Periodic Table of Swearing

[JackRayner]

Okay, Renee, are you gonna post a photo of your new "toy"?

Hey. Maybe we could start a gun thread to share pictures of our kids. :D

[Pretty sure that would give the Baboons an overdoes of paranoia juice, but...]

[ReneeHendricks]

Okay, Renee, are you gonna post a photo of your new "toy"?

Oh, man! Before anyone starts getting dirty thoughts, we're actually not going out to buy a new toy but to get one fixed (a gun, you perverts!). My guy has a Kriss with a blown out barrel and broken magazine release button. Plus, we're checking out the range to see about taking my 13 year old son out to fire my Walther and the Mossberg shotgun.

And you all were thinking sex toy!

No, I do not have an entire laundry basket full of sex toys that I received while working at a local sex shop. Shame on you!

[JackRayner]

[spoiler]

This reminds me of when someone took a look at the blue-haired one's involvement with JREF:

I had heard the name mentioned a number of times, so I wanted to see her contributions in the trenches, so to speak. She posted there nearly 7,000 times before being banned for acting like an adolescent. Do you know how many posts she had in General Skepticism and the Paranormal? A mere 124. Science? 130. Religion and Philosophy? 140.

How in the hell did she become some Skeptic Guru? Well, it ties into what you describe about the forums and TAM. It’s about popularity. She spent most of her time hanging out in Community, chatting it up and goofing around. She’s undoubtedly fun and somewhat charismatic. She certainly did NOT rise to the top (so to speak) for her insight and skeptical approach to things.

http://skeptopia.wordpress.com/2010/06/ ... omment-201

And in a reply to that comment:

I think it’s more impressive that there are people out there doing actual work, and Rebecca’s image deteriorated into basically being skepticism’s answer to Paris Hilton, (a party girl who is famous basically for being famous). One thing I will say for her, is that she’s a hell of a marketer and she’s got the savvy to know how to sell herself (in a marketing way, not a prostitute way).

...and...[/spoiler]

I just remembered one of the things that first started to bug me about Ms. Watson. At my first TAM, I went to the ‘Skepchick Pajama Party’ which was a ‘ladies only’ gathering (though some men did show up). It was different from the Forum Party which was hosted by Rebecca, but I still expected to see Rebecca there, since she was a prominent female in the movement and she was THE Skepchick. What I found out was that the men were having a “Scotch and Cigars” party at the same time for men only, as a counter-party to the all female Skepchick Pajama Party. The year I attended, Rebecca didn’t even make an appearance at the pajama party, preferring instead to crash the men’s party and hang out with the boys, who were her clear fan base. I found it incredibly rude of her, as it devalued the women’s party and it also showed that she was more interested in being the token girl than part of a group of women. Far from being interested in bringing more women into skepticism, she seemed to just wanted to be fawned over by drooling men.

All from June 2010. Dissatisfaction with Watson has been brewing for a long time.

Isn't there some video of that party floating around? The one where some older lady kneels down in front of some shirtless dude's crotch to simulate a blow job while taking a shot from a test tube? :think:

[Tried, but can't find that video...]

[Ape+lust]

Isn't there some video of that party floating around? The one where some older lady kneels down in front of some shirtless dude's crotch to simulate a blow job while taking a shot from a test tube? :think:

[Tried, but can't find that video...]

[youtube]gmLdaBTFtoA[/youtube]

[Outwest]

Okay, Renee, are you gonna post a photo of your new "toy"?

Oh, man! Before anyone starts getting dirty thoughts, we're actually not going out to buy a new toy but to get one fixed (a gun, you perverts!). My guy has a Kriss with a blown out barrel and broken magazine release button. Plus, we're checking out the range to see about taking my 13 year old son out to fire my Walther and the Mossberg shotgun.

And you all were thinking sex toy!

No, I do not have an entire laundry basket full of sex toys that I received while working at a local sex shop. Shame on you!

Okay, well, you got me there. Whenever I buy a new gun, I refer to it as a "toy". I'll be more careful in the future with my language.

On second thought? No, I won't.

[somedumbguy]

Okay, Renee, are you gonna post a photo of your new "toy"?

Oh, man! Before anyone starts getting dirty thoughts, we're actually not going out to buy a new toy but to get one fixed (a gun, you perverts!). My guy has a Kriss with a blown out barrel and broken magazine release button. Plus, we're checking out the range to see about taking my 13 year old son out to fire my Walther and the Mossberg shotgun.

And you all were thinking sex toy!

No, I do not have an entire laundry basket full of sex toys that I received while working at a local sex shop. Shame on you!

[youtube]4kU0XCVey_U[/youtube]

[Reap]

And here we go. No spoilers, let's put it out there:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8224/8351 ... 39ac_o.jpg

If you don't get it, her last tweet was a reference to my employment.

Excuse me, but I have a video to work on.

Oh, for FUCK'S SAKE! These people really haven't a fucking clue what a stalker *really* is. Mamby-pamby, don't-hurt-my-fee-fees, living in a fucking padded house asshats. Every.last.one.of.them.

You know...WE
http://reapsowradio.com/graphics/mel.jpg

[welch]

Oh, this is just...just so *Laden* - A Lot of Slymepitters Are IT People:

https://twitter.com/gregladen/status/287394291771387904

Ah, logical old Greg.

IT conference/convention situation is famous for being more like the skeptics conventions than the skeptics conventions r

IT conferences are more like skeptics conventions than skeptics conventions are?

Fuck if I know what the twat is on about. I can't speak for other conf., but I and my compatriots are ALWAYS looking for new blood. Keeps things interesting and gives you ideas you might not otherwise hear/have. That said, it can be more difficult than it should be to recruit new speakers.

[Measly Twerp]

http://i.imgur.com/4Ugz8.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/09jFM.png

[ikonografer]

Oh my, look what Melody has stepped into:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8334/8350 ... 5b04_o.jpg

tell her you pay by the pound. she'll go apeshit buying ho-ho's

[Steersman]

And here we go. No spoilers, let's put it out there:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8224/8351 ... 39ac_o.jpg

If you don't get it, her last tweet was a reference to my employment.

Excuse me, but I have a video to work on.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re ok with A Voice for Men publishing the name of some of the female protesters at the University of Toronto? How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Although I’ll readily concede that any attempt to involve one’s employer is beyond the pale. However, while I think that mendacious melodramatic Melody is running around in ever diminishing circles like the proverbial chicken without its head, it might be somewhat of a stretch to argue that her tweet is an explicit threat to contact your employer as a number of other possibilities present themselves.

[Tkmlac]

I was introduced to privilege in a much more constructive way than these a+ fucks do. They only use it to quiet dissent. "You're just privileged" does absolutely nothing, even if the person really is benefiting from some kind of privilege at the time. They are actually setting back equal rights by doing this, turning "privilege" into an insult instead of a topic for discussion. This is why I get so angry with these A+er fucks. They are literally ruining Anny hope for equal rights.

[welch]

From A+ forum:

http://i.imgur.com/63Occ.jpg

Ageism? :o

But is she wrong in her implicit argument that you’re not treating others as you would expect to be treated? If so then your “ageism” question looks to qualify as evasiveness and obfuscation ….

That's not the point.

The point is that A+ is supposed to be a movement that's against all that stuff. That's what social justice means in the first place. Or at least that's what people claim it means. When Jen put down her manifesto of sorts, yes, it was against ageism. And other things.

But instead, it's a movement that actually is drowning in sexism (to be fair, they wear their sexism on their sleeve as a badge of honor), racism, ageism, classism, etc.

This is at best, highly hypocritical. However, I think that it's more accurate to say that their entire ideology revolves around putting people into little boxes based on these groupings, and as such we shouldn't be surprised that they do this. SJW-dom in the end is everything they claim to be fighting against.

It's blowing up the world to save it.

Ah, so it’s ok to point out their hypocrisy, but ok to turn a blind eye to “ours”? You’re on-board with “in-group morality and out-group hostility”?

Generally a good idea, I’ve found anyway, that before one starts throwing stones to make sure that one isn’t living in a glass house of one’s own.

I have to say overall, Justin's thing there just seemed stupid. He knew he wasn't going to get a discussion or a debate of any kind out of them. I knew that, pretty much everyone here knew that. I can't believe anyone is THAT blind. So it really just seems like it was a "I have this hand grenade, let's see what happens" kind of move. Other than being able to say "I tried, and look at the response, they all suck", I'm unsure of what the point ever was.

[Ape+lust]

I want to thank the FtB APlussers for inspiring a photoshop renaissance in the pit.

[somedumbguy]

And here we go. No spoilers, let's put it out there:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8224/8351 ... 39ac_o.jpg

If you don't get it, her last tweet was a reference to my employment.

Excuse me, but I have a video to work on.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re ok with A Voice for Men publishing the name of some of the female protesters at the University of Toronto? How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Although I’ll readily concede that any attempt to involve one’s employer is beyond the pale. However, while I think that mendacious melodramatic Melody is running around in ever diminishing circles like the proverbial chicken without its head, it might be somewhat of a stretch to argue that her tweet is an explicit threat to contact your employer as a number of other possibilities present themselves.

The people that were named by AVFM were over 18, and were seen protesting, in public. (*) Their actions include blockading doors and ripping down posters. These are heckler's vetoes, anti-free speech actions, and both were possibly against the law.

What is it in society that protects these people, acting this way in public, from being named?

That they are young?

So was Mario Savio. So is every young man or woman that protests on campus or off campus for Occupy, against War, against the G-7, pro/con Israel or Palestine, against GM food, against India rape, pro women's rights.

What are the attributes of the Toronto protestors that lead you to think their very public actions should not result in the discussion along with their names at a website?

[Steersman]

I was introduced to privilege in a much more constructive way than these a+ fucks do. They only use it to quiet dissent. "You're just privileged" does absolutely nothing, even if the person really is benefiting from some kind of privilege at the time. They are actually setting back equal rights by doing this, turning "privilege" into an insult instead of a topic for discussion. This is why I get so angry with these A+er fucks. They are literally ruining Anny hope for equal rights.

Tend to agree with you on that point. The same way that their aversion, which borders on mind-killing panic and fear, to even the thought that some behaviour patterns of both men and women are determined, to a greater or lesser extent, by our genetic inheritances is preventing or hindering the implementations of solutions to the problems they complain so loudly about – rape in particular. Get their knickers totally in a bunch at the thought that, “oh, no”, atheism might be “more of a guy thing” while ignoring the same roots for the problem of rape and many others of a similar nature.

Reminds me of a documentary on the behaviour of monkeys in which they had put banana’s in clear plastic bottles with narrow necks. The monkeys were able to get their hands into the bottles and grasp the bananas but the openings were too narrow to get both hands and bananas out. Which caused them to go into paroxysms of rage. Kind of amusing in a way if one has some affinity for gallows humour ….

[cunt]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re ok with A Voice for Men publishing the name of some of the female protesters at the University of Toronto? How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Although I’ll readily concede that any attempt to involve one’s employer is beyond the pale. However, while I think that mendacious melodramatic Melody is running around in ever diminishing circles like the proverbial chicken without its head, it might be somewhat of a stretch to argue that her tweet is an explicit threat to contact your employer as a number of other possibilities present themselves.

No, it's an implicit theat Steersman, if other possibilities actually exist i'd fucking love to hear them. For what it's worth, I also thought revealing the name of creepybittergirl was over the top and unnecessary to make the point.

[Al Stefanelli]

And here we go. No spoilers, let's put it out there:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8224/8351 ... 39ac_o.jpg

If you don't get it, her last tweet was a reference to my employment.

Excuse me, but I have a video to work on.

Someone needs to tell these people that shit they tweet can actually be seen by other people.

[Zenspace]

Hey slymepitters

I gots a question. If you had to write a book your kid for when s/he's say 20 - 25, what topics would you include?

Atheism and ethics are two obvious ones, but any ideas (even if they're within those two broad categories) would be appreciated.

Three concepts that need resuscitation from ancient Greece. Typhos, atyphia and parrhesia. All have their roots in ancient Athenian Cynicism circa 400–300 BCE and are all largely lost, or more probably eradicated, as they are heretical to every ideology that has ever stained our species - no exceptions.

Parrhesia to an extent has been revived, most prominently by Michel Foucalt in his last lectures. At it's most superficial, it is simply free speech. More correctly, it is fearless or bold speech. Absolute frankness, truth and clarity, even at the expense of hurt feelings or personal consequences. The Foucalt extracts from the cesspit summarise it fairly well -

So you see, the parrhesiastes is someone who takes a risk. Of course, this risk is not always a risk of life. When, for example, you see a friend doing something wrong and you risk incurring his anger by telling him he is wrong, you are acting as a parrhesiastes. In such a case, you do not risk your life, but you may hurt him by your remarks, and your friendship may consequently suffer for it. If, in a political debate, an orator risks losing his popularity because his opinions are contrary to the majority's opinion, or his opinions may usher in a political scandal, he uses parrhesia. Parrhesia, then, is linked to courage in the face of danger: it demands the courage to speak the truth in spite of some danger. And in its extreme form, telling the truth takes place in the "game" of life or death.

and -

To summarize the foregoing, parrhesia is a kind of verbal activity where the speaker has a specific relation to truth through frankness, a certain relationship to his own life through danger, a certain type of relation to himself or other people through criticism (self-criticism or criticism of other people), and a specific relation to moral law through freedom and duty. More precisely, parrhesia is a verbal activity in which a speaker expresses his personal relationship to truth, and risks his life because he recognizes truth-telling as a duty to improve or help other people (as well as himself). In parrhesia, the speaker uses his freedom and chooses frankness instead of persuasion, truth instead of falsehood or silence, the risk of death instead of life and security, criticism instead of flattery, and moral duty instead of self-interest and moral apathy.

Typhos has been completely lost - to the point it doesn't even exist in google. But, to me, it is the most important concept of the three. It has nothing to do with the monster in Greek mythology that even the god's feared, nor the disease. It is so obscure, I have had to make an effort to reconstruct its meaning from quite a pile of sources. At its superficial level it translates as nonsense, but again, there is a lot more to it. This is my interpretation -

typhos – Archaic Greek, literally “smoke, vapor”. A cloudy, misty, befuddled state of mind; intellectual smog; the delerium of popular ideas and conventions that are thoroughly divorced from reality or merit.

Typhos sees no difference between religion, homeopathy, conspiracy theory, personality cultdom or the gibberish that spews from the baboons. It is all the product of a mind that is fogged by the indistinct mist of concocted realities and incapable of either objectivity or clarity.

Luis Navia, probably the best living Cynic historian puts it this way -

The Cynics persisted in the conviction that most people live as if immersed in a cloud of smoke (typhos) that prevents them from seeing clearly and does not allow them to use that which distinguishes humans from animals—namely, the capacity to reason. In abandoning this capacity, people forsake their true nature. Diogenes often said that the human world is an enormous madhouse in which every sort of madness is found everywhere: cruelty, greed, deception, mendacity, brutality, uncontrolled hedonism, and the rest of the all-too-common diseases that afflict humanity and have become endemic in the form of things such as religion, patriotism, tradition, and other manifestations of irrationality.

It is no extravagant claim to say that every fuck up this planet has ever made has been the direct result of typhos.

Atyphia is the simplest. It is the antithesis of typhos. It is clarity and simplicity in expression, the removal of ambiguities from meaning. It is the engine that drives parrhesia. Plain talk, calling a spade a spade, fuck your feelings, this is how it really is. Bullshit free and pure, if somewhat painful.

I think everything else that we have - from reason to ethics to logic - is built upon the foundation stones of these concepts.

That was truly interesting, thank you. I really need to read more on the ancient Greeks...those old, irrelevant, over-privileged white dudebros were really on to something...

Agreed, deeply interesting. I'm going to have to do some more digging around this. Franc, can you recommend some resources? Typhos is of particular interest. I've been aware of the effect via my casual studies of mentality - I'm a fan of Julian Jaynse' work and theories - and have a shorthand reference I use for a similar idea : the 'monkeymind'. The monkeymind prevails in a massive proportion of human interaction- likely over 90% (an estimate I pulled completely out of emperical thin air, but based on lots of observation.)

[Reap]

Looks like Oolon has accepted my invite to be on ReapSowRadio. Don't be nervous Al

[Dan]

A new sex tape has emerged this time it's Greg Bin Laden & Melodramatic Melody

[youtube]STUr1aFt3Gg[/youtube]

[ReneeHendricks]

Um, is anyone else seeing that Greg Laden's Twitter account is gone?

[Mykeru]

And here we go. No spoilers, let's put it out there:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8224/8351 ... 39ac_o.jpg

If you don't get it, her last tweet was a reference to my employment.

Excuse me, but I have a video to work on.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re ok with A Voice for Men publishing the name of some of the female protesters at the University of Toronto?

I didn't have anything to do with that, nor did I comment on it. So whether I was okay with it or not is just pulled straight from your ass.

How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Sasha Wiley Shaw gave press conferences presenting herself as a victim, and reading from Charter Rights, before, and after taking part in that speech-squashing action which, if you noticed, she was videotaping herself for apparent propaganda purposes When people on my channel started a "she shouldn't be a teacher" conversation, I shut them up. Not by blocking or banning, but by expressing my disapproval, for what that's worth.

So, once again, you either ignore important details, or invent them, mostly to puff up your own ego with XKCD agnosticism.

Also, you're a dick.

[ChrisNauczyciel]

@ReneeHendricks, yeah, I've just noticed that too. Perhaps he's going to open a new one like that Rhys Morgan kid.

[Mykeru]

@ReneeHendricks, yeah, I've just noticed that too. Perhaps he's going to open a new one like that Rhys Morgan kid.

Or maybe Greg, unlike Melody, can see the shit-storm coming.

Probably not, though.

[sacha]

only 16 pages behind

l

[Steersman]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re ok with A Voice for Men publishing the name of some of the female protesters at the University of Toronto? How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Although I’ll readily concede that any attempt to involve one’s employer is beyond the pale. However, while I think that mendacious melodramatic Melody is running around in ever diminishing circles like the proverbial chicken without its head, it might be somewhat of a stretch to argue that her tweet is an explicit threat to contact your employer as a number of other possibilities present themselves.

No, it's an implicit theat Steersman, if other possibilities actually exist i'd fucking love to hear them. For what it's worth, I also thought revealing the name of creepybittergirl was over the top and unnecessary to make the point.

Harassment seems to be an actionable offense, although I think that Melody would have a real problem trying to prove that in this case but it is, I think, another possibility, at least theoretically.

But I agree with you to some extent about “Creepy Bitter Girl” – the question is one of consistency, I think; sauce for the goose and gander both – Lousy Canuck had a post in suport of that idea not too long ago, although I tend to think that revealing names is an important option.

Maybe it’s getting a little close to vigilante justice, but at the same time it seems appropriate support for law enforcement agencies. Following some violence here in Vancouver several years ago after a Stanley Cup final, the police published photos of various perpetrators and asked for the public to provide identification – I don’t see Creepy Bitter Girl and the U of T protesters as being all that different from that case.

[ChrisNauczyciel]

Looks like Oolon has accepted my invite to be on ReapSowRadio. Don't be nervous Al

Far out, Reap! I love your show! He's kind of sitting on the fence, somewhere between the fainting couch and the slymepit. Should be interesting.

[Oneiros666]

My post on Greta Christina's hypocrisy - http://beliefblower.com/Greta-Christina ... risy-Shoes

Great post :)

I will never understand people like Greta Christina.

1. Let's say she had cancer and had to quit her job. Would it be okay to beg for money? No, it fucking wouldn't. It's fucking unacceptable to beg for money and expect to get it just because you have a fan- following. Especially when the person begging for money a) has a spouse with income of her own and b) obviously isn't poor to begin with.

2. She claimed to have stage 1 cancer and that it luckily got cleared up right away. Didn't miss any income except maybe 3-4 weeks (doesn't her job give her any sick- days?) so the donations adding up to several months of mortgage are superflous. To then not give all of the money back is not only unethical, it is down right illegal. She has swindled people out of money that was supposed to cover her medical expenses and living expenses when the cancer made it so that she couldn't sustain an income. When this didn't come to pass, all of the money should have been returned.

I will never understand why people can like a raging cunt like Greta Christina. She is just an awful human being.

[Jan Steen]

http://i.imgur.com/4Ugz8.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/09jFM.png

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

[justinvacula]

[youtube]lGnppQzJBcs[/youtube]

Here's some commentary following my ban from the atheism+ forums

"You're a fucking idiot, you know that? Debates are nothing but rhetorical games, and The Feculent has so much rhetoric dribbling out of his asshole he needs two pairs of depends to keep it all in." - A+ member The_Laughing_Coyote

[Steersman]

And here we go. No spoilers, let's put it out there:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8224/8351 ... 39ac_o.jpg

If you don't get it, her last tweet was a reference to my employment.

Excuse me, but I have a video to work on.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re ok with A Voice for Men publishing the name of some of the female protesters at the University of Toronto? How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Although I’ll readily concede that any attempt to involve one’s employer is beyond the pale. However, while I think that mendacious melodramatic Melody is running around in ever diminishing circles like the proverbial chicken without its head, it might be somewhat of a stretch to argue that her tweet is an explicit threat to contact your employer as a number of other possibilities present themselves.

The people that were named by AVFM were over 18, and were seen protesting, in public. (*) Their actions include blockading doors and ripping down posters. These are heckler's vetoes, anti-free speech actions, and both were possibly against the law.

[spoiler]What is it in society that protects these people, acting this way in public, from being named?

That they are young?

So was Mario Savio. So is every young man or woman that protests on campus or off campus for Occupy, against War, against the G-7, pro/con Israel or Palestine, against GM food, against India rape, pro women's rights.[/spoiler]

What are the attributes of the Toronto protestors that lead you to think their very public actions should not result in the discussion along with their names at a website?

That wasn’t really my point as I’m quite prepared to accept, at least as a “working hypothesis”, that people who act in the public sphere should expect to have their names, at least, made available to that same public.

My point was that Mykeru is, apparently, on-board with the two examples I provided, but reacts with some rather unseemly – being charitable – umbrage that his own name – which he had gracing his website at one point and which he pointed out was readily available to anyone who contributes to his site through the PayPal option – is used in the public sphere. Something does not compute, Captain ….

[ERV]

Just get it over with Mykeru, show her a dog dick.

No, it just has to be a non-human mammal dick, ESPECIALLY dog dicks.

[Darren]

Um, is anyone else seeing that Greg Laden's Twitter account is gone?

Yep, gone for me. Curious...

[Altair]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re ok with A Voice for Men publishing the name of some of the female protesters at the University of Toronto? How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Is Mykeru physically interacting with Melody, preventing her to enter a conference she wants to attend, spitting at her and calling her scum, rape apologist and making fun of the suicide of a friend of hers?
Has he damaged any of Melody's meat-space stuff?
Has he posted from twitter accounts that include his real name tweets saying he wants to kill all Melodies or saying that the fact that more Melodies kill themselves than non-Melodies is "good".

Unless the answer to any of these questions is YES, you're drawing a false equivalence between what AVfM did and Melody threatening to reveal Mykeru's name. Although I have the feeling he doesn't really care one way or the other

[Measly Twerp]

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

http://i.imgur.com/6pE3B.png

[Mykeru]

My point was that Mykeru is, apparently, on-board with the two examples I provided, but reacts with some rather unseemly – being charitable – umbrage that his own name – which he had gracing his website at one point and which he pointed out was readily available to anyone who contributes to his site through the PayPal option – is used in the public sphere. Something does not compute, Captain ….

Actually, when you are done making shit up, you can pay attention to this:

1. I laughed at Greg Laden's doxing, which was based on previous doxing that was based on investigating domain registration in 2003 which was used to harass my wife in 2005. Laden truly stands on the shoulders of midgets. Unfortunately, that genie can't be put back in the bottle. Your attitude seems to be if it happens enough times you learn to lay back and enjoy it.

2. What I "took umbrage" at was potentially targeting my ex-wife. Again.

3. Their next inevitable step is employer harassing. Was I on board with that? No.

You are an insufferable dick. Go fuck yourself.

[Ape+lust]

Just get it over with Mykeru, show her a dog dick.

No, it just has to be a non-human mammal dick, ESPECIALLY dog dicks.

Okay then, choose yer weapon. I vote koala, so an irresistably cute critter will forevermore give her the dry heaves.

[Measly Twerp]

Just get it over with Mykeru, show her a dog dick.

No, it just has to be a non-human mammal dick, ESPECIALLY dog dicks.

Okay then, choose yer weapon. I vote koala, so an irresistably cute critter will forevermore give her the dry heaves.

http://i.imgur.com/3HvBo.png

[Altair]

Okay then, choose yer weapon. I vote koala, so an irresistably cute critter will forevermore give her the dry heaves.

I vote for the Tasmanian Echidna. If animal penis freaks her out, a Four-Headed penis will have her running for the hills

[spoiler]http://tvblogs.nationalgeographic.com/f ... 34x446.jpg[/spoiler]

[cunt]

Harassment seems to be an actionable offense, although I think that Melody would have a real problem trying to prove that in this case but it is, I think, another possibility, at least theoretically.

None of this changes it from being an implicit threat to something else. I'm asking what else you think it might be, or whether you're just blowing smoke out your asshole. If melody thinks she's being harassed, is justified, and responds to it with an implicit threat to job security. Guess what she's still doing.

Maybe it’s getting a little close to vigilante justice, but at the same time it seems appropriate support for law enforcement agencies. Following some violence here in Vancouver several years ago after a Stanley Cup final, the police published photos of various perpetrators and asked for the public to provide identification – I don’t see Creepy Bitter Girl and the U of T protesters as being all that different from that case.

Big difference in that case. Police already knew who creepybittergirl is... they arrested her.

[Steersman]

And here we go. No spoilers, let's put it out there:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8224/8351 ... 39ac_o.jpg

If you don't get it, her last tweet was a reference to my employment.

Excuse me, but I have a video to work on.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re ok with A Voice for Men publishing the name of some of the female protesters at the University of Toronto?

I didn't have anything to do with that, nor did I comment on it. So whether I was okay with it or not is just pulled straight from your ass.

You might actually try reading my comments a little closer before commenting yourself. I did not say there that you were ok with it or not, only asked the question. Which still stands – want to take a run at it as a point of reference for all concerned?

How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Sasha Wiley Shaw gave press conferences presenting herself as a victim, and reading from Charter Rights, before, and after taking part in that speech-squashing action which, if you noticed, she was videotaping herself for apparent propaganda purposes.

Ah, but the question is did she reveal her name during that extravaganza? If not then that was something you added to the mix which would then appear – to me – to be much like some of what Melody and Greg have added.

When people on my channel started a "she shouldn't be a teacher" conversation, I shut them up. Not by blocking or banning, but by expressing my disapproval, for what that's worth.

Well, good for you; you do have at least some commitment to the principle of consistency.

So, once again, you either ignore important details, or invent them, mostly to puff up your own ego with XKCD agnosticism.

Apart from the fact that simply asking questions is neither ignoring nor inventing “important details”, I have to ask which armchair you got that psychology degree from.

Also, you're a dick.

Actually, FWIW, it’s Jim.

[xinit]

Um, is anyone else seeing that Greg Laden's Twitter account is gone?

I'm sure it's just that Mykeru haxored Greg's account and sent all those crazy tweets, so Greg was forced to take it down.

Mykerrrrrru!

[DownThunder]

[spoiler]

Hey slymepitters

I gots a question. If you had to write a book your kid for when s/he's say 20 - 25, what topics would you include?

Atheism and ethics are two obvious ones, but any ideas (even if they're within those two broad categories) would be appreciated.

Three concepts that need resuscitation from ancient Greece. Typhos, atyphia and parrhesia. All have their roots in ancient Athenian Cynicism circa 400–300 BCE and are all largely lost, or more probably eradicated, as they are heretical to every ideology that has ever stained our species - no exceptions.

Parrhesia to an extent has been revived, most prominently by Michel Foucalt in his last lectures. At it's most superficial, it is simply free speech. More correctly, it is fearless or bold speech. Absolute frankness, truth and clarity, even at the expense of hurt feelings or personal consequences. The Foucalt extracts from the cesspit summarise it fairly well -

So you see, the parrhesiastes is someone who takes a risk. Of course, this risk is not always a risk of life. When, for example, you see a friend doing something wrong and you risk incurring his anger by telling him he is wrong, you are acting as a parrhesiastes. In such a case, you do not risk your life, but you may hurt him by your remarks, and your friendship may consequently suffer for it. If, in a political debate, an orator risks losing his popularity because his opinions are contrary to the majority's opinion, or his opinions may usher in a political scandal, he uses parrhesia. Parrhesia, then, is linked to courage in the face of danger: it demands the courage to speak the truth in spite of some danger. And in its extreme form, telling the truth takes place in the "game" of life or death.

and -

To summarize the foregoing, parrhesia is a kind of verbal activity where the speaker has a specific relation to truth through frankness, a certain relationship to his own life through danger, a certain type of relation to himself or other people through criticism (self-criticism or criticism of other people), and a specific relation to moral law through freedom and duty. More precisely, parrhesia is a verbal activity in which a speaker expresses his personal relationship to truth, and risks his life because he recognizes truth-telling as a duty to improve or help other people (as well as himself). In parrhesia, the speaker uses his freedom and chooses frankness instead of persuasion, truth instead of falsehood or silence, the risk of death instead of life and security, criticism instead of flattery, and moral duty instead of self-interest and moral apathy.

Typhos has been completely lost - to the point it doesn't even exist in google. But, to me, it is the most important concept of the three. It has nothing to do with the monster in Greek mythology that even the god's feared, nor the disease. It is so obscure, I have had to make an effort to reconstruct its meaning from quite a pile of sources. At its superficial level it translates as nonsense, but again, there is a lot more to it. This is my interpretation -

typhos – Archaic Greek, literally “smoke, vapor”. A cloudy, misty, befuddled state of mind; intellectual smog; the delerium of popular ideas and conventions that are thoroughly divorced from reality or merit.

Typhos sees no difference between religion, homeopathy, conspiracy theory, personality cultdom or the gibberish that spews from the baboons. It is all the product of a mind that is fogged by the indistinct mist of concocted realities and incapable of either objectivity or clarity.

Luis Navia, probably the best living Cynic historian puts it this way -

The Cynics persisted in the conviction that most people live as if immersed in a cloud of smoke (typhos) that prevents them from seeing clearly and does not allow them to use that which distinguishes humans from animals—namely, the capacity to reason. In abandoning this capacity, people forsake their true nature. Diogenes often said that the human world is an enormous madhouse in which every sort of madness is found everywhere: cruelty, greed, deception, mendacity, brutality, uncontrolled hedonism, and the rest of the all-too-common diseases that afflict humanity and have become endemic in the form of things such as religion, patriotism, tradition, and other manifestations of irrationality.

It is no extravagant claim to say that every fuck up this planet has ever made has been the direct result of typhos.

Atyphia is the simplest. It is the antithesis of typhos. It is clarity and simplicity in expression, the removal of ambiguities from meaning. It is the engine that drives parrhesia. Plain talk, calling a spade a spade, fuck your feelings, this is how it really is. Bullshit free and pure, if somewhat painful.

I think everything else that we have - from reason to ethics to logic - is built upon the foundation stones of these concepts.

That was truly interesting, thank you. I really need to read more on the ancient Greeks...those old, irrelevant, over-privileged white dudebros were really on to something...

[/spoiler]

Agreed, deeply interesting. I'm going to have to do some more digging around this. Franc, can you recommend some resources? Typhos is of particular interest. I've been aware of the effect via my casual studies of mentality - I'm a fan of Julian Jaynse' work and theories - and have a shorthand reference I use for a similar idea : the 'monkeymind'. The monkeymind prevails in a massive proportion of human interaction- likely over 90% (an estimate I pulled completely out of emperical thin air, but based on lots of observation.)

Ive finally found words to describe concepts in my mind. Typhos and atyphia describe it beautifully. I see so much language used for the purpose of manipulation and emotional control - words which are poorly defined and sentences which are by extension nonsensical when read literally and clearly.

Franc, why are you wasting this on a forum? We need to get you as a speaker at skepchicon......

[welch]

@ReneeHendricks, yeah, I've just noticed that too. Perhaps he's going to open a new one like that Rhys Morgan kid.

Or maybe Greg, unlike Melody, can see the shit-storm coming.

Probably not, though.

I'm still waiting for his promised exposé on abbie

[Mykeru]

You might actually try reading my comments a little closer before commenting yourself.

All I know is you got a response, which is one more than you're entitled to.

[Ape+lust]

http://i.imgur.com/3HvBo.png

If only elevator guy had been so plainspoken. We'd all be doing something else right now.

I vote for the Tasmanian Echidna. If animal penis freaks her out, a Four-Headed penis will have her running for the hills

[spoiler]http://tvblogs.nationalgeographic.com/f ... 34x446.jpg[/spoiler]

Wow. That's creepier than an alien facehugger. Mind your manners Melody, or the spoiler tags get it.

[Steersman]

Harassment seems to be an actionable offense, although I think that Melody would have a real problem trying to prove that in this case but it is, I think, another possibility, at least theoretically.

None of this changes it from being an implicit threat to something else. I'm asking what else you think it might be, or whether you're just blowing smoke out your asshole. If melody thinks she's being harassed, is justified, and responds to it with an implicit threat to job security. Guess what she's still doing.

I didn’t say that it wasn’t an implicit threat – I said, or meant, that there were other possible implicit threats, i.e., to try charging Mykeru with harassment.

Maybe it’s getting a little close to vigilante justice, but at the same time it seems appropriate support for law enforcement agencies. Following some violence here in Vancouver several years ago after a Stanley Cup final, the police published photos of various perpetrators and asked for the public to provide identification – I don’t see Creepy Bitter Girl and the U of T protesters as being all that different from that case.

Big difference in that case. Police already knew who creepybittergirl is... they arrested her.

As mentioned in a previous post, the question is, was she arrested during that tear-down extravaganza? It’s been a while since I viewed that video, but my recollection is that she wasn’t part of that action and hadn't been arrested (all she was doing - from my recollection - was doing some recording), and that she had been arrested in the context of another one. And my subsequent impression was that Mykeru had somehow obtained additional information linking the two cases. Methinks somewhat of a different kettle of fish if that is the case.

[Tigzy]

How about with a certain Michael linking one Sacha Wiley-Shaw to the great poster tear-down extravaganza?

Sasha Wiley Shaw gave press conferences presenting herself as a victim, and reading from Charter Rights, before, and after taking part in that speech-squashing action which, if you noticed, she was videotaping herself for apparent propaganda purposes.

Ah, but the question is did she reveal her name during that extravaganza? If not then that was something you added to the mix which would then appear – to me – to be much like some of what Melody and Greg have added.

FFS Steers - this is just nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking. Look, Wiley-Shaw's name was already in the public domain before Mykeru uploaded his 'who is Creepybittergrrl' video. This article, for example, names Sasha and gives her occupation here. Note the date:

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/david-p ... -protester

And here's Mykeru's Creepybittergrrl: Origins video. Again - note the date it was published:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy0gryjL ... MnuDeww6JA

Fuck's sake Steers, you're hard work sometimes.

Also, you're a dick.

Actually, FWIW, it’s Jim.

Please, please don't tell me you're Noelplum. Lie to me if you have to.

[JackRayner]

Also, you're a dick.

Actually, FWIW, it’s Jim.

Please, please don't tell me you're Noelplum. Lie to me if you have to.

:lol:

[Edina Monsoon]

My post on Greta Christina's hypocrisy - http://beliefblower.com/Greta-Christina ... risy-Shoes

2. She claimed to have stage 1 cancer and that it luckily got cleared up right away. Didn't miss any income except maybe 3-4 weeks (doesn't her job give her any sick- days?) so the donations adding up to several months of mortgage are superflous. To then not give all of the money back is not only unethical, it is down right illegal. She has swindled people out of money that was supposed to cover her medical expenses and living expenses when the cancer made it so that she couldn't sustain an income. When this didn't come to pass, all of the money should have been returned.

IIRC, she gave up her job to go into full-time blawgging, which would mean no paid sick time.

She did allow as how she "might" pass along some of her massive windfall to charity, and not long after announced she and her spouse were donating a whopping $100 to - I can't remember, was it Skepticamp? Perhaps she might have donated more if designer shoes weren't so damn expensive.

[Measly Twerp]

As mentioned in a previous post, the question is, was she arrested during that tear-down extravaganza? It’s been a while since I viewed that video, but my recollection is that she wasn’t part of that action and hadn't been arrested (all she was doing - from my recollection - was doing some recording), and that she had been arrested in the context of another one. And my subsequent impression was that Mykeru had somehow obtained additional information linking the two cases. Methinks somewhat of a different kettle of fish if that is the case.

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

:)

[Zenspace]

[spoiler]

Hey slymepitters

I gots a question. If you had to write a book your kid for when s/he's say 20 - 25, what topics would you include?

Atheism and ethics are two obvious ones, but any ideas (even if they're within those two broad categories) would be appreciated.

Three concepts that need resuscitation from ancient Greece. Typhos, atyphia and parrhesia. All have their roots in ancient Athenian Cynicism circa 400–300 BCE and are all largely lost, or more probably eradicated, as they are heretical to every ideology that has ever stained our species - no exceptions.

Parrhesia to an extent has been revived, most prominently by Michel Foucalt in his last lectures. At it's most superficial, it is simply free speech. More correctly, it is fearless or bold speech. Absolute frankness, truth and clarity, even at the expense of hurt feelings or personal consequences. The Foucalt extracts from the cesspit summarise it fairly well -

So you see, the parrhesiastes is someone who takes a risk. Of course, this risk is not always a risk of life. When, for example, you see a friend doing something wrong and you risk incurring his anger by telling him he is wrong, you are acting as a parrhesiastes. In such a case, you do not risk your life, but you may hurt him by your remarks, and your friendship may consequently suffer for it. If, in a political debate, an orator risks losing his popularity because his opinions are contrary to the majority's opinion, or his opinions may usher in a political scandal, he uses parrhesia. Parrhesia, then, is linked to courage in the face of danger: it demands the courage to speak the truth in spite of some danger. And in its extreme form, telling the truth takes place in the "game" of life or death.

and -

To summarize the foregoing, parrhesia is a kind of verbal activity where the speaker has a specific relation to truth through frankness, a certain relationship to his own life through danger, a certain type of relation to himself or other people through criticism (self-criticism or criticism of other people), and a specific relation to moral law through freedom and duty. More precisely, parrhesia is a verbal activity in which a speaker expresses his personal relationship to truth, and risks his life because he recognizes truth-telling as a duty to improve or help other people (as well as himself). In parrhesia, the speaker uses his freedom and chooses frankness instead of persuasion, truth instead of falsehood or silence, the risk of death instead of life and security, criticism instead of flattery, and moral duty instead of self-interest and moral apathy.

Typhos has been completely lost - to the point it doesn't even exist in google. But, to me, it is the most important concept of the three. It has nothing to do with the monster in Greek mythology that even the god's feared, nor the disease. It is so obscure, I have had to make an effort to reconstruct its meaning from quite a pile of sources. At its superficial level it translates as nonsense, but again, there is a lot more to it. This is my interpretation -

typhos – Archaic Greek, literally “smoke, vapor”. A cloudy, misty, befuddled state of mind; intellectual smog; the delerium of popular ideas and conventions that are thoroughly divorced from reality or merit.

Typhos sees no difference between religion, homeopathy, conspiracy theory, personality cultdom or the gibberish that spews from the baboons. It is all the product of a mind that is fogged by the indistinct mist of concocted realities and incapable of either objectivity or clarity.

Luis Navia, probably the best living Cynic historian puts it this way -

The Cynics persisted in the conviction that most people live as if immersed in a cloud of smoke (typhos) that prevents them from seeing clearly and does not allow them to use that which distinguishes humans from animals—namely, the capacity to reason. In abandoning this capacity, people forsake their true nature. Diogenes often said that the human world is an enormous madhouse in which every sort of madness is found everywhere: cruelty, greed, deception, mendacity, brutality, uncontrolled hedonism, and the rest of the all-too-common diseases that afflict humanity and have become endemic in the form of things such as religion, patriotism, tradition, and other manifestations of irrationality.

It is no extravagant claim to say that every fuck up this planet has ever made has been the direct result of typhos.

Atyphia is the simplest. It is the antithesis of typhos. It is clarity and simplicity in expression, the removal of ambiguities from meaning. It is the engine that drives parrhesia. Plain talk, calling a spade a spade, fuck your feelings, this is how it really is. Bullshit free and pure, if somewhat painful.

I think everything else that we have - from reason to ethics to logic - is built upon the foundation stones of these concepts.

That was truly interesting, thank you. I really need to read more on the ancient Greeks...those old, irrelevant, over-privileged white dudebros were really on to something...

[/spoiler]

Agreed, deeply interesting. I'm going to have to do some more digging around this. Franc, can you recommend some resources? Typhos is of particular interest. I've been aware of the effect via my casual studies of mentality - I'm a fan of Julian Jaynse' work and theories - and have a shorthand reference I use for a similar idea : the 'monkeymind'. The monkeymind prevails in a massive proportion of human interaction- likely over 90% (an estimate I pulled completely out of emperical thin air, but based on lots of observation.)

Ive finally found words to describe concepts in my mind. Typhos and atyphia describe it beautifully. I see so much language used for the purpose of manipulation and emotional control - words which are poorly defined and sentences which are by extension nonsensical when read literally and clearly.

One of the most transparent, yet most critical, underlying structural characteristics of modern human thought and language is metaphor. It is at once an extremely flexible and adaptable and yet, so easily misdirected by whether via intent, bias or ignorance.

Franc, why are you wasting this on a forum? We need to get you as a speaker at skepchicon......

Indeed. A quality presentation on that topic - with its clear applications towards skeptical thought - would really be something.

[cunt]

Harassment seems to be an actionable offense, although I think that Melody would have a real problem trying to prove that in this case but it is, I think, another possibility, at least theoretically.

None of this changes it from being an implicit threat to something else. I'm asking what else you think it might be, or whether you're just blowing smoke out your asshole. If melody thinks she's being harassed, is justified, and responds to it with an implicit threat to job security. Guess what she's still doing.

I didn’t say that it wasn’t an implicit threat – I said, or meant, that there were other possible implicit threats, i.e., to try charging Mykeru with harassment.

In that case it'd only be necessary to indicate knowledge of his name and possibly general location. Going on about "the government" is shorthand for "imma try fucking with your job, bitch". His job is irrelevant.

Maybe it’s getting a little close to vigilante justice, but at the same time it seems appropriate support for law enforcement agencies. Following some violence here in Vancouver several years ago after a Stanley Cup final, the police published photos of various perpetrators and asked for the public to provide identification – I don’t see Creepy Bitter Girl and the U of T protesters as being all that different from that case.

Big difference in that case. Police already knew who creepybittergirl is... they arrested her.

As mentioned in a previous post, the question is, was she arrested during that tear-down extravaganza? It’s been a while since I viewed that video, but my recollection is that she wasn’t part of that action and hadn't been arrested (all she was doing - from my recollection - was doing some recording), and that she had been arrested in the context of another one. And my subsequent impression was that Mykeru had somehow obtained additional information linking the two cases. Methinks somewhat of a different kettle of fish if that is the case.[/quote]

Here's the timeline:

Creepybittergirl bangs some pots and pans in the street outside a police station, gets herself arrested after she throws herself at a truck.
Creepybittergirl goes out to tear down johntheothers posters, because fight the patriarchy.
Mykeru makes a video about the poster tear down as part of a larger view on atheism+
Mykeru then finds the video of creepybittergirl with the pots and pans, finds out her real name, occupation, and chooses to reveal it.

You notice how, the first thing in that timeline makes creepybittergirl known to the vancouver police department. So, revealing her name was plainly not done in order to help with police efforts and not equivalent to the police asking for information on unknown offenders involved in one of you retarded canadian hockey riots.

[mutleyeng]

Looks like Oolon has accepted my invite to be on ReapSowRadio. Don't be nervous Al

Im all for a civil discussion with "the other side" - but Oolon? really?

right, Im going to watch the Pharyngulites google hangout on "bad science" to kill off as many brain cells as I can

[Mykeru]

Mykeru then finds the video of creepybittergirl with the pots and pans, finds out her real name, occupation, and chooses to reveal it.

The timeline is correct, although I can't take credit for the detective work. It was handed to me in my inbox in a gift basket with a big bow on it.

That's not to say I disavow running with it, but the footwork wasn't my own. You may also notice that I haven't done a Creepy BitterGrrl since, as I really don't want to conflate Wiley-Shaw, who is a massive asshole in her own right, with the invention of my febrile imagination as it seems to be unfair.

The figment of my imagination is a lot more likable.

P.S. Steersman is a dick.

[cunt]

The figment of my imagination is a lot more likable.

Yeah. The actual creepybittergirl character is hilarious.

[franc]

Whoa. Naomi Chambers could use some youtube mirrors.

http://venturephilosophy.blogspot.co.uk ... ty-is.html

Whether you agree with her on law reforms, censorship by false flagging must stop.

Been mirrored and hers has been reinstated. If hers gets flgggeded again, mirror mine. I recoded the video so it has a different hash that tricked the YT censor bots.

[Gumby]

All right, I'm outta here. Take pity on me - my gf is making me take her to see The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey... the 3D showing. After that, I might need to start my own thread on the A+ Support Forum.

I'm really perplexed as to how PJ is going to drag out The Hobbit into three movies.

The Dwarves, however, do have really cool costumes, from the pix I've seen. There are already patterns for some of the knitted items on Ravelry.

/terminal Tolkien nerd

Well, now that I've seen it, I can tell you how Jackson will drag out The Hobbit into three movies - he's turning each sentence in the book into a movie scene. I'm exaggerating, but not by much. It was interminable. I simply couldn't wait to get out of the theater. It was a thick morass of dialog and visuals that was pretty haphazardly strung together into a jumbled mess. The visuals were OK, dialogue was often drowned out by action, the 3D sucked and diminished an already mediocre movie. 3D is far from hitting any sort of realistic stride, and I would have much rather seen it in regular 2D.

I'm disappointed in Jackson. I'm no huge Tolkien fan but I really enjoyed Jackson's original LOTR trilogy (I have the extended editions boxed Blu-ray set). They are so much better than Hobbit - An Unexpected Journey, which is probably going to be referred to as Jackson's Phantom Menace. At least Jar Jar Binks didn't make an appearance.

[Mykeru]

[spoiler][youtube]lGnppQzJBcs[/youtube][/spoiler]

Here's some commentary following my ban from the atheism+ forums

[spoiler]

"You're a fucking idiot, you know that? Debates are nothing but rhetorical games, and The Feculent has so much rhetoric dribbling out of his asshole he needs two pairs of depends to keep it all in." - A+ member The_Laughing_Coyote

[/quote][/spoiler]

How did you manage to get 23 minutes out of the simple idea "Failed to tap dance through a minefield"?