this is hugely embarrassing for regular atheists

[Alan C]

Could you please

1. Summarize what you think people are angry about? Hint : It's not the forum closing.

It doesn't matter what people think they are angry about. It's the rabid and vicious personal attacks on richard dawkins and his collegues that is the problem and the presentation of a Richard Dawkins Fan Site as the "largest online atheist community".

I visited the site on many occasions. It was not an "atheist community "- there was jews, humanists, theists, secularists and all walks of life on there. It was a Richard Dawkins Fan Site where some members were atheists.

I'd consider myself a regular atheist. I'm upset that the forum closed abruptly, that the admins decided to delete the accounts (and contributions) of those who dared to criticise, I'm angry that the admin treated the moderators in a disgusting manner, that the admin disabled/restricted the private messaging system (an attempt to cut people off from the friends they had made), I'm insulted by Dawkins statement, I'm disappointed the media have pickedup the story without researching it.

I've have never personally attacked or insulted Dawkins but I find his behaviour massively disappointing and I'm struggling to find any respect for him as a person. I still respect his work.

I don't consider myself a 'fan'. I came to the Dawkins site because of Dawkins work, I found the forum and I stayed not because of Dawkins but because of the members and the community who have educated me far more then Dawkins ever could on every aspect from evolution through every religion to general knowledge. It is these people I appreciate and respect, dawkins simply provided the platform and now he's torn it down I'm not surprised people are upset and that some have vented that by insulting Dawkins.

Agreed on all points and my experience/use of/reasons for joining were quite similar.
Fred, stop making crass generalisations and belittling [or patently ignoring] the real reason for this rather sorry affair. Please demonstrate some critical and investigative thinking on this matter before offering up more ill-considered comment.
What say you to the deletion of tens of thousands of posts and the accounts of a handful of prominent members [including uncountable knowledge articles] out of spite?

[heyjude]

Btw.... since when did all these 'regular atheists' get together and apoint you their spokesperson? On what basis can you speak for anyone else who shares your non-belief?

Perhaps this *huge embarrassment* (which appears to be from lack of information and lack of interest in gaining any) is... mostly your own.

[Fred Kite]

I'm just showing the guy above that, far from his portrayal of people with Aspergers being rabid lunatics they are actually quite thoughtful people

I'm sorry I posted that now. it was an opinion and I can understand how it might have inflamed this discussion.

Aspergers isn't like a broken leg, i.e. it's not the same for everyone. In the same way, he wasn't suggesting that everyone who was a fan of Richard Dawkins suffers from aspergers. There appears to be only a small group of Richard Dawkins fans/ex-fans who are responsible for the vicious and personal attacks.

[Peter Brown]

You are correct. I have no idea why you are angry and what you are angry about.

I was upset when the original post regarding the forums closure because of the dramatic change of an open question for answers policy was to be changed to only the committee approved questions and replies were to be allowed.

Certainly one can get a number of incorrect or religious inspired answers in an open forum, but a committee approved censorship is totally abhorrent and makes a mockery of the terms free thinkers or rational arguments.

Such dissention apparently wasn’t approved by the tech team and I then witnessed first hand the ‘new order’ of RDF when the offending thread was obliterated as well as whole account messages out of what can only be described as spite and anger that the RDF party view was being challenged.

Prof Dawkins message just added insult to injured parties as it was not factual of the events as they occurred. He either in the heat of the moment misses clues regarding that, or was deliberately lied to before writing his message and drew the wrong conclusions.

What would you say to my psychology pal who remarked that it (the rabid attacks on Richard Dawkin and his collegues) bears the hallmarks of aspergers rather than an "atheist community"?

That he had made an incorrect diagnosis; the resulting rabid remarks made hours later were a reaction to not the cause of the tech teams management of the situation that day. He would be more constructive to consider the mental processes of the tech team when writing a thesis on how not to manage a web site community.

[Fred Kite]

I've have never personally attacked or insulted Dawkins but I find his behaviour massively disappointing and I'm struggling to find any respect for him as a person. I still respect his work.

Thank you millefleur. That's a rational, civil and liberal way of looking at it.

I don't understand why more rational people in this so called "community" don't speak up in the same dignified and civil way.

[virphen]

There appears to be only a small group of Richard Dawkins fans/ex-fans who are responsible for the vicious and personal attacks.

That, I can agree with.

They do, however, have a reason for making those attacks. And I do think you owe it to yourself to find out what exactly went down and why.

[JimC]

I've have never personally attacked or insulted Dawkins but I find his behaviour massively disappointing and I'm struggling to find any respect for him as a person. I still respect his work.

Thank you millefleur. That's a rational, civil and liberal way of looking at it.

I don't understand why more rational people in this so called "community" don't speak up in the same dignified and civil way.

Given that you are speaking of us as "this so called "community"", why are you here, other than as a troll?

No point hanging around otherwise, wasting our precious bandwidth...

[Fred Kite]

That he had made an incorrect diagnosis; the resulting rabid remarks made hours later were a reaction to not the cause of the tech teams management of the situation that day. He would be more constructive to consider the mental processes of the tech team when writing a thesis on how not to manage a web site community.

Look, I'm sorry that I raised the aspergers thing but just to clarify...that's not the context he was looking at it. to use his exact words:

...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....

[JimC]

That he had made an incorrect diagnosis; the resulting rabid remarks made hours later were a reaction to not the cause of the tech teams management of the situation that day. He would be more constructive to consider the mental processes of the tech team when writing a thesis on how not to manage a web site community.

Look, I'm sorry that I raised the aspergers thing but just to clarify...that's not the context he was looking at it. to use his exact words:

...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....

And a fucking poisonous and bigoted set of words they are too...

I repeat - why are you here?

[virphen]

That he had made an incorrect diagnosis; the resulting rabid remarks made hours later were a reaction to not the cause of the tech teams management of the situation that day. He would be more constructive to consider the mental processes of the tech team when writing a thesis on how not to manage a web site community.

Look, I'm sorry that I raised the aspergers thing but just to clarify...that's not the context he was looking at it. to use his exact words:

...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....

Please tell your friend that the source of the anger is not the closing down of the forum. The source of the anger is how it was done. How the staff were treated. How the contributions of valued members was trashed. And how misrepresentations of the events that took place have been announced publicly by Dawkins, including and most seriously imprecations against the conduct of the (now former) RD.net staff. They are fantastic people. They are our friends. They were treated like shit. That is why a lot of the people your friend is commenting on (ignorantly in my opinion) are so upset.

[NineOneFour]

it is clear you have no idea what happened or why we are angry about it, and I struggle to believe you are even actually reading all the comments being made about this.

You are correct. I have no idea why you are angry and what you are angry about. Judging by the comments on this and other fora, it's clear that many of you don't understand what you are angry about and why.

The forum was being kept open for another 30 days to allow members to archive it - so, you can't be angry about the forum disappearing. It was also announced that there would be a new discussion area. So, you can't be angry about the inability to discuss on Richard Dawkins site. The web team appear to have made an executive decision about the future of the new discussion area, which is their prerogative as they are responsible for the site. So, you can't be angry about that.

Which leaves very little to be really and genuinely angry about. Certainly not anything to warrant the vicious and personal attacks on Richard Dawkins and his web team.

What would you say to my psychology pal who remarked that it (the rabid attacks on Richard Dawkin and his collegues) bears the hallmarks of aspergers rather than an "atheist community"?

You really need to do some research before you make yourself look stupid like this.

[NineOneFour]

What would you say to my psychology pal who remarked that it (the rabid attacks on Richard Dawkin and his collegues) bears the hallmarks of aspergers rather than an "atheist community"?

I would say he should be embarrassed for commenting so authoritatively on a topic he has not bothered to educate himself on.

Just like you should be. Learn what actually happened. Currently you're just making yourself look as silly as the average fundy.

how dare you. you don't know my friend. you have no idea what he has or has not studied. He made a remark about aspergers and explained the common symptoms to me as a possible explanation to why there has been such an irrational and vicious personal attack on richard dawkins and his collegues.

Uh, huh....anyone who attacks Dawkins has aspergers?

Right. Obviously you or your friend have done the research on this and can show us at least the causal relationship, right?

[NineOneFour]

I'm just showing the guy above that, far from his portrayal of people with Aspergers being rabid lunatics they are actually quite thoughtful people

I'm sorry I posted that now. it was an opinion and I can understand how it might have inflamed this discussion.

Aspergers isn't like a broken leg, i.e. it's not the same for everyone. In the same way, he wasn't suggesting that everyone who was a fan of Richard Dawkins suffers from aspergers. There appears to be only a small group of Richard Dawkins fans/ex-fans who are responsible for the vicious and personal attacks.

What vicious and personal attacks, precisely? The ones directed at Dawkins's web admin? Because they weren't directed at Dawkins, so what are you upset about in the first place?

[Millefleur]

I've have never personally attacked or insulted Dawkins but I find his behaviour massively disappointing and I'm struggling to find any respect for him as a person. I still respect his work.

Thank you millefleur. That's a rational, civil and liberal way of looking at it.

I don't understand why more rational people in this so called "community" don't speak up in the same dignified and civil way.

You seem to have missed the point though Fred that this is how most people feel and have responded, but without looking into this fully you can't appreciate that. Yes a few people (a tiny percentage of members) have responded with insults but the vast majority of them were reacting in the heat of the moment to the situation.

[Feck]

So on the one hand no one is allowed to get upset by the loss of the forum .......not real life, just get over it , it's the internet .....
But vent some spleen on another forum and all of a sudden we are monsters and they are reeling from all the terrible things said about them??

So it's Ok for Josh to release a patronising letter to the members and an insulting letter to the Admin and mods,but not Ok for indivduals to say what they like on THIS SITE ?
If Josh or Richard had been Bright then they could have joined Rationalia and then forum rules would have forbidden me saying that a couple of lying snakes deliberately and with premeditation caused all this outrage

Yes Josh I did say you Fucked the hard the working staff of the forum without even kissing them first ....And if that is hurtful to you good !

Suck it up and remember it's only a forum ....just PETULANT CHILDREN who are frightened by change .