Periodic Table of Swearing

[Mr Danksworth]

The part about Penny refusing to speak unless she gets paid strikes a cord too. I recently got into a pissing contest with the (female) president of the Humanists of Florida Association for asking if and how much Watson got paid to give the keynote address at a HFA conference last month.

So, how much did she cost?

I don't know. I never got an answer.

Well, that's no fun. No fun at all. There has to be some numbers floating around. My conservative estimate is a $1000 to $1500 speaking fee, plus accommodations/food/entertainment/travel.

[welch]

So, how much did she cost?

I don't know. I never got an answer.

Well, that's no fun. No fun at all. There has to be some numbers floating around. My conservative estimate is a $1000 to $1500 speaking fee, plus accommodations/food/entertainment/travel.

Well, if they're a proper 503 org, they may have to have their books public, although I may be wrong on that.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Ok, I'm fed up with the spambots that have found a way to post, so I'm going to start requiring guests to provide an email address to post. Apologies.

What an interesting post. I will certainly check back here to read more about your point of view. Did you know you can now order V==ia~g~ra direct from the factory at half the ph@rm~~@cy pri--ce? To read mo~re about this @m@z~~ing off""er please shove a candle up your ass and whistle Dixie.

[KiwiInOz]

Ok, I'm fed up with the spambots that have found a way to post, so I'm going to start requiring guests to provide an email address to post. Apologies.

What an interesting post. I will certainly check back here to read more about your point of view. Did you know you can now order V==ia~g~ra direct from the factory at half the ph@rm~~@cy pri--ce? To read mo~re about this @m@z~~ing off""er please shove a candle up your ass and whistle Dixie.

What if you don't know the Dixie tune?

[rayshul]

I'm noticing Julia Gillard appears to have become the new feminist icon.

She's a bit of a useless bigoted cunt. So, y'know. I guess that works.

[Dick Strawkins]

Skepticon 2012.
Final day - last (i assume keynote speaker)
Racial Diversity and/in Our Fight Against Theism, Tony Pinn SK5.

reason for posting - audience pan at 38 minutes


probably a bit unfair, but it made me chuckle.

Disgusting.

Like I said, I would rather have 100 people show up and really participate. '1600' people were at Skepticon 2012, and only 700 thought it was appropriate to support Jessica Alquist? A few dozen thought it was appropriate to support 'Racial Diversity and/in Our Fight Against Theism'?

If I was the Skepticon organizer, with '1600' idiotic, ungrateful fucks in attendance, I would have publicly chastised the audience, and never organize shit again.

Not them, though, 'BEST SKEPTICON EVAH!!!!'

I did a rough head count and guess that there are about 100 people in the audience (120 max).
Going by Svans figure of 1400 attendees this means that less than 8% of the Skepticon 5 audience were bothered to turn up to this talk.

The other figure I've seen mentioned is that less than 1% of the entire Skepticon 5 audience were black or hispanic (which is how I interpret the phrase,"ethnically non-privileged", used to describe the minority attendees)
What ever way you look at it there IS a serious problem with diversity in the US atheist community and yet the FTB/Skepchick approach is to divert attention into petty personal politics and power games, all with the single aim of solidifying their monopoly on speaker positions at skeptical/atheist conferences.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Ok, I'm fed up with the spambots that have found a way to post, so I'm going to start requiring guests to provide an email address to post. Apologies.

What an interesting post. I will certainly check back here to read more about your point of view. Did you know you can now order V==ia~g~ra direct from the factory at half the ph@rm~~@cy pri--ce? To read mo~re about this @m@z~~ing off""er please shove a candle up your ass and whistle Dixie.

I tried, and when I got to my spam box, VOILA: Plenty of offers for free Viagra! Amazing!

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

yet the FTB/Skepchick approach is to divert attention into petty personal politics and power games, all with the single aim of solidifying their monopoly on speaker positions at skeptical/atheist conferences.

Well, then the best solution would be to first have them out of the con circuits, then find real, interesting speakers who have something of value to say about these problems, don't you think?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Or we can create our own con:

SLYCON 2013

Speakers: *Abbie: Smith "ERV, ANTI-VAXXERS, Arnie!!!"

*Franc: Hoggle "The Diffuculties or Sex Reassignement and findind suitable rubber boots"

*Mykeru: "Doing it For the Lulz and not giving a fuck (opening by Phil Giordana)"

* John C Welch & Michael Kingsford Gray: IT, MUsic and Arguments Within the Community"

*Al Stefanelli: "The Power of Hats (and an introduction to glasses)"

*Sacha and Rayshul: "Being a Chill Girl, Gender Traitor and Sister punisher in 2013"

(Feel free to had your owns)

Animations for the kids: *Daycare with Bhoytony

*R/C sailboats with Steersman

*Whack-A-Bronie with most of the staff so they don't get a chance

*Try to Guess My Gender with...

[Dick Strawkins]

yet the FTB/Skepchick approach is to divert attention into petty personal politics and power games, all with the single aim of solidifying their monopoly on speaker positions at skeptical/atheist conferences.

Well, then the best solution would be to first have them out of the con circuits, then find real, interesting speakers who have something of value to say about these problems, don't you think?

I wouldn't even put it like that.
I think Rebecca and PZ do have an audience, perhaps even a reasonably sizeable one in the States. There are enough people who agree with them on social justice issues for them to command key speaker positions in some conferences.
The thing is, however, that this skepchick-positive audience is not particular interested in what I would call 'scientific atheism' - or genuine skepticism. Yes, they claim to be 'skeptics', but so do 'climate change skeptics'. Both of these pseudo-skeptics already have their answer and nothing you say will change their minds. If you try to argue against them you are 'trolling', derailing, or are being hyperskeptical (which basically means asking the question: "Do you have any evidence for that claim?")
All of which leads me, believe it or not, to the conclusion that aspects of Jen McCreight and Richard Carrier's original 'us and them' plan for atheism-plus may have some merit.
They do need their own conferences, free from "hyperskeptics", "trolls" and "derailers".
The SkepchickCon type of backslapping boozefest is perfectly suited to their needs.
What they should not do is expect mainstream conferences to turn into large scale versions of SkepchickCon - where they have control and authority over the proceedings.
Russell Blackford got a lot of shit for tweeting the other day that he wouldn't attend a conference with PZ or Rebecca Watson.
Why?
PZ isn't exactly presenting new material these days - it's all just recycled talks. And Rebecca has never been a compelling speaker when she talks about facts rather than her own feelings and she is well known for being totally unprofessional at these conferences.
Having them invited as key speakers reflects badly on the organizers - it shows that they are going for celebrity 'names' rather than good speakers. Seeing PZ or Rebecca on the keynote speaker list for any conference is like spotting a dead canary in the mine.

[real horrorshow]

What ever way you look at it there IS a serious problem with diversity in the US atheist community and yet the FTB/Skepchick approach is to divert attention into petty personal politics and power games, all with the single aim of solidifying their monopoly on speaker positions at skeptical/atheist conferences.

It depends on what you mean by problem and on what you propose to do about it if it is a problem. For cultural reasons Blacks and Hispanics in the US are more likely to be religious than Whites. If that's a problem, I'd say it's their problem. I don't see anything that White people can do to 'fix' that 'problem'. Though I can imagine plenty of tactics that would go down very badly.

As for getting those Black or Hispanic (or whatever) people who are sceptics/atheists to take part in organisations and events I view it in the same way as Jean Kirby's comments about women: You can open the door, you can lay out the welcome mat, but you can't make people take part when they don't want to.

The FTB/skepchick approach is even more stupid: "Let's make more room in the sceptic/atheist 'movement, for women/minorities/whatever by driving out the old white guys (and anyone else who disagrees with us)." Apart from being wrong in itself, this tactic is especially stupid because a lot of real work is being done by people they hate while the FTB/Skepchick crowd can't even be relied on to show up and stay sober.

[Dick Strawkins]

As for getting those Black or Hispanic (or whatever) people who are sceptics/atheists to take part in organisations and events I view it in the same way as Jean Kirby's comments about women: You can open the door, you can lay out the welcome mat, but you can't make people take part when they don't want to.

I have no easy answer to that problem but I think the facts about who is asked to present at the sort of conferences that the FTB crowd control is very illuminating - especially about their real commitment to the involvement of minorities.

For example, are we to really believe that in the five years of Skepticon meetings they could only find one single black speaker?

Here is the list of speakers for the past five years.
I don't know all the names but I think Tony Pinn (the guy on the youtube clip giving a talk to an almost empty auditorium) is the only prominent black atheist/skeptic on the list. I realize there are not many black atheists, but are there really none up to the standard of a McCreight or Watson (who has been an invited speaker for the past four years!)?

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

[mutleyeng]

What they should not do is expect mainstream conferences to turn into large scale versions of SkepchickCon - where they have control and authority over the proceedings.
Russell Blackford got a lot of shit for tweeting the other day that he wouldn't attend a conference with PZ or Rebecca Watson.
Why?

The answer isnt to tweet about them - its to highlight the pseudo skepticism and challenge it. Rather than not attend - he should say yeah i'll go ... can I be a a discussion panel with PZ? I got some questions.
If folks like Blackford are concerned about skepticism, they have to confront it with civility but in public and face to face. Write about it, but not get into a blog war. Do what skeptics should do - put the information out there and when they get the chance, challenge the other guy's view.
Its what we used to do before blogging ruled the world

[rayshul]

yet the FTB/Skepchick approach is to divert attention into petty personal politics and power games, all with the single aim of solidifying their monopoly on speaker positions at skeptical/atheist conferences.

Well, then the best solution would be to first have them out of the con circuits, then find real, interesting speakers who have something of value to say about these problems, don't you think?

I know a lot of black atheists. They show up for Dawkins. (As would I.) Like, virtually all of them have a pic with him.

I struggle to understand what type of person will be enticed to go to something because a speaker's skin colour is somewhat similar to theirs. That's... kinda racist.

I'm just saying.

[Dick Strawkins]

What they should not do is expect mainstream conferences to turn into large scale versions of SkepchickCon - where they have control and authority over the proceedings.
Russell Blackford got a lot of shit for tweeting the other day that he wouldn't attend a conference with PZ or Rebecca Watson.
Why?

The answer isnt to tweet about them - its to highlight the pseudo skepticism and challenge it. Rather than not attend - he should say yeah i'll go ... can I be a a discussion panel with PZ? I got some questions.
If folks like Blackford are concerned about skepticism, they have to confront it with civility but in public and face to face. Write about it, but not get into a blog war. Do what skeptics should do - put the information out there and when they get the chance, challenge the other guy's view.
Its what we used to do before blogging ruled the world

That's a reasonable point of view but the counter argument is that the problem is not at the level of the arguments presented by PZ or Rebecca - it is that they don't have serious academic arguments to present in the first place and so the real problem is with the conference organizers inviting pseudo-skeptics to the meeting. An analogy would be a high level evolutionary biologist talking about a skeptical conference where Ray Comfort had been asked to give a keynote speech.
Should they go and debate Comfort?
Or should they refuse to attend a conference that would invite such a speaker in the first place?

[real horrorshow]

I have no easy answer to that problem but I think the facts about who is asked to present at the sort of conferences that the FTB crowd control is very illuminating - especially about their real commitment to the involvement of minorities.

For example, are we to really believe that in the five years of Skepticon meetings they could only find one single black speaker?

Here is the list of speakers for the past five years.
I don't know all the names but I think Tony Pinn (the guy on the youtube clip giving a talk to an almost empty auditorium) is the only prominent black atheist/skeptic on the list. I realize there are not many black atheists, but are there really none up to the standard of a McCreight or Watson (who has been an invited speaker for the past four years!)?

Again, I'm sceptical that going out of ones way to find a Black speaker is the point. Finding a speaker 'up to the standard' of Jenni or Becky would be a doddle. I would expect any passer by on any university campus to be able to prepare and present a talk better than either of them.

If you specifically want a Black speaker I'd say try something like the essay competition where Justin recently got a mention. Top prize is an all expenses paid trip to present their paper at a con plus a cheque. Circulate that to Black students organisations.

[AndrewV69]

The FTB/skepchick approach is even more stupid: "Let's make more room in the sceptic/atheist 'movement, for women/minorities/whatever by driving out the old white guys (and anyone else who disagrees with us)." Apart from being wrong in itself, this tactic is especially stupid because a lot of real work is being done by people they hate while the FTB/Skepchick crowd can't even be relied on to show up and stay sober.

We are not amused, in fact you could say we are pretty skeptical:

http://www.phun.org/newspics/funny_friday_2/7578.jpg

[mutleyeng]

That's a reasonable point of view but the counter argument is that the problem is not at the level of the arguments presented by PZ or Rebecca - it is that they don't have serious academic arguments to present in the first place and so the real problem is with the conference organizers inviting pseudo-skeptics to the meeting. An analogy would be a high level evolutionary biologist talking about a skeptical conference where Ray Comfort had been asked to give a keynote speech.
Should they go and debate Comfort?

sure they should.
Its the conventions where the problem is, so its the conventions where you tackle it.
The internet isnt really a problem - all the might of skepchicks and FtB gets 2000 people signing up to the new movement, and seems most of them are now past caring. All thats left now on the net are the shits and giggles - but has no bearing at all on what the actual real world issue is - so far as I can tell.

[Dick Strawkins]

sure they should.
Its the conventions where the problem is, so its the conventions where you tackle it.
The internet isnt really a problem - all the might of skepchicks and FtB gets 2000 people signing up to the new movement, and seems most of them are now past caring. All thats left now on the net are the shits and giggles - but has no bearing at all on what the actual real world issue is - so far as I can tell.

While the idea of a conference debate between PZ and Watson on one side versus Dawkins and Sam Harris on the other, is rather hilarious, I don't think it will solve anything. I've never seen Watson debate anything and PZ, while a fearless warrior when safe at home on Pharyngula, is terrible in a one on one debate setting (I mean if you've been bested by both Chris Mooney and Chris Stedman you are not going to have a hope when facing Dawkins and Harris).
The FTB crowd will claim victory whatever happens.

[Dick Strawkins]

yet the FTB/Skepchick approach is to divert attention into petty personal politics and power games, all with the single aim of solidifying their monopoly on speaker positions at skeptical/atheist conferences.

Well, then the best solution would be to first have them out of the con circuits, then find real, interesting speakers who have something of value to say about these problems, don't you think?

I know a lot of black atheists. They show up for Dawkins. (As would I.) Like, virtually all of them have a pic with him.

I struggle to understand what type of person will be enticed to go to something because a speaker's skin colour is somewhat similar to theirs. That's... kinda racist.

I'm just saying.

I don't think the point is that conferences should get more black speakers to entice black people to attend. It is that the FTB crowd claim that speaker lists should aim to be inclusive of all members of society - hence their call for more women speakers. Yet when you look at conferences, such as Skepticon, where they have a significant say in who is invited, their real agenda becomes apparent - which is to keep a monopoly of speaker positions for their own clique.
http://i.imgur.com/zuIET.jpg

[real horrorshow]

We are not amused, in fact you could say we are pretty skeptical:

Wait, you wanted a picture of the President of the United States, so you went to a porn site? I know Obama is pretty laid by by presidential standards, but I doubt he does porn.

[real horrorshow]

Laid Back I meant laid back. Shit!

[mutleyeng]

yay - just had a jehovah witness call by for a chat.
How come I can have a nice civil chat with those guys - but if i were to go to you know where....
ah well.

[TedDahlberg]

Its the "always working" culture marketed as a lifestyle product. Companies throw free smartphones into the deal now for a reason. The expectation that having a lunch break is no excuse not to answer emails. That you should be readily contactable should the MD have a brain-fart at 8pm in the evening.

Fuck them, get one of the old nokia dumb-phones they now market to the third world.

Or take my route; I have a smart phone which rarely leaves my desk. If I'm not working, I'm not working. The sky won't fall if someone has to wait an hour, or a day, to talk to me.

I do have a private smart phone as well, but that one pretty much functions as an audio book/podcast player which also handily happens to be capable of sending text messages.

[TedDahlberg]

Ok, I'm fed up with the spambots that have found a way to post, so I'm going to start requiring guests to provide an email address to post. Apologies.

What an interesting post. I will certainly check back here to read more about your point of view. Did you know you can now order V==ia~g~ra direct from the factory at half the ph@rm~~@cy pri--ce? To read mo~re about this @m@z~~ing off""er please shove a candle up your ass and whistle Dixie.

I seem to be having connection issues, could it be that I'm whistling out of tune? I would appreciate a prompt response, the candle is starting to make me sore.

[Scented Nectar]

It's her TAM Meet and she'll cry if she wants to, cry if she wants to...

[youtube]6C8zfDrSMiE[/youtube]

[Scented Nectar]

Better to watch the above on the youtube page. This embedded one above cuts off the sides a bit.

[Dick Strawkins]

I noticed that Cristina Rad has turned up today after two months of non posting and put a new post on her FTB blog.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/cristinarad ... hor-video/

It's simply a link to some guy on youtube, I think he's Australian, who is discussing Islam and sexuality and criticising some Islamicic theologian/apologist.
Curiously Cristina hasn't made any comments which would indicate she disapproves of this video, which would suggest that she approves of it- The view expressed in the video are not rad-fem at all (it is very pro-pornography and sex positive) and seem similar to the views Cristina used to promote before she was abducted by the Skepchicks.

[welch]

What ever way you look at it there IS a serious problem with diversity in the US atheist community and yet the FTB/Skepchick approach is to divert attention into petty personal politics and power games, all with the single aim of solidifying their monopoly on speaker positions at skeptical/atheist conferences.

It depends on what you mean by problem and on what you propose to do about it if it is a problem. For cultural reasons Blacks and Hispanics in the US are more likely to be religious than Whites. If that's a problem, I'd say it's their problem. I don't see anything that White people can do to 'fix' that 'problem'. Though I can imagine plenty of tactics that would go down very badly.

As for getting those Black or Hispanic (or whatever) people who are sceptics/atheists to take part in organisations and events I view it in the same way as Jean Kirby's comments about women: You can open the door, you can lay out the welcome mat, but you can't make people take part when they don't want to.

Exactly. I've never quite understood treating religion like some kind of STD. it causes a lot of problems, esp. when you talk large-scale, but at the community level, there are a lot, and I mean a LOT of poor people who would be fucked without local churches. The A/S crowd says, correctly, "we CAN do that too", and for one-offs, or drives, they can be good. But I'd wager the atheist groups who, EVERY week and EVERY month are running soup kitchens, donating thousands of bags of groceries, running homeless shelters can, even just in the US be counted on one hand.

So they CAN do it, but by and large they don't. They have a canned food drive, or what have you, pat themselves on the back, and go home. Meanwhile, the local churches that Watson et al bag on are there e next week, and the week after and so on.

Do they prostelitize? Don't fucking care. They are feeding the hungry and trying to clothe and feed those who need it. That counts for a lot. The Catholics are an even easier target, but what A/S group is able to run things like foster home networks, homeless shelters, etc.? Watson's speaker fees would buy a lot of food.

That's why I don't get impressed when they talk about what they do here and there. Because I see the groups they shit on doing, frankly, a lot more. If the A/S lot wants to really make religion a thing of the past, they better become known for more than drinking hotel bars dry and stupid in-fighting. Sending Rees white women to TAM doesn't count.

The FTB/skepchick approach is even more stupid: "Let's make more room in the sceptic/atheist 'movement, for women/minorities/whatever by driving out the old white guys (and anyone else who disagrees with us)." Apart from being wrong in itself, this tactic is especially stupid because a lot of real work is being done by people they hate while the FTB/Skepchick crowd can't even be relied on to show up and stay sober.

But if they are sober, they can't think the deep thoughts they talk so well about!!! Don't be such a soberist!!!!

[Mykeru]

It's her TAM Meet and she'll cry if she wants to, cry if she wants to...

[noobtube]6C8zfDrSMiE[/noobtube]

The eyes have too much life and intelligence in them to be Surly Amy.

[Scented Nectar]

It's her TAM Meet and she'll cry if she wants to, cry if she wants to...

[noobtube]6C8zfDrSMiE[/noobtube]

The eyes have too much life and intelligence in them to be Surly Amy.

I must have caught her in a rare moment of lucidity.

[FredrickOfBollywood]

The view expressed in the video are not rad-fem at all (it is very pro-pornography and sex positive) and seem similar to the views Cristina used to promote before she was abducted by the Skepchicks.

Check her YouTube history. She clearly has not fallen for the hysteria and is opting to stay away from the non-intellectual shitfest.

[welch]

Well, then the best solution would be to first have them out of the con circuits, then find real, interesting speakers who have something of value to say about these problems, don't you think?

I know a lot of black atheists. They show up for Dawkins. (As would I.) Like, virtually all of them have a pic with him.

I struggle to understand what type of person will be enticed to go to something because a speaker's skin colour is somewhat similar to theirs. That's... kinda racist.

I'm just saying.

Maybe? I think what Neil Tyson said on this applies. He realized after seeing himself on TV for the first time that he had an answer for the friend who had told him that the black community couldn't afford for someone as smart as him to be an astrophysicist. He realized that by by being the expert, the smart guy first, that kids in the community would see that they could also be seen as smart, and an expert in fields other than "traditional" ones.

The idea that pinn is the only non-honkie available is ludicrous, and I think it is very important that he and Neil Tyson not be the only ones speaking. There are really smart non-honkies who could do a masterful job based solely on their expertise. Getting those folks on stage would do a lot more than any number of outreach bullshit.

[petal]

Delurking. Found another sort of Privilege:

{http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opini ... 8650.html}


I guess I'm less privileged when I go camping. Wonder if the OWS SJW's feel extra underprivilged when Starbux refuses them use of the plumbing

(hope I got the BBCode for the link above right.)

[petal]

gah
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinio ... 08650.html

[acathode]

Exactly. I've never quite understood treating religion like some kind of STD. it causes a lot of problems, esp. when you talk large-scale, but at the community level, there are a lot, and I mean a LOT of poor people who would be fucked without local churches. The A/S crowd says, correctly, "we CAN do that too", and for one-offs, or drives, they can be good. But I'd wager the atheist groups who, EVERY week and EVERY month are running soup kitchens, donating thousands of bags of groceries, running homeless shelters can, even just in the US be counted on one hand.

So they CAN do it, but by and large they don't. They have a canned food drive, or what have you, pat themselves on the back, and go home. Meanwhile, the local churches that Watson et al bag on are there e next week, and the week after and so on.

Do they prostelitize? Don't fucking care. They are feeding the hungry and trying to clothe and feed those who need it. That counts for a lot. The Catholics are an even easier target, but what A/S group is able to run things like foster home networks, homeless shelters, etc.? Watson's speaker fees would buy a lot of food.

Seems to me that the best strategy for increasing US minorities in the atheism community in that case would be to push for government stepping up it's game when it comes to taking care of the poor and sick.
It's IMO very unrealistic to expect secular voluntary organizations to do as much as the local churches when it comes to caring for the poor and homeless, so instead what you'd want is to make these citizens less dependent on the various religious organizations by getting the government to take their place. Though I guess that's a bit unrealistic too given the political situation in the US? I'm guessing it would have to be a pretty longterm goal...

Still, it's the way it works in Sweden, we expect our government to do all that stuff that your churches do for the poor and homeless, and when it comes to reducing religiosity it seems to be working pretty good. Up to the 20s or so, I don't think Sweden was that much less religious than the US.

In any case, the way that Watson, Myers, etc advocate for getting more minorities involved seem to me completely contra-productive (if the actual goal is to really get minorities involved, not just secure speaking gigs for their little group), it basically seem to consist of
1. Try to get rid of all the white men who've gotten shit done
2. Whine.
3. If anyone disagree with step 1 or 2, throw them on the fire with the rest of the wicked witches you've found.

When step 2 actually causes less women/minorities to attend (since the whine caused people to think that the community was misogynistic and racist), repeat 2 some more, and blame the people you burned in step 3.

[Gumby]

Exactly. I've never quite understood treating religion like some kind of STD. it causes a lot of problems, esp. when you talk large-scale, but at the community level, there are a lot, and I mean a LOT of poor people who would be fucked without local churches. The A/S crowd says, correctly, "we CAN do that too", and for one-offs, or drives, they can be good. But I'd wager the atheist groups who, EVERY week and EVERY month are running soup kitchens, donating thousands of bags of groceries, running homeless shelters can, even just in the US be counted on one hand.

So they CAN do it, but by and large they don't. They have a canned food drive, or what have you, pat themselves on the back, and go home. Meanwhile, the local churches that Watson et al bag on are there e next week, and the week after and so on.

Do they prostelitize? Don't fucking care. They are feeding the hungry and trying to clothe and feed those who need it. That counts for a lot. The Catholics are an even easier target, but what A/S group is able to run things like foster home networks, homeless shelters, etc.? Watson's speaker fees would buy a lot of food.

That's why I don't get impressed when they talk about what they do here and there. Because I see the groups they shit on doing, frankly, a lot more. If the A/S lot wants to really make religion a thing of the past, they better become known for more than drinking hotel bars dry and stupid in-fighting. Sending Rees white women to TAM doesn't count.

The charity that always gets the biggest annual donation from me is a Christian-themed homeless shelter in my city. The director is a Christian minister, and I'm sure there's the inevitable proselytizing, but like you I don't care. They do a great job and most of the money people donate (90 cents plus on the dollar) goes to actually feeding and sheltering the homeless (and transition from the streets education, job training, etc) rather than way-bloated "administrative" costs. The atheist movement simply does not currently have the infrastructure to do the kind of charity work that church-based organizations do, which is completely understandable. That infrastructure takes a long time to build up, and with callous fucking assholes like Ophelia "oh gross I had to sit near a smelly homeless man on my way to work" Benson and Jen "oh gross, a homeless man is masturbating in public" McCreight in atheism, it may take even longer.

That's why I happily started MasturbatingHobogate by displaying Jen's tweets here (and from here it spread! Ha)... homelessness is not a trivial matter to me like it is to privilige-bubble ivory tower middle class shits like Jen and Ophelia, and I wanted to publicly humiliate her by showing everyone exactly what her mindset is.

[micfzyho]

The reason for this is that servers need maintenance, and they need to be updated from time to time. nfl jerseys cheap aijqeoka
olrmespk uggs sale ogvqudqg doudoune moncler femme pas cher rsnlavgp authentic thomas sabo

[Gumby]

Goddamn fucking spammers. So the only solution is to require registration?

[real horrorshow]

Exactly. I've never quite understood treating religion like some kind of STD. it causes a lot of problems, esp. when you talk large-scale, but at the community level, there are a lot, and I mean a LOT of poor people who would be fucked without local churches. The A/S crowd says, correctly, "we CAN do that too", and for one-offs, or drives, they can be good. But I'd wager the atheist groups who, EVERY week and EVERY month are running soup kitchens, donating thousands of bags of groceries, running homeless shelters can, even just in the US be counted on one hand.

A valid point, but not the one I was trying to make. My point is twofold. First, I don't get greatly upset over the notion that women or ethnic minorities are 'under represented' in atheism/scepticism. I'm sure that they're aware that such organisations exist. If they want to get involved they can. I certainly disagree with the FTB/Skepchicks that there's some deliberate secret policy of excluding anyone. Who decided that atheism/scepticism in the US had to have a membership that matched the demographics of the country at large? People pursue the things that interest them. If, for a whole lot of reasons that are beyond the control of the atheist/sceptic 'movement', it attracts more white males than other demographic groups, so what?

Secondly, even if we were to agree that a low ratio of women or ethnic minorities was a problem what could we do about it? Should we evangelise? Should I, a white male, hand out leaflets in the street to women and Black people:

"Come to our atheist and sceptics group. Sceptical thinking is good for you. Most women/Black people don't do it. That's why our group is all white guys."

That's not going to work.

[FredrickOfBollywood]

Goddamn fucking spammers. So the only solution is to require registration?

That is still hackable.
I look at the security questions and think that they are incredibly weak. Most answers are either yes or no. Not fails? Just try again until it hits a winning question. Honey bots don't care.
I think having a larger pool of questions would be more effective such as permutations of math questions where one answer out of 100,000 would be correct.
The most effective approach I have ever taken was to block entire countries such as China who's population would have very little interest in said forum.

[CommanderTuvok]

He he. I love Scented Nectar's video remixes. BTW, Lesley Gore did a song called "That's the Way Boys Are" that would be ripe for a remix.

Although, from what I gather, Leslie Gore would have no idea what boys are like.

[Cunning Punt]

I'm noticing Julia Gillard appears to have become the new feminist icon.

She's a bit of a useless bigoted cunt. So, y'know. I guess that works.

How so? The refugee issue?

[Scented Nectar]

He he. I love Scented Nectar's video remixes. BTW, Lesley Gore did a song called "That's the Way Boys Are" that would be ripe for a remix.

Although, from what I gather, Leslie Gore would have no idea what boys are like.

Thanks. I have a lot of fun making them.

I have an almost complete set of the baboons in clips that can be used for these karaokes. I fucked up my last clips accidently (long story), but made some new and better ones. I haven't gotten around to most of the requests from last time, but I'll go find that song on youtube and check it out. I don't recognize it by the title.

People who I have clips ready to use for karaoke:
Amy
Greg
Greta
Jason
Jenny
Ophelia
PZ
Rebecca
Steffy

The old clips were clashing and causing mystery weird shit when used in combo with each other, anyways. I think I've fixed that by making these new ones all have the exact same green-screen settings, even though I use them in different tracks and it shouldn't matter.

I'm thinking that they should become a choir singing Helen Reddy's I Am Woman someday. Well, maybe just Greg, Jason, and PZ.

[Tigzy]

Goddamn fucking spammers. So the only solution is to require registration?

Wouldn't a guests-only captcha do the trick?

[Scented Nectar]

Goddamn fucking spammers. So the only solution is to require registration?

That is still hackable.
I look at the security questions and think that they are incredibly weak. Most answers are either yes or no. Not fails? Just try again until it hits a winning question. Honey bots don't care.
I think having a larger pool of questions would be more effective such as permutations of math questions where one answer out of 100,000 would be correct.
The most effective approach I have ever taken was to block entire countries such as China who's population would have very little interest in said forum.

Not to be picky. Well, ok, to be a little bit picky :) , I think harder questions rather than country blocks would be best. Even if most spam comes from any particular country, blocking could affect authentic readers/posters. Even if just one person were to be accidently blocked that way, I'd feel bad about it. Especially if they are in a country that is not very freedom of speech/information friendly. The internet might be their only source to external interesting, or informative, or amusing, or whatever, sites.

[Lsuoma]

Goddamn fucking spammers. So the only solution is to require registration?

Don't know - really don't like that idea. Let me take a look. I may need to change out the challenge questions.

[Readers DiGuest]

So they CAN do it, but by and large they don't. They have a canned food drive, or what have you, pat themselves on the back, and go home. Meanwhile, the local churches that Watson et al bag on are there e next week, and the week after and so on.

What you do doesn't matter. The logical strength of your motivation is the only criterion to the Gnu Gnus. I agree in terms of the long term goal of combatting religion. If they restricted their campaigning to that issue alone, then no problem. It's when they overreach. that we have a problem.

As usual I am going to refer to an article without links because I can't remember where I read it. It was about the funding, donations and tax concessions received by the Xtian churches and their charitable expenditure. If I remember correctly, overall, they come out looking parasitic. Pretty much like the Skepchicks then.

[Gumby]

Goddamn fucking spammers. So the only solution is to require registration?

Don't know - really don't like that idea. Let me take a look. I may need to change out the challenge questions.

I don't like the idea of people being forced to register to contribute either. Some people just don't like to register for forums. Hope there's some better challenge questions.

[Git]

Or we can create our own con:

SLYCON 2013

Speakers: *Abbie: Smith "ERV, ANTI-VAXXERS, Arnie!!!"

*Franc: Hoggle "The Diffuculties or Sex Reassignement and findind suitable rubber boots"

*Mykeru: "Doing it For the Lulz and not giving a fuck (opening by Phil Giordana)"

* John C Welch & Michael Kingsford Gray: IT, MUsic and Arguments Within the Community"

*Al Stefanelli: "The Power of Hats (and an introduction to glasses)"

*Sacha and Rayshul: "Being a Chill Girl, Gender Traitor and Sister punisher in 2013"

(Feel free to had your owns)

Animations for the kids: *Daycare with Bhoytony

*R/C sailboats with Steersman

*Whack-A-Bronie with most of the staff so they don't get a chance

*Try to Guess My Gender with...

Phalluses and Flowers with Scented Nectar.

The Kittehs of Ryleh^H^H^H^Hthe Slymepit by Pinker, Gumby and Git, with a special video appearance by Prof. Ceiling Cat.

Practical Demonstration of Carrion Bird Corpse Stripping by Sacha

DDoS, a how-to, with John Welsh, sponsored by Microsoft Word (bring your own external storage drives)


Music to be provided by Phil Giordana and his Death Skiffle act, and security by Melissa W.

[FredrickOfBollywood]

Even if just one person were to be accidently blocked that way, I'd feel bad about it. Especially if they are in a country that is not very freedom of speech/information friendly.

I agree with your concern and I have never made a decision like that lightly. But sometimes when you take a look at you existing user base and see that there are zero users from country 'X' and honestly evaluate the potential level of interest to people in said country, you may come to the assessment that the likelyhood of that scenerio comes down to homeopathic proportions.

[windy]

I know a lot of black atheists. They show up for Dawkins. (As would I.) Like, virtually all of them have a pic with him.

I struggle to understand what type of person will be enticed to go to something because a speaker's skin colour is somewhat similar to theirs. That's... kinda racist.

I'm just saying.

I don't think the point is that conferences should get more black speakers to entice black people to attend. It is that the FTB crowd claim that speaker lists should aim to be inclusive of all members of society - hence their call for more women speakers.

Why should the speaker list be inclusive, though, if not to make the entire movement more "inclusive"? I'm pretty sure that's the reason they originally started hammering about the speaker lists. (Doing some outreach to make the movement more inclusive from the bottom up would be too hard, and considering other possible causes for underrepresentation besides discrimination is taboo, that leaves speaker quotas and other superficial shit)

Yet when you look at conferences, such as Skepticon, where they have a significant say in who is invited, their real agenda becomes apparent - which is to keep a monopoly of speaker positions for their own clique.

Yes.

[FredrickOfBollywood]

Wouldn't a guests-only captcha do the trick?

Text based captchas have been proven to be weak too. A bot just needs to get one in a hundred scans correct, and get in based on a high number of attempts.

[Dilurk]

Wouldn't a guests-only captcha do the trick?

Text based captchas have been proven to be weak too. A bot just needs to get one in a hundred scans correct, and get in based on a high number of attempts.

And some of the captchas I've seen are hard for humans too.

[Scented Nectar]

Phalluses and Flowers with Scented Nectar.

I could probably do a fun presentation on botany porn, I mean plant sex. Stamens and pistils and bees, oh my! Well, if nothing else, how about a slide show of fragrant flowers? Sniff samples passed around the audience on a plate maybe for fun interactiveness?

[FredrickOfBollywood]

Hope there's some better challenge questions.

First off, no two questions should have the same answer e.g. yes or no.
Can you load up you own questions? If so, what is the format?

[Scented Nectar]

Even if just one person were to be accidently blocked that way, I'd feel bad about it. Especially if they are in a country that is not very freedom of speech/information friendly.

I agree with your concern and I have never made a decision like that lightly. But sometimes when you take a look at you existing user base and see that there are zero users from country 'X' and honestly evaluate the potential level of interest to people in said country, you may come to the assessment that the likelyhood of that scenerio comes down to homeopathic proportions.

We don't know that there aren't any legit ones though. Lsuoma might know though, if, that is, there is some way to differentiate between the spammers and people just visiting as a guest or registered user. However, even if there are no current legit visits from China, I'd still be against blocking the whole country, since it would prevent future legit readers/posters from China. I read the blog of a woman from China (thank you google translate!), and I'd hate to lose that due to them blocking entire countries from entering via internet. Out of all the people in China who go on the internet, not all of them are spammers.

Hmmm, sorry if I sound ranty. I guess I feel rather strongly about this.

[Gumby]

Hope there's some better challenge questions.

First off, no two questions should have the same answer e.g. yes or no.
Can you load up you own questions? If so, what is the format?

I'm just a poster here; Lsuoma is the boss. And he said he was going to look into it.

[skepCHUD]

Slycon 2013 workshop

skepCHUD- How to prepare delicious Rack of Richard Carrier, Skepchick-Fil-A sandwich

[Gumby]

The Kittehs of Ryleh^H^H^H^Hthe Slymepit by Pinker, Gumby and Git, with a special video appearance by Prof. Ceiling Cat.

Why is Ceiling Cat only making a video appearance? Does it have "cancer" too? I wonder if the poor thing asked for donations...