The Atheism Plus "movement" -- good, bad, ugly?

[Jason]

Welcome to Atheism Plus tm. Freethought Macht Frei.

Freies Denken ohne Freiheit

[A Hermit]

soooo...

the desire for reason, compassion and integrity makes one a Nazi, eh?

Yeah, that's rational...

[Jason]

I just like to exercise my Schnitzel once in a while.

You have to admit the Nazi's had some snappy uniforms.

[Bella Fortuna]

Richard Carrier says:
August 23, 2012 at 8:03 pm

I owned the mistake, explained it, apologized for it, and promised to police such mistakes better in future. In contrast, you are the one trying to diminish the apology by making it all about the causes and not the actual apology.

Gee that sounds fucking familiar...

[cowiz]

Richard Carrier says:
August 23, 2012 at 8:03 pm

I owned the mistake, explained it, apologized for it, and promised to police such mistakes better in future. In contrast, you are the one trying to diminish the apology by making it all about the causes and not the actual apology.

Gee that sounds fucking familiar...

GTFO

[Robert_S]

soooo...

the desire for reason, compassion and integrity makes one a Nazi, eh?

Yeah, that's rational...

Many of us have expressed agreement with the values listed. I get nervous about the language of purging. Many here have bad memories about purges in the online atheist community.

As I said before, not all of the FtB people are supportive of this.

I'm hesitant about this because I don't usually care much for branding.

[DaveDodo007]

I just like to exercise my Schnitzel once in a while.

You have to admit the Nazi's had some snappy uniforms.

Hugo Boss, nothing but the best for genocidal megalomaniacs.

[Robert_S]

Whoops!!!

Needs new logo. http://store.richarddawkins.net/product ... id-t-shirt

[A Hermit]

soooo...

the desire for reason, compassion and integrity makes one a Nazi, eh?

Yeah, that's rational...

Many of us have expressed agreement with the values listed. I get nervous about the language of purging. Many here have bad memories about purges in the online atheist community.

As I said before, not all of the FtB people are supportive of this.

I'm hesitant about this because I don't usually care much for branding.

I'm all for purging if it gets rid of this kind of crap:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/ ... ment-90615

GRETA CHRISTINA YOU FUCKIN HOE… I HOPE YOU GET RAPED YOU FUCKIN FEMINAZI SLUT… GO CHOKE ON A DICK AND DIE

What are you gonna do, Greta? Are you gonna ban me again?

That's what this is all about. Why objecting to that kind of crap makes people angry I'll never understand...

For the record, this is what I'm on board with...

http://freethoughtblogs.com/camelswithh ... /#comments

[Drewish]

In response I propose Atheism++. It's Objectivism oriented

[Robert_S]

soooo...

the desire for reason, compassion and integrity makes one a Nazi, eh?

Yeah, that's rational...

Many of us have expressed agreement with the values listed. I get nervous about the language of purging. Many here have bad memories about purges in the online atheist community.

As I said before, not all of the FtB people are supportive of this.

I'm hesitant about this because I don't usually care much for branding.

I'm all for purging if it gets rid of this kind of crap:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/ ... ment-90615

GRETA CHRISTINA YOU FUCKIN HOE… I HOPE YOU GET RAPED YOU FUCKIN FEMINAZI SLUT… GO CHOKE ON A DICK AND DIE

What are you gonna do, Greta? Are you gonna ban me again?

That's what this is all about. Why objecting to that kind of crap makes people angry I'll never understand...

It is that I don't appreciate someone insinuating I get with their brand or I'm like the person who typed that crap.

[Ayaan]

So, A Hermit, the way to deal with a few comments like that is with things like this?

In the meantime, I call everyone now to pick sides (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement, or are you going to stick with Atheism Less?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid.

Tom says:
August 20, 2012 at 4:04 pm

I’ll stick with the original atheism, thanks.
Reply

Richard Carrier says:
August 21, 2012 at 9:46 am

So, one vote for douchery. Got it.

Brian Carnell says:
August 20, 2012 at 6:27 pm

“…anyone who makes a fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit it, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with.”

So the Logic Police will be maintaining a database of all Scarlet Fs issued by the Central Committee?
Reply

Richard Carrier says:
August 21, 2012 at 10:05 am

If you mean “rational people will be making mental notes of who is irrational, then documenting it, and publicly informing their colleagues of it,” then yes. There is no other way to promote a rational society than to call out those who are irrational and denounce and marginalize them as such. No longer will we treat them as one of us. Because they are not.

There won’t be any central committee for this. Just the internet and the evidence.

Accept it or GTFO.

IfICantDanceAtYourRevolution says:
August 22, 2012 at 3:52 pm

“it’s not dogma if it’s open to discussion and evidence-based revision”
…
“So either you endorse the values and aims I have laid out, or you do not…if you don’t endorse these values, then you are our enemy,”

In other words, it’s dogma.
Richard Carrier says:
August 22, 2012 at 6:11 pm

XTOG said: Given the evidence free hysteria and closed discussion of the FTB lot on the recent sexism issues, why should anyone believe that there will be a “open… discussion and evidence-based revision”?

When have I ever exhibited any “evidence-free hysteria” or “closed discussion” on this subject?

You are now fabricating a non-existent claim about my blog, as another childish excuse to deny its values without having the courage to actually say so. Nice.

XTOG said: Atheism does not have the luxury of kicking people out of its movement…

Yes, it does. Atheism+ is our movement. We will not consider you a part of it, we will not work with you, we will not befriend you. We will heretofore denounce you as the irrational or immoral scum you are (if such you are). If you reject these values, then you are no longer one of us. And we will now say so, publicly and repeatedly. You are hereby disowned.

That’s all she wrote.

Goodbye.

[DaveDodo007]

soooo...

the desire for reason, compassion and integrity makes one a Nazi, eh?

Yeah, that's rational...

No, it is the totally demanding of conformity with no power of dissent that leads a person to be branded 'the other' is where the parallel lies. A cursory glance at history will show you where it ends. So yes you are a Nazi, if the cap fits put a swastika on it.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

I'm all for purging if it gets rid of this kind of crap:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/ ... ment-90615

GRETA CHRISTINA YOU FUCKIN HOE… I HOPE YOU GET RAPED YOU FUCKIN FEMINAZI SLUT… GO CHOKE ON A DICK AND DIE

What are you gonna do, Greta? Are you gonna ban me again?

That's what this is all about. Why objecting to that kind of crap makes people angry I'll never understand...

Anyone that posted something like that here would be reminded of our rules on personal attacks. If they persisted, they would be warned of a suspension for further offences and then suspended for longer periods for each subsequent repetition.

The reminders and warnings would be public, as would announcements of their suspensions. Their posts would remain though - and discussion of the validity of the staff responses would be freely permitted - there would be no deletions or editing (unless they went so far as to post something that was actually illegal.)

They would also be repeatedly given the chance to self-moderate their behaviour and stick to expressing their views without attacking another member and, should they succeed in that, they would be quite happy to stay and post whatever they liked.

This is not some lofty ideal. It is how we operate here and how we have done for years. We kind of like it.



What would NOT happen (unlike some places) is that their posts would be deleted, their account closed and any accusations of unfairness regarding the staff treatment of them would be likewise deleted.

Now, do you see why some here see some other methods of moderation as a bit nazi-ish?

[DaveDodo007]

So, A Hermit, the way to deal with a few comments like that is with things like this?

In the meantime, I call everyone now to pick sides (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement, or are you going to stick with Atheism Less?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid.

Tom says:
August 20, 2012 at 4:04 pm

I’ll stick with the original atheism, thanks.
Reply

Richard Carrier says:
August 21, 2012 at 9:46 am

So, one vote for douchery. Got it.

Brian Carnell says:
August 20, 2012 at 6:27 pm

“…anyone who makes a fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit it, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with.”

So the Logic Police will be maintaining a database of all Scarlet Fs issued by the Central Committee?
Reply

Richard Carrier says:
August 21, 2012 at 10:05 am

If you mean “rational people will be making mental notes of who is irrational, then documenting it, and publicly informing their colleagues of it,” then yes. There is no other way to promote a rational society than to call out those who are irrational and denounce and marginalize them as such. No longer will we treat them as one of us. Because they are not.

There won’t be any central committee for this. Just the internet and the evidence.

Accept it or GTFO.

IfICantDanceAtYourRevolution says:
August 22, 2012 at 3:52 pm

“it’s not dogma if it’s open to discussion and evidence-based revision”
…
“So either you endorse the values and aims I have laid out, or you do not…if you don’t endorse these values, then you are our enemy,”

In other words, it’s dogma.
Richard Carrier says:
August 22, 2012 at 6:11 pm

XTOG said: Given the evidence free hysteria and closed discussion of the FTB lot on the recent sexism issues, why should anyone believe that there will be a “open… discussion and evidence-based revision”?

When have I ever exhibited any “evidence-free hysteria” or “closed discussion” on this subject?

You are now fabricating a non-existent claim about my blog, as another childish excuse to deny its values without having the courage to actually say so. Nice.

XTOG said: Atheism does not have the luxury of kicking people out of its movement…

Yes, it does. Atheism+ is our movement. We will not consider you a part of it, we will not work with you, we will not befriend you. We will heretofore denounce you as the irrational or immoral scum you are (if such you are). If you reject these values, then you are no longer one of us. And we will now say so, publicly and repeatedly. You are hereby disowned.

That’s all she wrote.

Goodbye.

Tut tut Ayaan, don't you know that is it righteous fury when they do it, if anyone else behaves like that they are cockroaches. As for the scumbag who posted on Greta's blog, that is a direct threat and should be reported to the authorities. Though don't try and tell me Richard Dawkins doesn't get ten times as many type posts before his morning coffee.