First reaction by Richard Dawkins.

[drl2]

Although I am a little miffed. I've seen the traffic numbers on RD.net from Google Analytics, and it gets about 1/2 to 2/3 of the traffic of Pharyngula (and sorry to inform you of the diminution of your status further still, but the forums only got about 1/4 of the traffic of the whole site). And you guys keep talking about how RD.net is the biggest.

Ah, but what do your numbers look like once you eliminate the folks who end up there mistakenly after Googling "tentacle porn"?

[cowiz]

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... =75&t=9149

I suspect a merge coming

[pzmyers]

Maybe now he will accept my Facebook friend request - after sending it weeks and weeks ago

I hit the 5000 friends limit on FB a while back -- I have to wait for people to drop out or die to add more.

[SnowLeopard]

Sorry, didnt see it. I'm behind the times as usual.

[cowiz]

Maybe now he will accept my Facebook friend request - after sending it weeks and weeks ago

I hit the 5000 friends limit on FB a while back -- I have to wait for people to drop out or die to add more.

That's a relief, I was feeling all sad and rejected

Thanks for letting me know

[M]

Maybe now he will accept my Facebook friend request - after sending it weeks and weeks ago

I hit the 5000 friends limit on FB a while back -- I have to wait for people to drop out or die to add more.

That's not friends, that's your Bejewelled score.

[normal]

Maybe now he will accept my Facebook friend request - after sending it weeks and weeks ago

I hit the 5000 friends limit on FB a while back -- I have to wait for people to drop out or die to add more.

If they die they're just going to clog up the place. Tell all the people who are doing very hazardous jobs and the very elderly to defriend you just in case

[Xamonas Chegwé]

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... =75&t=9149

I suspect a merge coming

Uncanny spider-sense strikes again. Threads merged.

[Flora]

I have to say, I don't know what everyone is pissed off about, other than the fact that all this happened suddenly. I think that that's what set some people off - the fact that this sort of was sprung on the forum without a real clear statement of what's going to happen and when. Then a bunch of people flew into a rage, probably boiling over from being upset at Timonen for not showing them what they thought was due respect. And, then some members of RDF.net forum seem to have really gone over the line with the vitriol, as quoted by Dawkins.

ALL of those quotes come from this forum - AFTER the RD.net forum had been closed.

They are most certainly NOT a response to the letter from Josh that Dawkins quotes - they are a response to Josh's criminal vandalism and Stalinesque behaviour.

That's what I hope someone can prove with evidence via linked sources. Please do this if you can because Richard has been grossly misled.

suppurating rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum inside a dead skunk that’s been shoved up a week-old dead rhino’s twat.

From :

Now let's get back to calling this Josh a suppurating rectum ....

Ok. Josh is a suppurating rectum. A suppurating rat's rectum. A suppurating rat's rectum inside a dead skunk that's been shoved up a week-old dead rhino's twat.

I feel better now.

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... m…#p349715

Or suppose that somebody on the same website expressed a “sudden urge to ram a fistful of nails” down your throat

The bottom line is that I personally am far more offended by Josh's 'handling' of this debacle than I am of the initial decision.

When someone tells me they know that change can be frightening in order to at both times shut me up and patronise me, I get the sudden urge to ram a fistful of nails down their throat.

So, yeah, bad handling.



(I'm glad you've sent a letter. A few well known names with calm and honest opinions might at least wake RD up to what has been done, even if he doesn't care)

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... ls#p352349

trip you up and kick you in the guts.

From :

For being booed out of the building at the Atheist Convention Australia. I wonder if he has the guts to show his face there?

Good question! If I see the fat-faced little porker wandering around with his camera, I swear I'll trip him over and kick him in the guts. If he is there I am all the more determined to get folks to join me in turning our backs in silent protest when RD takes the stage. He can get that on camera!

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 50#p352333

a slack jawed turd in the mouth mug if ever I saw one

From :

Is that really him? Now I've clapped eyes on him, I totally understand. That's a slack jawed turd in the mouth mug if ever I saw one. This is just Revenge of the Nerd really, isn't it.

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... ne#p352318


So there we have it, every single one from Rationalia, none from RDF.

Thank you very much for sourcing all the quotes. I will pass this on as evidence that these comments were not the reason that the forum was changed to "read-only".

[Twoflower]

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... =75&t=9149

I suspect a merge coming

Uncanny spider-sense strikes again. Threads merged.

Damn you!!! I was doing that!!!!!!!!

[Simon_Gardner]

I'm known as the village atheist.

Or “the only atheist in the village” (sorry, Brit cultural reference).

[fredbear]

hurrah, hurrah, hurrah, it's pzmyers!!!


who he?

[pzmyers]

I do talk with Richard now and then, but they are brief missives by email. We have never discussed this new forum in any way. I doubt that he's concerned at all about it -- he is not the internet monitor.

I have mentioned to him that the forum archives should be preserved. It's his understanding that they will be -- barring any technical issues. We're talking about it, anyway, and I'm sure that if there is no problem, there will be a clarification made.

[life]

I think most of you are wrong. I think Richard Dawkins did not read this website, and did not read the comments made here. I think Josh quoted comments from this website made about him, and send them to Richard Dawkins in a very selective and tendentious manner. I think that Richard Dawkins, led by this limited information, made false assumptions about what has been going on.

I do not believe that Richard Dawkins himself quote-mined or misrepresented the case. I think that it is important that someone presents a time-line, and sources those comments, and places them within a context. I think it is important that Dawkins realises that (1) the comments at the change were not so much ones of conservatism, but at shock that all the old posts would be removed (10 GB's, equal to wikipedia in size), (2) the criticism was largely one of disappointment, not hostility, (3) people were outraged not at the change, but at the way moderators were handled, (4) accounts and posts of highly contributing members were deleted and (5) then and only then were these comments made towards Josh.

I think that at the heart of this is a misunderstanding, and I believe that Richard Dawkins, when facing this information will reconsider his perspective.

Someone in his line of work probably figures this whole uproar is worth about 20 minutes of his time, if that.

I think that Dawkins believes that if he has hurt the feelings of many hundreds of people that he would consider that worth more than 20 minutes of his time, especially when a group of those people have contributed in money and effort to his cause.

Thank you for writing this. Exactly my sentiments. I suggest we do just that: present a factual, objective time-line, incl. sources.
I'll be more than happy to post it on the site I created earlier, if anybody would like to volunteer, I'm being too emotional right now.

[95Theses]

My view is that PZ came on this site like buffer on a train to take the shock out of a sudden stop. Do you think that PZ has not had a chat to Dawkins before posting? Dawkins as far as I’m concerned is beyond the pale.

No I think PZ is his own man and came to have a look for himself.

Also, despite his protestations to the contrary on his blog, I suspect he is a bit of a fan of drama

Richard however has gone totally off the deep end and selectively quoted 3-4 posts from on here, after everything had happened and now appears to be implying that every member of his forums was unmitigated scum that deserved everything they got.

After reading his post on RDF.net I have come t the distinct impression that being a member on his own forums has taught me to think about things a little more clearly and rationally than he is able to. Certainly that level of creative quote mining and mis-characterization would have been shot down in flames had a creationist attempted to use it on the old forums.

The whole post seems to be a bit of a whine that some nasty people said bad things about his friend.

As the great Stephen Fry says 'Oh, you're offended? so fucking what? it's nothing more than a whine'