Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[zooterkin]

Well, the victim of the horrible oppression has seen fit to "guest" himself, so that's something. (And I have no idea why.... just stirring the pot, so to speak.)

AvalonXQ? Did he mistake a satirical comment for an attack on him? Or did I have that backwards myself?

 

[Wildy]

Coming here is the last thing any of them would want to do. To debate on a neutral playing field, without the ability to ban anyone who disagrees with them, would mean that they would actually have to defend their dogma.

I don't think they would consider this place to be a neutral playing field, what with the whole "JREF hates women" thingamywhatsit.

If one of the "big players" over there were to come here I'd have a tough choice on where to put my money. Would they ragequit or would they commit suicide by mod?

I have to admit, though, that teh eeeeebil part of me would move one of their posts to AAH just to generate an AutoModAction PM. I know; if there were a hell, I'm headed there.

And cause them to potentially shut down for three days? You impress me Mr. Mod.

 

[kellyb]

Heh, I've apparently been banned from posting in the "forum matters" subforum. No notice was given or anything - but the quote and post buttons are all invisible there now to me.

 

[kellyb]

Oh, wow. Avalon totally has guestified herself! Jeez. Be careful 'bout proclaiming yourself willing to torture and kill for your deities 'round these parts, I guess. The mods won't auto-guestify you, but apparently you'll request guestification upon being called out.

wtf.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Heh, I've apparently been banned from posting in the "forum matters" subforum. No notice was given or anything - but the quote and post buttons are all invisible there now to me.

Well, that's one way to make sure the criticism of your moderation isn't too one-sided (for the other side, that is)!

I still think you're in on a pass because it would just be a tad unseemly to ban you after you exposed their dirty little secret... and made them out to be lying liarheads in the offing.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Oh, wow. Avalon totally has guestified herself! Jeez. Be careful 'bout proclaiming yourself willing to torture and kill for your deities 'round these parts, I guess. The mods won't auto-guestify you, but apparently you'll request guestification upon being called out.

wtf.

Avalon is a he xe hir bleh, whatever.

 

[Mr. Scott]

Still can't keep my eyes off the train wreck. From "Are the moderators here censorious, capricious and biased?":

irkthepurists:

If [sociology is] akin to any academic subject, I'd say it's more like music: a complex discipline, one with certain accepted terminology and rules...but everyone's entitled to (a) have a go, and (b) break the rules if they see another way of doing things.

ceepolk (showing air-tight closed-mindedness):

and they have the right to be rejected for not understanding the fundamentals, too.

They have a "right" to be rejected?

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

to make the comparison to music? Blech. My real, lived experiences with bigotry and discrimination is in no way comparable to why someone likes a particular tune because technical and asthetics reasons. I aint here to be put under a microscope and be dissected for your enjoyment.

ceepolk (posted TODAY):

okay, bored now.

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

linky

 

[theprestige]

Are you guys still following the Mr. Samsa narratives? Looking to me more and more like he came to A+ to kick ass and chew gum, and xe's out of gum. Check out the latest here. http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3830&start=150

I'd like to, but I keep getting an sql error--too many connections. There may actually now be more lurkers there, watching the train wreck, than people riding the train.

How does the song go?

Rebecca Watson still the handle and
The train it won't stop rolling--
No way to slow down.

 

[theprestige]

I'd like to, but I keep getting an sql error--too many connections. There may actually now be more lurkers there, watching the train wreck, than people riding the train.

How does the song go?

Rebecca Watson still the handle and
The train it won't stop rolling--
No way to slow down.

Ah, it's back up now. It seems at least two other members have taken up Mr. Samsa's banner in that thread, which is heartening.

 

[Wildy]

Ah, it's back up now. It seems at least two other members have taken up Mr. Samsa's banner in that thread, which is heartening.

You mean he's converting people with logic and reason? I don't think that bodes well for him.

 

[squealpiggy]

Perkygoths are still gloomy, they're just cheerfully gloomy.

You need to check your mainstream privilege. You're not a Goth, you can't speak from Goth experience; and trying to dictate how Goths should collectivize themselves is offensive. Stop your oppressive mundanesplaining.

This is just an example of eldritchsplaining.

 

[theprestige]

I finally read through the "wind incident" in the Are the Moderators...? thread.

It seems to me that if the Secret Forum really were about improving the lives of members, it would be advertised prominently as a desirable and attractive feature of the forum.

Think about it: You're a movement that prides itself on being the next-generation social justice community. You make a point of being a safe space for the walking wounded in the skeptical community. You even have a subforum dedicated especially to that purpose.

Wouldn't you want to tell people about that? Wouldn't you want to reach out to those walking wounded? Wouldn't you want to say, loudly and clearly to the skeptical community, "if you need a safe place to talk about your problems, in private, because your life may be at risk, we have that place. Come to the A+ forums, and PM a mod to apply"?

Battered womens' shelters advertise. Why not this secret forum, if its purpose is as alleged?

What we actually see is a forum so secret that nobody is supposed to know about it. You can use it as a safe place, but only after the in-group sees fit to invite you.

It's pretty obvious that the secret forum isn't intended to be a service to those in the community who need it.

I think Exi5 was right on the money, by choosing to focus on the admission that the secret forum is used to discuss dissenters from the party line.






*cough*Mussolini's Demon*cough*

 

[qwints]

Ah, it's back up now. It seems at least two other members have taken up Mr. Samsa's banner in that thread, which is heartening.

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

And to the A+ lurkers who we assume are reading this thread (between seizures because of all the trigger-worthy material). The door is open here. We'd dearly love to dogpile yer sorry asses have this discussion WITH you rather than about you and we can't go there 'cuz identifiable folks (like me with my obvious IP address) won't even make it through registration. So, bring it, tough guys! Bringing about change and orienting organized skepticism towards social justice just might require that you get out and address some actual skeptics and not the Amen Chorus in your club house.

Coming here is the last thing any of them would want to do. To debate on a neutral playing field, without the ability to ban anyone who disagrees with them, would mean that they would actually have to defend their dogma.

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.

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?

 

[Kochanski]

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.

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?

I still don't see how a level playing field on the internet can exclude people from marginalized groups. No one knows who you are on the internet if you choose to keep your personal information to yourself. It is the ultimate disguise. How does this exclude marginalized groups?

As far as profanity and abuse, no the two are not the same but when you direct profanity AT a person it is verbal abuse.

I am not at all creeped out by how much some posters know about atheismplus posters, if the atheismplus posters reveal that information about themselves on the forum, that is their issue.

I personally would never go to the atheismplus forum to post anything, it is far more amusing to observe the train wreck with my popcorn than it would ever be to participate and I have no desire to contribute to the damage to some individuals that seem rather damaged to begin with and who seem to be rather easily damaged by far too many things.

 

[Joe Random]

<...>

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?

No, because (at least to me) it indicates people are going to the source to make up their minds about something, rather than blindly adopting someone else's opinions as their own. Speaking for myself I read some of the earlier reports on the A+ movement and how it started off on a wonderfully exclusionary, absolutest note, and wanted to see things for myself. What I saw then (and continue to see now) was worse behavior than I was anticipating, even with my negative expectations. Rather than simply saying to myself "wow, sounds like those guys are all a bunch of tools", I went to the source and made up my own mind (that many of them are /serious/ tools).

Note that I'm speaking only to the bits that I quoted. I'm not commenting on trolling them, and I've not even registered over there - I'm read-only on that site. All I'm saying is that, rather than being creepy, the fact that so many on this thread know so much about what's going on there indicates that we're examining evidence and coming to our own conclusions, rather than repeating some Divine Truth(tm) or established party line.

 

[qwints]

I still don't see how a level playing field on the internet can exclude people from marginalized groups. No one knows who you are on the internet if you choose to keep your personal information to yourself. It is the ultimate disguise. How does this exclude marginalized groups?

If there's a forum where racist jokes are common, and people frequently use racial slurs, can we agree that some people might not feel welcome there?

Similarly, if there's a forum where sexist jokes are common, and people frequently use gendered slurs, can we agree that some people might not feel welcome there?

Now not every person who feels unwelcome is going to be from a marginalized group, and not every person of a marginalized group will feel unwelcome, but the nominally level playing field is not actually going to be equally easy for everyone to access.

 

[Kochanski]

If there's a forum where racist jokes are common, and people frequently use racial slurs, can we agree that some people might not feel welcome there?

Similarly, if there's a forum where sexist jokes are common, and people frequently use gendered slurs, can we agree that some people might not feel welcome there?

Now not every person who feels unwelcome is going to be from a marginalized group, and not every person of a marginalized group will feel unwelcome, but the nominally level playing field is not actually going to be equally easy for everyone to access.

Why not? Seems to me challenging people who make comments you are uncomfortable with is far easier on the internet than anywhere else. Now you might not see that place as a place to hang with your buds but there is nothing preventing you from joining. And if you are looking for a way to understand individuals who have different views and discover common ground and perhaps even change some people's prejudices, what better way?

All I see on Aplus forum is a place that is getting smaller and smaller, with far more people excluded from the conversation all for the purpose of allowing a "safe space". It just seems a way to reinforce isolation, reinforce the view that they are marginalized, reinforce their own prejudices and their view that world is an unsafe place for them to be. None of this is healthy.

 

[Brainache]

If there's a forum where racist jokes are common, and people frequently use racial slurs, can we agree that some people might not feel welcome there?

Similarly, if there's a forum where sexist jokes are common, and people frequently use gendered slurs, can we agree that some people might not feel welcome there?

Now not every person who feels unwelcome is going to be from a marginalized group, and not every person of a marginalized group will feel unwelcome, but the nominally level playing field is not actually going to be equally easy for everyone to access.

You are here to defend A+, right?

Can you tell me who feels welcome at A+?

 

[dasmiller]

All I see on Aplus forum is a place that is getting smaller and smaller, with far more people excluded from the conversation all for the purpose of allowing a "safe space". It just seems a way to reinforce isolation, reinforce the view that they are marginalized, reinforce their own prejudices and their view that world is an unsafe place for them to be. None of this is healthy.

Indeed, the A+ forum appears to be a place where the marginalized are further marginalizing themselves.

 

[Daald]

If there's a forum where racist jokes are common, and people frequently use racial slurs, can we agree that some people might not feel welcome there?

I would call that place "the internet".

Similarly, if there's a forum where sexist jokes are common, and people frequently use gendered slurs, can we agree that some people might not feel welcome there?

Again..the internet.

Now not every person who feels unwelcome is going to be from a marginalized group, and not every person of a marginalized group will feel unwelcome, but the nominally level playing field is not actually going to be equally easy for everyone to access.

Sure. People who don't have access to the internet or who are adverse to have their views challenged will feel marginalized. The point is not that it has to be equal emotionally and financially to everyone. It has to be an equal opportunity to express your views. The internet provides that in spades. This forum does as well.

If you want to create something where you hear from the voices that are afraid to speak then first you will have a huge problem in your hands as it seems contradictory (they are afraid to speak after all and their reasons vary). Secondly the evidence will only be subjective and you have to still do a lot more work before it can be acted on. Good luck with that.