Actually, all are very good indeedIlovelucy wrote:Very good, though I still think my new sig's better.Simon_Gardner wrote:Aha. My favourite Tweets from today
Dawkins forum meltdown - perhaps a national day of prayer should be organised.
There's probably no forum... Now relax, and enjoy your life
First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
- 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: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
He quoted me!Richard Dawkins wrote:Imagine that you, as a greatly liked and respected person, found yourself overnight subjected to personal vilification on an unprecedented scale, from anonymous commenters on a website. Suppose you found yourself described as an “utter twat” 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.”
Well, OK. Josh quote-mined me.
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
IDMD2Cormac 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.
I am a twit.
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
Spot on luis, well said.Luis Dias wrote:You don't know shit about "quote mining". There's no quote mining when I'm merely pointing exactly to what I disagree, when your fucking post is on top of mine, and I have not misrepresented your views.Chauncey Gardner wrote:you're quote mining luis diasLuis Dias wrote:He DOESN'T have to know "everything" to know that Dawkins and Josh treated everyone as imbeciles. That's a fucking ridiculous demand of yours. He just has to read what was put forth to him. Like I have. I felt insulted by both condescending "messages" from the high ground.Allow me to explain: you DON'T KNOW the full story Peter.
"Quote Mining" was what Dawkins did in his "Outrage" silly post. Go read it.
It's no "mob rule" at all. Dawkins built a forum, and now recklessly destroyed it without even giving anyone's notice, in the most condescending way. Thus, I say, fuck him. I don't care if Josh was inapropriate because her mother died. I don't hang out with condescending and dictatorial types.I don't subscribe to mob rule, luis, I would prefer to wait until the full facts are known. at the moment they aren't.
What happened resumes as follows. A friend invited us to his place. And then suddenly states that it's his place and thus doesn't want our presence anymore, in the most condescending manner. I say, good for you, asshole. Next time, don't fucking invite me. And all the 85k people, enraged with the issue, just goes out to find another nice place to chat, while not giving a damn for that obnoxious, snobby "friend".
“I wish no harm to any human being, but I, as one man, am going to exercise my freedom of speech. No human being on the face of the earth, no government is going to take from me my right to speak, my right to protest against wrong, my right to do everything that is for the benefit of mankind. I am not here, then, as the accused; I am here as the accuser of capitalism dripping with blood from head to foot.”
John Maclean (Scottish socialist) speech from the Dock 1918.
John Maclean (Scottish socialist) speech from the Dock 1918.
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
In that thread, mine was the first use of 'suppurating rectum' but astonishingly it was taken out of context and my post was fully supportive of Dawkins (who later only very slightly diminished the respect I had for him by going off half-cocked with the 'Outrage' response, when clearly he had very little understanding of what had happened). It wasn't me who really went to town with the phrase though, I'll let them take the credit/infamy if they wish.Mysturji wrote:He quoted me!Richard Dawkins wrote:Imagine that you, as a greatly liked and respected person, found yourself overnight subjected to personal vilification on an unprecedented scale, from anonymous commenters on a website. Suppose you found yourself described as an “utter twat” 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.”
Well, OK. Josh quote-mined me.
Sorry for bringing about the worldwide collapse of atheism guys...or you know, "Josh is scum" (depending on your outlook)
- Chauncey Gardner
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:50 pm
- About me: Dubliner.
- Contact:
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
LMAO. the words memory and selective springs to mind.Luis Dias wrote:
It's no "mob rule" at all. Dawkins built a forum, and now recklessly destroyed it without even giving anyone's notice, in the most condescending way. Thus, I say, fuck him. I don't care if Josh was inapropriate because her mother died. I don't hang out with condescending and dictatorial types.
What happened resumes as follows. A friend invited us to his place. And then suddenly states that it's his place and thus doesn't want our presence anymore, in the most condescending manner. I say, good for you, asshole. Next time, don't fucking invite me. And all the 85k people, enraged with the issue, just goes out to find another nice place to chat, while not giving a damn for that obnoxious, snobby "friend".
isn't it more correct to say that a friend invited a bunch of people to his place...after a while...a long while, the friend said he is going to change the living room and build an extension to his place....you all told him to fuck off, who does he think he is? etc. because he didn't consult you. he goes woah, wtf! and threw out the most abusive guests?
then the bunch of people went around other people's houses, inviting themelseves in..ranting and raving about the friend who has horns on his head or on his supperating scrotum....going on and on and on and on....to the point of distraction.
isn't that a bit closer to the truth?
- 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: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
U can haz mittens.ED209 wrote:In that thread, mine was the first use of 'suppurating rectum' but astonishingly it was taken out of context and my post was fully supportive of Dawkins (who later only very slightly diminished the respect I had for him by going off half-cocked with the 'Outrage' response, when clearly he had very little understanding of what had happened). It wasn't me who really went to town with the phrase though, I'll let them take the credit/infamy if they wish.Mysturji wrote:He quoted me!Richard Dawkins wrote:Imagine that you, as a greatly liked and respected person, found yourself overnight subjected to personal vilification on an unprecedented scale, from anonymous commenters on a website. Suppose you found yourself described as an “utter twat” 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.”
Well, OK. Josh quote-mined me.
Sorry for bringing about the worldwide collapse of atheism guys...or you know, "Josh is scum" (depending on your outlook)
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
IDMD2Cormac 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.
I am a twit.
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
No.Chauncey Gardner wrote:LMAO. the words memory and selective springs to mind.Luis Dias wrote:
It's no "mob rule" at all. Dawkins built a forum, and now recklessly destroyed it without even giving anyone's notice, in the most condescending way. Thus, I say, fuck him. I don't care if Josh was inapropriate because her mother died. I don't hang out with condescending and dictatorial types.
What happened resumes as follows. A friend invited us to his place. And then suddenly states that it's his place and thus doesn't want our presence anymore, in the most condescending manner. I say, good for you, asshole. Next time, don't fucking invite me. And all the 85k people, enraged with the issue, just goes out to find another nice place to chat, while not giving a damn for that obnoxious, snobby "friend".
isn't it more correct to say that a friend invited a bunch of people to his place...after a while...a long while, the friend said he is going to change the living room and build an extension to his place....you all told him to fuck off, who does he think he is? etc. because he didn't consult you. he goes woah, wtf! and threw out the most abusive guests?
then the bunch of people went around other people's houses, inviting themelseves in..ranting and raving about the friend who has horns on his head or on his supperating scrotum....going on and on and on and on....to the point of distraction.
isn't that a bit closer to the truth?
- ozewiezeloose
- Account Suspended at Member's Request
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:19 pm
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
+1.Mazille wrote:No.Chauncey Gardner wrote:isn't that a bit closer to the truth?
- Surendra Darathy
- Posts: 701
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:45 pm
- About me: I am only human. Keep in mind, I am Russian. And is no part of speech in Russian equivalent to definite article in English. Bad enough is no present tense of verb "to be".
- Location: Rugburn-on-Knees, Kent, UK
- Contact:
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
After the "Truth", eh? I know the type.Chauncey Gardner wrote:isn't that a bit closer to the truth?
I'll get you, my pretty, and your little God, too!
- ozewiezeloose
- Account Suspended at Member's Request
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:19 pm
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
It's one step closer to complete arsewankery, imho. But hey, that's just me.Chauncey Gardner wrote:isn't that a bit closer to the truth?
- Girlysprite
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:54 am
- About me: Atheist, not really anti-theist.
RC background. - Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
You know...I can actually sort of understand him. I mean Dawkins.
Think of it...he doesn't really know us, as he hasn't posted much on the forum. He just knows there is a forum out there attached to the website bearing his name, and with some luck he knows that it was quite a busy place. Then his friend shuts the thing down, and all he knows that it would likely be for some good reason (well, likely it isn't but that is what Dawkins has likely been thinking so far). So then shit hits the fan, and he peeks around the corner, and what does he see? Well, certainly not just people who are calmly and rationally explaining their point. Maybe those were there, but there was also lots of people yelling quite some abusive things. And I am sure that all the pm's and emails weren't so nice either. Remember, it's still his friend they were talking about, a person he trusts. I dunno, but if I'd see such a vitorlic mob, my thought would be 'well, nice sideffect getting rid of those as well!'.
Many people have not just shot themselves in the foot, but royally nuked their own feet until all the legs of our cause were gone and evaporated.
Yes, the way things have been handled was not right, though the big guy on the website is of course, within his rights to change and remove things. But he should have handled it much better.
But then again, we also should have.
I think it's not likely that Dawkins would take any forum person really serious anymore, after all the abuse.
Think of it...he doesn't really know us, as he hasn't posted much on the forum. He just knows there is a forum out there attached to the website bearing his name, and with some luck he knows that it was quite a busy place. Then his friend shuts the thing down, and all he knows that it would likely be for some good reason (well, likely it isn't but that is what Dawkins has likely been thinking so far). So then shit hits the fan, and he peeks around the corner, and what does he see? Well, certainly not just people who are calmly and rationally explaining their point. Maybe those were there, but there was also lots of people yelling quite some abusive things. And I am sure that all the pm's and emails weren't so nice either. Remember, it's still his friend they were talking about, a person he trusts. I dunno, but if I'd see such a vitorlic mob, my thought would be 'well, nice sideffect getting rid of those as well!'.
Many people have not just shot themselves in the foot, but royally nuked their own feet until all the legs of our cause were gone and evaporated.
Yes, the way things have been handled was not right, though the big guy on the website is of course, within his rights to change and remove things. But he should have handled it much better.
But then again, we also should have.
I think it's not likely that Dawkins would take any forum person really serious anymore, after all the abuse.
Canards can be so cute!
Anatidaephobia; the fear of being watched by a duck
Anatidaephobia; the fear of being watched by a duck
- virphen
- Posts: 1451
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:37 am
- About me: "that fairy-fingering ass-raping space lizard"
One year own my home planet = 3 on earth. - Location: Orbit.
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
He was quite happy to post in that trivial forum when he needed help.
- ozewiezeloose
- Account Suspended at Member's Request
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:19 pm
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
Oh, you mean like when he asked for help for his new book for children? That was, like, two weeks ago or so, wasn't it?virphen wrote:He was quite happy to post in that trivial forum when he needed help.
- klr
- (%gibber(who=klr, what=Leprageek);)
- Posts: 32964
- Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:25 pm
- About me: The money was just resting in my account.
- Location: Airstrip Two
- Contact:
Re: First reaction by Richard Dawkins.
Or hawking his wife's artwork. Or when he sometimes got tired of antics on the Front Page, and told people that if they really wanted to discuss XYZ, they could go and start a thread on the forum.ozewiezeloose wrote:Oh, you mean like when he asked for help for his new book for children? That was, like, two weeks ago or so, wasn't it?virphen wrote:He was quite happy to post in that trivial forum when he needed help.
We don't forget much.
God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no place within organized religion. - Superintendent Chalmers
It's not up to us to choose which laws we want to obey. If it were, I'd kill everyone who looked at me cock-eyed! - Rex Banner
The Bluebird of Happiness long absent from his life, Ned is visited by the Chicken of Depression. - Gary Larson
It's not up to us to choose which laws we want to obey. If it were, I'd kill everyone who looked at me cock-eyed! - Rex Banner
The Bluebird of Happiness long absent from his life, Ned is visited by the Chicken of Depression. - Gary Larson
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests