A Possible Change In The Rules - RatSkep tangent

[Dries van Tonder]

RatSkep, yes, I'm a member there as well; rules a little tight, not to much in my opinion though. If you want to see an uptight bunch; go see HAF (Happy Atheist Forum), although they have an awesome pictures thread (called "atheist picture dump'). EDIT: They advise against posting when you're drunk or angrY.

[devogue]

Shut it you two.

The drama is too awesome.

I don't know why you like this one Dev, it doesn't have the usual air of scandal that you seem to thrive on

Well, there's plenty of injustice, which is something I've been used to.

[The Curious Squid]

Shut it you two.

The drama is too awesome.

I don't know why you like this one Dev, it doesn't have the usual air of scandal that you seem to thrive on

Well, there's plenty of injustice, which is something I've been used to.

Do I need to read back through the entire thread or can you summarise?

[Imagination Theory]

I have a question.

Why the hell are you lot even having this argument on Rationalia? What the fuck has it got to do with us?

I've only been reading for the last 2 pages but I can't see why this forum is being used as battlefield.

It is over there too, a few people linked to this place.

....Rationalia is seen as the frivolous "bums, tits, cocks and fannies" forum, the scabby arsehole of RDF that was thankfully ejected so the great intellectual debates of our times could continue in serene academic comfort both on RDF and ultimately here, but I think that even if the discourse on Rationalia is less lofty the framework in which it takes place most certainly isn't - it's far more rational than here:

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 12&start=0

This is Rational Skepticism - start being rational and skeptical!

That's why I am here. I clicked the link. I didn't sign up just to post here or anything, I am already a member and have posted here before. Sorry if you think I am rude and "importing drama to another forum". I'm not trying to.

It's just the person who started the OP here : http://www.rationalskepticism.org/feedb ... 8-140.html is not responding there. That person than come here and started this and is posting a lot! So I thought maybe I get an answer here.


Oooh! I want to go see what Happy Atheist Forum is like!
BRB

[JimC]

RatSkep, yes, I'm a member there as well; rules a little tight, not to much in my opinion though. If you want to see an uptight bunch; go see HAF (Happy Atheist Forum), although they have an awesome pictures thread (called "atheist picture dump'). EDIT: They advise against posting when you're drunk or angrY.

1. What a fucking awful name for a forum!

2. We advise against posting sober...

[Bella Fortuna]

I wasn't impressed by HAF at all. Same old dry arguments, blah blah blah. It's become the refuge for one person who's not here anymore, too, and that's reason enough to not visit there for me.

[leo-rcc]

Atheistforms.org has an awesome admin, who also happens to be a mod here, and is into robots.

[Bella Fortuna]

Atheistforms.org has an awesome admin, who also happens to be a mod here, and is into robots.

Nope... doesn't ring a bell....

[leo-rcc]

Atheistforms.org has an awesome admin, who also happens to be a mod here, and is into robots.

Nope... doesn't ring a bell....

My hints are always too subtle.

[Ayaan]

I just signed up over there to see what the place is like and can't even post at the minute because there's a post approval system It looks a lot more serious than this place from the get go.

Every other forum is more serious than this place.

[Robert_S]

I wasn't impressed by HAF at all. Same old dry arguments, blah blah blah. It's become the refuge for one person who's not here anymore, too, and that's reason enough to not visit there for me.

They have a Mission Statement. Everybody loves Mission Statements!!!

[Bella Fortuna]

I wasn't impressed by HAF at all. Same old dry arguments, blah blah blah. It's become the refuge for one person who's not here anymore, too, and that's reason enough to not visit there for me.

They have a Mission Statement. Everybody loves Mission Statements!!!

Mission: Impossible

[Feck]

I wasn't impressed by HAF at all. Same old dry arguments, blah blah blah. It's become the refuge for one person who's not here anymore, too, and that's reason enough to not visit there for me.

They have a Mission Statement. Everybody loves Mission Statements!!!

I seem to remember the topic of a mission came up when Ratz was started

[maiforpeace]

I wasn't impressed by HAF at all. Same old dry arguments, blah blah blah. It's become the refuge for one person who's not here anymore, too, and that's reason enough to not visit there for me.

They have a Mission Statement. Everybody loves Mission Statements!!!

I seem to remember the topic of a mission came up when Ratz was started

Our mission, should we choose to accept it...DERAIL!!!!

[Warren Dew]

That's been a big part of what this discussion is about...from what I surmise by members of RS they are able to have this discussion over there - there was a misconception that such discussion was stifled or locked. So, I agree with you, why isn't it over there?

It isn't really a misconception. As a regular discussion thread, it would have been locked or quashed with warnings - and in fact there have been a couple of warnings. The actual threads have stayed open in the feedback forum there probably because the admin, LIFE, is actually concerned about the issue and is interested in feedback.

Of course that means that some of us feel that our posting in those feedback threads should be limited to actual feedback. The thread here is a bit more wide ranging, though in my case I'm mostly trying to answer questions from people who don't seem that familiar with Rational Skepticism.

I think it's likely that Gallstones feels vulnerable there partly because she doesn't realize just how much good karma she built up as a moderator over there, as evidenced by how many people took the trouble to wish her well when she retired from moderating:

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/fun-g ... t6011.html

She's right about there being favored and disfavored posters, she may not realize that she's one of the favored ones. On the other hand, perhaps she just doesn't like to take advantage of favoritism. Certainly some of the posters in that thread seem to have changed their attitudes since.