RDFRS

[lordpasternack]

Richard Dawkins is a charlatan and a fucking idiot. I look forward to being part of bringing his farce of a Foundation crashing down.

Srsly?

The "idiot" at least in some areas has been apparent for some time now. "Charlatan" comes as unexpected to me.

A charlatan is someone who pretends they have abilities or credibility that they don't have. Someone who can't or won't respond to a simple query of what it is that their Foundation DOES, within five weeks, is clearly straining their credibility as it is. But there's more, oh God, there's more…

[Robert_S]

Richard Dawkins is a charlatan and a fucking idiot. I look forward to being part of bringing his farce of a Foundation crashing down.

Srsly?

The "idiot" at least in some areas has been apparent for some time now. "Charlatan" comes as unexpected to me.

A charlatan is someone who pretends they have abilities or credibility that they don't have. Someone who can't or won't respond to a simple query of what it is that their Foundation DOES, within five weeks, is clearly straining their credibility as it is. But there's more, oh God, there's more…

[lordpasternack]

http://richarddawkins.net/audio/643409- ... ent_878865

Feel free to pop Paula an email yourself and ask her what she has been doing for the foundation at...

Paula's a lovely honest-to-goodness, frank, sincere woman, after all, and she'll be glad to regale you with how proud she is of the work she's been doing. Or is she such a lovely woman? And is she going to be glad to sate your curiosities about her involvement in RDFRS?

And maybe CC Richard into that email: ...

[lordpasternack]

Oh, and don't worry - Richard will be loving every minute of this thread, and all the exposés of the fucknuttery of his Foundation staff - because he loves the truth. He's Disinterestedly Questing for all that Truth that is up in this motherfucker, baby. He loves what I'm doing. He obviously has to have the deepest respect for my critical thinking skills, reasoning, quixotism, decency and determination to expose charlatanism. He has to admire my love of truth. He's got to be sitting there singing praises for me.

Yes, yes, I'm sure of it.

[Ronja]

LP, no offense, but I'm taking those email addresses out at least temporarily while the staff discusses whether it's OK to publish them or not. There is nothing in the rules that directly forbids it, but we had better check UK law and possible similar cases on other UK based websites, to be sure our asses are covered. This is an open subforum, after all, visible and searchable for guest, bots, all and sundry.

[Ronja]

And - big time

[lordpasternack]

LP, no offense, but I'm taking those email addresses out at least temporarily while the staff discusses whether it's OK to publish them or not. There is nothing in the rules that directly forbids it, but we had better check UK law and possible similar cases on other UK based websites, to be sure our asses are covered. This is an open subforum, after all, visible and searchable for guest, bots, all and sundry.

They are EMAIL ADDRESSES. What could be illegal or questionable about publishing email addresses?

[PsychoSerenity]

Yes, yes, I'm sure of it.

[Bella Fortuna]

LP, no offense, but I'm taking those email addresses out at least temporarily while the staff discusses whether it's OK to publish them or not. There is nothing in the rules that directly forbids it, but we had better check UK law and possible similar cases on other UK based websites, to be sure our asses are covered. This is an open subforum, after all, visible and searchable for guest, bots, all and sundry.

They are EMAIL ADDRESSES. What could be illegal or questionable about publishing email addresses?

Are they personal/private or are they used on websites or public places for contact? If the former, I think it's a breach of someone's privacy.

[Ronja]

I found only one Google hit for the one address, and none for the other. So they likely are not published as (semi)official contact information much anywhere. The hit seemed to be a forgery (I doubt either of them writes too good German).

As I happened to be the first of staff who noticed the report, and am not familiar with the details of UK law on the privacy rights of prominent / public people / celebrities, I decided to err on the side of caution. In any case, the next step is finding information about those aspects of the law and previous comparable cases and discussing what our policy should be (seeing as our rules say nothing about the privacy of non-members).

[lordpasternack]

Paula Kirby speaks German. Studied it at university. This is public domain infomashuns.

[Ronja]

Okay, so you think this really might be her? Asking for a post to be deleted, just like that, out of the blue? http://www.islam-deutschland.info/forum ... 36239d39b8

Does e.g. the age fit (47)?

[lordpasternack]

Okay - what about ... and richard.dawkins@zoo.ox.ac.uk ?

The latter gets automatically forwarded to Richard's personal account, if it hasn't gone defunct.

[lordpasternack]

Okay, so you think this really might be her? Asking for a post to be deleted, just like that, out of the blue? http://www.islam-deutschland.info/forum ... 36239d39b8

Does e.g. the age fit (47)?

A British person named Paula Kirby, speaking German, in a religion-related forum, which you got as a hit for Googling her email address?

[Ronja]

Okay - what about ... and richard.dawkins@zoo.ox.ac.uk ?

The latter is IMO public: over 20 google hits. Mind taking out the other yourself, seeing as that one German link serves the purpose already?

Sorry for the inconvenience - it would just be stupid to have an interesting thread pull the whole forum into trouble. At least I don't want any server downtime now that pertinent news about RDFRS seem to be unraveling fast.