So, whose forum is this, anyway?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-07-2013, 12:34 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 12:03 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(07-07-2013 11:53 AM)Humakt Wrote:  Good of you to acknowledge that I am not at fault here or the focus your assertions. That people have read posts here and exercised there freedom to leave the community because there feelings have been hurt, unfortunate, that they feel the general community has turned against them even more so. Here I will speak only for myself, I have great sympathy for the victims in this case and also I feel sympathy for those you would wish to silence. But, if they have chosen to leave, they have made it themselves for whatever reason and they are of course within there rights to do so, if as you are contesting they have left not because they find it hard to deal with the topics under discussion, but because of deliberate harrassment, thats a completely different issue, if they have been harassed into leaving that would definatly constitute a violation and should be brought to the mods attension immediatly.

Personally again, I think the opposite it would be irresponsable of a mod to allow personal feelings interfere with there duties as Hughsie as said, he has taken some personal offence to comments, but will not let that sway him in his modding. As to what might expect to find in an atheist forum, Im not sure I even know what that means, maybe your limited idea of what we all should be discussing is the issue here however. Since when did atheist equate to scientific or newsy?

I may swing by and have a quick read to at least equate myself.

Letting thdem talk freely and openly, in naturally going to show up on search engines as search engines are primed to report on activity. So what your saying is that because they get more hits in googole we should silence them is no different to saying they should not be allowed to talk.

They haven't posted but they haven't left. They are hanging in the "breaking the silence" thread in the support section. People have been sending me PMs because they are worried about posting there with them reading.

"Letting them speak for themselves is one thing. Giving them such an enormous boost in the search engine is another. I don't want to know how many more victims result from that SEO boost in the future."

Is what I was replying to, this would be a seperate and new issue I have just been made aware of. Seems to me that PMs are an option, privacy is as much of a right as freedom of speech, but if "they" are frequenting a public forum that seems like not an issue to me. Maybe again I feel your spirit of reciprocity is somewhat lacking, as youve frequented and commented on there thread, yet seem to be implying they should stay out of your equally public one.

Also I have as per your invitation, read the thread, I see no evidence there that anyone is giving anything but support, I see no calls on you be quiet so that would seem to me to be a done deal, everybody wins.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2013, 12:53 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
Quote:That includes Deep, our site admin, who was viciously attacked when he lost his cool in that thread because - he is a victim and all the shit came bubbling to the top.

I addressed him because he made a mistake. I did not attack him viciously in my very first post addressed to him. Nor in my subsequent posts after. I attacked him (in a raised voice, but I never utter a damn insult against him) "viciously" after he claimed my goals were to demonize him.

And even after he was proven to have made the mistake, you know what he said? He certainly didn't say he was sorry to the guy. He said "Fuck fortylegs." Drinking Beverage

I could not let that shit slide. That was NOT OK. That was unacceptable behavior and you very well know it, and yet why was I one of the only ones to defend the unsuspecting victim? Why did I HAVE to nail the point home to him with that post? Why am I still viewed as the badguy and Deep as a victim of a "Vicious Attack"?

The guy accused another of something bad, and he got disproven.

He wouldn't apologize, he tried to rationalize it in the private thread (You know what the fuck I mean by that, don't you?) and then said he made a mistake, after denying it many times.

If his actions are to be defended, and if I was supposed to let go of the fact that he accused an innocent, then I don't want to be a fucking human being anymore.

If I have to be attacked for defending an innocent, so fucking be it.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Atothetheist's post
07-07-2013, 12:58 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
If nothing else, the pedo threads have made me reexamine my own feelings towards free speech and investigate it further. In the US at least, it is a complicated issue that the Supreme Court Justices have had to revisit again and again. I ain't no Supreme Court Justice, but this exclusion (i.e. speech which is not protected) to the First Amendment feels apropos here:

"Fighting words

Inflammatory words that are either injurious by themselves or might cause the hearer to immediately retaliate or breach the peace. Use of such words is not necessarily protected 'free speech' under the First Amendment. If the hearer is prosecuted for assault, claiming fighting words may establish mitigating circumstances.[8]"


As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
07-07-2013, 01:04 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
Again Ato, it's not up to you to demand an apology on behalf of anyone from anyone. Drop it, Deep's gone.

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
07-07-2013, 01:07 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 12:53 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
Quote:That includes Deep, our site admin, who was viciously attacked when he lost his cool in that thread because - he is a victim and all the shit came bubbling to the top.

I addressed him because he made a mistake. I did not attack him viciously in my very first post addressed to him. Nor in my subsequent posts after. I attacked him (in a raised voice, but I never utter a damn insult against him) "viciously" after he claimed my goals were to demonize him.

And even after he was proven to have made the mistake, you know what he said? He certainly didn't say he was sorry to the guy. He said "Fuck fortylegs." Drinking Beverage

I could not let that shit slide. That was NOT OK. That was unacceptable behavior and you very well know it, and yet why was I one of the only ones to defend the unsuspecting victim? Why did I HAVE to nail the point home to him with that post? Why am I still viewed as the badguy and Deep as a victim of a "Vicious Attack"?

The guy accused another of something bad, and he got disproven.

He wouldn't apologize, he tried to rationalize it in the private thread (You know what the fuck I mean by that, don't you?) and then said he made a mistake, after denying it many times.

If his actions are to be defended, and if I was supposed to let go of the fact that he accused an innocent, then I don't want to be a fucking human being anymore.

If I have to be attacked for defending an innocent, so fucking be it.

If a friend who has been sent to war freaks out when he hears thunder because he thinks the bombs are falling, and he hides shaking under the table, do you tell him over and over and over that he is under the wrong table and needs to apologize? Because people with suppressed traumatic events snap back in time when it happens, at the snap of a finger. And they become that person back in time during the event. The ex-soldier with PTS is physically being bombed again. he feels it with every fiber of his body, and his thought are exactly back in that time. When a sexually abused adult who has repressed the experience perceives a trigger (like the thunder for the soldier) s/he is instantly that little boy or girl, during the abuse.

Neither person is in the actual present at all. They have regressed. They are not themselves. They are not thinking thoughts that apply to the present.

[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
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
07-07-2013, 01:08 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:04 PM)Anjele Wrote:  Again Ato, it's not up to you to demand an apology on behalf of anyone from anyone. Drop it, Deep's gone.

I am not demanding it, I am noting the ABSENCE of one. Do you know the difference between the two? Because it seems you don't understand.


Dom brought it up, I was responding.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2013, 01:13 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:07 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(07-07-2013 12:53 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  I addressed him because he made a mistake. I did not attack him viciously in my very first post addressed to him. Nor in my subsequent posts after. I attacked him (in a raised voice, but I never utter a damn insult against him) "viciously" after he claimed my goals were to demonize him.

And even after he was proven to have made the mistake, you know what he said? He certainly didn't say he was sorry to the guy. He said "Fuck fortylegs." Drinking Beverage

I could not let that shit slide. That was NOT OK. That was unacceptable behavior and you very well know it, and yet why was I one of the only ones to defend the unsuspecting victim? Why did I HAVE to nail the point home to him with that post? Why am I still viewed as the badguy and Deep as a victim of a "Vicious Attack"?

The guy accused another of something bad, and he got disproven.

He wouldn't apologize, he tried to rationalize it in the private thread (You know what the fuck I mean by that, don't you?) and then said he made a mistake, after denying it many times.

If his actions are to be defended, and if I was supposed to let go of the fact that he accused an innocent, then I don't want to be a fucking human being anymore.

If I have to be attacked for defending an innocent, so fucking be it.

If a friend who has been sent to war freaks out when he hears thunder because he thinks the bombs are falling, and he hides shaking under the table, do you tell him over and over and over that he is under the wrong table and needs to apologize? Because people with suppressed traumatic events snap back in time when it happens, at the snap of a finger. And they become that person back in time during the event. The ex-soldier with PTS is physically being bombed again. he feels it with every fiber of his body, and his thought are exactly back in that time. When a sexually abused adult who has repressed the experience perceives a trigger (like the thunder for the soldier) s/he is instantly that little boy or girl, during the abuse.

Neither person is in the actual present at all. They have regressed. They are not themselves. They are not thinking thoughts that apply to the present.

You are using A FALSE example. First of all, the solider IS NOT HURTING ANYONE in your example. Now, lets say he did, would that still make it OK? Lets say the solider was brought back to a time with that thunder stike and KILLED his wife and kids because he thought he was a solider and they were the enemy.

Does he get a free pass? Does he still get punished? Drinking Beverage Yes, Yes he does. He pays for the crime by being in a mental ward.

Deep doesn't get a free pass on this. No matter what he went through, that doesn't make it ACCEPTABLE to say that to fortylegs, the abuse makes it UNDERSTANDABLE.


Do you UNDERSTAND the difference between the two words?

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
07-07-2013, 01:16 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 12:58 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  If nothing else, the pedo threads have made me reexamine my own feelings towards free speech and investigate it further. In the US at least, it is a complicated issue that the Supreme Court Justices have had to revisit again and again. I ain't no Supreme Court Justice, but this exclusion (i.e. speech which is not protected) to the First Amendment feels apropos here:

"Fighting words

Inflammatory words that are either injurious by themselves or might cause the hearer to immediately retaliate or breach the peace. Use of such words is not necessarily protected 'free speech' under the First Amendment. If the hearer is prosecuted for assault, claiming fighting words may establish mitigating circumstances.[8]"


I choose to respond thusly.
"To hell with your courts! I know what justice is!" - Jack White Tongue

Seriously though, I don't think 'fightin' words' should ever be restricted, you bearded mank twat. You hear that? You no good, stinky, diaper-wearin', nutsack suckin', beer-gut havin', white trash. Take your halitosis laden words elsewhere, you ain't welcome here no more! Wink

We ain't arguing US Amendments as interpreted by some American court justices. We are arguing what speech is protected by the TTA's rules. As far as I can tell, all is fair 'cept threats.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dark Light's post
07-07-2013, 01:17 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
I sometimes wonder if we remember how to be human. I don't think we do.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hobbitgirl's post
07-07-2013, 01:17 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:13 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(07-07-2013 01:07 PM)Dom Wrote:  If a friend who has been sent to war freaks out when he hears thunder because he thinks the bombs are falling, and he hides shaking under the table, do you tell him over and over and over that he is under the wrong table and needs to apologize? Because people with suppressed traumatic events snap back in time when it happens, at the snap of a finger. And they become that person back in time during the event. The ex-soldier with PTS is physically being bombed again. he feels it with every fiber of his body, and his thought are exactly back in that time. When a sexually abused adult who has repressed the experience perceives a trigger (like the thunder for the soldier) s/he is instantly that little boy or girl, during the abuse.

Neither person is in the actual present at all. They have regressed. They are not themselves. They are not thinking thoughts that apply to the present.

You are using A FALSE example. First of all, the solider IS NOT HURTING ANYONE in your example. Now, lets say he did, would that still make it OK? Lets say the solider was brought back to a time with that thunder stike and KILLED his wife and kids because he thought he was a solider and they were the enemy.

Does he get a free pass? Does he still get punished? Drinking Beverage Yes, Yes he does. He pays for the crime by being in a mental ward.

Deep doesn't get a free pass on this. No matter what he went through, that doesn't make it ACCEPTABLE to say that to fortylegs, the abuse makes it UNDERSTANDABLE.


Do you UNDERSTAND the difference between the two words?

I give up. I am done talking with you on this topic. Other topics, fine. Deep wasn't even there. You missed the entire point. And now, please don't address me on the topic of abuse anymore. I find your comments very upsetting. All you want to do is win an argument, and you don't want to understand that you do not at all understand what a repressed traumatic event is and does. Yours is not repressed, you remember just fine, it's not the same.

[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
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: