Re: The other A+ forum: a safe space?

[rEvolutionist]

This might be because I was relaxed enough to share some personal information about myself with some people who then appeared to turn on me.

This is exactly why labeling any pseudonymous public forum on the Internet as a safe space is a lie. I would guess that you would be as safe and find just as knowledgeable individuals in this forum as over there.

I would only be comfortable with sharing personal information about myself pseudonymously. One of my main worries about sharing things is that information could be resolved to my real world identity. The most plausible case for that would be somebody who knows me finding the information on the safe space and working it out, but a determined third party might be able to triangulate things I revealed there with nuggets of data from elsewhere in order to find out who I was.

Yeah, this is why they need to have a section (at least) of the forum that is hidden from bots and public searches. As you say, a determined enough individual can beat that system, but at least it stops casual and accidental release of sensitive information into the public sphere. This is why I question the honesty of them in asserting their interest in a safe space. The fact that they constantly ignore this simple piece of obvious advice says to me they are actually more interested in a public display resistance to "The Man".

[scott1328]

It's really cool that I've been banned so people can cast aspersions and make judgements about me while I'm unable to defend myself.

To me, their mockery and disparagement are a shining endorsement of your character.

[rEvolutionist]

This is encouraging, at least Mr. Samsa is in the ballpark of getting it:
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2440

I think we can all agree that what is 'excruciating detail' for one person may not be 'excruciating detail' for another person; for some people, mentioning that they were abused at all is more detail than they are comfortable sharing with other people, and for others excruciating detail involves more facts about what happened to them.

If the forum at large (or specifically its moderators) has not already grasped that concept though it might be that I should wait until it has matured somewhat before engaging with it fully again. In my experience of dealing with people who handle these things professionally I have never met anyone who failed to grasp that basic idea.

Mr.Samsa is a clever guy. I've known him for years on RatSkep and RD.net. And while I'm a bit bamboozled at his support for the behaviour of that forum as a whole, and his inability to acknowledge the shit treatment he and others initially got, I think he's lightyears ahead in understanding forum dynamics and issues than the current lot of clowns they've got admin'ing and moderating there. And even though I've had problems with him relating to other matters at Ratskep, I still think they'd do well to make him a mod there, if they are truly interested in the concept of a free space. But, as I said, I doubt that's even close to their primary reason for existing.

[Zampano]

It's really cool that I've been banned so people can cast aspersions and make judgements about me while I'm unable to defend myself.

To me, their mockery and disparagement are a shining endorsement of your character.

Thanks. Can't say I'm able to read it that way though.

I'm not sure whether they understand how upsetting/offensive accusing people of being "trolls" is when those people are there sincerely. It's not just somebody saying that they think you're actually a bad person, it is more the accusation that you've fabricated the real personal things you've told them about yourself for the purpose of playing some stupid joke.

[Atheist Dude]

This is encouraging, at least Mr. Samsa is in the ballpark of getting it:
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2440

I think we can all agree that what is 'excruciating detail' for one person may not be 'excruciating detail' for another person; for some people, mentioning that they were abused at all is more detail than they are comfortable sharing with other people, and for others excruciating detail involves more facts about what happened to them.

If the forum at large (or specifically its moderators) has not already grasped that concept though it might be that I should wait until it has matured somewhat before engaging with it fully again. In my experience of dealing with people who handle these things professionally I have never met anyone who failed to grasp that basic idea.

Mr.Samsa is a clever guy. I've known him for years on RatSkep and RD.net. And while I'm a bit bamboozled at his support for the behaviour of that forum as a whole, and his inability to acknowledge the shit treatment he and others initially got, I think he's lightyears ahead in understanding forum dynamics and issues than the current lot of clowns they've got admin'ing and moderating there. And even though I've had problems with him relating to other matters at Ratskep, I still think they'd do well to make him a mod there, if they are truly interested in the concept of a free space. But, as I said, I doubt that's even close to their primary reason for existing.

A wholesale change of mods and admins is what they need! imho

[rEvolutionist]

It's really cool that I've been banned so people can cast aspersions and make judgements about me while I'm unable to defend myself.

Yeah, i've noticed that with my own banning and others as well. It's really pathetically juvenile to continue a "discussion" after your opponent has been banned while acting like they haven't. It would be ok if they were debating honestly, but they are more interested in getting cheap shots in. I actually really do feel very sorry for some of those people. Although, if I met anyone as rude and arrogant as that in real life, I'd probably smack them in the chops.

[scott1328]

It's really cool that I've been banned so people can cast aspersions and make judgements about me while I'm unable to defend myself.

To me, their mockery and disparagement are a shining endorsement of your character.

Thanks. Can't say I'm able to read it that way though.

I'm not sure whether they understand how upsetting/offensive accusing people of being "trolls" is when those people are there sincerely. It's not just somebody saying that they think you're actually a bad person, it is more the accusation that you've fabricated the real personal things you've told them about yourself for the purpose of playing some stupid joke.

They are so afraid of trolls it dominates every aspect of every discussion. And any difference of opinion is met with suspicion and accusations of trollery. Failure to back down will result in being sent to timeout. But, once you have been so tainted there is no real way to come back.

And even worse, ceepolk, setar, cipher, grimalkin will hunt you down and bait you until you get permanently banned for defending yourself. This of course is done to make the forum a safe space.

[Dar]

Sorry Zampano.

I get the impression that you still hold some small seed of hope in your heart, and that if you nurture that seed it might blossom into all you hoped Atheism Plus could be when you first decided that Atheism Plus was for you.

It will hurt less if you let go of that seed sooner rather than later.

[Atheist Dude]

Sorry Zampano.

I get the impression that you still hold some small seed of hope in your heart, and that if you nurture that seed it might blossom into all you hoped Atheism Plus could be when you first decided that Atheism Plus was for you.

It will hurt less if you let go of that seed sooner rather than later.

I try to keep in mind how messed up some of the people are over at the other forum, It keeps me from taking how I was treated their to personally.

[rEvolutionist]

I almost don't care about that. I think we are eventually in the long term doing people like that a favour by hopefully helping them to realise what a nut-house that place is. I think that place is going to be very damaging to some people in the long term. Finding safety, and being immersed in so much hatred and aggression, are thoroughly incompatible, IMO.

I also just checked over there to see what new nonsense has been going on and I see that I have been subject to a thorough "analysis" of my known "trolling" on other forums. These guys are imbeciles. I didn't go there to troll, but after how they treated me and others, I'd happily troll them now.

[Zampano]

Nice. Now even piegasm is piling on without mentioning that they banned me.

I almost don't care about that. I think we are eventually in the long term doing people like that a favour by hopefully helping them to realise what a nut-house that place is. I think that place is going to be very damaging to some people in the long term. Finding safety, and being immersed in so much hatred and aggression, are thoroughly incompatible, IMO.

I also just checked over there to see what new nonsense has been going on and I see that I have been subject to a thorough "analysis" of my known "trolling" on other forums. These guys are imbeciles. I didn't go there to troll, but after how they treated me and others, I'd happily troll them now.

Do you not think that the more this place is trolled the worse it's going to get?

[Atheist Dude]

Do you not think that the more this place is trolled the worse it's going to get?

I don't think the trolling is the problem, it's the reaction to the trolling that has caused all the problems. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not so sensitive that I can't take trolling without going over the deep end.

[Skavau]

Do you not think that the more this place is trolled the worse it's going to get?

I don't think the trolling isn't the problem, it's the reaction to the trolling that has caused all the problems. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not so sensitive that I can't take trolling without going over the deep end.

The whole "don't feed the trolls is bad science" article set them up for a path of eventual and prolonged self-destruction.

It may predate it, but its influence remains apparent.

[scott1328]

Their own forum rules tells each new user that (s)he will be treated as trolls until (s)he can demonstrate otherwise.

Does it surprise anyone, then, that the forum has become "beset with trolls", mostly imaginary?

[Corke]

Their own forum rules tells each new user that (s)he will be treated as trolls until (s)he can demonstrate otherwise.

Does it surprise anyone, then, that the forum has become "beset with trolls", mostly imaginary?

That would probably be because the mods take such obvious delight in squashing people with their banhammers. Can't build a safe community when it is run by the power crazed.

It was an idea with noble intentions. I'll give them that. But if they want a safe space, they need a hidden forum.

Members like simpleflower venting can't be good for the place. There's too much hate flying around. Take a look at this (I bolded important bits.

I'd personally love it if the WBC couldn't protest at peoples' funerals. Free speech is always going to be restricted in some manner or another and always has. Usually when someone like Hitchens (who was a neo-conservative, along with Harris and Dawkins) makes an argument about free speech, what they are really saying is that they want the political status quo to continue. The reality is that free speech of the sort that allows the WBC to picket peoples' funderals is free speech of a sort that allows assholes to inflict trauma on other human beings during their weakest moments. I'm actually all for the State fining, taxing, and hauling off to labor camps even, assholes who think their free speech entitles them to use their mouths to inflict trauma on other human beings. It was pretty traumatic getting called the f-word hundreds of times before I ever got into the 5th grade, and, fyi, physical harassment accompanied this verbal harassment-and it usually does but it doesn't have to). In fact it was a constant hostile environment. Also, it was pretty traumatic to have to constantly endure being called the t-word in online spaces ruthlessly, in addition to the f-word, while being stalked, harassed, rape threated, and even death threated. I'm all for a society where kids (and adults too) who do that sort of thing get confronted by the state and have their heads kicked in ruthlessly and thrown in juvvie or jail if need be where they can whine about free speech in the dungeon with all the other assholes. I would love an America where the WBC yelled out their right to free speech and were told that, if they wanted to make a website and express their views there, they where free to do so, or that, if they wanted to make a bulletin board in their church hall, and express their free speech there, they where free to do so, but nowhere else.... That's my idea of free speech for these assholes, and it has very little to do with Hitchens' thinking as it was phrased and represented by you. Censoring someone completely such that the state tries to make their existence, much less what they are saying, totally invisible, is not the argument you are giving here and it's not the argument Hitchens was making. The argument hitchens was making was a more general argument afaik, and you correctly latched onto it. I actually have no problem with THAT form of censorship if the State has to do this to prevent genocidal groups like the Neo-Nazis from intimidating people. Would I support totalitarian censorship of neo-nazi groups to the point people weren't even aware they existed? Yes, yes, I actually would support that kind of censorship as well.

Now it's clear that this poor girl has been through some tough times. However, any sympathy she might have earned from me is counterbalanced by the fact that, were she in power, she'd order the state to kick people's heads in and throw them in prison.

A suitable punishment for the people she hates already exists. The social stigma of making such comments. If one of my friends went on a homophobic rant, you can rest assured that they wouldn't be my friends for much longer.

She's just entertaining her violent fantasies. The rest of the people in the thread ignored the fact that this girl needs someone to talk to.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=38935#p38935

[Pitchguest]

Is it a safe space?

Exhibit number one for the day,

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2422

'Ladies and gentlemen' (when used in showbiz at least) is such an ingrained and decontextualised cliché that it's pretty much become a gender-neutral phrase. It's now one word, best said in an Elvis voice: 'layzgennulman'.

NO. FUCK YOU. CHECK YOUR FUCKING CISBINARY PRIVILEGE.

You be the judge.

Either Setar is a troll purposely winding people up (with support from the moderators), or he/she/xe/ze/xshe/s/h/it is a textbook case of cult personality made flesh. Reel them in all gullible like and that's what you'll end up as. A mindless husk, all ready to shout as loud as they can to please their overlords. I wouldn't be able to cope with the endless tension that's constantly emanating from that place.

[Westprog]

It's really cool that I've been banned so people can cast aspersions and make judgements about me while I'm unable to defend myself.

Yeah, i've noticed that with my own banning and others as well. It's really pathetically juvenile to continue a "discussion" after your opponent has been banned while acting like they haven't. It would be ok if they were debating honestly, but they are more interested in getting cheap shots in. I actually really do feel very sorry for some of those people. Although, if I met anyone as rude and arrogant as that in real life, I'd probably smack them in the chops.

I particularly note the list of banned people, together with the reasons for the ban - always containing an insult. In my case, it's a lie - and I suspect that that applies to many others. That they think that this kind of thing is OK says a lot about the values they espouse.

[Westprog]

This is encouraging, at least Mr. Samsa is in the ballpark of getting it:
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2440

I think we can all agree that what is 'excruciating detail' for one person may not be 'excruciating detail' for another person; for some people, mentioning that they were abused at all is more detail than they are comfortable sharing with other people, and for others excruciating detail involves more facts about what happened to them.

If the forum at large (or specifically its moderators) has not already grasped that concept though it might be that I should wait until it has matured somewhat before engaging with it fully again. In my experience of dealing with people who handle these things professionally I have never met anyone who failed to grasp that basic idea.

Yes, they don't seem to realise that simply because someone doesn't tell them upfront about bad things that have happened to them, or their own unprivileged position, then they are perforce privileged white males. The assumption is almost automatic now.

[Westprog]

And even worse, ceepolk, setar, cipher, grimalkin will hunt you down and bait you until you get permanently banned for defending yourself. This of course is done to make the forum a safe space.

That's precisely how my ban came about. Someone accused me of flailing, I accused them of crawling to the mods - bang, permanent ban.

[scott1328]

And even worse, ceepolk, setar, cipher, grimalkin will hunt you down and bait you until you get permanently banned for defending yourself. This of course is done to make the forum a safe space.

That's precisely how my ban came about. Someone accused me of flailing, I accused them of crawling to the mods - bang, permanent ban.

I was thinking of your case specifically. I lurk at RatSkep as well.

[Atheist Dude]

This is encouraging, at least Mr. Samsa is in the ballpark of getting it:
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2440

I think we can all agree that what is 'excruciating detail' for one person may not be 'excruciating detail' for another person; for some people, mentioning that they were abused at all is more detail than they are comfortable sharing with other people, and for others excruciating detail involves more facts about what happened to them.

If the forum at large (or specifically its moderators) has not already grasped that concept though it might be that I should wait until it has matured somewhat before engaging with it fully again. In my experience of dealing with people who handle these things professionally I have never met anyone who failed to grasp that basic idea.

Yes, they don't seem to realise that simply because someone doesn't tell them upfront about bad things that have happened to them, or their own unprivileged position, then they are perforce privileged white males. The assumption is almost automatic now.

Myself and everyone I know are both privileged and unprivileged. In some ways we're privileged, in other ways we're not, and to varying degrees. I suppose if I were to only focus on how I'm unprivileged, that would justify my curling up in a ball and crying myself to sleep every night, but what good would that do me?

[Atheist Dude]

And even worse, ceepolk, setar, cipher, grimalkin will hunt you down and bait you until you get permanently banned for defending yourself. This of course is done to make the forum a safe space.

That's precisely how my ban came about. Someone accused me of flailing, I accused them of crawling to the mods - bang, permanent ban.

I was thinking of your case specifically. I lurk at RatSkep as well.

Once the question "what do you want?" is asked, you're as good as gone. Unless of course, a person immediately starts to grovel like a scolded puppy. I've seen that happen only once, it was sad to watch as someone allowed themselves to be treated in that way.

It was like watching as a person getting treated like crap in public by their spouse and not defend themselves. I find that difficult to watch without saying something.

[scott1328]

Once the question "what do you want?" is asked, you're as good as gone. Unless of course, a person immediately starts to grovel like a scolded puppy. I've seen that happen only once, it was sad to watch as someone allowed themselves to be treated in that way.

It was like watching as a person getting treated like crap in public by their spouse and not defend themselves. I find that difficult to watch without saying something.

This wouldn't happen to be a certain individual whose handle is the same as the surname of a protagonist in a certain Kafka novel?

[Atheist Dude]

Once the question "what do you want?" is asked, you're as good as gone. Unless of course, a person immediately starts to grovel like a scolded puppy. I've seen that happen only once, it was sad to watch as someone allowed themselves to be treated in that way.

It was like watching as a person getting treated like crap in public by their spouse and not defend themselves. I find that difficult to watch without saying something.

This wouldn't happen to be a certain individual whose handle is the same as the surname of a protagonist in a certain Kafka novel?

Yes, it would.

I hold out hope that this person recognizes what's happened to them.

They've been manipulated!

[uncrystal]

My take on the most notorious A+ members is that they are people who feel very powerless in their everyday lives. Whether they are as powerless as they feel who knows. They take all the anger and frustration out on the first person "privileged" (and a privileged person is seemingly defined as someone who disagrees with the consensus of the members) who disagrees with them about anything.

It's clear that it is only a safe place for those they deem deserving of a safe place. If you're not "deserving" you get a big red fuck you, obviously.

[Sponsored content]