this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

A forum to talk about other sites and things you've found in the jungle that is the internet.

Please take a moment to read the rationalia guidelines: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3449
Post Reply
User avatar
Mysturji
Clint Eastwood
Posts: 5005
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:08 pm
About me: Downloading an app to my necktop
Location: http://tinyurl.com/c9o35ny
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Mysturji » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:00 pm

Sorry if this has been said before, but... Hey! what about us irregular atheists? :lay:
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
Cormac wrote:Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.
IDMD2
I am a twit.

User avatar
laklak
Posts: 18763
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
Location: Tannhauser Gate
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by laklak » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:03 pm

Xamonas Chegwé wrote:Can we get back to talking about cheese, people? What is the place coming to with all this waffle about regularity? If you're not a regular atheist, try syrup of figs - end of.
How about a waffle with cheesey fig sauce? Sounds good to me, being slightly on the irregular side. Could always add a few habaneros for that extra, start-up kick.
Yeah well that's just, like, your opinion, man.

wtargentina
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:51 pm
Location: Penicuik, Scotland
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by wtargentina » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:05 pm

Fred Kite wrote:
ultimately, the blame game is irrelevant. It doesn't really matter now who is to blame.
I would suggest that the exact opposite of this statement is true to both sides. The forum members want to know who is to blame for the death of the forum and the loss of the information, plus the incredibly insensitive treatment of the moderators and members. I would also think RD will want to know who is responsible for a cock up that is threatening his reputation which up til now was impeccable.

User avatar
Mysturji
Clint Eastwood
Posts: 5005
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:08 pm
About me: Downloading an app to my necktop
Location: http://tinyurl.com/c9o35ny
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Mysturji » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:06 pm

laklak wrote:
Xamonas Chegwé wrote:Can we get back to talking about cheese, people? What is the place coming to with all this waffle about regularity? If you're not a regular atheist, try syrup of figs - end of.
How about a waffle with cheesey fig sauce? Sounds good to me, being slightly on the irregular side. Could always add a few habaneros for that extra, start-up kick.
On the other hand, if you want to be an irregular atheist in that sense of the word, try eating a whole 1 lb bag of licorice.
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
Cormac wrote:Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.
IDMD2
I am a twit.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:08 pm

Wow - this is amazing.

I think that even if people were treated badly at RDF, the fact of the matter is what we are talking about is a glorified chat room, where people got together to post arguments and discussions. It was fun, but that's all it was.

Now, most people who were commonly posting every day on RDF are over here on rationalia posing on a message board that is hardly distinguishable in format. You can start threads, and argue, and get into discussions and debates.

It seems to me that some people got entirely too much "emotionally invested" in an online message board.

So you got taken by surprise and nobody consulted you about what was going to happen? So you don't think there is any justification for this action and that the new boards will likely suck ass? In the grand scheme of things, so what? It's a message board.

We were not part of Dawkins' inner circle. We were not part of RDF and helping to shape its policy and direction. We were people sitting around wiling away time arguing on a message forum. Dawkins never told you that he would discuss changes and modifications to the board with the forum members, or even the moderators. He never made any such commitments. He put up a message board, and it became popular. That's it.

And, Dawkins was never really a very personable fellow. I met him, and he's a bit stand-off-ish and curt, or at least terse. He doesn't have great social skills, and he seems a bit elitist. Did anyone really think that the forum was anything other than "trivial" (to use Dawkins' own word) when compared to the other stuff he's working on?

I think it's a question of perspective here. Those getting very upset are really placing an importance on the RDF forum that it doesn't merit. and to Dawkins it was really just a small piece of the puzzle - something to be used if it works in light of his overall mission, or discarded if need be.

In time, you'll have another place to do all the same things. This rationalia forum is in many respects superior. I haven't seen as much moderator interference here, and this place seems quite free wheeling. Maybe it's better than RDF's forum was?

User avatar
Xamonas Chegwé
Bouncer
Bouncer
Posts: 50939
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:23 pm
About me: I have prehensile eyebrows.
I speak 9 languages fluently, one of which other people can also speak.
When backed into a corner, I fit perfectly - having a right-angled arse.
Location: Nottingham UK
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Xamonas Chegwé » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:09 pm

macdoc wrote:Fred Kite whined
what's with the snide remarks?

one minute you welcome someone to the forum and give tips about the rules, the next you post a snide remark?

what is it with you people?
Because at this point it's easy to recognize a troll and YOU realllllly don't get it at all....

YOU don't represent me, YOU don't represent fuck all except your own limited mindset. YOU were not there and I suggest YOU try contributing thousands of hours here in valuable posts instead of the nonsense you started with and THEN take a look three years down the road at how YOU might feel.

Josh's activities verged on criminal in vindicitively erasing 10's of thousands of posts by volunteers who had hundreds and thousands of hours of work invested.

The handling of a transition was unacceptable especially the treatment of mods.

Take your little pinched mouth tut tut and shove it where the sun don't shine.... :lay:

10k poster on Dawkins with thousands of hours invested in science and education on the site......
Macdoc,

I have just warned Fred for his behaviour. Please don't make me have to do the same to you.

The staff are dealing with this and your overly-polemic contribution is not welcome.
A book is a version of the world. If you do not like it, ignore it; or offer your own version in return.
Salman Rushdie
You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic.
House MD
Who needs a meaning anyway, I'd settle anyday for a very fine view.
Sandy Denny
This is the wrong forum for bluffing :nono:
Paco
Yes, yes. But first I need to show you this venomous fish!
Calilasseia
I think we should do whatever Pawiz wants.
Twoflower
Bella squats momentarily then waddles on still peeing, like a horse
Millefleur

Fred Kite

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Fred Kite » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:09 pm

wtargentina wrote:You don't think people should fight to keep something they worked really hard at?

You think they are metally ill?

why are you twisting what I said?

I never said people who worked hard are mentally ill. Here's the quote again. I have emboldened the text so it's clear to you.

...it's fascinating, more from an anthropological point of view than a psychological point of view because you're dealing with a group of people here but there is clearly some symptoms of aspergers being displayed in the comments on the guardian and the times. Richard and his team needs to tread very carefully now. The reaction is so exceptionally personal and vicious it suggests that it doesn't matter now who was right and who was wrong....it appears to me that the source of the anger is because many of these people became addicted/obsessed with the forum and spent a huge amount of time there. That's not Dawkins' fault but there are parallels with how some people get obsessed with religion.....in my opinion he is doing the right thing to shut it down and change it to be fully moderated....
Its not over because you say it is - what gives you that power?

What exactly is shocking about a press release?
There is nothing shocking about a press release. It's the rationale and logic behind the press release that is shocking.

It's the sort of gang mentality that religious types use to influence the media.

It is over. Not because I said so. But because nobody in their right mind would want the sort of people who have directed vicious and personal attacks at richard dawkins/josh as part of their community.

Richard was dead right to close down the forum. Just listening to you guys on here is proof enough of that.

Fred Kite

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Fred Kite » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:12 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:Wow - this is amazing.

I think that even if people were treated badly at RDF, the fact of the matter is what we are talking about is a glorified chat room, where people got together to post arguments and discussions. It was fun, but that's all it was.

Now, most people who were commonly posting every day on RDF are over here on rationalia posing on a message board that is hardly distinguishable in format. You can start threads, and argue, and get into discussions and debates.

It seems to me that some people got entirely too much "emotionally invested" in an online message board.

So you got taken by surprise and nobody consulted you about what was going to happen? So you don't think there is any justification for this action and that the new boards will likely suck ass? In the grand scheme of things, so what? It's a message board.

We were not part of Dawkins' inner circle. We were not part of RDF and helping to shape its policy and direction. We were people sitting around wiling away time arguing on a message forum. Dawkins never told you that he would discuss changes and modifications to the board with the forum members, or even the moderators. He never made any such commitments. He put up a message board, and it became popular. That's it.

And, Dawkins was never really a very personable fellow. I met him, and he's a bit stand-off-ish and curt, or at least terse. He doesn't have great social skills, and he seems a bit elitist. Did anyone really think that the forum was anything other than "trivial" (to use Dawkins' own word) when compared to the other stuff he's working on?

I think it's a question of perspective here. Those getting very upset are really placing an importance on the RDF forum that it doesn't merit. and to Dawkins it was really just a small piece of the puzzle - something to be used if it works in light of his overall mission, or discarded if need be.

In time, you'll have another place to do all the same things. This rationalia forum is in many respects superior. I haven't seen as much moderator interference here, and this place seems quite free wheeling. Maybe it's better than RDF's forum was?
thank you. that's very well put.

however, I disagree about the rationalia forum. I have seen photos and slander on here, depicting josh as the love child of richard dawkins and a lady called trixie...alongside a lot of vicious and vindictive comments directed at same.

I would hazard that rationalia.com are willing to let things slide for the sake of more traffic.

Richard has even quoted some of the vitriolic posts and personal attacks on him from this website.

So I agree with your core point, but, I don't agree with your point about rationalia.com

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:12 pm

macdoc wrote:Fred Kite whined
what's with the snide remarks?

one minute you welcome someone to the forum and give tips about the rules, the next you post a snide remark?

what is it with you people?
Because at this point it's easy to recognize a troll and YOU realllllly don't get it at all....

YOU don't represent me, YOU don't represent fuck all except your own limited mindset. YOU were not there and I suggest YOU try contributing thousands of hours here in valuable posts instead of the nonsense you started with and THEN take a look three years down the road at how YOU might feel.

Josh's activities verged on criminal in vindicitively erasing 10's of thousands of posts by volunteers who had hundreds and thousands of hours of work invested.

The handling of a transition was unacceptable especially the treatment of mods.

Take your little pinched mouth tut tut and shove it where the sun don't shine.... :lay:

10k poster on Dawkins with thousands of hours invested in science and education on the site......
Thousands of hours "invested in science and education on the site?"

I think, with all due respect, you need to step back a tad and recognize what it really was. It was a discussion forum, and like any other discussion forum posters do not retain ownership of information posted on the site. Nobody requested that anyone invest thousands of hours.

This is an example of an overly emotional investment in what amounts to a glorified chat-room.

User avatar
Randydeluxe
Filled With Aloha
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 7:01 am
About me: Ua mau ke ea o ka 'aina i ka pono.
Location: SoCal. Previously Honolulu, HI. Previously Vancouver, BC. Sometimes Austin, TX.
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Randydeluxe » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:15 pm

How many times can one vindictive, anonymous poster copy and paste the same text diagnosing Asperger's Syndrome as the source of opinion with which he disagrees, over and over and over into multiple new posts in the same thread?

Stay tuned to find out!!

User avatar
Xamonas Chegwé
Bouncer
Bouncer
Posts: 50939
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:23 pm
About me: I have prehensile eyebrows.
I speak 9 languages fluently, one of which other people can also speak.
When backed into a corner, I fit perfectly - having a right-angled arse.
Location: Nottingham UK
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Xamonas Chegwé » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:16 pm

Fred Kite has been given a week's leave of absence to consider whether he really wishes to be a member here.

Can we talk about tits and cheese now, please?
A book is a version of the world. If you do not like it, ignore it; or offer your own version in return.
Salman Rushdie
You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic.
House MD
Who needs a meaning anyway, I'd settle anyday for a very fine view.
Sandy Denny
This is the wrong forum for bluffing :nono:
Paco
Yes, yes. But first I need to show you this venomous fish!
Calilasseia
I think we should do whatever Pawiz wants.
Twoflower
Bella squats momentarily then waddles on still peeing, like a horse
Millefleur

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:17 pm

Fred Kite wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:Wow - this is amazing.

I think that even if people were treated badly at RDF, the fact of the matter is what we are talking about is a glorified chat room, where people got together to post arguments and discussions. It was fun, but that's all it was.

Now, most people who were commonly posting every day on RDF are over here on rationalia posing on a message board that is hardly distinguishable in format. You can start threads, and argue, and get into discussions and debates.

It seems to me that some people got entirely too much "emotionally invested" in an online message board.

So you got taken by surprise and nobody consulted you about what was going to happen? So you don't think there is any justification for this action and that the new boards will likely suck ass? In the grand scheme of things, so what? It's a message board.

We were not part of Dawkins' inner circle. We were not part of RDF and helping to shape its policy and direction. We were people sitting around wiling away time arguing on a message forum. Dawkins never told you that he would discuss changes and modifications to the board with the forum members, or even the moderators. He never made any such commitments. He put up a message board, and it became popular. That's it.

And, Dawkins was never really a very personable fellow. I met him, and he's a bit stand-off-ish and curt, or at least terse. He doesn't have great social skills, and he seems a bit elitist. Did anyone really think that the forum was anything other than "trivial" (to use Dawkins' own word) when compared to the other stuff he's working on?

I think it's a question of perspective here. Those getting very upset are really placing an importance on the RDF forum that it doesn't merit. and to Dawkins it was really just a small piece of the puzzle - something to be used if it works in light of his overall mission, or discarded if need be.

In time, you'll have another place to do all the same things. This rationalia forum is in many respects superior. I haven't seen as much moderator interference here, and this place seems quite free wheeling. Maybe it's better than RDF's forum was?
thank you. that's very well put.

however, I disagree about the rationalia forum. I have seen photos and slander on here, depicting josh as the love child of richard dawkins and a lady called trixie...alongside a lot of vicious and vindictive comments directed at same.

I would hazard that rationalia.com are willing to let things slide for the sake of more traffic.

Richard has even quoted some of the vitriolic posts and personal attacks on him from this website.

So I agree with your core point, but, I don't agree with your point about rationalia.com
Rationalia shouldn't be held to blame for what people post. It's a message board forum. People should be free to post scurrilous stuff, I think. My point of saying that rationalia may be better than RDF is that there are all the same avenues to voice opinion, discuss, debate and even argue and fight there as there was on RDF. My point was not that what people are saying here is good or bad, but that there is no reason that this site can't be exactly what RDF was. Why the investment in going to that website as opposed to this one?

User avatar
Feck
.
.
Posts: 28391
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by Feck » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:19 pm

Xamonas Chegwé wrote:Fred Kite has been given a week's leave of absence to consider whether he really wishes to be a member here.

Can we talk about tits and cheese now, please?
You bring me a nice pair of tits I'll happily smear them with cheese :biggrin:
i did tell him not insult my mates
:hoverdog: :hoverdog: :hoverdog: :hoverdog:
Give me the wine , I don't need the bread


User avatar
my_wan
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:12 pm
Location: RD refugee
Contact:

Re: this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

Post by my_wan » Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:19 pm

Fred Kite wrote:
Rum wrote:What are you talking about? 'Regular atheists'??? It isn't a community. Its a group of people who don't believe something!

The anger is about lumpen, inconsiderate, unfeeling, insensitive and badly managed behaviour. That is about human beings treating each other badly, period.
The anger being displayed online is not coming from atheists, it's from fans (or ex-fans, as the case may be) of Richard Dawkins who are upset at whatever happened over the last week with his web team. Period.
I'm no fan of Dawkins, never even read one of his books. But I am an atheist and I am outraged at the decietful methodology of the shutdown, not the shutdown itself. Soit is coming from an atheist here, and no the outrage has nothing to do with atheism.
Fred Kite wrote:The incessant whining and vicious comments being made about Richard Dawkins and his web team are completely unnecessary, has nothing to do with atheism and everything to do with the relationship between Richard Dawkins, his webteam and Richard Dawkins fans.
You paint with a awfully wide brush with your claims of what "everybody" is motivated by. That automatically ranks your claims as false. I speak for myself. The fact is, irrespective of motive or intent, the shutdown was preceded before and after with deciet from within those making the choices, period. I was never a fan of Dawkins. I am a fan of the truth, and the truth is we were lied to, irrespective of intent. To paint "everybody" as simply over reacting "fans" is itself a lie. A lie that implies further lies about the sequence of events.
Fred Kite wrote:Most atheists I know are civilised, rational-thinking, liberal-minded and decent human beings who don't see the vicious vendetta and personal attacks on Richard Dawkins and his webteam as rational-thinking, civilised, liberal minded or decent.
If you consider yourself one of these rational-thinking individuals, why are you painting an entire group of people with one pait brush in one color? Is that not irrational in itself?
"I will not attack your doctrine nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men" - Robert Green Ingersoll
Ex RDer

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests