Times Online- Richard Dawkins unleashes tirade against fans

[The Curious Squid]

CG, you don't seem to realise that you're not on RDF anymore.

My above post was not an attack, it was fact. You've constantly linked Life's website in most of your posts in this thread even after several members had reacted to your previous posts. You're lucky you're not getting a suspension for you're antagonistic behaviour. I'm asking you kindly now to desist from further comments that seem to be purposefully designed to agitate other members.

If you have a problem with my request then I advise you to PM an admin.

Once again, can people please refrain from casting insults, calling someone an idiot is hardly going to help.

[Jack Rawlinson]

And how do you feel about the fact that Dawkins has directed insults towards his "apparent fans"?

Ah, Jack, you can't possibly expect the Great Unwashed to understand. He's a bleeding DON, fer chrissakes. Condescending, supercilious insults are their stock in trade.

We proles should learn something from the example set by our betters.

I'm actually still - just - giving RD the benefit of the doubt. It looks very much to me like Timonen and that other nonentity whose name I keep forgetting are the villains here. The most likely explanation for RD's impatient and insolent post was that he was rushing to get off to Aus, things on his mind, and then The Golden Child slipped him the massively Goebbelised version of events so RD rather stupidly thought that behaving like a superannuated prep school master and trying to slap his disgruntled class into submission was the way to go.

Error. Huge, huge miscalculation.

Let's get one thing clear. I really, really admire RD and I have huge respect for him and what he has achieved in terms of communicating the reality and mechanism of evolution to the public. I also respect him for being so very willing to publicly criticise the evil stupidity of religion and to soak up the inevitable flak such action attracts. But I have long felt that RD is a bit naive about the way the internet works, and about the way most people interact on the internet. I think this is a particularly unfortunate instance of that. I also think he has become blind to the Timonen problem, and I understand why. Let's be honest: Josh gave RD his first truly substantial website. He did it because he admires RD. He has involved himself in RD's work in a major way and he has undeniably "helped the cause". We have to be honest and admit that.

But he also seems like a socially maladjusted geekboy who has become just a little too impressed with his own association with the Prof, and has therefore started to believe that he can piss on 85,000 scummy nobodies like us and get no fallout. Timonen needs the major reality check here. RD needs to take a second look at both his unquestioning trust of Timonen and his (let's be fair) very occasional tendency to jump to conclusions.

[95Theses]

And how do you feel about the fact that Dawkins has directed insults towards his "apparent fans"?

Ah, Jack, you can't possibly expect the Great Unwashed to understand. He's a bleeding DON, fer chrissakes. Condescending, supercilious insults are their stock in trade.

We proles should learn something from the example set by our betters.

I'm actually still - just - giving RD the benefit of the doubt. It looks very much to me like Timonen and that other nonentity whose name I keep forgetting are the villains here. The most likely explanation for RD's impatient and insolent post was that he was rushing to get off to Aus, things on his mind, and then The Golden Child slipped him the massively Goebbelised version of events so RD rather stupidly thought that behaving like a superannuated prep school master and trying to slap his disgruntled class into submission was the way to go.

Error. Huge, huge miscalculation.

Let's get one thing clear. I really, really admire RD and I have huge respect for him and what he has achieved in terms of communicating the reality and mechanism of evolution to the public. I also respect him for being so very willing to publicly criticise the evil stupidity of religion and to soak up the inevitable flak such action attracts. But I have long felt that RD is a bit naive about the way the internet works, and about the way most people interact on the internet. I think this is a particularly unfortunate instance of that. I also think he has become blind to the Timonen problem, and I understand why. Let's be honest: Josh gave RD his first truly substantial website. He did it because he admires RD. He has involved himself in RD's work in a major way and he has undeniably "helped the cause". We have to be honest and admit that.

But he also seems like a socially maladjusted geekboy who has become just a little too impressed with his own association with the Prof, and has therefore started to believe that he can piss on 85,000 scummy nobodies like us and get no fallout. Timonen needs the major reality check here. RD needs to take a second look at both his unquestioning trust of Timonen and his (let's be fair) very occasional tendency to jump to conclusions.

Nope

From an interview today with the times :

He said the assumption on the internet seemed to be that websites 'belonged' to those who posted on them. 'You would never expect that in a letter to The Times. You do not cry censorship if you write a letter to The Times and it is not published.'

He added: 'The positive thing is that we are going to try and improve the quality of the articles and comments. Josh Timonen is brilliant and is a real star and it is extremely unfortunate that he should have been vilified.'

http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhil ... eists.html

[maiforpeace]

And how do you feel about the fact that Dawkins has directed insults towards his "apparent fans"?

Ah, Jack, you can't possibly expect the Great Unwashed to understand. He's a bleeding DON, fer chrissakes. Condescending, supercilious insults are their stock in trade.

We proles should learn something from the example set by our betters.

I'm actually still - just - giving RD the benefit of the doubt. It looks very much to me like Timonen and that other nonentity whose name I keep forgetting are the villains here. The most likely explanation for RD's impatient and insolent post was that he was rushing to get off to Aus, things on his mind, and then The Golden Child slipped him the massively Goebbelised version of events so RD rather stupidly thought that behaving like a superannuated prep school master and trying to slap his disgruntled class into submission was the way to go.

Error. Huge, huge miscalculation.

Let's get one thing clear. I really, really admire RD and I have huge respect for him and what he has achieved in terms of communicating the reality and mechanism of evolution to the public. I also respect him for being so very willing to publicly criticise the evil stupidity of religion and to soak up the inevitable flak such action attracts. But I have long felt that RD is a bit naive about the way the internet works, and about the way most people interact on the internet. I think this is a particularly unfortunate instance of that. I also think he has become blind to the Timonen problem, and I understand why. Let's be honest: Josh gave RD his first truly substantial website. He did it because he admires RD. He has involved himself in RD's work in a major way and he has undeniably "helped the cause". We have to be honest and admit that.

But he also seems like a socially maladjusted geekboy who has become just a little too impressed with his own association with the Prof, and has therefore started to believe that he can piss on 85,000 scummy nobodies like us and get no fallout. Timonen needs the major reality check here. RD needs to take a second look at both his unquestioning trust of Timonen and his (let's be fair) very occasional tendency to jump to conclusions.

It surprises me greatly that Dawkins doesn't have a PR person to advise him...his letter was a gigantic PR gaffe. Isn't he married to an actress? I'm surprised she never encouraged him to get one.

For all the support that Josh may get from Dawkins, it can't matter. Josh has to be suffering tremendously from this - no one is immune to the hatred of that many people. He is most definitely getting a big reality check here.

And, hello again - JACK!!

[Jack Rawlinson]

Nope

From an interview today with the times :

He said the assumption on the internet seemed to be that websites 'belonged' to those who posted on them. 'You would never expect that in a letter to The Times. You do not cry censorship if you write a letter to The Times and it is not published.'

He added: 'The positive thing is that we are going to try and improve the quality of the articles and comments. Josh Timonen is brilliant and is a real star and it is extremely unfortunate that he should have been vilified.'

http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhil ... eists.html

Yeah, I saw that. But it still sounds to me like he's simply unaware of the way these events actually unfolded. He's still basing his comments on Golden Child's version.

However, I know that Topsy, Cali and others have emailed him to give him the facts. If I see no retraction or adjustment from RD within the next week he shares culpability, as far as I'm concerned. I hope that doesn't happen.

[Randydeluxe]

It surprises me greatly that Dawkins doesn't have a PR person to advise him...his letter was a gigantic PR gaffe.

I am not entirely convinced that Richard wrote it.

I'd really like some verification of that.

[95Theses]

It surprises me greatly that Dawkins doesn't have a PR person to advise him...his letter was a gigantic PR gaffe.

I am not entirely convinced that Richard wrote it.

I'd really like some verification of that.

Well he was interviewed by the times today and repeated it, so I'm going to say he probably did write it ....

http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhil ... eists.html

[aca]

i posted the link to this article on talkrational.com and one of the members (RAFH) posted an interesting comment, my bold:

http://talkrational.org/showpost.php?p= ... tcount=306

Wow, I don't know if I'm more concerned by his comments or by his willingness to talk to this woman when he won't even talk to his own supporters. I think the latter. If he 's so bloody busy down in Australia he can't be bothered to discuss the matter with his own forum members and especially the moderators of such but has the time to talk to this woman and be made out like a twat by her, one has to wonder what's happened to his clear thinking abilities.

Personally, I couldn't care much about RDF, I didn't belong. It is sad that he would lend his name to a website that became a home to so many of his supporters and then chose to abruptly and with little explanation, pack it all in in such a willful manner. He may have the right to do so, legally. Sure. But morally, I don't think so. One thing's for certain, he's lost a lot of respect of a lot of former supporters and made himself look the twat for doing so. Can and may are not the same as should. It could have been done in a very different manner, assuming it should have been done. But the high and mighty often don't like getting their hands dirty associating with the rabble. They like to keep clean and above it all. Unfortunately, life is not like that.

In any case, any refugees from there, welcome. Hope you like the freedom here. Say what you will. And expect no quarter

[Svartalf]

It surprises me greatly that Dawkins doesn't have a PR person to advise him...his letter was a gigantic PR gaffe.

I am not entirely convinced that Richard wrote it.

I'd really like some verification of that.

You think that josh or some flunky would have sent it in the boss' name without RD even reading it?
If that's the case, either he'd better get wise to the going ons behind his back in a hurry, before his reputation gets permanently marred by the incident, or the fact he so completely trusts somebody to handle responsibilities that are his own is clear indication he's too old (or even completely senile) and should totally retire from public life in any way shape and form.

[TBickle]

It surprises me greatly that Dawkins doesn't have a PR person to advise him...his letter was a gigantic PR gaffe.

I am not entirely convinced that Richard wrote it.

I'd really like some verification of that.

You think that josh or some flunky would have sent it in the boss' name without RD even reading it?
If that's the case, either he'd better get wise to the going ons behind his back in a hurry, before his reputation gets permanently marred by the incident, or the fact he so completely trusts somebody to handle responsibilities that are his own is clear indication he's too old (or even completely senile) and should totally retire from public life in any way shape and form.

I too would be surprised if he posted that under his name without permission. Ultimately, that comment is open to the public and he needs to be careful what is released as his wording as he is a well-known individual.

[Jack Rawlinson]

I think it's pretty obvious RD wrote it. Sadly it bears all the hallmarks of one of his "I'm annoyed, so I'll toss off a haughty, insufficiently-considered rant" posts.

[Crazyfrog]

For what it's worth, my fourpennyworth now added to the Times' comments:

Ultimately it’s Dawkin’s forum and, of course, he is free to do with it as he wishes. Indeed, handled in the right way I’m sure most of the community would come to accept and possibly even like the new look. A few die-hards might leave, but it sounds as if this would have fitted nicely with plans. However, as everyone else has pointed out, that isn’t the cause of the vitriol.

The problem lies with the way the changes were managed (or not, as the case may be). Where was the explanation, involvement, reassurance, respect and communication with stakeholders that goes with any properly planned and executed change project? RDF was one of the world’s largest atheist forums, but it appears as if admin were allowed to behave like egotistical school kids enjoying a brief moment of power. And as for redirection to a Rick Astley site, my teenage daughter has grown out of things like that.

It might be Dawkin’s forum but to summarily toss aside those volunteers whose time, knowledge and money helped to build the site, without even a thank you, is further example of the unprofessional manner in which everything was handled.

Perhaps one day a business school will immortalise this gross incompetence and preserve it as a case study – a perfect example of how NOT to manage a high-profile change project that affects tens of thousands of individuals.

FUBAR

[HughMcB]

PLEASE READ

(I've been asked via PM to address this issue so bear with me)

Although some people here have been acting like right little toe rags using snarky comments and spamming to encourage people to fuck off to http://www.rationalskepticism.org/index.php .

I would like to assure people that this forum is in no way affiliated with the aforementioned toe rag, and is in fact made up of genuine RDF survivors.

So far we ahve about 92 members (mostly exRDF) and Hackenslash is modding (for the time being at least).

Our esteemed colleague Life, is feverishly working to try to get the site up and running and so far people seem to like to be able to stretch their legs without getting under anyones feet.

Again to reiterate just because some little toerag has taken it upon themselves to discourage others by trolling on this site, does not mean that we are not legit.

All you people know me!

We would like anyone interested to have a look if they so wish, and we in no way would like to discourage anyone from leaving their membership here (in fact the general consensus there is that people will whore themselves between the two as everyone likes the membership here so much, that is most of the membership except for any particular toerags.)

Cheers!

HughMcB

[Kristie]

PLEASE READ

(I've been asked via PM to address this issue so bear with me)

Although some people here have been acting like right little toe rags using snarky comments and spamming to encourage people to fuck off to http://www.rationalskepticism.org/index.php .

I would like to assure people that this forum is in no way affiliated with the aforementioned toe rag, and is in fact made up of genuine RDF survivors.

So far we ahve about 92 members (mostly exRDF) and Hackenslash is modding (for the time being at least).

Our esteemed colleague Life, is feverishly working to try to get the site up and running and so far people seem to like to be able to stretch their legs without getting under anyones feet.

Again to reiterate just because some little toerag has taken it upon themselves to discourage others by trolling on this site, does not mean that we are not legit.

All you people know me!

We would like anyone interested to have a look if they so wish, and we in no way would like to discourage anyone from leaving their membership here (in fact the general consensus there is that people will whore themselves between the two as everyone like the membership here so much, that is most of the membership except for any particular toerags.)

Cheers!

HughMcB

[Svartalf]

Thanks for the update Hugh Mc. Hyena incomin'