Pharyngula

Hey, is the blog still here?

Tap, tap. Can you hear me?

You sure? I heard that International Authorities were going to disappear me.

If you hadn’t heard that, you missed one of the most hilarious comment threads ever. After we made light of a pointless poll about the afterlife, various fans of that site were so horrified that many complaints were launched…and of course, the owner was so deeply committed to free speech that he simply deleted our contribution. One fellow was so indignant that he charged off to the Richard Dawkins forums to complain. He lists his grievances, and, boy, are you readers wicked people. You use rude language, you aren’t sufficiently respectful of loony ideas, and when people come here to tell you to shut up if you can’t say anything nice, you insult them.

I think I love you guys.

I am also very evil, because I link to sites with which I disagree, and then you loud, rude, skeptical hooligans go off and laugh at them. This was too much for Jonny-Boy, who wants us silenced.

Having failed to get this man to accept a single shred of responsibility for dragging his offensive website in the direction of other people who haven’t in any way requested its presence, and also for allowing deliberately offensive personal attacks to both appear and remain online in concern of me, I’m now wondering who I should start complaining to?

I’ve taken snapshots of all the content I’ve mentioned–including PZ’s remarks here–and I’m going to start emailing this stuff out to any relevant ISP’s, internet watchdog groups and scientific bodies in the States and Europe. Let’s see what other people make of it.

I also think it’s intellectually dishonest and harms the atheist cause–both points which I happen to care about.

I had hoped he’d be nice enough to cc this damning letter to me, since I’m sure it would put me in a very jolly mood, but I haven’t heard anything yet. The Western Civilization Internet Police haven’t dropped in on me yet, either. I’m facing a long afternoon of lab maintenance, the really dreary stuff that isn’t exciting at all, so being hauled off to the Hague for fomenting rowdiness on the internet would be an exciting and welcome relief.

How often have you heard the phrase, “harms the cause”? It’s getting a bit old; the only time it comes up seems to be when some over-cautious WATB gets worked up over someone who is trying to change the status quo, and especially when anyone actually dares to criticize bourgeois convention in the pursuit of a goal. It’s not a phrase I use, but it’s as good as donning a uniform for recognizing those timid souls who intend to stand in our way.

The “intellectually dishonest” accusation is a peculiar one. He’s applying it to me because I won’t go into your comments and edit them to remove profanity, harsh accusations, or worst of all, insults directed at Jonny-Boy. I’m not making this up — he actually suggests that I remove all the comments that offend him.

So that aside, please attend to those offensive comments aimed at me on your site (perhaps do it only as a one-off courtesy if you like) and feel free to replace those unwarranted, derogatory posts with animated pictures of little bunnies skipping around and eating grass–if it makes you feel better. That way you can still kind of rub my nose in the content when it’s gone and have another chuckle, only this time fully on me.

Poor fellow. He doesn’t understand that free speech means you let people say things which you find disagreeable, and that intellectual honesty doesn’t involve censoring everyone who disagrees with you. He also doesn’t seem to understand me at all — why would I feel good about shredding other people’s comments and replacing them with fluffy bunnies? Why do I need to censor other people’s ideas to laugh at him? Why do I owe him any courtesy at all?

I hope you see this. You might not. Jonny-Boy has big dreams of deleting the whole site.

Anyway we’ll see how this turns out. Don’t be surprised if you end-up wondering where Pharyngula went.

Because that would be intellectually honest and would help the atheist cause.


Amusing:

i-9cbb9c8f9aced85c1ef7c0d5459cf47d-jon.jpeg

Greg, the host of the Daily Grail, speaks, and confirms that he is an idiot. Why was he unhappy that I linked to a poll on his site?

My take is that you intentionally vandalised my site.

Take away his license to use the interwebs — I am gobsmacked that someone that stupid is actually contributing to it. (Oh, well, that’s hyperbole: I’ve read youtube comments and myspace pages, and I’m actually aware of how stupid you can be and get away with putting stuff on the web.)

Comments

  1. #1 Sven DiMilo
    February 28, 2009

    I followed those threads, and now I’m concerned for your safety, Dr. Myers. The WCIP SWAT teams are the least of your worries. Jonny-boy, in addition to being a WATB, is also an ITG (ha! a little link-humor; I mean Internet Tough Guy).
    Watch your kneecaps; all I’m saying.

  2. #2 PZ Myers
    February 28, 2009

    I’m not too worried about the kneecaps, but the ankle-biting might sting a little bit. I’m wearing extra thick socks, just in case.

  3. #3 Angela
    February 28, 2009

    Mr. JB

    You don’t get to dictate what appears or doesn’t appear on others’ blogs. Get your own blog and moderate the comments.

  4. #4 BABH
    February 28, 2009

    What you fail to understand, PZ, is that the internet is a series of tubes. Jonny-boy is just looking for the Internet Plumber.

  5. #5 ndt
    February 28, 2009

    JB, you seem to have two complaints. 1: people followed a hyperlink on the internet to a publicly-available web page and voted in an online poll that was set up so that anyone could vote in it.

    2: People on someone else’s blog made fun of you, sometimes using crude language.

    #1 is not legitimate complaint in any conceivable universe.

    On #2, I can see how your feelings were hurt. I suggest a twofold remedy. First, don’t read comments on other people’s blogs. Second, don’t say stuff that’s really stupid that other people are likely to make fun of.

    In closing, go fuck yourself.

  6. #6 KI
    February 28, 2009

    As one who is relatively new around here, I just want to say this is the only place I’ve ever wanted to actually bother saying anything (on the intertubes, anyway) because the combination of intelligence and fearless snark mixed with merciless adherence to actual factual reality is such an inspiration to my daily existence.
    Thank you, Dr. Myers.

  7. #7 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Self appointed censors and tone critics can be so bbbooorrriiinnnggg. We’ve had a few others drop by to complain about our tone. JonnyWhinny-boy was probably the worst of the bunch. Off to practice my offensive tone for the next critic…

  8. #8 woody
    February 28, 2009

    If lil Jon hauled out his benighted, withered wee-wee and started to spray piss AT me, I believe I’d have to kick his nuts up into his throat.

  9. #9 Grendels Dad
    February 28, 2009

    Why do I get the feeling that Jonny boy will be reading these comments with a small shuddering flinch after each one, as he mutters ?Thank you sir, may I have another?? under his breath?

  10. #10 druidbros
    February 28, 2009

    Well at least he didnt call in Bill O’Reilly and his Fox Security goons. But I’ll bet he did call his mother to cry about how mean we were to him then he called the UN to complain about his human rights.

  11. #11 H.H.
    February 28, 2009

    Yeah, I found the charges of intellectual dishonesty particularly puzzling. Since when is blunt honesty a form of dishonesty? If only these concern trolls spent a few seconds subjecting their own position to the same level of agonizing scrutiny they waste monitoring others they’d avoid making such fools of themselves.

  12. #12 Tabby Lavalamp
    February 28, 2009

    By Odin’s scruffy beard that Jon Howard cretin is a whiny little fucktard, a sad dungbrain, a pathetic loser, a morbidly stupid clown, a hollow-headed shitwit, and a rancid-minded assface.

    I just hope I didn’t hurt his feelings or sensibilities. Just in case… a bunny. http://omgbabies.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/little-bunny.jpg

  13. #13 Bogans
    February 28, 2009

    At first I thought the guy had a point, but the constant complaining that insults remain undeleted quickly became pathetic. It’s like he thinks insults have some power over him as long as they’re left on the site, maybe he feels he has to keep rereading them over and over as long as they’re here? Maybe he’s new to the internets?

  14. #14 Ryogam
    February 28, 2009

    If only there was some way to keep all the ruffians from coming over to his pool and pissing in it and dunking his head and making all the cute girls laugh at him.

    Oh, what to do, what to do?

  15. #15 ndt
    February 28, 2009

    He seems to be in a huff about the use of profanity. From that I conclude that he is either my grandmother or a kindergarten teacher.

  16. #16 Reginald Selkirk
    February 28, 2009

    and also for allowing deliberately offensive personal attacks to both appear and remain online in concern of me, I’m now wondering who I should start complaining to?

    I’d complain to that James Madison character, I hear the Bill of Rights, free speech and all, is all his fault.

  17. #17 Kees
    February 28, 2009

    All other things aside I would not mind having PZ visit the Hague (being a resident). FSM knows us Dutch folks need him now more than ever.
    Ontopic: How is it there are so many people who fail to realize there are places on the Internet where people are not nice to you. More so if you keep whining. I’m willing to bet most people on this blog would have had already forgotten about this particular poll if it weren’t for the reminder.

  18. #18 Coyote
    February 28, 2009

    He seems awful uptight about profanity and insults. So to Johnny_B, Greg, and possibly Limbo, I say:

    FUCKING SHITEHEADED GORRAM SONSABITCHIN GOATFUCKERS.

  19. #19 Ashman
    February 28, 2009

    I don?t think you?d disagree that the issue is very complex and fused into a wider ethical framework.

    This seems particularly silly. There is nothing complex about free speech or belief in the afterlife. One of these is a very laudable thing for civilized society, the other is a bunch of shit.

    Saying something is complex or intricate doesn’t make it so. Believing in Santa Claus is not particularly complex, either.

  20. #20 damnedyankee
    February 28, 2009

    I suggest another solution to keep those bad ol’ internet bullies at bay…

  21. #21 Pareidolius
    February 28, 2009

    Hooo boy, he seems to have thrown down the famous WATB challenge, the “twatwah”. It’s fashioned after, and delivered with all the spittle spraying passion of the Islamic fatwah . . . by a complete and utter twat. Oh, and it’s utterly safe as a kitten. No harm has ever come to the recipient of a twatwah, except from laughing too hard. Actually, I’m way more worried about that crafty octopus in Santa Monica . . .

  22. #22 tony
    February 28, 2009

    most people on this blog would have had already forgotten about this particular poll if it weren’t for the reminder

    I missed a poll!

    Oh Noes!!eleventy-onel1II!
    ;P

  23. #23 Chayanov
    February 28, 2009

    That’s right up there with “It’s not what you said, it’s how you said it.” *Boo hoo, boo hoo*

  24. #24 Hank Fox
    February 28, 2009

    Gosh. Did Jonny only just now discover the Internet?

    He sounds “new.”

  25. #25 NewEnglandBob
    February 28, 2009

    Another mosquito swatted.

    Where is that spray for cretins?

  26. #26 Lana
    February 28, 2009

    Oh, dear. Will you naughty boys just settle down and stop being so rude? Not all boys are hooligans. Some are sensitive beings who must never be exposed to anything offensive.

    Hmm. Wait a minute. I’m not offended by much of anything except people who take offense. So when he gets offended, he’s offending me. Is that right? Oh, my. It’s all so confusing.

  27. #27 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Where is that spray for cretins?

    I think it’s in the same cupboard as the spare cojones for trolls like Whinny-boy. They need a pair so they don’t get offended.

  28. #28 QrazyQat
    February 28, 2009

    They’re “harming the cause” is why Condi Rice’s father opposed MLK’s methods. If only he’d succeeded in stopping MLK’s group we’d have enacted a civil rights act in the 60s.

    Next week: how Obama’s atheist mother caused Hitler.

  29. #29 Sili
    February 28, 2009

    Not that I’m a great believer in syncronisity, but “we appreciate your concern“.

  30. #30 AnthonyK
    February 28, 2009

    Don’t be surprised if you end-up wondering where Pharyngula went

    I give up. Where did it go?

    The whole thing reminds me of this (oh go on, you know you want to):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL9oA1LFoMw

  31. #31 The Atheist Missionary
    February 28, 2009

    Sorry this is off topic:

    Happy Saturday to all. I hope you are enjoying your well deserved weekends.

    In an effort to create some controversy today and to honour the Professor on the cusp of his North American speaking tour, I pose the question: Does teaching your child to believe in God amount to child abuse?:

    http://www.atheistmissionary.com/2009/02/does-teaching-your-child-to-believe-in.html

    Best regards,

    The Atheist Missionary

    P.S. If there was some way we could arrange a post-talk pub at MSU for RichardDawkins.net members, that would be awesome. If anyone is familiar with a good location in East Lansing, let’s get that arranged. I am making a 5 hour trek in order to attend and I will be up for a beer after the talk.

  32. #32 SC, OM
    February 28, 2009

    I can actually make this fit here as it’s a recording by Open Media Boston.

    :)

    Pardis Sabeti’s talk the other day on Evolution in the Post-Genomic Age:

    http://www.openmediaboston.org/node/554

  33. #33 A. Noyd
    February 28, 2009

    I think part of Jonny-Boy’s problem is he doesn’t realize that one doesn’t apply different standards of “polite” to oneself and the rest of the world.

    Jonny’s timeline of events from RD.net w/ emphasis:

    PZ dropped his site on Greg…I went to Greg?s site…I followed the link back out to PZ…watched a 2nd blog appear there…spotted this was a foul…called it (politely)…got insulted (not so politely)…made the mistake of thinking Dawkins would have no truck with such unfair rubbish (more fool me)…came here to give a heads up (another mistake)…and now I?m taking some action as it seems like the only way I?m going to get an apology or any recognition of the point you force me to keep making.

    Considering he started out in full whine mode while tossing insults about and promising to tell on Daddy Dawkins before any return insults were fired his way, he’s either delusional or one of the most convincing “fake” trolls I’ve ever seen.
    He’s very proud of himself, though:

    This is one of the few times I?ve been able to step-back, look at numerous comments I?ve made online and not crticise myself for resorting to any cheap debating tricks.

    And the boy wants to be taken seriously?

  34. #34 faux mulder
    February 28, 2009

    western civilization internet police here, we have a warrant. come out with your keyboard down.

  35. #35 AllanW
    February 28, 2009

    I think post #12 sums it up nicely :)

  36. #36 The Atheist Missionary
    February 28, 2009

    Correction to post #31: I meant to say both RichardDawkins.net members and Pharyngula readers. We’re all one big happy family aren’t we?

  37. #37 decius
    February 28, 2009

    PZ, apologies in advance for taking advantage of the lack of moderation in your blog.

    I just wanted to say to Jon_Howard that he is a whining twat. I couldn’t do it in RD’s forum , which is heavily moderated against personal insults (contrary to rd.net’s front page).
    That’s probably the reason why the thin-skinned jerk with the hobby of concern trolling brought his nonsensical criticism over there, lest he would get treated here as he deserved.

    One last thing, Jon. Go and fuck yourself.

  38. #38 Master Mahan
    February 28, 2009

    How *dare* you interfere with the scientific validity of my non-scientific poll?! How *dare* you visit my site and make me suffer the agony of an increased number of visitors?! How *dare* you make a mockery of my attempts to mock you?! You, PZ Myers (if that is your real name), are truly a monster worse than the love child of Hitler and Darwin.

    And how do I know you’re wrong about the existence of the afterlife? Because, good “sir”… I was a ghost the whole time!

    *fades out of frame*

  39. #39 Patricia, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Hot dawg! We got an upgrade from rowdies to hooligans.

    Over on Dawkins site one poster said PZ is running his own song and dance version of Lady Divine’s Cavalcade of Perversions. How nice of them to have noticed. :)

  40. #40 Rodger T NZ
    February 28, 2009

    To the gulag with you mr PZ ,you strident atheist you, hurter of feelings and allround nasty person.

    JH farts in your general direction and waves his private parts at your aunties.

  41. #41 Rachel I
    February 28, 2009

    Relevant only to Pharyngula as a whole, I discovered that much of “Science Made Stupid” was posted online, and thought people here could put this page to good use:

    http://www.besse.at/sms/descent.html

  42. #42 Michelle
    February 28, 2009

    This reminds me of when I started on the internet. I was about 11, 12 years old, and it was sorta brand new and fancy. I would mostly hang out in chatrooms and new fancy little bulletin boards.

    Now I remember one threat kids loved to make whenever you insulted them on THE SERIOUS INTERNET is “I have your IP! I’m gonna complain to your ISP and you won’t touch internet ever again!”. Ensued was the kid I was arguing me writing letters to my ISP. Of course, nothing ever happened. D’uh.

    That’s the level of threat that overgrown kid is giving you. He’s acting like a brat that doesn’t know the interwebs isn’t working like that.

  43. #43 Menyambal
    February 28, 2009

    As best as I can recall from that “Made Them Cry” thread, somebody on the Grail site was bitching because nobody from here signed up to Grail to comment. Now someone complains that someone did comment? PZ never said to comment, for what that’s worth.

    I wrote in a thread comment for Greg, “Awfully brave of you to show up. Seriously. Good man, Greg. Welcome, and good luck. Enjoy, and learn lots–I always do.” His reply to that part was, “What an odd thing to say. Why should it require bravery to comment on an internet forum?”

    Granted, I’d said something about stupidity earlier in the comment when I was addressing his actions, but I was trying to compliment what I felt was good about him at the end. You know, be civil. He didn’t want it.

    I, for one, have been civilly disagreeing with various crazies for years, and will not be instructed on how to do so, thanks. Greg and John_H are whining, and perhaps a bit spoiled.

    I’m thinking that the comments implying that PZ has delusions of grandeur because he runs a blog are projection, pure and simple, as often done by the woo-woo types. Greg thinks that he deserves extra-special treatment because he runs a blog. He’s jealous that he hasn’t as many minions as PZ, has no flying monkeys, and gets no frickin’ respect outside his little world.

    PZ earns the respect that he gets, and truly has no minions. I only keep using that word so I’ll get promoted to flying monkey.

  44. #44 Schmeer
    February 28, 2009

    Dear John-boy,
    Freedom of speach motherfucker. If you don’t like it, don’t read it, fuckwad.
    p.s. I hope this comment won’t cause a case of “the vapors” for your delicate self.

  45. #45 sph965
    February 28, 2009

    I looked over the beginning of that discussion over at the RD forums. The most ridiculous part of all this is that he claims that the commenters here are all uncivil and offensive. I do see a few posts over at the comments on your last article about the Daily Grail complaining about this that could probably be fairly called offensive by some people (One post calls Greg an asshole.) but, from what I’ve seen, the commenters here are a pretty civil group.

  46. #46 eigenvector
    February 28, 2009

    And what exactly is the Hague going to try you for? Exposing the obvious logical stupidity of creationism, a conclusion available to anyone with a functioning brain? The only thing the Hague could possibly do is give you a hero’s welcome! Fight on!

  47. #47 Bride of Shrek OM
    February 28, 2009

    Hey Patricia

    Remember the “Dear Sir” thread of ’08 when you and I officially gained slut status after the whining of that idiot Brenda who got her sensibilities all ruffled by Pharyngula?

    I think Jonny may be her brother, they’ve both got the same whiny-arse tone.

  48. #48 Patricia, OM
    February 28, 2009

    *TING* Menyambal you are now a flying monkey.

  49. #49 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    I only keep using that word so I’ll get promoted to flying monkey.

    Great! How soon can you evolve wings?

  50. #50 Zeno
    February 28, 2009

    I am a remarkably meek and clean-spoken person who sedulously eschews swear words, but I think Jonny-Boy should go screw himself. (Was that too harsh? So sorry!)

  51. #51 Todd
    February 28, 2009

    It’s almost as if Jon has time traveled to the present from 1998 with an AOL trial CD in hand.

  52. #52 ndt
    February 28, 2009

    If Johnny thinks an ISP will respond to complaints about profanity, he obviously has never seen tubgirl or two girls one cup.

    Johnny, whatever you do, don’t Google either of those phrases. It’s for your own good.

  53. #53 PZ Myers
    February 28, 2009

    I’ll repeat here a comment I left on the thread at the RDF about Jonny_Boy’s characterization of Pharyngula.

    Just to correct one very significant error in Jon_Howard’s opening post, please note this description:

    Myers? forum lit-up with streams of insulting, off-balance and mean-spirited comments aimed at the place they were using as a hit-and-run target.

    Go ahead and take a look at the thread . Reality and Jon_Howard have little to do with one another.

    There is almost no discussion at all of the Daily Grail site — there is one comment that commends the site for including the “no evidence” option. There is discussion of the various kinds of evidence people use, like NDEs and EVPs, and in my opening article, I stated my opinion of those lines of ‘evidence’. There is almost no profanity or insults. People are having an amused conversation about the topic.

    If that comment thread were sentient and litigious, it would have grounds to sue for libel.

    So, yeah, both Jonny_Boy and Greg were thin-skinned, lying wankers.

  54. #54 Patricia, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Bride of Shrek, Oh boy do I remember that one! I got accused of descending into obscenities too. *Me*

    Brenda one upped whiney boy though, Seed did waggle their finger at PZ.

    That was a fun thread!

  55. #55 Carlie
    February 28, 2009

    Direct quote from Jon at one of the links:

    my main complaint is that your site is IMO very definately a sewer. In fact it more properly stinks like a brothel at low-tide.

    Yeah, that’s much more civil than telling someone to fuck off. What world does he live in, again? Oh, right, the one where he gets to be uncivil and then whine that no one else is, either.

  56. #56 PZ Myers
    February 28, 2009

    People did get very abusive here…but only after these two charlatans flew into a snit and called attention to themselves and their wankery. When you set yourself up as a capering target, expect to get slathered in rotten fruit.

    Oh, and what is all this talk of promotion to “flying monkey”? That’s one of the lowest ranks in the Cabal. The officer class starts at “Tentacled Predator”.

  57. #57 Aquaria
    February 28, 2009

    He thinks we’re rude? BWAHAHAHAHA.

    I don’t think he’s ever heard of Something Awful, 4chan or Anonymous.

    Where’s a b-tard when you need one?

  58. #58 Julie K
    February 28, 2009

    Donning the thin-skinned lying wanker suit is the only thing left for those who have nothing to back up their extraordinary claims. Just think how Whiney-Boy and Greg could have put us all in our places if they had produced valid evidence! But no, they just whine how meeeeean we all are. Pathetic.

  59. #59 Kevin
    February 28, 2009

    I read all Pharyngula’s posts in an RSS reader, but I rarely click through to read or post in the comments sections.

    On this occasion I have, and it seems to me that Jonny Boy may have a point. Even if he doesn’t, I don’t think he deserves to be labelled a “concern troll”, which implies he’s some kind of liar or mole, just for speaking his mind on matters of politeness.

    On Pharyngula, is it always the case that somebody who doesn’t agree with the prevailing opinion is automatically labelled, by some, a “troll”?

    I’m worried that this is the kind of straw-man tactic the other side uses, and might portray the secular cause in a bad light.

  60. #60 RM
    February 28, 2009

    I’d love to know how to disappear things.

  61. #61 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    I’m beginning to believe there is a Nisbetian archetype personality which must obsessively attack anyone who does not prescribe to his mode of behavior or assume his sensibilities toward issues. Jonny-Boy is obviously of this personality type with a sensitivity for course language.
    One of you Psych egg heads out there should do a study. Uncle Tom Compulsion in Nontheistic Rejectionists: The Nisbetian Framing Personality Disorder. ; p

  62. #62 Sauceress
    February 28, 2009

    Jon Howard, I’m going to report you to the intertubes police for being a serially boring whining wanker. Have a nice day!

  63. #63 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    IIRC (I caught the tail end of the action in the morning), the commenters did follow the three post rule. And Greg and Whinny weren’t shy about mixing it up either. I suspect they thought we would bow, scrape, and apologize, but when we didn’t, and pointed out the steps they should have taken, they were thoroughly confused and hurt. I think they still want us to apologize for crashing their poll, and are using the tone argument to apply pressure. I give them a middle finger salute for their efforts.

  64. #64 Kyle W.
    February 28, 2009

    Fucking laughable, mahn.

  65. #65 Greg Laden
    February 28, 2009

    PZ, you may have gone too far this time. We’ll see.

  66. #66 Tor A H
    February 28, 2009

    Seeing all the hubbub caused by strange people after linking to that poll makes me so proud.

    :D

  67. #67 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    We’re sinking! Okay, everybody over to Greg Laden’s blog!

  68. #68 Somnolent Aphid
    February 28, 2009

    Always happy to be your minion.

  69. #69 varlo
    February 28, 2009

    What a whiny nutso.

  70. #70 Zmidponk
    February 28, 2009

    I really like his attitude – I’ve been holding a discussion with him over there about his apparant vote-rigging, and it’s been very amusing watching him try to justify it. As a summary of what his most pertinent points seem to be, here’s a short list:

    -Pharyngula’s readers votes weren’t valid when they voted first, and won’t be valid for the rest of this week, but will magically become valid after he resets the ‘there is no evidence’ votes again next week sometime. Meanwhile, anyone who votes for any other option than ‘there is no evidence’ casts a valid vote, no matter when they vote.

    -PZ Myers is ‘childish’ because he succeeded in doing what he set out to do, prove the poll is pointless, but it’s in no way childish to remove votes from the poll because you didn’t like the way those folk voted.

    -Apparantly, the comments here are proof that their poll is very important to PZ Myers and the rest of the regulars over here (even though, it seems to me, most of the comments seem to indicate a strong amusement at it, and the events surrounding it).

    -Stringing together the most insulting language he can find in the comments made to him is an accurate sampling of the commentary made to him on this blog.

    -In order to criticise him on his apparant poll-tampering, I have to gain control of Pharyngula from PZ Myers and start censoring the comments that insulted or offended him.

  71. #71 Kseniya
    February 28, 2009

    It’s nice to see that the site is still up. I sure was scared about that.

    [snicker]

  72. #72 Capital Dan
    February 28, 2009

    This John Howard asshole is actually serious?!?

    I thought he was just having a bit of fun pretending to mimic the whining of the soft-skulled hordes, but his panties are actually in a knotted little twist?!?

    What… a… TOOL!

  73. #73 TLSHULL
    February 28, 2009

    my main complaint is that your site is IMO very definately a sewer. In fact it more properly stinks like a brothel at low-tide.

    Uhm…brothels smell at low-tide? I’ve been to a few (former LE) and uhm…nowhere near an ocean – and frankly…smelled like Lysol. *Inhales through nose*

    Smells like…Lysol and sex actually.

  74. #74 Cheezits
    February 28, 2009

    Weren’t you supposed to be fired from your job by now, or have God smite you or something?

    I hope you’re keeping track of all the times the death of this blog has been predicted/threatened. This can’t be the first time.

    I can’t believe he actually expects you to delete comments that *he* doesn’t like from *your own* blog! *ROFL*

  75. #75 blueelm
    February 28, 2009

    I’m looking through the thread on the RD site. Lots of tl;dr.

    Jon: once people give up on reasoning with you they’re only posting for the lulz!

    “On this occasion I have, and it seems to me that Jonny Boy may have a point. Even if he doesn’t, I don’t think he deserves to be labelled a “concern troll”, which implies he’s some kind of liar or mole, just for speaking his mind on matters of politeness.

    On Pharyngula, is it always the case that somebody who doesn’t agree with the prevailing opinion is automatically labelled, by some, a “troll”?

    I’m worried that this is the kind of straw-man tactic the other side uses, and might portray the secular cause in a bad light.”

    It’s pretty common on any forum for a person who comes into a thread hopping mad with a crusade to be called a troll. A troll is not always insincere, and a troll is not always stupid. I wouldn’t personally have called him a troll, but the “harming the cause” thing is silly. If we can’t be seen as whole and diverse human beings who happen to share a skeptical attitude, then there is no cause anyway.

  76. #76 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    Kseniya:
    Are you taking Pharyngula for granted? (Good to see you post again)

  77. #77 'Tis Himself
    February 28, 2009

    Were Jonny_Boy’s feelings hurt? Poor fluffy. Well, fret no more, Mr. Jonny_Boy. I shall chastise those miscreants with vindictive that I learned in my country’s naval service. To wit:
    Oh you mean nasties, stop being so mean and nasty. Jonny_Boy’s nerves are not robust and he does not take ridicule easily.
    You may rest easy, Jonny_Boy. I have berated the uncouth Myers’ minions.

    My bill will be coming forthwith.

  78. #78 JWC
    February 28, 2009

    I hear the hookers in The Hague are world-class.

  79. #79 JWC
    February 28, 2009

    (I hope that offended Johnny Boy, or should I have said the man-ho’s?)

  80. #80 JoshS, Official SpokesGay
    February 28, 2009

    I saw Jonny Boy lurking on the Epic Drama Thread he started on the Dawkins forum this morning, and was sorely disappointed he didn’t chime in again. Lots of us have been trouncing his prissy whining (and that of the other “concerned” forum members), and I’m getting tired of waiting for him to show up. Damn it.

  81. #81 Julie K
    February 28, 2009

    It’s always sad when the squeaky toy stops squeaking.

  82. #82 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    We do tend to use a blanket tag of “troll” to all dissenters, angry or not, just as Coke is the generic term for any soft drink in Texas. We need new designations like KOAIS (King of all I survey), Tone Cop, Behavior Cop, MTP (missing the point), YNTRTAF (You need to read the archives first!) or WABTTA (We’ve already been through this, asshole! YNTYRAF!) and the Neo or YNHAY (You’re new here, aren’t you?)
    AYFKM?! will do in a pinch.

  83. #83 Zarquon
    February 28, 2009

    So John Howard is a spineless wanker? Millions of Australians would agree.

  84. #84 cody
    February 28, 2009

    This makes me think we ought to be more offensive, rude, derogatory and invasive. I am deeply offended by the large number of followers of such atrocious organizations, they offend the species’ defining characteristic: intelligence.

    I’ll leave the religious alone just as soon as they stop interfering with scientific, social, medical and cultural progress in the name of tinkerbell or some equivalent.

    Bunnies for Jonny:
    http://flickr.com/photos/ccgd/32362649/sizes/l/
    http://lookwhatthecatdraggedin.wordpress.com/

  85. #85 puseaus
    February 28, 2009

    We all have our subjective ideas of what’s “offensive”. Some will be offended when you don’t share their ideas, or bow down to their ridiculous authorities. I guess if you think you are kind of god or lick religious power, that’s reasonable.

    Offensive PZ squid tank??? No way! This place smells like seafood in a nice french restaurant!

  86. #86 Mobius
    February 28, 2009

    But, but, but…

    PZ, don’t you realize that the religious have a God given right to not be offended? [/sarcasm]

    And, BTW, Jonny-Boy…Pthththththt!

  87. #87 IST
    February 28, 2009

    EV> Large numbers of commenters here occasionally MTP that dissent doesn’t equal troll. That might be the only thing Jonny Boy got right (unless that was someone else’s add-on to him).

  88. #88 CalGeorge
    February 28, 2009

    He sounds like the perfect companion for Matt Nisbet.

    Oh, and since he can’t stand all the bad language:

    Go fuck yourself, Jon.

  89. #89 Larry
    February 28, 2009

    I was lazy and didn’t read all of the comments. But my
    question is (if not mentioned above): Shouldn’t we have a
    law requiring a psychological test to determine if one is sane enough to own a computer or even get close to one??

  90. #90 Bryn
    February 28, 2009

    C’mon now, P.Z., the only reason you want to get summoned to the Hague is the possibility of getting some really good beer.

    I love how the upright, rigidly-moral, God-fearin’, “I’m so patriotic, my undershorts hurt” nutjobs keep forgetting about freedom of speech. Oh, wait–they only want to drop it when it’s *other* people’s speech; theirs, of course, should remain free. (insert rolling eyes) If you need a “fluffy bunny”, my houserabbit would be proud to serve. I won’t let her, though. Jon may have some, um, “unclean thoughts” about our lagomorph cousins.

  91. #91 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    EV> Large numbers of commenters here occasionally MTP that dissent doesn’t equal troll.

    Ummm, I believe that was my point, IST. Troll =dissenter, but dissenter does not necessarily =troll.

  92. #92 AnthonyK
    February 28, 2009

    Shouldn’t we have a
    law requiring a psychological test to determine if one is sane enough to own a computer or even get close to one?

    I don’t really think so.
    Oh, personal reasons.

  93. #93 Anonym
    February 28, 2009

    #65 – PZ, you may have gone too far this time. We’ll see.

    O-o-o-h, be afwaid; be vewy, vewy afwaid!

  94. #94 Insightful Ape
    February 28, 2009

    Hi JB. I just wanted to say, if you don’t like the meanies, you can sit on my middle finger and swivel.
    Oh, and PZ, hope you’ll have fun wearing your thick socks in the Hague.

  95. #95 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    Dammit, I pissed a punch line.

    IST: TROLL! :p

  96. #96 Ken
    February 28, 2009

    I came for the science, stuck around for the atheism and keep coming pack for the comedy.

    PZ, your blog’s comment threads are almost as funny as the glory days of talk.origins. Keep up the great work.

  97. #97 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    Avast Greg Laden! Prepare to be boarded!
    Surely you’ll provide safe haven for the Pharyngula hordes…

  98. #98 AlanWCan
    February 28, 2009

    ndt #5:

    In closing, go fuck yourself.

    The ony way that could have been any better is tagged with “Respectfully”
    ndt FTW!

  99. #99 Azkyroth
    February 28, 2009

    EV> Large numbers of commenters here occasionally MTP that dissent doesn’t equal troll. That might be the only thing Jonny Boy got right (unless that was someone else’s add-on to him).

    I think what’s happening is that when people show up and argue in a genuinely intellectually dishonest or unreasonable fashion, commenters tend to assume they’re being intentionally provocative or contrary, whether or not they’re also sincere. Which, given their obstinacy and persistence, is a reasonable assumption.

  100. #100 PZ is living in his own little world
    February 28, 2009

    PZ said:

    “You use rude language, you aren’t sufficiently respectful of loony ideas, and when people come here to tell you to shut up if you can’t say anything nice, you insult them.”

    Yea that’s just what happened. In your mind PZ, I’m sure that’s it.

    When he instigates idiotic actions on other people who respond in kind, he blogs like crazy about it whining away for DAYS that the other people are complaining like babies. Um WHO is complaining? WHO started it? Nobody told anyone to shut up. They just said that blowing out someone?s internet poll is a jerky thing to do. When the raspberry response came back at them it was obvious what type of people they were dealing with.

    The bottom line is you started a stupid rant on another group of people who you were ill informed about and they refused to take the idiotic rantings sitting down. Those people came back with actual discussion and counterpoint and you RANTED BACK! You have shown you are an imbecile to so many people at this point and pretending that this is just how you like it isn’t going to make it go away.

    Most people aren’t as stupid as you give them credit for. Your idiotic rantings are obvious and people don’t need me to point it out. Go ahead and keep this up and you’ll be left with 15 posters who agree with your nutty rationalizations about your childish behavior. You may have had good points in the past but that doesn’t give you enough leeway to be an idiot for the remainder of your life.

    Nyaaa Nyaaa Nyaaa you are loony because you believe in god! You are loser doody dumheads! Yea good idea PZ, I feel like I learned something. I learned that you might be intelligent but you?re not very wise.

  101. #101 Irene
    February 28, 2009

    “If that comment thread were sentient and litigious, it would have grounds to sue for libel.”

    Beautiful.

  102. #102 Marcus J. Ranum
    February 28, 2009

    Let’s see if I can follow all this (I just finished reading most of the thread on Dawkin’s site, too)

    1) guy posts a poll, it gets crashed
    2) guy comes to complain on blog A
    2b) guy gets laughed at
    3) guy then goes to blog B to complain about the shoddy characters on blog A
    3b) guy gets laughed at some more
    4) guy wants to complain to ISPs about blog A ….

    OK, I’ve figured it out: guy is a fucking retard.
    Oh, yeah:

    5) guy doesn’t like foul language on his tender ears

    does that sum it up? Can someone explain what is not laugh worthy about this guy’s performance?

  103. #103 co
    February 28, 2009

    Go ahead and keep this up and you’ll be left with 15 posters who agree with your nutty rationalizations about your childish behavior.

    *cough* Logic and history fail.

  104. #104 Bride of Shrek OM
    February 28, 2009

    #100

    Yes dear. Now go to sleep, the big people are talking.

  105. #105 Leander
    February 28, 2009

    “and of course, the owner was so deeply committed to free speech that he simply deleted our contribution”

    For Pete’s sake, would you just stop being a baby and hiding behind free speech ? If he had changed the results of the poll because he just didn’t like the result, you might have a point. If he does so however to restrict your sheeple crashing it after you mentioned it (because their lives seem to be so miserable that they need to lighten up by herd-voting on “pointless” internet polls…sad when you think about it), that’s perfectly legitimate.

    And you’re complaining about us whining and being thin-skinned when it comes to the kind of fun enjoyed and language used on here…do you really think offending “thin-skinned” people is the only thing that behaviour does ? Has it ever crossed your mind that you’re demonstrating to people who stop by here while educating themselves about science, materialism, atheism etc., that the owner of one of the biggest science blogs on the web, and his community, think this kind of harsh language is the proper one to engage in discussion ? And not just using this language, but to just go around and ridicule people just for thinking differently and the topics they pick for their polls…and then crashing these ? Maybe you wanna do a post about how that is helping the image of atheism and science. Seriously, I challenge you, enlighten the world on how that works.

    If you really don’t see what’s wrong with this picture…maybe you should start reflecting on that for a bit. From experience though I guess the only reply to this suggestion will be more clever, insanely funny replies and ridicule, instead of some serious thinking. Because you’re not interested in actual, mature and reasonable discussion one bit – and some part of you must know that. You’d of course never admit that, so bring on the ridicule and vitriol, you’re talented at that at least.

  106. #106 Marcus J. Ranum
    February 28, 2009

    Nyaaa Nyaaa Nyaaa you are loony because you believe in god! You are loser doody dumheads!

    I’ve found – seriously – that kind of abuse works better than reason. After all, if the faithful were capable of reason, they wouldn’t be faithful. They do, however, understand mockery. Sarcasm might work (but it’s often too subtle) and irony generally eludes them.

    So, yeah, “you godwhalloping creo doodypants!” is a pretty good comeback when someone starts talking about their imaginary friend. Extra points if you can deliver it in Elmer Fudd baby-talk voice of +5 sarcasm.

  107. #107 jt512
    February 28, 2009

    Pharyngula is still here, but ironically I’m getting a 503 error from the Daily Grail.

  108. #108 Azkyroth
    February 28, 2009

    Leander:

    What do you propose as an alternative, and what is your evidence that it would be more effective? If you’ve got a productive suggestion to contribute instead of finger-waggling and hand-wringing, make it, but as far as I can tell, you just “want the ocean without the roar of its many waters.”

  109. #109 co
    February 28, 2009

    Has it ever crossed your mind that you’re demonstrating to people who stop by here while educating themselves about science, materialism, atheism etc., that the owner of one of the biggest science blogs on the web, and his community, think this kind of harsh language is the proper one to engage in discussion?

    Ceiling cat apologizes.

  110. #110 caveman73
    February 28, 2009

    “You are all individuals!”……. “I’m Not.” ~ Life of Brian.

  111. #111 Kel
    February 28, 2009

    Concerned troll is concerned, and whiny. Did we hurt your feelings Johnny-boy? Well, good. Given you’ve spent so long complaining, trying to take the moral high-ground, maybe it is you who needs to grow up. Go fuck yourself Johnny-boy

  112. #112 Chris Tucker
    February 28, 2009

    Please address all complaints about rudeness, hooliganism, tom-foolery and other suchlike goings-on to The Elders of the Internet.

    Thank you!

  113. #113 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Poor Leander, he just can’t stop himself from being concerned. Guess what. Grow up, grow a pair and be a man. Whinny and concerned about tone is for boys. If you have real ideas and evidence to back them up, bring them out. Otherwise, you will be ridiculed. Make your choice and take the consequences thereof like a man. Or, just shut up.

  114. #114 Marcus J. Ranum
    February 28, 2009

    Because you’re not interested in actual, mature and reasonable discussion one bit – and some part of you must know that.

    Until I read this, I was amused – but now I’m just disgusted. You’re willing to assume that I was taking the time out of my busy day to read your postings just so I could laugh at you and show how clever I am.. But, what you apparently don’t realize, is that I don’t need to take the time to read your postings if that was all I was trying to do. You may not believe this but we’re not all brainless fanboys here – I’ve been trying to read through both sides of the argument and at least be fair. So much for that. Fuck you.

    Saying “you’re not interested in a REAL discussion…” is pathetic loserliness. It just screams “what I REALLY mean is that you’re not LETTING ME WIN!” Because, the only real discussion that’ll make you happy by being real enough is one you’re winning. Sorry, but you’ve burned any credibility you might have had – long ago. All that’s left now is giggling and pointing.

    The reason people aren’t listening to your carefully thought-out arguments is because it’s pretty obvious that you don’t actually have a point you’re trying to make other than that you want to win the argument.

    I wish there was some technology that let you smush a pie in someone’s face across the internet. :(

  115. #115 Knockgoats
    February 28, 2009

    If he does so however to restrict your sheeple crashing it after you mentioned it (because their lives seem to be so miserable that they need to lighten up by herd-voting on “pointless” internet polls…sad when you think about it) – Leander

    Come on, surely you can do better than that? How exactly would crashing a poll alleviate serious misery? You’re not really thinking what you’re saying, or you wouldn’t come out with such balderdash? The point of poll-crashing is – simply – to get a bit of amusement while demonstrating how ridiculous open internet polls are. Which it did. If Greg wanted to find out what his regular blog-readers thought, as he now claims, all he had to do was restrict the poll to those who had a login there before the poll was set up. We had a bit of fun at his expense, and he’s acting like it was a major human rights violation. Clearly he, like you and so many woo-ists, completely lacks a sense of proportion, and of the ridiculous.

  116. #116 Anonym
    February 28, 2009

    Posted by: Greg Laden | February 28, 2009 3:41 PM
    PZ, you may have gone too far this time. We’ll see.

    Reads like someone is honing his “terrible swift sword”.

  117. #117 E.V.
    February 28, 2009

    Anonym: Greg Laden is also a wonderful science blogger and good friend of our beloved Dr. Myers.
    He’s just yanking PZ’s chain.

  118. #118 ndt
    February 28, 2009

    OK, what’s the difference between voting in a poll and crashing a poll? If I vote in a poll that PZ didn’t tell me about, is that a legitimate vote that should be counted? What if I vote in a poll, and then later PZ mentions the poll? Is my vote retroactively invalid because I’m a fan of PZ? What if I find out about the poll from PZ, but vote differently than he suggests? Is it still an illegitimate vote because I followed a link from PZ’s site?

    See, here I was thinking all this time that if a poll was posted publicly on the internet, it meant the people who put it there intended it to be available for anyone to vote on. I have now learned that is not the case, so I need some guidance as to which polls I can legitimately vote on and which I cannot.

    Help me out, Leander.

  119. #119 Hockey Bob
    February 28, 2009

    Hey, Jonny-Boy… here’s a tip for you;

    When you find yourself at the bottom of an ever-deepening hole,

    SHUT THE FUCK UP!

    (I might have gotten my memes mixed up there, but I’m sure you can discern the gist of it.)

  120. #120 spinetingler
    February 28, 2009

    @ QrazyQat
    MLK’s methods…If only he’d succeeded in stopping MLK’s group we’d have enacted a civil rights act in the 60s.

    Yeah – the 2060’s.

  121. #121 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    February 28, 2009

    Most people aren’t as stupid as you give them credit for.

    How do you give someone credit for being stupid?

    maybe “you’re to stupid to know how stupid you are”?

    Or “Well at least you’re stupid enough to not have a fucking clue about what you’re talking about”?

    or maybe “I can excuse it because you’re obviously too stupid to form a compelling argument”

  122. #122 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    February 28, 2009

    They just said that blowing out someone?s internet poll is a jerky thing to do.

    Yes it is a horrible thing when people vote on a poll posted on the internet..

  123. #123 AdmiralNaismith
    February 28, 2009

    Have you seen this one yet? Definitely a top ten contender for Stupidest Christian in America (a hard contest to win, considering there are so many contenders). He’s trying to counter Kosher salt with an equal and opposite Christian salt.

    Because, evidently, Kosher salt is a footsoldier in the War on Christmas or something.

    http://www.volunteertv.com/home/headlines/40397472.html

  124. #124 Clevis Pinback
    February 28, 2009

    #100 & #105: nletbtl;dr

  125. #125 puseaus
    February 28, 2009

    This thread reminds me of my mother. She always interprets any problem that occurs within her horizon as her PERSONAL problem. I have to explain time and time again that no, it is not your responsibility this time! This is the world.

  126. #126 Allen N
    February 28, 2009

    PM and Leander you fatuous gits:

    I will repeat what other have pointed out before – if you only want the opinion of the faithful, restrict voting to membership. Otherwise, running an open poll is a request for input from the rest of the world. Guess what – we’re part of it.

    If you ever actually get involved in a serious discussion – the kind where you have something besides your opinion, you will find that you get very few “fuck off, dickweed” comments. Come in here off topic or with faulty information or a thin skin and whiny disposition, and you get “Shut the fuck up, you festering sack of syphlitic sheep shit!” Just like that.

  127. #127 Captain Louis Renault
    February 28, 2009

    I’m shocked, shocked to find that commenting is going on in here!

  128. #128 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    February 28, 2009

    I’m shocked, shocked to find that commenting is going on in here!

    Good point sir.

    PZ, I am shocked these people are coming and commenting on your blog un-invited.

  129. #129 Cruithne
    February 28, 2009

    Bad language?

    How in the name of jumping buggery can language be bad?
    It’s language you fuckwit, it’s not good or bad, it’s just language.
    Who the fuck in this day and age thinks it’s OK to tell other grown adults what words are and aren’t acceptable?
    You pissguzzling shitsniffing dickhole.

  130. #130 C. M. Baxter
    February 28, 2009

    If the Mormons can beef up the vote on a real issue, causing real damage to people’s lives and get away with it…well, just sayin…

    I don’t think PZ will be lawyering up any time soon.

  131. #131 Ryan
    February 28, 2009

    I am Ryan Stone, Chairman of the Make Nice on the Internet or We’ll Disappear Your Blog Committee. We make decorative pies for every meeting. Isn’t that sweet?

  132. #132 SEF
    February 28, 2009

    @ E.V. #82:

    We need new designations

    Too many acronyms (or even neologisms) would soon get confusing – and look very clique-like. However, there have been various cartoon series sub-categorising internet trolls/flamers/users and dodgy arguments (to which people could conceivably link as clarification). Eg:

    http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/
    http://fstdt.com/winace/pics/index.htm

    (They do keep moving their locations though!)

  133. #133 FSMdude
    February 28, 2009

    Posted by: Aquaria | February 28, 2009 3:28 PM
    «Where’s a b-tard when you need one?»

    /b/tard reporting in, sir! This thread needs more mudkips.

  134. #134 puseaus
    February 28, 2009

    Alcohol, Anger and Religion, was that it?

  135. #135 www.10ch.org
    February 28, 2009

    Considering how there are many non-believers, the words of one single non-believer is not likely to “harm the cause,” after all.

  136. #136 John Morales
    February 28, 2009

    Give Jonny-boy credit, he’s (so far) smart enough not to venture to this thread. Oh well.

    Perhaps he’s gotten a Clue.

  137. #137 Cruithne
    February 28, 2009

    He may not be posting but it’s a certainty that he’s reading.

  138. #138 clinteas
    February 28, 2009

    I was one of the first posters on the original thread to be rude to Greg,because not only did I feel he was whining,but also this “freedom of speech only applies to me” attitude rubbed me the wrong way,leaving aside the idiocy that if you put a public poll on a public website….

    Reading through all this whiny angry teenager “you are rude and wont let me win” BS,that he and his mate have now even taken to RD,I see I was right.
    Theyre actually much worse than I thought.

    E.V. @ 61 made me spill my coffee…:-)

  139. #139 pcarini
    February 28, 2009

    I was surprised, on a quick scanning of the RDF thread, to see how many people were complaining about PZ’s tone rather than anything that was done or said. As presumably rational adults shouldn’t we be able to distinguish the message from the tone by now, and respond to the message?

    I could understand the tone argument if the audience were pets and infants, but otherwise it’s a non-starter for me.

  140. #140 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    Dammit, I was on that thread when that twerp said he was tattling to R.D. I layed off him ’cause he was getting his.

    Jonny-boy, piss off you little pissant.

    There, I feel better now.

    (Ha ha, it was funny when someone told him R.D. posts here.)

  141. #141 Epikt
    February 28, 2009

    John Howard? Moe and Curly called. They want to get the act back together.

  142. #142 Carlie
    February 28, 2009

    Good grief, it’s pretty easy.

    Person dissents from post opinion, backing up their disagreement with solid information and rebutting against probes into their position with specifics:
    not a troll, and not called such.

    Person dissents from post opinion, but responds to any questioning with “You’re all mean and use bad words”: troll.

    Person dissents from post opinion, but responds to any questioning with “You’re all mean and use bad words and should SHUT UP so you don’t offend anyone”:
    concern troll.

    See? Easy. If you’ve been called a troll, check your posts and note where you’ve engaged in those behaviors. I haven’t seen people called trolls here who weren’t acting like one, even if that wasn’t their original intent.

  143. #143 Happy Trollop
    February 28, 2009

    Jonny_Boy:

    Some
    Knave
    Was
    Insufficiently
    Deferential
    On
    The
    Internet

    New Pharyngulite acronym! SKWIDOTI.

  144. #144 Larry
    February 28, 2009

    Hey, John, can you feel the love yet?

  145. #145 damnedyankee
    February 28, 2009

    I wish there was some technology that let you smush a pie in someone’s face across the internet. :(

    Were that so, then who would escape the meringue?

    Well, Firefox users, I reckon. Soon as the technology becomes available you can bet there’d be a PieBlock add-on posted in just under six hours, cuz that’s how we roll.

    IE users on the other hand, well, best put on a bib before turning on the computer.

    Am I forgetting anything? Oh yeah: Fuck you, Jon. And your WATB concern troll buddies.

  146. #146 Menyambal
    February 28, 2009

    I like how some people always know what my life must be like to act the way I do, what my motives are and what I’m thinking, and how they miss by a mile. Well, to take my turn at it, I’m thinking they are still struggling with the concept that other people even have a point of view.

    Actually, I’m thinking I need to go let the dog out to play in the snow.

  147. #147 bastion of sass
    February 28, 2009

    Geez, PZ! Better hide your cyberpistol!!

    Looks like Jon the Cybernanny thinks your having a cyberpistol makes the intertubes too distressing dangerous for the easily offended decent readers who don’t know that, instead of whining not only here but in Dawkins’ forum couragously engaging in reasoned dissent with your rational and amused commenters mean, foulmouthed minions, they can stop reading this blog and its comments whenever they feel their delicate sensibilities are offended only want you adhere to their standards of propriety to help you make your blog a friendlier place for all, and wants to confiscate your cyberpistol!

  148. #148 PZ is living in his own little world
    February 28, 2009

    RE: pcarini

    “I was surprised, on a quick scanning of the RDF thread, to see how many people were complaining about PZ’s tone rather than anything that was done or said. As presumably rational adults shouldn’t we be able to distinguish the message from the tone by now, and respond to the message?”

    The issue is that PZ incited the situation in the first place and then got all huffy when people took offense to it. Then he escalated the whiny crying by continuing to blog about it for days after the event. If there is a point to his actions it is either that he wanted to shout down a dissenting opinion or that he is an adult-child idiot. If he actually wanted to address the issue and attempt to tell the people that belief in an afterlife makes them idiots, why crash a stupid internet poll on the issue anyhow? Is that what he?s reduced to? Why not discuss it with them and tell them WHY they are wrong? Does that take too much time? Is he assuming they are too stupid to understand his intelligence?

    He has no interest in actually debating the issue or hearing what others have to say, he just wanted to crash the poll and have a nice night thinking about the fun time he had at the idiot after-lifers expense. While I don?t doubt his belief that he feels people who believe in an afterlife are idiots, I also don?t doubt that he does not have a true concept of reality in that his narrow vision of humanity does not take into account people other than himself and his views.

  149. #149 Azkyroth
    February 28, 2009

    Too many acronyms (or even neologisms) would soon get confusing – and look very clique-like. However, there have been various cartoon series sub-categorising internet trolls/flamers/users and dodgy arguments (to which people could conceivably link as clarification). Eg:

    http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/
    http://fstdt.com/winace/pics/index.htm

    (They do keep moving their locations though!)

    I’m rather fond of this one I came up with. ^.^

  150. #150 bastion of sass
    February 28, 2009

    PZ wrote:

    I think I love you guys.

    think? think?!

    Sounds as though you’re just not that into us. :-(

  151. #151 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    “Harms the cause”

    What utter bullshit. R.D.s site perhaps carries the banner for “the cause”, and that’s his choice, more power to him.

    THIS site is a rowdy, rollicking place by and for atheists to speak their minds and to call the stupid stupid. The likes of stupid Barb showing up on a porn thread and complaining she’s in a “pit of vipers” and Jonny-boy, Leanders and the rest, complaining about manners and language, what the fuck, go to the Nicey-Nice site.

    Greg, think of how much better things might have gone if you came here and said “Ha ha, very funny you guys, thanks for crashing my poll. By the way, I took great delight in deleting your poll-crash, smart-asses.” That would have been very well received here, I wager.

    Barb, I took great delight in offending your sensibilities. If you post your address, I will send you a dildo. Jonny-boy, you are a dildo.

    And the rest of you “harms the cause” types, fucking fuck off. Nothing that goes on here is one-tenth as offensive as Phelps and his godhatesfags shit. Nothing that goes on here is one-tenth as offensive as the “lake of fire for all eternity” threats.

    “I know what god thinks” is what’s truly offensive.

    *End Rant*

  152. #152 Azkyroth
    February 28, 2009

    Why not discuss it with them and tell them WHY they are wrong? Does that take too much time? Is he assuming they are too stupid to understand his intelligence?

    Why are whiny trolls so down on pattern recognition?

  153. #153 Aquaria
    February 28, 2009

    Okay, FSMDude, I haven’t been able to reach one of your compatriots yet, so I leave everything in your capable hands. ;)

  154. #154 Katkinkate
    February 28, 2009

    Posted by: Ken @ 96 “I came for the science, stuck around for the atheism and keep coming pack for the comedy.”

    +1 :)

  155. #155 John Morales
    February 28, 2009

    @148: Your pseudonym (PZ is living in his own little world) is revealing.

    Anyway

    [1] He [PZ] has no interest in actually debating the issue or hearing what others have to say, he just wanted to crash the poll and have a nice night thinking about the fun time he had at the idiot after-lifers expense. [2] While I don?t doubt his belief that he feels people who believe in an afterlife are idiots, [3] I also don?t doubt that he does not have a true concept of reality [4] in that his narrow vision of humanity does not take into account people other than himself and his views.

    1. Noted.
    2. Noted.
    3. Noted.
    4. Noted.

    I see projection.

  156. #156 JFK, hypercharismatic telepathical knight
    February 28, 2009

    9. PZ has allowed personal, offensive and expletive strewn comments in concern of myself to both appear and remain on his site.

    So now I admit he?s got me. I really am annoyed

    Jon_Howard is an ass pimple.

    And finally, my view of atheism remains intact but my view of certain atheists does not.

    An ass pimple who thinks he deserves a pat on the back from atheists because he’s an atheist too. (Jon_Howard, meet Walton.) Maybe he’d be happier joining the Freemasons.

    The issue is that PZ incited the situation in the first place and then got all huffy when people took offense to it.

    I haven’t seen PZ get huffy. I have seen him laughing his beard off. Maybe he was trying to catch his breath between guffaws.

  157. #157 Valor Phoenix
    February 28, 2009

    The Results of my completely scientific like poll at an amazing 16 votes.

    The original poll was sorta hilarious.
    0 (0%)

    As above, but the indignant response of the pollster to being Pharyngulized was actually funnier.
    1 (6%)

    As above, but his showing up to defend his actions here was funnier still.
    6 (37%)

    Seriously, people, once you imply in print you believe someone might actually have evidence their Auntie Flo is living on a cloud and playing a harp, anything else you do after that is really pretty much redundant, humour-wise.
    8 (50%)

    I refuse to waste my time on this, on the basis that I know perfectly well you’ll just pick the answers you like anyway–feel free to stick an x wherever you were going to say I did anyway, however, on my behalf.
    0 (0%)

    I refuse to answer on the basis that I’m a resident of a swing state or a state with a tight congressional race, and if I get one more @#$^ing moron calling me with a push poll they’d like me to answer, I’m going to hunt down whoever ordered it and violate them with the handset!
    1 (6%)

    —===—

    This important scientifically accurate poll will be open for 3 or 4 more days before auto-closing. You can go there to vote by clicking on my name.

    PS, please comment on my Eratosthenes post if you do visit :p

  158. #158 'Tis Himself
    February 28, 2009

    #148

    Concern troll is not only concerned, he’s a whiny crybaby as well.

  159. #159 Wowbagger
    February 28, 2009

    Concern troll is not only concerned, he’s a whiny crybaby as well.

    Indeed. Has anyone called for a whaaaaaaaaambulance yet?

  160. #160 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Indeed. Has anyone called for a whaaaaaaaaambulance yet?

    Better call several. His ego is big enough to fill two or three.

  161. #161 Jim
    February 28, 2009

    Sadly, I missed the initial drama surrounding this poll (but I do remember logging my now-deleted vote). That being said, when I started to wade through the threads in question (here and at RD), I tried to be netral, and I was momentarily on the fence as to who was in the wrong. It seemed like PZ was kind of being a dick, and Jon was calling him on it, but with questionable tactics. But after wasting an hour or two catching up, I realized it was just PZ being PZ, which I usually enjoy; Jon just comes across as a passive-aggressive twit with a severe persecution complex. I’m pretty sure he’s Jesus 2.0.

  162. #162 David Marjanovi?, OM
    February 28, 2009

    dragging his offensive website in the direction of other people who haven’t in any way requested its presence

    I thought he must be new to the Internet (and told him so).

    But there’s actually no way to tell, because…

    …he’s insane. Stark raving mad. Stone cold fuck nuts. Batshit crazy. Head-trauma crazy. 0.75 Tc, easily.

    PZ dropped his site on Greg…

    Oops, I take everything back. He is, in fact, new to the Internet — and has made up a complete set of terminology about it!!! He’s talking about PZ asking people to go to the Daily Grail and vote on the poll there. <headdesk>

    I suggest another solution to keep those bad ol’ internet bullies at bay…

    New muscles? What is he, a squid!?!

    I read all Pharyngula’s posts in an RSS reader, but I rarely click through to read or post in the comments sections.

    [...]

    On Pharyngula, is it always the case that somebody who doesn’t agree with the prevailing opinion is automatically labelled, by some, a “troll”?

    Maybe, maybe not. Find out for yourself by reading the comments!

    I mean, please.

    soft-skulled hordes

    :-D :-D :-D

    does that sum it up?

    No, two different guys are involved: one (Greg) made the poll, the other (Jonny_Boy) has delusions about what the Internet is.

    their lives seem to be so miserable that they need to lighten up by herd-voting on “pointless” internet polls…sad when you think about it

    Looks like we need to explain once more what the point of poll-crashing is. It is to teach people how silly it is to put a poll on the Internet. That’s because the respondents are 1) self-selected, rather than randomly selected, and 2) huge, unpredictable biases are inevitable, such as when the poll happens to get mentioned on a website full of like-minded people.

    The author of the poll in question said after the fact that the poll had been intended to survey the readership of his blog, not anyone else, and therefore deleted all votes for “there is no evidence” that had arrived after PZ had blogged about it. This, too, is silly. He doesn’t know, after all, what other websites full of (not quite that many) like-minded people might have discovered his poll and, shall we say, influenced the results.

    If he wants to survey his readership, he has to make it available only to people who have been registered for a certain time. (People already need to register on that strange blog if they just want to comment.) There is simply no way around that. And we have demonstrated it.

    Sometimes, you see, the obvious needs to be stated explicitly.

    Has it ever crossed your mind that you’re demonstrating to people who stop by here while educating themselves about science, materialism, atheism etc., that the owner of one of the biggest science blogs on the web, and his community, think this kind of harsh language is the proper one to engage in discussion ?

    I’m sure it has.

    This teaches an even more important point: that, in science in particular and in logical/rational thinking in general, it simply doesn’t matter how you say something — the only thing that matters is what you say.

    Yes, we know you’ve probably been taught otherwise throughout your life. That, too, doesn’t matter.

  163. #163 marc buhler
    February 28, 2009

    I have to wonder if any of the Aussies here (winks at Wilkins!) have smiled a slight smile that “Jon” is just a letter removed from “John”.

    (To the non-aussies, “little jonnie howard” used to be the prime minister here.)

  164. #164 clinteas
    February 28, 2009

    I’m pretty sure he’s Jesus 2.0.

    More like Jesus 0.7 alpha3

  165. #165 Jim
    February 28, 2009

    More like Jesus 0.7 alpha3
    Touché

  166. #166 Cat of Many Faces
    February 28, 2009

    I love how they always cry “you’re hurting the atheist cause” as though no one else posts here.

    As for “bad language”, go fuck yourself! you have no right to tell ANYONE what language they can use you slimy fucktard.

  167. #167 David Marjanovi?, OM
    February 28, 2009

    The issue is that PZ incited the situation in the first place and then got all huffy when people took offense to it.

    Nope. If you post a poll on the Internet, you have to know that the respondents will be self-selected out of a pool of people who have been informed of it by random means. Period.

    If there is a point to his actions it is either that he wanted to shout down a dissenting opinion or that he is an adult-child idiot.

    Wrong. There are plenty more possibilities.

    If he actually wanted to address the issue and attempt to tell the people that belief in an afterlife makes them idiots

    But he didn’t want to, young padawan. He wanted to teach people that Internet polls are ipso facto meaningless.

    An ass pimple who thinks he deserves a pat on the back from atheists because he’s an atheist too. (Jon_Howard, meet Walton.) Maybe he’d be happier joining the Freemasons.

    Only the French Freemasons take atheists. All others only let theists and deists join, says Wikipedia.

  168. #168 cokey
    February 28, 2009

    That octopus knows too much.

  169. #169 Kendo
    February 28, 2009

    #148

    Er…since when does laughing one’s arse off equal whinny crying?

  170. #170 windy
    February 28, 2009

    People! I think you are disregarding this most important bit of information:

    Having already explained in relation to post that I look like wardrobe with a hang-over, and having already qualified that further by saying this fact alone would be enough to put these brave insulting internet-warriors off

    I don’t know how you can argue with that logic so I think we should all just be quiet now.

    Unless, of course, one of you can anonymously claim to resemble an even MORE impressive piece of furniture than Jonny-boy! Sadly, I look like a mere IKEA Billy bookcase with a mild case of ennui.

  171. #171 Patricia, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Kamaka @151 – I left you a reply over on the Tickets to Dawkins thread re: brass bosoms. ;)

  172. #172 Logicel
    February 28, 2009

    Jon Howard is a control freak. The irony is that he stated (at the Dawkins’ forum thread) that it was the control-freaky behavior of which he experienced during his religious upbringing that as an atheist (with some wooist tendencies it seems) he so much wants ALL OF US to avoid! Well, mega fail there, Jon.

    Though Jon may be an ‘atheist’ I feel more intellectually tuned to some religious believers (like Hatfield here and Flying Goose over at Dawkins) then I do to confused, petulant, silly control freaks like Jon who has left religion but has blindly retained its pathetically narrow concept of acceptable and good behavior. What a truly depressing, boring, and deranged dipshit!

  173. #173 PZ is living in his own little world
    February 28, 2009

    Since, yes it’s stupid to put polls on the internet about literally anything because it proves nothing, it therefore means that any opinion put on the internet is ridiculous because it is just a small segment of many opinions that is separated from an entire scope of reality. Because without a much larger scientific grouping of opinions and statistically proven information, there really isn?t anything of value other than bits and pieces of information that someone could possibly use to form their own opinion from. If you value that though, then couldn?t you value a stupid internet poll?

    So, taking that fact, this grouping of information from PZ and yourselves is just as much a bunch of bullshit as an internet poll. You?re opinions are meaningless. One guy patting the other on the back because he told off some other guy is meaningless because it?s a stupid sub-section of some guy?s opinion. So what value is it?

    But you all seem to post here A LOT and back each other up a lot. But it?s meaningless. Why do you do that? Why do you spend so much time here? It has no value, so says the great PZ. It is meaningless mumbo jumbo because it doesn?t take into account much greater slices of reality. But here we are listening to you all talk about how stupid the internet poll was but how important PZ?s and your opinions are. That?s not self aggrandizing at all.

  174. #174 talking snake
    February 28, 2009

    Jon Howard, your comments lack brevity. I prefer whiners get to the point. Jonny-Boy needs his own blog so he can comment to himself. What a bag of wind.

  175. #175 talking snake
    February 28, 2009

    @173

    Could you pass the corn flakes, please.

  176. #176 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    PZ is living in his own little world, your uninformed opinions are less than worthless to us. Now, either grow a pair of gonads or shut the fuck up. Concern trolls, which you are, are for little boys, not men, which makes you unworthy.

  177. #177 ndt
    February 28, 2009

    PZ is living in his own little world, can you help me understand which polls are ok for me to vote in and which are not?

  178. #178 calm reason
    February 28, 2009

    Jonny’s tone seems quite passive-aggressive to me.
    http://www.passiveaggressivenotes.com/

  179. #179 clinteas
    February 28, 2009

    Gee,this is like debating creationists !

    Way to miss the point again,and again……

  180. #180 articulett
    February 28, 2009

    I’m not sure what the point is, but I find the whole experience invigorating.

    Call me evil, but I just think blowhards are so cute when they’re angry! And so many of the comments at Pharyngula make me laugh out loud (as I plot to steal them and use them in some future situation to make myself look brilliant.)

  181. #181 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    I left you a reply over on the Tickets to Dawkins thread re: brass bosoms. ;)

    I think I’m having a cheap thrill right now. Perhaps I shall wait ’till morning to read your reply, in hopes the anticipation will enhance said thrill.

    Perhaps not.

  182. #182 PZ is living in his own little world
    February 28, 2009

    RE: ndt

    I said all polls are stupid. They don’t provide anything of value. It is a subsection of a greater reality because it is limited to a select group of people. The mere execution of a discussion with a select group of people such as that is worthless. And by the same rules this opinion site is stupid. Correct?

    RE: talking snake

    I assume that means you are confusededed?

    RE: Nerf of Redhead

    I realize my “uninformed opinions” are less than worthless to you. By “uninformed opinions” I take it that you mean points that you wish not to address. And calling me a name just makes me giggle.

    The really weird thing is that I agree with many of PZs points. But shoving ideas onto others isn’t the way to get points made. And I disagree that pushing someone around and laughing about it does anything other than piss people off. And why shouldn’t they get pissed?

  183. #183 Patricia, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Kamaka – Will one cheap thrill, an extra turn at the spanking couch, and 10 ducats added to your bar tab do it?

    Or do you want to watch me fork a christian?

  184. #184 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    Patricia,

    Hahaha, I’m old enough to have watched that as a kid. And it wasn’t just girls who thought super-women were cool.

    I still like super-women.

    Brass bras, not so much.

  185. #185 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    PZ is living in his own little world, you are still a concern troll. We note you concern. And we will ignore it, like any other concern troll. If you want to debate, put out a proposition with evidence. Until then you have nothing.

  186. #186 Damian
    February 28, 2009

    Since, yes it’s stupid to put polls on the internet about literally anything because it proves nothing, it therefore means that any opinion put on the internet is ridiculous because it is just a small segment of many opinions that is separated from an entire scope of reality. Because without a much larger scientific grouping of opinions and statistically proven information, there really isn?t anything of value other than bits and pieces of information that someone could possibly use to form their own opinion from. If you value that though, then couldn?t you value a stupid internet poll?

    This is transparent nonsense. Comments, as well as internet polls, are meant to convey information. That much is true. It’s fairly obvious why the information that’s gleaned from an internet poll is useless, perhaps with the exception of attempting to gain insight in to the opinions of a particular community, which can then influence future content.

    But the written (or typed) word is different, both in its ability to convey a message, as well as its usefulness. And the informational value of a comment section is of an entirely different type and quality to a poll.

    For instance, It’s quite possible that a single individual is in possession of a fact, or even many facts, (an objectively true statement), so there may be no need to get a second or third opinion. And even if a comment consists entirely of opinion, it can still influence the thinking of others, as well as provide entertainment and community for those who choose to engage in it.

    Nobody is pretending that a thread on a particular site represents a scientifically valid cross-section of society. But that is how polls are often presented and perceived. We are attempting to change that, in our own small, and likely insignificant, way.

  187. #187 Patricia, OM
    February 28, 2009

    #182 – Fork you.

  188. #188 Rick R
    February 28, 2009

    #182- “And by the same rules this opinion site is stupid. Correct?”

    PILIIOLW has opinions.
    Opinions are stupid.
    PILIIOLW is stupid.

    QED

  189. #189 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    Patricia,

    Oh, please, the spanking will be plenty of thrill. Really, I can hardly wait. Bare-hand, please.

  190. #190 Patricia, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Kamaka – It’s just good clean fun! ;P

  191. #191 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    It’s just good clean fun! ;P

    Ummm…yah…spank…fork the crister…spank…fork the christer…

    Seems like the most fun ever…

  192. #192 Jafafa Hots
    February 28, 2009

    Let’s see.
    A person finds an open internet poll. He tells others about the poll and encourages them to go vote for their choice.

    They do this, in large numbers. They go and silently, anonymously vote for the answer in the poll that conforms to their personal opinion.

    This, according to some person above, is “pushing others around.”

    Well that’s interesting. Apparently silently, anonymously voting in a poll and encouraging others to do so is too strident. The proper way for atheists to express their opinion must be something like, I dunno… going deep into the woods, digging a hole and burying themselves.

    I know it sounds crazy, but I’m just trying to follow the logic to it’s conclusion.

    And of course, since anonymously voting in a poll is “pushing people around,” the only conclusion I can come to is that a person coming here and posting repeatedly to complain about it – coming to someone else’s website and opening posting WORDS, that people can actually SEE, well, that must be like mass murder.

    Pushing people around is assault, after all… so posting actual visible words of dissent must be like slitting our throats.

    Stop slitting our throats, man! Stop it!

  193. #193 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    Where’s Naked Bunny With a Whip?? Her input is relevant here.

  194. #194 PZ is living in his own little world
    February 28, 2009

    RE: Nerd of Redhead

    “Nobody is pretending that a thread on a particular site represents a scientifically valid cross-section of society. But that is how polls are often presented and perceived. We are attempting to change that, in our own small, and likely insignificant, way.”

    That’s a valid point, I do get that and I do know that was your initial point in the first place. It was the crappy face-slapping of the Daily Grail and the thumb-to-the-nose response that irked a lot of people. It seems a lot here, marshaled by PZ himself, seemed to wallow in that attitude. But really, many of the people that were pissed likely agreed with this same point. They were put off considerably by the method it was implemented because honestly the people there are not one sided in any respect. That was how they were labeled though, and worse. But a lot of the people that visit that site likely often visit this site just as I do.

    But I?m not going to go further because I guarantee I?ve just opened myself up to a bunch more name calling. And really I don?t care, but I?m now speaking not just for myself.

  195. #195 'Tis Himself
    February 28, 2009

    Concern troll is still whining. Tell us, concern troll, do you actually expect anyone here to have any sympathy for you? Because if that’s what you’re trying to get you’re going about it in completely the wrong way. Crying six month old babies get sympathy. Crying hungover wardrobes get laughed at.

  196. #196 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    PZ is living in his own little world, you concern is noted and rejected. It will never be taken to heart, since it is an illogical position. But I’ll leave it up to you to determine the illogic. Now, you have had your say. You are reaching the troll point. Stay and be dumped on, or go. Choose wisely cricket.

  197. #197 Jafafa Hots
    February 28, 2009

    “And really I don?t care, but I?m now speaking not just for myself.”

    Geez. Do these other people you’re speaking for know you’re speaking for them, or did you just appoint yourself their spokesfucktard?

  198. #198 Rey Fox
    February 28, 2009

    I’m afraid I’m going to shut down this entire line of discussion, as it has gotten entirely too silly.

  199. #199 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    ,blockquote>but I?m now speaking not just for myself.

    Oh, bullshit. You and who’s army?

    It was the crappy face-slapping of the Daily Grail and the thumb-to-the-nose response that irked a lot of people.

    Another, more useful response would have been to take the poll-crash as the chain-yank that it was, instead of playing victim. Playing victim is “passive-aggressive” behavior. Greg met the definition of same.

  200. #200 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    but I?m now speaking not just for myself.

    Bullshit

  201. #201 Erroneous
    February 28, 2009

    @PZ is living in his own little world #173:

    Since, yes it’s stupid to put polls on the internet about literally anything because it proves nothing, it therefore means that any opinion put on the internet is ridiculous because it is just a small segment of many opinions that is separated from an entire scope of reality.

    followed by:

    Why do you spend so much time here? It has no value, so says the great PZ.

    No, YOU said that. Those are BOTH from you, in the SAME COMMENT.

    At first, after having read all of this, I thought you were just an asshole, but now I find myself seriously doubting your sanity. Projection is one thing, but projecting your own conclusions upon the other as part of making your very point is a good indication of borderline personality disorder.

  202. #202 Valor Phoenix
    February 28, 2009

    The original poll was sorta hilarious.
    0 (0%)
    As above, but the indignant response of the pollster to being Pharyngulized was actually funnier.
    1 (3%)

    As above, but his showing up to defend his actions here was funnier still.
    12 (42%)

    Seriously, people, once you imply in print you believe someone might actually have evidence their Auntie Flo is living on a cloud and playing a harp, anything else you do after that is really pretty much redundant, humour-wise.
    12 (42%)

    I refuse to waste my time on this, on the basis that I know perfectly well you’ll just pick the answers you like anyway–feel free to stick an x wherever you were going to say I did anyway, however, on my behalf.
    2 (7%)

    I refuse to answer on the basis that I’m a resident of a swing state or a state with a tight congressional race, and if I get one more @#$^ing moron calling me with a push poll they’d like me to answer, I’m going to hunt down whoever ordered it and violate
    1 (3%)

    I suppose the great lesson to be had here is that half the people here find ghosts stupid and the other half prefer messing with people that believe in ghosts.

  203. #203 Aquaria
    February 28, 2009

    And still the troll tries to go into someone else’s house and dictate how they should behave in their own home.

    You know what I thought was really funny?

    The idea that anyone had to ask permission to link to a site!

    Anyone want to name a time when the NYT or BBC threw a hissy fit about someone linking to their site? What makes TDG so fucking special that one must ask for permission to link to them?

    Hint, TDG: If you have a website, you will get linked to, and you just have to accept that, just like the NYT or BBC do.

    Get over yourselves. You are certainly not in the league of the NYT or BBC. Or even Pharyngula. Stop acting like you’re so fucking special.

    You’re not.

  204. #204 Sven DiMilo
    February 28, 2009

    Hey, is the blog still here?

  205. #205 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    Hey, is the blog still here?

    No.

    This is now imaginary. We Have been deleted by the ISP police.

  206. #206 Rob
    February 28, 2009

    Am I the only one getting the vibe that PZ is living in his own little world is WATB Jonny boy himself?

  207. #207 kamaka
    February 28, 2009

    Am I the only one getting the vibe that PZ is living in his own little world is WATB Jonny boy himself?

    WIN!

  208. #208 Damian
    February 28, 2009

    This whole incident really isn’t that difficult to understand. As I said at RD.net, we were simply amused by the dishonesty of wiping the poll results. And as others have said, without a note asking only those who regularly visit the site to vote (or even better, making it only visible to those who log-in), it was essentially a public poll for all to take part in.

    The accusations of incivility were clearly a result of both Greg and Jon’s inability to defend themselves, both in terms of wiping the results, as well as their reasons for believing in an afterlife (or at least, taking part in a site that promotes such a view). It’s the classic behavior of someone who knows that their position is not supportable. Greg even refused to support his position on one of the threads, here.

    And here’s the thing: it’s folly to intimate, as so many do, that it’s self-evident that a particular mode of behavior is preferable for all. It needs supporting. People who claim that others are uncivil tend to project their own beliefs, behavior and values on to everyone else. They appear to have this mental block, where they mistake their own preferences for the best course of action. That’s clearly nonsense, and it needs challenging.

    If someone can argue, preferably backed by evidence, that a particular mode of behavior is preferable, I’m willing to modify my behavior, accordingly. I’m not particularly rude, any way (what is rude, by the way, and who gets to decide?), but I am interested in the best methods of communication.

    The banning personal attacks (as they do at RD.net) is another thing that needs to be supported (although it’s perfectly within the right of a site owner to do so). I don’t accept that calling someone a liar is a personal attack, as long as you can support it. It’s a descriptive word that is often entirely appropriate. I can understand why things like shithead and fuck-face, etc, are frowned upon, because they’re accusations that are not easily supportable. But even then, I see no reason to ban the use of language, particularly as there are no universally “bad” words. We decided that fuck was a swearword, for fucks sake. :)

  209. #209 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Rob, could be. Our concern troll is very concerned. And his/her position is very incoherent, with shades of foot stamping and controlled crocaduck waterworks.

  210. #210 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    February 28, 2009

    Moral laws exist because of the impoissiblity of the contrary. Haven’t I already proven this?

    no.

    You’ve claimed that you have via unsupported assertions. But you have no proven it.

  211. #211 catta
    February 28, 2009

    So… after reading the comments here and the thread over at RD.net, I’ve thought long and hard about adding a lengthy opinion, or a slightly more apt metaphor for Jon to use, or whatever. Nah. Only two things to say.

    1. You people are awesome.
    2. The bizarre RD.net/WoW/druid tangent was highly enjoyable and I can’t resist it. At all. So:

    “Tehm whos consernd athiest, can B 4 fite troll.”
    Also, /golfclap.

    Carry on, then.

  212. #212 Patricia, OM
    February 28, 2009

    Come on you naughty bunnies!

    There’s only one Naked Bunny With a Whip – and one spanking couch. You’re just going to have to deal with it.

    And if Piltdown Man, Walton and Silver Fox keep hoarding turns I’m going to have to take the couch out to be re-upholstered.

    So far I’ve been able to absorb the cost of paddles, but if y’ll are going to wear them out at such a furious rate I will have to charge a modest fee.

  213. #213 ndt
    February 28, 2009

    Posted by: PZ is living in his own little world | February 28, 2009 10:06 PM

    RE: ndt

    I said all polls are stupid. They don’t provide anything of value. It is a subsection of a greater reality because it is limited to a select group of people. The mere execution of a discussion with a select group of people such as that is worthless.

    A poll isn’t a discussion.

    But back on topic, apparently our offense here was voting in an internet poll we weren’t supposed to. What I’m trying to understand is which polls I can vote in and which I can’t. I’d hate to offend another website owner by voting when I’m not supposed to.

  214. #214 Damian
    February 28, 2009

    And if Piltdown Man, Walton and Silver Fox keep hoarding turns I’m going to have to take the couch out to be re-upholstered.

    Now, now, Patricia, I thought that we’d established that the findings that are outlined in the porno thread suggested that the non-believers in those states were the ones using all of that smutty stuff, because deep down they just know that they cannot measure up to the good Christians? that they live next door to.

  215. #215 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    February 28, 2009

    Says the liar who regularly deletes comments with which he disagrees, like you tried to do earlier with this one. Luckily it was saved and could be easily re-posted. What was that you were saying about people being entitled to their own facts?

    Pot, meet kettle.

    yawn

  216. #216 articulett
    March 1, 2009

    I think the real reason for the brouhaha is because those mean old atheists refuse to alleviate existential fear by propping up everyone’s favorite delusion–eternal consciousness sans a brain.

    Damn those rationalists!

    (And damn reality for not providing actual evidence for whatever magical story makes people feel the best.)

  217. #217 Azkyroth
    March 1, 2009

    The accusations of incivility were clearly a result of both Greg and Jon’s inability to defend themselves, both in terms of wiping the results, as well as their reasons for believing in an afterlife (or at least, taking part in a site that promotes such a view). It’s the classic behavior of someone who knows that their position is not supportable. Greg even refused to support his position on one of the threads, here.

    As always, “civility” is 1% common courtesy and 99% egregiously dishonest attempt to Gerrymander the rules of acceptable discourse.

  218. #218 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    Says the liar who regularly deletes comments with which he disagrees, like you tried to do earlier with this one.

    Bzzzzzt!

    Sorry, try again. The comments that get deleted here at Pharyngula are not those which disagree with any particular viewpoint expressed by the author, or other commenters. The comments that are deleted generally are from ten-year-olds who seem to have confused Pharyngula with their favorite Hannah Montana fan page on Myspace.

  219. #219 A. Noyd
    March 1, 2009

    Marcus J. Ranum (#102)

    Can someone explain what is not laugh worthy about this guy’s performance?

    He might have functional gametes?
    ~*~*~*~*~

    PZ is living in his own little world (a.k.a. Jonny-Boy) (#182)

    By “uninformed opinions” I take it that you mean points that you wish not to address.

    Or it could mean “the opposite of informed opinions,” informed opinions being highly valued around here.

  220. #220 Lowell
    March 1, 2009

    I haven’t read the other thread, but did Jonnny-Boy ever attempt to argue that there was evidence for an afterlife?

    Did he address any of the substantive issues at all?

  221. #221 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    Then you won’t mind providing at least three examples of comments which agreed with the viewpoint expressed by the author and which were deleted.

    That makes so little sense that it’s almost laughable.

    It’s people like you who end up in the dungeon with their comments deleted because you’re only here to cause strife and chaos.

    And now back to our regularly scheduled Pharyngulosities…

  222. #222 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    I haven’t read the other thread, but did Jonnny-Boy ever attempt to argue that there was evidence for an afterlife?

    Did he address any of the substantive issues at all?

    Not that I noticed. There was a lot of blather about “supporting the atheist cause” and such. It seems that a lot of people don’t get the idea that crashing a poll is intended to show up the total irrelevance of internet polls in the first place.

  223. #223 Global Warming Is A Scam
    March 1, 2009

    Posted by: Dan J | February 28, 2009 11:50 PM

    Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

    Wow Danny-boy, you sure have some projection issues happening there. If I were you I would seek professional help with that.

  224. #224 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    Wow, I see we have some simply brilliant minds at work tonight. :)

    Regarding Jonny_Boy, I did find it rather strange when he was mentioning his experiences as a member of a fundie xtian group picking on a group of Wiccans. The World of Warcraft references were also a bit odd.

  225. #225 Erroneous
    March 1, 2009

    Wow Danny-boy, you sure have some projection issues happening there. If I were you I would seek professional help with that.

    Look, it learned a new word. Too bad it forgot to take the time to understand it’s correct application.

  226. #226 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    Look, it learned a new word. Too bad it forgot to take the time to understand it’s correct application.

    Well, it’s got to learn to walk before it can run.

  227. #227 Erroneous
    March 1, 2009

    *its

    Crap.

  228. #228 clinteas
    March 1, 2009

    GWIAS defending J and G somehow make sense…..:-) He’s right in the ballpark.

  229. #229 SquidBrandon
    March 1, 2009

    /me wonders why the comic sans is reversed on Global Warming Is A Scam’s posts

  230. #230 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    GWIAS defending J and G somehow make sense…..:-) He’s right in the ballpark.

    Yes, in the ballpark, and probably all occupying the same dugout.

  231. #231 Wowbagger
    March 1, 2009

    Just ignore GWIAS; his comments will be deleted anyway – besides, think of the
    kittens
    .

  232. #232 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    Apparently GWIAS was upset earlier because he spent a whole ten minutes composing a comment and someone went and deleted it. I think part of the problem wa that he was really upset because his mom told him to turn of the computer and get to bed because he has to go to church in the morning.

  233. #233 Ragutis
    March 1, 2009

    Oh goody. Global Warming is a Spam. Again.

    Why couldn’t Kenny be this persistent instead? He was good for some laughs at least. GWIAS, on the other hand, is just a tiresome twat crying out for attention.

    Are you brain-damaged? Trying to qualify for “Troll of the Year” or something? Why do you keep coming back? What a pathetic way to get your jollies. Go for a walk. Jerk off. Play some pool. Watch a DVD. Look at the stars. Go fishing. Read a book. Whatever. Just fuck off while you’re at it.

  234. #234 Andyo
    March 1, 2009

    “Oooh, look at me, I can quote in Comic Sans! Take that, Slea Z Lyers *hoho*! I’m mocking your mocking… I’m the MAN! Yeah! oh, and did you hear? Global warming is a scam.”

  235. #235 Erroneous
    March 1, 2009

    After reading through the last 3 posts on here, and the thread on RD.net, I made this image which I think pretty much sums things up (SFW):

    http://i43.tinypic.com/lh3qg.png

    Feel free to repost.

  236. #236 «bønez_brigade»
    March 1, 2009

    Finally caught up on the comments on this post… and the whole time I was really hoping Jonny_Boy (named as such, that is) would pop up to provide more comedy.
    *sad face*

    Anyway, maybe we should change tactics and poll-crash for the choice we oppose. It would fuck with their heads, at least.

    @ SquidBrando [#231],
    Mealsowonders.

  237. #237 «bønez_brigade»
    March 1, 2009

    Many lulz have just been emitted due to Erroneous’ pic.

  238. #238 pcarini
    March 1, 2009

    Wow, this thread still has some life in it! That’s at least one long thread on RD.net and one here; such is the mighty power of the hyperlink. Also: I’m shocked people are allowed to swear, in print on the intertubes!

  239. #239 decius
    March 1, 2009

    #239

    I was really hoping Jonny_Boy (named as such, that is) would pop up to provide more comedy.

    But he did. Who do you think “PZ is living in his own little world” is? Just compare inanity and style.

  240. #240 Leander
    March 1, 2009

    So someone, between all these replies, the tone of which was so, uhm, so…unexpected – someone asked for me to contribute something constructive. And I guess it’s only reasonable to demand that from me – only I thought I had already done that by pointing out that a mature tone might go a long way in winning people over. Anyway, I’m gonna try and make it a little bit clearer, just for you – who seem to be stuck in a very b/w world. Is it really just the faithful vs. the reasonable for you ? The religious fundamentalists and the deeply convinced atheists ? Well, I got news for you – the majority of people is really either undecided, or only loosely affiliated with one of these camps and still open for other points of view. Think politics – every party has their hardcore voters, but the “important” voting comes from people who are undecided and open. So what wins these people over ? Good content for one. And, like it or not, maturity and tolerance in behaviour. Kindness and the ability to take the high road. If you think your content is worth to be spread in the world, make sure it is by demonstrating to people that it’s the content of mature, tolerant people, who – even on the internet – don’t need to act like brickheaded bullies.

    Again – it’s not as b/w as you’d like it. The world is full of the undecided, the slightly interested, and the “somewhat decided but open-minded”. To all of whom, should they stop by (considering the size and matter of this blog that’s not unlikely), PZ has demonstrated loud and clear how he – again, as one of the biggest science bloggers on the web – favours childish, bullying playground behaviour over maturity and taking the high road. And that he hosts, tolerates and encourages a community of people who do so as well. Maybe he sees that, consciously or not, and that’s why his repeated attempts to poke fun at and ridicule the situation seem increasingly desperate.

    Any neutral observer checking both sites in this “feud” will see that so far the “kooks” and “loons” over at TDG largely manage to behave like respectful tolerant adults, while over here, people seem to be posting straight from the playground. Even if you’re on PZ’s side, to deny this striking difference in tone requires delusion of the highest degree. And I just explained why the tone can be very important. Just like this seems to go completely unnoticed by you people, and all you think your tone does is offend the thin-skinned – just like that, when you complain TDG should have not made the poll public if they didn’t like you coming there, it seems to totally escape your attention that it’s the defenders of reason and science that are the ones making the internet a place where it is necessary for polls to be restricted to registered users.

    If you don’t understand the idiocy of that, don’t ask me to explain it. I’ve already pointed out what I see as wrong with your behaviour, which was met with the same rubbish you reply to anything that rubs you the wrong way, justified or not. Still, when prompted I constructively explained (though I thought it was so obvious that this would be unnecessary) an alternative, and that’s it for me here. You can go back now to flinging feces. Or think through your behaviour, like could be expected on a blog about science and reason. But oh well, we all know about the chances of that here, huh ?

    And oh, PZ…I’d still love for you to dedicate a post to explaining to the unenlightened how good content+childish bullying will succeed better in winning over people than good content+respectful maturity – in a world full of scary shades of grey, instead of the b/w you seem to cherish so much.

  241. #241 «bønez_brigade»
    March 1, 2009

    @decius,
    Yeah, that had crossed my mind — but the name being present on the comment would’ve produced the complete comedic effect (for me, at least). If so, his ITG points have decreased, and he’s now likely hiding away _inside_ the wardrobe he at one time resembled.

    Then again, maybe PZILIHOLW is just a Drive-by Defender of the Whine.

  242. #242 Pope Maledict DCLXVI
    March 1, 2009

    Leander,

    your concern is noted.

    Regards, PMaL

  243. #243 Zarquon
    March 1, 2009

    I’d still love for you to dedicate a post to explaining to the unenlightened how good content+childish bullying

    PZ didn’t bully anyone and what’s childish is the whiners who take disagreement as personally as you do. Grow a spine and grow up.

  244. #244 pcarini
    March 1, 2009

    Leander @ #243

    Anyway, I’m gonna try and make it a little bit clearer, just for you – who seem to be stuck in a very b/w world. Is it really just the faithful vs. the reasonable for you ? The religious fundamentalists and the deeply convinced atheists ?

    What possibly made you think this was anyone’s position, let along the prevailing consensus? Back it up with links to posts, please. The original topic was whether linking to another website is a bad thing to do, and whether unfiltered profanity in forum posts is bad.

    Think politics – every party has their hardcore voters, but the “important” voting comes from people who are undecided and open. So what wins these people over ?

    I can’t speak for anybody else here, but I sure as hell didn’t sign up for the sales position. You have all the fun you want with that, and I’ll feel free to speak my mind.

    Again – it’s not as b/w as you’d like it. The world is full of the undecided, the slightly interested, and the “somewhat decided but open-minded”.

    Again – who argued otherwise, or expressed a preference for a black and white world?

    … Maybe he sees that, consciously or not, and that’s why his repeated attempts to poke fun at and ridicule the situation seem increasingly desperate.

    What could be more silly than a big flap over one website hyperlinking to another? Or grown adults getting worked up about swear words?

    Any neutral observer checking both sites in this “feud” will see that so far the “kooks” and “loons” over at TDG largely manage to behave like respectful tolerant adults, while over here, people seem to be posting straight from the playground. Even if you’re on PZ’s side, to deny this striking difference in tone requires delusion of the highest degree.

    Who (again, provide links to comments) asserted that people at TDG are kooks and loons? The ones that have come here to complain don’t seem to understand how the internet works, but this is the first mention I’ve seen of “kooks” and “loons”. (This could easily be ignorance on my part, I haven’t followed the entire thing all the way through.)

    And I just explained why the tone can be very important.

    For people with certain goals, tone may indeed be very important. I, for one, am not trying to win converts, so I don’t consider it all that important. To each his, her, or its own, however.

    … it seems to totally escape your attention that it’s the defenders of reason and science that are the ones making the internet a place where it is necessary for polls to be restricted to registered users.

    All of them? Every poll? You’re tone is starting to sound a little melodramatic. It’s been a common practice for many sites to restrict polls to registered users, and has been for longer than PZ has been linking to polls. It’s generally the webmaster’s decision about who they would like their participants to be — not requiring any sort of authorization leaves it open to any/everybody.

    Nice try, but still no substance…

    In closing, I would like us all to take a moment to solemnly reflect on the sacrifice made by all the brave strawmen and women to whom your post owes its length. They truly gave it their all.

  245. #245 Leander
    March 1, 2009

    One last thing…do you not see the idiocy and hipocrisy of complaining about people coming here to “whine” about the way you do things here – when you go and crash polls to demonstrate to the people who put them up that they’re pointless ?

    And please, I said I’m done here – so if you wanna post lengthy replies to my comment in order to demonstrate what witty and tough guys you are, or because you think it will save some of your dignity – go ahead and do so. If you do it because I think I’ll read it, save the time. I put in my two cents, you exhibited again the silliness that is seemingly identified as such by everybody except the defenders of science and reason, and so I won’t bother any more. Good day.

  246. #246 Kendo
    March 1, 2009

    Leander@243

    So someone, between all these replies, the tone of which was so, uhm, so…unexpected

    [I call bullshit, you got exactly what you came here for.]

    – someone asked for me to contribute something constructive. And I guess it’s only reasonable to demand that from me – only I thought I had already done that by pointing out that a mature tone might go a long way in winning people over.
    [fuck that shit! Why would you think it's reasonable to demand anything constructive from the likes of you?]

    Anyway, I’m gonna try and make it a little bit clearer, just for you – who seem to be stuck in a very b/w world. Is it really just the faithful vs. the reasonable for you ?
    [Yes]

    The religious fundamentalists and the deeply convinced atheists ?

    [false dichotomy. convinced atheists are not the opposite of religious fundamentalists. Atheists can be just as irrational as as anybody else.]

    Well, I got news for you – the majority of people is really either undecided, or only loosely affiliated with one of these camps and still open for other points of view.
    [No kidding]

    Think politics
    [OK, I'm thinking "politics".]
    – every party has their hardcore voters, but the “important” voting comes from people who are undecided and open.
    [I love the quotes around "important"]

    So what wins these people over ? Good content for one.
    [So why don't you provide some of that?]

    And, like it or not, maturity and tolerance in behaviour. Kindness and the ability to take the high road.
    [You left out the end of that sentence.]

    If you think your content is worth to be spread in the world, make sure it is by demonstrating to people that it’s the content of mature, tolerant people, who – even on the internet – don’t need to act like brickheaded bullies.
    [This is getting more incoherent by the word.]

    Again
    [Yeah right, like you already stated a point in the first place.]
    – it’s not as b/w as you’d like it.
    [I beg your pardon, how the fuck do you know how how b/w I like it?]

    The world is full of the undecided, the slightly interested, and the “somewhat decided but open-minded”.
    [You left out the totally fanatical sociopaths.]

    To all of whom, should they stop by (considering the size and matter of this blog that’s not unlikely), PZ has demonstrated loud and clear how he – again, as one of the biggest science bloggers on the web – favours childish, bullying playground behaviour over maturity and taking the high road.
    [which is what you're doing, right? Taking the high road.]

    And that he hosts, tolerates and encourages a community of people who do so as well.
    [Do what now?]

    Maybe he sees that, consciously or not, and that’s why his repeated attempts to poke fun at and ridicule the situation seem increasingly desperate.

    [Yes, desperate. Our character is evident in our ability to maintain humor in the face of retards like you.]

    Any neutral observer
    [No such animal.]
    checking both sites in this “feud”
    [There are more that just two sides.]

    will see that so far the “kooks” and “loons” over at TDG largely manage to behave like respectful tolerant adults,
    [Good for them.]

    while over here, people seem to be posting straight from the playground.
    [True! this is where we come to let of a bit of steam]

    Even if you’re on PZ’s side, to deny this striking difference in tone requires delusion of the highest degree.
    [Oh no, I'm quite willing to concede the difference in tone.]

    And I just explained why the tone can be very important.
    [No you didn't. You babbled like a moron.]

    Just like this seems to go completely unnoticed by you people, and all you think your tone does is offend the thin-skinned – just like that, when you complain TDG should have not made the poll public if they didn’t like you coming there, it seems to totally escape your attention that it’s the defenders of reason and science that are the ones making the internet a place where it is necessary for polls to be restricted to registered users.
    [Fuck me! You're a complete imbicile.]

    If you don’t understand the idiocy of that,
    [No really, I completely understand idiocy.]

    don’t ask me to explain it.
    [Didn't you just try to explain it? No wonder I still think you're a moron.]

    I’ve already pointed out what I see as wrong with your behaviour,
    [See, you just told us.]

    which was met with the same rubbish you reply to anything that rubs you the wrong way,
    [That's right. Rub me the wrong way and I'll tell you to fuck off. By the way, that reminds me, I forgot to tell you to fuck off.]

    justified or not. Still, when prompted I constructively explained (though I thought it was so obvious that this would be unnecessary) an alternative, and that’s it for me here. You can go back now to flinging feces.
    [Can we really? Thanks for that. Here have some feces.(fling!)]
    Or think through your behaviour, like could be expected on a blog about science and reason.
    [You're a master of rhetoric.]

    But oh well, we all know about the chances of that here, huh ?

    [Wow! You got us there. The chances are like Buckley's]

    And oh, PZ…I’d still love for you to dedicate a post to explaining to the unenlightened how good content+childish bullying will succeed better in winning over people than good content+respectful maturity – in a world full of scary shades of grey, instead of the b/w you seem to cherish so much.
    [Fuck you! We don't need to win anyone over. We are your future, get used to it.]

  247. #247 Knockgoats
    March 1, 2009

    And please, I said I’m done here – Leander

    Can we hold you to that, you egregiously tedious person? My experience is that concern trolls can seldom resist trying to have the last word.

  248. #248 Capital Dan
    March 1, 2009

    Knockgoats | March 1, 2009 6:39 AM

    And please, I said I’m done here – Leander

    Can we hold you to that, you egregiously tedious person? My experience is that concern trolls can seldom resist trying to have the last word.

    I can’t help but notice that you asked a question, and then accused him of needing the last word. This concerns me. Perhaps you shouldn’t be so hard because, when you are mean, baby Jesus rips the ears off the heads of bunnies and waves them in the air while dancing naked.

    Please think of the bunnies.

  249. #249 Damian
    March 1, 2009

    Is it really just the faithful vs. the reasonable for you ? The religious fundamentalists and the deeply convinced atheists ? Well, I got news for you – the majority of people is really either undecided, or only loosely affiliated with one of these camps and still open for other points of view. Think politics – every party has their hardcore voters, but the “important” voting comes from people who are undecided and open. So what wins these people over?

    Right, and most of the people who visit this site would also fit in to that category. You’re the one who appears to have placed us in a box, forever condemned.

    Remember, if we attack an argument, or even a particular belief, that says absolutely nothing about the vast myriad of beliefs and opinions that the individual whose argument we are attacking also happens to hold.

    What we are refusing to accept is that we must refrain form forcefully attacking an argument or belief, simply because that person also happens to help old ladies across the road from time to time.

    Good content for one. And, like it or not, maturity and tolerance in behaviour. Kindness and the ability to take the high road. If you think your content is worth to be spread in the world, make sure it is by demonstrating to people that it’s the content of mature, tolerant people, who – even on the internet – don’t need to act like brickheaded bullies.

    But you are missing one very important point, and it’s something that virtually all of the people who believe as you do appear to be either unaware of, or steadfastly refuse to contemplate.

    Who gets to decide what “good content” is, “maturity and tolerance”, “kindness and the ability to take the high road”? You, by the looks of it. What you really want is for everyone here to agree with you, and quite amazingly, you still haven’t even made a detailed argument for your position.

    I repeat: people like yourself appear to have mistaken your own behavior and values for that which is preferable. Whatever gave you that impression? And all those who speak as you do appear to believe that all of this is self-evident. It isn’t.

    Either argue for it, definitions and all, or cease making assertions. I’m not interested in what you think (not generally, only with respect to this particular point), I’m interested in you establishing why. Of what value is it, taking in to account the general populace?

    Again – it’s not as b/w as you’d like it. The world is full of the undecided, the slightly interested, and the “somewhat decided but open-minded”. To all of whom, should they stop by (considering the size and matter of this blog that’s not unlikely), PZ has demonstrated loud and clear how he – again, as one of the biggest science bloggers on the web – favours childish, bullying playground behaviour over maturity and taking the high road. And that he hosts, tolerates and encourages a community of people who do so as well. Maybe he sees that, consciously or not, and that’s why his repeated attempts to poke fun at and ridicule the situation seem increasingly desperate.

    I’ve highlighted something which certainly flowed from the ends of your fingers. However, the implication appears not to have registered:

    ? 40 million visits to this site in no more than 4 years.

    ? The biggest science blog on the internet.

    ? Visitors (and regulars) from pretty much every demographic that you can think of.

    ? Becomes more and more popular, the longer PZ has been doing it.

    Now, you are claiming that those tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of individual visitors are all wrong, and that it is you that is uniquely in possession of some sort of cosmic truth. Pretty much everything counts against that opinion.

    Does that mean that all people would enjoy visiting this site. Obviously not. But show me a site that caters for, influences, and entices all people to return, time and time again? I don’t believe that you can. So what we are really talking about here is a niche ? a site that cater for a particular type of person, or a particular subject.

    Any neutral observer checking both sites in this “feud” will see that so far the “kooks” and “loons” over at TDG largely manage to behave like respectful tolerant adults, while over here, people seem to be posting straight from the playground. Even if you’re on PZ’s side, to deny this striking difference in tone requires delusion of the highest degree. And I just explained why the tone can be very important. Just like this seems to go completely unnoticed by you people, and all you think your tone does is offend the thin-skinned – just like that, when you complain TDG should have not made the poll public if they didn’t like you coming there, it seems to totally escape your attention that it’s the defenders of reason and science that are the ones making the internet a place where it is necessary for polls to be restricted to registered users.

    If you don’t understand the idiocy of that, don’t ask me to explain it. I’ve already pointed out what I see as wrong with your behaviour, which was met with the same rubbish you reply to anything that rubs you the wrong way, justified or not. Still, when prompted I constructively explained (though I thought it was so obvious that this would be unnecessary) an alternative, and that’s it for me here. You can go back now to flinging feces. Or think through your behaviour, like could be expected on a blog about science and reason. But oh well, we all know about the chances of that here, huh ?

    And as I’ve already said, what makes you think that you are in possession of some sort of universal truth? You haven’t seriously argued for your position, at all. You’ve thrown out a series of assertions as if they are self-evident, and intimated that if we don’t agree, then we must obviously be “deluded”.

    We’re not buying it, though. We’ve been over this subject hundreds of times before with people just like yourself, and most of us, while having modified our views when persuaded, have not been convinced by the overall “argument”, or lack thereof.

    You have all of your work ahead of you, I’m afraid. Please, be my guest.

  250. #250 AnthonyK
    March 1, 2009

    Erroneous @ 238. Splendid! I’m tempted to add “you fuck-witted arsehole” as that’s apparently how we’re supposed to do things here, but will refrain in case anyone should complain ;)

  251. #251 Damian
    March 1, 2009

    Blockquote fail: Paragraph directly beneath the last section of blockquoted text is Leander.

    The two paragraphs (and one line) below that are mine.

  252. #252 Wowbagger
    March 1, 2009

    It’s not politics. It’s not even close.

    What I always want to ask people like Leander is if he (or she) thinks that, if there are people who are having serious doubts about the existence of god, they’re going to be turned back to the arms of the church and the pages of the bible because a bunch of atheists were mean to people on the internet.

    How about you have Greg set up poll for that? Find out just how many Christians have had doubts but decided to stick with it because they read about an atheist calling someone a fucking clown shoe.

    Maybe we can add that to that webpage with the hundred of proofs for God’s existence; we could call it the argument from WATB:

    Atheists are mean to people on the internet; therefore, God exists.

  253. #253 Ryan
    March 1, 2009

    PZ,

    Why not compromise? Any time there is a comment criticizing him just add pictures of “little bunnies skipping around and eating grass” at the bottom but still leave the comment fully intact. I doubt any of us commenters would mind.

  254. #254 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 1, 2009

    Ahh, poor Leander is still concerned, and still incoherent. Maybe he needs his teddy bear,a cup of cocoa, and a nice nap. Leander, grow a pair of balls. People can disagree with you, and in doing so they aren’t uncivil. Unsupported ideas will be shot down at this site, so if you have unsupported ideas, stay away. Not all ideas are equal.

  255. #255 Walton
    March 1, 2009

    What I always want to ask people like Leander is if he (or she) thinks that, if there are people who are having serious doubts about the existence of god, they’re going to be turned back to the arms of the church and the pages of the bible because a bunch of atheists were mean to people on the internet.

    I would agree. When I first came here, I was a (lukewarm) theist; I’m now firmly non-religious and a weak agnostic. The reason for my change was not because the people here were nice, likeable, or good role models; most of them weren’t. The reason for my change is because I simply realised, on the basis of additional reading and thinking. that my former position wasn’t intellectually defensible.

    Many people convert to Christianity because they find that being part of a church community, and having a “spiritual centre” to their lives, makes them happier and more fulfilled, makes them a nicer person and allows them to face the tribulations of life more easily. And that’s fine. I felt the exact same way when I was a practising Christian. But the problem is that it simply has no bearing on the cold, hard question of who is right and who is wrong. There is no correlation between being nice and being right; someone can be nice and yet be deluded, and, conversely, someone can be a complete bastard and still turn out to be right.

    “God exists” is a claim of fact. “God exists and appeared in human form in Palestine two thousand years ago, was killed and was physically resurrected from the dead, and intervenes in our lives today” is a particularly extraordinary claim of fact, and one which is not adequately supported by empirical evidence. I cannot accept such a claim simply because I like some of the people who believe it, or because those who reject it can be rude and obnoxious. To judge claims of objective fact according to subjective, personal feelings is simply intellectually dishonest.

    At the risk of being accused of derailing another thread, I would say the exact same about politics. Libertarians are often accused of being cold, callous and heartless. And maybe many of us are. But that doesn’t make us wrong; and I will say that while there are plenty of unpleasant libertarians in the world, I’ve never met a stupid libertarian.

  256. #256 Raiko
    March 1, 2009

    I hope that you, “Johnny-boy”, end up reading the comments here. Go for it – read every single one: every insult, every word of ridicule. Then take a break, make some coffee, sit back and think about the question:

    Why do people think you’re a ridiculous twat?

    All you did was exaggerating completely about a silly internet poll. I mean, surely, those ARE serious business, right? Right?!

  257. #257 Carlie
    March 1, 2009

    I will stand up and argue that the style embraced here, that of absolute derision and mocking of the claims of religion, is exactly what is needed to pierce through the fuzzy happy aura that so often cushions religion against any criticism. Is it offensive to many? Absolutely. But two things can then happen. As Walton just showed, it can incite people to try and defend their religion, thereby delving more deeply into apologetics than they have before, and often then realizing that there is no “there” there. The other main effect is simply to bring religion down to the ground, to get it dirty and show that it is indeed possible to treat it as critically as any other idea and not get zapped by lightning for doing so. It demystifies the religious experience. As one who was deeply immersed in it for decades, I can vouch for the fact that the “feel” of religion is very gauzy, very emotional, very much NOT based in reality. It can take a very large jolt to push those rose-colored glasses off of a person so that they can see it clearly. The tone taken here is absolutely valid, and is needed more. The Nesbits of the world don’t realize that when they treat religion with kid gloves, it’s reinforcing to the religious the idea that there is something special about it.

  258. #258 MH
    March 1, 2009

    Leander:

    … it seems to totally escape your attention that it’s the defenders of reason and science that are the ones making the internet a place where it is necessary for polls to be restricted to registered users.

    It would be a step in the right direction. Then the poll would be clearly representative of a particular group’s registered users, rather than trying to appear to be a representative of internet users in general.

    Of course, it would loose its ability to re-enforce the beliefs of the pollster, and couldn’t be used as an effective argumentum ad populum, but so what? That sort of behaviour is intellectually dishonest.

  259. #259 Raiko
    March 1, 2009

    PZ is living in his own little world, why do you ever talk to your friends (if you have any), especially about your own life and opinions? I mean, it’s just useless talk, right? Why would you engage in conversation for anything but conveying useful, statistically valuable information?

  260. #260 Lowell
    March 1, 2009

    Wowbagger #252,

    Tee he. Yup, that one’s already on the Godless Geeks Hundreds of Proofs of God’s Existence. Argument 122:

    ARGUMENT FROM PERSECUTION (III)
    (1) You atheists are mean!
    (2) Therefore, God exists.

    http://godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

    I discovered that site about a year ago, and in all that time I haven’t seen a single argument from a believer that isn’t covered there.

  261. #261 Sven DiMilo
    March 1, 2009

    I feel bad.
    All this time I’ve been ignorant–yes!–of the True Purpose of Pharyngula: to win people over.
    I confess: my own purpose here has always been selfish and unworthy and of no help whatsoever to the Cause:
    procrastination.
    And fun. My two purposes here have always been unhelpful to the Cause: procrastination and fun.
    Oh, and learning about interesting current biology outside of my esoteric little bailiwick. These have always been my three purposes here.

    Never once have I attempted to win somebody over, and now lo, the scales have fallen fromst mine eyes and I see clearly, outlined in red, the error of my ways.

    And so verily I hereby recant, abjure, and reject my formerly selfish-purpose-driven blog-comment life, and do solemnly dedicate myself to the higher needs of the Cause collective by Pledging my Heart, Spleen, and Brachiocephalic Artery to the task of Winning People Over. Viva The Cause!!

    um…one thing though. If I am to successfully WPO, it’s my understanding that a mature tone is prerequisite, right? So here’s the thing: suppose the P I’m trying to WO are themselves immature?

    oh, and what’s “the cause,” again? Thanks.

  262. #262 Notagod
    March 1, 2009

    Treating christians with respect was tried in the past, sadly it didn’t work. When christians are treated with respect they act as if they are being submitted to.

  263. #263 ndt
    March 1, 2009

    Leander, can you explain for me which polls are appropriate for me to vote in and which are not?

  264. #264 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    Leander, can you explain for me which polls are appropriate for me to vote in and which are not?

    ndt: I see you still can’t get anyone to give you a good answer to your question.

  265. #265 angst
    March 1, 2009

    Leander @ 245:

    One last thing…do you not see the idiocy and hipocrisy of complaining about people coming here to “whine” about the way you do things here – when you go and crash polls to demonstrate to the people who put them up that they’re pointless ?

    It was more pointing and laughing than complaining.

    (points and laughs)

  266. #266 We Do Not Forgive, We Do Not Forget
    March 1, 2009

    He thinks we’re rude? BWAHAHAHAHA.

    I don’t think he’s ever heard of Something Awful, 4chan or Anonymous.

    Where’s a b-tard when you need one?

    You rang? If we wanted to be really offensive, we could either send 4chan to the poll, or we could send Jonny-boy towards /b/. Either way, there will be casualties, and it’s not going to be anon.

    Also, moar mudkips.

  267. #267 PZ Myers
    March 1, 2009

    Oh, no. Jonny is a clueless twit, but condemning him to /b/ seems a little…excessive.

  268. #268 We Are Legion
    March 1, 2009

    Fun, though.

  269. #269 PZ Myers
    March 1, 2009

    And cruel.

  270. #270 Janine, Ignorant Slut
    March 1, 2009

    But PZ, you are evil. You draw a line at excess cruelty? Perhaps it would help that you were being cruel to be kind.

  271. #271 Patricia, OM
    March 1, 2009

    Nice to see the Kniggit’s of the Holy Grail didn’t slaughter everyone during dark of night. :)

  272. #272 Grendels Dad
    March 1, 2009

    No, nobody was slaughtered. But several did get their daily dose of faux persecution. They are now ready to maintain their little David and Goliath fantasies for another days? battle against the mean secularists.

    It?s funny how far you need to go to get persecuted when you are part of such an obvious majority as these folks like to point out.

  273. #273 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 1, 2009

    Ok I’m sure I’ll regret this…

    What is /b/?

  274. #274 Guy Incognito
    March 1, 2009

    @273 (RBDC): It’s the random board at 4chan.org, a site I believe was originally devoted to anime/manga. I think it is called /b/ because of its URL. I went there once on a co-worker’s recommendation and am now stupider because of it.

  275. #275 Dan J
    March 1, 2009

    What is /b/?

    /b/ is the “random” board on 4chan. It’s an “anything goes” kind of place, other than bans on some illegal activities.

  276. #276 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 1, 2009

    Ahh. Ok, I was fearing it was something like Goatse.

    I guess in a way it is.

  277. #277 JFK, hypercharismatic telepathical knight
    March 1, 2009

    At the risk of being accused of derailing another thread, I would say the exact same about politics. Libertarians are often accused of being cold, callous and heartless. And maybe many of us are. But that doesn’t make us wrong;

    Very bad analogy. Huge category error.

    “Does God exist” is a question of fact. “What is good” is a question of values. If the goal is building a world worth living in, then your callousness alone can make you wrong.

  278. #278 mandrake
    March 1, 2009

    notagod @ 262

    Treating christians with respect was tried in the past, sadly it didn’t work. When christians are treated with respect they act as if they are being submitted to.

    Also, we get really tired of re-explaining the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

    No, seriously, after a while it’s just too much to be patient in the face of such willful ignorance.
    Therefore, Pharyngula.
    Well, AFAIAC, anyway.

  279. #279 JFK, hypercharismatic telepathical knight
    March 1, 2009

    and I will say that while there are plenty of unpleasant libertarians in the world, I’ve never met a stupid libertarian.

    Haha! You are quite the joker. Funny man. You had me going there.

    What, you’re serious?

    We’ll fix that then. You can meet all the stupid libertarians you like. Just participate in the comment thread of Zeitgeist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kHhc67GopM

    Then maybe you’ll have the sense not to say such stupid things as “I’ve never met a stupid libertarian,” which de facto makes you one.

  280. #280 mandrake
    March 1, 2009

    To be fair, perhaps Walton has the same excuse I do – when faced with stupidity I will usually get bored and wander off, and so I never know the political beliefs of said stupid person.

  281. #281 dean
    March 1, 2009

    “… I’ve never met a stupid libertarian.”

    Walton, look in the mirror and say hello to the poster child of stupid libertarians.

  282. #282 Michael
    March 1, 2009

    John, in the future, if you don’t want to get dicked, don’t act like a cunt.

  283. #283 JFK, hypercharismatic telepathical knight
    March 1, 2009

    Oh jolly good, a rape joke.

    Followed by apologists claiming that an unwanted dicking isn’t rape, and/or that rape jokes are ever appropriate.

  284. #284 DLC
    March 1, 2009

    J-B suffers from SBMOTI syndrome.
    Or maybe he’s sitting back savoring a single malt and considering what a fine job he did stirring up a bunch of people. I’d like to believe he was just gaming the entire Pharyngula and RD.Net communities, but I really doubt he’s that clever. Of course, now that I’ve brought up the possibility, there is a statistically significant chance he will post something somewhere saying that’s just what he was doing.
    But, most likely, it’s just a case of Someone’s Being Mean on the Internet — a psychological syndrome not unlike SIWOTI syndrome.

  285. #285 Knockgoats
    March 1, 2009

    “Does God exist” is a question of fact. “What is good” is a question of values. If the goal is building a world worth living in, then your callousness alone can make you wrong. – JFK, hypercharismatic telepathical knight

    Bizarrely, I find myself having to partially support Walton here. “Libertarians” do make claims of fact; and whether these are true or (as is almost always the case) false, does not bear any logical relation to their cold, callous, heartlessness. However, one can deduce their cold, callous heartlessness from the fact that they put forward obviously false claims of fact in support of their cold, callous, heartless policy prescriptions: i.e. they are not reluctantly driven to the latter by empirical evidence and logical reasoning, but maintain them in the teeth of the facts.

  286. #286 Knockgoats
    March 1, 2009

    Incidentally, much the same can be said of those religious people who believe in the everlasting torment of “sinners”. Can there really be any human being more disgusting than one who does not feel stark horror at the very thought that this doctrine might be true?

  287. #287 Patricia, OM
    March 1, 2009

    Maybe he meant librarian. You know how those Chimp cooties screw up words. *rolls eyes*

  288. #288 bastion of sass
    March 1, 2009

    At #261, Sven DiMilo wrote:

    I feel bad.
    All this time I’ve been ignorant–yes!–of the True Purpose of Pharyngula: to win people over.

    You’re not the only one! I too seem to have missed the mission statement about winning people over. Not to tell PZ what to do, but IMO that purpose needs to be made clearer somewhere on the blog so others don’t misconstrue the purpose of Pharyngula as we did.

    Alas, I’m not an Evangelical Atheist. I originally only came here to read some of PZ’s interesting posts, but I stayed for the snarky fun.

    Now what am I to do? If I don’t want to proselytize for atheism, must I stop commenting?

  289. #289 bastion of sass
    March 1, 2009

    At #287, Patricia OM wrote:
    Maybe he meant librarian. You know how those Chimp cooties screw up words.

    With all due respect, Patricia OM, but the librarian is an orangutan, not a chimp.

  290. #290 Ken
    March 1, 2009

    Am I having a psychotic break or is the blog still here?

  291. #291 Aj
    March 1, 2009

    Why limit yourself to an ‘either/or’?

  292. #292 Amy
    March 1, 2009

    “…directed his forum contributor?s attention towards a poll running there…”

    I don’t know why he’s getting upset if it was just one person.

    (http://www.angryflower.com/aposter.html)

  293. #293 druidbros
    March 1, 2009

    Posted by: Ken | March 1, 2009 5:49 PM

    Am I having a psychotic break or is the blog still here?

    Yes, the medication has not worn off.

  294. #294 marcus
    March 1, 2009

    By the spelling of “offence” I posit that he is an Englander. Some Englanders (though not all) don’t understand or appreciate the fact that we’re Americans and real Americans despise the very thought of anyone limiting our ability to express ourselves.

  295. #295 Dutch Vigilante
    March 1, 2009

    PZ Myers, you are under pretend arrest for having naughty words on your blog.
    Thanks to a fine upstanding gentleman who’s strong as an ox, is the sole arbitrator on what is allowed on the internet, who doesn’t play geeky games like warcraft like geeks do and hasn’t got an aggresive fibre in his being the internet police has found you, punishment will commence!

    You are a meanie!

    There, let that be a lesson.

  296. #296 kamaka
    March 1, 2009

    Carlie @ 257

    Insightful comment.

    Stupid Barb: “oh, I’m in a pit of vipers.”

    Let’s see, you’re on a porn thread at an atheist blog, and you just started spouting religion. What did you expect, candy and flowers? A group hug?

    I’m with Carlie, religious claims beg for derision and mockery, the same way Barb did.

  297. #297 Louis
    March 1, 2009

    I don’t normally post in the poll threads or even participate in the pointless poll or any of the resulting drama, but this one has got hallmarks of being Teh Funneh.

    Let me see if I have got this right:

    Ok so this Jon chap is going to complain to PZ’s ISP, Internet watchdog groups, and scientific bodies in the States and Europe.

    Because people in the comments of PZ’s blog were rude to him and used profanity this Jon chap is going to try to have PZ censured (and possibly censored) by PZ’s ISP and professional organisations associated with PZ’s scientific career.

    Sorry if I’m repeating myself but let’s get this clear: Comments posted on PZ’s blog were rude therefore Jon is now trying to damage PZ’s career (reporting him to scientific bodies) and have PZ’s blog removed from the internet (reporting him to ISP etc).

    {beckons Jon over}

    [Samuel L Jackson voice]

    Motherfucker do you even KNOW the meaning of the word “proportional”?

    [/Samuel L Jackson voice]

    Having also read the entirety of this thread and the two previous to this and the RD net thread, I have to say what amuses me most however is Jon’s description of himself as resembling “a wardrobe with a bad hangover” and also as having beaten the shit out of two massive South African rugby playing chaps (not actual Springboks I presume). As he couples this with comments that he thinks the meanness on the part of the odd pharynguloid is the impotent frustrations of someone who would never say these things to his face (because he looks like a wardrobe with a bad hangover, so mean and large we presume, rather than vomiting and riddled with woodworm).

    So we have an internet toughie. I reckon we can take this to the next level. If I’m not mistaken Wardrobe Jon is in the UK. I am in the UK. I reckon we settle this issue like men, in a pub car park. We’ll get Josh Timonen back from videoing PZ to film it, and it can get put on a forthcoming RDF/Pharyngulite DVD about the REAL controversy “Tactics for when dealing with the perpetually benighted”.

    Does it help Jon to know that I’m an ex-county rugby player and a deft exponent of the martial arts?*

    Louis

    *http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFsKRKEW-Og

  298. #298 «bønez_brigade»
    March 1, 2009

    Louis, that’s the gist of it. Drama has definitely ensued.

    —–

    PZ, any word yet from the Internet Police? (though, I guess if the answer to that were yes, the blog wouldn’t be up right now)

  299. #299 AJ Milne
    March 1, 2009

    Unless, of course, one of you can anonymously claim to resemble an even MORE impressive piece of furniture than Jonny-boy!

    Well, I once had someone say I looked a bit like a referigerator, but she was pretty messed up at the time… And a minute or two later, she also said I looked like a cactus…

    So I’m not sure she was that reliable with either report.

    Me, I think I look sorta like an NFL linebacker… Or at least I do insofar as they’re sporadically bidedal, and so am I.

    Anyway, the point is, he may have something there–as I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t say anything mean to a wardrobe with a bad hangover–or not to its face…

    But then, it also seems to me I probably can’t. I mean, do wardrobes even have faces? I mean, apart from some of those really grotesque old ones, with carving around the door, and one of the carvings has a face… And I’m not sure those count, really.

    So about as much as I can say in defense of his claim is this: I guess I also wouldn’t say anything mean to a wardrobe’s front doors, if that’s at all germane to this discussion. Because let’s face it, that’s just silly. They’re wardrobe doors. What have they ever done to me?

    Hey, speaking of, why does the wardrobe have a hangover? And what does a wardrobe drink to get a hangover, anyway? Wood alcohol?

    Or… wait… it’s me who has the hangover, and it’s just a wardrobe? Because that makes more sense. And then, I guess, I might say something mean to it. I mean, if I was messed up enough from the hangover and I stubbed my toe on it or somethin’…

    Anyway, why is this wardrobe even posting on the web? Shouldn’t it be doing more wardrobey things, whatever those are? Hanging out in dusty attics, storing old clothes, sending British schoolchildren to other worlds in which beavers talk?

    Now that I’ve thought about it a bit, it seems to me if a wardrobe posts on the internet, it deserves whatever it gets…

    I mean, furniture should know its place, dammit.

  300. #300 articulett
    March 1, 2009

    I don’t know what the cause is, but Sven at #261 has won me over.

  301. #301 Ichthyic
    March 1, 2009

    Oh, I do so miss Louis as a regular contributor to these threads.

    ROFLMAO

  302. #302 'Tis Himself
    March 1, 2009

    I mean, furniture should know its place, dammit.

    Especially when hungover. I don’t want the dining room chairs barfing on my shoes.

  303. #303 Sven DiMilo
    March 1, 2009

    Sven at #261 has won me over

    Ha! Excellent! First notch on my…uh…guess I’ll just cut a notch in my laptop here…

  304. #304 Patricia, OM
    March 1, 2009

    Bastion of Sass #289 – *GASP* It’s not my fault! I was deceived by the Chimp! He verily dropped a cootie and I picked it up, and he said – now, thou shalt commit typos.

    And low, it came to pass that I did commit typos. And in the fullness of time all of Pharyngula commenters did commit typos.

    Then Bastion showed up and read the rites of Orangutans. And the Chimp believers in typo’s did doubt.

    Splitter.

  305. #305 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 1, 2009

    My plan is coming along nicely.

  306. #306 Azkyroth
    March 1, 2009

    Leander, I have the following suggestions:

    1) define the terms you keep using (“maturity,” “bullying,” etc.).
    2) provide some evidence for your assertions about how and by what people are influenced, rather than just unanchored rhetoric about what “seems obvious” to you.
    3) in particular, account for the number of commentators who have amassed sizable followings and substantially influenced the political process in the United States by offering childish bullying (per the dictionary definition) and NO content.

  307. #307 Sondra
    March 1, 2009

    Is this the same guy who says we’re all going to hell?

    and now we’re all just a bunch of meanies too; I agree with #5…

  308. #308 Azkyroth
    March 1, 2009

    At the risk of being accused of derailing another thread, I would say the exact same about politics. Libertarians are often accused of being cold, callous and heartless. And maybe many of us are. But that doesn’t make us wrong; and I will say that while there are plenty of unpleasant libertarians in the world, I’ve never met a stupid libertarian.

    Being cold, callous, and heartless is considerably more relevant to whether a proposed course of action is advisable or inadvisable than to whether a claim of fact is true or false. In fact, “argument from consequences” is not only unfallacious but paramount in discussing courses of action, since any sane person evaluates courses of action on that basis.

  309. #309 A. Noyd
    March 1, 2009

    mandrake (#278)

    Also, we get really tired of re-explaining the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

    Maybe we could rename it “the second law of thermo-the-earth-is-not-a-closed-system-you-fucking-retards-so-this-doesn’t-disprove-evolution-dynamics” or something?

  310. #310 Tom
    March 2, 2009

    Poor Johnny-boy. You mock him but look at all he has done to help the internets and protect the children. Keyboards include the letters F, U, C, and K and children might be exposed to them by accidentally typing those letters. Can you imagine the horrors if an 8 year old mistakenly typed “fuck you” when sending a message to an annoying friend? Thankfully, Johnny-boy has fought hard to get all the letters that might possibly be used to type offensive words, F, U, C, K, S, H, I, and T for example, removed from our keyboards. But I can hear your complaint that removing those letters would infringe upon your first amendment rights. But isn’t protecting the children more important than your slight inconvenience? We should all thank Odin for people like Johnny-boy. So stop calling Johnny-boy a fucking shithead asshole even if those words do accurately describe him. Instead, think of the children!!!

  311. #311 ESPness
    March 2, 2009

    After Ken #96,

    I came for the atheism, stuck around for the science and keep coming back for the language.

    I swear for a job (Firefighter) but I’m always sure to learn some new gems here, and get a good laugh in the process.

    Now if I can only work fucktard into a conversation at work…

  312. #312 ESPness
    March 2, 2009

    Oh, and if PZ is assembling a defensive furniture sqaud, I’m sorta built like a dishwasher with tinea (if whiteware is included).

  313. #313 tony
    March 2, 2009

    re: wardrobe boy & alcohol.

    I once pissed in a wardrobe while one too many sheets to the wind – it *looked* like a loo, it had a door & everything!

    I wonder if johnny boy looks at all like a loo? he is a john after all. maybe we could simply settle this by pissing all over him.

    Oh, wait! We’ve done that already! Never mind.

  314. #314 bastion of sass
    March 2, 2009

    At #304, Patricia, OM *GASP*ed:

    Bastion of Sass #289 – *GASP* It’s not my fault! I was deceived by the Chimp! He verily dropped a cootie and I picked it up, and he said – now, thou shalt commit typos.

    And low, it came to pass that I did commit typos. And in the fullness of time all of Pharyngula commenters did commit typos.

    Mighty indeed the Great Chimp’s powers must be, for I also have endured exceedingly egregious typing since long before I wandered into Pharynguland.

    So, I wonder: Did I unknowingly encounter the Great Chimp in my pre-Pharynguland life, and thus become infected with the typo cooties?

    Or did the Great Chimp time travel back from the present and infect me with the typing cooties many years ago?

    Or, did the awesomeness of his typo power spill out through the intertubes and infect me even though I had not yet entered into Pharynguland?

    And, perhaps, did the Chimp use his wonderous powers to lure me–a fellow fumble-fingered keyboarder–to Pharynguland?

  315. #315 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 2, 2009

    I

    Are

    Everywheres

  316. #316 Rick R
    March 2, 2009

    ESPness @312- “Oh, and if PZ is assembling a defensive furniture sqaud, I’m sorta built like a dishwasher with tinea (if whiteware is included).”

    I’m built a bit like a front-loading clothes dryer.

    Complete with lint trap.

  317. #317 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    March 2, 2009

    The internet police, they live inside of my head.
    The internet police, they come to me in my bed.
    The internet police, they’re coming to arrest me, oh no.

    I am so sorry, I could not help it.

  318. #318 teammarty
    March 2, 2009

    Going to see Dawkins too. Traveling up from Ann Arbor to enemy territory in Lansing. Being a college town, there are a ton of students bars on Grand River, just north of campus. There are more respectable establishments east on Michigan towards the Capitol.

    #53 “Fucking Clown Shoe”

    Just great, I’ll have to use that sometime.

    I usually don’t read all the comments once there are so many but once in a while it proves to be worth it.

  319. #319 John Phillips, FCD
    March 2, 2009

    Leander, irrespective of what someone might have told you or what you yourself might have thought, this is not the St. PZ School for the righteous atheist web sight. I.e. we are not trying to proselytise, simply sharing some rays, some laughs, some science, maybe a toke or two (or whatever floats your brain) and a whole shitload of rationality as a bulwark against all the dumbfucktitude out there beyond the Internet.

  320. #320 Hugh Troy
    March 2, 2009

    Wow! PZ’s lighthearted comments whipped up some silly person who doesn’t appear to dwell in reality. I’m amazed at the storm of words over at dawkins.net especially from some so called atheists.
    Atheists should be able to say things out loud and be proud, not respect the mad imaginings of uncritical buffoons.The ire of uncritical buffoons who do have their cherished stupidities bashed would be better directed at those beliefs. Perhaps then would some of these gullible fools begin to develop some discernment when it comes to what is real and what is imagined.

  321. #321 Knockgoats
    March 2, 2009

    Ok so this Jon chap is going to complain to PZ’s ISP, Internet watchdog groups, and scientific bodies in the States and Europe. – Louis

    What puzzles me is why he’s going for these half-measures. I’d take it straight to the UN Security Council – surely Jonny-boy can find a current member state that would submit an emergency resolution he drafted, in a case of this gravity?

  322. #322 Louis
    March 2, 2009

    @Icthyic #301#:

    It’s nice to be missed! You too are missed at AtBC btw, and Obliviot has been restricted to the Wall so he no longer plays. So sad. We have been getting low grade kooks atm, Denial Smith is some people’s current chew toy. Pay us a visit. How are things in the new country of residence?

    @Knockgoats #321:

    Quite right, hence my comment questioning whether Jon knows the meaning of the word “proportional”. I however, haven’t waited for Jon to find a dictionary with pictures in it and nice big writing in crayon, I’ve taken action.

    I’ve written to my Auntie Liz (the Queen, you know) and she’s brought it to the attention of that little chappie who runs her country for her, a Mr Brown. He’s rung around a few of his friends, and they all agree that Mister Meirz* leaving comments on his blog that include nastiness to Jon and SWEARY THINGS is not very nice. Hence, as of 3 pm today Europe is united in war against Morris, Minnesota (since they allow Mister Myahshz* to live there, some responsibility resides with them, surely) to eradicate this known terrorist, Mister Mjihardsh*.

    To use the words of that lovely man Mr Bush (the REAL president, not that nasty black fellow) “We will be tough on tourists and on the causes of tourism”. Or something like that.

    Louis

    *One things I have noticed for many years, since before Pharyngula and way back, in the before time, during the Never Never of Talk.Origins. was that for some reason few people, when discussing PZ, can spell his surname or get his title right. This is especially the case for people whining about PZ. M-Y-E-R-S. Five letters. It’s not even fucking approaching difficult. Yes, I am well aware of other spellings of similar sounding names, but spunky-suffering-fuck people this is not hard! Hence why I misspell his name at every given opportunity in relatively bizarre ways, it’s a joke. Also, he does have a PhD, it’s AT LEAST Dr Myers (if using his surname) he’s earned that much. In the USA I understand it’s commonplace to call academics Professor (whether or not they are full profs). I detest many of the policies of Lady Thatcher. Even when I am arguing vehemently against them, it’s still “Lady Thatcher”. Humorous comments are exempt, where part of the fun is juxtaposing someone of some achievement (regardless of how one might like some of those achievements) by over familiarity.

    P.S. Do you think in the bulk of the post I was sufficiently sarcastic? Sometimes I worry that, with people like Jon out there, thin skinned and unable to form coherent arguments, that humour is seen as persecution. Given the attempts by various western governments to censor even humorous criticism of religion (for example) I worry that my worry isn’t so far off base.

  323. #323 les
    March 2, 2009

    It’s been a while, but Jonny may be worthy of the Flame:

    http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1443107

  324. #324 SLW13
    March 2, 2009

    JWC @ 78: “I hear the hookers in The Hague are world-class.”

    Well played, sir. I did a movie-worthy spit-take when I read that. And may I just say, I am utterly heartbroken that I missed all of this while it was going on? How vastly obliging of the clueless little douchetards to entertain us like this.

  325. #325 Erroneous
    March 2, 2009

    PZ: I’m glad you liked the comic, I thought it fitting.

    Though, I must say it’s been bugging me for a day or two, and I feel I did you a disservice with it out of my own editorial imprecision. You never did personally use the “naughty” bit sequences that the hungover wardrobe found so insufferable.

    Thus, I would like to pay penance to your noble Science Beard by correcting my own error:

    http://i43.tinypic.com/jztso6.png

    Also: Jon is a fucking git.

  326. #326 Qwerty
    March 2, 2009

    “Everybody run. The homecoming queen’s got a gun.
    Stop it Debbie. You’re making a mess.
    Powder burns all over your dress….

    Why did you do it Debbie?

    I did it for Jonny.”

    Now I know who Jonny is in the song “The Homecoming Queen has a Gun.”

  327. #327 ESPness
    March 2, 2009

    Looks like Jonny is assembling a crack team of whiners to take down Pharyngula.

    The line up includes a couch with an headache, a bookcase with flatulence, and a dining table with a dicky leg.

    You can catch the action over at RD.

    http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=73754&start=375

  328. #329 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 2, 2009

    way TOO much time

    pfffrt

  329. #330 'Tis Himself
    March 2, 2009

    I loved the comment by PhiloKGB on RichardDawkins.net:

    Even if the jack-booted, e-scythe wielding thugs allow your “contributions” to stay, I hope that does not deflate your persecution complex. Because the whole world really is against you. It’s true; I just asked everyone.

  330. #331 Faintpraise
    March 2, 2009

    Don’t know if anyone will read down this far, but I’d like to thank the Pharynguloids above for a superbly entertaining read! I don’t often read all the comments when there are so many, but I’ve read them all on all threads on this topic, and on the RD forum as well!

    Also, I am built somewhat like a kitchen cupboard (or cabinet if you prefer).

  331. #332 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 2, 2009

    Even if the jack-booted, e-scythe wielding thugs allow your “contributions” to stay, I hope that does not deflate your persecution complex. Because the whole world really is against you. It’s true; I just asked everyone.

    that’s good stuff right there

  332. #333 Damian
    March 2, 2009

    Jon’s latest bit of hilarity, for those who don’t click through to the links above:

    [snip]

    And I fully admit?to give all your acolytes and probably yourself a hearty chuckle?that it did what it was supposed to do and caused me offence. I actually found it deeply, personally troubling for about an hour or so, give or take.

    Then I had the good sense to stop and get a coffee, light a ciggie and here?s what suddenly occurred to me.

    Basically you?re running the biggest, most frequently visited, hardcore science and atheism site on the net. You have millions of people flooding through all year round, agreeing with you and standing right behind you, along with big names in the sciences making contributions and what-not.

    Now one bloke?just me alone?makes some critical comments about that site and your shoddy conduct in relation to same, on another atheist forum. He also threatens to complain about your site…which will apparently have no effect at all, according to you.

    So how do you choose to respond to that? Well, you elect to go absolutely hairless and start blogging (even updating the blog a second time to add another irresistible cartoon of yours truly) while racking-up hundreds of insults aimed my way. It?s as if an army had taken you on?only as Bjork said, it was just an Army of Me.

    Consequently I?m flattered and I thank you and yours sincerely. Every single one of those insults was like a red rose through the post. So please keep them coming. They?re beautiful and very welcome.

    Meanwhile I also have to thank you for handing me the best ammunition to fire right back. If I ever wanted to demonstrate my point, referencing the low-tide mark set by your site, I?ve now the perfect opportunity to do so. The spiteful, irrational tone of all this stuff?which again YOU elect to host?reveals so many negative things about you that it?s a gift.

    (Thank you for gifting me PZ. I can only offer my deepest gratitude :-D )

    Whatever, you?ve now managed to prompt a whole bunch of people I both know and have contacted to get busy dealing with this stuff. It was one thing to have a single complainer ?whining? (your term) away in the corner but when it turns into stacks of offended ?whiners? acting in tandem, I wonder how that will go? As the weeks tick-by and those voices crystallise to a single point.

    [snip]

    Best Wishes,

    Jon

    What next, do you think? A call to President Obama? Hire a hitman? Or……….a full scale invasion of the US by his “whole bunch of people”?

    My bet’s on just more of that damn whining, and then a little more for good measure. Whatever you say about him ? nuckin’ futs, comes to mind, personally ? the guy doesn’t give in easily. Imagine what he’d be like if someone really did do something that was “deeply, personally troubling”? Wow.

  333. #334 SC, OM
    March 2, 2009

    Then I had the good sense to…light a ciggie

    That’s not good sense, Jon.

  334. #335 druidbros
    March 2, 2009

    Oh dont think John has only been offended by us. He also got offended over at Empire Burlesque.

    http://chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/3/1712-floyd-unmasked-a-savage-purveyor-of-violence.html#comments

  335. #336 Elwood Herring
    March 2, 2009

    Oi!

    Wass goin’ on in ‘ere ven?

  336. #337 Azkyroth
    March 2, 2009

    Jon

    Ladies and gentleman, the president of the World Association of Allegedly Affable, Allegedly Accomplished Apologists Against Angry, Arrogant, Abrasive Atheists, Agnostics, And Humanists has spoken.

  337. #338 Thunderbird5
    March 2, 2009

    #335 Moar Mudkips for Monopolistic Marxists apparently.

    Fuck me sideways, the dribbling tosspot just never knows when to put a sock in it.

  338. #339 Phledge
    March 2, 2009

    Long time lurker here. I know I can’t be the only one who hears “you strident atheists aren’t helping the cause” and readily substitutes “feminists/gays/POCs/abortion rights activists,” etc., for the word “atheists.” Fuck that. Anyone who purports to speak for a group of people with a single cause yet dismisses some of those people because they aren’t “seemly” enough is no longer supporting the group but rather their own agenda. I am grateful that I can come to places like Pharyngula and have the stupidity of religious belief pointed out to me, as it was my weak logic that allowed me to keep talking to the various sky fairies with whom I grew up. Don’t underestimate the power of contempt, folks. Dr Myers’ attitude changed mine.

  339. #340 Elwood Herring
    March 2, 2009

    “There’s only one thing worse than being talked about, and that’s not being talked about”

    Oscar Wilde (or was it Monty Python?)

    And in that vein I’d like to announce that I’m absolutely outraged and incensed that nobody has mentioned me at all in this entire thread, so I’m pulling the plug on Pharyngu

  340. #341 aratina
    March 2, 2009

    druidbros #335, are you certain that is the same person as Jonny-Boy here? I ask because the username is “John Howard” over at Empire Burlesque but Jonny-Boy seems to drop the “h” both here and on Dawkins’ forum. Both Howards do match in tone, length, and mind-numbing logic, but is it possible they are not the same concern troll?

  341. #342 Damian
    March 2, 2009

    Unholy shit, Jon has just dropped what has been dubbed by a fella calling himself Joshua Slocum (props), “The Argument From Uncle Mike”:

    I directed my Uncle Mike towards your site this evening – and before you start sneering he’s not the ‘internet police’ (ho ho ho) but just a secondary school science teacher. He checked it out and the first thing he asked was if you bothered to put-up any warnings at all that the responses following your blog entries were unmoderated for language and so on. HIs point was, if your site is such a good place to research current science, perhaps you (as a respected scientist, noted Prof and such) might have thought about at least younger visitors or people who might not like that.

    And as we all know, you should always listen to your uncle Mike. Game over. He he.

  342. #343 Guy Incognito
    March 2, 2009
  343. #344 Azkyroth
    March 2, 2009

    Speaking as an actual parent, I would have no objection to a teenaged Koboldling reading this thread or similar. I don’t think she’d be interested before that age.

  344. #345 Thunderbird5
    March 2, 2009

    Mar 3rd (today) is the start of No Cussing Week in LA.

    Yes, the LA County Supervisor has announced just that, and its all thanks to that self-righteous little shit Mckay Hatch (him of the No Cussing Club – look up them and their ‘What Constitution?’ pledge of mouth-clean) and his band of soapbar-wielding interferonities.

    (Source LA Times)

    Calling Uncle Mike…

  345. #346 Thunderbird5
    March 2, 2009

    Link

    http://www.nocussing.com/

    Where the nice children who don’t like sweary science blogs dwell

  346. #347 Azkyroth
    March 2, 2009

    Thunderbird: thanks for the link; I need to remember it. Koboldling and I will have fun mocking them someday.

  347. #348 «bønez_brigade»
    March 3, 2009

    Azkyroth @ 337 for the winz!

  348. #349 Discombobulated
    March 3, 2009

    For those who are just catching up, here is the story to date, in visual form:

    “The Saga of Jon”

    http://i39.tinypic.com/5qz5g.png

  349. #350 Snail
    March 3, 2009

    Bravo, Discombobulated!

  350. #351 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    March 3, 2009

    Discombobulated, I loved the wardrobe with the icepack. I want Jonny-Boy to try to ban you from the intertoobz.

  351. #352 clinteas
    March 3, 2009

    Nice one,disendings…..

  352. #353 «bønez_brigade»
    March 3, 2009

    Great stuff Discombobulated! I really like the increasingly bewhiskered wardrobe (and his legion of carpentered companions). Though “mighty” may be giving Jonny_Boy a little too much credit, the png was a lulz inducer, indeed.

  353. #354 Brachychiton
    March 3, 2009

    For someone who gets his knickers in a knot over tone and profanity, jonny_boy likes dishing it out.

    Yep, Wilber is a cancer who is in need of radiotherapy … So, along with the Christian Right, I wish you much pain, sadness and suffering as you grovel in the ashes of transcendent word that was never there outside of your wish-fulfilment!!!

    To state…Fuck You–You Lost, Idiot (lmao)

    But it surely can’t be the same Jon Howard, can it? That would make him a hypocrite.

    Well, yes. Yes, it is

    As Louis said “Oh, the huge manatee!”

  354. #355 Ichthyic
    March 3, 2009

    How are things in the new country of residence?

    the first two months has kind of been like attending a giant theme park, where you get to drive your own car on the rides.

    IOW, fucking fantastic.

    I’ll try to remember to shoot you an email this week, and I’ll be setting up a blog soon enough.

    did you ever decide to back to grad school?

    cheers,

  355. #356 Signs and Symptoms
    March 4, 2009

    While not wishing to label anyone (“You deny it? You need help!”), I wonder if Myers and his ilk have considered (or even care) that this site may attract, exploit and exacerbate the condition of people with personality disorders. I’m talking about Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD), Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), Paranoid Personality Disorder (PPD), Borderline Personality Disorder and Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder.

    Take a look at this on the signs and symptoms of serial bullies if you dare.

    It seems that bullies may be their own worst enemies.

  356. #357 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 4, 2009

    S&S, check out where Whinny-boy would be on that list. Include yourself too. You have a problem with bullying by trying to correct us. Find it.

  357. #358 aratina
    March 4, 2009

    S&S #365, I’m not sure how to make sense of your position and doubt anyone could be certain of what you meant. Is it snark (calling blog followers “ilk”) or is it admonishment (daring to say that pro-PZ people and PZ are bullies) or is it consideration (saying that Jonny and Greg are bullies)? How is a bully their own worst enemy? I don’t know what to say other than that is stupid and makes no sense. Please elaborate.

    The only person who made a serious (non-snarky) threat was Jonny (pathetically attempting to shut down this blog–see the title bar in your browser). There were cruel things said, but that does not equate to bullying. Greg feigned vandalism because we voted in his poll (multiple times each!), but how is it really possible to disrupt a public, freely accessible poll on the Internet? So, the only one who came close to bullying would have to be Jonny, in my opinion, and he really wasn’t very successful if that’s what he was doing.

  358. #359 aratina
    March 4, 2009

    “S&S #356″ is what #358 should have said at the start.

    By the way, I like the new anti-repetitive submission feature, whoever implemented it. How long do we need to wait between posts I wonder.

  359. #360 no2religion
    March 9, 2009

    Hey Jonny-Boy, I think you are a

    and that is what I think of you.

  360. #361 no2religion
    March 9, 2009

    Well that did not work well. How do I insert a picture in a post?

  361. #362 hery
    January 25, 2010

    I was surprised, on a quick scanning of the RDF thread, to see how many people were complaining about PZ’s tone rather than anything that was done or said

  362. #363 hery
    January 25, 2010

    Yes, we know you’ve probably been taught otherwise throughout your life

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.