Sex on the new forum

[devogue]

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/feedb ... t1782.html

I'm honestly not trying to flame or anything. I just want to discover the vibe of the new forum.

[cowiz]

What does Australian semen taste like?

[devogue]

What does Australian semen taste like?

Coopers.

[Ayaan]

It's quite funny seeing that they lifted that straight from the RD.net FUA, given that it was originally just a safeguard for Richard and his PR. Many of them don't know that - but some will. Why have they done that?

I'm guessing that it was easier than starting from scratch - and given that most of the folks there (and most of the staff) are straight from RDF it's also what they were used to. There is a tech support section over there if anyone wants to suggest changes to the FUA.

[mark1961]

I think I'll start a new thread there.

Something like...

What does semen taste like? Seriously.

Orrid. It cloys and leaves a weird taste in the back of your mouth. Not as bad as earwax though. I was so surprised at how bad that tasted I had to try it twice.

[devogue]

I think I'll start a new thread there.

Something like...

What does semen taste like? Seriously.

Orrid. It cloys and leaves a weird taste in the back of your mouth. Not as bad as earwax though. I was so surprised at how bad that tasted I had to try it twice.

Ear wax isn't very nice at all. It's like snotters made by Indians - too rich for Western palates.

[devogue]

It's quite funny seeing that they lifted that straight from the RD.net FUA, given that it was originally just a safeguard for Richard and his PR. Many of them don't know that - but some will. Why have they done that?

I'm guessing that it was easier than starting from scratch - and given that most of the folks there (and most of the staff) are straight from RDF it's also what they were used to. There is a tech support section over there if anyone wants to suggest changes to the FUA.

I thought that was the case - I thought that the RDF rules would be used as a stop gap, but it seems as though that part, the single most controversial part, will still be enforced, and there's really no need.

[Bella Fortuna]

Dev, from your posts I read there you've being perfectly reasonable, merely asking if relaying personal sexual experience, if it would make for a meaningful contribution to a topic, would be permitted... and are told no, go back to the rat hole for that smut. Seems rather disappointingly knee-jerk. I'm surprised after going through the experience they/we have and feeling bonded in a social community they would still want to be so Mrs. Grundy about these things. Oh well. Those in charge there have the right to govern that site as they think best.

[devogue]

Dev, from your posts I read there you've being perfectly reasonable, merely asking if relaying personal sexual experience, if it would make for a meaningful contribution to a topic, would be permitted... and are told no, go back to the rat hole for that smut. Seems rather disappointingly knee-jerk. I'm surprised after going through the experience they/we have and feeling bonded in a social community they would still want to be so Mrs. Grundy about these things. Oh well. Those in charge there have the right to govern that site as they think best.

I think that rule will be relaxed, but I do agree that it is disappointing that Ratz is seen as the dumping ground for "unnecessary" and supposedly embarrassing shit.

A while back here I took the entirely personal decision to reveal that I had just enjoyed some really great sex. It wasn't even that graphic, but the thread was fun and the community seemed to enjoy the gossip. That was just after seriously partaking in a thread about the nature of love.

It's not just a fetid, shit fest and squalid dumping ground full of thick, anti-intellectual reprobates here, and I'm getting fed up with that image being projected on to us.

[Bella Fortuna]

I am too - especially now that many who decried or looked down at us before and said 'Good riddance' apparently rethought this broad-brush appraisal and came here after the debacle - some even apologetic for their behaviour back in '08. They've seen this place first-hand, and if anyone can't see the balance here that I think is uniquely reflective of ALL facets of us as humans and social creatures, then I think they do us a disservice bordering on the offensive. It's a little hurtful if we're going to be stereotyped on a single aspect.

I worry that Ratz will be painted as the whore a man goes to to satisfy his basest carnal desires because he doesn't want to defile his pristine wife with them.

Edit: grammar

[Animavore]

I don't think they should be high and mighty.
They're still whinging and sore about Dawkins.
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/richa ... t1725.html

I can understand them keeping the rules. They were after a home away from home. That doesn't mean I agree with them, I think they're a little misguided if they don't see the new forum as a tabla rusa. They have no obligation to go by the RDF rules at all.
I'm not sure people see this place as "the whore a man goes to to satisfy his basest carnal desires because he doesn't want to defile his pristine wife with them" (forgive me for laughing at this, that is just classic) I just think that they still believe they are trying to carry on the same standard of science and reason and are perhaps even trying to prove something to RDF?

[Bella Fortuna]

I did mean that line rather tongue in cheek...

[devogue]

I did mean that line rather tongue in cheek...

As a whore or a wife?

[Bella Fortuna]

I did mean that line rather tongue in cheek...

As a whore or a wife?

I like to think I'm the best of both worlds.

You didn't ask me which cheek, after all...

[tytalus]

I was about to ask whose tongue, and in which cheek...damn, predictable.

I will check out the RS thread, however, and check in on the subject. Can't make any promises, though, as I am no mod/donator type and I go for subtle humor anyway.