Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Apparently someone wrote a SJ-friendly call to civility. Well, we can't have that!

Basically, the rebuttal is that some jerks act nice when they are being jerkish... Which has nothing to do about how you should act when you have good motives!

Rephrased:

Civil + Kind = Awesome, persuasive, bringing together
Uncivil + Kind = Okay, divisive, unpersuasive, makes people defensive, leads to misunderstandings
Uncivil + Mean = Jerk
Civil + Mean = Jerk that makes you really angry

And don't you love it how the 301 level discussions always seem to end up as them agreeing with one another? That is not my idea of how things should work out. Once we've settled the banal arguments that the common filth offer about gay marriage, we should be free to disagree about the deeper issues!
Click to expand...
People who say that their opponents are being unpersuasive are Dunning-Kruger rejects. They have what Jonathan Haidt calls, The Righteous Mind, in which everyone else is wrong and are being obtuse or simply refusing to acknowledge the truth.

Haidt points out that few people ever change their mind during an argument. That humans, by and large, don't arrive at their beliefs via reason. That goes for people on both sides of the political fence. Further, all of us, we are not as correct about things as much as we assume.

Don't start a debate by assuming you absolutely know the truth. Don't assume the worst of those who you are arguing against. Don't take offense when none is meant. Be judicious with your advice to fellow posters. Don't presume to be some expert in most fields. If you are an expert in cosmology then be patient, state that you are an expert, and following Haidt's advice provide the best arguments you can without patronizing and without condescending.

See The Principle of Charity. And to everyone, I strongly urge Reading Haidt's book. You will likely find it both eye opening and a bit humbling.

 
Last edited:
Tsukasa Buddha said:
And don't you love it how the 301 level discussions always seem to end up as them agreeing with one another? That is not my idea of how things should work out. Once we've settled the banal arguments that the common filth offer about gay marriage, we should be free to disagree about the deeper issues!
Click to expand...

The goal is to pretty much create an echo chamber although aplussers will be loathe to admit it. Thae their current feminism and porn thread where they're all agreeing that porn is good. Good I agree with them porn is good.

There's branches of feminism that would disagree with them but those voices are noticably absent and I'm curious as to what would happen should they show up with the usual porn is exploitation argument.

I'd like to try saying, that as a man, viewing porn taught me to objectify women and play the lived experience card.
 
Stout said:
The goal is to pretty much create an echo chamber although aplussers will be loathe to admit it. Thae their current feminism and porn thread where they're all agreeing that porn is good. Good I agree with them porn is good.

There's branches of feminism that would disagree with them but those voices are noticably absent and I'm curious as to what would happen should they show up with the usual porn is exploitation argument.

I'd like to try saying, that as a man, viewing porn taught me to objectify women and play the lived experience card.
Click to expand...
They, the anti-port feminists would have many of the very same rhetorical devices that A+ folks employ. They would tell their sisters that anyone, male or female, who is pro-porn are simply the end result of thousands of years of patriarchy. The +A crowd just don't get it.
 
theprestige said:
I think he's rebutting your "isn't it creepy" by demonstrating how easy--and Totally Not Creepy At All, I Swear--to find out a lot of stuff about people who carelessly practice information promiscuity on the Internet.
Click to expand...

Yes and when we pair that with how "damaging" unsolicited PMs can be and the supposed incriminating content in the secret forum we have people who aren't all that well versed in protecting their privacy from, errrr, fans.

Aplussers will call it doxxing, even though I didn't hack anything to get the info.
 
RandFan said:
They, the anti-port feminists would have many of the very same rhetorical devices that A+ folks employ. They would tell their sisters that anyone, male or female, who is pro-porn are simply the end result of thousands of years of patriarchy. The +A crowd just don't get it.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see that go down though, I almost saw it on another SJ forum but the anti-porn crowd had moderator and popular support so, well it didn't really.:mad:

Quinn, don't worry, I won't show up at your office, I actually like you and I'm nowhere near Texas.
 
Mr. Scott said:
Still can't keep my eyes off the train wreck. From "Are the moderators here censorious, capricious and biased?":

irkthepurists:


ceepolk (showing air-tight closed-mindedness):


They have a "right" to be rejected? :confused:

GreatBlueHeron (showing hyperbole, missing the point, and straw personing):


:confused:

ceepolk (posted TODAY):


So, one of the conductors on the train is bored by the wreck in progress :rolleyes:

linky
Click to expand...

I think Ceepolk's comment was directed specifically at Wind showing up in the thread again. I believe it might coincide with Wind's banishment from the whinging thread.


qwints said:
I feel compelled to point out that neither Mr. Samsa nor I have been banned for pushing our point.

Hey, I'm still here. I think the two key points I've made are that level playing fields can exclude people from marginalized groups, and that profanity should not be conflated with verbal abuse.
Click to expand...
Well, you're not one of the inner sanctum, and you're actually having conversations here. And while I do think the thread with Mr. Samsa is actually close to the most productive conversation I've seen there, it's a complete rarity. My comment was addressed to the internet tough guys giex who can take down any argument just by showing up at a debate. The ones the sycophants toadie up to every day to see which way the wind is blowing. The ones who even brag of what badasses they are. I don't think I need to name names - anyone can spot them. [/quote]

Additionally, there have been a lot of jokes/references from people in this thread talking about trolling the atheismplus forums. I don't blame anyone who stays away from a place where people routinely talk about doing such things. Is anyone here a little creeped out by how much some posters here seem to know about atheismplus posters?
Click to expand...

The latter part first... Not in the least creeped out by people who know how to read and who read the material they post on the internet. It's there for all to see. No one's stalking them at home or trying to Do A Watson (i.e. rallying friends who try to get debating opponents fired). Did that creep you out? Did that creep out any of the uber-sensitive. Imagine if Ceepolk showed up at work in whatever town she's in and found that someone was launching an email campaign to her boss to get her fired? Wanna bet that if you start a thread over there about what Rebecca's minions did (and Rebecca has been seen bragging about) that every one of them would think it was Social Justice In Action?

So, no. I'm not in the least creeped out that they're being called to task in a freewheeling but moderated forum of an organization that's done more for skepticism than they've ever dreamed of doing.

As to your first point... understanding why they wouldn't want to come here? Sure, I understand, but us actual SJWs call that what it is. Chicken**** behavior. People have DIED for social justice. Jim Clark's team in Selma had guns and batons and cattle prods. The protesters had arms linked together. Yet the protesters went and they got the living **** beat out of them. Participants who backed Gandhi got SHOT. Anti-apartheid activists got jailed and tortured and DISAPPEARED. Kids in Franklin Park got their heads busted in by Daley's cops. But the uber-sensitive 301 levels can't step out of their safe little cubbies to discuss and support their positions with rational (albeit sometimes quite snarky and/or cynical) critical thinkers?

Sorry, but I see this as another in many years of dealing with armchair intellectuals and ************ revolutionaries. (One of which I'm becoming in my dotage. :D ) The old "yer mouth's writing checks that your ass can't cash" syndrome. There just aren't that many seats available on the steering committee for the revolution. You need some front line warriors if you're going to effect actual change in the way people think, perceive, behave....
 
RandFan said:
They, the anti-port feminists would have many of the very same rhetorical devices that A+ folks employ. They would tell their sisters that anyone, male or female, who is pro-porn are simply the end result of thousands of years of patriarchy. The +A crowd just don't get it.
Click to expand...
"Port?" Who the hell could be against port? It's great as an apéritif. :o Anti-porn.

Stout said:
Yes and when we pair that with how "damaging" unsolicited PMs can be and the supposed incriminating content in the secret forum we have people who aren't all that well versed in protecting their privacy from, errrr, fans.

Aplussers will call it doxxing, even though I didn't hack anything to get the info.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
theprestige said:
Well, SubMor has just taken his side against Setar, so clearly something is going on...
Click to expand...

Reminds me of that scene in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington when the Senators are beginning to pay attention to Jeff Smith. "Diz, terrible things are happening. They're listening to him, now."
 
A thread discussing what is going on in another forum. It should have died off long ago. Really, why are you so obsessed with those people?
 
Verklagekasper said:
A thread discussing what is going on in another forum. It should have died off long ago. Really, why are you so obsessed with those people?
Click to expand...
I've been posting on JREF for more than a decade and I've heard this about everything.

  • Why are you folks so obsessed with Big Foot?
  • Why are you folks so obsessed with psychics?
  • Why are you folks so obsessed with UFO's?
  • Why are you folks so obsessed with dowsing?
  • Why are you folks so obsessed with Homeopathy?
  • Why are you folks so obsessed with crystals?
  • Why are you folks so obsessed with conspiracy theory?
It's just what we do.
 
Really, chocolate pie is wonderful. Sometimes I wake up moaning "Chocolate pie!! Chocolate pie!!!"
 
kellyb said:
Really, chocolate pie is wonderful. Sometimes I wake up moaning "Chocolate pie!! Chocolate pie!!!"
Click to expand...

Derail: I've thought of making a chocolate pie for the caffe, but I've got sooper dooper killer double chocolate fudge cake, bittersweet chocolate gelato, milk chocolate gelato, mocha coffee and crispy chocolate wafers on the menu already.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom