Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-08-2015, 02:18 AM
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 02:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(29-08-2015 12:39 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  It's really far from that picture. There are clear distinctions from slander laced conversations and those not with theists here and non-theists. The rep system more responds to behavior. People like you have a neg rep because you act like a troll from the start of your name to routine behavior. People of that nature never seem to grasp how their behavior is the cause and not their "stances" or "views." Silly things like saying I forgive you also isn't being mature or polite it's just showing either a social awkwardness or unable to grasp what people say when they talk about your behavior being trollish. Theists who even are mostly in constant disagreement in discussion with people like Tomsasia still will have positive rep because they know how to discuss things out sensibly most of the time.

No, the rep system is biased toward atheists. People like Bucky, Angle, Morondog, Chas, Girlyman, and many other can spew childish insults with impunity because you atheists do not police your own. However when a theist does it the same, all of a sudden it is a chorus of "You're not being Christlike", "You're a troll", etc...and out comes the neg rep. Since neg repped people can't rep it just allows all the atheist bad eggs to continue their bad behavior.

The rep system should be trashed because the forum is incapable of being unbiased and fair. But somehow, it seems, you have convinced yourself that it is completely fair and unbiased. Do you really think atheists as group have propensity to be unbiased and fair? No group does and it is silly to think that atheists are somehow special in this regard.

Interesting. Tell us why a theist has the second or third highest rep on the whole forum. Consider
Must be the bias.

It has been explained time and again that you have the rep you have earned.

Quit your whining. It's an atheist forum; get over it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
29-08-2015, 02:29 AM (This post was last modified: 29-08-2015 02:41 AM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 12:11 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The rep system here is Jim Crowish because it creates a disparate impact against theists.

The leader is TrainWreck at -63 and he most assuredly is an atheist. But you have a shot at beating him.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
29-08-2015, 02:39 AM (This post was last modified: 29-08-2015 05:14 AM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 02:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  No, the rep system is biased toward atheists. People like Bucky, Angle, Morondog, Chas, Girlyman, and many other can spew childish insults with impunity because you atheists do not police your own.

Atheists do not like being policed for their opinions. Or for their use of insults.

(29-08-2015 02:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The rep system should be trashed because the forum is incapable of being unbiased and fair.

Not gonna happen. Sounds like sour grapes to me.

I think Heywood has finally reached his limit and will soon go on another leave of absence. Don't worry he'll be back in a few months when he doesn't have anybody to forgive.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2015, 02:51 AM
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 02:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(29-08-2015 12:39 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  It's really far from that picture. There are clear distinctions from slander laced conversations and those not with theists here and non-theists. The rep system more responds to behavior. People like you have a neg rep because you act like a troll from the start of your name to routine behavior. People of that nature never seem to grasp how their behavior is the cause and not their "stances" or "views." Silly things like saying I forgive you also isn't being mature or polite it's just showing either a social awkwardness or unable to grasp what people say when they talk about your behavior being trollish. Theists who even are mostly in constant disagreement in discussion with people like Tomsasia still will have positive rep because they know how to discuss things out sensibly most of the time.

No, the rep system is biased toward atheists. People like Bucky, Angle, Morondog, Chas, Girlyman, and many other can spew childish insults with impunity because you atheists do not police your own. However when a theist does it the same, all of a sudden it is a chorus of "You're not being Christlike", "You're a troll", etc...and out comes the neg rep. Since neg repped people can't rep it just allows all the atheist bad eggs to continue their bad behavior.

The rep system should be trashed because the forum is incapable of being unbiased and fair. But somehow, it seems, you have convinced yourself that it is completely fair and unbiased. Do you really think atheists as group have propensity to be unbiased and fair? No group does and it is silly to think that atheists are somehow special in this regard.

So you return a comment of mine into making Black/White statements upon what you proclaim the system to be and what claim I am "convinced of."

That is the logic of why you'll get no respect of acknowledgement of honesty because you spout those comments. This is why there is no pleading for you in this stance, it's a routine of this type of thing.

oh and buddy we have had a whole ton of discussion on the rep system here. It's also gone on many times and quite a few times in your time here. Another thing that distinguishes, "theists/atheists" if they are actual forum members engaging on not just their special interest topics. Even in my case I've been on here a long time at varying degrees of consistency; though mainly I was in the science/philosophy/skeptic sections for most of my posting and my rep wasn't all so high. I began posting more around in the casual or general atheist section and it rose substantially more and more via being more spread.

And there has been guys like I&I or Res Republic who spend a lot of their time in the politics/conspiracy section though are certainly atheists. Though because they excessively feverishly take stances and bicker childishly they got neg repped. As far as other commenters getting to spew things, they also don't go on here proclaiming to have a view based on acting more righteous. Like that Protheosuers or whatever that guy the past month's name was, that constantly talked about being positive but would burst every 10 posts into an outrageous rant against another person. One is being hypocritical while the other isn't being so.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
29-08-2015, 03:10 AM
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 02:51 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(29-08-2015 02:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  No, the rep system is biased toward atheists. People like Bucky, Angle, Morondog, Chas, Girlyman, and many other can spew childish insults with impunity because you atheists do not police your own. However when a theist does it the same, all of a sudden it is a chorus of "You're not being Christlike", "You're a troll", etc...and out comes the neg rep. Since neg repped people can't rep it just allows all the atheist bad eggs to continue their bad behavior.

The rep system should be trashed because the forum is incapable of being unbiased and fair. But somehow, it seems, you have convinced yourself that it is completely fair and unbiased. Do you really think atheists as group have propensity to be unbiased and fair? No group does and it is silly to think that atheists are somehow special in this regard.

So you return a comment of mine into making Black/White statements upon what you proclaim the system to be and what claim I am "convinced of."

That is the logic of why you'll get no respect of acknowledgement of honesty because you spout those comments. This is why there is no pleading for you in this stance, it's a routine of this type of thing.

oh and buddy we have had a whole ton of discussion on the rep system here. It's also gone on many times and quite a few times in your time here. Another thing that distinguishes, "theists/atheists" if they are actual forum members engaging on not just their special interest topics. Even in my case I've been on here a long time at varying degrees of consistency; though mainly I was in the science/philosophy/skeptic sections for most of my posting and my rep wasn't all so high. I began posting more around in the casual or general atheist section and it rose substantially more and more via being more spread.

And there has been guys like I&I or Res Republic who spend a lot of their time in the politics/conspiracy section though are certainly atheists. Though because they excessively feverishly take stances and bicker childishly they got neg repped. As far as other commenters getting to spew things, they also don't go on here proclaiming to have a view based on acting more righteous. Like that Protheosuers or whatever that guy the past month's name was, that constantly talked about being positive but would burst every 10 posts into an outrageous rant against another person. One is being hypocritical while the other isn't being so.

Just because some white guys are in jail doesn't mean the criminal justice system isn't biased against blacks. Just because a black man is president doesn't mean racism is so non existent it is not a problem.

Arguing that spreading yourself out or that some atheists get bad reps isn't a compelling argument against the fact that this forum, collectively, likes atheists more than theists. Is that surprising? No and it is not surprising the rep system has Jim Crowish effect of shutting out theists. It doesn't have to be that way. Let neg repped people give rep. What are you guys afraid of?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2015, 04:35 AM
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 03:10 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(29-08-2015 02:51 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  So you return a comment of mine into making Black/White statements upon what you proclaim the system to be and what claim I am "convinced of."

That is the logic of why you'll get no respect of acknowledgement of honesty because you spout those comments. This is why there is no pleading for you in this stance, it's a routine of this type of thing.

oh and buddy we have had a whole ton of discussion on the rep system here. It's also gone on many times and quite a few times in your time here. Another thing that distinguishes, "theists/atheists" if they are actual forum members engaging on not just their special interest topics. Even in my case I've been on here a long time at varying degrees of consistency; though mainly I was in the science/philosophy/skeptic sections for most of my posting and my rep wasn't all so high. I began posting more around in the casual or general atheist section and it rose substantially more and more via being more spread.

And there has been guys like I&I or Res Republic who spend a lot of their time in the politics/conspiracy section though are certainly atheists. Though because they excessively feverishly take stances and bicker childishly they got neg repped. As far as other commenters getting to spew things, they also don't go on here proclaiming to have a view based on acting more righteous. Like that Protheosuers or whatever that guy the past month's name was, that constantly talked about being positive but would burst every 10 posts into an outrageous rant against another person. One is being hypocritical while the other isn't being so.

Just because some white guys are in jail doesn't mean the criminal justice system isn't biased against blacks. Just because a black man is president doesn't mean racism is so non existent it is not a problem.

Arguing that spreading yourself out or that some atheists get bad reps isn't a compelling argument against the fact that this forum, collectively, likes atheists more than theists. Is that surprising? No and it is not surprising the rep system has Jim Crowish effect of shutting out theists. It doesn't have to be that way. Let neg repped people give rep. What are you guys afraid of?

It is a fact.. yes, s that all you said previously, no. So what? That wasn't the case being countered at you, you can argue based on actual cases and not go to extremes.

Do you not get that? If you make rational sensible points and not make outlandish assertions based off of speculations or assumptions then you'll get different responses and different reps.

But you can't help yourself or something, because you end it off with an nice trolly blow of "what are you afraid of?" as if there is some reason you think it's a threat or fear or anything. Let's just resort to your style. Why do you hide behind a fake shell of a juvenile attitude?

(the system is that why so at least there is some type of function, otherwise there would be 0 functionality to being of a neg rep. There isn't some auto banned or timedout of posting for a certain neg spot so there otherwise is no point to having it then)

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
29-08-2015, 05:26 AM
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 03:10 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Arguing that spreading yourself out or that some atheists get bad reps isn't a compelling argument against the fact that this forum, collectively, likes atheists more than theists.

Guess what, ya fucking idiot ?
It's a god damn atheist forum. Seth set TTA up as a community for non-believers.
Sorry if that comes as news to you. Of course this forum likes atheists more than theists, ya fucking idiot. You're a passive-aggressive attention-seeking fool. And here we are yet again. Watching you whine your lips off. You enter an atheist form, talk like an idiot, and start whining.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
29-08-2015, 05:43 AM (This post was last modified: 29-08-2015 05:46 AM by Anjele.)
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 02:29 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(29-08-2015 12:11 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The rep system here is Jim Crowish because it creates a disparate impact against theists.

The leader is TrainWreck at -63 and he most assuredly is an atheist. But you have a shot at beating him.

Tempted to go pos rep Trainwreck... Consider

Blink What the hell am I saying?

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
29-08-2015, 06:40 AM
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(29-08-2015 05:43 AM)Anjele Wrote:  
(29-08-2015 02:29 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  The leader is TrainWreck at -63 and he most assuredly is an atheist. But you have a shot at beating him.

Tempted to go pos rep Trainwreck... Consider

Blink What the hell am I saying?

With Woofs gone there hasn't been a good rep rant in a while. Bitching about rep seems to be the go-to place when you have no actual arguments left.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like unfogged's post
29-08-2015, 06:56 AM
RE: Kentucky, impeach this damn bitch ... NOW
(28-08-2015 11:28 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The woman has first amendment rights, but those rights do not protect her from fulfilling her conditions of employment. She really should be fired....but lets be real....thats not going to happen.

This is the first thing you have said that has made any sense.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: