StevOr has received threats to disclose his identity if he doesn’t leave Pharyngula permanently. You may not like him, you may oppose what he says, but anyone who pulls that kind of stunt will find themselves banned.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Thankyou PZ.
Also, this person demands that he leave “freethoughtblogs, scienceblogs, badastronomy,
skepchick, and all related sites”…and the little coward is doing it all through an email anonymizer.
For what its worth I’ll certainly admit that in the past I have said some things I now no longer believe and aren’t proud of and suspect this is probably true of just about everybody.
I’m the first person to admit that I’m fallible, sometimes mistaken and have said a few silly things and been carried away when drunk and overtired and will try to do better in future.
Whoa!
F* that.
StevoR, I’m with you against this campain. I support the not-so-benign dictatorship of our tentacular overlord and his right to ban folk as he sees fit from his personal blog – though it may be on a larger network. Beyond that, we like the community and participate, or we don’t.
I appreciate why anonymity may be necessary. In a day and age where potential employers (or current ones) believe that they should have access to all of our online presences, anonymity (at least nominal anonymity) is a part of our community. Luckily for me, stay at home parent and part time sex slave are not “normal” jobs.
Thankyou Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden.
What do people think of John Morales suggestion here :
https://proxy.freethought.online/pharyngula/2012/12/05/thunderdome-11/comment-page-2/#comment-509802
Is that okay / a good idea?
@StevoR #3 –
No excuse. It’s PZ’s banhammer to use.
As for the specifics, I’d much rather see someone f* up and then analyze things and come to new conclusions (demonstrate the capacity to learn) than agree with everything I say in a way that doesn’t feel genuine or thoughtful.
This place isn’t primarily a place to change minds – it’s primarily a place for like-minded folk to hang together. However the community values honesty and tolerates honest dissent, which makes your earlier statements (which I don’t remember) not grounds for asking someone to leave. But then you have to consider that although this isn’t primarily a place to change minds, it is that too.
Feel good about your thoughtful growth. Stick around, you might help someone else grow, too.
Not cool in the least.
So, not possible to figure out who?
Bad acting. Well done, PZ.
Some internet tough-guy wants to “out” a commenter while hiding behind an anonymizer? Some people truly have no shame.
Woah. I have little use for StevoR, but this beyond the pale and utterly unacceptable.
As much as I dislike StevoR, the person who has made the threats should be banned.
We all make a big deal about revealing a person’s real identity, Easy to do when that person is liked. That same goes for those who goes on repulsive rants.
Unless the person is making threats to harm or kill others, we should respect privacy (As difficult as that actually is now.)
So, yes, I would support the idea of banning the person threatening StevoR.
(StevoR, don’t you dare thank me. I still think you are a despicable racist. But a principle should be upheld.)
Wow, count me in also as a fuck that, totally unacceptable. What the hell is wrong with people?
You are wrong about that point. Not sure how I can prove it to you – but you are. I don’t judge people by thecolour of their skins and think the whole notion of “race” is utter nonsnese and harmful.
I totally reject and condemn racism and I’d ask that you understand that and don’t call me erroneous and hurtful names here please.
As I’ve noted before I agree with the majority views here about 80% of the time to 20% and enjoy and try to make positive contributions here and elsewhere.
Are we supposed to thank the anonymizered person for protecting us against StevoR?
We all have the ability to hushfile or scroll down.
Want to fucking prove that you are not racist?
Disown the idea of a preemptive strike on Iran.
I will not be commenting anymore about this or with you.
StevoR, just this once, show some sense and spare us your claims of not being a disgusting racist.
If this is back to StevoR bombing Iran, let’s take it back to [Thundedome].
SteveOr is a racist fuckwit–or, if you prefer, Steve, a fuckwit with a long history of saying things that cannot be construed as anything but racist by most reasonable people–but this is unacceptable.
Threatening to out people like that is cowardly to the max. I fully support a bannination. What kind of douchecanoe does this shit?
What the hell is this, even.
StevoR, for what it’s worth, you seem to be promoting something called color-blind racism, which I disagree with entirely, but whatever. Threatening to out people is cowardly and immature.
StevoR, on this particular issue you have my sympathy and support. (Even though I am still very much at odds with too many of your ideas – which are often condescending and bigotted.)
I feel sad that this shit can happen on Pharyngula. It is so out of keeping with what (pretty much) the entire horde stands for.
Wow, at first i thought StevoR was a a blogger on FTB, but now this seems even more bizarre, a anonymous person demands that a commenter (who could come back under a different name) leave FTB, as well as ” scienceblogs, badastronomy,skepchick, and all related sites”. The guy making the threats isn’t too bright, because as above mentioned StevoR could return as Stevob and deny being StevoR, and Mister anon wouldn’t be any the wiser.
Completely and utterly inacceptable.
Those rules don’t only apply for people we like.
I too find you to quite often espouse racist and poorly thought out arguments. You might reread many of your comments and think about why so many people ” misunderstand, mischaracterize” your views, but that is unacceptable. Kind of like carpet bombing is it not?
My opinion about StevoR aside, threatening to disclose his name is a unacceptable.
What the ever-lovin’ fuck?
StevoR,
I have often disagreed with you in the past, and regarding racism/islamophobia we’ll probably continue to disagree. That is, however, of no matter at this moment. These threats against you are horrible and unacceptable.
I really never understand such threats and i have to question the mentality of those who make them. Do they really feel as if they have won the argument by strongarming the opponent into not commenting.
Not sure I have ever read one of Steve’s comments but these threats do noone any favours and diminish all of us. Hats off for your unequivocal and unqualified condemnation PZ.
Jim
Im not sure any real thought goes behind such threats, its a petty childish and pathetic response. It is also often a sign that the person making the threats is losing. Badly.
Threatening to out an anonymous commenter who is not making threats to harm anyone is completely unacceptable. I am very glad that PZ would ban anyone who did this.
@ opposablethumbs
Banning is ineffective, a banned person could make a new email address and an account and be back posting the next morning. The nature of the internet ,the comment sections of blogs and forums mean that banning and blocking are both short term and unfortunately ineffective.
If you read what I wrote, chigau, you would not have to said this.
I did have a legitimate reason to bring that up though, StevoR is claiming that he disowns much of the crap he has spewed. It could be true. Taking back the idea that Iran must be preemptively bomb in order to prevent the spread of Islamic thought is but one way.
But it does seem that a thread that is dedicated to StevoR is the right place to talk about that.
Also, as I said before, I really do not want to get involved in this. But I also do not like what you wrote.
De-lurking here to mention that while I’ve often read StevoR making racist (xenophobic if you prefer?) sounding arguments and what I think are often poorly informed geopolitics arguments, here a non-exhaustive list of what I don’t remember hearing form him ever:
– Never threatened to “out” someone private information.
– Never threatened someone with harassment or violence.
– Never even wished harm, even rhetorically, on any other commenter (might consider extending that courtesy to foreign civilians?).
I’m actually a little baffled (and saddened) that it happened here. I hope the coward is found and banned.
StevoR, sorry if it feels like I took a few cheap shots at you up there. I want to confirm that I’m 100% behind you on this issue.
Absolutely agree with most posters here. While I may disagree with him on some issues (most commonly when he sides with slc1 against the majority of FtB posters) StevoR has done nothing that would make “outing” him justified.
I must commend him for actually making me laugh out loud when he posted that if he were American he would vote for Newt Gingrich because he “promised” to build moon bases…
As to the racism, I’m not sure what exactly that’s referring to. He has (IIRC as MTU on Bad Astronomy – a connection he himself has declared so this is no outing) asserted that “western culture” has shown itself to be superior to every other culture (which merely showed historical ignorance as was pointed out to him at the time).
SteveOr: While I don’t care much for views you’ve held in the past, and probably will continue on occasion to verbally bash you for being a howling bigot, this is totally unacceptable.
I hope the person behind this see the error of their ways and mend them. Hiding from the shame in a decrepit location isn’t inappropriate either. This is not how we treat people we disagree with, even when they come across as insufferable bigots.
Getting rid of posters who disagree with the collective is a crap idea however it’s done. We have issues that are the subject of disagreement anyway, but even on topics where the vast majority of us are in agreement, without a few dissenting voices we won’t be able to roll out all the concurring arguments. Without that disagreement, we really will become the echo chamber seen is some people’s prejudices. In short, not only is the anonymous fool wrong for using despicable methods, he/she is also wrong in even wanting SteveoR gone in the first place.
There are different kinds of disagreement. You must have noticed the dungeon here.
This idea of outing people is cowardly. Thanks for standing on principle, PZ, and bringing it to light. FFS!
StevoR,
I certainly don’t agree with you about everything, but I’ll be double fucked and thrice on Sundays if I support your outing, even implicitly by my silence.
Outing people for differing views on a blog is wrong. Period.
What’s that saying often (mis)attributed to Voltaire?
“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
Whatever StevoR has written, it doesn’t merit his “outing”.
Disgusting.
Louis
Oh and as for your #6 StevoR, personally, even though I lack the skills to do it, I’d LOVE to know which pissant was behind this (their nym only, obviously) and have them permanently banned. I don’t like malice of this type at all.
Louis
Beatrice:
Nobody gets put in the dungeon for disagreeing. It’s the other behaviours that land them there.
Yeah, for example rampant racism in their “little disagreement”. Look, I know I’m going to be the asshole here, but, while whoever wants to out StevoR is absolutely wrong and should be banned, I stand by my opinion that a lot is tolerated from StevoR that got people into the Dungeon.
I actually think that StevoR should have gotten into the Dungeon a long time ago for spewing his racist crap, but that is not my decision to make. Nonetheless, threatening to out him is just not on, for the reasons listed by kassad.
So whoever is doing this, please stop.
Despite my curiosity over this email I doubt the headers would provide any useful information.
Though on the other hand, anyone who writes “ur” in an email may not be an expert at komputer.
I don’t know what options there are for breaking through such anonymizing services, but I hope it can be done, so whoever sent that threat can be kicked to the curb. That kind of behavior is way out of line.
@ pelamun
Where ya been?
(What was TZT has been turned into a den of depravity. But at least the beers are cold.)
StevoR #3
“…said a few silly things and been carried away when drunk and overtired”
Oh well, that’s alright then.
I agree with many previous comments, outing a pseudonym is despicable and should not be tolerated.
I have never engaged StevoR in discussion because I consider him a xenophobe who advocates the death of millions of people because of his fear and hatred of their leadership. I feel I have nothing to say to him nor him to me. Recently I was bemoaning the lost of killfile due to the changes in FTB formats. Fortunately killfile is back and StevoR is once more killfiled.
Just one more who heartily dislikes StevoR, but agrees that threats to out his RL identity are absolutely wrong.
This is a public service announcement.
Dear fucktards,
Iran is a nation, not a race. Declaring that you wish to bomb a nation may be sadistic, bad policy, impractical et cetera, but it is not “racist” by any reasonable standards.
That is all.
*Unless of course, you consider “fucktards” to be a racist, then this statement is therefore fucking racist as hell.
[meta]
I see that the poster using the ‘nym “Skeptic Dude” lives up to the heuristic relating to nominative irony.
Amazing, I can’t believe none of the people here have noticed that before. In fact it seems almost astoundingly improbable!
Maybe there is a more likely explanation for all these accusations of racism? More likely, at least, than “we don’t know the difference between ethnicity and geography”.
On second thought… naaaah. You’ve clearly considered this thoroughly and have come to the best conclusion.
Dear shitlord,
Per your enquiry:
Racist? No.
Ableist? Yes.
I suppose I should weigh in also. I don’t give two shits for StevoR’s opinions, but I neither know nor care who is really behind the ‘nym, nor would I reveal such information if I knew it. Further, allow me to join with the others commenters here in saying that anyone who would do so is beyond the pale.
I’m off.
Someone needs to step away from Pharyngula for a while if this is what they are coming up with.
Aren’t people with terrible opinions an integral part of Pharyngula? Aren’t they part of the reason many come here? To argue, expose and fight their disgusting ideas?
Never thought SteveoR should be banned for saying the stupid shit he says. I think banning should be reserved for spamming harrassers who offer nothing to the conversation. While steveor’s opinions are pretty disgusting, at least they are opinions he tries to defend and not just spam you with them. He generates conversation where better ideas are offered and supported.
Granted it can get tiring doing it over and over, but there is benefit to it imho.
The person who sent this email is another story. Assuming it’s real.
I saw this just before I went to bed. I’ve been hoping StevOR would have the honesty and integrity to understand his bigotry is not welcome here, and he should voluntarily leave. He is in my killfile, which is turned on every time he posts. Nothing he says is of any interest to me due to his islamophobic bigotry.
That said, whoever is threatening to out his identity should have the decency to leave on their own. That behavior has no place at Pharyngula.
Follow-up PSA.
Compromising a posters anonymity is unconscionable. And racist.
Racist no. But then, anybody with skeptical in their nym isn’t using real skepticism. Typically they have their own problems.
Skeptic Dude being a useless little shit again. I guess some things never change.
@16. Janine :
I will certainly say that I disown a preemptive attack on Iran in almost all circumstances with the exception of the very worst case hypothetical situation(s) where Iran is imminently about to attack another nation especially with nuclear or other WMDs and no other better way can be found. In such a case war and millions of innocent casualities are already inevitable. This may be a very far fetched and unliekly scenario but i don’t think it should be 100% dismissed or overlooked.
If Iran is willing to live peacefully even in a cold peace with its neighbours and the rest of the world then I would condemn any military strike against it – and the same even applies to Gaza.
My preference would be for peace and mutual understanding among everyone of course and no avoidable wars at all.
Also FWIW, I count Japan and India as among the modern Western nations.
@21. Miriam, Professional Fun-Ruiner :
Could you please elaborate on what is meant by that “colour blind racism” thing or provide linkage?
I certainly don’t believe in treating people differently on the basis of their skin colour or “race” and think racism is frankly a really stupid belief.
I don’t judge all Muslims as evil either only the Jihadists because of their beliefs and actions.
I think Westerners are priviledged to be born Westerners with a set of opportunities and understandings that are more egalitarian, more logical,scientific and have a far better quality of life in general than other cultures. I think I am very lucky to be born Australian and think our Western values are a bad thing. Thought that was axiomatic really?
That’s
“.. think our Western values are NOT a bad thing.”
Natch.
Forget it. I don’t want to waste good mood on arguing with (or about) StevoR and his terminal stupidity.
Have fun those who like it.
I do however find it interesting that one of the biggest “poor me” complainers on Pharyngula who makes constant ridiculous (and a huge majority mostly) unsubstantiated claims of bullying which are consistently and rightly dismissed and one of the most prolific posters of nonsense and defending said nonsense now has his very own thread for people to discuss specifically him ad nauseam.
If this is indeed the case, then you have certainly changed your tune since I was last involved in a discussion with you, as I remember you being utterly baffled by some of us having muslim friends, while being perfectly ok with people being friends with christians, hindu, sikh, whatever. Something that-quite clearly-reeks of Islamophobia. If it is indeed the case that you don’t have a problem with moderate muslims (or at least not more of a problem than you would have with moderate christians or other religions), than you have changed, and that is a good thing.
You do realize that most racists wouldn’t call themselves racist, right? You can be racist, say racist shit, without going about lierally saying ‘I hate blacks/asians/latinos/whatever. You do realize this, right?
I think asking him to disown a pre-emptive strike on Iran was asked in too broad a manner. It’s easy to see where he is going with his answer. But even if he had reevaluated his stance, this doesn’t suddenly make all his past statements go away.
Also, to call Japan a western nation is so offensive on so many levels, I don’t even…
Rev. BigDumbChimp,
bad opinions are an integral part of Pharyngula, but posters with racist or sexist ideas have been banned before. But as I said this is not my decision to make, though I usually try to just ignore him.
And I’ll just go back to doing so.
This is a public service announcement.
Dear pedants,
Bigotry might be racism, but need not be. Declaring that someone is racist when they are being bigoted in a possibly non-racial manner is technically wrong, but not hard to parse correctly if you’re trying*. This statement has been made at least a half-a-dozen times just be me on this blog, and comes up every time someone is under the bizarre assumption they appear intelligent by splitting hairs between racist and bigoted.
That is all.
*If understanding that a dislike of Middle Eastern Muslims by (presumably) white westerners might just be racially motivated is honestly too difficult for you, just substitute the word ‘bigoted’ for ‘racist’ and you’ll feel all warm and happy inside.
Especially after having a large chunk of the regulars telling xim to “leave” in no uncertain terms.
Also Theo, I’ll send you an email…
You say that with one breath, and with the other paint Palestinians as synonymous with terrorists, advocating carpet-bombing and genocide against them. Fuck you. Fuck you in the eye with a thousand burning fucksticks.
How fucking convenient! If you deem a nation advanced enough, it’s “Western”, so any non-Western nations are backward by default! You’re a piece of work.
Delivery usually matters in those cases, but you are correct.
Oh good, we get a thread specifically dedicated to StevoR’s “why are they all so mean to me?” complex, with PZ going out of his way to not criticize the shit that StevoR has said. I mean, “[We] may not like him, [we] may oppose what he says” is all that has to be said on the matter. We don’t need to bother going over the fact that StevoR advocates borderline genocidal tactics against non-Israel Middle Eastern countries while working himself into a lather about how barbaric Islam is. We don’t need to bother mentioning how the dislike and opposition is justified. We don’t need to bother mentioning how he is to Islam as creationists are to evolution, as MRAs are to feminism, and how his “opinions” are at least as vile as anything said by MRAs. Outing StevoR would be horrible and the person claiming they would do so is stepping over a line, but I find it galling that a post specifically about StevoR would ignore or whitewash the kinds of shit he actually says.
Threats? That isn’t cool.
Huh. Is this the same SteveoR who said the following on my blog?
Racist? Maybe not. Islamophobic? Abso-freakin’-lutely.
As much as I may despise StevoR’s genocidal ranting, the idea of outing a commenter who has made no threats of violence against others (though he may have ideas about it) is never acceptable.
Groupthink Groupthink Groupthink!!!!
My dad always told me that two wrongs don’t make a right.
StevoR has been wrong, dead wrong, in his assessment of Islam, specifically Iran, as an existential threat to the Western world. His bigotry has been on display. Repeatedly.
Whoever has been threatening to out StevoR is wrong, dead wrong, in hir assessment of the proper way to deal with disagreements, even extreme disagreements, on Pharyngula.
Two wrongs. No right at all.
You know, we keep on saying how wrong this threat maker is. But maybe whoever sent that e-mail sent it while they were drunk or overtired? From what I’ve been led to believe, that should exonerate them from whatever awful things they’ve said, even if they can’t actually show that they think anything different when they are rested and sober.
StevoR? meh
threatening to out StevoR is a weaselly dirtbag idea that leaves me with no respect for whoever made that threat
blah blah blah outing is wrong but seriously fuck this PZ. This bullshit is way too long now. Regardless of how wrong outing is a place that puts up with his racism and shit for so long is bjust not one I feel welcomed to. Since were all blowing his martyr complex I’ll give him a gift and leave. fuck this.
Janine #33
Back at #18 when I suggested taking the StevoR-bombing-Iran stuff to Thunderdome I thought the this thread was going to about ‘outing’ people on the internet, not specifically about StevoR.
I should have known better.
Sounds to me more like splitting hairs between xenophobe and racist, and based upon everybody’s comments in this thread, StevoR appears to be the former rather than the latter. So why is Skeptic Dude being a “useless little shit” for pointing this out?
I have to agree with those who wonder why StevoR has never been banned. Some MRAs, creationists and other bigots have been banned for spouting crap less offensive and bigotted than the kind of things StevoR spouts ‘when he’s drunk’. (StevoR, if you know you’re an asshole when you’re drunk, stay the fuck away from a computer when drinking)
That said, this is PZ’s blog, and ultimately it’s up to him.
I have to say that I find it odd that this has become a thread about SteveoR. It really should not be. His views on the issue of Muslims are absurd, impractical, cowardly and wrongheaded. Period. No more need be said.
No, this thread is about whether it is EVER proper to out someone’s RL identity on the Intertubes when they have made no threats themselves. It isn’t. Ever. Period. No more need be said.
Ing #82 wrote:
You seem to have a different definition of “putting up with” than I do. StevoR is challenged all the time. And from what I can tell he welcomes disagreement, in the classic sense of debate. He wants to make an argument, not simply argue. That’s probably why he stays.
I hope you change your mind and stay, too. Pharyngula would be poorer without you.
for fuck sake it is not when he’s drunk.
Pentatomid,
Read here:
https://proxy.freethought.online/pharyngula/2011/08/01/pharyngula-standards-practices/
SteveoR has not been banned because he has not committed a banworthy offence. He’s come close a couple of times–derailing a thread or two with paranoid drivel. It would also be worth a tour of the Dungeon. The denizens thereof are not just first-rate douchebags, they also have no sense of self preservation. They keep pushing and eventually tunnel into the dungeon by sheer force of will. SteveoR has stopped short so far. But, as I said, this isn’t about SteveoR
Ing, I know it’s not when he’s drunk. See the little quotation marks around the word drunk in my comment? I meant that StevoR all too often uses ‘I’m drunk’ or ‘I’m tired’ as an excuse. StevoR is a bigotted asshole. Trust me, I am not defending his bigotry or making apologies for it.
@sastra
That is rank bullshit stevor spends half his squeels complaining that people respond to him for one. For another after hearing so often how unfair it is here for women to treat earnest veiws of their inferiority with respect the idea that Stevors disvgusting antihumanism gets a pass because he’s arguing for it sincerely is hypocrisy and shows the underlying problem that the skeptic subculture just doesn’t see some people as human
if Stevors rants had been about Jews women gays or blacks or other minorities would we really be saying “well he hasn’t broken the rules”. I am skeptical.
I tend to think StevoR is here to evangelicalize his bigotry. Look at his behavior and way of presenting arguments, and trying to ingratiate xiself into the community here. Almost exactly how one would expect a missionary to behave. Especially xis insistence we have a lot to learn from xim, when conclusive evidence to the contrary says xe has nothing cogent to say.
@Ing #91:
If the first part of my comment is wrong — then the second part is even more right.
a_ray_in_dilbert_space,
I have to agree with Ing @92 on that one.
Not even Violentacrez?
Treating people humanely and respecting their rights isn’t something that should be up for “debate.” There is no argument to make about that. Leaving that open for discussion doesn’t make you seem “skeptical” or “non-dogmatic;” it only makes it seem like treating them inhumanely or denying their rights is a valid ethical position, which it isn’t.
If so, that’s a poor excuse. PZ could ban people from his blog simply for being bigoted shitheads, or for whatever reason. That’s just as “banworthy” as things which are stated explicitly on his dungeon page.
Just a note that I’m supporting Ing here
So people outraged and disgusted at an attempt to out a known bigot (StevoR) and/or not calling for said bigot’s (StevoR’s) banning are what? Closet islamophobes themselves? Colour *ME* exceedingly sceptical of the innocence of that implication.
Perhaps some of us recognise two separate issues when we see them.
SteveoR has argued some amazingly bigoted and wrongheaded shit here, whether he should be banned or not (IMO, that due date has long passed, but hey, I’m not in charge, at least he tries to argue his case, which is better than 99% of the bigots) is entirely orthogonal to whether or not some other shithead should out him.
Just because we don’t like his views…more than that…just because his views are abhorrent, bigoted and wrong, it doesn’t follow that he (or anyone) is fair game for anything. He’s not a public figure masquerading as something he’s not (AFAICT), nor a public business excluding people, he has not tied his views to his real name, it’s not for us to do it either. No one has any idea if he translates what he writes here into “real” life or not (I suspect he does, it would be the natural consequence) , no one has any idea if he’s a troll or not, in fact know one, apart from the perpetrator of this threat, knows anything about him I’m guessing. And that’s the way it should stay.
His crime is being unpleasantly and bigotedly wrong on the internet. Ban him by all means for that, make this safe space a little safer for a wider variety of people, but don’t confuse condemnation of someone trying to do him material harm for that crime for support for that crime. That’s just fucking daft.
I can’t speak for anyone but me, but ING, please stay, but also recognise that at least for some of us your #92 is way far of the mark.
Louis
Pentatoid and Ing,
Tour the dungeons. I think PZ has been extremely judicious in consigning idjits to the dungeons for behavior, not content. What unites the denizens of the dungeon is less any ideological thread than an inability to understand what is required for self-preservation. SteveoR’s schtick can be equally offensive. However, he stops when warned that he is on the verge of derailing a thread.
As you have pointed out, it is PZ’s blog. He makes the rules. However, I think he has been quite consistet in administering those rules, and that is to be applauded.
I am sorry that what SteveoR says makes you uncomfortable. Some of it also makes me feel uncomfortable. However, I don’t come here for comfort. And I sure would not feel comfortable if people were banned for the content of what they said rather than for their behavior.
Frankly, I feel sorry for SteveoR. Something must have happened to make him so monomaniacally fearful. It is not rational, and it seems to dominate all other aspects of his life. That cannot be a fun way to live.
Gretchen,
What Violentacrez and chums were/are up to is (IIRC IANAL) criminal and certainly threatening. If StevoR were posting pictures of Muslim people, or identifying local Muslim people on a specific site aimed at intimidating them, then yes, outing him as the criminal (incitement to violence/hatred) he undoubtedly would be, would be appropriate.
I’m at least relatively sure that he hasn’t done that. Mind you, I’ve not being paying attention to much of what he’s said. I worked out he was a loon on this issue a while back. There’s only so much time available.
Louis
Gretchen, I draw the line for outing someone when they make threats. Trolls are annoying. Don’t feed them and they go away.
So, either respect privacy or do away with anonymity and privacy entirely for everyone.
me:
I don’t mean to suggest that StevoR’s bigoted fuckwittery isn’t consistent with some of the explictly “banworthy” offenses. You could easily make a case for “proselytizing,” “trolling” and “stupidity.”
Louis:
Gotta disagree with you. If he were frequently saying hateful things about gay people, trans* folks, or women how is that different than other, ban worthy forms of hate speech?
The threats against him are unequivocally wrong.
His continued bigoted, xenophobic, genocidal views are inexcusable.
Tony,
I think you misunderstood me. Don’t worry, I’ll cope! ;-) I think we actually agree.
Like I said, I think the due date for his banning has long passed, i.e. I thought he would have been (rightly) banned a long time ago.
My “complaint” was that because in *this* thread some of us are saying unequivocally that trying to out him is wrong and not saying anything about his banning in the same breath, it doesn’t follow that that some of us support his views in any way. His outing is orthogonal to the issue of his banning.
This is not the case with people like Violentacrez etc, i.e. people making actual threats and committing illegal acts.
Louis
Consciousness Razor,
I disagree.
Proselytizing implies trying to win over over someone toward your worldview/religion. SteveoR has shown no inclination to care whether we agree with him or not
Trolling–Nope. He isn’t after an angry response or stirring the pot. He seriously believes his phobia.
Stupidity–This one comes closest. However, if you look at past recipients of the banhammer–you have to be pretty damned persistent to get banned on these grounds. The latest chewtoy sprayed stupid in all directions for 2 days before succumbing. SteveoR has not gone as far as derailing whole threads. He usually stops when warned.
Mere fuckwittery is not on the list. I deplore what Steve says. However the appropriate responses to deplorable speech/attitudes range from persuasive argument to ridicule, not censorship. The problem with censorship is that it doesn’t like to go back in the bottle once let out.
anteprepro @ 80:
I’m sorry but saying that maybe the threat maker was just “drunk or overtired” sounds very similar in intent to the “maybe he is just socially awkward!” claim MRAs use to dismiss sexual harassment. An excuse used to minimise harmful behaviour. I’m not a big fan of StevoR’s rants about Islam either but you are not seriously implying that drunkenness is an adequate excuse for what this person did, are you? Would you use “Aw c’mon cut him some slack, he was drunk!” in relation to a discussion about the harm drink driving causes to society?
Alright, then I disagree with your interpretation of his behavior and how the rules apply. But if that’s we all have to go on, neither of us can definitively state what is or isn’t “banworthy.”
In any case, PZ makes, interprets and enforces the rules. I’ll just quote him, with my emphasis:
While I’m glad you made this post PZ; this type of abuse (loss of pseudo-anon) is a consequence of your training up a cadre of vicious rend-bots.
w00dview
“I was drunk and overtired” has frequently been StevoR’s excuse, so I believe anteprepro is being sarcastic there.
Also, I disagree with your concept of “censorship,” but that’s a side issue.
Fuck you so fucking much.
Yes he has.
For fuck sake do not play fucking rule lawyer when some regulars get warnings and sabre rattling for being irritating
SO!? Again would you put up with a homophobe saying this? You are fucking unbelievable. This bullshit expects ME(or anyone else here who has Arab friends) to put up with him saying personal things about people I know and care about (that they should be killed, that they are jihadists, that they are incapable of friendship) that you would not tolerate people saying to anyone else here because they are sincere? Would you tolerate someone coming here and saying “all gays should be killed” and constantly going on that?
And bullshit on him not stirring the pot. Everyone fucking gives him a WIDE range of space and he keeps going back to that one topic that he knows will get people mad at him. He has shown nothing but the intention of being an ass.
As an aside I have to address. I almost wrote “of being a dick” and went back and changed that. Do you realize that if I had slipped and not caught that *I* would be violating rules and get a deserved tribal pile on and shaming for using gendered slurs…but contrast that to StevoR. The rules are literally nicer to advocating genocide and murder than of using careless language. What the fuck happened here?
baal #109 wrote:
An odd slippery-slope argument, coupled with a very ambiguous term like “vicious rend-bots.” I don’t think encouraging people to “shred bad arguments” amounts to training people to ignore all moral and ethical rules. If it did, then PZ would not have made this post, and the commenters would not have agreed with it.
You made a bad argument, then. Shred, shred.
Who was it toying with outing other commenters and leaving hints in another thread? They should heed this warning and I hope their comments will be deleted.
Which undermines your whole rules layering argument. If PZ can (and has) removed or warned people for reasons outside the rules because he can then claiming that hands are tied because of the rules is ridiculous. And that’s a good complaint against PZ, there’s a reason why people try to be consistent with rules, because selective enforcement causes problems. Since PZ has revoked privileges because he’s in charged before what are we to take away from consistent presence of some people without comment or irritation? StevoR doesn’t annoy or bore him? Well if that’s how it looks than that makes my case. StevoR is tolerated because he’s picking on a target that is seen as less worthy of defense than others. PZ does good work protecting some targets of batshit insane hatred which makes this stand out all the more. I’m not saying he shares STevoR’s prejudices, but the skeptic community and all does have an unconscious bias that tolerates way more of this than it would for other hate. PZ said it himself in previous posts that the fact that everyone is racist makes it important to be aware and conscious of it. So yeah, be conscious of it
You know maybe a lot of people talking about just what StevoR is saying and how bad or bad it isn’t should first check out the Thunderdome where we hashed out exactly what he said and whether it extends into a generalized racism
That assumption ignores the evidence available.
Fixed it for you!
https://proxy.freethought.online/pharyngula/2012/12/05/thunderdome-11/comment-page-1/#comment-507495
You know this didn’t even need to be a thread about StevoR. “Someone is threatening to out someone else, don’t do it”. Done.
baal@109;
Boy you are an ignorant cupcake aren’t you. If you were less ignorant you would have known that the breaking of pseudonymity has been consistently decried and condemned by multiple people on multiple threads on Pharyngula. Entire threads have been devoted to the subject. And previous transgressors have been INSTANTLY banned. No other crime triggers the banhammer faster. Other dungeon denizens have to earn their place over multiple posts if not multiple threads, but for this it is pretty close to strike one and you’re done. Zero tolerance.
Next time you think you want to cheap shots at Pharyngula, take some effort to educate yourself first about what your target actually is and does. It will spare you from making a total fool of yourself the way creationists do when the criticize evolution without understanding what evolutionary theory actually says.
Baal has had an axe to grind against Pharyngula ever since hir inability to read caused hir to think I accused hir of lighting cats on fire.
Ing, #120,
That would have been potentially useful.
Louis
Well, it is nice to see StevoR at least walk back his previous clear support for preemptive action against Iran.
StevoR continues to claim he is not racist, but still refuses to acknowledge that the actual real world result of his prior statements is the furtherance of racism and the enabling of racists.
He claims when challenged that his disdain is directed only at jihadists and not at Muslims or Arabs in general but continues to make statements that clearly conflate the two and for practical purposes treat the two as the same.
He claims to not be in favor of genocide, but continues to advocate for courses of action that would either BE genocide or make the risk of genocide happening greater.
He tries to cover himself in blanket of self defence, but all the actions he advocates are aggressive ones rather than defensive ones.
And it is far far past the point where StevoR can use the unrecognized racism defense. His racism has been pointed out to him over and over again and he has not acknowledged it, nor retracted those prior statements.
Not that he won’t support it he just is claiming that’s not what he’s doing because he’s a shit head.
Anthony K (The artist formerly known as Ian Brown),
You accused someone of lighting cats on fire? But isn’t that us?
Louis
And besides, rend-bots are not vicious. Rend-bots are clinical, dispassionate, efficient.
It’s the only reason to use bots for the rending rather than the far more effective cats. (Flaming cats, of course).
never pet a flaming cat
As a mostly-lurker, I gotta agree with Ing on this one. StevoR is peddling a particularly vile bigotry, and I’m not sure why he hasn’t been banned yet (or at least limited to Thunderdome).
Beatrice @ 110:
Oops, my mistake! My sarcasm detector was obviously faulty today. Sorry, anteprepro.
Consciousness Razor and Ing,
The fact is that PZ has allowed homophobes and MRA types to post their vile filth. They don’t get the banhammer until they do so for several hours or even days on end. Usually, they get multiple warnings that they ignore. SteveoR usually takes the hint before he gets splatted.
In any case, rule #1 makes it very clear that it is not up to me. I am merely stating that in my opinion PZ has been consistent in enforcing his guidelines. I believe in freedom of speech. That means I have to put up with speech that I consider vile. In return, I can tell the speaker that what they’ve said is vile. If I think the speaker is amenable to persuasion, I can argue against the speaker’s point. Or, I can say, as I have here, that I think the speaker is mentally ill and needs help. Or I can ridicule the speaker. If I think the speaker is a troll, I can ignore him. What I will not do is try to make my problem that of the blog owner.
I hope that clarifies things.
a_ray_in_dilbert_space
StevoR has repeated that same shit in thread after thread after thread. He might stop right before the boss gets mad every time, but there is the cumulative effect of this being repeated quite often.
And honestly, even without the repetitiveness and his “oh woe is me I am bullied” derails, his hateful genocidal shtick is something I have trouble seeing as “just” a dissenting opinion we can merrily talk about. We’re talking genocide and bombing of entire nations. And we have even debated that, more than once. It’s never enough because StevoR keeps going with the same thing again. And again.
And now I’m arguing this even though I said I won’t.
Fuck you too
That’s not nice, it just shows he’s a marginally competent liar. He backpedals when called on his bigotry, but then resumes saying the same shit when the dust settles.
I don’t want to draw up even older shit storms but you cannot honestly claim THIS while claiming consistency.
Have any of you who want us to keep debating with StevoR ever actually talked to him? Not just read a comment or two, but debated for some time?
Because I was of the opinion that he should be given a chance too, even though I found his opinions disgusting, but then I spent one of my mornings exchanging comments with him. Boy, how that changes one’s tolerance of his words.
Also not true. Some have been removed after one or two posts because of vileness.
It’s quite evident to me that he hasn’t been banned and that his shit is just as vile as homophobic and misogynistic shit. So how is this relevant?
Is it circular? StevoR shouldn’t get banned because he hasn’t been banned yet?
Who cares? How’s this relevant? Being consistent with enforcing some blatantly arbitrary guidelines shouldn’t be preferable to shutting down bigotry as much as possible.
Who cares? This has nothing to do with freeze peach or “censorship.” Bigots can express their hate in society in all sorts of ways. PZ is not the State. He’s not a corporation. He’s a fucking blogger.
Also I want to beat everyone to it: FREEZE PEACH!!!!
Well yes when one of the guidelines is “I can be inconsistent in enforcing guidelines and remove people because I want to” then by definition you’re being consistent in your promise of inconsistency.
I may not agree with what you say, but I support your right to pseudonymously say it, absent PZ’s deployment of The Hammer…and to suffer such fire as you may provoke by saying it.
Coercively de-cloaking you, however, is just not on.
–
@Nerd in 58:
Can I go in your killfile, too? PRETTY PLEEEEZE ???
I have often diagreed with StevoR (a certain conversation in which he pontificated about the permissability of preemptive nuclear war against Iran springs to mind particularly strongly), but I consider outing someone’s real identity when they choose to post anonymously to be utterly disproportionate in all cases short of personal threats of violence. Using such threats in a bid to silence and ostracise commenters simply isn’t acceptable. If the culprit is ever positively identified, then I think that PZ should seriously consider banning them.
‘Anonymously’ should be ‘pseudonymously’ in my last post. Apologies.
Yeah, I’ve been there.
(Note: I was indeed being ironic in order to flush out a comment like “Now okay some white folks did some bad things” from StevoR in response to genocidal massacres committed by white Australians against Aborigines. I denied it at the time because Ing was coming close to letting the jig up. But I don’t hate Australians, or think they’re any more racist as a group than Canadians, Americans, or Brits.)
The point of this post is to criticize whoever sent that email. StevoR’s opinions are completely irrelevant to that matter. I don’t see why it should be necessary for PZ to point them out and they’re hardly being ignored by the commentariat.
Since you want in, NO. Deal with it offline.
sigh
@Ing in #82:
Too bad there isn’t a God, because I’d be praying “Oh Lord PLEASE let this be true!
I’d also be praying about a certain swinging exit door making flush contact with an arse…
;)
Rev. BigDumbChimp,
Was that a “and there they all go indulging him” sigh?
I know, I should really shut up about this.
For fuck sake, consider it wish granted asshole.
Fuck that shit that nohellbelowus is spewing, Ing. Do not let the words of an idiot be the reason why you leave.
not “they”
@Nerd in #147:
Then why, oh why, did you tell this blatant lie in our exchange last night:
Because you’re a disingenuous drama-queen who feeds on confrontation, perhaps?
@151:
Do you need help with your baggage, perhaps? Anything I can do to help expedite the process.
Blow it out your fucking ass, nohellbelowus.
@156:
That hurts me, Janine. I’ll assume you’re just hungover and tired.
Ing, the lurkers support you in email!
nohellbelowus, just because you don’t believe in a hell in the afterlife doesn’t mean you should try to make one here! Stop being an ass.
Beatrice,
I do not like SteveoR’s shit any more than you. I really do think he is mentally ill. He needs help.
My response is not to respond. I don’t read his shit. I don’t comment on his shit. If I see he is spewing his shit, I come back later. He is utterly ineffective, utterly impotent. He persuades no one. He inspires pity at best and disgust from others. But it is not my place to beg PZ to consign him to the dungeon any more than it is to try to get the crazy guy thrown off of the subway.
If he were making threats, it would be different. He is not.
You are no doubt aware that Xtians would be as upset about my speech as you are about SteveoR’s. Freedom of speech has to protect even vile speech, as long as it does not threaten physical harm.
nohellbelowus,
You only got 4.2 for that last round of trolling. I’m afraid the Austrian judge was very hard on you and your originality marks were low.
Do try harder.
Louis
Wow, fuckface! It like you know me and my actions.
I will simply assume that you are an idiot. At least I have proof of that.
Nohellbelowus,
Shut the fuck up, asshole.
a_ray_in_dilbert_space,
I don’t buy the free speech argument from misogynists and I don’t buy it in this case either.
What happened to StevoR is no surprise to me, and I heartily disagree with his views on nuking Iran — or any nation, or place, or 2000-foot hole in Nevada, or anywhere, at anytime.
However, Pharyngula appears to be a “gateway drug” to behavior like this, for a few unscrupulous cowards. Whoever did this needs to be located, strapped-down, and forced to smoke a cannabis cigar as large as the Hindenburg.
Beatrice,
Christians don’t buy the free speech argument from atheists.
Libertarians don’t buy the free speech argument from the reality based community.
I live in a glass house.
And here.
Such behaviour is not limited to Pharyngula, nor is there evidence that it’s much more common here than in other corners of the atheoskepticosphere.
a_ray_in_dilbert_space:
I like you and wish you’d comment more often, like you used to.
But seriously, that freeze peach shit is ridiculous. I had assumed you understood it well enough not to conflate government/corporate repression of people’s rights with someone banning a commenter (for their “content”) on a blog. Or at least, after having that conflation pointed out, not to continue doing it unless you address that issue. So because I think you should know better, I’m having trouble figuring out what the hell your position is actually supposed to be.
Nohellbelowus,
Ohhh please can I see the evidence for this “appearance”. As far as I’m aware, and I may well be wrong, I seem to remember almost all the regular posters are vehemently against breaking people’s pseudonymity in all but the most extreme/criminal of cases.
Louis
@nohellbelowus:
You know how pathetic you look impotently baiting the regulars here, right? Of all the millions of things you could be doing with your time right now you’ve opted to try to start a confrontation with people you don’t like.
Then you post something like this and it wraps all the way around through pathetic back to funny:
Says the guy(?) disingenuously trying to start confrontations.
If you’re trying to paint yourself as somehow smarter, wiser, or otherwise superior to the people you’re baiting in any way, you’re completely failing. The very best you can accomplish with your current tactics is to “drag yourself down to their level” — I’m assuming that’s not what you want to do given your evident antipathy towards these folks.
But it’s funny as fuck so from my perspective keep it up.
a_ray_in_dilbert_space,
I live in Europe.
Must be why I don’t throw around “free speech” as an argument in favor of very fool being allowed to post on every private blog or forum.
@Louis in #160:
Hilarious.
I’m assuming “I’m hungover and tired” won’t impress the Austrian judge? Damn the luck.
*yawn*
@169:
You need some context, dude. This whole deal goes back to my views on Atheism-pus, er plus.
I just get a kick out of people who actually believe they can squelch someone using nothing more than foul language and electronic messages on the interwebz. Especially in a place that prides itself on its rationality. It’s ironically funny, and I appreciate ironic humor.
Thanks for your ignorant input, however!
Consciousness Razor,
We may simply have a philosophical difference. I believe the proper weapon to use against speech I deplore is speech. Or silence, if I feel that speech would simply feed the troll or goad the lunatic. I am sufficiently confident in my ability to defend my position, that I do not fear vile speech. I am confident that I can likewise help to defend those who choose not to speak for whatever reason.
If I advocate censorship, then in my mind I am admitting that I fear certain speech. I am also legitimizing the concept of censorship. Censorship is not an idle threat to an atheist, as I am sure you understand. In much of the world, I would not be free to speak my mind. In many of our own families, we do not feel free to voice our opinions. Many of us do not feel free to speak our minds in our places of employment.
Our speech in the eyes of many is considered more vile and less acceptable than that of SteveoR. If I yield on the question of censorship, my position to push back elsewhere is weakened. So, I am left in the position of tolerating speech while opposing it as vigorously as I can with speech of my own.
And, as pointed out previously–it’s PZ’s call. I would support his decision either way for that reason. I am merely pointing out why consistency in allowing free speech on an atheist blog may not be a bad thing.
Nohellbelowus,
Why thank you.
Nothing on my #168?
Louis
@Janine:
May I interpret this comment as meaning that you won’t be employing the killfile option, or the scroll function?
And if my assumption is correct, can I at least request more original insults? The constant F-bombs do become a bit boring, just sayin’.
@Louis:
Sure. Regarding #168:
Not funny at all.
Yer welcome.
;)
Beatrice,
In the European country you live in, do they have blasphemy laws?
Just spitballing here, but didn’t PZ at one point say that he despises people saying “Must be a poe” when their opinions are outrageous? Not that the above is claiming poeness, but it seems to me that declaring someone insane because they are a paranoid bigoted fuckface comes dangerously close in my book. You don’t have to be mentally unhealthy to be a racist or bigot of any type. In fact, it’s pretty insulting to people living with mental health issues to imply it to be so. Don’t trivialize his bullshit by essentially patting him on the head and saying “There, there, poor lunatic.”
I think he should be at least confined to the Thunderdome.
a_ray_in_dilbert_space,
No they don’t and I’m seriously not going to start explaining why the hell that has absolutely nothing to do with blog rules. Government ≠ blogs and all that. Well enough explained by others.
People should be free to hang around a blog without reading that their friends or family or themselves should be bombed to death.
It’s not like this is the first time we’re talking about censorship and free speech.
Freeze peach indeed.
Shorter nohellbelowus
“how come StevoR gets his own post. It’s not fair! I wants one!”
And yeah, armchair diagnosing people with mental illness is frowned upon here. Or is noting this infringing on your free speech rights, a_ray_in_dilbert_space?
Speaking of ‘more original insults’, this is cribbed from every conversation between fourteen-year-olds on XBox Live.
If I had a blog, I wouldn’t want racist garbage all over it. Racist garbage is bad. So I could quite properly remove racist garbage from my blog (if I had one) if I wanted to, for any reason. So responding to it or being silent aren’t the only “proper” ways of dealing with it, unless that just means how you would want to deal with it.
Great. I’m not afraid either. Some shit just doesn’t even merit a defense. There’s no point. So anyone would be completely justified in deleting shit from their blog.
If bloggers were governments or corporations which had some power to infringe freedom of speech or other rights, then of course it would be different story, because then concepts like free speech and censorship would actually apply. But they’re not and they don’t apply. Bannination simply isn’t censorship or infringing free speech. The former doesn’t “legitimize” the latter either (except in the minds of people conflating them), because they’re not even close to the same thing.
@183:
Such bigotry toward teenagers is scandalous. Consider yourself electronically reprimanded.
I also have my finger poised above my Killfile button, so do watch your mouth.
Aww… Poor little Fuckface spouts unoriginal shit behind assumptions but stupid little Fuckface demands originality from me.
Why the fuck would I want to give such effort to such a pissant little troll.
Please, keep slagging. That is something we all fucking need.
I’ll continue to type, then.
@Koshka in #181:
I’ve been quite emphatic in advising people to ignore my comments. I’m not sure how much clearer I can say it.
At least your jab here contains some humor, but I’m pretty sure StevoR and I have little in common.
Wow, Janine.
Four F-bombs in one comment! That places you in 1,234,446th position on the All-time Pharyngula F-bombers list.
Congratulations!
Don’t be so humble. I’m sure both of you have parents who unwarrantably think you’re special, interesting additions to the world.
I don’t think I do need any context. The situation is really simple: you’re criticizing people for behavior that you are also engaging in — by performing the very act of criticizing them.
It’s the tightest circle of hypocrisy I’ve ever seen.
I’m not even saying you’re wrong. I don’t even care what the subject under discussion is. The hilarious part is that you’re doing exactly what you’re saying is such a terrible, bad thing that no one should ever do.
Again, you’re putting me in stitches. I point out your lack of self-awareness — the ignorance you’re displaying regarding the contradiction between your words and deeds, and you describe this simple, straight-forward observation as “ignorant input.”
I’m trying to help you, dude. You’re making yourself look like an idiot. Again, hilarious, so I feel like I’m doing you a favor by trying to stop you. It’s certainly better for me if you keep this up.
Wow, nobraininmyhead, comment on the number of times I say “fuck” instead of address the fact that I am calling you out as a useless idiot troll.
Now whine about the “f-bomb”, twit.
First, atheists are, for the most part, not the most likely people to follow instructions. Think ‘herding cats.’
Second, then why the fuckity-fuck do you fucking comment so fucking often with so fucking little to fucking say?
@191:
But the fact that you don’t direct this comment at the other participants just identifies you as another blinkered dumbass.
Laugh at that.
Ogvorbis! Fuck; fuck yeah!
@193:
Fucking because I fucking fuck-fucking fuck FUCK fuckingly fucking want to?
Sheeple’s just another word for nothing left to say…
Want to what? Be a know-nothing blowhard cluttering the place up with your sputtering?
Another point of similarity between StevoR and nohellbelowus.
The “other participants” aren’t doing what you’re doing. They aren’t jumping up and down screaming about how bad it is to jump up and down screaming.
They may be jumping up and down screaming. And it may be bad to jump up and down and scream. Such behavior may warrant criticism. Again, not saying you’re wrong.
Just saying that you’ve picked a stupid and hypocritical way to express your criticism — your means of criticism is identical to that which you’re criticizing.
Makes it a little hard to take your criticism seriously is all I’m saying.
Incidentally, now you’re calling me names unprovoked. Doesn’t that seem like more of the stuff that you’re supposed to be criticizing but which you’re actually enthusiastically engaging in?
No. nohellbelowus was answering my question in kind.
“Get ‘im, Oggie! Janine screamed incoherently, wiping at her mouth with a bright green cheerleader’s pom-pom.
“Whhhhoooooo HOOOOOOOO, Oggie… you really showed ‘im that time.“
Unlike some, I’m able to ignore the tone for the content, Ogvorbis. It’s the vacuous, masturbatory self-obsession that makes them as peas in a pod.
“Get ‘im, Oggie! Janine screamed incoherently, wiping at her mouth with a bright green cheerleader’s pom-pom.
“Whhhhoooooo HOOOOOOOO, Oggie… you really showed ‘im that time.“
Translation: I am unable to understand Janine’s comment.
Nice.
After I just defended you from what I thought may have been an unwarranted attack.
You really are just trolling for responses, aren’t you?
Nobody is “jumping up and down,” you pseudo-philosophical dweeb. This is an exchange on the internet. I’m calmly typing in a library, as a matter of fact.
Can I, at this point, just say one thing?
Fuck.
That is all.
Louis
[meta]
I see that nohellbelowus is transparently trolling.
(That is indeed a bannable offence)
Yes, as part of his search for validation. This’ll help explain the problem.
Was that meant as verb, noun, or command, Louis?
Alright, that’s it. No Christmas cards for ANY of you in here.
I know one bad apple shouldn’t spoil the entire bunch, but I can only take so much electronic abuse. And I had already purchased the stamps, too.
That includes you, too, Morales. No Christmas cheer from me this season.
“Pseudo-philosophical dweeb”? Hmm, this may have wrapped around through funny and back into sad.
The tenor of your comments is not especially calm, you realize?
You seriously don’t have anything better to do with your time?
Thank you. Don’t celebrate Christmas so . . . .
Speaking of lack of self awareness . . . .
oh no, you’re both attention whores. you do in fact have that much in common.
go drown yourself in eggnog, twit.
In a library? What do you expect him to do? Learn something?
Nobraininmyhead is still slagging.
And to think he demanded originality from me.
*Unbuckles kevlar vest, shaking head*
That was nearly one hurled “fuck” too many. Might need to replace this thing.
Later, everybody. May the sun shine blindingly in your eyes. Or something.
Yes, I can see how that could be asking a little too much in this case.
But just in case…nohellbelowus, check if the library has a copy of “Beyond Good and Evil”. Nietzsche has a punchy little aphorism in there that describes your current course of action perfectly.
Try using a non-important part of your body to shield your vitals.
That empty head of yours should do fine.
Good luck correcting the recto-cranial inversion!
Yawn, egotistical troll is banal, insipid, and boring. Not one iota of imagination. Can’t learn anything from abject trollery.
If ohhellitrollit was actually honest about wanting its posts to be disregarded it could save everyone a lot of time and effort, and reduce its carbon footprint, by not posting at all.
Even if we’re going to pretend that nuking Iran is just a “different opinion”, the way StevoR specifically fucks with Ing is pretty despicable.
And just sit there, bored, in a library?
I believe you’re asking much of our resident intellectual giant.
In case it wasn’t clear, my support of his not being outed extends only to that. The banhammer’s long overdue on StevoR.
Ichthyic,
Always a verb, definitely a command, and frequently also a noun.
HTH HAND. ;-)
Louis
@nohellbelowus:
Well, aren’t you a brave little snowflake. “I don’t believe making idiots unwelcome works, so I’ll prove it by being the biggest, most annoying idiot I can! That will show them!”.
*slow clap*
righto!
*rips self apart attempting to engage all meanings at same time*
owwwww!
Hey, StevoR. Whoever is threatening you shouldn’t be doing that, because that is wrong.
Also, this:
Is disgusting, and it ain’t from long ago, and it ain’t even the worst thing you’ve been reported to have said. You shouldn’t be outed, but I sure wouldn’t mind if you were banned.
Link for convenience:
https://proxy.freethought.online/pharyngula/2012/09/12/lets-not-get-confused/comment-page-1/#comment-459674
He might not be wrong but the methodology needs serious work.
Yeah no. dittoheads ditto and the ones not dittoing are in support of doing any and everything to SteveOr. Also, when the rend-bot rends me when I complain that PZ has failed ethics, that would be called the expected response.
The problem is that PZ rarely allows that anyone he is pillorying has a shred of humanity nor deserves to be treated like a person. That needs to happen in the regular posts that happen daily. One off trimming of excessively harmful crap is just that, one off trimmings. Evenmoreso, this post above is devoid of nuance as well.
There isn’t a general idea to follow or an ethical principal described. It’s a rule with a punishment for breaking. I can tell that it’s a very short posting and that clarity in these cases is important. Would having literally 1 additional sentence weakened the OP?
The commentors here show the same lack of regard for folks being human. You can read this thread and see folks think that SteveOr doesn’t deserve even the courtesy that PZ is asking for in the OP.
PZ will recognize certain specific harms and call them out (like this OP) but that’s not the problem. The problem is that he lacks nuance and the impact of the “please shred this one now, it’s a failed human so it’s ok” is not freaking ok. You rend-bots seem unable and unwilling to understand that you cannot rend people and comments endlessly and not have it impact you. You’ll have to show me that you understand what I’m saying before I’m going to take your rendings of me seriously. I am explicitly saying that you commentors seem to still have a problem with dehumanization*.
Disclaimers since you all have trouble with unwarranted assumptions and
Caveats since you all don’t believe in reading with charity:
I’m not a slymepitter nor MRA. I’m an anti-violence, pro-egalitarian, pro-affirmative action (egalitarianism doesn’t solve structural problems) person who thinks that endlessly shredding folks is a bit like going to war. You lose perspective if you bury the needle all the time. Take a month off from reading pharyngula and come back with fresh eyes and see if all the comments really seem sane and proportional or if they are extreme and needlessly hostile.
I use male pronouns as I suspect you know brownian since I think I’ve seen you get it right on Ed’s blog. Was that you using gender ambiguity as a slur?
Cupcake is a gendered insult.
Before the post I had no idea who is SteveOr nor his propensity for derail.
*Special caveat – I’m not asking you to tolerate the intolerable or that it’s intolerant to not tolerate intolerance but that you have lost perspective on what dehumanization is and how you are dehumanizing the subjects of your rending. Get out more and read other blogs. Other blog’s commentors are just as unhappy about various issues and yet manage to give the impression that they know the targets of their ire are still people.
Since I like flouncing and it’ll give some of you a shiny to swat, I now return you to your regularly scheduled self-righteous parade.**
**see prior point about being unable to deal with nuance and substance rather than easy hateful pot shots.
@221 – Anthon K who used to be brownian:
I’m not sure if I should make my standard comment on posts like this or applaud your ability to be abusive.
Calling folks stupid is bad but minor.
Saying that the target of your comment should be on the look out for violence is detestable. You are threatening violence. Stop it.
To the rest of you who are not bothered by comments like this one, you too need to reexamine your views. This is not how you make the world a better place.
Only in your delusional mind.
And you will have to show perspective before we take a self-important tone troll saying nothing cogent seriously. Take your ego down about fifteen notches.
@234:
Why are you completely ignoring the context the comment in question inherited from nohellbelowus’s post?
The violence is clearly metaphorical. I kinda hear what you’re saying otherwise, but highlighting stupid stuff like that damages your credibility a bit.
And cupcake is a gendered insult? Be explicit as to how. The best I can come up with is that girls don’t mind being called sweet, fluffy things like cupcakes but it makes boys feel insecure so that’s totally unfair. (An analysis which is itself based on some pretty sexist premises.)
The rend-bot is designed to rend and is covered by a 3-year manufacturer’s warranty*. If your rend-bot is negatively impacted by rending during this period, please contact the manufacturer with the proof of purchase and serial number.
*Tampering with the internal systems of the rend-bot in order to alter or disable its ‘Rending in Progress’ tone will void the warranty of the rend-bot and may cause its IFF subsystem to reset. Do not attempt this.
baal:
Can you explain why this is the case? Which gender is insulted by the use of this term? Men? Women?
The above definition does not fit with yours. So why should you be able to arbitrarily decide that cupcake is a gendered insult?
Um, I don’t see anyone supporting revealing StevoR’s personal information. I’ve seen condemnation of such actions across the board.
PZ said whoever is threatening StevoR should stop. Whoever it is will be banned if he learns their identity.
The regulars (and even a few lurkers) have agreed. They’ve said it is wrong to reveal personal information. It is wrong to threaten StevoR. Period.
That is giving StevoR the courtesy that PZ is asking for.
In addition to this, people have also been discussing why they think StevoR is genocidal, racist scum. They have also been talking about why he should/shouldn’t be banned.
One of the biggest problems I see in your whining above is that you’re conflating criticism of ideas with criticisms of people. I suspect you don’t like the tone around here and think that when someone is told to ‘Fuck off’ or that they’re a ‘piece of shit’ when they say something vile is dehumanizing. If your criticisms have merit, give examples. Don’t speak in generalities. List an example of what you feel is a regular dehumanizing someone.
baal:
Nope. This is just you misreading and misapprehending PZ.
(It’s your problem, not his)
Nope. On the contrary, reading this thread shows that “folks” have uniformly endorsed the OP, which is to the effect that trying to use extortion to coerce someone from posting here is despicable despite many of them wishing that someone would leave or wishing that someone were banned.
You’ve now twice claimed something is “The problem”; this means neither “The problem”, but ‘a problem’, with their compound effect itself being “The problem”.
(Not just a sloppy thinker, you, but a sloppy writer)
I don’t have to show anything to you, but I tell you that your attempt at orotundity is risible.
Leaving aside that your martial metaphor is absurd, you are also exhibiting hypocrisy by chiding the commentariat here.
Cupcakes are confectionery, and to imagine that confectionery is gendered is very foolish.
Well, when it comes to self-righteousness, you certainly take the cake.
(You win the hypocrisy cup for this thread!)
baal:
What are you smoking?
Anthony K is not threatening any violence.
@219, you said this:
You’re trying to make with the funny. You’re being “attacked” with the word fuck. You think it’s amusing to compare that word with bullets.
@221, Anthony (can I still call you Brownian?) says:
He’s working within the context of your silly scenario. He’s not advocating or supporting any violence done to you.
You’re being massively dishonest. Just like you were over at Patheos when you whined about Pharyngula regulars.
[meta]
baal claims to like to flounce, but can’t stick the landing:
@233:
@234:
<snicker>
I wonder if the people who are saying that “cupcake’ is a gendered insult are getting it confused with “cheesecake”?
Or are they just stupid?
So Baal, those of us who genuinely do think outing people is bad and also genuinely think StevoR has crossed lines that have had others banned are simply dittoheads?
Wow. Who knew that it’s impossible for more than one person to reach the same conclusion based on the same data?
Nice.
Louis
I forget. Am I one of the dittoheads, or am I one of those who support doing anything and everything to StevoR? I’m sure it must be one or the other.
Is that so? Citation needed.
Which nuances do you think are important but missing?
No it probably wouldn’t have weakened it (unless the addition was pointless tripe like yours), but what additional sentence did you think ought to be there?
“Don’t be dittoheads”? “Don’t support doing anything and everything to StevoR”?
Is that the kind of fucking nuanced principle you’re talking about?
I sure do. It’s bad thing, and I have a problem when people do it.
Would you consider “rend-bots,” for example, dehumanizing? If not, why not?
I don’t see how. Don’t you think that instead of just asserting it, you should give some reason for claiming that, since it’s not at all obvious?
@baal:
Yet you’re here, being one more in an endless parade of people who seem more worried about the feelings of shithead bigots than about their targets.
You want to talk about dehumanization? Where are you when people like StevoR and the Slymepitters need to be taken to task on that?
Instead, you show up intermitently in threads to complain about the commenters being abusive. Fucking hypocrite.
This is both wrong and tired, being dragged out by every person without a sound argument. From the Pharyngula Wiki, memes section:
Threatening violence?
Alright, baal, your inability to read is getting tiresome. That comment was in response to this:
Threatening violence?
Literacy also makes the world a better place, baal.
Tony, you’re confusing baal with nohellbelowus.
baal is the one who can’t read. nohellbelowus is the, er, other one.
Actually, baal, let me put it to you:
Which part of the body do you think nohellbelowus should use to shield himself from hurled “fucks” on this site?
Literally, I suggested he use his head.
What do you suggest?
Yes Baal, where were you when StevoR was advocating genocide against all Islam just because a few Jihadists operate under its banner? Where were you when the Slymepitters are making rape threats against Rebecca Watson and run intimidation tactics against other women who are well known skeptics? Until you address those problems with you taking them repeatedly to task, and linking to it for our verification, you haven’t a leg to stand on. We will ignore your criticism, since it comes from an obvious HYPOCRITE.
Confectionery is baked. Baking occurs in a kitchen.
Thus cupcake would be a gendered insult if and only if kitchen is gender-associated.
So cupcake is NOT a gendered insult, but to CLAIM that cupcake is a gendered insult, IS a gendered insult.
baal, it would seem, has just betrayed the fact that it thinks women belong in the kitchen.
Hey baal, remember that old aphorism concerning silence, being thought a fool, the opening of mouths and the removal of doubt? Think on it while you flounce. It might do you some good.
Louis:
Way to ruin the groupthink/echo chamber thing we had going there.
You just had to introduce reality to the mix.
Buzzkill.
baal @ 233;
Ummm… how? In what conceiveable way can ‘cupcake’ be considered a gendered insult? It is not as though confectionary has gender – if it did, then we would have to seriously reexamine the whole policy of eating it…
Assuming that you haven’t just made the food/gender discovery of the century, then I assume that you feel that cupcakes are specifically culturally associated with one of the human genders? In which case I must ask – which gender is specifically cupcake-centric and why? How did you come to this conclusion? And are you sure you are feeling alright?
OK, now let’s see if I can be serious for a moment.
I think you may be going a tad far with accusations of dehumanisation – no one has accused StevoR or yourself of actually being being less than human* so far as I can see. Dehumanisation has a very specific meaning. It is so dangerous because it specifically denies the humanity of its target, thus making it easier for those engaging in the dehumanisation, or those who come to accept such a toxic ideology as reasonable, to go on to further abuse the targets of that dehumanisation, possible even going so far as to engage in violence. As you can imagine, this becomes extremely dangerous when the dehumanising attitude is embedded within a widespread culture or backed up with the power of the state or other types of powerful and/or influencial organisations such as religious bodies.
Insulting or mocking you (whether or not by means of humourous allusion to foodstuffs) is not the same as dehumanising you. On the other hand, suggesting that an entire cultural group of people should be exterminated because there are a few violent extremists among their number and the advocate of such genocidal violence finds certain aspects of the religion and culture of the group in question objectionable (or at least finds their presuppositions of what that culture amounts to objectionable) – as StevoR has done in the past** – certainly does qualify.
Words have meanings, and you cannot simply redefine the meaning of this term at will in order to score notional ‘points’ on this thread.
———————————————————————————————————————-
* The ‘failed human’ statement you reference from another thread refers to a failure to behave in an ethical fashion rather than a literal statement that the individual in question is less than human and so is unworthy of the status of a person.
** To be fair, StevoR has subsequently repudiated this position on several occasions and has stated that he no longer advocates the deployment of nuclear weapons against the muslim nations of the world. Whather or not one takes these statements at face value is a matter of personal judgement.
Caine @247:
Um, I didn’t know it* was that big!
*the cupcake bingo card
Anthony K:
Is there a supersecret formula to tell them apart?
Tony:
So big, there’s more than one!
baal is always breathlessly earnest about the impending demise of Civilised Discourse, while nohellbelowus is just killing time until his pot connection gets off work.
In a recent post someone used the pronoun ‘it’ to refer to a person. This was quickly responded to as not being appropriate. I have seen this happen occasionally in the past. If anything, on the whole, comments on Pharyngula specifically oppose dehumanising people..
Baal is wrong to imply this. He should either cite where “you commentors” have a problem with dehumanisation or he should apologise.
Caine #247
There should be an entry: “You disagreeing with my claims is denying me free speech.”
Rodney:
You’re right. I’ll have to edit to add freeze peach criers.
[OT + meta]
Koshka, I use ‘it’ to refer to trolls all the time.
(Because it’s a troll I address, not a person)
John:
Which puts you in the wrong.
Caine, when did personas become people?
Shall we run a book on who gets banhammered first?
1) unashamed bigot, StevoR
2) irritating whiny serial poster, nohellbelowus
3) author of threatening e-mails sent via an anonymising service
My bet’s on number 2.
But to be a troll you must also be a person. In this case you are dehumanising them.
John Morales, I think I see what you’re saying. But to my eyes, it’s a distinction without a difference. Best to be on the safe side, wouldn’t you say?
John:
For all I know, “John Morales” is a persona. That doesn’t make it right for me to refer to you as it. A human being is behind whatever you’re reading (except those times the rats take over the keyboard), regardless of their behaviour. There have been plenty of times I think you’ve been sporting a troll hat and I haven’t referred to you as it.
Caine, Portia, Koshka, of course I don’t deny that behind the persona is a person; it’s one of many rhetorical tactics that I’ve used for lo these many years, and consciously-so.
I never thought you a hypocrite. :)
Thank you, John.
That’s only if 3) doesn’t get found out first. Count on it – the idiots always seem to like unmasking themselves…
Vaiyt:
Hasn’t worked so far. I have trouble believing it’s anyone who is an active Pharyngulite. You never know, I suppose. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was some asshole who has a grudge against Pharyngula.
I doubt it as well, considering how poorly written the e-mail was.
Don’t care who said what, or how “useful” (or unpleasant) someone is, you don’t drop their personal information. You just DON’T.
(Unless they are presenting an actual threat to themselves or others, in which case you do whatever you have to do to contact the local authorities and get them help.)
Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a buddy of StevoR who sent it at xis request, to give the Islamophobic bigot a chance to get some sympathy. The timing was auspicious.
Based on my extensive 5-second google search, I am under the impression that the source of the insult in calling someone a cupcake is belittlement; i.e., you’re not a cake, you’re just a cupcake (Texan version: you’re not a big dog, quit yapping from the porch). Used by Captain James T. Kirk, provoking a bar fight with a Starfleet cadet in an Iowa bar – true story!
Doesn’t seem gendered to me.
Can anyone tell me the definition of troll?
@277:
Start here– http://pharyngula.wikia.com/wiki/Troll
@277:
http://pharyngula.wikia.com/wiki/Troll
[OT]
kinkyjack, acquainted as I am with the existence of Wikipedia, I can serve your need: troll.
Consciousness Razor and Beatrice,
No. I agree that blog=/=gummint. However, censorship can occur in commercial space as well. A fuckwitted xtian could buy up the IP on which FtB resides and kick them off as offensive.
And yes, a blog owner is perfectly justified in deleting hate speech from his blog. If I had a blog, I might well follow that strategy for the simple reason that I find it so disturbing. Is this the most effective way of dealing with the issue, though? While it might make the site a “safe” place, it is not as if it makes the world or the Intertubes any safer. There are plenty of places where hate speech finds a welcoming audience–where it is applauded and amplified. In some ways, I find it more reassuring that SteveoR occasionally posts his crap here, where it is invariably eviscerated by thoughtful commenters–some of whom SteveoR may respect. It is always my hope that people can be reached–and that does make the world a safer and more pleasant place.
There is also the question of how to best support threatened groups. Yes, we can immediately delete the post and make the site “safe”. It is not my experience, though, that threatened individuals feel safe on a “safe” site. They know the hate is there. Might it not make them feel safer if hate speech is vigorously attacked and condemned by the consensus of commenters? Vigorous defense might be more reassuring than a pretense that such sentiments do not exist.
Beatrice, I would not dream of diagnosing mental illness over the Internet. However, SteveoR’s monomania about Islam is clearly not a rational position. It is my opinion that such intensity can only be generated by intense, irrational fear. I would not begin to try to diagnose the origin of that fear. That would ot stop me from suggesting that SteveoR might benefit from some professional help.
At some point, people got sick of refuting StevoR’s words for the upteenth time. So then you have the situation where you really don’t want to go over “bombing countries because you have irrational feelings about Muslims is monstrous” again, but also don’t want to let it slide because someone might think that lack of condemnation is approval. And then we’re locked in a circle of all StevoR all the time (which I am contributing to right now, I realize).
Add “advocating” before “bombing countries”.
Sure. That’s why I included “corporations” in my concept of censorship, but this is very far from the reality of the situation right now on this blog. The slope is not that slippery. We can make sensible distinctions between when restricting people’s ability to publish information on a website is restricting their rights and when it is not.
I don’t know. It depends.
Since you’ve admitted it is a proper way of dealing with it, I’m guessing you’ve retracted or qualified your previous implication that it isn’t proper, so we’re basically on the same page now.
Sure. Neither does speaking to a bigot, or remaining silent and hoping they will go away, so no one of those options is a guaranteed one-size-fits-all solution.
And in terms of the big picture, there’s nothing to suggest banning people or deleting their content is less effective than the other options. Rather, it allows one to spend more time on serious objections, from people who have legitimate concerns about the real challenges that are involved in ensuring everyone’s rights are respected and they’re treated fairly. Being distracted by the constant influx of fuckwitted trolls and letting their presence dictate how the conversation is supposed to work is not making the world a better place. Trolls could adapt to make their nonsense less likely to be removed (or their commenting privileges revoked), if they really think it needs to be heard, or they could learn how futile and masturbatory their trolling is and stop it altogether.
Also, I don’t think there’s any need for scare quotes around “safe.”
I’ve been arguing here in self defence because I’ve been accused of racism and bigotry and I know that’s not true. Yes, I have my faults, I’m not neurotypical, its no big secret that I have a few mental abnormalities, my brain gets stuck in certain grooves and I’m somewhat of an alcoholic. (Trying to cut down lately and on the light beers mainly at the moment, FWIW.) That doesn’t necessarily make what I say wrong or have any relevance to my arguments here. Because I feel very strongly on some issues and think I’ve got a good case I’ll argue it like, I’d say, everyone else would.
A lot of people here have been wrongly claiming I’m all sorts of horrible things that I know I am not.
How do I prove that to you all and show I deserve another look and chance? What would y’all suggest?
I’m happy to promise not to mention anything to do with Muslims again here for an indefinite period of at least many months and I’m willing to ask PZ to put me on automoderation for a while if he’s willing to agree and folks think that will help? I really don’t want to be restricted to thunderdome since I’d rather comment anywhere else and I do want to make positive contributions here since I enjoy this blog and participating on it, mostly.
(Cross posted to the “Thunderdome” thread too hope that’s alright.)
PS. @281. a_ray_in_dilbert_space :
Yes. I do respect many of the thoughtful commenters here.
@68.pelamun, the Linguist of Doom :
It is? How??? Can you or anyone explain this please because I really don’t understand why it would be in the least?
It was meant as a compliment to the Japanese and a sign I do include other “races” for whatever meaning that term has in positive things. I think “Western” is an, okay somewhat nebulous concept of having a particular mindset incl. ideals of democracy, human rights, treating people well and giving them opportuities to pursue happiness etc .. Including I may add having a secular state where church or Shinto shrine are separate from government.
What the blazes am I meant to have said wrong this time?!?
I like Japan and the Japanese FWIW.
Oh FFS, is this thread still going on?
StevoR
Because “the Japanese” are just sitting there waiting for some Whitey to accept them as ‘Western’?
If you had ever encountered a certain subset of “the Japanese”, you would know that they consider you less than human.
[meta]
Everyone knows the Japanese are inscrutable, being orientals.
StevoR, I somehow doubt that the Japanese would feel all warm and tingly at the thought that their “worthiness” depends on the degree to which their culture resembles ours.
Let’s flip this a bit. Let’s say we take a viewpoint from the very most exaggeratedly-stereotypic viewpoint that China is the realio, trulio, factual center of the Earth, and that non-Chinese are invisible vampire ghosts inhabiting lands not Favored Of The Gods (but potentially useful as expendable resources). Just how proud would it make you feel if some citizen of this ‘China’ were to pat you on the head for the ways in which your (poor, naturally-inferior) culture most closely resembled hir culture, and told you that only those features of your culture were worthwhile? With, of course, the implication that your culture was only ‘civilised’ to the extent that it was a copy of theirs. And that you must change it, forthwith, or default to “highly suspicious” status.
–