A message from Seth
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-07-2013, 01:45 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 01:10 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Seth had no mission statement for this forum nor did he want one. He handed the forum over to Stark and Stark made the forum, its rules, and set it up. It was Stark that advocated unlimited free speech. He had the backing of Seth.

Now, Seth has stepped in because of this ordeal. We now have clear-cut instructions on how to deal with this issue; thus, it's clear that there is not unlimited free speech.

So, because Seth didn't have a mission statement at the time this forum was created and approved of unlimited free speech, he can't change his mind to say some subjects (really only one topic) should be off limits?

As atheists I think we have enough stigma assigned to us.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
08-07-2013, 01:49 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 01:45 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(08-07-2013 01:10 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Seth had no mission statement for this forum nor did he want one. He handed the forum over to Stark and Stark made the forum, its rules, and set it up. It was Stark that advocated unlimited free speech. He had the backing of Seth.

Now, Seth has stepped in because of this ordeal. We now have clear-cut instructions on how to deal with this issue; thus, it's clear that there is not unlimited free speech.

So, because Seth didn't have a mission statement at the time this forum was created and approved of unlimited free speech, he can't change his mind to say some subjects (really only one topic) should be off limits?

As atheists I think we have enough stigma assigned to us.

I think you misread what I wrote.

That's exactly what I said.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
08-07-2013, 01:49 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 01:49 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(08-07-2013 01:45 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  So, because Seth didn't have a mission statement at the time this forum was created and approved of unlimited free speech, he can't change his mind to say some subjects (really only one topic) should be off limits?

As atheists I think we have enough stigma assigned to us.

I think you misread what I wrote.

That's exactly what I said.

Yes it is, you guys agree.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
08-07-2013, 01:50 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 01:44 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(08-07-2013 01:36 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  What? I didn't say ban, even with regards to the forum I suggested people go to and see. They haven't banned me on there for breaking these rules. But ask any of the atheists on there if people willingly leave over that kind of BS over-moderation and they will say yes.

I think more people leave because the moderation is made up of Christians biased in favor of Christians.

But if we moderate as atheists in favor of atheists, then no theists would stick around for a conversation at all. No

And more moderation still means more moderation. I've seen them remove posts from threads on that site over language used by other theists, including banning a theist for starting a thread discussing doubts. Making a lot of rules and subforums with their own rules, and subforums where only people of a particular category can post, does 1 of 2 things well. It either gives plausible reason for removing content deemed inappropriate to the discussion (which is subjective in nearly all cases) or discourages honest discussion since some people will avoid posting since they know it will just get removed. Leaving a big circle-jerk community.

Pedophilia is illegal and discussing it necessarily means that at some point somewhere along the way, someone is going to make a dick statement. In a discussion on nearly any other topic, I'd just say to grow a thicker skin. But this is not so trivial a topic...

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
08-07-2013, 01:54 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 08:09 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(08-07-2013 08:04 AM)Ferdinand Wrote:  LET US RETURN TO REJOICING AND LOVE-MAKING Weeping

Sorry, no joining the orgies until you're 18 Ferdy.

We'll tell you all about how awesome it was when we've finished though. Smile

Yo, I'd be legal in England. I think I deserve an exception.

The only exception.

Meaning Stevie gets no exceptions. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Ferdinand's post
08-07-2013, 01:55 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 01:50 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(08-07-2013 01:44 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  I think more people leave because the moderation is made up of Christians biased in favor of Christians.

But if we moderate as atheists in favor of atheists, then no theists would stick around for a conversation at all. No

And more moderation still means more moderation. I've seen them remove posts from threads on that site over language used by other theists, including banning a theist for starting a thread discussing doubts. Making a lot of rules and subforums with their own rules, and subforums where only people of a particular category can post, does 1 of 2 things well. It either gives plausible reason for removing content deemed inappropriate to the discussion (which is subjective in nearly all cases) or discourages honest discussion since some people will avoid posting since they know it will just get removed. Leaving a big circle-jerk community.

Pedophilia is illegal and discussing it necessarily means that at some point somewhere along the way, someone is going to make a dick statement. In a discussion on nearly any other topic, I'd just say to grow a thicker skin. But this is not so trivial a topic...

What makes you think there is no such thing as mild moderation? Intelligent moderation? Why would it have to equal a lion set free in a room of puppies?

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
08-07-2013, 01:57 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 01:54 PM)Ferdinand Wrote:  
(08-07-2013 08:09 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  Sorry, no joining the orgies until you're 18 Ferdy.

We'll tell you all about how awesome it was when we've finished though. Smile

Yo, I'd be legal in England. I think I deserve an exception.

The only exception.

Meaning Stevie gets no exceptions. Tongue

This is a good point actually (I say actually because I am not sure if it was intended).

I assume that the legality of things like age of consent is based off of the US laws, but not all are in the US. This kind of adds a bit of a conundrum. Is there a way of actually generating a moral basis for no discussion on certain topics?

Or is that trumped by Seth? (I don't disagree with that because he who hath the money to make it go, hath the power to make it stop)

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
08-07-2013, 01:58 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 01:50 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  But if we moderate as atheists in favor of atheists, then no theists would stick around for a conversation at all. No

I think we have proven that we are impartial to what creed our administration is. Right, Kingschosen?

(08-07-2013 01:50 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  And more moderation still means more moderation. I've seen them remove posts from threads on that site over language used by other theists, including banning a theist for starting a thread discussing doubts. Making a lot of rules and subforums with their own rules, and subforums where only people of a particular category can post, does 1 of 2 things well. It either gives plausible reason for removing content deemed inappropriate to the discussion (which is subjective in nearly all cases) or discourages honest discussion since some people will avoid posting since they know it will just get removed. Leaving a big circle-jerk community.

I am not arguing for the creation of more sub forums or strict rules concerning the content of threads. I simply made an observation, which I think I am entitled to sharing since I've been on that forum for three years.

(08-07-2013 01:50 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Pedophilia is illegal and discussing it necessarily means that at some point somewhere along the way, someone is going to make a dick statement. In a discussion on nearly any other topic, I'd just say to grow a thicker skin. But this is not so trivial a topic...

Same here, which is why I have not made any formal complaints about the content of any thread.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
08-07-2013, 01:59 PM
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 01:49 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(08-07-2013 01:45 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  So, because Seth didn't have a mission statement at the time this forum was created and approved of unlimited free speech, he can't change his mind to say some subjects (really only one topic) should be off limits?

As atheists I think we have enough stigma assigned to us.

I think you misread what I wrote.

That's exactly what I said.

No, I didn't misread it. And I agree. Smile


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
08-07-2013, 02:00 PM (This post was last modified: 08-07-2013 06:01 PM by Atothetheist.)
RE: A message from Seth
(08-07-2013 05:06 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-07-2013 03:56 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  I said it a place of discussion. I read Seth's post, which is why my RESPONSE WAS MY OPINION, Chas. I stated it frequently that it was my opinion. It goal is to support ATHEISTS/AGNOSTICS/FREE THINKERS. It is here to support them on atheism/agnosticism/Free Thinking because that is the majority. Its goal is NOT to help people with pyschological problems. It is not here to stop suicides, it is not here to prevent PTSD, it is not here to appease everyone.

That is how I took Seth's statement.

I recongnize this is private poperty, and shit can be done as it is wished, however it is my opinion that the issue, if brought up in a manner that wasn't intentionally harmful, should be discussed.

You recognize opinion, right? I recognize the fact we can't talk about it, and I accept it as a rule, why? Because I recongnize private property.


However there is no rule to say that I can't critizise or voice my disagreement on a rule, without breaking them is there?

You said: "The goal of the forum is not to help people. It is to discuss issues."

That is in contradiction to what Seth said.

Ok, if you want me to admit I had a poor choice of words, I certainly will. I admit that this forum is meant to "help" people, but it isn't meant to deal with non-religious psychological problems, and it isn't meant to deal with drug abuse, PTSD, medical issues, etc. this forum is meant to "support" the atheist/agnostic/free thinker on issues where atheism/agnosticism/ free thinking are INVOLVED.

If you want to nitpick my statement, go ahead. If you think that because I worded it badly, that my statement was wrong, think again. My interpretation was that, the only help that TTA forum is qualified to give is DEALING with atheist/agnostic/ free thinking issues, and that's why I don't consider this forum's main goal to "help."

If you wanna bag on me for my opinion that I thought this decision was a bad one, you have the right to do so. However, I do have the right to still dislike the decision and wish that the integrity of this forum wasn't compromised.

Now, that being said, do you think I am going to leave or even criticize this forum for making the decision that I thought was unnecessary? No. I am staying because I more than understand that while this LIMITS free speech, this does not REMOVE free speech.

It is plainly my opinion that it shouldn't have been limited. That was my stand. If you disagree with me, fine.

Also, the act of abusing a child sexually, Seth, IS NOT pedophilia. It is child molestation. I just wanted to say that if there is at least one thing I've learned is that there is a difference.

So, in conclusion: I understand the decision, I understand the reason behind it, I understand that he could do it, and I understand that the rule will not be changed. However, you have to understand that I CAN still disagree with the ruling, I still have the right to.

I also understand that people disagree with me, and are happy that you can now just "avoid" the topic. However I find that the way you some guys acted to get what you wanted was childish, manipulative, and completely disgusting. The actions of many here left me with a bad taste in my mouth, and I honestly don't know if that is because Emotions are supposedly fucking king in this game, when I believe rationality should be, or because I got called a lot of things that others ended up being.

So, while everyone can breathe a sigh of relief over this issue, I am still left with the childish actions of the users involved, and that will definitely make me look and talk to them differently.

Also, I find it more than funny how people think I don't know that there is some semblance of free speech, however there is one thing you can't deny, it has been limited. We can no longer talk about an issue we could otherwise discuss, preferably in a civil manner (Dodgy ). We have denied ourselves the right to hear a perspective that makes us think, and while some of you may be OK with that, I find it unfortunate. I was learning something there, I learned that there was a difference, and it opened my eyes that people STRUGGLE with that.

I don't know, maybe I'm the only one that wanted to discuss on the merits of the OP, but again, its done, its over with, and there is no point to keep talking about this issue.

Carry on.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 4 users Like Atothetheist's post
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: