers in them.

So Lord Northcliffe changed the route of the invasion to make sure that all the towns that were sacked and pillaged had lots of Daily Mail readers. Here is the map of the invasion as agreed with the circulation department.

The serialisation was an enormous success. The prime minister got up in the House of Commons and said Le Queux was "a pernicious scaremonger" and that the story was "calculated to alarm the more ignorant public opinion at home."

Result.

Then things started getting out of control. Thousands of Daily Mail readers sent Le Queux letters telling him that they had spotted people acting suspiciously - which meant they must be German spies.

The letters were mirror images of what Le Queux had written in his books. But rather than making him suspicious, Le Queux decided that this proved that what he had written as fiction must actually be true. There was a gigantic German spy ring in Britain.


Thousands of Daily Mail readers couldn't be wrong.

The man whose job it was to uncover spies in Britain was very excited by all this. he was called Colonel Edmonds. He had a tiny budget and two assistants - and noone on the General Staff bothered with him.

But now Col. Edmonds saw his chance. He teamed up with Le Queux and together they bombarded the Committee for Imperial Defence with the evidence from the Daily Mail readers. Edmonds said that the government should set up a "secret service bureau" to combat the threat.

The head of the Committee - Lord Haldane - said this was ridiculous. But even he couldn't stand against the wave of spy fever that was sweeping the country. He gave in - and MI5 was set up - created in large part by the dreams of a socially excluded novelist, and the paranoid imaginings of the readers of the Daily Mail.

But the problem for MI5 was that the spy network didn't exist. The Germans did have some agents in Britain - but nothing like the 5000 that Le Queux had described.

Rystefn
.
.
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:03 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14684

Post by Rystefn » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:07 pm

katamari Damassi wrote:I haven't read any of Scalzi's novels so I'm not a fan, but I can understand why he's at least SJW friendly. A lot of geeks are SJW's and we know how fickle the SJW demographic can be, but geeks who oppose the nonsense of the SJW's are still going to read his stuff even if they disagree with his nonfiction, ideological writing, because nonSJW geeks will read pretty much any SF and fantasy.
Yeah, nerds need to pull their heads out of their asses on that front. There's a difference between good writing and bad writing, and it's not defined by genre. Fuck, it should be legal to punch people in the dick for suggesting George R. R. Martin is even a competent writer, much less a good one. That's not even counting supporting horrible human beings who will take the money and use it support evil shit. (Yes, I'm comparing Scalzi to Card, and I stand by it. Two sides, one coin.)

Biohazard
.
.
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:19 am
Contact:

Poppy v. Drescher

#14685

Post by Biohazard » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:10 pm

OK, this is the FB conversation, featuring Carrie Poppy, I was referring to that no one could see. I have replaced the names of people not already mentioned with anonymous handles (Commenter #1 etc.). This is based on the conversation as it appeared this morning, it in two parts so get your scroll finger limbered up if you're not interested:
Commenter #1 Nailed it.
Yesterday at 6:40am • Like • 1

Commenter #2 Brilliant!
Yesterday at 6:44am • Like • 1

Commenter #3
[snip picture of Nancy Regan with a "just say no" sign in front of her.]
Yesterday at 7:18am • Like

Commenter #4 He really went for the jugular in the end, lol.
Yesterday at 7:36am • Like

Wendy Hughes The Deity does not mince words.
Yesterday at 7:55am via mobile • Like

Carrie Poppy Yeah, great. Victim blaming. Great.
23 hours ago • Like • 1

Commenter #4 Where's the victim blaming?
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy The alcohol bit appears to be a reference to one of the accusers saying alcohol was involved in her alleged rape.
23 hours ago • Like

Commenter #4 You mean the water into wine comment?
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy No, he's offered alcohol and says no, and then says that wasn't hard, because he's an adult, responsible for his own decisions (summarizing-- I watched it last night).
23 hours ago • Like

Commenter #4 Oh, I see. I had initially took that part as the wine being a metaphor for gossip. Don't drink from the cup of gossip, so to speak.

But now that I rewatch that segment from the perspective of the claim that the victim was plied with alcohol, I understand what you mean. Now I wonder if he did mean that. If he did, I'd say it's a cheap shot. To me, this whole issue is about how PZ chose to treat the issue as his own personal dilemma about whether to blog about it, instead of urging the claimant to go to the authorities and then waiting for that to play out. I mean, there shouldn't have been a big hurry considering the alleged event took place several years ago.

Either it's a legit claim or it's not*. The details about alcohol and otherwise are irrelevant, as far as I can tell.

*this isn't to say that I think it's someone crying rape falsely, but it's a suspect situation with an 'anonymous' claimant reported by a guy who's been acting rather erratic lately.
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy For the protection of the victim/accuser, I can't say much, but I know who she is, I have heard her account, and for what it's worth, I believe her. And based on what she's told me, I understand why she hasn't gone to the authorities, although I (and PZ) have encouraged her to do so. Ultimately, that's her decision. But what she asked was for PZ to post her statement. So, he did.
23 hours ago • Edited • Like

Carrie Poppy But anyway, back to the alcohol: If that's not what he meant, I don't get the joke. Definitely read as blaming the victim, to me.
23 hours ago • Like

Commenter #4 Yeah, if that's the intent of that gag, it's no different then him doing up his top button and suggesting that we should cover up.
23 hours ago • Like • 3

Carrie Poppy Absolutely.
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy There are no winners here. I get why it sucks for everyone. But blaming the victim is, hands-down, the worst way we can handle this awful situation.
23 hours ago • Like • 3

Commenter #4 Agreed. I can't imagine what it would be like to endure an assault by a prominent community figure and feel stuck. I also can't imagine being accused of rape (assuming I hadn't done it). From my perspective, I have no personal knowledge of the truth of the matter is so ultimately, I don't have an opinion, beyond wishing that justice would miraculously occur for all parties. I just think PZ's delivery of the information was pretty ridiculous.

Now, if I had a friend who felt stuck and she confided in me and asked me to share her experience on a prominent blog, I don't know what I'd do, to be honest. You want to believe your friend, but taking such a inflammatory claim to the court of public opinion is a huge risk.

Ugh. You are absolutely right about there being no winners, Carrie.
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy It was definitely a risk. But he knew that, I'm sure. He did it because he thought it was the right thing to do. Like him or hate him, he took a huge risk because he wanted to help a woman who said she'd been raped, and felt she had no other options.
23 hours ago • Like • 2

Barbara A. Drescher The wine segment clearly refers to a story that didn't involve sexual contact at all. Of course you'd have to have read the story for this to be clear, but I believe it was added to PZ's post. The story was a woman who claimed that she asked Shermer to sign a book and he was chatty and flirty with her afterward. She said that he kept filling her wine glass. She found it creepy and left. End of story. There is no victim to blame.
23 hours ago via mobile • Like • 2

Barbara A. Drescher I'll add that, like abuse of the term "privilege", calling every criticism of unsubstantiated claims "victim blaming" is a convenient dodge of personal responsibility. This issue is not black and white. There is very little in this world that can be categorized so neatly into "always right" and "always wrong". That's why we have systems in place to help us decide where the lines are *as a society*.
22 hours ago via mobile • Like • 2

Carrie Poppy Oh, if it was a reference to the "creepy" wine thing, that's fine (I hadn't even heard that story). But the woman who made the statement to PZ said the story involved alcohol, too. She says she was raped.
22 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy Actually, I shouldn't say "that's fine." It's still not a very responsible thing to do right now. But it's certainly different from the reference I thought he was making, if you're right. And I would be somewhat relieved to learn you are.
22 hours ago • Like

Barbara A. Drescher You can't have it both ways. If drunk people are not responsible for the choices they make, then nobody should be prosecuted for drunk driving, are you prepared for that? All of this *sounds* very compassionate, but short-sighted thinking and rhetoric-driven behavior such as blacklisting and vigilantism is actually very, very irrational and harmful.
22 hours ago via mobile • Like • 2

Wendy Hughes It's a lot like the death penalty. It's across the board or not at all. You can't pick & choose who and when to apply it.
22 hours ago via mobile • Like • 3

Commenter #2 Maybe I'm just really naive about this, but if someone keeps giving you drinks, are you at all obligated to drink them? Can you not just say "no thanks" if a person keeps giving you drinks? Or give them to someone else if that person insists on buying you drinks? Unless you're being forced to drink (or are drugged) are you not responsible for your own actions and alcoholic intake?
21 hours ago • Edited • Like • 2

Carrie Poppy Again, I can't give more details. All I said was that alcohol was involved. There are a lot of assumptions being made here, and they are incorrect assumptions. I can't give you more details than that because the victim asked me not to.
21 hours ago • Like

Commenter #2 I'm talking strictly about a hypothetical situation, based on Mr. Deity's speech.
21 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy Okay. I'm not.
21 hours ago • Like

Barbara A. Drescher The details are not relevant. That's part of the problem with this conversation.
21 hours ago via mobile • Like

Barbara A. Drescher Try taking the bit on face value.
21 hours ago via mobile • Like

Carrie Poppy Well, I just lost faith in humanity.
21 hours ago • Like • 1

Commenter #5 Getting drunk and getting in a car to drive it implies action on the part of the drunk person. Getting drunk and and having something done to you (like sexual assault or robbery, say) doesn't mean you've actually made any decision except the decision to drink itself. I'm sure we'd all agree that if a drunk person is passed out in a public park, say, it doesn't mean we can all go have sex with them. Or if a drunk person passes out in your hotel room. Obviously not every situation is that clear, but I don't think this parallel totally passes muster.
21 hours ago • Like • 2

Barbara A. Drescher [Commenter #5], please do not misrepresent what I wrote. People who are passed out don't drive cars, either. They don't make choices. That's a straw man.
21 hours ago • Edited • Like

Commenter #5 Yes, that's true. Didn't mean to lump everything together like that. Was more of a response to other alcohol comments. I realize yours is a more nuanced comment.
21 hours ago • Like • 2

Barbara A. Drescher Thank you, [Commenter #5]. I expected someone to bring it up and I'm glad that it was you, since you clearly recognize the difference.
21 hours ago • Like • 2
[End part 1 of 2 (damn character limit)]

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5371
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14686

Post by katamari Damassi » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:11 pm

Early Cuyler wrote:
BTW, Stolichnaya is already pro-LGBT.
Call me a skeptic, but I'm not inclined to take their word for that and prefer to see some proof.

Biohazard
.
.
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:19 am
Contact:

Poppy v. Drescher

#14687

Post by Biohazard » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:11 pm

[Part 2 of 2]
Commenter #2 In regards to the refilling of the wine glass thing, I think it's quite clear that Brian Dalton is referring to the woman who said Shermer had kept buying her drinks or kept refilling her glass and that made her feel uncomfortable. And she totally doesn't get drunk at cons and for some reason got really embarassed by that. But that was a different story from the one PZ initially told on his blog as far as I can tell and Dalton might have gotten the stories mixed up? Or thought they were the same one?

No one here is saying that just because you get drunk and get raped, you are to blame for getting raped. But you can't blame anyone for getting yourself drunk. Again, unless someone forced you or drugged you. Forcing someone to drink or drugging someone's drink so you can rape them is NOT okay. I can't believe I had to clarify that.
20 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy Right, again, the details are very relevant, but I can't disclose them.
20 hours ago via mobile • Like

Commenter #1 I think when we caution people to "drink responsibly" we mean that drinking to the point of losing control of your own actions, and your ability to resist the actions of others, is very risky, even in the most safe-seeming circumstances. Whenever we drink we are, to the degree that we become drunk, abandoning our human agency, leaving the safety of ourselves and others to chance or to other people whose own judgment may be poor -- or worse.

But no amount of irresponsible drinking on the part of a crime victim diminishes the guilt of the perpetrator. The most it may do is diminish our sympathy for someone as a "pure and blameless" victim, on the principle of contributory negligence. Voluntary drunkenness is always risky, and assessing that risk sensibly before choosing to drink is what we expect of adults, so that they do not become victims *or* victimizers.
20 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy But all of this is horrible assumption making that amounts to victim blame.
20 hours ago via mobile • Like • 1

Commenter #6 Carrie - PZ wrote about "if it was a reference to the "creepy" wine thing, that's fine (I hadn't even heard that story)" on the same blog as the one that you are referring to, as if it is collaborating evidence
20 hours ago • Like • 1

Carrie Poppy Hey [Commenter #6]. Sorry if I'm just not reading this right, but I don't follow what you're saying.
20 hours ago • Like

Barbara A. Drescher [Commenter #1], here's the problem with your argument: it's circular. One is considered "a perpetrator" because they had sex with someone who said "no", or who was unable to say "no", not because the victim was drunk. In other words, while drinking can make someone incapable of saying "no", it's the state of being unable to say it that makes sex a crime, not the fact that the person drank. One is not a victim merely because they are drunk. And, as a friend noted, when both people are drunk is that a mutual rape?
20 hours ago • Like

Barbara A. Drescher Carrie, This is about information that is available to all, not your personal viewpoint. By even bringing up a specific situation that only you know about, you're asking people to act on YOUR judgments of a situation instead of allowing them to judge the situation for themselves. And that's the problem with discussing specific situations. That's what due process is for.
20 hours ago • Edited • Like • 3

Commenter #1 For most of us, at this point, assuming that there *is* a victim, and that we know who the victim is, is going too far. We only have reports and speculations. We can only blame hypothetical victims based on hypothetical scenarios. Pretty thin soup there.
20 hours ago • Like • 1

Carrie Poppy Yes, I do mean that a person in a horrible situation gave me information, and that it appeared that the video at hand was remarking on that same information. That is why it is relevant. I recognize that this conversation has evolved or devolved into broader conversations. In any case, private or public info aside, all this "it's your fault if you were drunk" is not only victim blaming, but it's counter to federal law.
20 hours ago • Like • 1

Commenter #2 Barb, I was just about to make a very similar comment.
20 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy That's all I have to say about that. Again, my comment was about the video and what it appeared to comment on. It is, in my mind, very clearly victim blaming if it is about a rape accusation.
20 hours ago • Like • 1

Commenter #6 Carrie, No prob! I am sure it is an issue with my wording... The other "creepy" wine thing that you mentioned you were not aware of is on PZ's grenade post.
20 hours ago • Like

Commenter #2 Except Carrie, NO ONE has said that!
20 hours ago • Like • 2

Carrie Poppy Got it. Thanks, [Commenter #6]!
20 hours ago • Like • 1

Commenter #1 No, Barbara, my statement about the perpetrator's guilt not being diminished was only in reference to any hypothetical situation where the fact that a crime occurred is not in dispute. I wasn't making any statements about *what* drunken actions specifically would represent a rape. Though I tend to agree with the general principle that a relatively sober person having sexual contact with an unconscious person who has not clearly consented is assault/rape, by any reasonable definition.
20 hours ago • Edited • Like • 1

Barbara A. Drescher Carrie, please do not misrepresent what I or anyone else has written. It is not only unhelpful and dishonest, but it's harmful.
20 hours ago • Like • 1

Carrie Poppy Yep, I certainly promise I won't misrepresent anything. I will tell you exactly how I interpreted what you wrote, which is what I did. That's all I have to say.
20 hours ago • Like

Barbara A. Drescher You already have misrepresent it.
20 hours ago via mobile • Like

Commenter #7 Are we all reading the same words on the screen here?! I do not see where any one here said "it's all your fault if you're drunk" or anything close to that. If anything they've taken pains to make it clear that they are NOT saying that. Talk about unethical and dishonest...
20 hours ago • Edited • Like

Commenter #8 Barbara, please restate your point more clearly. Both Carrie and I seem to agree on what you meant.
20 hours ago • Like

Barbara A. Drescher Furthermore, just who is making assumptions here? Take the bit (in the video) at its face, rather than assume that it's about some secret incident.
19 hours ago via mobile • Like

Barbara A. Drescher [Commenter #8], my points are clear as written.
19 hours ago via mobile • Like

Commenter #9 Barbara, given the timing of the video and the references therein, and Brian's relationship with Shermer, how can it NOT be about PZ's grenade blog?

You might want to generalize it to make it about something vague, and perhaps that's a discussion to be had, but I'm pretty certain that this is specific and not a "secret incident".

And thus, the details that Carrie knows are quite relevant -- even if we don't (or cannot) fully understand the situation.
19 hours ago • Like

dogen
.
.
Posts: 2579
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 1:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14688

Post by dogen » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:12 pm

BarnOwl wrote:
Mykeru wrote:I like it:
Fascist (tit) fits with the downfall parodies and is "war" by another name.

Thoughts?
PëeZusdämmerung

FTBnarök
Rape KulturKampf?

yomomma
.
.
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14689

Post by yomomma » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:16 pm

16bitheretic wrote: I don't wanna get too deep into this because I get ranty, but the types of ideology seen on the A+ forum and in the commentary at Pharyngula and Skepchick are denigrating to everyone, male and female, and typically revolve around suburban first world whining from very socially dysfunctional people. It is like stepping into an alternate reality when you encounter these types.
It's an organization that seeks to demonstrate how upper class white women are persecuted in America.

JustAtheist
.
.
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 1:41 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14690

Post by JustAtheist » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:20 pm

Carrie Poppy Oh, if it was a reference to the "creepy" wine thing, that's fine (I hadn't even heard that story). But the woman who made the statement to PZ said the story involved alcohol, too. She says she was raped.
So all along shes crying victim blaming and is clueless to what was said on the blog and is being poked fun at.

This just underscores the group think crap.

yomomma
.
.
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14691

Post by yomomma » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:21 pm

Biohazard, thanks for posting that. Interesting.

I thought you said that Penn Gillette commented too, or am I mistaken?

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14692

Post by Badger3k » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:21 pm

JackRayner wrote:
Badger3k wrote:I've tried to figure this out: PZ on @elevatorgate. MAybe it's just because I don't use twitter or storify, and couldn't care less if people copy what I make public or if they want to spam. Spam gets tossed out and ignored. Same as junk mail and junk phone calls - deleted off the machine.

PZ compares him to Mabus. Not sure on this. As far as I know, @elevatorgate never threatened anyone (could be wrong, as I don't follow him).
Correct. He hasn't.
It sounds like this guy is doing the same thing as spamming. However I don't know what is being said, and whether it is harassment - whether he is manking personal suggestions, etc, or just spamming. I did notice the disconnect that we have been saying all along. There is a difference between things being brought to your attention and things that you must go to and look for yourself. That I agree with.
He isn't spamming. EG has just been storifying their publicly available tweets. Now, there are settings on Storify that each user can set, and one of these lets the user know anytime they've have been added to a Storify. These idiots raving against EG are partly crying about the fact that they don't want to have to turn off email notifications, but they're mostly just building a threat narrative against EG by repeatedly asserting that he is a stalker and a harasser. [One of these idiots has literally been crying about fearing for her life.]

Personally, I think both are straight BS. The former for obvious reasons, the latter because they've been given the means to shut him out from seeing any of their tweets [why keep your account public and then bitch and moan that people can read your shit and share it around?!], or even just turn off their Storify notifications, so they don't have to know when he's compiling the shit they've said publicly and sharing it with the world. Nothing EG is doing is violating the Twitter Terms of Service, and the co-founder of Storify himself has told these idiots that there's nothing wrong with him [or anyone else, for that matter] storifying their publicly available tweets. [PUBLICLY AVAILABLE. How many more times should I spell that out?] But of course, these are delicate flowers we're talking about, so expecting them to do anything about it is just promoting rape culture.

Anyways, check this Storify and this Storify for the scoop.

Fuck it! Let me add one more. This last one really shows how batshit these people bitching about Storify are...
Appreciate all the responses on this. It looks just like another overreaction by the usual suspects. Should have known, and it is what I suspected but since I had no information I didn't want to jump the gun (or the shark, 'ey PZ - I was going to link his name to the Fonz, but not even on his best day).

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5371
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Contact:

Re: Poppy v. Drescher

#14693

Post by katamari Damassi » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:22 pm

Biohazard wrote:OK, this is the FB conversation, featuring Carrie Poppy, I was referring to that no one could see. I have replaced the names of people not already mentioned with anonymous handles (Commenter #1 etc.). This is based on the conversation as it appeared this morning, it in two parts so get your scroll finger limbered up if you're not interested:
Commenter #1 Nailed it.
Yesterday at 6:40am • Like • 1

Commenter #2 Brilliant!
Yesterday at 6:44am • Like • 1

Commenter #3
[snip picture of Nancy Regan with a "just say no" sign in front of her.]
Yesterday at 7:18am • Like

Commenter #4 He really went for the jugular in the end, lol.
Yesterday at 7:36am • Like

Wendy Hughes The Deity does not mince words.
Yesterday at 7:55am via mobile • Like

Carrie Poppy Yeah, great. Victim blaming. Great.
23 hours ago • Like • 1

Commenter #4 Where's the victim blaming?
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy The alcohol bit appears to be a reference to one of the accusers saying alcohol was involved in her alleged rape.
23 hours ago • Like

Commenter #4 You mean the water into wine comment?
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy No, he's offered alcohol and says no, and then says that wasn't hard, because he's an adult, responsible for his own decisions (summarizing-- I watched it last night).
23 hours ago • Like

Commenter #4 Oh, I see. I had initially took that part as the wine being a metaphor for gossip. Don't drink from the cup of gossip, so to speak.

But now that I rewatch that segment from the perspective of the claim that the victim was plied with alcohol, I understand what you mean. Now I wonder if he did mean that. If he did, I'd say it's a cheap shot. To me, this whole issue is about how PZ chose to treat the issue as his own personal dilemma about whether to blog about it, instead of urging the claimant to go to the authorities and then waiting for that to play out. I mean, there shouldn't have been a big hurry considering the alleged event took place several years ago.

Either it's a legit claim or it's not*. The details about alcohol and otherwise are irrelevant, as far as I can tell.

*this isn't to say that I think it's someone crying rape falsely, but it's a suspect situation with an 'anonymous' claimant reported by a guy who's been acting rather erratic lately.
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy For the protection of the victim/accuser, I can't say much, but I know who she is, I have heard her account, and for what it's worth, I believe her. And based on what she's told me, I understand why she hasn't gone to the authorities, although I (and PZ) have encouraged her to do so. Ultimately, that's her decision. But what she asked was for PZ to post her statement. So, he did.
23 hours ago • Edited • Like

Carrie Poppy But anyway, back to the alcohol: If that's not what he meant, I don't get the joke. Definitely read as blaming the victim, to me.
23 hours ago • Like

Commenter #4 Yeah, if that's the intent of that gag, it's no different then him doing up his top button and suggesting that we should cover up.
23 hours ago • Like • 3

Carrie Poppy Absolutely.
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy There are no winners here. I get why it sucks for everyone. But blaming the victim is, hands-down, the worst way we can handle this awful situation.
23 hours ago • Like • 3

Commenter #4 Agreed. I can't imagine what it would be like to endure an assault by a prominent community figure and feel stuck. I also can't imagine being accused of rape (assuming I hadn't done it). From my perspective, I have no personal knowledge of the truth of the matter is so ultimately, I don't have an opinion, beyond wishing that justice would miraculously occur for all parties. I just think PZ's delivery of the information was pretty ridiculous.

Now, if I had a friend who felt stuck and she confided in me and asked me to share her experience on a prominent blog, I don't know what I'd do, to be honest. You want to believe your friend, but taking such a inflammatory claim to the court of public opinion is a huge risk.

Ugh. You are absolutely right about there being no winners, Carrie.
23 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy It was definitely a risk. But he knew that, I'm sure. He did it because he thought it was the right thing to do. Like him or hate him, he took a huge risk because he wanted to help a woman who said she'd been raped, and felt she had no other options.
23 hours ago • Like • 2

Barbara A. Drescher The wine segment clearly refers to a story that didn't involve sexual contact at all. Of course you'd have to have read the story for this to be clear, but I believe it was added to PZ's post. The story was a woman who claimed that she asked Shermer to sign a book and he was chatty and flirty with her afterward. She said that he kept filling her wine glass. She found it creepy and left. End of story. There is no victim to blame.
23 hours ago via mobile • Like • 2

Barbara A. Drescher I'll add that, like abuse of the term "privilege", calling every criticism of unsubstantiated claims "victim blaming" is a convenient dodge of personal responsibility. This issue is not black and white. There is very little in this world that can be categorized so neatly into "always right" and "always wrong". That's why we have systems in place to help us decide where the lines are *as a society*.
22 hours ago via mobile • Like • 2

Carrie Poppy Oh, if it was a reference to the "creepy" wine thing, that's fine (I hadn't even heard that story). But the woman who made the statement to PZ said the story involved alcohol, too. She says she was raped.
22 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy Actually, I shouldn't say "that's fine." It's still not a very responsible thing to do right now. But it's certainly different from the reference I thought he was making, if you're right. And I would be somewhat relieved to learn you are.
22 hours ago • Like

Barbara A. Drescher You can't have it both ways. If drunk people are not responsible for the choices they make, then nobody should be prosecuted for drunk driving, are you prepared for that? All of this *sounds* very compassionate, but short-sighted thinking and rhetoric-driven behavior such as blacklisting and vigilantism is actually very, very irrational and harmful.
22 hours ago via mobile • Like • 2

Wendy Hughes It's a lot like the death penalty. It's across the board or not at all. You can't pick & choose who and when to apply it.
22 hours ago via mobile • Like • 3

Commenter #2 Maybe I'm just really naive about this, but if someone keeps giving you drinks, are you at all obligated to drink them? Can you not just say "no thanks" if a person keeps giving you drinks? Or give them to someone else if that person insists on buying you drinks? Unless you're being forced to drink (or are drugged) are you not responsible for your own actions and alcoholic intake?
21 hours ago • Edited • Like • 2

Carrie Poppy Again, I can't give more details. All I said was that alcohol was involved. There are a lot of assumptions being made here, and they are incorrect assumptions. I can't give you more details than that because the victim asked me not to.
21 hours ago • Like

Commenter #2 I'm talking strictly about a hypothetical situation, based on Mr. Deity's speech.
21 hours ago • Like

Carrie Poppy Okay. I'm not.
21 hours ago • Like

Barbara A. Drescher The details are not relevant. That's part of the problem with this conversation.
21 hours ago via mobile • Like

Barbara A. Drescher Try taking the bit on face value.
21 hours ago via mobile • Like

Carrie Poppy Well, I just lost faith in humanity.
21 hours ago • Like • 1

Commenter #5 Getting drunk and getting in a car to drive it implies action on the part of the drunk person. Getting drunk and and having something done to you (like sexual assault or robbery, say) doesn't mean you've actually made any decision except the decision to drink itself. I'm sure we'd all agree that if a drunk person is passed out in a public park, say, it doesn't mean we can all go have sex with them. Or if a drunk person passes out in your hotel room. Obviously not every situation is that clear, but I don't think this parallel totally passes muster.
21 hours ago • Like • 2

Barbara A. Drescher [Commenter #5], please do not misrepresent what I wrote. People who are passed out don't drive cars, either. They don't make choices. That's a straw man.
21 hours ago • Edited • Like

Commenter #5 Yes, that's true. Didn't mean to lump everything together like that. Was more of a response to other alcohol comments. I realize yours is a more nuanced comment.
21 hours ago • Like • 2

Barbara A. Drescher Thank you, [Commenter #5]. I expected someone to bring it up and I'm glad that it was you, since you clearly recognize the difference.
21 hours ago • Like • 2
[End part 1 of 2 (damn character limit)]
Why does anyone even engage Carrie Poppy? Shouldn't she get back to euthanizing animals for PETA?

real horrorshow
.
.
Posts: 1505
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:59 am
Location: In a band of brigands.
Contact:

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14694

Post by real horrorshow » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:23 pm

AndrewV69 wrote: Woman makes false rape claim, cop: 'We run into that all the time'
http://www.cotwa.info/2013/08/woman-mak ... e-run.html
Several things struck me reading that article:
Eighty per cent of men had overall positive feelings about the experience compared to 54 per cent of women. . . . . The predominant negative feeling reported by women was regret at having been 'used'.
This has baffled me all my sexually active life. The only reward you're even half-way entitled to in a one night stand is an orgasm (or several). Why do some women think that having sex is something they should be rewarded for over and above the pleasures of the act itself? And if they feel that way why not cut the crap and go into prostitution or porn?
Similarly, last year in Ohio State University's student newspaper The Lantern, Amy Bonomi, a professor of human sexuality at OSU specializing in domestic violence and assault, said:
"Women tend to feel bad after having a random hook up," she said. Typically men are not upset by these occurrences. Bonomi attributed this situation to society's "gender double standard" that men are expected to be more sexually forward than women.
Again, I've been hearing about this "double standard" all my life. I know that it exists, I've seen it in action, but who's enforcing it? Because - for the most part - I don't think it's guys. If the male students at OSU are anything like I was as an undergrad "sexually forward" women are what they want. (It was the only way I got laid at University!) About the only time you'll find men being critical of a woman for being too sexually active are:

1) If he thought they had a monogamous relationship and she fucked other people.

2) If she fucks a lot of people he knows, but not him. (In fact, the latter is the joke male definition of 'slut')

The real "slut-shamers" - in my experience - are other women. And I would love to know why so many women - here in the First World and the 21st Century - think pussy must be rationed. It's not like there's a shortage! Women do understand that I am not going to marry them and provide this nowadays don't they:
[youtube]XuK9_yXN-H8[/youtube]
That was over before I was born.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14695

Post by Badger3k » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:25 pm

Ä uest wrote: Scalzi is a very well known SF writer and former President of SFWA.

He is widely known for his essay http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/s ... -there-is/ but this essay suffers from his own "privilege" - that is, he is a very smart talented guy that has become very successful.

Because he feels he was successful and made it on his own, then all white men should be successful and make it on their own.

I think of this as a "bootstrap fallacy" -- it's often attributed to "tea partiers' by folks on the left.
Thanks, I thought I had heard that name. I think I have a few of his books in my electronic library, but haven't read any of them. From reading the links people put up, I'm not impressed with his intellect or comprehension, so I'm not sure if I will read them. Was the one of the people who started the whole "misogyny in SF" thing a short time back? If so, I have to wonder about his evidence for that also. I never looked into it either so I had no opinion either way at the time - I just saw it being used as ammunition by the SJWs to target all of mankind.

JustAtheist
.
.
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 1:41 pm
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14696

Post by JustAtheist » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:26 pm

You cant have it both ways. You cant say hey i cant give any details but if you assume any details or do any conjecture its victim blaming. Without details there is no victim there is a rumor of a victim. Without any details you cant blame anyone since there is nothing to directly criticize.

Fucking stupid.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5371
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Contact:

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14697

Post by katamari Damassi » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:26 pm

ERV wrote:
Verklagekasper wrote:The reason why Twitter storifying raised the interest of PZ is this:
You know what I thought was scary, Rebecca? Having a real stalker.

Verklagekasper wrote:White knight to the rescue: He does have a crush on her, doesn't he. If the FTB/Skepchick environment wasn't so sex-negative, they could have settled this with drunk monkey sex long time ago, and nothing of all the current hassle would have happened.
I am big on trust in my relationships. I dont care if my partner goes out and parties with friends/family without me, or has scantly dressed women as fitness clients. I am either with someone I trust, or Im not with someone.

But the way Myers has been following Watson around the past few years, seeing him throw away relationships over her, risk his career and the financial security of his family for her, going to events she is at (that he isnt speaking at)-- I would have ended it with him a long time ago.

Its weird.
It looks like Peezus is successful using this non-crisis/controversy of Storifying=stalking to distract from false rape accusationgate or whatever the fuck we've decide to call it.

Biohazard
.
.
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:19 am
Contact:

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14698

Post by Biohazard » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:29 pm

yomomma wrote:Biohazard, thanks for posting that. Interesting.

I thought you said that Penn Gillette commented too, or am I mistaken?
Your welcome and I don't recall seeing Penn in that thread.

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

Re: Shall Mr Vacula Make a Misstep in the Capital of Eire?

#14699

Post by Karmakin » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:30 pm

I've said it before and I'll say it again. There's nothing new with what @Elevatorgate is doing, especially from a progressive PoV. It's not that much different from say Amanda Marcotte spending years writing about Vox Day every week or so or John Cole and the others at Balloon Juice writing about the latest from Andrew Sullivan or Megan McArdle.

Of course at this juncture most people don't even know where it started, which was a guy by the name of BartCop writing about the bleatings of Rush Limbaugh day in and day out.

Nothing new under the sun. Just pisses me when people don't put this stuff in the proper context.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 10590
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri
Contact:

Re: Love is a Battlefield

#14700

Post by Lsuoma » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:31 pm

katamari Damassi wrote: It looks like Peezus is successful using this non-crisis/controversy of Storifying=stalking to distract from false rape accusationgate or whatever the fuck we've decide to call it.
Doesn't matter, really. The real action - I'm guessing, based on PeeZus' self-pitying whine - is going on in attorney-land, and will take some time to come to light.

ὀψε θɛῷν ἀλέουσίμύλοί, ἀλέουσί δε λɛρṯά,

Locked