I mentioned before that we're a bit full up on commenting kooks, and it's time to purge a few. Here's a short list of our contestants this week, a few of the obnoxious people who are lurking about in the comments right now. We're going to get rid of some of them, one at a time.
Barb
Alan Clarke
Facilis
John Kwok
Pete Rooke
RogerS
Simon
Everyone gets to vote them off the blog — just leave a comment with the name of the competitor you like least, and I'll tally them up on Wednesday morning, and the winner gets evicted.
But wait! There's more! We have to have an immunity challenge, don't we? Our 7 intrepid dingleberries have an opportunity to save themselves by meeting an appropriate challenge by 1:00pm Central time tomorrow. After 1:00, I'll ask the readers here to vote on who best and adequately met the challenge (and you'll all be fair and honest about it, I hope), and that winner will be exempt from eviction this round. Sounds fun, right?
Here's the challenge. In a comment that isn't longer than about 200 words, that is grammatically correct and logically coherent, and that does not cite the Bible or other religious authorities (and does not rely on tales about who you went to high school with, or tortured analogies involving necrophiliac pedophilic milkmen), explain how evolutionary biologists resolve the trivial conundrum represented by the common question, "If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?" Remember, answer as a biologist or intelligent layman would, not like Pat Robertson or Ken Ham.
Go! Voting will continue until Wednesday morning, our contestants have until 1:00pm Central on Tuesday to meet the immunity challenge.
Honestly, I despise Barb's idiocy and pig headed ideas about who is deserving of love but at least lessons can be learned from destroying her arguments.
Simon is just a fucking idiot with nothing to add.
Plonkhammer simon. The rest have the ability to be good teaching examples.
What about Mark that recently showed up in an old cracker thread?
Barb, hands down.
If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?
They should also explain why are there still PYGMIES + DWARFS!!!
Barb
I hope we get to vote again, because Pete Rooke makes me angry too. The rest are pretty easy for me to ignore, for some reason.
Thanks for letting the lurkers play!
Barb!
I have already made it clear who should go. But for the sake of this thread I will say it again. Barb.
Barb. Barb. Barb.
In solidarity with Janine, she of many names:
Barb
Is there a way I can search the site for comments made by these contestants?
PZ: For those of us that haven't been following the series that closely, perhaps you could include a short montage of each contestant's most endearing moments?
Hi. I'm going to have to say Barb. Reading the threads she's in just gets tiring and sad because it wanders so far from the point and always ends the same way.
Barb, Thumbs down!!!!
I say Barb is the worst as she has a tendancy to ramble on and on.
www.thenewatheist.com
[sung in a high falsetto]
Barb, Barb, Barb, Barb, Barb-a-ran,
Barb, Barb, Barb, Barb, Barb-a-ran...
That should have been "they" instead of "it" but whatever. Good English or bad English I still vote for Barb, although Pete would be next.
More solidarity with Janine: Barb
Louis
Pete Rooke.
But Barb is a close second.
Barb must be EXPELLED!
In solidarity w/ my sister vagitarian Janine, my vote is for Barb to go.
(Runner-up: SfO.)
Barb. The Rookie may be annoying, but at least watching people argue with him provides amusement. Barb, OTOH, is just vile, and her attack on Janine in an earlier thread makes her well deserving of the hammer.
What Janine said.
Barb.
David Jay, in the upper land hand of this page, there is a search engine. Just enter the name and follow the links.
Great idea and contest! It would make a great game show too! I vote Barb. She makes no attempt at logic at all, even the tortured kind.
Barb.
Pete Rooke freaks me the hell out, but he also goes away for long stretches of time.
Barb. And she will never be able to answer that question coherently and without Bible in hand. I'm looking forward to the various attempts, though!
Barb cannot have a landslide, Rooke is harmless fun so. . .
I vote for Facilis, Facilis, Facilis the simpleton!
Just for everyone's benefit, anyone have the link to the exact comment from Barb?
Even if it were just to stand with Janine against her: Barb.
I agree with Rev that there are things to be learned from decimating Barb's "arguments," but that's far outweighed by the fact that she's fucking evil.
Barb.
Well dang, I like them all (in a sort of circus sideshow sort of way). What I can't stand are the troll-feeders. But since PZ laid down the rules for this game... I vote for Pete Rookie.
Barb, most def
Here you go, Rev.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/creationists_in_denial.php#c…
This is tough. Pete Rooke is a sick, disgusting waste of skin.... But Barb is too stupid for words....
Okay... Barb... for now.
One can of Pete Rooke be gone please.
barb.
though, if it weren't for my vacation giving me a chance to recover, I'd have to do with Alan Clarke and the idiotic "shaking leaves make wind" analogy to disprove science. that was not just headache-inducing, it was downright tumor-producing.
But at least Barb is entertaining, in a frustratingly head-bashing sort of way.
Pete, on the other hand, isn't. Pete must go.
Another vagitarian voting for Barb the Bigot.
Ok. It was the homosexuality = rape = incest = pedophilia line of comments
That's what I thought.
Peat Rookers or Barb, Facilis is a bore too.
I think Barb will eventually leave on her own. Pete and Facilis; never.
Kill Pete. Then kill Facilis.
oh, poor Barb. she's not entirely useless you know--she can always be used as a bad example.
brilliant Barb
Chimpy, here it is. Just like any other time she splashes in, there is a lot of activity afterward. It is like a school of piranhas taking chunks from a huge and stupid beast.
I'm casting a tentative vote for Barb. Could someone point me to some particularly flagrant evil done by her? I missed all the fun. :-(
One rational, though non-scientific vote for Barb.
Barb. Gone. Now.
My vote goes for Simon. He adds nothing and will not be missed.
Barb is a complete moron, will never change, but provides too many lulz...."hearts that beat for a lifetime without any external energy source". Classic. Also, if she isn't spending all her time posting here she might find out her great MD husband is having an affair with a woman he can actual have respect for.
Facilis and Rooke are idiots, but they can be somewhat reasonable. Like many, I was surprised to learn that Rooke was in his early 20's. I always pictured him as a senile old man chasing kids off his lawn between posts. Perhaps he is like a mental Benjamin Button and in 30 years will lighten up. Facilis on the other hand, with his childhood certainty and statements like "ha ha, I win", comes across as a 12 year old. As long as Facilis doesn't bring up the "logic" proof for God (which he has mentioned about 50 times since) and Rooke refrains from making gruesome analogies I think they should stay.
Alan Clarke seems to think that Pharyngula is some sort group therapy and has continually been sharing the intimidate details of his life,in substitute for actual arguments, on the Science of Watchmen thread. He needs to cut it out. That's time I could spend reading about Walton! Also, needs to cut out all that bible quoting.
As for the other two, I really don't know enough to comment.
I'd lean toward Pete Rooke also, but I'm actually hoping for a fullscale housecleaning.
Barb
As a true nihilist, I can only say "who cares?"
Thanks for the linky Sgt. Obvious.
I join the chorus of those voting for Barb.
Voting does not seem particularly interesting, but the immunity challenge is frackin' AWESOME! I'm not on the list of 9 to be voted off, but I still want to try.
If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?
They don't taste good enough and are hard to shoot (quick little bastards, always climbing about in trees). If monkeys tasted anywhere as good as bacon, we would have eaten them all long ago. If they were a bit slower, then the colonial Europeans would have blasted them out of existence, much like the Dodo. They are marginally cute, which might be enough to save a few in a zoo (even if they tasted good), but the cuteness is overridden by the shrieking and poo throwing.
I thought ABB - Anybody but barb - because if barb creates so much entertainment for the Farangulinetti, it would be cruel to deprive them of their entertainment...
... but I looked at a barbpost... I saw the light, the dark, dark light... delete barb. Deffo. Delete delete delete!
As a true nihilist, I can only say "who cares?"
Breaking out of my long stint of lurking to vote.. and it has to be Barb.
Usually I find creationists either "stupidly hilarious", or "down-right annoying", but Barb bypasses all of that and heads straight for the chasm of "sickeningly inhuman".
Barb. She is hateful and mean.
Bah. The joy of crossposting. Now I see what everyone is talking about. G'bye Barb.
Could I ask a small favour:
I have missed the reasons for John Kwok's inclusions...well the reasons other than just BEING John Kwok...does anyone have a pertinent link or pointer to prevent me wade through all Kwokian output?
Thanks
Louis
casting my vote for BARB
Ban me! Ban me!
let's see...uh...
I was once an atheist like you rude and insensitive cracker-impaling religious-atheist "scientists." I went to high school (a prestigious one, thanks to God) with an esteemed milkman, whose poor oral hygiene and habit of wearing tiny miniskirts (above the knee-roll) fashioned from the tanned skin of my loved ones caused me to remark just the other day to my great friend, a celebrated ex-athiest evolutionary biologist who shall remain nameless, but who attended my Ivy-League alma mater together with me and my classmates and fellow esteemed and prestigious alumni, that homosexuality is DISGUSTING AND EVIL according to Scripture, and that of course (like my classmates)(and Jesus) while I love the sinner but hate the sin, homosxls and there Agenda will BURN AND ROAST IN HELLFIRE FOR ALL ETERNITY along with Holy Ineffable Baked Goods Defilers and Binders of Books in Human Skin, like the Nazis!!!!!1!! that you worship along with the Holy Darwin, and also ROASTING (FOR ETERNITY!!!) will be all you "scientifical" deniers of the evidences right in front of your snot-packed NOSES that the WORLDWIDE FLUD of Naoh can explain all of geologgy BETTER than your so-called athiest materialist naturalist "Science" which you all buy into because of your unquestioning hero-woirship of Darwinianisticalismists like Hitler and P>Z> Meyers and your ALL GOING TO BURN IN HELL with some of my fellow alumni and classmates with whom I was recently enjoying some chamber music at an invitation-only event (to which P.Z. Meyrz was NOT invited, also not Dawkins nor, unfortunately, Abbie Smith, who is in my OPINOIN more attractive and more likely to kiss me someday than any of my esteemed classmates or Facebook friends, of which there are many) but anyway you DISGUST me and I demand that you RESPECT my innermost secret BELEIFS and stop SWEARING on the internet: think of the Children! So anyway, how could there be reason and logic without my particular God who sent his ONly Son to die for YOUR SINS?! YOURS NOT MINE! PERVERTS! So please stop swearing and show some respect for my belief in magic cracker juju. OR YOU WILL BURN IN HELL!
ban me
Barb... I'm not sure which is worse, her willful ignorance or all the poor electrons that have been violated by her expression of it.
I choose Mrs. Barb Rooke
I just married them (and yes, I can cough up my correspondence degree in marriage making if required!). Since Barbaric Barb believes that marriage makes two people into ONE person, with the woman belonging to the man, blah, blah, blah, kick them both off for they are truly one person.
OK, if that is not convincing, then it is Barbaric Barb that must go.
Hmmm. Trying to get these 7 to learn something via your challenge. What are you, some kind of teacher..?
Feynmaniac, how could you forget the epic Titanoboa?
Rooke! I vote for Rooke!
Oh this is FUN! reality TV was getting so boring (was getting boring since about the 2nd week it was invented actually.), thanks to PZ for making it interesting again.
PS: has anyone seen this? It sounds like a gem, but I don't have 2 hours of my life to waste.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
@53 and you cared enough to say it twice.
Barb. so tedious and stale she can drive narcoleptics to reach for the sleeping pills.
ding!
Sven @ #59: Good work! Painful to read, but spot on.
Can I vote for SilverFox?
Please?
The lying, pathological name-dropper, Kwok.
I love this idea. I don't read the comments enough to know these folks but it sounds like Barb is a real jackass. I can't wait to see if any of them respond to the challenge.
Barb, but also a shout out for Facilis.
On the basis solely of that nasty, bigoted, fearful and frankly mentally retarded comment about lesbians:
Barb.
End her please.
Barb.
The others may be vile, but Barb is the one who said being a lesbian was the same as being a paedophile.
She has got to go.
oh gawd Sven I think I cracked a rib.
Wow, I used to think that Barb was mostly just annoying and uninformed. At least she uses fairly good grammar and spelling, and doesn't usually resort to overt insults. But when I read that post where she basically implied that someone must have molested Janine for her to be a lesbian, I changed my mind. She is completely hateful and so I will vote for her. And she is too obsessed with turning every thread into an anti-abortion campaign.
I'm not that familiar with about half of the people on the list; I guess I haven't been reading this blog long enough.
Sven, you are so twisted! And by that I do mean you are twisted in the right way.
I vote for Pete Rooke
.....why are there still monkeys?
I always answer that question with another question; If Americans came from English pilgrims why are there still Englishmen?
Barb. Don't let the doorknob hit you where the FSM split you.
You dern scientistsicalists are so confused about yer theories that you gotta ask the real scientists(creationists) to explain them for ya!
Barb because she is delusional and needs to up her meds. She speaks for god, scientists and sinners even though I doubt she is any of these things/people and does not possess the powers of ESP to read their minds.
Another one of the "Best of Barb" moments:
Wow Sven. I think you've nailed the mutant that would be a combination of all the above.
Barbalan Clarkilis Kwokookeroimon
My sister, BMS, just showed me Barb's comments from that other thread.
I was Best Man for my sister this summer when she married her wife. I wore a Utilikilt at my sister's request. Our mother officiated. They married at my new sister-in-law's parents' house in Cali.
Barb's gotta go.
Janine,
I had midterms around that time and missed out on all the fun of that thread. Oh well, I'm sure there will be others...
Sven DiMilo @ #59
Sorry pal. No ban. Instead: Molly nomination
What, no libertarian trolls to plonk?
I guess Barb will have to do.
Wow. I came here thinking... That's a tough crowd. I hope my one vote for Barb can at least keep it close only to see a whole lot of Barbs. I find this strangely heartening.
p.s. Sven, you just want to be able to put it on your blog that you were banned by PZ to generate traffic. While an admirable attempt, we can tell your heart just wasn't in it. You had several sentences that were not self contradictory. For shame.
Sven @ 59,
Are you channeling Kenny and David Mabus at the same time?
Lol! Nice job.
Barb
I vote none of them.
Those are the people that make places like this interesting.
Barb.
I could probably put up with the godbotting, insipidity, and stupidity, but combined with her despicable views about humanity it's just too much.
I have trouble believing most Creationists would be able to appreciate the significance of the monkey question...
Barb. No question. Pharyngula deserves a better class of troll.
Sven @ 59 - you nearly induced an asthma attack!
Ale, I think that was her first post here. That was such a shining moment of burning stupidity.
The Dave, the story about your sister's wedding was lovely.
Seems like Barb is going to get the ban, so I would point out one redeeming quality for her. She is a shinning example how evil her religion is. It was due to good christians like her that I started down the path towards atheism.
The Dave, what is a Utilikilt and do they come in orange?
Janine-
Photos.
For those too lazy to search the record, some arbitrarily selected comments:
Barb
Alan Clarke
Facilis
John Kwok
Pete Rooke
RogerS
Simon
John Kwok, from the few posts I see, doesn't seem that bad; Pete Rooke, while a religious nut, doesn't seem to be distorting science, more just appealing to Scriptural Authority.
Alan Clarke, Facilis, and RogerS all seem to be promoting crappy science; Barb, crappy science plus harping the Scriptural Authority. I hope all of them eventually get the boot (with "Barb" going next round).
However, my immediate vote is for Simon, since he seems to be promoting bad science via using religious idiocy to attack a bogus and offensive strawman.
Barb the Brainless, Boring, Brainwashed, Blathering Homophobe.
John Kwok...
please... the others are just ignorant and/or stupid, but they don't hijack threads with utter drivel like Kwok does.
Obviously Barb, but I still think it would be better if we had a beauty contest too.
The Idiot Trio:
1. Barb
2. John Kwok
3. Facillis
Barb's behavior to Janine is unacceptable. Kwok is insufferable. Facillis is ... stoopid.
The snuffling we're hearing in the background is poor old Piltdown Man crying because he wasn't named.
Did it occur to anyone that the banned ones could just change name and email and continue to be noisome?
Utilikilts
I have to give BMS' computer back to her now.
Later!
Kwokkers
I've just had a flash through some of the contestants' greatest hits and I'm somewhat inclined to booting the whole sorry lot off the blog but perhaps I'm just feeling a little despairing today. That said, the challenge should be interesting.
#97"I started down the path towards atheism"
BAD metaphore!
That path actually leads UP!
Pete Rooke OUT
Barb seems to be winning in a landslide, and it couldn't happen to a nicer person.
But Teleprompter@69 is right: wherever is SilverFox?
I hate to give her this much attention, because she probably gets off on it, but Barb has crossed the line and is now utterly preachy and hateful, with nothing but vileness to contribute. So, in solidarity with Janine and my other fellow LGBT folks on Pharyngula,
Barb it is!
I'm not entirely comfortable with this idea of kicking people off; even Barb, who seems to be winning by a landslide. I've just gone and reviewed the creationists in denial thread and while Barb is clearly ignorant and prejudiced, most of the replies were not exactly reasoned responses: more like petty insults. Look, this is a web page: if someone is blathering nonsense you can just ignore it. Or use it as an opportunity to hone your debating skills. Barb almost certainly won't learn anything, but you might.
One of the things I hate about Christian/Creationist websites is their censorship policies. Surely Pharyngula should be able to swallow even a Barb without suffering indigestion?
I don't actually recognise all the handles on that list, but every one of the ones I do recognise I essentially always skip when reading the comments. Unfortunately, the long fallout of each burst of Teh Stoopid as the silliness is shredded means I do wind up getting bits and snippets. There's wit, explanations, interesting angles or viewpoints, typos, people going SPRONG!, and a feck of lot of cursing and headdesking in that fallout, sometimes in the same comment. But—and the point of this ramble—having generally avoided the originals I don't feel I can cast a fair vote. And I've got better, more fun, things to do that go back and reads lots of dribble so that I can try to cast a fairly-considered vote.
pgpwnit @ 92 said:
I agree with pagprawns'nits.
Nothing more boring that a bunch of people agreeing with each other.
I vote to keep them all. (I mean, what is this, Uncommon Descent?)
Is the anti-Barb faction pharyngulating this poll?
Janine,
I even got The Dave not to shave for weeks before the wedding so he'd look as scruffy as possible (rather difficult given he has very little beard growth) - very fun.
I'm the one in the tartan shawl.
Seriously, after looking through my wedding photos, I'm voting again to ban Barb. She can suck it.
I vote for Barb also. She just reeks of stunningly willful and hateful ignorance. Her attack on Janine was the last straw for me.
#88: What, no libertarian trolls to plonk?
Stop that. It's not polite to make fun of other people's religious beliefs.
I hate to give her this much attention, because she probably gets off on it, but Barb has crossed the line and is now utterly preachy and hateful, with nothing but vileness to contribute. So, in solidarity with Janine and my other fellow LGBT folks on Pharyngula,
Barb it is!
Oust Barbara the Barbarian, hands down. Her mind is a cesspool of vile calumny and compassionless "Christian love". Kwok next, because he's a dead bore whose attempts at social climbing are beyond pathetic and whose comments are far too long and dull. Keep Pete - he's young enough to be nurtured towards a more rational mindset.
I know I'm mostly your friendly, Canadian lurker and rare poster, but if there must be a vote I'd have to say Barb is the most annoying.
I duly cast my vote for the most annoying poster and individual that must leave pharyngula council...um... blog, BARB!
Barb, pack up your **** and get the **** out!
I'm just so glad there isn't a "skin to win" rule, my eyes hurt just thinking about it.
Brilliant idea PZ.
Thanks for the link to Barb Janine. Now I remember the terrible feeling I had when my eyes involuntarily rolled back into my head and I felt as if I'd have a frickin seizure. But I gotta say Simon and Facilis Hmmm. The contest could be good if they are up to it.
I think an award should be sent to the banned if they are good enough sport about it. You kmow something like You've been BANNED From the Pharyngula Hive. However you will still be assimilated. In capital letters and cartoon style.
I vote for Barb You are all sinners at the foot of the cross.??? WTF.
Not to mention, Pete Rooke has already proven he'd win that challenge.
Am I eligible for this immunity challenge? I haven't been promoting creationism here on Pharyngula. (The closest thing was saying that I like the documentary "Expelled" which is really only about Intelligent Design and academic freedom).
Anyway the theory of evolution says that mankind and other apes evolved from a common ancestor. It does not state that we evolved from any extant forms of monkey
The Dave, thank you.
BMS, continue your assault on all decency. That was the scariest display I have ever seen. (Pure snark!)
Belated congratulations.
I have no idea what I'm voting for, so in true reality-TV-voter style...
Barb.
+1 for Barb.
OK Barb if you can convincingly elucidate what is going on between these two male flamingos that are successfully raising chicks together then I would vote that you be allowed to stay.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/05/gay_flamingos_a.html
we have our first contestant.
Sven:
Always nice to wake up to a good laugh..
My vote goes for Barb. I'd rather sit through another year of IEDs than listen to any more of her hateful shit.
Hey, that's much too easy. There are monkeys to collect tips for organ grinders.
Duhh.
John Kwok (even though he has crossed paths with MANY celebrities)
Sven "Poe" DeMilo
I guess at this point Barb has probably clenched it, but I'm going to throw another vote in for Facilis, although I have a feeling this is the sort of thing he/she'd love.
I've vote for 'ol Peety. Just to keep things semi interesting.
Bard is nuts, granted, but I just can't bring myself to vote for her. Possibly because she's so completely gone that I can't take her seriously.
Janine,
I wanted us to go out together on Hallowe'en in our wedding outfits, knocking on doors and threatening marriages.
:)
No it's about manufactured controversies.
Thank you Sgt Obvious.
I wasn't going to vote, as I only recognized Pete Rooke in all that and I'm too lazy at present to search. But that link of Barb has made the case. I don't even need to see the rest of the group. Barb is so....sooooo.....I don't even know if I have enough brain cells left to come up with a proper adjective, and I only managed to get through one and a half posts.
So yeah. Barb. Totally.
Now I have to try my best to purge the Barb-ness from my head in the hopes that my single remaining brain cell will emerge from hiding and repopulate my cranium--at least enough that I can gut it out through her challenge offering, which will no doubt be the piece de resistance of her evangelical career.
Banninating is too good for Barb, but it will have to do, after her assaults on Janine and reason. The rest of PZ's ordering is about right also. Alan Clarke needs banning, and ministering from mental health professionals. Facilis, the ineducable, needs a line of Jesuit Nuns with rulers to smash his knuckles, for his Epic poetic circular song cycle arguing (paraphrased, but close enough), "...for the existence of God from the impossibility of the contrary, no God, no logic, anybody who says that isn't logical can't explain the origins of logic because of their presuppositions, therefore I've proven the existence of God, so gimme my Molly," repeated, ad nauseum; then he needs to be banned.
Barb.
Peter Rooke
Barb.
Down necessarily doesn't mean bad. In space, there is no down, and on Earth, it is where the glorious squid are!
God did not grant Facilis the universal logic needed to see that Expelled is not about academic freedom. Hint, it arguments for creationism by painting the debate as an either/or proposition. And then it paints evolution as pure evil.
Of course you're eligible, you fuckwit, you got an engraved invitation. Passing the immunity challenge is the condition for not being banned! And guess what, it looks to me as if you passed the test, accurately and concisely!
Who are you really, and what have you done with facilis?
That, sir, was teh hawesome. You have my vote.
Seriously, I have trouble voting for any of them. I find Rooke kinda creepy/sad, Barb just seriously... ewww. And Facilis... I just sorta feel sorry for Facilis, when I even notice the posts... I sorta read Silver Fox as a slightly more deliberate BSer...
But anyway: getting that people are burning cycles dealing with their silliness, and Seed isn't running a DB purely for them to spread this shite, I'll do it like this:
I figure the bookmakers' odds any single one of 'em is ever gonna learn anything substantial from these exchanges is in a descending sequence of Facilis, Barb, Rooke, Silver Fox, where the first number is still probably at best in the order of .05, so I'm going:
(Write-in) Fox
Rooke
(... yes, I know Facilis is probably the lamest of the bunch in many ways. But it seems to me maybe that degree of utterly misinformed might be slightly more brittle, in the long run.)
(Also, please feel free to count these votes as 1/2, as I don't really spend a lot of time on any of them, and there are others who do yeoman service answering said disinfo. Thatsall.)
Really? I wonder if PZ is aware of this loophole in his plan?
BMS, I am relieved. We share a similar type of humor. Too funny!
I think this modified quote from The Dark Night sums Barb up nicely:
"Because some trolls aren't looking for anything logical, like evolution. They can't be convinced, reasoned or argued with. Some trolls just want to watch a blog burn."
Posted by: dahduh | March 16, 2009 3:20 PM
Someone wasn't reading, then. As usual, someone has already said it as clearly as it can be said:
Posted by: Patricia, OM | March 16, 2009 3:16 PM
dahduh, equating Janine with the sorts of criminals and aberrants that Barb did - especially for the reason she did so - deserves nothing more than petty insults and derision. And banning, IMO.
Barb eggs bacon and Barb.
I'm tied between Pete Rooke and Barb. Barb is a bigot and sanctimonious, and exemplifies the "baptised in vinegar" type of Christian, but Pete Rooke is a boring sophist who must think we're all too stupid (and/or ill-educated) to see through his facile little rhetorical tricks.
If we're having a run-off vote (much like run-off from a factory swine farm, I think), I say Silver Fox needs to go.
My sense of humor is all limbo-wife's fault! ;)
I vote for Barb. Barb, start writing your "challenge" entry. Good luck, moron.
As much as I want to vote for Kwok out of pure annoyance (you're sure we can pick only one?), I say Barb.
You don't go after people I like, regardless if those people even know who I am or not.
See, Barb? That's called caring about others; also known as "empathy". Normal humans have it.
Posted by: dahduh | March 16, 2009 3:20 PM
Someone wasn't reading, then. As usual, someone has already said it as clearly as it can be said:
Posted by: Patricia, OM | March 16, 2009 3:16 PM
dahduh, equating Janine with the sorts of criminals and aberrants that Barb did - especially for the reason she did so - deserves nothing more than petty insults and derision. And banning, IMO.
Hmmm. Looks like Barb's the strong front-runner at this point, so it won't hurt either way if I give my vote to John Kwok.
You're welcome, John.
Rt
My lurker vote is Barb.
"If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?"
This is unfair...the answer has only been given to them a few hundred times...but never from their pastor, so they won't be able to regurgitate it.
The clouds are like headlines on a new front-page sky...
Shiver me timbers, Barb is sailin' away.
Here's hoping I'm not double posting.
I've read Barb's posts. Gotta be Barb.
My vote: Throw out the stupid asshole called Barb.
I just don't know who to vote for. So many worthy (unworthy?) candidates. Some one give me a Pro/Con list on the nominees.
Barb was the only one I as a lurker recognized. So Barb it is. Does that mean need to read more pharyngula?
re 115:
The difference is that they are not being banned solely for disagreeing but for genuinely contributing nothing of value and simply wasting everyone's time pontificating without engaging in any real dialogue at all.
I'm hooked on the idea of Barb being forcibly evicted from here. As much as I enjoy seeing this Barbie being grilled repeatedly, I'm not sufficiently barbaric to want her to continue flinging her barbs at us.
And anyone who can write this, and mean it, is truly beyond hope: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/creationists_in_denial.php#c…
Barb, though she has provided such a shining example of hate-filled, perverted Christianity.
(Next choice - Simon - now he is a pervert. I've nothing against perverts at all, but I don't like them jacking off all over these nice clean threads.
And talking of jacking off - JK, even if he does it with some very important friends.
But Barb no 1
And hey - I bet she's reading this!
Wait, you mean you can answer the "why are there still monkeys" question WITHOUT making analogies to "necrophiliac pedophilic milkmen"?
Damn, I think it's time I stop buying my science books from the dollar store. :)
Evolutionary biologists explain the reason for the continued existence of monkeys despite the fact that it is often casually said that 'humans evolved from apes' by:
1. Clarifying that monkeys are not apes (this is because evolutionary biologists are technical people and have a crippling intolerance for technically incorrect statements).
2. Pointing out that other species of apes and humans share a common ancestor who was ape-like.
3. Rolling their eyes because they can spot half a thankless day of wading through the clinging, wet, dumb-swamp of mindless creationism and regurgitated logical abominations.
None of them has made me want to punch them in anger...
...except Barb. I was on the verge of leaving a comment for that slime to the effect of "if you had been standing here saying that, you'd be on the ground and missing teeth". I figured it was wrong, and it is, because I don't like violence, but there it is anyhow. Barb is an engine of hatred and emotional abuse that fails to turn over because of her sputtering ignorance. People like her don't deserve a platform from which to spew their hate.
Also, dahduh @ #111 and other "HOW DAER U BAN PEEPLZ FRUM UR OWN SIET" posters, your concern is noted, now get lost. Banning a troll != silencing dissent/censorship, so you and your troll arguments can get fucked.
Could we please get some highlights of these people's idiocy. It's a bit hard to dredge examples of all of them up.
See my post at #149.
Upon further research I think Mr. Kwok should stay if
(1) He refrains from name-dropping
(2) Complies with the terms of Abbie Smith's
Restraining Order against him.
Facilis,
Actually, that wasn't too bad.
Looks like Facilis is in the lead so far. Let's just hope we don't have to see him naked on a tropical island....
Barb
I think you need to stand up and take a walk outside. So much anger.
;P
If the idiot who calls himself "Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer" was on the list I would have voted for him.
Why vote anyone off? I would only vote someone off if they have made personal threats or spam jammed the blog. Other than that, why not either ignore the posts you don't like, or respond to the person's ideas and avoid getting into the personal snark fight/ pissing contests that seem to crop up so often. This blog would be a lot less interesting if everyone agreed all the time.
That said, I think Barb is pretty mean-spirited, but anyone can see that. Let her and the others say what they're gonna say, and keep the debate going!
no barb Poey imitators please.
@ SteveM #147
Coming back under another pseudonym is called "Sock Puppetry."
SOCK PUPPETRY IS GROUNDS FOR GETTING PUNTED AGAIN!
Others have tried it and been removed multiple times. It's not a loophole, it just makes the challenge more fun as it isn't immediate gratification. It becomes a long term project!
"but I don't like them jacking off all over these nice clean threads."
Alright, I've stopped for now, but I'm not making any promises.
Barb, Champion FAIL....
I take it back. Ban her; she is a fuckwit.
You are all mean, and atheists on a daily basis etc. In #57 I asked for a link or hint to highlights of Kwokery to prevent me from wading through a huge amount of Kwokput. I have now been Kwokked and feel quite ill.
Honestly, why won't you act as my mental shield from Kwokism?
Louis
P.S. I understand he is best friends forever with some very famous people.
Rik G:
Barb has neither started, contributed to, nor completed any sort of worthwhile debate.
Just looking through Barb's wonderful post, I still gotta stick with Rooke, for his stick-to-itiveness.
Pete Rooke.
You cannot ignore the persistence factor.
I'm with the majority here. Barb is so thoroughly brainwashed there is no mind left. Out, I say!
Barb. The real one, not the Poe.
I think that the trolls we successfully ignore are less damaging than the ones who are SO egregious that they force every decent regular to respond. Some trolls are comparatively harmless; they just make their fellow creatards look bad. Other trolls are so bad they make us look bad just because we don't swiftly show them the door.
Facilis is fun to poke at. Kwok is a useful idiot. But Barb is the kind of nasty, disgusting person who truly makes it "not fun" to be here. I vote Barb out.
K'ching me!
Yep, because that's what we're going for here, right? Crush all dissent! Ban all who disagree! PZ uber alles!
That people cannot see the difference between "should I ban these people who contribute nothing and annoy people for their own amusement" and "agree or die" is stunnning. Ignorance comes in many forms, it seems.
Besides, it's PZ's site, and it's his call as to what is and isn't acceptable. Don't like it? Get out.
After almost 200 posts it is obvious the front runner and plonkee to beat is Barb the brainless. Since she is such a front runner (and my real first choice), I'll officially vote for Pete Rooke just to make things a little more intersting. Given her lead, it still doesn't make it much of a race.
Barklikeadog, that was not Barb.
Please do not do that again. Barb says enough foolish things on her own. We do not need to make up stuff and claimed she said it. Beside, it is hard to top the heart beating for a lifetime without an external power source.
re Ice Farmer @178:
What I was trying to convey is that as the blog owner, PZ is probably well aware of what banning is capable of and the techniques for getting around it. Apparently you missed the invisible sarcasm tag in my previous comment.
Barb.
Barb!
She cannot make a coherent thought, and mostly cause she equates sex between two consenting adults to pedophilia.
Count this as yet another gay woman voting for...
Barb!
Surprised you all there I bet.
Trolls can sometimes be entertaining but I find her particular brand of homophobic invective depressing and it makes me angry. Especially when she has a go at Janine.
Well, I hate to swim against the stream like this, but Barb gets my vote. :p
The rest are just as dreadfully dense, but Barb's hatefulness gives her the edge. That's a sad, nasty, sick human being right there.
If I were to prognosticate though, I'd guess Simon'll be next. The handful of his comments that I've seen have struck me as quite creepy, and I get the feeling he's going to go over the edge in spectacular fashion one day soon.
Barb -- she's boring crazy. At least folks like Pete Rooke are interesting examples of psychopathology. She's just redundant.
Count this as yet another gay woman voting for...
Barb!
Surprised you all there I bet.
Trolls can sometimes be entertaining but I find her particular brand of homophobic invective depressing and it makes me angry. Especially when she has a go at Janine.
It takes a real special thought process to come up with that idea.
(hers, not yours).
Normally I wouldn't vote, but bigots need to get booted. Barb gets my vote.
Sorry, my bad. I hate stepping in Poe like that!
Sorry for double post, accidental clickage. I wasn't trying to vote Barb twice (apart from anything else, she doesn't need it!)
This is why I mostly lurk.... (sigh!)
Broken Soldier, OM (#182), "Barb has neither started, contributed to, nor completed any sort of worthwhile debate".
I haven't seen everything she's posted, but that seems to be true and I'll take your word for it, but why not just ignore her and respond to the posters who do have something to say? Don't get me wrong; I don't think that banning v not banning is a free speech issue--this is Prof Myers blog and he can do what he likes with it--but I am a little perplexed by the desire to punish. Despite all that I like about this blog--and all that I've learned from many of you!-- there's a lurking touch of schadenfreude here that bothers me.
You could have an FAQ section for questions like:
"If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?"
It would be more of a "Questions Frequently Asked By Idiots", or QFABI than an FAQ section...
Sure, go ahead, heap all the scorn and mockery on me that you can WHILE you still can. Common sense tells me that evolution is the stupidest idea ever and yet you so-called educated "scientists" fall for it hook line and stinker, just as you're told to by your worshipped leaders like P.Q. Miers and Richard Dawkins and Hitler. I (and all of my classmates) know for certain that I am right and you are GOING TO ROAST IN HELLFIRE FOR ETERN wrong because I have three things on MY side NOT YOURS:
1.) The Holy Word of Omniscient God the FAther, Jesus His SOn (but also God too) and Caspar the Friendly Ghost (also God, seriously). Yes, I am talking about the Holy Bible. Everything in there is True so it trumps your pitiful "empirical" "facts" and "logical" "deductions" every time. You materialist Darwinisticalians make me laugh and laugh with your appeels to "reason" and "logic" and "measurements" because YOU COULDN"T HAVE REASON AND LOGIC WITHOUT God, all three of them in One. FOur if you count the magic wheat-paste.
2.) My favorite teacher at my celebrated and prestigious high school, who is an esteemed and extremely well-known memoirist who taught me and my fellow classmates and esteemed alumni at our high school, but whose name I will not mention lest I be accused of name-dropping, but still you've heard of him, believe me (as has Abbie Smith, who is so fine).
3.) My husband, who is a REAL Doctor, meaning an MD, meaning smarter and more knowledgable automatically than you debauched disgusting fools and "scientists" who couldn't get into medical school. And he agrees with me about fags and lesbeans and how their as disgusting as people who have sex with innocent children, animals and birds, or human-skin kilts.
4.) you are poopyheads
I say Barb, but John Kwok always raises my blood pressure so maybe for my health he should go,too.
Hey, where's Africangenesis?
Bleh. Okay, Simon then, please?
Bad ass idea PZ. Hey I have some good news. Since you visited Springfield, we now have an Freethinkers club. There are about 50 of us so far and these kinds of groups are popping up all over MO. Oh yeah, I vote for Barb too. Chow!
You could have an FAQ section for questions like:
"If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?"
It would be more of a "Questions Frequently Asked By Idiots", or QFABI than an FAQ section...
Really PZ, you made the immunity challenge far too easy. If creationists can get PhD's in subjects related to evolution by just "faking it", the trolls here can easily pass this challenge.
If Facilis is chosen (which looks unlikely at this point) he should have to explain in detail why an Argument from Ignorance is not a valid position in a logical argument.
I can sympathize with the desires to ban Barb, but I'd say that her blathering tends to work against her position and beliefs.
Ultimately, I vote for Simon....mostly for just the series of boring cut and paste from Wells the Mooney cultist.
So go ahead: shut me up! Ban me! You and your ilk cannot stand to have your dogmatic opinions questioned in any way so you have to rely on censership and "banning." But the Truth will not be Banned and God will not be Mocked. And here's something you never thought of before, I bet:
What if your WRONG?
A hint: All creatures alive today are the tips of the ancestral tree/bush of life.
I am not much for banning people who comment. But the rules are the rules and they have been well published.
I cast my anti-vote; I think we shouldn't kick any of them out.
This voting contest makes it too likely that the "winner" would claim martyrdom. I think they have enough pompous self-righteousness, don't you? Why lend fuel to the fire?
That said, if anyone again says that homosexuality is an addictive reaction to molestation, the Pharyngula squad should fire at will.
The Kwokian "My Big Friend Said" thing was really irritating, but just that.
Dunno wot the others said, but I'm trying to have a good day here.
Longtime lurker here...I have only posted a couple of times, but from what I have read, Barb needs to go.
After reading her attack against Janine (thanks for the link) I believe the tribe has spoken.
I think Pete Rooke is especially insidious. He'll complain about cursing and then in the next breath casually mention how men and women shouldn't work together.
Agreed, and I like it just fine. I like the intelligent discussion, I like laughing at fundie wackaloons. I really like that fundies actually show up here and post from time to time, and summarily get torn apart with actual fact, logic and reasoning.
.. and the redundancy there was intentional on my part.
Barb for hatefulness, even though she won't understand.
I'v got to say that 200 logically coherent words for the immunity challenge seems to be setting the bar too high. Perhaps immunity for the dingleberry who writes the longest consecutive sequence of logically coherent words? About 30 should win it I guess.
While my vote for Barb is already placed, and I stand by it, I can't really support tossing her solely on the basis of that post linked above. Yes, it was both stupid and insulting, but we should be able to handle that.
While she did say that homosexuality is a sin, she made it a point to say that she didn't put it in the same ballpark as rape. She then said that while she recognized a difference in severity, her asshole god only has two categories: "sinner" and "not sinner". So far we're dealing with bog-standard fundy Christian belief here, and nothing that I took to be particularly aimed at Janine.*
The other part about having been abused as a child, c'mon.. we've all seen trolls use the same reasoning to explain why we're atheists, or why why we do anything they don't agree with. Yes it's completely asinine but I have a hard time seeing actual malice behind it. It's always seemed like more of a defense mechanism to me; once they explain it away in those terms they don't have to consider that normal people can be gay, or atheist, or whatever. They can always blame it on some imaginary traumatic experience.
*Full disclosure, I didn't follow that thread so I may have missed the context.
I had this thought briefly, and I think your psychology is dead on. But then, there's also context and proportionality: and I note that (a) from parting shots fired by a few bannees, they tend to develop that attitude with or without the popularity contest (and I'm taking it as given the comments threads are getting a bit congested with this rot, and someone's gotta go, anyway), and (b) many of 'em got plenty of that 'oh, group X of which I am a charter member is so persecuted' thing going on with or without banning...
So I figure this is probably just dropping a few more straws into a bonfire already well on, really.
My vote seems unnecessary but,
Barb.
OK then, I vote Sven.
Even if it is censership.
'Cause he called me a poopyhead.
Barb, Barb, Barb... Barb Barb Iran ... Wait - that doesn't quite work....
JC
Eliminate Barb this week, <- dementia
then Pete Rooke next week, <- illogical
then John Kwok the following week, <- nonsensical
then Sven DiMilo. <- what an IDiot...lol
So, time to play the devil's advocate: based on reading the comments starting at #549, in the thread linked by Sgt.Obvious in #32 of this thread, Barb does not need banning. Barb does not need censoring of any kind. Granted I didn't read a personal attack on Janine, that would warrant a ban I suppose. I hope #549 in the linked thread wasn't considered personal, it doesn't read that way to me at all. Unless you see her misunderstanding of, and faith-based argument against homosexuality to be a personal attack on all homosexuals. I found this paragraph of her's to be quite informative:
Barb claims that she herself sees a difference between homosexuality and rape, but that her opinion does not matter because her God sees no distinction. This is a useful post! We can learn from this and better understand where they are arguing from, without in any way agreeing with it.
I know it's barely above flame-baiting to say this here, but the reactions to Barb's posts seem to me, to be rather intolerant. She is arguing from a radically different viewpoint than the rest of us open minded (I hope) individuals. Unfortunately the evidence shows that roughly 40% of the United States still shares a similar point of view (Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life). I would contend, that of that 40%, Barb is probably able to better articulate her reasons than most.
I understand that what she says is found to be disagreeable and disgusting by the vast majority of commenters here, but should we really be silencing dissenting voices here? I hope at least one of you will forgive me for saying so, but sometimes it seems to me that the enemy is right: commenters here do often seem to be just as close minded as we accuse them of being, probably safe in the knowledge that few people here will disagree with their hateful anti-religious speech (I do recognize that this doesn't apply to everyone, but it's common enough that I often make it no further than the first 10 comments before closing the page in disgust).
If your purpose in commenting, and reading comments on this blog is honestly to encounter interesting discussion with people who do more than simply nod in agreement, then Barb seems a poor choice for a ban. Unless someone can show me evidence of a personal attack of course... then most of the wind gets sucked out of my sails and I'll vote for Barb. :D
NOW! I'll check back fairly often to defend and qualify my argument for the rest of the day. I do have a paper to write though, so forgive me if I don't address your comment immediately.
(Yes I am an atheist; yes I hate fundamentalism; yes I hate people who hate)
Rik G:
And apparently, he has chosen this. Your concern is noted.
I'll peek out of lurkdom to say that for unvarnished hatefulness, it has to be Barb.
What did I miss?
Next round can we have them have to come to an agreement about who's immune? Nothing so fun as christian backstabbing.
I was gonna go for Pete Rooke, since he's been here long enough that I noticed. But if Barb has attacked Janine (who needs an OM), I'll bray with the flock and vote for her: Barb.
Kwok is annoying, but I'm not gonna waste a vote on him.
Pete Rooke gets my vote, but I must proclaim my ignorance of some of the other candidates. Maybe they would change my mind. Could someone direct me to Barb's posts...I'd like to see if it's the one I work with!
When PeeZed nominates a poll I usually vote - early and often. But it's a thumbs down to this one. Ranting by these people he's listed serves to remind me daily that I am absolutely right in what I think and believe
Several reasons.
1) One should always speak out against bigotry - this is why people react to Barb's hateful spewing.
2) If people ignore the ignorant rantings of the trolls, others who stumble on the site might be led to believe that there might be something to their rambling streams on nonsense.
3) We are here to debate. If we all ignore anyone who said something stupid, it would mean that we would become the choir singing PZ's praise that people accuse of us of being.
4) We tend to believe that it's possible to educate people, or at least inform them. On rare occasions, people don't want to get neither educated nor informed, but until we try, it's not possible to know for sure.
On top of that, I'll also note that many of the people on the list have a tendency to go on and on, so scrolling past their comments is a tedious task (though it beats reading those posts). If they don't contribute anything worthwhile, e.g. no one actually reads what they write, there is no need for them to suck bandwidth.
Blue Fielder (#188) " 'This blog would be a lot less interesting if everyone agreed all the time.'
Yep, because that's what we're going for here, right? Crush all dissent! Ban all who disagree! PZ uber alles!"
No, that's not what I'm saying, please don't put words in my mouth.
"That people cannot see the difference between 'should I ban these people who contribute nothing and annoy people for their own amusement' and 'agree or die' is stunnning. Ignorance comes in many forms, it seems."
I do see the difference, I just don't come down in favor of banning, nor do I think it is terrible if anyone is banned. I can understand those who favor banning, and just thought I'd offer a different point of view. No need for the vituperation.
"Besides, it's PZ's site, and it's his call as to what is and isn't acceptable."
I agree with you 100%.
"Don't like it? Get out."
Jeeze! There are things I like and things I don't, so what if I have mixed feelings about it? If Prof. Myers asks me to get out, I'll get out. As for you and me, can't we just disagree in a friendly manner??? It really ain't THAT big a deal if anyone is banned or not and we've all obviously got extra time on our hands if we're contributing to this discussion anyway, so let's just agree or disagree with each other, but keep things respectful along the way.
Pete Rooke gets my vote, but I must proclaim my ignorance of some of the other candidates. Maybe they would change my mind. Could someone direct me to Barb's posts...I'd like to see if it's the one I work with!
My vote is for Barb to go, her posts are way too long and and don't say anything. My poor irony meter gets broken everytime I attempt to read her comments.
My vote goes out to the lady Barb(ed Wire)
After seeing the link to Barb's post, attacking Janine, I throw my rock at her pile o' crap.
I do not take her comment as an personal attack on me. And I asked her that question about a dozen times, so I pushed her for an answer. I did so because I find her to be typical of fundamentalist christian parents who kick their GLBT children out of their homes. I do not hate her because of what she said to me. I hate her because I have seen the harm that people like her have done to their children.
I'll peek out of lurkdom to say that for unvarnished hatefulness, it has to be Barb.
Rik G:
There's a suggestion no one's seen here before...
Ah, so it's okay if you put words in everyone else's mouths, but how DARE I tell the truth about your garbage, right?
Your concern trollery is noted, and you are hereby killfiled for the duration.
OK, I already voted and I admit that I won't miss Barb being gone. However, I have doubts about censoring in general, no matter how wrong these people are. As long as they aren't using terrible grammar and spelling, maybe we should just let them type whatever they want and just choose not to read their posts. However, it is really frustrating to explain to them the same things over and over when they simply choose to ignore those things. I feel like banning them is giving up, but I certainly won't be sad to see them go.
Kristjan Wager (#227) points 1-4
Good points, every one! Thanks for making four good points, and also for being civil about it!
We find trolls useful in so many ways, but Barb has no socially redeeming features whatever. I have never seen a troll so hateful or purely evil. She is a disgrace to humanity, because she hasn't any. Can you all tell that Barb gets my vote?
Sorry for the duplicate post.
True enough, but I think, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."
The thing is, the frequently mentioned Barb homo post and my recent Kwok readings aren't enough. I haven't read comments by the other candidates (or, if I did, I totally don't remember). Searching through old posts for their comments is too tedious, I'd rather sort the dust bunnies gathering beneath my desk.
Frankly, I honestly don't care if they stay or go. Their presence does not curdle my milk; their absence will not sweeten my coffee.
I will admit that I am curious whether any of them will write those essays. It'd be nice to have somewhat equivalent writing samples. So, I'd say it's a fair game if they write and then we vote after reading them. Non-attendance can merit disqualification.
Death to Barb!!!
@235 - Thanks for the helpful clarification there Janine, and I hope that if you read what I posted a couple minutes before you, you won't be too upset by it.
Everyone mentions Barb, but I haven't found a single comment from her yet. I was away for a couple of days, though. Did they all get deleted?
Apparently Sven DiMilo is upset she wasn't included on the list.
I would have said Pete Rooke until I read the ignorant homosexuality=pedophilia comment made by Barb directed towards Janine and all other lesbians.
Barb deserves to be cast away. She's been getting on my nerves anyway.
In support of Janine I MUST vote for Barb!
I don't have a problem with Barb. I don't agree with her philosophy, but she's always honest and polite about it. I have not found responses to her posts to be generally polite.
Actually, I'll go a bit further: Some of the responses to her are embarrassing, as are the anti-Barb comments on this thread. This Survivor idea isn't one of your better ones, PZ.
Anyway, I vote that she stays.
Barb.
I'll agree with RikG (and pgpwnit and Newfie and dahduh and divalent) and vote for none of the candidates. I find it too easy to ignore posts I don't want to read, and don't need PZ to save me from SIWOTI syndrome (if you have it, you don't want to get better.)
Besides, many of those 'bad' arguments require work, cunning, patience, and/or skill to answer, because they're either
1.) classic ones you encounter in apologetics
2.) common ones thrown at you by friends, relatives, co-workers, and neighbors
But I suppose one can make the best case for voting off poor Barb. In addition to other problems, she's very long-winded.
Personally, I would have voted for Nat, who not only makes us scroll, scroll, scroll to the bottom of almost every one of his interminable posts -- but he's not even writing his own arguments; it's all cut 'n paste from AIG. And when this is repeatedly pointed out, he doesn't stop. That's bannable trollishness.
(The only one on list I don't recognize is Roger5.)
Barb?
Barb. To paraphrase a line from Cool Hand Luke, what we've got here is failure to communicate; some people you just can't reach.
John Kwok doesn't belong with these creationist noodniks, though. He preemptively wins the immunity challenge.
Ban me and my power will only grow STRONGER! Know why?
1. I'll post it on my Facebook page for all of my many and well-known friends to see.
2. I'll start a NEW blog, better than this pit of disgusting athiests and anybody on the whole Internet will be able to read about it! Ha!
3. I'll tell Ken Miller, a fellow alumni of me and my classmates at Brown, which is prestigious.
4. I'll tell Abbie Smith.
5. I will tell Matthew Nisbet so he can frame it.
6. I will Morph! and Sockpuppet! and...and...I'll seek advice from Charlie Wagner!
7. I will write respectful, non-swearing letters to P.Z> Meijers's Dean, Provost, President, Chancellor, Chairman, Tennis Pro, and Boss.
So go ahead. Ban me.
You don't have the guts!
I have watched this laughable blog for a long time, but I have never seen something so despicable as this--trying to ban those followers of the Lord who speak the truth? You have reached a new low, Professor Meyers, you, and all of your evilutionist followers.
How can you truly believe in evolution? Besides the fact that the Bible says nothing about it in any of its God--given pages, if evolution is true, why does Ontology not Recapitulate Phylogeny? It's obvious to anyone who thinks.
But I suppose evilutionists don't do that, now, do they? In between rooting for the Muslim Obamanation in the White House and ridding it of all our Christian brother Dick Cheney has worked to build and wishing for another Hitler to arrive so as to evolve the human race onto godhood, you can't think very well, now, can you?
Barb.
Janine said:
And it's for this reason that I have to concur with many, and vote for Barb. Reading the dialogs involving her reminds me too much of someone trying to debate a tape recorder - two people are talking, but only one is capable of listening and responding intelligently - and the material spewing out of the tape is nothing but ignorance and bigotry, with the smarmy sound of Florence Henderson's motherly voice, daggers dripping with honey and venom. She's worthy of being the first voted off, most definitely.
Come on now Sven, I think you've trolled enough. Masterfully done I admit, bravo. But time to give it a rest. ^^;
@Janine #235: I totally respect that. I think she should should be booted for her complete posting history, she hasn't added to any discussion and pretty much has shit on everything she's touched. I'm seeing too many posts saying she should be banned because of her egregious attack on you, which I didn't see, and I refuse to read more into that post than what I think Barb intended.
If it was a direct attack on you, I still would leave it be unless I thought you couldn't easily handle it yourself. There's a fine line between being showing solidarity and being overprotective.
He has only posted in Titanoboa and Science of Watchman threads.
There are no stay votes.
I hereby vote for Sven six times more.*
(*The winking smiley would go here if I could bring myself ever to type a smiley.)
It looks like all the barbs thrown at Barb means she's going down... down deep to the dungeon.
I was surprised GodIsLove and Silver Fox didn't make the list. Maybe PZ is saving them for a prime time special.
Facilis actually made a good play with his immunity challenge. If only he wasn't a closet case VD worshiper.
No Libertarians made the list because PZ ran them off last month. He hurt their (sob) feelings.
Pete Rooke is about creepy and twisted as they get.
So knowing that Barb is going down I will pull a Nader and throw away my vote on Rooke.
Sven, I will admit that I don't have much of a sense of humor when it comes to trolling and poe-ing, but if you keep this up, I'll have to killfile you.
Can't you at least use a modified name for your poe-ing, so I don't kill the good comments you make in other contexts?
As mentioned above, I haven't seen any of Barb's posts, but I lean towards "nobody".
Even though I don't agree with what many people say, I don't generally have a problem with reading/ignoring them, except for the pure trolls, ie those posting obnoxious comments that they don't even believe themselves just to get a rise out of people. I don't think anybody on the list qualifies.
Barb
The wrath of BlueFielder be upon you.
;P
Actually, I'd like to change my vote, please.
I'd like to have banned everyone who came on this thread to bitch about banning people.
No, not it's not a useful post.
Why?
I couldn't give a flying fuck what she fucking claims.
Because what she says is nothing new. She offers no insight. I, and other LGBTs have heard that bullshit all our fucking lives.
And we're fucking sick of it.
On top of that, the waste of carbon Barb knows what she says is personally hurtful to us. Such is not an academic discussion - it's an attack, an old old old, tired and mean and bullshit attack.
It illuminates nothing.
Do you not have any comprehension whatsoever the psychological, the physical damage these knuckledraggers do to their LGBT children, to all LGBT children, to all LGBTs??
I mean, fuck.
So fuck you, too, for your complete lack of empathy.
Fucker.
Barb
Sastra, you can find RogerS tag teaming with Alan Clarke at the Titanoboa and Science of Watchmen threads.
What we really need is for a system for easy labeling of creationists banters and over all theistic nutcases. Something like a name tag next to their user name like you would see in lan guilds.
Something like ,, etc etc.
That way people can easily identify the morons and easily ignore them if needed, while still providing the people who enjoy mocking them without the need for banning.
Bluefielder (#238) "Ah, so it's okay if you put words in everyone else's mouths, but how DARE I tell the truth about your garbage, right?"
What words have I put in other people's, or as you say, "everyone else's" mouth? I don't think I have done that, but if I have, please point it out and I will apologize, because that is not my intention.
"Your concern trollery is noted, and you are hereby killfiled for the duration."
C'mon, man, haven't you ever heard of a friendly disagreement? If you're ever in Austin, TX, look me up and I'll buy you a beer, or I can see you at 4:20 if that's your pleasure. Get to know me for five minutes and you'll realize I ain't no "concern troll".
She's a witch! Burn her! Burn her! She's a witch!
P.Z., why is John Kwok on the list? He usually (on Amazon anyway, I can't recall any of his posts here) pounds on the creationists ... though he does tend to go over the top ...
Just curious ...
Why all this concern? Do we have to be nice to everybody? If you don't weed the trolls from a site periodically it will become their site.
Personally, my distaste for Barb is not personal or political. I get irritated when people hijack threads in order to turn them into long winded platforms for their ideology. IMO Barb is the worst non-libertarian offender on the list. She makes me scroll and scroll...
I'm not Poeing.
I'm trying to get banned.
I'd get a lot more work done.
Silver Fox would be my target, but I'd actually wouldn't kick anyone. Without them, where do I get my daily does of facepalm?
I'd really like to write in Sven DiMilo or PrisonerOfEvil, but damned if I can't tell if they are Poes or not.
Barb looks like the leading contender so far and with the evidence supplied I can see why, so unless you can write one hell of an essay barb, goodbye. You are the missing link.
Sven, go modify your hosts file, and map the pharyngula URL to the IP of whatever work related site you should be looking at.
Simon.
BMS @ 270:
That's a post full of WIN.
Probably don't need to ban Barb. All it would take would be for a few of the womenfolk here to start hitting on her. She'd be gone in a (perpetual motion) heart beat.
I'm currently reading an account of cave exploration. Down can be good.
Barb is a classic example of what jeebus brain rot does to a human brain...
Gooey in the extreme and barely sentient...
Maybe keep what is left of that thing as a 'kind' of 'creationist Cepheid variable'...summat to measure the rest of them against.
Otherwise deep six de bitch!
I vote for that Meyrs guy, he´s always stirring shit up.
"Sven, go modify your hosts file, and map the pharyngula URL to the IP of whatever work related site you should be looking at."
At the risk of offending you: Kristjan Wager for the win!!!
Why? Newfie, Sastra and the others are regulars. And their points are valid, not an example of people coming in to bitch.
BMS @ 270:
"Barb claims that she herself sees a difference between homosexuality and rape, but that her opinion does not matter because her God sees no distinction. This is a useful post!
No, not it's not a useful post.
Why?
I couldn't give a flying fuck what she fucking claims.
Because what she says is nothing new. She offers no insight. I, and other LGBTs have heard that bullshit all our fucking lives.
And we're fucking sick of it."
I completely agree about your having to listen to the BS (and live with threats and discrimination -- it's long past time for all that to end*.) But, I advise considering the source. The comment at the top is useful in that it helps identify the Barb as a god-walloping moron, whose opinion you can blithely ignore. It only comments on her idiocy and says nothing about you (or any non-existent gods.)
(* I ask everyone, how can on person's marriage, regardless of its configuration, POSSIBLY hurt, insuly, or in any way diminish MY marriage?!?!?! I say: For Hank's fucking sake, PLEASE let the gay folk marry if they want to!!!!)
*287
Fine...who is that?
@#279: Bah, you can ban me if you wish, unbelievers--but the spirit of the Lord shall live on! Eventually, through the brilliant writing of Jack Chick and the wonderful creation science of Ken Ham, all the world shall come to know the Lord--and all those who prosecuted Real True Christians will come to regret it.
So make me a martyr if you wish, fools--more evidence for your ridiculously intolerant and close-minded world view.
Nerd of Redhead and Janine:
Ah, so that's where RogerS lurked. I came into Tintanoboa and Science of Watchman only a few times, and watched Alan Clarke just long enough to decide to take myself off to newer and shorter threads ...
In school, one generally does not get expelled for failure to learn your lessons, but for disrupting the learning of others.
I raise this because of all the potential banees, I think I have learned the most from Barb and Facilis. Not from their posts, mind you, but from the responses to their posts from others, including very interesting bible counter-apologetics.
But enough is enough. I believe that all the trolls designated so by PZ, in order to maintain commenting privileges here, should be required to maintain their own public blog with commenting as open as that of PZ's, so that people can respond to their comments there, rather than here, if they choose. Too much productive discussion on this blog is getting hijacked to deal with these 'disruptive students.'
brokenSoldier @ 283,
Thank you.
I'm so flippin' angry now I have to give up the intertubes for the day and just get out of the apartment.
(Oh, hey - just a little follow-up from our previous convo - Limbo-wife and I, on Inaug. Day on the Mall, turned our backs in our own small little protest when R. Warren spoke. Some folks nearby did as well in solidarity. Thanks for the discussion.)
Pete Rooke, fer-sher.
Barb is a godbotting moron but Pete is guilty of repugnant Catholic apologetics and the worst analogies EVAH!
1. Barb - highly annoying, contentless, repetitive and smug - qualities that would get you banned anywhere.
2. Facilis - see above
3. This Sven character - because he has work to do.
If it were my blog, I'd have a twist ending to this contest whereby the loser is kept on and remaining rogue's gallery banned, followed by a second twist in which the winner/loser is banned, too. At best their comments, collectively, read like a transcript to the interview you posted earlier, it worst it's real estate sucking yammering that destroys anything of interest in the comments, by burying it in pig-shit ignorance.
Barb has it sown up but, like a California voter, I have to vote for her. She's not only hateful but stupid and willfully ignorant.
The idea that banning any or all of the people on P-Zed's list would make Pharyngula into a place where everybody agrees is. . . amusing.
Barb is a weapons-grade ignoramus but she does serve a useful purpose: As a warning to others. Grow up as she did and think as she does and you too can be a fine example of a moronic, ignorant, and hateful coagulated sludge of a human spouting crap from her bible.
If she is to be banned is there any way we can smack her upside the head first?
[hockey stick at the ready - although I did debate the merits of the stinging and slashing effect from a graphite fly rod blank]
#291
Sorry I thought always spelled his name wrong as a wind-up
Barb!
She's vacuous and boring. Several of the others have at least provided a little entertainment. Some I've missed entirely! What a shame.
Or not.
I have to admit, I wasn't particularly keen on the idea of voting off some of the more entertaining posters on the blog, both because it eliminates their amusing "contributions" and because it gives them a badge of honour to wear to their next tinfoil hat assembly. And I resolved not to vote for Barb because she appears to be the overwhelming favourite, and I'm just contrary like that.
But I actually went back looking for some of her posts (I'd skipped some of the recent open threads), and... screw my earlier resolution, I'm going to have to go with the mob, here. I won't miss Bigot Barb in the least.
Barb.
We have such system. We call it "reading their posts"!
As for Sven who is pretending to be a Poe; I think there should be a separate name for those who pretend to be mad in an apparent attempt to mock the madness of others (?) can I propose the term a "Lovecraft"?.
And no, I don't think he should get one.
He'll have to go mad on his own.
Another vote for Barb, based on her irrationality and hatefulness.
Assuming we can vote only once, I don't see how this is going to last until Wednesday.
Also, BMS, congratulations on your lovely wedding!
Blake (@#299): I disagree.
Barb
@203 call it a Frequently asked questions, moron edition, or FAQ-ME?
If someone is to leave the blog, I have to vote for Barb.
In an earlier career, I did research on the mitochondrially bound isozyme of creatine kinase in mammalian cardiac tissue. Heart energy metabolism is complex, but not mysterious.
Barb on the human heart: "..how do we get.. hearts that beat for a lifetime without any external energy source.." And after being corrected on that: "It's still amazing --and designed --and empowered mysteriously."
Ignorance so deep, so proud, so impervious to correction doesn't contribute anything of value to the conversation. Not even comedy relief.
barb
As I am also a vagitarian of (though of the xy persuasion) I say pull out that barb!
Simple Simon gets my vote, Barb gets the preferences.
Will this make Barb a witnessing martyr for her cause?
She's only butting in here to show her creotard friends how she entered the lion's den and left without a scratch (or a clue).
I think SF, AG and Simon should go ... No, the ultimate wanker is Kwok, followed by Simon, SF & AG are tied with Scott from Oregon and Charlie Wagner is already banned but returns regularly.
Everyone is venting their hatred for ultraconservative religiotard Barb, so she may provide a mental health service as blogging equivalent of a punching hag bag after all. Besides, I still want to know about her views on oral after she opined about her distaste with anal as "unnatural." Has she *wink wink nudge nudge* "lollipopped" knowhatImean? And how does this square with her definition of what are natural and unnatural sex acts? Hmmmm Barb the hypocrite? Inquiring minds want to know.
As I am also a vagitarian of (though of the xy persuasion) I say pull out that barb!
I find these proceedings a bit distasteful actually.
P.Z. wishing to boot somebody is fine, it's his blog.
Everyone else gathering round chanting "kill the pig!" is disturbing. At least I think so.
Barb, because she is so directly mean. I'd ask for Pete as a second, though, because he scares me. I mean, really. Isn't he the one who made analogies about human-skin lampshades and said that women wearing miniskirts deserve to be raped? Frightening.
And no, banning is not a bad thing. When someone consistently offers NOTHING to the conversation except to stick their fingers up their nose and yell "HERE I AM LOOK AT MY BOOGERS" over and over again, it really does make the discourse better if they are kicked out.
Another vote in solidarity with Janine. Most on the "boot list" seem to be just garden variety kooks and Jebus freaks. Annoying, but on the other hand occasionally entertaining. Kind of like watching the monkeys at the zoo. But within that "Jebus is Luuuuv" crowd are some truly nasty excuses for human beings. Those are the ones who really need to be exposed for the hatemongers they are and shown the door. So I cast one more vote for Barb the Wicked.
Then again I could vote for Facilis for the simple reason his user name sounds like a venereal disease.
Nah, Barb of Darkness gets my vote.
@ 80: "Barb. Don't let the doorknob hit you where the FSM split you."
Thanks ever so much for making me snort-laugh out loud, thereby earning funny looks from the gaggle of attorneys standing outside my office door.
This is repetitive and redundant and repetitive and redundant, but Barb.
Mark:
Perhaps it is because you identify as a pig. Just sayin'
Sven DeMilo gets my vote for a Molly for #59.
The trick is this, skip over everything Alan and Roger has to say (Too much information.) and my attempts at mocking them and read Josh, David Marjanović and Owlmirror.
Another vote in solidarity with Janine. Most on the "boot list" seem to be just garden variety kooks and Jebus freaks. Annoying, but on the other hand occasionally entertaining. Kind of like watching the monkeys at the zoo. But within that "Jebus is Luuuuv" crowd are some truly nasty excuses for human beings. Those are the ones who really need to be exposed for the hatemongers they are and shown the door. So I cast one more vote for Barb the Wicked.
Then again I could vote for Facilis for the simple reason his user name sounds like a venereal disease.
Nah, Barb of Darkness gets my vote.
You don't...care for bacon?
That's because they all love bacon.
Pete
After reviewing the evidence against the accused... Barb.
Do we get a bonus set of 6 Ginsu Steak Knives for nominating the winning troll?
I can't nominate any of them -- sadly, I haven't been here enough lately to know who's who.
But is the nomination just for being stupid? Or is it for gratuitous and never-ending attacks on other commenters?
If it's for stupidity, is that really enough?
I do hate it when a thread is sort-of-hijacked by an idiot, and everybody's attention slides away from the original point of the post. But not every bit of that is the idiot's fault.
In the past, the only ones I've really wanted out were the ones who made the Pharyngula experience unpleasant for me personally, by attacking me (or someone I know/like) directly.
Over the years I've been online, I've discovered that the low-level trolls and idiots actually made me better at voicing and understanding my own arguments. Fighting with them can be good PRACTICE.
But, then again, I guess as long as we don't run out of them, any specific one can be ousted without harm.
Maybe it's too late for this round, but in the future, could Pharyngula set an educational example and institute instant run-off voting for these important elections?
Those who just can't put their two-cents'-worth in without writing an essay can nominate prospective immunity challenge questions. (300 comments here and no such suggestions? Who are you guys, and what have you done with the real Pharyngula regulars?)
Too many comments for me to sift through! How do you have time to read them all? :/
Barb, please
Also, a condom would prevent both.
Facilis, because I hate people who hide behind anonymous internet pseudonyms.
Janine,
Yes, I know they are regulars. Yes, I am aware of their contributions, having been a regular reader of Pharyngula since before it hit Scienceblogs.
I made that comment because it seems to me that they've forgotten who it is that actually writes this blog, makes up it policies and decides what gets done, or not done, here.
PZ decided we were going to play "Survivor Pharyngula". He set out the rules, and ensured that those he chose out of the nominations had already violated his previously, and quite publicly, posted rules.
If he had simply decided to ban them, instead of letting the rest of us have some fun with it, I doubt they would have complained. The complaints being made are what we as a group would normally categorize as "Concern Trolling". (IMO) I see no reason to give anyone a pass on behaviour that would normally be ridiculed.
It's all about equality.
Hmmm, a lot of people (myself included) didn't recognize all the names. I think next round would benefit if PZ puts profiles of our contestants and quotes of theirs. Here's how it might look:
Facilis: Has defended God killing 42 children for merely mocking a prophet. Had a "proof" of God which was just an Argument from Ignorance (summary of his argument can be found here ). Has repeated said "proof" over and over and over while ignoring the criticisms of it.
Quote:
Actually, I don't think you get the point here. PZ wants to reduce the number of trolls and pig-ignorant posters here, since they are being disruptive to the general conversation going on here. Instead of picking one (or more) himself to boot, he's leaving it up to us to pick one (or more?) to get rid off. This allows those who are getting disrupted to have a say in which person is the biggest problem.
Note that PZ doesn't ban, or offer up for general ridicule, any commenter who comes here in good faith to argue, who are willing to listen to other peoples' arguments, and who are willing to change their mind, when warranted. He only offers up people who have demonstrated (in his opinion) that they do not participate in the conversations in a meaningful way
Bacon has to be one of the best things ever. Imagine what a loving god we have to give mankind BACON! The dog & I agree, bacon is the best and anyone who says different can eat beans.
Barb.
idahogie, I couldn't possibly. Can I just hit on Janine instead and hope Barb is disgusted and goes away?
Sven: LOL. Just step away from the computer.
Sven DiMilo is hereby banned from the spanking couch until the game is over.
Mark wasn't holding the conch when he said that!
Barb.
Mark #315
Your concern is noted.
I would have to go with Barb.
Aaron @51:
I believe you've got something, there. Evolution has clearly favored monkeys that taste as un-bacon-like as possible.
Of course, the flip-side might be to select for monkeys that taste as much like broccoli, or turnips, as possible. Sort of like selecting for poisonousness.
:)
@335: Oh, how wrong you are. Professor Meyers persecutes all those who only seek to spread the word of the Lord to the masses. And then, the man has the nerve to suggest that it adds nothing useful to the conversation--when what could be more useful than how to avoid eternal torture in hell and find eternal life in heaven?
Besides, Real True Christians understand that so many of these conversations are useless. Take the Titanoboa, for example. Some of you criticize Pete Rooke for diverting the conversation away from this Satan-snake and onto other matters. You perhaps think you could be theorizing on the Satan-snake's behavior, or habitat, or some other science-y thing like its position in the Great Hierarchy of Living Beings.
But we Real True Christians realize that, before the Fall, it was a simple creature of the Garden of Eden that did not need to eat, drink of even breathe. After the Fall, God smote it for looking like the form Satan took to corrupt Eve. Duh. Stupid Evilutionists.
What condition are Piggy's glasses in?
Let it be noted, this time I was not the one responsible for the left turn to bacon.
Well, not directly at least.
Facilis, intelligent design IS creationism...[from Of Pandas and People](pre supreme court decision) Creation means that various forms of life began abruptly through the agency of an intelligent Creator with their distinctive features already intact—fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc. (post supreme court decision) means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, wings, etc.
If Pete Rooke writes a story about a milkmonkey with carious teeth, I'm nominating him for the immunity challenge.
I'm seconding spurge's question@88, what about the glibertarian trolls? Nobody derails a thread like those stinkers!
Continued Profiles of our contestants.
Alan Clarke: Complained about Pharyngula being a group therapy session and then proceed to tell several intimidate, disturbing details of his life. Regularly quotes the Bible and AiG. Odd obsession with Owlmirror.
Quote
Simon: Never added a single worthwhile thing. Accuses others of being homosexual and then spends the next 10 posts graphically talking about a pensis entering an anus.
Quote:
Has anyone else noticed that most obnoxious trolls have a tendency to use common names? I'd say they're out to disrupt us one way or the other - either through the sheer hatred, ignorance, or self-righteousness of their posts, or by causing us inconvenience should we killfile them.
I vote for Simon. He doesn't even appear capable of offering even the feeble apologetics of Facilis or Barb. In fact it seems he's interested only in broadcasting his anal sex fixation to the whole damn internet.
That should say:
Intelligent Designmeans that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, wings, etc.
Posted by: AnthonyK | March 16, 2009 5:20 PM
"Everyone else gathering round chanting "kill the pig!" is disturbing."
"That's because they all love bacon."
Real bacon... not that slab o' ham British or chunk o' fat Argentine kind.
I vote -- Pete Rooke.
Barb is insufferable, but if she's banned here she's more likely to go back to another site I frequent. It took a while to chase her out of there (far fewer commenters), and I don't want to do it again.
Barb.
After reviewing some of the evidence against her, I really want to see if a person that inane can write one cogent paragraph when something so important to them is at stake: their forum for trolling.
I have my doubts given my experience with people who have a mental illness.
That bacon sandwich & I have a date. Please excuse me for several hours.
Bye Barb.
PS: Barb. no one cares if your husband is a MD. It gets no points and begs the question...Are you proud of yourself? Isn't that a sin? You are probably just like all those airheaded girls I went to undergrad w/. They were only there to meet the pre-meds & wanted nothing but their MRS married to a doctor degree.
It is not nice to make fun of drawings published in ' WashingtonPost '!
It won't take 538.com statistical magic to pick the "winner" here.
PigSticker @ #355:
There, fixed that for you. (sorry, that one always gets my goat)
Barb is a vicious bitch who must be stopped.
I'll delurk to vote for the one who, like her namesake, is so prickly and hurtful.
Well done, Barb, well done.
Drop the banhammer on Barb. She's possibly the most annoying in my opinion.
I believe you've got something, there. Evolution has clearly favored monkeys that taste as un-bacon-like as possible.
I dunno about that, given the form of the immunity challenge, we might have to add a corollary:
If evolution has favored monkeys to NOT taste like bacon, why do we call humans "long-pig"?
Somewhat off topic: I think that The Real World: Pharyngula would be very entertaining.
On second thought, I change my vote to Simon.
Pete Rooke was disturbing, but at least he presents an argument. If that's representative of Simon's quotes he's just annoying.
And Barb's "hearts that beat without any external energy source" is just hilarious.
If the female Pharyngulites like to call themselves "vagitarians" (although I find the term "labiatarians" more apropos to this blog), what do we with the male appendage call ourselves?
Facilis. He/she might actually try the immunity challenge. See the post #125 - 'nuff said. Or the hopeless quote that I trust is correct in #334.
BARB! She's hateful, wilfully ignorant beyond any hope of redemption, and plainly just here to argue, not to debate.
Mr. Kwok doesn't bother me, and the others I recognize are usually easier to ignore. Half of the list don't stand out enough to have made an impression on me.
I see Inky's point about making martyrs, but the reason we ban trolls is to keep the conversation from getting mired in idiocy (it's rules of engagement, not censorship). The alleged lulz that ensue after these master debaters chime in are repetitive, tiresome, and just bloat the comments beyond my willingness to even attempt to follow them.
Come on PZ,
If one of these morons can't answer in ,lets see , how about five words they should be voted off the island.
Can anybody guess them?
I vote for Barb but I was really hoping to submit the whole lot of them to trial by water!
"If evolution is true, why are still monkeys?" That's rather an easy question to answer IMHO. Although we - humanity - and monkeys are both primates - and thus are related relatively closely by common descent - we have undertaken our own separate evolutionary histories as different Primate clades during the Cenozoic Era (If by monkeys, you are referring to South American and African/South Asian monkeys, then these two groups have also diverged due to reproductive isolation caused by the final separation of Gondwana in the early Cenozoic Era (primarily Paleogene Period)).
Sincerely yours,
John Kwok
@ PZ - If I am bounced off Pharyngula, then you may find yourself losing some friends over at Facebook.
...or making it difficult to name our children without fear of painful flashbacks...
AnthonyK #330
Yep. Alas, if their fathers had only known what wack-o-loons they would create, they might have taken a few more precautions. Dammit, wack-o-loon prevention is so darn facilis....uh, I mean easy.
I might need to change my vote.
What an egomaniac.
As the daughter of a lesbian I vote for Barb. She hasn't said anything more vile that what I've heard hundreds of times before from well meaning Christians, but it still sucks to hear the same crap over and over and over and over....
As for those who are concerned that this is censorship, keep in mind that it is really easy to avoid getting banned (all they need to do is answer one fairly simple question). Not only that, but this is not a systematic banning of everyone who holds contrary points of view. It is banning one person (one who contributes nothing to the conversation) for shits and giggles. If it doesn't tickle your funny bone, that is fine but most people seem to be having fun.
I wasn't aware of how much vitriol I inspired. I'll take my leave then.
Not tasting like bacon gives humans a leg up on pigs, foodchainwise. Clever of us, back when we were monkeys, to have thought "Whatever becomes of us as a species, let's not wind up tasting like pork."
Me thinks that John Kwok thinks he's the Crabman on Buddybook.
Idiot!
well, we've got two contestants now.
facilis' description was short and superficial, but accurate
kwok's was in-depth, but he was unable to keep himself from being a blowhard for even a single post.
facilis leads the immunity challenge.
"If evolution has favored monkeys to NOT taste like bacon, why do we call humans "long-pig"?"
That's just more proof we didn't descend from monkeys.
Pass the long bacon please.
Bullshit.
Does he actively work at this or is it just his personality?
Barb.
She makes me wish there were a god, just so I could hate her for all eternity, even though I'd be burning in hell, I guess, according to her hateful logic, and I'm pretty sure Satan caused me to write this run-on sentence.
What a smug, judgmental, dishonest, boneheaded idiot she is.
You mean we only get to pick one?
Here's the simple answer: they're all idiots - they all go!
LOL.
Tell me that's from someone older than 12.
Mayhempix at #365 ....
Pen(is)ultimate? Dicquavering? Fail-us? Sven?
Tax Religion.
Tark
Can we see pictures of the contestants, please?
Stephanurus
pffft. I actually was starting to enjoy the Rookester.
Barb.
Definitely Barb. Now if only we could find a way to purge any memory of the putrid wreaking stench of her epic bigotry...
Maybe we can develop a protocol for responding to Stupid Trolls®, in which we proleptically vote against them. Like: "Barb@1122: IVYOTP1; rest of comment follows" or some such.
I mean, with my limited time, I'm really not going to wade through hundreds of comments.
1. I vote you off the planet.
This is not about crushing dissenting views or getting others to toe the line, acadmically speaking...
For my money (although as a starving academic myself, that's not a hell of a lot of money) this is an opportunity to wave goodbye to someone who cannot distinguish between a consensual relationship with a person of the same sex, and rape and pedophilia. It's hard to enjoy reading the comments when you have to worry about reading something that fundamentally sickening.
BARB is the only one who's continual stupidity really irks me. She has my vote because she is beyond saving by us or her imaginary god.
@BMS, #270
Did you really have to go to such extremes to validate my 'flame-baiting' assumption? I understand that the minority she arguing against have had to deal with people like Barb their entire lives, but if we're banning people here based on the hatefulness and close mindedness of their opinions...
hint, hint?
@Kate, #333
Excuse me, but what the hell is this garbage? I'm usually very hesitant to purposely antagonize anyone, but are you -really- saying what I think you're saying? That anyone who comes in here to try to defend your piggy (to use Mark#315's fitting allusion) of the hour, is a "Concern Troll" and should be ridiculed? I hope not.
I appreciate that I'm not going to save Barb from being banned here; the masses have overwhelmingly demanded their pound of flesh. I just hope that maybe my previous rant made a single person stop and think about the mob behaviour here. So to finish off my "concern trolling", I'll say that I agree with Professor Myers' right to set this pit of vipers hissing, and his right to ban anyone from commenting that he disapproves of. What disgusts me is the lack of rational thought, and excess of hate being demonstrated in the comments that goes unremarked.
Barb with simon a close second... though I think John Kwok gets special mention now for trying to threaten PZ with the lost of some facebook friends.
Awww, I am developing this sort of HUGE crush on Sven! Can I keep him (or her)?? Soooo funny!
I ignore most of the really vapid posts, so cannot in all conscience cast a vote.
(But I'll vote for Sven for a Molly)
anyhow, am I the only one who thinks RogerS is a sockpuppet of alan clarke?
Really? Have you not been paying attention?
Are you sure about that.
I am beginning to seriously seriously think that John is a Kwoe.
I have promised not to address J*hn Kw*k, but c'mon. That Facebook threat was easily the funniest thing in the whole thread.
What a crock!!
Almost 300 posts and I barely get a dishonorable mention.
MU:
"Silver Fox would be my target"
Sorry, MU. I didn't even make the short list.
What a bunch of toadies: "Thank you Dr. P.Z., "You're so wonderful Dr. P.Z.", "Can I kiss your ring Dr. P.Z." What a bunch of sycophantic ass-kissers!
What is surprising is that Barb is running away with this poll. There must be more to Barb than meets the eye. I was never impressed that Barb was so much head and shoulders over this rabble.
SF
Do you taste like bacon?
sf, too late to fish for your nomination now. you'll have to wait till next week
@ PZ -
I am not writing again to irritate you, but I am putting you on notice. I have contacted several prominent friends over at Facebook to act accordingly if you decide to bounce me from Pharyngula.
@ #343
Shouldn't that have a TM somewhere next to it?
tee hee
i think i'm about to change my vote...
My vote? Barb.
I also want to say that this is not the one and only place for all people in the world to speak out, so it's hardly censorship to boot trolls. Furthermore, the candidates are being judged on what they've said already and they have a way out. They don't even have to agree with the explanation for monkeys, they just have to get it technically correct.
Ultimately, this is a playground for atheists, scientists and science nerds. Why should we tolerate people who are disruptive and spew unmitigated ugliness or stupidity or self-promotion in a place where we're enjoying ourselves? It's not like this contest is a call to silence all who disagree or all who argue for things that are the product of flawed thinking. We only want them to be able to listen to and understand what is said to them, whether they agree or not. I don't think this is too much to ask.
dearest mayhempix,
Ask yourself this: What do vegetarians eat?
That should help explain the moniker "vagitarian."
'Tis not about the parts we posses.
@403, I'm sure PZ is quaking in his boots. Make your vague and impotent threats elsewhere.
HAHAHA. Fuck you John. Geeze. I almost wanna change my vote because you're such a douche bag.
@403: are you even aware of why people are laughing at you?
This mostly-lurker votes for GIL. Boot the batty one.
BTW - Klokwurk? Sounds more like KwokLurk to me. :>
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
TheSciencePundit @2
What about Mark that recently showed up in an old cracker thread?
That wasn't me[1]
E.V. @319
Perhaps it is because you identify as a pig. Just sayin'
I wondered if somebody would say "wooo, you must be a creationist!" or some such. But nope. I'm just your regular militant atheist. There are no sky fairies on me :-)
Sven @323
You don't...care for bacon?
Bacon is yummy, as are shrimp and lobster... I wonder what owls taste like?
Grendels Dad @339
Mark wasn't holding the conch when he said that!
Sucks to your asthma!
Blue Fielder @349
Has anyone else noticed that most obnoxious trolls have a tendency to use common names?
[1]That's a reasonable point which I hope wasn't aimed at me, however since my parents gave me a rather common first name I'll use the initials of my "hiding behind a made up name" name from now on, so as not to be confused with any creatures of the under the bridge variety :-)
(I hope this doesn't bust P.Z.'s "no fucking about with your nick" rule or something).
Oh well, I rather thought I'd be in a minority of one, but nevermind.
John Kwok @370
@ PZ - If I am bounced off Pharyngula, then you may find yourself losing some friends over at Facebook.
What a wanker. If I were P.Z. I'd bounce you right out the door just for laughs. And @403 again.
John Kwok @ #403
Bwa ha ha ha! Beware PZ, you might lose JohnKwok001 - JohnKwok999 from your Facebook friends!
Pastor Pete has been complaining about the amount of "vitriol" directed at him here since he first started posting back in Crackergate. Now he says he's leaving for good! I'll believe it when I see it. He's flounced out before.
And John Kwok is seriously threatening PZ with a loss of Facebook friends? *Snort* What a fucking joke.
OK. That's it. Bounce Kwok just for laughs.
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
Brian, BMS and I made the same point. The only difference is that this time, I decided not to swear. I understand and endorse every profanity BMS used.
Fuck it... I take back my vote. Let Barb stay, boot this childish Kwok twat.
Please boot Barb please. Runner up would be John "I have famous imaginary friends" Kwok.
Brian in Edmonton @ 392
In case I wasn't clear:
FUCK
YOU
OK. That's it. Bounce Kwok just for laughs.
We find trolls useful in so many ways, but Barb has no socially redeeming features whatever. I have never seen a troll so hateful or purely evil. She is a disgrace to humanity, because she hasn't any. Can you all tell that Barb gets my vote?
For anyone who's ever heard the Howard Stern show, you can't help noticing how much John Kwok is like a combination of Eric the Midget (with his tantrums and threats) and the New Atheist Elegant Elliot Offen (with his repeatedly shouted multisyllabic three-world insults like "mendacious intellectual pornography!" (if you ever heard the show you heard that in Elliott's voice). But I can't have as much fun with it ever since it occurred to me that maybe the guy just has a major cognitive condition like Asperger's. Reading his posts just made me sad.
Definitely John Kwok. It was a toss-up between him and Barb, but post #403 did it for me.
Go play with your Facebook friends, John.
ctenotrish - Feel free to play with Sven, but remember he's banned from the spanking couch until Wednesday.
Holding Facebook-friends hostage? Really? Are you in the 5th grade or something? Do you really think it's a traumatic event to "lose" a Facebook friend. Wow. That explains a lot.
Barb.. i read the links... i saw the sheer dumb brain-washed vacuous xtian crap and bigotry against LGBT people.... she's got to go....
Barb, por favor, although Facilis's Facebook threat made it a difficult choice.
I was initially inclined to vote for the Rokester, but his whole "tortured analogies involving necrophiliac pedophilic milkmen" schtick, is kind of amusing, in a "what if Stephen King was a sicko, cracker-obsessed, Catholic?" sort of way.
I agree with a poster above. Why no libertarian trolls on the list? I hate it when the Asshole from Oregan shows up and starts babbling about three legged stools. Kick his ass to the curb.
Kwok,
[Bold mine]
LOL!
I hope you realize that everyone here is laughing at you. Also, you are just increasing your chances of being kicked out.
I am not writing again to irritate you, but I am putting you on notice.
I am reading this with Stephen Colbert's voice.
Posted by: BMS | March 16, 2009 6:20 PM
"Ask yourself this: What do vegetarians eat?
That should help explain the moniker "vagitarian."
'Tis not about the parts we posses."
Well at least now it's clear.
I too am a vagitarian.
Shelly @420
John "I have famous imaginary friends" Kwok
Perhaps they're not imaginary, perhaps they're just not his friends?
Bwahahahahaa.
John Kwok has failed so hard it wrapped back around to win.
That first name scared the crap out of me. I don't particularly care about the ability to comment, but there was a moment when I wondered if I was one of those delusional people who only think they post fairly innocuous comments (and rarely) when, in reality, they are obnoxious pains in the collective ass.
If you're delusional, how would you know? Seriously.
I am relieved to find out it's a creationist harpy, which I am not. So, to avoid future panic attacks, I vote Barb!
Don't know if it's been suggested but for all those on your ban list, have the background color match the text color on their posts. You could read it if you hilite the text but otherwise they wouldn't be able to cry to the world that you banned them. And those of us who find them offensive would only see the the redacted post and read it only if interested.
Oh, frack. My bad. Make the "Kwok's" Facebook threat. It's so hard to keep track of the crazies; need a scorecard.
"I am not writing again to irritate you, but I am putting you on notice"
It's just a fracking Kwoker.
Best to impale it on a rusty nail and throw in the wastebasket.
Indeed. Borders on inspiring, that.
Also, you are just increasing your chances of being kicked out.
seconded.
If I voted for Barb to get on this list to begin with, I really have to vote for John to be first OFF of it (and out of here).
He has become a tendentious bore of late.
despite the fact that he is a staunch anti-creationist, his whacky rethuglican rants, name dropping idiocy, and inability to separate argument from person, makes me constantly hearken back to the old saying:
"with friends like this..."
I vote to boot him for the same reason Uncommonly Dense got rid of John Davison.
Sorry, needle still stuck at #365 ....
Scrotumscious? Enmanced? ExMenstral? Kwokless?
Somebody please **headdesk** to free me from this groove...
Tax Religion. Feed the children, bacon.
Tark
Ah, too bad Facilis :( Nice try though.
I wonder if the kooks can submit multiple entries? If not Facilis should get one point for being first and one point because it's funny to think of a penis-person feverishly typing out its christian god-idea gooblebot.
Although Barb the Fatuous Bint appears to heading for victory lane, I'd like to write in AG. It is virtually certain that he/she can be depended upon to try to derail any thread into a fact proof rant about AGW.
Petey - Certainly no more abuse than you usually get. You know, if you did not attempt to try to turn everything into a philosophy debate, you'd not get so much abuse. And do try to learn some science, will ya?
I am reading this with Stephen Colbert's voice.
LOL
exactly.
the problem is, John is entirely serious, and wouldn't understand sarcasm even if Ken Miller explained it to him.
My vote's for Barb, though Kwok was pretentious enough in his response to this to make me giggle.
Have I just been threatened with facebook retaliation?
I think I need to go lie down. I'm feeling an attack of the vapors.
I'm not a frequent poster but I try to visit here every day.
My vote is for Barb to go.
ah but ichthyic, you don't understand. Ken Miller doesn't explain things to Kwok; Kwok explains things to Ken Miller!
Posted by: Pete Rooke | March 16, 2009 6:05 PM
"I wasn't aware of how much vitriol I inspired. I'll take my leave then."
He's just jealous Barb has left him in the dust.
Continued profiles of our contestants
John Kwok: (AKA Johhny Kookz) Name dropper. Has imaginary famous friends. Unhealthy obsession with Abbie Smith. Threatened PZ with "losing some friends over at Facebook" if he gets banned and by doing so increased his chances of being banned.
Quote:
I vote Barb.
But will miss Patricia's "barbs" that have repeated raked Barb across the coals of reason...as I squeeled with laughter and delight.
Sweet, a lurker can effect change at Pharyngula. I just can't vote against homophobia, so I say toss Barb, but this John Kwok fella really reminds me of one of those catty little teenagers from that movie Mean Girls.
@Tark
See post #432 for**headdesk**.
You too may be a vagitarian.
On second thoughts I will fight this tyranny.
1. I never said that wearing a mini-skirt absolved rape of said person. Merely that it might increase the risk of a person being raped. The statistics do not, I was then told, support this view.
2. I don't deny evolution. Neither does the Catholic church.
3. Do not distort the analogies. They were fantasies of mine only in the sense that they were imaginings/fictions. One can write of things that one disapproves of, no?
4. I am heartened to hear from my supporters.
5. If gravitational theory is correct why are there clouds.
6. My apologies to the feminists whom I offended.
7. On the gruesome trio: I feel we are not too dissimilar so as to be unable to learn from one another, profanities excepted.
Ichthyic,
Ken Miller? Why does that name ring a bell? Maybe if I knew where he went to undergrad it would help me place it.
Kwok will then retrieve his spheroid and retire to his domicile.
Whoooeeee! OMG that was truly funny! My best estimate... age 14. I could be off by a year or two, but I doubt much more than that.
Good luck with puberty. Remember, even if you love Jesus, make him use a condom.
I appreciate that I'm not going to save Barb from being banned here; the masses have overwhelmingly demanded their pound of flesh.
oh please, save the fucking histrionics, eh?
mayhempix,
Well, I suppose so. Although I think it's more a combination of, uh, diet and parts....
Now you guys have made an old lurker curious about Barb's idiocies. Does anyone have a worst of her comments list somewhere?
I'm feeling masochistic.
Ever notice how close Rooke and Kwok come to Kook?
This could be the proof for Intelligent Design Dumbski has been waiting for...
Excellent point, they only appear on the same threads.
They can take away my life. But they cannot take away my FREEDOM!
uhoh. I think this means there's soon going to be a "PZ Myers is a Big Meanie" Facebook group.
I vote for Barb. Evil.
Good to see all you mature uber-rationalists behaving, um, maturely and rationally. The world will be so much kinder when you are in charge!
Now I must spend time with some grownups--I have an E&M class to teach.
Rooke,
They always come back. Alright Petey answer the question:
If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?
I always wondered where all the geeks who hid in the library in high school because they lacked anything resembling a personality and a spine eventually wound up...
The answer- Pharyngula comment section where they get off tossing around their collective weight in cyber-anonymity...
I suppose it is all highly understandable-- all this geek-swagger.
I mean really, when was the last time the real world ever took any of y'all's name-calling and righteous self-congratulating seriously?
It's funny.
Sad.
But still funny...
@Mayhempix
Oh, was already fully cognizant of underlying concept. Have had a seat at the buffet table early and often.
Am just OCD enough to be unable to resist 'create new word'
challenges. Even if I have a distinct lack of talent in that
area. The word thing, that is, not the buffet thing ...
Tax Religion. Purse your lips and smile upwards with your eyes...Mumbling "I love you".
Tark.
Okay, I'm still digging Rooke.
Sure, he's demented, but he's entertaining. Sometimes he's even endearing.
Kwoktwat is just ridiculous. Does his mother know he's gotten past the parental locks?
Barb is just plain evil and has no clue about it. That's a dangerous combination.
I vote Barb.
OK, Barb is a homophobic assclown. Pete needs a good 12-step program and a blow job. Homo Facilis is a 12 nanowatt bulb. However, when somebody starts making threats, they elevate themselves to an asshole on the same level as my brother-in-law. And when the threat is as lame as John's was, that cinches it. John has truly demonstated himself to be a Kwokpot.
kwok
verb
to not understand the most obvious references to one's own obtuseness.
Opposite of "to grock".
as in, "He just doesn't fracking kwok it."
Pete Rooke:
"I wasn't aware of how much vitriol I inspired. I'll take my leave then."
LOL
lying for jesus again, Crow?
Your concern has already been noted. You have moved from the concern part of the description to the troll part.
Must we choose? I am not a cruel Panda. Better to hold a mass purge and dump all the refuse at once so that the remainder do not suffer the psychological agony of wondering when they will be kicked off the island.
Oh, who am I kidding? Trolls demonstrate no remorse. That is what makes them trolls and not merely people who disagree.
It is a difficult call, but I must concur with the present majority: Barb. Dungeon. Immediately.
To every tone-and-concern-D'Orc who has shown up to protest this, may I suggest you have a look under the Dungeon tab, there at the top? The rules are clearly listed, and given how patient PZ has been, those set for the chop have no right to complain at those rules finally being applied.
(Kate #333 got it more or less right, I think. Well said, milady.)
The MadPanda, FCD
I think I'd be characterized more as a dirty hippie than a geek.
If gravitational theory is correct why are there clouds.
Thermodynamics.
It's really disturbing if you think that is an interesting question. It shows that you have absolutely NO idea of the depth and breadth of factual knowledge about reality humanity has gained with science. You have NO idea of the intellect, creativity, and sheer tenacity of the researchers exploring and dedicating their lives to questions like these.
I vote Pete Rooke, though it seems like it's a waste of a vote. Barb is pitifully misled... Rooke is dangerous.
5. If gravitational theory is correct why are there clouds.
And just isn't the atmosphere just lying flat on the surface of the Earth?
I mean really, when was the last time the real world ever took any of y'all's name-calling and righteous self-congratulating seriously?"
your concern is noted, and it is, as usual, stupid.
you'll get to participate in the next vote, I'm sure, no reason to get jealous now, Scott.
Here's one:
" For ID evidence: how do we get the sexes, sexual reproduction, organs, self-healing skin, hearts that beat for a lifetime without any external energy source, our computer-like brains, our eyes and the ability to see colors?" [Bold mine](Source)
SO @#468 again shows the Libertarian's complete lack of perception of humor and sarcasm.
He's all kwoked up.
looky there, he's capable of real humor!
and I see SfO is of the deluded opinion that "geek" is an insult.
The SfO post at #468 can't be real, it doesn't end with "the mind boggles"...
I'm not voting, because I'm like above all that or something.
But I do find it interesting how this thread has attracted all the minor trolls who were snubbed for a nomination. I think some feelings have been hurt.
@454: IVYOTP!
Are you just begging to be asked just how stupid you are, or did you make a huge amount of typos that totally ruined what would otherwise not be an obviously idiotic question? Because one reason there are clouds is that (along with, say various other known relationships of nature) gravitational theory is correct.
Note to audience: I acknowledge that the quoted text may have been part of a Poe intended to make Pete Rooke look even more stupid than he looks when he posts his own text.
I don't like the idea of banning, but it's PZ's blog and he's asked us to choose.
So, I choose Simon. Why him? Well, they're all idiots - but what differentiates Simon from the rest is that he doesn't inspire anyone to respond to him with any kind of illuminating and/or entertaining posts - at least, not in comparison.
The others do - and they bring out the best in our regulars. Some of the cleverest, most informative (for me at least; remember, we're not all scientists here), most inspiring and downright hilarious smackdown posts have been those written by the brilliant Josh, David Marjanović, Owlmirror, Sastra, Sven de Milo, Patricia, Janine, Kel, RevBDC and the other regulars.
I know their odious blather inspires me to put on my angry pants and give them a good thrashing when the opportunity arises.
Simon gets ignored, as do responses to him - hence the vote.
There should be a "why" after "just".
@ #468: You tell 'em, man. After all, when was the last time 'intellectuals' and 'reason' or 'learning' did anything good for the world?
Never, I say! The world would be a better place without Professor Meyers and his desire to make his voice heard, without his desire to bring 'rationality' to those who live in fear (rightfully so) of hell (though if you're a Real True Christian, you don't have to because the Lord will take you in his arms.)
In fact, I say the world was far better without those 'intellectuals.' I yearn for a time before the internet, when we settled our disputes by torture and execution, rather than by debating it on a forum. Back then, it didn't matter how much you actually knew--so long as you could kill people well enough.
Perhaps when the Lord returns to Earth (pretty soon, I think, as we have elected the Antichrist to the White House) this will be how we argue again. God bless.
There needs to be some kind of prize for Sven. Its rare one gets to experience such carefully crafted sarcasm (though comic sans or crayon would be nice). Molly for sure!
Enough with the bacon guys! Isn't it enough that I had to go out in the snow yesterday to fetch bacon and maple syrup for my expecting wife after reading the open thread?! Big Dumb Chimp what have I done to deserve this?
Barb. I don't know Janine personally, but I can't stand by and let someone rip on an e-acquittance of mine like that. And she's just terrible, not even original.
Allah on an ampersand, is every damned irrational regular going to drop in with the vapors? Facilis, Pete Rooke, John Kwok, Heddle, Scott... all we need is Alan, Barb and AG and we should have a full house of the clueless.
Defriend PZ Myers and get a Whopper free bacon!
They can take away my life. But they cannot take away my FREEDOM!
knowing where Petey originally inserted himself (on the crackergate thread), you might like this:
Welcome to Crackergate
@Tark
"Am just OCD enough to be unable to resist 'create new word'
challenges."
Understood. Here is the word I think you were looking for:
"Erectarian"
And I appreciate your taste in the finer things of life.
Scott
I was the wrestler/geek who protected those library geeks, and we all know that it's the high school geeks who go on to rule the world.
Now stop running your mouth and flip those burgers.
Quoting myself way way up thar @ 20:
He never disappoints to fail.
John Kwok #403
Awesome. Thanks, that was the best laugh I had all day.
But, seriously, you need to get a new joke now. I think you've taken that one as far as it will go.
@Ichthyc: John really means it? And all this time I thought he was being brilliantly clever and nobody else got the joke and I wondered what he was doing on the list. I guess that makes him the Anti-Poe.
I'm still not changing my vote.
@mayhempix (365)
"what do we with the male appendage call ourselves?"
Phallusofers?