recursive prophet
Graduate Poster
@appalling: Having learned you are not a dedicated member of A+ but simply looking for an audience for your rhetoric I'm not inclined to take the time to respond in detail to each of your points as I did before. I now suspect you simply haven't spent enough time there to observe just how extremely antisocial the small group in control at A+ has become. Why do you think so many other atheist/skeptic sites like this one have a thread mocking them? And this one is quite deferential compared to the one at Talk Rational. which is now on part 3, lofl. Notice JREF doesn't have a thread on TR, or they one on JREF. A+ is really special.
I didn't ignore their objections. I simply didn't/don't believe they are at all valid. One person, who admitted her argument was moot as she blocked PM's, claimed it would be a major problem. This same lady compared getting a PM to being approached alone on parking lot as opposed to a busy street. Wanna defend that one on a recorded Skype debate I can post on YouTube? I want to see you keep a straight face while doing so. Like somebody really as paranoid as SC presented herself would ever venture out on a street filled with live Schrodinger's rapists? When knowing someone sent her a PM on the internet would trigger a 2 day panic breakdown? Did you actually read her posts? I'm starting to think I'm being trolled.
Your logic in saying I was asking someone to provide evidence to support my own claim is bass ackwards. I made a conjecture based on not having seen or perhaps remembered any such requests. You can't produce evidence if in fact it doesn't exists. Others claimed they had such evidence, and I requested their source. They made the claim, so the burden of proof was on them. Pay attention. Turns out they had some. 19 requests by my count, pretty slim given the number of threads and people involved. Still, as I mentioned earlier in this very thread, they have every right to make silly rules and ban whoever they choose for whatever reason. But I have every right to LMAO at their comical melodrama, too.
I mentioned the language used but that wasn't what offended me. It was ceepolk's inane, dishonest hyperbole: "are you seriously arguing that you should be allowed to trigger people into panic attacks that could prompt them to need days of adjustment because asking for permission in public is "uncomfortable?" Do remember there were many other problems I mentioned with the public permission bs. And I have yet to read a rational explanation for how asking an unstable person in public would bother them less than just blocking all PM's so they would never even see it. It ain't rocket surgery. One click.
One of many things I doubt you're aware of is that the A+ ban list is missing many of the names of those perma-banned. Quite a few were eliminated because of things they said at other sites, and I fully expect as a result of what I've written here I'll soon be joining them. No big loss. I really would have loved to have had a private conversation with some there who seemed pretty normal and discovered how they saw the way the forums were being moderated and dominated by a small group of churlish berks. But I knew without the opportunity to have such discussions beyond the realm of ceepolk et al I would have been banned long before I got any answers. I'll be really surprised if that site is still around in 2014.
@Ronja: Actually I was aware epileptics could be triggered by colors, but do you really think a red smiley could do the trick? If so should we eliminate all colors from the net? That's the mentality at A+ was my point.
@Tsukasa Buddha: Welcome to the club. We're going to order T-shirts. Slurs from ceepolk followed me out the door also. Was she the one who booted you? And you do know they read this thread and will perma-ban you for speaking out here, right? Big Xiester is watching you even now!!
tl;dr
I didn't ignore their objections. I simply didn't/don't believe they are at all valid. One person, who admitted her argument was moot as she blocked PM's, claimed it would be a major problem. This same lady compared getting a PM to being approached alone on parking lot as opposed to a busy street. Wanna defend that one on a recorded Skype debate I can post on YouTube? I want to see you keep a straight face while doing so. Like somebody really as paranoid as SC presented herself would ever venture out on a street filled with live Schrodinger's rapists? When knowing someone sent her a PM on the internet would trigger a 2 day panic breakdown? Did you actually read her posts? I'm starting to think I'm being trolled.
Your logic in saying I was asking someone to provide evidence to support my own claim is bass ackwards. I made a conjecture based on not having seen or perhaps remembered any such requests. You can't produce evidence if in fact it doesn't exists. Others claimed they had such evidence, and I requested their source. They made the claim, so the burden of proof was on them. Pay attention. Turns out they had some. 19 requests by my count, pretty slim given the number of threads and people involved. Still, as I mentioned earlier in this very thread, they have every right to make silly rules and ban whoever they choose for whatever reason. But I have every right to LMAO at their comical melodrama, too.
I mentioned the language used but that wasn't what offended me. It was ceepolk's inane, dishonest hyperbole: "are you seriously arguing that you should be allowed to trigger people into panic attacks that could prompt them to need days of adjustment because asking for permission in public is "uncomfortable?" Do remember there were many other problems I mentioned with the public permission bs. And I have yet to read a rational explanation for how asking an unstable person in public would bother them less than just blocking all PM's so they would never even see it. It ain't rocket surgery. One click.
One of many things I doubt you're aware of is that the A+ ban list is missing many of the names of those perma-banned. Quite a few were eliminated because of things they said at other sites, and I fully expect as a result of what I've written here I'll soon be joining them. No big loss. I really would have loved to have had a private conversation with some there who seemed pretty normal and discovered how they saw the way the forums were being moderated and dominated by a small group of churlish berks. But I knew without the opportunity to have such discussions beyond the realm of ceepolk et al I would have been banned long before I got any answers. I'll be really surprised if that site is still around in 2014.
@Ronja: Actually I was aware epileptics could be triggered by colors, but do you really think a red smiley could do the trick? If so should we eliminate all colors from the net? That's the mentality at A+ was my point.
@Tsukasa Buddha: Welcome to the club. We're going to order T-shirts. Slurs from ceepolk followed me out the door also. Was she the one who booted you? And you do know they read this thread and will perma-ban you for speaking out here, right? Big Xiester is watching you even now!!
tl;dr
This smiley would get a lot of reaction at A+, but while I'm not a neurologist either I seriously doubt any epileptics would be triggered by it, only their faux protectors. Lots of zircons in the rough at A+. 
