Thunderfoot hacking FtB - Allegedly

[Robert_S]

This has gone silly. Thunderfoot had all that the email addresses before he got kicked out of FTB. He could have outed people.

He didn't break into a house, he walked into a clubhouse that someone left the door unlocked to. It is a violation in the real sense, but not quite as personal as some might want to make it out to be. He didn't hack anyone's personal email and AFAIK, hasn't threatened to release personal real life information.

It doesn't do his reputation much good, not does it paint the critics of FtB in a favorable light.

[A Hermit]

This has gone silly. Thunderfoot had all that the email addresses before he got kicked out of FTB. He could have outed people.

He didn't break into a house, he walked into a clubhouse that someone left the door unlocked to. It is a violation in the real sense, but not quite as personal as some might want to make it out to be. He didn't hack anyone's personal email and AFAIK, hasn't threatened to release personal real life information.

Are you sure? Natalie Reed says otherwise: http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed ... 10/all-in/

This led to something really creepy and scary when Thunderf00t began threatening to publish the confidential contents of FTB’s private listserv, to “prove” that I’d been “lying” about his behaviour. When I reminded him of the ethical problems with this, and hinted at the real danger it poses to me, he laughed and suggested that his treatment by PZ and FTB as a whole justified any actions he wanted to take.

I think Natalie has a legitimate reason to be concerned and her friends have a legitimate reason to be pissed at Thundefoot.

[A Hermit]

If there weren't financial details on there I would. I write nothing down that I wouldn't want to enter the public domain. You can have it without the password billhayhurst1977@gmail.com

So someone having access to your private documents is a concern to you? Why do you so easily dismiss other people's concerns about their privacy?

No, but she does need to be more careful with her information if that is what she fears might happen. It is very unlikely to this time seeing as her information was never released. Life lesson learned for her.

As she herself admits. But do you understand her concern, especially after T-foot basically threatened to release it? (see my reply to Robert above...)

Typical baboon trick. I said nothing of the sort and you know it. Information security and rape are not even comparable categories. My views on one have no bearing on my views on the other.

But the argument you are making is exactly the same...it's called blaming the victim. "If you are too stupid to do it you deserve to get doxxed" is the same in principle as "if you're stupid enough to pass out at a party you deserve whatever happens to you..."

Do really think Natalie Reed DESERVES (that was your word choice remember...) to be publicly outed just because she was careless one time about using her real name?

("Baboon" slur noted by the way...you do realize the use of that particular meme started with Franc Hoggle and the "slymepit" crowd...the same people who started the "kick Ophelia Benson in the cunt" thing, don't you? Interesting that someone so concerned about the alleged bullying by people at FtB has no problem with adopting such tactics himself...)

[tantamount]

FTB is a place where, as soon as you deviate from their (bizarrely skewed) norm, you get comments directed to you in the style of:

Hence I conclude that you are either massively dumb or a dirty fucking liar...

And you think this is a problem unique to FtB?

Yes, FTB is unique. If I call a commenter in this blog a shitbag, it can be subject to moderator's intervention. If you do it on FTB, you get backslapping by the commentariat and a pat on the head by PZ.

It's like you've never read FTB and you've been hired by a public relations firm to clean up their mess.

Well A Hermit, I admit you have a point there. A few FtB folks might not be the measure by which to make sweeping statements about the entire network.

I mean, a network has a lot of different members and making broad general statements might cause "splash damage". Kinda like judging an entire forum by one thread.

Yeah, but the Commentariat is the same, no? You'll get the same "you shitbagging mansplaining fucktard halfwit" when commenting any of the wonderful 36 blogs there.

No you won't. Try it on Fincke's blog and see what happens.

And honestly, most of those kinds of comments are directed at known trolls like the bunch who like to "joke" about kicking Ophelia Benson in the cunt...

But SHE's the bully...?

I've never seen so much mileage made out of one a-hole troll's comment (the Ophelia one).
PZ carries it as his bloody banner to show everyone "Here is what disagreeing with me means, it means you are this commenter."

"And honestly, most of those kinds of comments are directed at known trolls"
BULLSHIT. THEY'RE DIRECTED AT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH THEM. DO YOU READ FTB?

[A Hermit]

Yes, FTB is unique. If I call a commenter in this blog a shitbag, it can be subject to moderator's intervention. If you do it on FTB, you get backslapping by the commentariat and a pat on the head by PZ.

You're still perpetuating this myth that FtB and PZ Myers are synonymous. If you actually spent some time there you'd know it isn't true.

And so far in this thread I've been told to "suck cock" called a "wackstain" and a "baboon." ANd I got similar treatment when I objected to Pappa's rape "joke". So this place doesn't look that different to me.

I've never seen so much mileage made out of one a-hole troll's comment (the Ophelia one).

It wasn't a one time comment, it was a month's long recurring theme on Twitter and on Abbie Smith's ERV blog (There was a thread there called "The Periodic Table of Swearing" which was almost entirely dedicated to smearing the FtB bloggers. It has since migrated to whole forum called the "Slymepit" dedicated to that purpose.) And it's just one example of the kind of abuse she and others at FtB have had to put up with because they dared to suggest that women should be treated with respect.

But Ophelia's the bully....right?

You seem to think the nastiness originated with FtB and has all been one way. You're wrong on both counts.

BULLSHIT. THEY'RE DIRECTED AT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH THEM. DO YOU READ FTB?

Yes, do you? I mean beyond the selective excerpts their critics like to pull out?

And again, can you explain what bearing any of this has on the ethics of Thunderfoot's theft of private e-mails?

[tantamount]

And honestly, most of those kinds of comments are directed at known trolls

BULLSHIT. THEY'RE DIRECTED AT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH THEM. DO YOU READ FTB?

Yes, do you? I mean beyond the selective excerpts their critics like to pull out?

And again, can you explain what bearing any of this has on the ethics of Thunderfoot's theft of private e-mails?

Uh, selective? No. I went through one page of one thread of one blog for those "selective" quotes, and believe me I left a lot on the cutting room floor. See how easy it is to find the slime that is FTB?

You clearly need to read more FTB. You need to find out what it is that you purport to be authoritative on.

The reason it has to do with TF is you keep citing these barbarian FTB links, when I've already informed you that FTB is in quarantine.

[A Hermit]

Uh, selective? No. I went through one page of one thread of one blog for those "selective" quotes, and believe me I left a lot on the cutting room floor. See how easy it is to find the slime that is FTB?

So you think one thread is representative of all 36 blogs? really? And you didn't show us any of the comments those admittedly vulgar examples were responding to...or link to the thread. Why not?

See, that's exactly what I call "selective".

You clearly need to read more FTB. You need to find out what it is that you purport to be authoritative on.

Funny, I'd say the same to you. How many of those 36 blogs are you really familiar with? Do read Alethian Worldview? Reasonable doubts? Camels with Hammers? El Tequila Es Verdad? Crommunist? Token Skeptic? Zinnia Jones? Biodork? Uncredibe Halq? I get the feeling you don't...because you;re generalizations about FtB don't sound at all like what I find in those places...

The reason it has to do with TF is you keep citing these barbarian FTB links, when I've already informed you that FTB is in quarantine.

Sorry, I'm not really sure what that's supposed to mean?

[tantamount]

Uh, selective? No. I went through one page of one thread of one blog for those "selective" quotes, and believe me I left a lot on the cutting room floor. See how easy it is to find the slime that is FTB?

So you think one thread is representative of all 36 blogs? really? And you didn't show us any of the comments those admittedly vulgar examples were responding to...or link to the thread. Why not?

See, that's exactly what I call "selective".

ok, so now we know you don't know the meaning of "selective." Can you define "intellectually dishonest"?

You clearly need to read more FTB. You need to find out what it is that you purport to be authoritative on.

Funny, I'd say the same to you. How many of those 36 blogs are you really familiar with? Do read Alethian Worldview? Reasonable doubts? Camels with Hammers? El Tequila Es Verdad? Crommunist? Token Skeptic? Zinnia Jones? Biodork? Uncredibe Halq? I get the feeling you don't...because you;re generalizations about FtB don't sound at all like what I find in those places...

I've read 6 or 7. Enough to know their opinions are uniform on TF, Elevatorgate, the alleged non-existence of harassment guidelines at TAM 2012. Just the fact that they've elevated TF into their Trotsky-like nemesis shows how bankrupt they are for subject matter. Equally, the way they were planning to mount an offensive on Michael Payton of CFI Canada, due to the egregious offense of criticizing FTB. That's FTB: they'll object to your objecting to them. No one needs to sample every offered meal at McDonalds to know its nutritional value. You are a creationist telling me I need to read the Bible more.

The problem with your all your advertising is, if people actually go to your site, they'll see what a mess it is and leave. All your attention should be to pestering Ed Brayton to fix his mess rather than trying to get our eyeballs over there to view his mess.

[A Hermit]

ok, so now we know you don't know the meaning of "selective." Can you define "intellectually dishonest"?

Yes; pretending that a few carefully chosen comments from one thread on one blog presented with no context are representative of all threads on thirty six blogs. I'd call that intellectually dishonest.

I've read 6 or 7.

Of 36...that would be one sixth of them. And that's enough, in your opinion, to pass judgement on the other 30?

Enough to know their opinions are uniform on TF, Elevatorgate, the alleged non-existence of harassment guidelines at TAM 2012.

Or enough to get a false impression...you're talking through your hat and we both know it.

Just the fact that they've elevated TF into their Trotsky-like nemesis shows how bankrupt they are for subject matter.

Really? How many threads on those 36 blogs have been about Thunderfoot in the last month and how many have been on subjects that have nothing to do with T-foot?? Go count them, I'll wait...

And when you've done that go to Thunderfoot's blog and his youtube channel and calculate the percentage of posts which target FtB. in the last month. Then compare the percentages and let us know what you find out. (Be sure to show your work...) I think you'll be surprised to find that it's TF wo has the unhealthy obsession with FtB and not the other way around.

Equally, the way they were planning to mount an offensive on Michael Payton of CFI Canada, due to the egregious offense of criticizing FTB. That's FTB: they'll object to your objecting to them.

Oh the HORROR!!!!11!! They discussed the best way to respond to an unprovoked, unwarranted blanket criticism of the whole site by the leader of a national skeptics organization who admitted he hasn't even read more than a few comments there (kind of like you... ) Payton dismissed all of the work by everyone on the site in spite of the fact that, as he later admitted, he's never really paid any attention to them. They defended themselves by calling attention to the hypocrisy and dishonesty of his ignorant attack. Boo fucking hoo.

The problem with your all your advertising is, if people actually go to your site, they'll see what a mess it is and leave. All your attention should be to pestering Ed Brayton to fix his mess rather than trying to get our eyeballs over there to view his mess.

I hope people will go there, and that they will do so with open minds (instead of sifting through a single thread looking for the worst possible comments to rip out out of context and use as a club to smear the whole community with) and actually think about the issues being raised there; issues like taking on serious social problems instead of satisfying ourselves with debunking Bigfoot and laughing at creationists, like engaging in the political arena, like treating women and minorities in our community with respect. I honestly am really puzzled as to why that last item provokes such hostility from people like your precious Thunderfoot.

And again, how does any of this mitigate Thunderfoot's ethical lapse? Do rude comments on PZ's blog somehow justify TF threatening to "out" Natalie Reed? The subject of this thread, after all, is thunderfoot's violation of the FtB's private emails. All you're giving us here is a colossal case of victim blaming.

[tantamount]

[just a sec]

[tantamount]

ok, so now we know you don't know the meaning of "selective." Can you define "intellectually dishonest"?

Yes; pretending that a few carefully chosen comments from one thread on one blog presented with no context are representative of all threads on thirty six blogs. I'd call that intellectually dishonest.

Pretending that 6 or 7 randomly chosen, extensively read blogs, cannot possibly be representative is intellectually dishonest. A few quotes? How many do you want? I can't quote the entire comment log. I gave you seven quotes so you couldn't say they were few or unrepresentative. Ah, and now I also have to quote and describe the context.

I've read 6 or 7.

Of 36...that would be one sixth of them. And that's enough, in your opinion, to pass judgement on the other 30?

So, even if those 6 or 7 randomly chosen, extensively read blogs, are vituperative bile, I should still slog my way through the remaining 28 or 29. You're lucky I stopped at 6. Most people will stop at 1.

Enough to know their opinions are uniform on TF, Elevatorgate, the alleged non-existence of harassment guidelines at TAM 2012.

Or enough to get a false impression...you're talking through your hat and we both know it.

You can't even just say you disagree. You have to insist that not only you are right but that I know you are right. Your response is not atypical of FTB bloggers and commenters. You assume false faith in the face of disagreement. I, on the other hand, have no illusions that you know you are wrong. I believe you are perfectly sincere in your error.

Equally, the way they were planning to mount an offensive on Michael Payton of CFI Canada, due to the egregious offense of criticizing FTB. That's FTB: they'll object to your objecting to them.

Oh the HORROR!!!!11!! They discussed the best way to respond to an unprovoked, unwarranted blanket criticism of the whole site by the leader of a national skeptics organization who admitted he hasn't even read more than a few comments there (kind of like you... ) They defended themselves by calling attention to the hypocrisy and dishonesty of his ignorant attack. Boo fucking hoo.

The "HORROR!!!!11!!" was exacting one Tweet. A disagreeable tweet is, in the FTB thoughtsphere, "unprovoked, unwarranted blanket criticism." And if we have to "Boo fucking hoo", let's do it for Zinnia for having her catty emails revealed. Kanye does some really crazy tweets: you should get FTB on his case.

See, what you should be concerned about is that the leader of a national skeptics organization thinks you guys are going off the rails. Yet your instinct is to shut him up rather than address the reasons behind his criticism.

"who admitted he hasn't even read more than a few comments there (kind of like you..."
I never "admitted" this because it's not true. I used to read FTB extensively. You again display the condescending FTB tic of associating disagreement with ignorance.

The problem with your all your advertising is, if people actually go to your site, they'll see what a mess it is and leave. All your attention should be to pestering Ed Brayton to fix his mess rather than trying to get our eyeballs over there to view his mess.

...instead of sifting through a single thread looking for the worst possible comments to rip out out of context and use as a club to smear the whole community with ...

Again, a false assumption. I didn't sift at all. I looked at one thread of one page of one blog. I could practically challenge you to find a thread on a blog that does not have this type of commentary in it. And you seem to think that, in context, any of these comments are appropriate. You yourself don't seem to enjoy being called names. Yet, it's the norm on FTB. These comments are representative. I don't "smear" FTB. I "present" it.

As for context, context is irrelevant. When you have a blog for the interchange of ideas, you either have a policy where calling someone you disagree with a "fuckbrained worthless goddamn piece of shit" or you don't. In the first case, you have a blog for the interchange of ideas. In the second case, you have FTB.

...and actually think about the issues being raised there; issues like taking on serious social problems instead of satisfying ourselves with debunking Bigfoot and laughing at creationists, like engaging in the political arena, like treating women and minorities in our community with respect. I honestly am really puzzled as to why that last item provokes such hostility from people like your precious Thunderfoot.

If you would stick to Bigfoot and creationists, everyone would be on your side. If, alternatively, when you dealt with feminist issues, you didn't assume antagonism, false faith, and malevolence on the part of anyone who even mildly disagreed with you, everyone would be on your side. But you and FTB don't, and so people aren't.

Believe me, TF is not precious to me. Some of his political views are repugnant (in particular, his anti-Muslim posts on the Park 51 Mosque) and some of his logic is not so deft. PZ disagrees with TF. But instead of PZ explicating his disagreement, he demonized him. And, in kicking him out, PZ concludes TF was an insincere troll who knew what he was doing would result in expulsion. (Then whyever was TF so pissed?) And the FTB commentariat piled on.

In short, I don't like bullies. And PZ and FTB and the commentariat are nothing but bullies, ironically often parading themselves as victims. And, yes, in the final event, I think TF is an idiot and an a-hole for gaining access to the listserv without permission. That doesn't change the fact that FTB is still a horrible place to visit.

[Thinking Aloud]

And so far in this thread I've been told to "suck cock" called a "wackstain" and a "baboon." ANd I got similar treatment when I objected to Pappa's rape "joke". So this place doesn't look that different to me.

Please use the "R" button on the posts to report them, and the moderators will take any appropriate action.

[Coito ergo sum]

Are you sure? Natalie Reed says otherwise: http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed ... 10/all-in/

This led to something really creepy and scary when Thunderf00t began threatening to publish the confidential contents of FTB’s private listserv, to “prove” that I’d been “lying” about his behaviour. When I reminded him of the ethical problems with this, and hinted at the real danger it poses to me, he laughed and suggested that his treatment by PZ and FTB as a whole justified any actions he wanted to take.

I think Natalie has a legitimate reason to be concerned and her friends have a legitimate reason to be pissed at Thundefoot.

He didn't threaten to publish identities. He threatened to publish statements contained in the emails, so that FtBers couldn't lie and say they weren't up to the no good they were up to.

[Coito ergo sum]

If there weren't financial details on there I would. I write nothing down that I wouldn't want to enter the public domain. You can have it without the password billhayhurst1977@gmail.com

So someone having access to your private documents is a concern to you? Why do you so easily dismiss other people's concerns about their privacy?

What "private documents" were accessible on that email list? Tax returns? Or, was it "unflattering statements made by FtBers about destroying other people's reputations?"

No, but she does need to be more careful with her information if that is what she fears might happen. It is very unlikely to this time seeing as her information was never released. Life lesson learned for her.

As she herself admits. But do you understand her concern, especially after T-foot basically threatened to release it? (see my reply to Robert above...)

It? What was the "it" specifically? Seemed to me the "it" was nasty statements by FtBers about destroying other people's reputations, not identity, addresses or personal documents.

Typical baboon trick. I said nothing of the sort and you know it. Information security and rape are not even comparable categories. My views on one have no bearing on my views on the other.

But the argument you are making is exactly the same...it's called blaming the victim. "If you are too stupid to do it you deserve to get doxxed" is the same in principle as "if you're stupid enough to pass out at a party you deserve whatever happens to you..."

Nobody said getting "doxxed" was something anyone deserved. But, if one of the FtBers tried to claim they didn't want to make T-f00t a pariah, for example, he would say -- here's a copy of an email where they are saying just that.

Do really think Natalie Reed DESERVES (that was your word choice remember...) to be publicly outed just because she was careless one time about using her real name?

Did anyone public out her or threaten to do so?

[DaveDodo007]

And so far in this thread I've been told to "suck cock" called a "wackstain" and a "baboon." ANd I got similar treatment when I objected to Pappa's rape "joke". So this place doesn't look that different to me.

Please use the "R" button on the posts to report them, and the moderators will take any appropriate action.

The offer to suck my dick should be considered a privilege and a treat, I sorry that you find a penis so disgusting that you think of it as a threat. There is just no pleasing some people.