Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[Kirbmarc]

An oddly appropriate tweet from ThimbleDick:

[ReneeHendricks]

In the *ENTIRE* realm of video games, MEN AND WOMEN are sexualized. Narrow minded women like Sarkeesian think it *only* happens to women. But then she's not looking into games that put men in skimpy and sexual outfits, is she?

Sarkeesian is trying to do more than just pointing out sexual imagery in video games. If she simply complained about how sexualized female video game characters are, people wouldn't have cared about her opinion and would have called a bigot straight away. What really gets people's attention, and what really pisses off gamers, is that she's arguing that games are actively dangerous to women, that they're designed to arouse people through a "perverse mix of sex and violence".

She doesn't seem to notice (or more probably she pretends not to notice) that if games were really dangerous they'd be far more dangerous to men than women, given the impressive amount of ways you can get away with if you want to show how to kill a male character.

The claim that video games turn you into a potential murderer is ignored and laughed off by most of people in the medias. But when Sarkeesian claim that video game turn you into a potential rapist, influential people (including the likes of Joss Whedon) lap it up and parrot her views everywhere.

Why am I now thinking of why they don't show cartoons from the 50s and 60s? Oh, yes. Because (ignorant) people thought that children would be compelled to drop anvils on their peers and jump off of cliffs. Sarkeesian has that sort of intellect.

[Skep tickle]

:popcorn: at @micknugent 's tweets in the past hour, esp w/ Benson.

[comhcinc]

Why am I now thinking of why they don't show cartoons from the 50s and 60s? Oh, yes. Because (ignorant) people thought that children would be compelled to drop anvils on their peers and jump off of cliffs. Sarkeesian has that sort of intellect.

I think it has more to do with the selling of smokes

[youtube]NAExoSozc2c[/youtube]

Racism

[youtube]H8D93Awa434[/youtube]

And suicide

[youtube]jUcJFYQAyvI[/youtube]

[jugheadnaut]

In the *ENTIRE* realm of video games, MEN AND WOMEN are sexualized. Narrow minded women like Sarkeesian think it *only* happens to women. But then she's not looking into games that put men in skimpy and sexual outfits, is she?

Sarkeesian is trying to do more than just pointing out sexual imagery in video games. If she simply complained about how sexualized female video game characters are, people wouldn't have cared about her opinion and would have called a bigot straight away. What really gets people's attention, and what really pisses off gamers, is that she's arguing that games are actively dangerous to women, that they're designed to arouse people through a "perverse mix of sex and violence".

She doesn't seem to notice (or more probably she pretends not to notice) that if games were really dangerous they'd be far more dangerous to men than women, given the impressive amount of ways you can get away with if you want to show how to kill a male character.

The claim that video games turn you into a potential murderer is ignored and laughed off by most of people in the medias. But when Sarkeesian claim that video game turn you into a potential rapist, influential people (including the likes of Joss Whedon) lap it up and parrot her views everywhere.

And that brings up another lame point from the musically gifted dimwit that Sarkeesian linked to. He criticized Sommers' video for having a bit about violence. "Wasn't this supposed to be about sexism?" he chirped. But it was Sarkeesian who emphatically brought up the point that sexual portrayals of women in video games are particularly dangerous because it was mixed with violence. So bringing up the fact that studies have repeatedly shown no link between violence in video games and violence in real life is completely relevant in a critique of her.

(Based on his favorite analysis technique, I'm betting he would whine "But the title of the video is 'Are Video Games Sexist', not 'A Critique of Anita Sarkeesian').

[Guestus Aurelius]

[comhcinc]

Listen shitlord don't fucking tell me I am smart enough to understand your point. Fucking ablist piece of shit.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[zenbabe]

Guestus.. lol

[bovarchist]

I am going to pretend that Mack th.e Knife comment didn't happen so I won't go all rage bloggy

Well then you'll love this... Ah, the 80s.

[youtube]owhA_sKoKbE[/youtube]

[austin]

Listen shitlord don't fucking tell me I am smart enough to understand your point. Fucking ablist piece of shit.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

The criticism arrow only goes in one direction.......

SJW ---------------------> misognistic shitlord

critic --xxxxxxxxxxx--> SJW (no, no, no, strait to the dungeon STFU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

[jet_lagg]

I think it's time for my annual apology to the pit.

For the most part, I'm only on the periphery of the atheist movement. I don't follow any blogs (had never heard of Nugent until I came here) and don't go to any cons. I involve myself locally, debating the religious I know personally or meet in public, and lobbying politicians when I see some injustice being done, but I don't have the same involvement with the internet community that many of you do. So, when I see a good number of members dismissing someone's claims out of hand, it looks like bias to me. I'm not privy to the background information that bred your cynicism (and since I hate to get through an honest apology without adding an insult, let's remember I do keep explaining all of this to you assholes, but you're too thick to catch on ;) ). Every once in a while I do get the opportunity to dig a bit deeper into what's happening on the onlines though, and, when I do, I often find myself becoming as angry and disgusted as some of the more dickish members, like Mykeru.

So I'm sorry for not being more like Mykeru. I think.

[Guestus Aurelius]

Wow. Why doesn't he just join the Pit already? He clearly hates all women, just like we all do.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

(Benson has me blocked so she'll only see it if someone who she doesn't have blocked replies or RT's it, & then she'll tweet me saying she doesn't want me to tag her, and then if history is any guide she'll consider copying it into a blog post at which PZ or Zvan, possibly alerted via backchannel, will be the first commenter.)

:lol: :lol: 8-) So true!

[BlueShiftRhino]

I involve myself locally, debating the religious I know personally or meet in public, and lobbying politicians when I see some injustice being done, but I don't have the same involvement with the internet community that many of you do.

i.e., you do useful stuff instead of have fun

bah!

[austin]

A puzzling little factoid, for some reason on simple phrase or the equivalent sets of a SJW like almost no other. If you want to set them off in a torrential rage, just say this:

CALM DOWN.

[another lurker]

(Benson has me blocked so she'll only see it if someone who she doesn't have blocked replies or RT's it, & then she'll tweet me saying she doesn't want me to tag her, and then if history is any guide she'll consider copying it into a blog post at which PZ or Zvan, possibly alerted via backchannel, will be the first commenter.)

:lol: :lol: 8-) So true!

Skep is a supremely devious and cunning stalker!!

[BlueShiftRhino]

Why is Michael Nugent hammering away on his request that Oafie withdraw her accusation? Is he really that offended by the accusation or is he just testing to see if she'll ever withdraw anything that isn't warranted? It's very difficult to tell. Almost like a POE.

[Badger3k]

They said not to leave the pit home. They said there were weird dangerous people out there.

But did I listen?

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

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php? ... st10232493

That's the point where you repeat what they say, with a question mark, and ask - what is wrong with you? Why does your mind go there? Projecting?

Not having gone there, I assume this refers to actually asking for witnesses or evidence? That sounds like the pat answer to that.

[austin]

I sometimes wonder if PZ's problem isn't that he's is blindingly un-self aware, but that he has the attention, retention and memory of a two year old. He can breezily spout new nonsense forgetting that all the stuff he ever said never happened. I wouldn't be surprised if he finds something he likes about what Dawkins wrote, and cheerfully blogs on it.

I also wouldn't be surprised if at some future conference he approaches Dawkins like they are two old blokes, sharing stories, as if none of this ever happened. I really think he's capable of acting that stupid, so the question has to be why.

[jet_lagg]

A puzzling little factoid, for some reason on simple phrase or the equivalent sets of a SJW like almost no other. If you want to set them off in a torrential rage, just say this:

CALM DOWN.

Don't EVER tell me to calm down! You're not some big strong man looking over me!

If my memory is working, that's actually a direct quote of a response from a friend when I told her she wasn't making any sense, and since I knew she was intelligent enough to follow the conversation, this was probably because she needed to calm down. :lol:

[bovarchist]

partly I think it's recognizable b/c the artist was working from this iconic and horrifying picture.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/ ... 34x498.jpg

once you see it, you can't unsee it.

That's hair! All this time, I thought it was some sort of head wrapping, like something out of the renaissance or some nuns habit thing. Before I knew it was hair, she does kind of look like some bizarre medieval or renaissance painting. Or maybe Picasso.

Or Geiger.

I was thinking it was an owl-headed gorgon.

I was thinking Harry Potter character. Rita Skeeter probably.

[jugheadnaut]

A puzzling little factoid, for some reason on simple phrase or the equivalent sets of a SJW like almost no other. If you want to set them off in a torrential rage, just say this:

CALM DOWN.

Saying 'calm down' is an invalidation of their beliefs which require them to be outraged. And in the borderline personality disorder variant of SJW's, it can be an invalidation of their entire personhood, since they conflate their beliefs with their actual identity.

[JacquesCuze]

So many weird but basically stupid bots on twitter.

I used a Nietzsche quote a week ago, and got followed by at least three different Nietzsche twitter bots.

I just now "dissed" journalists who think they know tech because they attend "startup"parties, and within seconds a bot from a startup "news" source favorites it.

I suspect half of the entities "following"me are bots that have followed me because of some keyword match.
The other half probably brain damaged.

[Scented Nectar]

I sometimes wonder if PZ's problem isn't that he's is blindingly un-self aware, but that he has the attention, retention and memory of a two year old. He can breezily spout new nonsense forgetting that all the stuff he ever said never happened. I wouldn't be surprised if he finds something he likes about what Dawkins wrote, and cheerfully blogs on it.

I also wouldn't be surprised if at some future conference he approaches Dawkins like they are two old blokes, sharing stories, as if none of this ever happened. I really think he's capable of acting that stupid, so the question has to be why.

I think he's too far gone into paranoid-land and stubborn-ville to ever revert back to being friendly to his declared enemies. Maybe if they renounced their reasonable words as sinfully misogynistical (rhymes with wooey 'mystical'), and promised to repent for the rest of their days. There's no being saved by the great Earth Mother of Superior Ovaries without confessing your sins. And if you don't think you have those sins, you're automatically wrong and unsavable.

The only difference between those idiots and religious groups, is that religious groups are much better at scamming big money from people. :lol:

[Avalyne]

Why is Michael Nugent hammering away on his request that Oafie withdraw her accusation? Is he really that offended by the accusation or is he just testing to see if she'll ever withdraw anything that isn't warranted? It's very difficult to tell. Almost like a POE.

Or, he's prepping to make a case for harassment and get her blocked from Twatter for a day or two. Isn't that how she works? Asks "nicely" a hundred times, then gets someone kicked off for harassing her?

[bovarchist]

I recently heard a 911 recording of an elderly woman who called, reporting a guy breaking into her house. Her late husband gave her and taught her how to use a .38 revolver. As expected, the guy breaking in was making far more headway than the police. During the call she retreated into the bathroom. The guy , apparently some meth-head asshole, got into the house and attacked her in the bathroom. You hear the sounds of screaming, a scuffle and a kind of a metallic thud, some microphones aren't good at picking up the sound of a discharging firearm. Yes, she shot him. He seemed deeply offended by this. She assured him that if he got up, she would shoot him again. They had time for a three way conversation with the 911 operator before the police finally showed up.

[youtube]mEkqKrM7BeU[/youtube]

"Ma'am, where did you shoot him?" "In my house!"

I laughed pretty hard at that.

Speaking of which, do they let just anybody be 911 operators? That guy was pretty much worthless.

[JacquesCuze]

A few questions for pit biologists and pit MDs.

1) There are reports that ebola blood from ebola survivors has protective properties. On TV, it would be a matter of a few hours to determine , isolate, and manufacture the protective elements (presumably antibodies). In real life, assuming ebola blood does contain ebola antibodies, how long would it take to determine and isolate those antibodies?

2) Given the antibodies and my understanding antibodies are "just" proteins, how long to fully determine the specific structure of the protein (and thus be able to write down the genetic code to create that protein?)

3) How cool is this? http://www.futurity.org/vip-vaccines-hi ... ria-768232

WILL ‘VIP’ PROTECT US FROM THE FLU AND HIV AND MALARIA?
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYrightOriginal Study

Posted by Kimm Fesenmaier-Caltech on September 19, 2014

Efforts to develop broadly effective vaccines for HIV and malaria have had limited success. Now scientists are testing a totally different approach—one that so far seems very promising.

Unlike vaccines, which introduce substances such as antigens into the body hoping to illicit an appropriate immune response, the new method provides the body with step-by-step instructions for producing specific antibodies shown to neutralize a particular disease.

The method is called vectored immunoprophylaxis, or VIP. The technique was so successful in triggering an immune response to HIV in mice that it has since been applied to a number of other infectious diseases.

HOW VIP TREATMENT WORKS

VIP relies on the prior identification of one or more antibodies that are able to prevent infection in laboratory tests by a wide range of isolated samples of a particular pathogen.

Once that has been done, researchers can incorporate the genes that encode those antibodies into an adeno-associated virus (AAV), a small, harmless virus that has been useful in gene-therapy trials. When the AAV is injected into muscle tissue, the genes instruct the muscle tissue to generate the specified antibodies, which can then enter the circulation and protect against infection.

[austin]

A puzzling little factoid, for some reason on simple phrase or the equivalent sets of a SJW like almost no other. If you want to set them off in a torrential rage, just say this:

CALM DOWN.

Saying 'calm down' is an invalidation of their beliefs which require them to be outraged. And in the borderline personality disorder variant of SJW's, it can be an invalidation of their entire personhood, since they conflate their beliefs with their actual identity.

Adding to what you and jett_lagg have said, calm down to a SJW essentially means stop making emotional arguments - be reasonable - essentially applying all the stereotypes about women in one statement.

[Gumby]

Why is Michael Nugent hammering away on his request that Oafie withdraw her accusation? Is he really that offended by the accusation or is he just testing to see if she'll ever withdraw anything that isn't warranted? It's very difficult to tell. Almost like a POE.

The red part, I think.

I'm coming to the conclusion that Nugget has been largely out of touch with the Schism goings-on, and now he is finally trying to learn about it, lab-animaling Ophie and others with his blog posts and tweets to see if all the unfavorable things said about the SJWs are actually true.

Or, maybe he's just an idiot. Who knows.

[Badger3k]

An oddly appropriate tweet from ThimbleDick:

That's not fair - how much alcohol were they given?

[austin]

I sometimes wonder if PZ's problem isn't that he's is blindingly un-self aware, but that he has the attention, retention and memory of a two year old. He can breezily spout new nonsense forgetting that all the stuff he ever said never happened. I wouldn't be surprised if he finds something he likes about what Dawkins wrote, and cheerfully blogs on it.

I also wouldn't be surprised if at some future conference he approaches Dawkins like they are two old blokes, sharing stories, as if none of this ever happened. I really think he's capable of acting that stupid, so the question has to be why.

I think he's too far gone into paranoid-land and stubborn-ville to ever revert back to being friendly to his declared enemies. Maybe if they renounced their reasonable words as sinfully misogynistical (rhymes with wooey 'mystical'), and promised to repent for the rest of their days. There's no being saved by the great Earth Mother of Superior Ovaries without confessing your sins. And if you don't think you have those sins, you're automatically wrong and unsavable.

The only difference between those idiots and religious groups, is that religious groups are much better at scamming big money from people. :lol:

I don't know, it is always claimed that he is so meek and mild in person. Maybe he'd run away and hide at the sight of Dawkins.

[Gumby]

This just happened. Anyone surprised? *yawns*

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/ ... 3327b0.png

:lol:

Case in point re my previous post. If Noogy has two brain cells worth rubbing together, he's learning all he needs to learn about the infantile mindset of Ophie and the other SJWs.

[BlueShiftRhino]

Saying 'calm down' is an invalidation of their beliefs which require them to be outraged. And in the borderline personality disorder variant of SJW's, it can be an invalidation of their entire personhood, since they conflate their beliefs with their actual identity.

Yes. It goes hand-in-hand with the idea that merely saying "I'm offended!" is some kind of argument against what was said to cause said offense. And, please note, that this is not a gender-based problem. In a meeting about a week ago a male said "I'm offended!" (to which I almost replied: "I'm sorry to hear that, but please stay on-topic").

[Scented Nectar]

So many weird but basically stupid bots on twitter.

I used a Nietzsche quote a week ago, and got followed by at least three different Nietzsche twitter bots.

I just now "dissed" journalists who think they know tech because they attend "startup"parties, and within seconds a bot from a startup "news" source favorites it.

I suspect half of the entities "following"me are bots that have followed me because of some keyword match.
The other half probably brain damaged.

Twitter fucks up people's follows. Yesterday, I followed BlueShiftRhino, and while logged in, I took a lot at the list of who is following me. There were a couple dozen that I'm sure I was following already, but was not. So, I just went through the list and clicked follow on almost everyone there. I mean, what the fuck?

Twitter and facebook and google have all admitted to doing marketing research in unethical manners, such as one 'research' which was to make people only see tweets and posts that are deemed 'positive' or 'negative' to see if that would change the person's own tweets, and they've admitted to changing who a person follows too. Youtube did the same thing a while back.

Market research is fine, but not when done unethically. Not only do you not see what you've signed up to see, but it can lead to people who you've been unfollowed from, thinking that you unfollowed them on purpose!

I gave up recently on keeping up with google plus posts because each time I used it, I saw different posts for the last 24 hours each time I opened it up. It should have been the same posts plus some new ones at the top, but nope. Those fuckers made their product totally unusable for me.

I think it would be very nice if someone like Wikileaks, leaked out their various unethical social experiments. I would like that a lot.

[Jan Steen]

Jan Steen - nice comments over at Nugent's, in several threads.

Thanks. Enjoying the Irish hospitality. :D

[BlueShiftRhino]

I don't know, it is always claimed that he is so meek and mild in person. Maybe he'd run away and hide at the sight of Dawkins.

A huge majority of internet bullies are pussy-cats (or just pussies) in person. That's a defining attribute of bullies: to suddenly back off when they are on equal ground. You can even see a hint of this on the few occasions where PZ posts on a blog that isn't controlled by a member of The Horde; he's suddenly much more reasonable.

Nothing new to see here.

[Mykeru]

Elderly!? She is 47 and reportedly Demi Moore sucks blood from her to maintain her looks.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/loc ... /14989333/

You've got the wrong link there. The link is to the story Mykeru mentioned earlier.

Yeah, Mykeru's elderly woman is 47.

Goddamnit so much.

Based on the DID YOU FUCKING PEOPLE SEE WHAT WHATEVERTHEFUCK SAID IN THAT THREAD ON THAT FORUM THAT I LINKED TO SIX PAGES BACK posts and now this, I can only conclude that y'all just suck at linking.

[BlueShiftRhino]

Twitter fucks up people's follows. Yesterday, I followed BlueShiftRhino, and while logged in, I took a lot at the list of who is following me. There were a couple dozen that I'm sure I was following already, but was not. So, I just went through the list and clicked follow on almost everyone there. I mean, what the fuck?

I'm not sure what the standard etiquette is for following followers, so I'll just say "thanks" and then apologize for un-following one Pitter (but you retweet more than I can possibly handle).

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

I don't know, it is always claimed that he is so meek and mild in person. Maybe he'd run away and hide at the sight of Dawkins.

A huge majority of internet bullies are pussy-cats (or just pussies) in person. That's a defining attribute of bullies: to suddenly back off when they are on equal ground. You can even see a hint of this on the few occasions where PZ posts on a blog that isn't controlled by a member of The Horde; he's suddenly much more reasonable.

Nothing new to see here.

He's supposed to be able to be an asshole in person as well, but more snide and passive-aggressive than belligerent. I do so hope to meet him in person someday. What a guy!

[jugheadnaut]

I sometimes wonder if PZ's problem isn't that he's is blindingly un-self aware, but that he has the attention, retention and memory of a two year old. He can breezily spout new nonsense forgetting that all the stuff he ever said never happened. I wouldn't be surprised if he finds something he likes about what Dawkins wrote, and cheerfully blogs on it.

I also wouldn't be surprised if at some future conference he approaches Dawkins like they are two old blokes, sharing stories, as if none of this ever happened. I really think he's capable of acting that stupid, so the question has to be why.

I have to say I disagree, except for the 'blindingly un-self aware' part. Peez strikes me as a grudge holder. I think Dawkins would have to do the whole sackcloth and ashes thing and then join the SJW cause as an obsequious underling before Peez would regard him as a friend.

I definitely don't think Peez could regard Dawkins as frenemy. In fact, the whole frenemy concept is completely alien to this kind of hardcore manichean.

Some people can spew vicious personal vitriol in a debate and think that once the debate is over, friendship automatically resumes and all is forgotten. I'm pretty sure this type of person is somewhere on the autism spectrum. But I can't see Peez as this type, either.

[JayTeeAitch]

Just like this classic really cool song (IMO) sounds kinda like Frank Sinatra, though it ain't.

[youtube]SEllHMWkXEU[/youtube]

That compelled me to look up where the name came from. The song's from a 1920's opera:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mack_the_Knife

Here's a clip from a 1989 film adaptation:

[youtube]CQJlvqeXrC8[/youtube]

Not sure who singing it.

[JacquesCuze]

[.quote="JacquesCuze"]Elderly!? She is 47 and reportedly Demi Moore sucks blood from her to maintain her looks.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/loc ... /14989333/[./quote]

You've got the wrong link there. The link is to the story Mykeru mentioned earlier.

Yeah, Mykeru's elderly woman is 47.

Goddamnit so much.

Based on the DID YOU FUCKING PEOPLE SEE WHAT WHATEVERTHEFUCK SAID IN THAT THREAD ON THAT FORUM THAT I LINKED TO SIX PAGES BACK posts and now this, I can only conclude that y'all just suck at linking.

Except it was only one page back from when I posted it, viewtopic.php?p=217884#p217884
And it was a joke that I thought didn't require the typical internet fact check.

I probably do suck at linking.

[austin]

Since public drunkenness has come up in discussion….

Here is an interesting tragic true story that a colleague of mine relayed to me several years ago. He was on travel to New Mexico for some reason, and he was sitting across the aisle from some asshole who was totally obnoxiously drunk, yet was continually ordering drink after drink throughout the flight. He got off the plane apparently wasted and proceeded to drive in his truck pick up another six pack of beer at a gas station, drive on the wrong side of the freeway, kill a family as well as himself the same night. Discussion arose who was responsible, obviously the asshole was, but how responsible can you be if you’re totally wasted. Should the airlines have continued to serve him drinks and should the gas station have sold him beer if he was wasted. If I recall they tried to sue the gas station, but don’t know what happened, did follow the story. I don’t want to sound like an SJW, but it does bother me when airlines continue to serve drunken assholes, and I’ve seen it a number of times.

Anyway below is a past excerpt from the event.

I don’t want to create a pitter fight, but I thought I’d pass this along, since it comes to mind.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/travel/n ... xico_x.htm

[jugheadnaut]

"Ma'am, where did you shoot him?" "In my house!"

I laughed pretty hard at that.

Reminds me of this old joke:

A helicopter was flying around above Seattle yesterday when an
electrical malfunction disabled all of the aircraft's electronic
navigation and communication equipment. Due to the clouds and haze
the pilot could not determine his position or course to steer to the
airport. The pilot saw a tall building, flew toward it, circled, drew
a handwritten sign and held it in the helicopter's window. The sign
said "WHERE AM I ?" in large letters.

People in the tall building quickly responded to the aircraft, drew a
large sign and held it in a building window. Their sign said, "YOU
ARE IN A HELICOPTER." The pilot smiled, waved, looked at his map and
determine the course to steer to SEATAC (Seattle/Tacoma) airport and
landed safely.

After they were on the ground, the co-pilot asked the pilot how the
"YOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER" sign helped determine their position. The
pilot responded, "I knew that had to be the MICROSOFT building
because they gave me a technically correct but completely useless
answer."

Speaking of which, do they let just anybody be 911 operators? That guy was pretty much worthless.

It took him about 23 seconds to get annoyed with her desperation, even though she was in a legitimately scary and hyper-stressful situation.

[Ape+lust]

Thunderf00t's mad at Twitter. Rightly so, he didn't do anything wrong.

[youtube]XTSQbLt9DS8[/youtube]

Speaking of Thunderf00t, remember when Nugent went after him? Ophelia, as usual, pulled a big chunk of it for a blog post and bracketed it with the phrase "a joy to read" top and bottom. Now poor dumb Nuge has learned giving her buds the same is like feeding a Mogwai after midnight, makes her pop-eyed kerblooie. He should've known :lol:

[Jan Steen]

So I posed this question to Pharyngula regular theophontes:

Aren’t you the one who compared Rebecca Watson with Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King and Harvey Milk? May I take this opportunity to thank you for the good laugh this gave me? It brings a smile to my face again as I write this. Thank you.

The reply:

Guilty as charged. All four of them have fought against bigotry. All four of them were initially derided for doing so.

Do I think Rebecca currently enjoys the fame and stature of the others? No, of course not. Or at least: not yet.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Not yet! It's the mad optimism of someone who sets up a business selling water-skiing equipment in the Sahara.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2014/09/17 ... ng-people/

[Semi]

http://s10.postimg.org/ti4ty4lpl/image.jpg

[jet_lagg]

It's my understanding that most states do have laws about serving visibly intoxicated people. The corner liquor store in NYC has a big sign that says they'll refuse service to anyone who appears to be drunk, and that's a good thing IMO. At some point it becomes obvious bullshit for an individual or organization to ignore the actions of someone else and then claim they were in no way responsible for what the person ends up doing.

[paddybrown]

I think he's too far gone into paranoid-land and stubborn-ville to ever revert back to being friendly to his declared enemies. Maybe if they renounced their reasonable words as sinfully misogynistical (rhymes with wooey 'mystical'), and promised to repent for the rest of their days. There's no being saved by the great Earth Mother of Superior Ovaries without confessing your sins. And if you don't think you have those sins, you're automatically wrong and unsavable.

I'm not sure even repenting would work. Repentance is an admission of guilt, and that'd just be an excuse for more attacks and denunciations. As the Bora whatsisname story showed, SJWs are perfectly capable of extorting apologies from people just to use as ammunition against them later.

[austin]

Thunderf00t's mad at Twitter. Rightly so, he didn't do anything wrong.

[youtube]XTSQbLt9DS8[/youtube]

Speaking of Thunderf00t, remember when Nugent went after him? Ophelia, as usual, pulled a big chunk of it for a blog post and bracketed it with the phrase "a joy to read" top and bottom. Now poor dumb Nuge has learned giving her buds the same is like feeding a Mogwai after midnight, makes her pop-eyed kerblooie. He should've known :lol:

They may have to change the name to TWITter. What bullshit. If you can't win the war of ideas, the best move is censorship. Cowardly. Hope this isn't a sign of things to come.

[austin]

It's my understanding that most states do have laws about serving visibly intoxicated people. The corner liquor store in NYC has a big sign that says they'll refuse service to anyone who appears to be drunk, and that's a good thing IMO. At some point it becomes obvious bullshit for an individual or organization to ignore the actions of someone else and then claim they were in no way responsible for what the person ends up doing.

That's pretty much along the lines of my thinking too.

[Badger3k]

So many weird but basically stupid bots on twitter.

I used a Nietzsche quote a week ago, and got followed by at least three different Nietzsche twitter bots.

I just now "dissed" journalists who think they know tech because they attend "startup"parties, and within seconds a bot from a startup "news" source favorites it.

I suspect half of the entities "following"me are bots that have followed me because of some keyword match.
The other half probably brain damaged.

You could be right. I may tweet once in a blue moon, when I'm bored and nothing else good is on my phone so I'll browse. Did a bit more during gamergate to see if I can understand any of it or see what is going on. I may retweet something I find interesting or want to look at later (easier to find it if it is in my list), yet I still get followers. I rarely say anything worth anything, yet for some reason get followed. Makes no sense.

[AndrewV69]

Thunderf00t's mad at Twitter. Rightly so, he didn't do anything wrong.

[.youtube]XTSQbLt9DS8[/youtube]

Speaking of Thunderf00t, remember when Nugent went after him? Ophelia, as usual, pulled a big chunk of it for a blog post and bracketed it with the phrase "a joy to read" top and bottom. Now poor dumb Nuge has learned giving her buds the same is like feeding a Mogwai after midnight, makes her pop-eyed kerblooie. He should've known :lol:

They may have to change the name to TWITter. What bullshit. If you can't win the war of ideas, the best move is censorship. Cowardly. Hope this isn't a sign of things to come.

Incoming ban in 5, 4, 3 .... ?

[BlueShiftRhino]

It's my understanding that most states do have laws about serving visibly intoxicated people. The corner liquor store in NYC has a big sign that says they'll refuse service to anyone who appears to be drunk, and that's a good thing IMO. At some point it becomes obvious bullshit for an individual or organization to ignore the actions of someone else and then claim they were in no way responsible for what the person ends up doing.

That's pretty much along the lines of my thinking too.

Check your (plural) coastal privilege. Rather few states in the south or mid-west have these laws.

[jugheadnaut]

Thunderf00t's mad at Twitter. Rightly so, he didn't do anything wrong.

That twitter 'targeted abuse' policy is really fucked up. The second item doesn't bother even defining abuse, thus defining abuse in terms of abuse. More outrageously, the third item seems to assume behavior that is 'one-sided' is of a similar standing to behavior that includes threats. What do they mean by 'one-sided'? You can't be polemically critical? You have to grant some kind of concession when criticizing somebody?

[Mykeru]

I'm proposing this replacement for the octopus.

This is "classic"

DOGNOPE.gif

(969.64 KiB) Downloaded 156 times

Can also render it in a "pit ready" "FUCK NO" version.

[JacquesCuze]

I'm proposing this replacement for the octopus.

This is "classic"

DOGNOPE.gif

Can also render it in a "pit ready" "FUCK NO" version.

I'm going to have to try that at fark, but my guess is that's a timeout there.

[Avalyne]

I'm proposing this replacement for the octopus.

This is "classic"

DOGNOPE.gif

Can also render it in a "pit ready" "FUCK NO" version.

Exploiting the Disabled again, Mykeru? Shitlord!

[Avalyne]

I'm proposing this replacement for the octopus.

This is "classic"

DOGNOPE.gif

Can also render it in a "pit ready" "FUCK NO" version.

Exploiting the Disabled again, Mykeru? Shitlord!

Oh, and love it, btw. :lol: :lol:

[JacquesCuze]

I'm proposing this replacement for the octopus.

This is "classic"

DOGNOPE.gif

Can also render it in a "pit ready" "FUCK NO" version.

I'm going to have to try that at fark, but my guess is that's a timeout there.

Sadly, imgur sez

> Image format not supported, or image is corrupt.

Do you have that anywhere were I can link to it or rehost it? (apart from the slymepit url)?