First reaction by Richard Dawkins.

[Ilovelucy]

I don't really see how Dawkins' post is any different to the apologists who say that 'The New Atheists' are just screaming insults without actually looking at what is really being said, why it is being said, and what they did to cause it to be said.

It's no different IMHO. Even assuming he's been led by the nose in saying what he did, you'd think he'd have taken the time out to do some independent research before going out on a limb like that. It always helps to have independent verification/a second opinion.

Yes, it reminds me of how Dinesh D'Souza likes to quote all the irrational atheist threats that appear in comments to his blog that insult or threaten him and ignore all the rational arguments. Of course though, D'Souza is different to Dawkins. D'Souza "screams like Hitler". Dawkins talks calmly, like Mao.

[klr]

I don't really see how Dawkins' post is any different to the apologists who say that 'The New Atheists' are just screaming insults without actually looking at what is really being said, why it is being said, and what they did to cause it to be said.

It's no different IMHO. Even assuming he's been led by the nose in saying what he did, you'd think he'd have taken the time out to do some independent research before going out on a limb like that. It always helps to have independent verification/a second opinion.

Yes, it reminds me of how Dinesh D'Souza likes to quote all the irrational atheist threats that appear in comments to his blog that insult or threaten him and ignore all the rational arguments. Of course though, D'Souza is different to Dawkins. D'Souza "screams like Hitler". Dawkins talks calmly, like Mao.

... and has had almost as many wives.


Sorry. Couldn't resist it.

[debunk]

The IDers at uncommon descent are having a field day: http://www.uncommondescent.com/atheism/ ... -harrison/

[Huxley]

There is an article about it all on the Times Online site.

[klr]

There is an article about it all on the Times Online site.

Link please!

And welcome!

[Simon_Gardner]

Part Of the original tech support thread is saved online and anyone can read through it to see that there were no untoward comments made about Josh.

Edited

[Huxley]

Sorry, link to Times as requested

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/ ... -fans.html

[klr]

Sorry, link to Times as requested

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/ ... -fans.html

I'm going to ask for this to get wider coverage, so that people can comment on it and also respond on the Times site, which is moderated people!

[Simon_Gardner]

Richard Dawkins unleashes tirade against fans



Richard Dawkins has something of a reputation for provoking the religious community, but it seems he may have underestimated the atheistic fervour of his own fanbase. Amidst a tsunami of vulgar and vitriolic comments, the 85,000-strong forum on his official website RichardDawkins.net had to be shut down this week.

The implosion appears to have been provoked by an announcement on the website that discussion threads and responses would in future be tightly moderated to help curb irrelevant discussions, frivolous gossip and abuse.

However, the announcement itself created such an explosion of ire that the planned 30-day switch-over period had to be scrapped and the discussion forum locked down immediately. Some members are complaining that their profiles have been wiped out and others have lost access to files and messages that they uploaded onto the website. Not willing to be silenced, many of the former Dawkins fans are continuing to vent their feelings on atheist forums elsewhere on the net.

Chris Wilkins, who has blogged about the row, told me yesterday that one of his acquaintances described the closing of the forum as "feeling like a friend had died".

Dawkins himself is less than sympathetic. In a personal message posted today entitled Outrage, he lets rip at the members of his website:

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 [...] that somebody on website expressed a “sudden urge to ram a fistful of nails” down your throat. Also to “trip you up and kick you in the guts.” And imagine seeing your face described, again by an anonymous poster, as “a slack jawed turd in the mouth mug if ever I saw one.

(You will also have to imagine the uncensored version of this extract)

He goes on to ponder what could possible be wrong with people who "over-react so spectacularly to something so trivial" and concludes that "there is something rotten in internet culture" and that he is determined to purge his website of this vicious element. And so the battle commences...

Posted by Hannah Devlin on February 25, 2010 in

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/ ... -fans.html

[95Theses]

Fucking hell, just the title is enough :

Dawkins unleashes tirade against Fans

[cowiz]

Sorry, link to Times as requested

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/ ... -fans.html

I'm going to ask for this to get wider coverage, so that people can comment on it and also respond on the Times site, which is moderated people!

It's not exactly accurate - it blames the proposed changes for the issues, not the handling of the dissent and subsequent behavior of the Admin. Sloppy IMHO

[Chauncey Gardner]

I have seen some people speculate about why Josh may have taken the actions he did, and of course only inferences can be made there. However, the basic bullet points that have been repeated across forums with the timeline of events are all basic facts of the situation with numerous lines of evidence backing them up - saved by those of us who were there witnessing the events unfolding.

the more you repeat something or see others repeating it, doesn't make it more plausible. billions of people subscribe to various interpretations of the bible....that doesn't make it more true...

there's no confusion with me. in baby steps...

1. rd.net team announce that there will be changes and the forum will be kept alive for 30 more days.
2. something happened.
3. rd.net team suddenly shut down comments on the forum AND revoke privileges to some forum moderators.
4. people go postal.

you're speculating on point 2. you don't know the full facts. you were NOT sitting beside josh for the entire week...nor were you sitting beside richard dawkins.

I'm not saying that your speculation isn't true....what I'm saying is that it's speculation. Speculations ARE NOT FACTS, mr. samsa. Regardless of how many people repeat it or concur with them.

And I hope it's not too embarrassing for you if I point out that the title of this forum is RATIONALIA.COM which is wordplay on the adjective or adverb RATIONAL....which people used to mean: agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible: a rational plan for economic development.

there's nothing wrong with speculation, but, It's not reasonable, sensible or agreeable to reason for people to string together a bunch of speculations to draw such drastic conclusions....

It's quite clear to me that many bloggers and posters are quote mining and piecing together speculations and dressing them up as "overwhelming evidence" to satisfy their anger/loss of power as a moderator/immaturity/stupidity or whatever...

[Ilovelucy]

Sorry, link to Times as requested

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/ ... -fans.html

I'm going to ask for this to get wider coverage, so that people can comment on it and also respond on the Times site, which is moderated people!

It's not exactly accurate - it blames the proposed changes for the issues, not the handling of the dissent and subsequent behavior of the Admin. Sloppy IMHO

I made a separate thread about the Times article. It might get merged into this one. I said thee that it's the same lies on one hand, but at th same time you know that RD Josh and Chalkers dont want it to blow up as big as this.

[ozewiezeloose]

The IDers at uncommon descent are having a field day: http://www.uncommondescent.com/atheism/ ... -harrison/

Oh, kraist! Loads of bollocks there. And 1 rather funny post:

Dawkins found the root of all evil … on his own website … I got to wonder!

[RPizzle]

Well things certainly are going to get more interesting...