My third email to FreeThought Blogs about their complaints procedure regarding PZ Myers

by Michael Nugent on January 25, 2015

I have today sent this third email to FreeThoughtBlogs.

To Ed Brayton,
Manager,
Freethought Blogs Network

Dear Ed,

This my third email to you asking about the procedures for bringing details of a complaint about the behaviour of one of your bloggers to the attention of your Executive Committee. My previous emails were three weeks ago and twelve days ago.

The complaint that I am asking you about is a serious one. One of your bloggers, PZ Myers, has falsely alleged on your network that I defend, provide a haven for, and support rapists.

He made this defamatory allegation in response to my highlighting of the hurt that he had caused to other people, and the harm he has caused to the atheist movement, by earlier smears and misrepresentations.

This defamatory allegation is a considerably more serious ethical violation than the plagiarism by another of your bloggers, Avicenna, to which you responded by recommending to your Executive Committee that he be removed from your network.

I am told that you are a man of integrity, and this seems to be borne out by your response to Avicenna’s plagiarism, so I am puzzled by your lack of response to this more serious matter being raised by a colleague in promoting atheism, reason, compassion and justice.

My emails have not bounced back, and I have confirmed that the email address that I have used is one at which you have recently received and responded to email, so it may be the case that my emails have been caught up in your spam filters.

Also, I sent you a direct message on Twitter three weeks ago asking you if I had the right email address for you, and you have not responded to that either, so there may also be a problem with your Twitter software.

Can you please respond to this email, by telling me (a) the procedures for me bringing details of a complaint about the behaviour of one of your bloggers to the attention of your Executive Committee, along with supporting documentation which I will supply, and (b) the procedures that your Executive Committee will employ to investigate my complaint, including ensuring due process and avoiding conflicts of interest?

If for some reason you do not intend to respond to this request, can you please let me know that, so that I can consider my next steps in furthering this matter?

Thank you in advance,

Yours sincerely,

Michael Nugent

Be Sociable, Share!

{ 169 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Dave January 25, 2015 at 10:32 pm

looks like the lights are on but nobody is at home over at FTB.

On a more serious note, it is of considerable concern that a valid fact-based complaint is being ignored.

2 Aneris ✻ January 25, 2015 at 11:17 pm

Michael Nugent wrote: […] Also, I sent you a direct message on Twitter three weeks ago asking you if I had the right email address for you, and you have not responded to that either, so there may also be a problem with your Twitter software.

The situation with them is comical, otherwise it would be depressing. Why can’t he even send a heartfelt “pogue mahone, Mick” if that’s what he thinks.

3 chill chick January 25, 2015 at 11:19 pm

Ed Brayton’s hand was forced in the case of Avicenna because he could have faced lawsuits from multiple large publishers which could have put FTB out of business. Sadly, he seems to think that when it’s just one individual who has a grievance, he can ignore that person.

4 Richard "The King" Sanderson January 25, 2015 at 11:32 pm

This says everything about the lack of integrity of Ed Brayton (if he is ignoring Michael’s messages) and the management at FTB.

5 piero January 26, 2015 at 12:24 am

@Michael:

… it may be the case that my emails have been caught up in your spam filters.

…there may also be a problem with your Twitter software.

Ha ha. Priceless!
But yes, I agree: it may be the case.

6 A Bear January 26, 2015 at 12:26 am

Probably Ed is too busy to reply as the computer tele-conference called FTB Conscience is on this weekend.
Ironic, isn’t it?

7 Lancelot Gobbo January 26, 2015 at 12:31 am

Yes, busy deleting all the comments on the YouTube channel showing the Google Hangouts that constitute this ‘conference’.

8 John Morales January 26, 2015 at 12:33 am

Michael:

If for some reason you do not intend to respond to this request, can you please let me know that, so that I can consider my next steps in furthering this matter?

I would have thought you could consider your next steps in furthering this matter even without a response indicating that there would be no response (!).

9 Pitchguest January 26, 2015 at 12:46 am

What, is the ‘Executive Committee’ (pffffffft) on vacation?

That could be the only explanation for why Ed isn’t answering Michael’s emails for smears that are most definitely libellous should they appear in a court of law. Suppose he must really have been itching to let Avi go. I guess in Ed’s mind, plagiarism > libel?

10 Shermertron January 26, 2015 at 12:49 am

Pitchguest 9

FTB already laughed at and wiped its behind with Voldemort’s cease and desist order. If they don’t care about a real lawyer threatening possible legal action, they (unwisely) don’t care about Mr. Nugent’s polite attempt to get PZ to retract those unfair claims.

11 Pitchguest January 26, 2015 at 12:50 am

Indeed. Ed’s email service must be malfunctioning. As must his Twitter. And Facebook. And FtB account, of course. I suppose those articles he churns out daily that have little to do with advancing secular goals as he often states is of the utmost importance have to be auto-generated or something.

Either that, or Ed Brayton has the integrity of a hungry pig.

12 Bemused observer January 26, 2015 at 1:29 am

@Pitchguest
“I suppose those articles he churns out daily that have little to do with advancing secular goals as he often states is of the utmost importance have to be auto-generated or something.”

Maybe he’s using Avi’s laptop.

13 franc January 26, 2015 at 1:41 am

You think you are the only one that Ed gets email from about ethical/moral bankruptcy and abusive behaviour by FTB? That would be his biggest mail folder, most likely labelled “ignore”. As stated earlier, Avicenna got his attention – but only because of the potential for legal redress affecting his wallet.

But please, keep on trying. At least it shows the world exactly what kind of shop the operate.

14 john welch January 26, 2015 at 1:41 am

But, it is showing the rest of the “community” just what the FTB lot really are.

15 ChasCPeterson January 26, 2015 at 3:36 am

“This defamatory allegation is a considerably more serious ethical violation than the plagiarism by another of your bloggers”
Not following the ethical calculus there.
Plagiarism is pretty bad, in my book, whereas your beef is essentially “he said a hyperbolically mean thing about me”.
I mean, he didn’t even accuse you of a crime. ‘No police reportability, no foul’ is I think one of those unwritten laws of the internets, isn’t it? Something like that?
Suck it up. Hell, Welch has said meaner stuff to me plenty of times.

16 john welch January 26, 2015 at 4:29 am

And you’ve earned it every time Chas. Or is it Sven. Can never keep track.

What’s so bad about plagarism, if we’re going to go that route. I mean, it’s just mix culture, right? Samples, etc. How many forms of art do you see this happening where you know they’re using someone else’s work, unattributed, but it’s okay due to the end result. Why care about it so much just because it’s writing?

Seems to me they’re both about the same thing: a fundamental dishonesty.

And Michael does have the right to take the course he’s taken when an overweening jackanape like PZ decides that oh, words don’t matter, just suck it up.

Funny isn’t it, how “just suck it up” doesn’t apply when it’s PZ or Zvan or Watson or Hensley at the end of that bon mot. Then it’s a fucking trajedi.

One learns over time that “just suck it up” always means “I don’t find your shit important, but it is messing up my mental happiness, so could you and your non-important, non-me problems please just run along until something important happens. You’ll know when it’s important, it will be about me.”

Funny how that works. Every Time.

17 Shermertron January 26, 2015 at 5:02 am

ChasCPeterson 15

You may not be troubled by being labeled a possible rapist on the basis of where you post on the Internet, but such a label is troubling to me.

18 Gerhard January 26, 2015 at 6:01 am

@ Chas.

Unlike PZ Myers, Michael Nugent actually has a good reputation to damage and he actually uses it constructively.

Myers and co.’s disregard for the meaning of words and irresponsible carelessness with shit-flinging hasn’t negated the existence of the real world in which words still mean something. So Michael should not be concerned about the possibility of being announced as the controversial atheist leader who has been accused of rape supporting the next time he’s in the news? Interesting. I guess normal standards are irrelevant when you are in a holy war to promote the One True Way.

19 Michael Kingsford Gray January 26, 2015 at 7:19 am

Chas:-
What Myers’ published *was* a crystal-clear deliberate attempt at defamation of character.
This constitutes at least a tort, if not an actual crime.
In both the USA and Ireland.

20 Steven Carr January 26, 2015 at 9:23 am

It is ironic that Freethought Blogs don’t appear to have even the rudiments of an anti-harrassment complaints procedure in place.

Regardless of whether or not complaints against FTB are justified, basic social justice demands that a responsible organisation should have something, however basic, to process complaints.

21 Jan Steen January 26, 2015 at 10:23 am

Michael said,

I am told that you are a man of integrity

Seeing that Ed Brayton defends, provides a haven for, and supports a smear artist like PZ Myers, I have my doubts about Mr. Brayton being a man of integrity. I’d classify that assertion under “unsubstantiated rumours”. The longer he fails to respond to your e-mail, the more likely it is that the rumour is false.

22 Jan Steen January 26, 2015 at 10:54 am

Ed Brayton once had PZ Myers’s number, but it appears he lost it since.

The following quotes are all by Ed Brayton.

Unfortunately, you can also find several examples of PZ Myers flat out lying about what I’ve said and done, which is hardly a surprise given his past behavior toward me.

To PZ, who is crazed in his obsession to insult and demean me with his lies, reality takes a bizarre turn when entering his mind.

PZ, you really are just about the biggest asshole I have ever known…You’re a liar, PZ, and a first class, double-barrelled, fully automatic asshole.

Again, for any sane, rational person that would be the end of it. Which explains quite well why you won’t let it end now, PZ.

The blame for the confrontation lies squarely with the one who started it, not with the one who responds. And since this whole situation had nothing at all to do with Myers and he was the one who chose to start the personal (and just as importantly, highly dishonest) attacks on me, I think the blame should be put squarely where it belongs.

You don’t have a clue about PZ’s “M.O.”. His MO is to start the personal attacks and then pretend to be above it all when they’re returned and he clams up. This isn’t the first time it’s happened and I doubt it will be the last. I’ve had this behavior aimed at me multiple times and I’m simply not going to play the passive victim. When he starts the shooting, you can be damn sure I am going to return fire. If he doesn’t want to be called an asshole, he can stop being an asshole.

As for the alleged childishness of “third party insults”, it had nothing to do with insults at all. It simply has to do with the fact – yes, it’s a fact – that PZ has a long history of this behavior that far too many people have just rolled their eyes at and excused it away because “oh that’s just the way he is”. Well screw that. The way he is isn’t acceptable to me, and when he aims that behavior at me he’s gonna get it blown right back at him.

PZ, on the other hand, seems to think that if it makes the other side look bad, then facts be damned, start firing; he seems completely unaware of the fact that doing so undermines our credibility when we do, as we usually do, have the evidence on our side

It should be clear right now that PZ has reached the point of being absolutely crazed in his antipathy to me and he has thrown all reason to the wind. This is what those with an extremist mentality do, they identify their enemies and seek to demean them and destroy them, not caring whether their attacks are rational and justified or not. Ironically, that’s the same behavior he no doubt finds appalling when done by the Jerry Falwell crowd.

This was back in 2006. It seems that the “man of integrity” once wasn’t afraid to point out and denounce Myers’s behaviour. Now he turns a blind eye at it. I suppose it’s like the say in The Godfather (part three, I think): “This is business!”

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/12/30/dawkins-repudiates-signature-p/

23 Hunt January 26, 2015 at 11:20 am

Also, I sent you a direct message on Twitter three weeks ago asking you if I had the right email address for you, and you have not responded to that either, so there may also be a problem with your Twitter software.

“There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture…”

24 MosesZD January 26, 2015 at 11:24 am

I see the FTBullies are out apologizing and missing the point of Myer’s odious conduct and general lack of morality.

So, let’s put it in perspective. When I was a GA I caught a student plagiarizing. He got an F for the course and was put on academic probation. Further, his past course work was re-reviewed.

Here in the US, if you are a man, in today’s hysterical, feminist dominated University System, and are accused of rape you lose your rights and are expelled after being shoved through a kangaroo court where you’re not even allowed to put on a defense. Kind of like a modern, high-tech lynching.

The meta-point is that, like any group of zealots, they redefine what is good or bad, including relative levels of ‘good/bad’ to suit their in-group/out-group world view. Clearly, in society, being accused of a being a rapist has much more serious consequences (both civilly and criminally). In fact, in the US law, it’s one of three things that are, barring proof of the truth, considered to be automatic slander/libel.

The people in the SlymePit are not a bunch of rapists, misogynists, etc. In fact, what most of them were were White Knights for Stef McGraw in the McGraw/Watson cat-fight over whether or not there was anything wrong with Elevator Guy asking her out.

McGraw thought not and made a small comment on the YouTube video. A polite disagreement. Watson attacked her in public (as a speaker at a conference) and used her (McGraw an avowed feminist then and now) as a whipping girl claiming that McGraw had internalized misogyny. From that point it got pretty testy because what Watson did was really a low-move and way out of context.

Hence the initial rift. Yet through years of character assassination by Myers, and the other FTBullies, over this White Knight fight has buried that important point.

That’s one of the ironies in all this. The people in the SlymePit are simply regular, plain old atheists across of spectrum of atheists who’ve spent years being character assassinated by Myers, et. al.

Just like they do with anyone else that doesn’t toe their ideological line.

25 MosesZD January 26, 2015 at 11:28 am

Whoops, this:

That’s one of the ironies in all this. The people in the SlymePit are simply regular, plain old atheists across of spectrum of atheists who’ve spent years being character assassinated by Myers, et. al.

Should have said this:

That’s one of the ironies in all this. The people in the SlymePit are simply regular, plain old atheists across of spectrum of atheists who’ve spent years being character assassinated by Myers, et. al. for picking the ‘wrong’ woman to defend.

26 Hunt January 26, 2015 at 11:35 am

Maybe I’m missing something here, but where did Brayton establish his impeccable ethical bona fides? He was a standup comedian who then started a blog network. And before that? He led civil liberty marches, gave speeches from the Lincoln Memorial, and turned water into wine? To me Ed is just a guy who is nominally on my side politically and seems to be perennially underfunded. That doesn’t necessarily mean he isn’t a shit.

27 Hunt January 26, 2015 at 11:53 am

Brayton will act precisely when the liability of doing so ticks over to outweigh the benefit of not doing so. One might wonder, why doesn’t he just take the side of trying to provide a retraction and apology. What does he have to lost, what does it cost him? Well, the only possible thing is that he doesn’t want to piss off Myers, who is no doubt the cash cow* of FtB.

*And by that I mean relative to the comparative Depression era Dust Bowl that is the rest of the blog network. I have no idea how much FtB actually grosses, but when you don’t have much, even a modest amount is worth protecting. I learned that in biology class.

28 Hunt January 26, 2015 at 12:11 pm

Interestingly, when asked to comment on this situation, FT Blogger Ally Fogg indicated profound disinterest. This might not be noteworthy but for the fact that Fogg, as well as a few others at FtB, also accommodates Slymepitters in his comments, apparently escaping charges of rape abetting to date, that I know. Learning this, I said on Slymepit:

“First they came for Michael Nugent and I said nothing because I wasn’t Michael Nugent…”

More than likely, the implication is false, since Fogg is a FtB blogger and will therefore appear under the rubric of “in-group,” not to mention “profit maker.” Fogg will be tolerated, though in fact he has committed the exact “offense” you have and should rightly be condemned for the company he keeps. C’est la vie.

29 Jan Steen January 26, 2015 at 12:20 pm

@Hunt,

Brayton will act precisely when the liability of doing so ticks over to outweigh the benefit of not doing so.

As I show in a post that is currently in moderation, Ed Brayton knows exactly what kind of person PZ Myers is. His unwillingness to speak up about him now (unlike eight years ago*) casts a shadow over his “man of integrity” reputation.

This is business! Right, Ed?

* _http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/12/30/dawkins-repudiates-signature-p/

30 Jan Steen January 26, 2015 at 12:28 pm

Do check out the comments in that thread.

31 Shatterface January 26, 2015 at 12:58 pm

Plagiarism is pretty bad, in my book, whereas your beef is essentially “he said a hyperbolically mean thing about me”.

There’s nothing ‘hypothetically’ bad about being called a rapist or a rape apologist – unless you belong to a rape culture where rape allegations simply go away if you have a quiet word with your principle.

32 Hunt January 26, 2015 at 1:20 pm

Do check out the comments in that thread.

Holy sh–, yes that is an eye opener. Eight years ago, but things can’t have changed that much. Brayton seems quite passionate about defending himself against dishonest attack, but now that doesn’t seem to extend to others within the scope of his responsibility. As the OP states, if Brayton really doesn’t agree in this case, why doesn’t he simply state it?

33 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 1:54 pm

@ChasCPeterson #15

Plagiarism is pretty bad, in my book, whereas your beef is essentially “he said a hyperbolically mean thing about me”.

This is what I call the “Bill O’Reilly defense” which he put forward to prevent himself being indicted as a conspirator in the murder of Dr. George Tiller after he spent weeks/months inflaming his viewers by calling him “Tiller the Baby Killer” on his show on a regular basis.

Dr. Tiller’s murderer brought up at his trial that he felt vindicated in doing what he did because of the pronouncements of O’Reilly which he took as encouragement and being called upon to be the agent of Dr. Tiller’s demise.

You might see it as harmless “hyperbole” but for someone else the pronouncements of PZ could well be a justification for grievously harming Michael.

Aside from anything else, what you call “hyperbole” I call a despicable lie.

You have posted here, does that make you a rapist? Because according to PZ it does and you are.

If harm does come to Michael then it has to be said here and now that Brayton through his patently obvious unwillingness to put an end to the baseless, mendacious and inflammatory rhetoric PZ has employed with regard to Michael must be considered complicit.

Are you seriously suggesting that one should sit back and look on until some “lone wolf” decides that Michael would serve as the perfect target? Because it only takes one deranged mind reading the equally deranged sputum emanating from PZ to create a tragedy.

34 franc January 26, 2015 at 3:04 pm

Michael Nager #33

Are you seriously suggesting that one should sit back and look on until some “lone wolf” decides that Michael would serve as the perfect target? Because it only takes one deranged mind reading the equally deranged sputum emanating from PZ to create a tragedy.

Neither farfetched nor exaggerated. This is the kind of marginal lunatic Myers both enables and encourages –

http://i.imgur.com/r6kATKw.png

35 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 3:41 pm

@franc #34

What makes the scenario even more plausible is theistic enemies of Michael in Ireland pointing to PZ as a “leader” of the atheists in the US calling Michael a harbourer of rapists to incite violence towards him.

And let’s face it, any country that would introduce blasphemy laws has to be considered religiously extremist.

36 Lancelot Gobbo January 26, 2015 at 4:17 pm

@Jan Steen #22

Wow! Someone must have an ultra-potent orally bioavailable form of oxytocin for Brayton to change his views to not only accommodate PZ, but also to go into a business partnership with him. What’s that? Say it ain’t so! You really mean he associates with PZ simply because PZ brings in the money? I might just be slightly disillusioned by that—if I weren’t an old, wrinkled, bitter cynic with far too much experience of the world and its fallible and selfish inhabitants. (Still, I would have liked to try the oxytocin analogue! And if Brayton is truly that cynical when it comes to profit, I think we should give the poor bastard a dose too.)

37 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 4:40 pm

@Lancelot Gobbo #36

Brayton is that cowardly. PZ has radicalised – evangelised if you will – his audience and Brayton is afraid of that.

PZ has issued the equivalent of a fatwa against Michael and Brayton is too far invested in Myers to call him out.

For Brayton as a yank Myers is too close to do the right thing with regard to some Irish “nobody” like Michael.

38 Lancelot Gobbo January 26, 2015 at 5:20 pm

Ed Brayton wrote:
PZ just has this juicy bone in his mouth and he can’t let it go; that is how rabid dogs, rather than rational people, behave.

Ain’t quotemining fun? I can foresee a future in reminding EB just how he regarded PZ before it suited his financial interests to overlook such niceties.

39 Billie from Ockham January 26, 2015 at 5:20 pm

For those who haven’t bothered to read the 2006 thread on Ed Brayton’s blog, it’s worth it for no other reason than watching PZ Myers white-knight Richard Dawkins.

_http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/12/30/dawkins-repudiates-signature-p/

40 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 5:31 pm

@Lancelot Gobbo #38

Brayton didn’t refer to what the target of PZ’s rapidity was and you also failed to mention in which year Brayson had this epiphany towards PZ.

It was in fact in Dec. 30 2006. This is relevant to PZ and his abominable accusations against Michael now exactly how??

It certainly has not been the opinion of Brayson with regard to Myers and his defamation of Michael any time in recent memory.

41 Shatterface January 26, 2015 at 5:38 pm

For those who haven’t bothered to read the 2006 thread on Ed Brayton’s blog, it’s worth it for no other reason than watching PZ Myers white-knight Richard Dawkins.

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/12/30/dawkins-repudiates-signature-p/

So Brayton actually wrote:

Unfortunately, you can also find several examples of PZ Myers flat out lying about what I’ve said and done, which is hardly a surprise given his past behavior toward me.

I can’t believe Myers would actually lie about someone else.

42 Shatterface January 26, 2015 at 5:40 pm

Plus:

To PZ, who is crazed in his obsession to insult and demean me with his lies, reality takes a bizarre turn when entering his mind.

No! Say it isn’t so!

43 Shatterface January 26, 2015 at 5:41 pm

And:

PZ just has this juicy bone in his mouth and he can’t let it go; that is how rabid dogs, rather than rational people, behave.

44 Arakes January 26, 2015 at 5:44 pm

…I am puzzled by your lack of response to this more serious matter…

Hint: no one outside of Slymepit Ireland takes this matter seriously at all.

If for some reason you do not intend to respond to this request, can you please let me know that, so that I can consider my next steps in furthering this matter?

With “next steps” presumably meaning “I´ll try to find some other guy and pester him with messages while he ignores me”.

45 Aratina Cage January 26, 2015 at 5:46 pm

So the question is, how did Ed and PZ make amends? That might give Michael some more fruitful routes to take if he really wants to be back on good terms with PZ. Have you got any links to that, Jan Steen?

46 Lancelot Gobbo January 26, 2015 at 5:49 pm

@Michael Nager #40

I’m so sorry, I didn’t realise you hadn’t read or were incapable of understanding the previous posts that put mine in context. But never mind, perhaps you can help me out with a link to Ed Brayton’s road to Damascus experience wherein he records his conversion to being PZ-positive?

47 Shatterface January 26, 2015 at 5:50 pm

More from Brayton in 2006.

PZ, you really are just about the biggest asshole I have ever known, and you are lying through your teeth.

Given that Myers was defending Dawkins at the time it’s debatable who has been drinking who’s Kool Aid since then.

48 Shatterface January 26, 2015 at 5:56 pm

I think it’s worth remembering that while Myers was defending Dawkins back in 2006 his tactics of misquoting people, smearing them by association, etc. were the same as now – only we were willing to let his behaviour slide because he seemed to be on the ‘right side’.

This is why we need to call out bullies even when they appear to be on our side. Bullying isn’t a means to an end, it’s an end in itself.

49 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 6:04 pm

The takeaway is that Brayson could prevent harm coming to Michael from the lies of PZ and despite all Michael’s attempts to alert Brayson of this possibility, Brayson will not make any effort to prevent that harm.

If you believe me or not I am not a rapist. I also think that Michael’s evangelizing on the “vegan lifestyle” is a crock of shit (my wife who was a vegetarian called vegans the “culinary Waffen-SS).

I eat meat and vegetables because that is what my teeth were evolved to do. I do not – and neither does any other human being – have enough enamel on my teeth to be a natural herbivore from the evolutionary history of homo sapiens sapiens.

Everyone is allowed to have beliefs that are just full of shit but nobody is allowed to incite violence against that person because of those beliefs.

50 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 6:12 pm

I’m so sorry, I didn’t realise you hadn’t read or were incapable of understanding the previous posts that put mine in context. But never mind, perhaps you can help me out with a link to Ed Brayton’s road to Damascus experience wherein he records his conversion to being PZ-positive?

You mean the context you completely fail to provide and then put the onus on me to provide?

I think your reply provided all the context that anyone would ever need because if it existed you would articulate it.

51 Darby January 26, 2015 at 6:19 pm

I’ve always wondered how the FTB commentariat decides who’s going to provide the pathetic rebuttals and pointless distractions for each post here. Do they draw lots? Rock, Paper, Scissors? Random number generator?

52 Lancelot Gobbo January 26, 2015 at 6:19 pm

Say no more; we know exactly who and what you are already.

53 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 6:24 pm

@Aratina Cage #44

So the question is, how did Ed and PZ make amends? That might give Michael some more fruitful routes to take if he really wants to be back on good terms with PZ. Have you got any links to that, Jan Steen?

You are trying to shit me here aren’t you?

If someone accused me of being a rapist then that is the last face they would ever see – with regard to looking at death in the face I have been there and done it and I am still here.

Michael is taking “the more fruitful route”.

Personally I would not be so kind.

54 Glen Davidson January 26, 2015 at 6:47 pm

So the question is, how did Ed and PZ make amends? That might give Michael some more fruitful routes to take if he really wants to be back on good terms with PZ. Have you got any links to that, Jan Steen?

Apparently Ed got over the problem he had with attacks lacking in truth and integrity.

That is not a route open to all, fortunately.

55 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 7:14 pm

@Glen Davidson #51

Brayson has hordes of idiots to integrate within his purview. The PZ crowd, the feminist crowd, the “intellectual artillery” crowd.

So atheists can basically go and take a fuck to themselves as far as the FtB “community” is concerned.

How about. “I am an atheist, I do not believe in God and that is my thing”.

If you are pissed off about something else then fuck off and pester them, don’t try to pretend to be an atheist to co-opt me for your agenda.

As an atheist I don’t give a shit if you are a feminists – I have my own problems.

As an atheist I don’t give a shit about your skin colour – I have my own problems.

As an atheist I don’t give a shit about your gender identity – I have my own problems.

As an atheist I most certainly don’t care what kind of sectarian problems you have just because you are of the wrong sect.

In fact stop trying to co-opt me unless you are willing to give back the fucking support you expect from me as an amorphous minority which does not have any homogenous trait except for a disbelief in a deity.

56 Shatterface January 26, 2015 at 7:32 pm

So the question is, how did Ed and PZ make amends?

Brayton accepted Myers’s bullying methods while Myers accepted Brayton’s ’cause’ of cutting famous atheists down.

57 Jan Steen January 26, 2015 at 8:06 pm

@Aratina Cage,

So the question is, how did Ed and PZ make amends? That might give Michael some more fruitful routes to take if he really wants to be back on good terms with PZ. Have you got any links to that, Jan Steen?

You want to know when and why Ed Brayton became a spineless coward who made amends with that horrible man, PZ Myers, because it was good for business? You tell me. I’m sure you have more insight into the psychology of people like Ed Brayton than I do. A matter of introspection.

Why anyone would want to be on good terms with a disgusting little bottom feeder like PZ Myers is a complete mystery to me. I would think that decent people would want to avoid his kind like the plague.

58 Michael Nager January 26, 2015 at 8:20 pm

@Jan Steen #55

He’s American – it is always the path of least resistance.

Of course that means being spineless.

FtB has atheism at the bottom of its list of priorities.

Thus FtB is “Freethought-“, just as “Atheism+” is everything except atheism.

59 KennyD January 26, 2015 at 9:14 pm

@Aratina Cage #44

<>

This is probably the most constructive advice that has been offered to Michael Nugent in his series of attacks against PZ. I really think Michael should consider following Brayton’s example. Contrary to what other people are saying, there is nothing “spineless” or “cowardly” about Brayton forgiving PZ and working with him. I think it requires more strength to forgive than to continue with this hate campaign.

Follow Ed Brayton’s example and you both could come out winners.

60 Jan Steen January 26, 2015 at 11:03 pm

@Billy from Ockham,

For those who haven’t bothered to read the 2006 thread on Ed Brayton’s blog, it’s worth it for no other reason than watching PZ Myers white-knight Richard Dawkins.

Remember that this was shortly after Dawkins published The God Delusion, which contained this reference to PZ Myers:

This whole issue, including an independent invocation of Brer Rabbit in the briar patch, is well discussed by the biologist P. Z. Myers, whose Pharyngula blog can reliably be consulted for trenchant good sense.

In December 2006, Myers was still glowing with pride that he had been noticed by the great Richard Dawkins, whom he was to visit soon afterwards to discuss his (Myers’s) new and interesting (but to this day unpublished) ideas about evolution. No wonder that Dawkins could do no wrong in his eyes.

Regarding Ed Brayton’s remarkable conversion to Peezus, some quick scanning of his old site turned up the following.

On 1 April 2011 he wrote:

On the one hand, PZ and I have had our disagreements but we long ago put those behind us and became friends. On the other hand, he’s such a huge draw that his leaving [ScienceBlogs, J.S.] will undoubtedly reduce traffic to this blog and to the entire network. So overall, I’m sad to see him go [to his short-lived private blog digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.co.uk, J.S.] — but I certainly understand why he made the decision.

_http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2011/04/01/saying-goodbye-to-pz/

By 1 August 2011 he had fully accepted Peezus in his heart:

As many of you already know, I have launched a new blog network, Freethoughtblogs.com, devoted to atheism, skepticism, humanism and freethought. PZ Myers and I are both now going to be posting most of our work to that network while still posting science-related stuff here [ScienceBlogs, J.S.].

_http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2011/08/01/the-new-dispatches-from-the-cu/

Make of this what you will.

61 piero January 26, 2015 at 11:18 pm

@Jan:

Well, that comment thread on Brayton’s blog was… refreshing. Best laugh in quite a while. Had Brayton based his routine on that, he could have hosted Saturday Night Live and wouldn’t be forced to tolerate the asshole in ” if he doesn’t want to be called an asshole, he can stop being an asshole.”

Concerning our local comedians, I’m sorry to say their punch lines fall flat: Michael Nagger, ChasChaplin, Aracket, John Moranis, do yourselves a favour and don’t try to outdo the pros. Unintentional humour (of the paradoxical kind displayed by Aracket taking the time to post a message in order to claim that “no one outside of Slymepit Ireland takes this matter seriously at all”) does not count.

62 piero January 27, 2015 at 12:01 am

@Arakes:

LOL

See? Even I am a better comedian.

63 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 12:10 am

@piero

See? Even I am a better comedian.

Wetting yourself in public isn´t exactly the same as being a comedian, but you´re indeed quite hilarious.

64 piero January 27, 2015 at 12:21 am

@Arakes:

Wetting yourself in public isn´t exactly the same as being a comedian, but you´re indeed quite hilarious.

Thank you. I aim to please.

65 Michael Nugent January 27, 2015 at 1:06 am

I’ve removed several comments that were very off-topic for this post.

Please try to keep at least approximately on-topic. Thanks.

66 Michael Nager January 27, 2015 at 1:07 am

To the moderators, I do not think it is fair to truncate a conversation where nobody has called foul.

67 Michael Nugent January 27, 2015 at 1:12 am

Michael, this isn’t a general discussion forum. I am trying to highlight the behaviour of PZ Myers and the response of FreeThought Blogs to being asked to address that issue. There are plenty of places to discuss other issues.

68 Michael Nugent January 27, 2015 at 1:21 am

I’ve moved some comments about veganism to this post

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2014/12/31/new-year-resolution-vegan-heres-why/

69 Michael Nager January 27, 2015 at 1:24 am

I abase myself.

I only say that when I truly mean it because the words “I’m sorry” have become meaningless through overuse.

It is a bug/feature of my autism that when someone speaks to me I reply as factually as I can.

Sometimes the facts do not speak well of me and that is my burden.

70 Michael Nugent January 27, 2015 at 1:26 am

Okay Michael, that’s fine, but please try to stay approximately on-topic when commenting here. Thanks.

71 Michael Nager January 27, 2015 at 1:33 am

Thank you Michael,

the only true friends I had left after I came out as autistic were people like you who kicked me in the shins when needed and still associated with me even if they didn’t have to.

In the light of what you now know I would not criticise you for curtailing any ties with me.

72 john welch January 27, 2015 at 3:01 am

ARatina @45 once again going full Clear:

So the question is, how did Ed and PZ make amends? That might give Michael some more fruitful routes to take if he really wants to be back on good terms with PZ. Have you got any links to that, Jan Steen?

Why should Michael do shit to be on good terms with PZ. PZ is the offender, remember? Look, I know you have to defend PZ at all costs, (I am still somewhat curious as to just what PZ would have to do before you would criticize him in anything but the most timorous way), but Michael isn’t the one at fault here.

PZ needs to apologize. This is not rocket science. It is not even Jr. High Science. This is literally kindergarten shit.

Christ, I don’t know what’s worse, that you believe your own tripe or that you think anyone outside of your little cult is so stupid as to believe it.

Darby @51:

I think it’s whoever stands up last and has to eat the cookie.

KennyD@59:

This is probably the most constructive advice that has been offered to Michael Nugent in his series of attacks against PZ. I really think Michael should consider following Brayton’s example. Contrary to what other people are saying, there is nothing “spineless” or “cowardly” about Brayton forgiving PZ and working with him. I think it requires more strength to forgive than to continue with this hate campaign.

Right, and then PZ learns that there is no limit to how shittily he can treat someone, no limits to how cruel he can be to someone and not get away with it.

I don’t think PZ gives a squirt of piss about Michael, or anyone else not following your lead and putting their nose up his sphincter and telling him how sweet his perfume is, but there is nothing to be gained by allowing PZ to once again shit all over someone and not have *any* fallout over it. Screw that.

and Michael is conducting a hate campaign.

Come on, admit it. PZ could have a basement full of dead hobos and you’d tell us why it was the hobos’ fault for making PZ kill them.

73 MadMike January 27, 2015 at 3:54 am

@ KennyD in 59-
Attacks? Nugent is “attacking” PZ Myers? A re-definition way too far. If everybody starts redefining words to mean what they wish they meant, intelligent discourse will be dead. Please use conventional English.

74 Richard "The King" Sanderson January 27, 2015 at 4:38 am

Arakes: Hint: no one outside of Slymepit Ireland takes this matter seriously at all.

Don’t you regard the trivialization of rape seriously, Arakes? Don’t you take seriously an organization’s responsibility to respond to an official complaint?

FTB, specifically Ed Brayton, has/have received an official complaint on several occasions. They have a duty to respond to it. Failure to do so reveals a lack of integrity and a potential disregard for their complaints and anti-harassment procedures.

You might think it is OK to trivialize rape by justifying or excusing PZ Myers’ baseless smears. Michael does not.

PS – Just in case you don’t quite understand why I am accusing you and PZ Myers of trivializing rape – if you throw around false allegations that rapists post at a certain website, and are unable to back up those smears when asked, you are guilty of trivializing rape. The same goes for those who defend and excuse PZ Myers for not responding. Simple!

75 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 7:04 am

To the Brayton apologists.

Ed Brayton wrote:

It simply has to do with the fact – yes, it’s a fact – that PZ has a long history of this behavior that far too many people have just rolled their eyes at and excused it away because “oh that’s just the way he is”. Well screw that. The way he is isn’t acceptable to me

The last few years PZ’s behaviour has become, if anything, even worse, to the point that it can be called unhinged. What does Ed Brayton do now? He rolls his eyes at it and excuses it away because “oh that’s just the way he is.”

76 Glen Davidson January 27, 2015 at 7:16 am

KennyD, #59:

Follow Ed Brayton’s example and you both could come out winners.

Why yes, you could both be responsible for untruthful attacks on others, the one enabling the smears of the other. You could both win, and everyone else lose–if you’re that kind of person, anyway.

For the fantacist sorts, it should be noted that Nugent was trying to stop PZ’s smears against others, when, of course, he was smeared by PZ in response to that. It wasn’t and isn’t all about Nugent, it is about decency and integrity in atheist society and beyond. The ridiculous suggestion that Nugent follow the path of least resistance for the sake of self-interest has no merit to it.

77 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 8:20 am

@Richard “The King” Sanderson

Don’t you regard the trivialization of rape seriously, Arakes?

The question should be “don´t you care what Slymepit Ireland considers to be a trivialization of rape?!”. And the answer would be “No. And neither does anyone else outside of Slymepit Ireland”.

FTB, specifically Ed Brayton, has/have received an official complaint on several occasions. They have a duty to respond to it.

If Ed considers it to be an utter waste of time to interact with Michael, then he is perfectly entitled to ignore him.

PS – Just in case you don’t quite understand why I am accusing you…

I understand, that´s why I don´t care.

78 Steven Carr January 27, 2015 at 8:24 am

‘If Ed considers it to be an utter waste of time to interact with Michael, then he is perfectly entitled to ignore him.’

So a harrassment policy consists of somebody deciding they can just ignore complaints if they want to?

Myers throws out smears, slurs and slanders because he needs to trash the name and reputation of people he disagrees with.

Brayton knows this. Brayton himself documented Myers behaviour thoroughlly in 2006.

And nothing has changed since then except that now Myers brings dollars to Brayton, which buys Brayton’s silence.

79 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 8:41 am

@Steven Carr

So a harrassment policy consists of somebody deciding they can just ignore complaints if they want to?

You think that the www has a harassment policy and that Ed Brayton is in charge of the www? Cute.

80 Steven Carr January 27, 2015 at 8:48 am

You actually took some time out of your life to write that?

FTB has no procedure in place to deal with potential complaints about what is written on its site.

Which means Myers can continue his standard operating procedure of reaching for the rape-word, threatening violence, slurs and smears – the same procedure Brayton documented in 2006, and which has, if anything , got worse over the past few years.

81 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 8:52 am

@Steven Carr

FTB has no procedure in place to deal with potential complaints about what is written on its site.

It doesn´t?? What happened to the harassment policy that you were speaking of just a few minutes ago?
You might want to organize your thoughts a little.

82 Steven Carr January 27, 2015 at 8:58 am

Wow! The defenders of FTB really are having to resort to desperate trolling.

Just think. At one time Myers rubbed shoulders with Dawkins.

And now look at who he has supporting him.

83 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 9:36 am

Just think. At one time Myers rubbed shoulders with Dawkins.

Maybe he comes to his senses and invites Dawkins back into his heart.
Seriously though, thanks for providing an example of actual hero-worshiping for reference 😉

84 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 9:36 am

One thing is unclear because it’s unspecified: what email address did Michael use?

85 Hunt January 27, 2015 at 9:37 am

Arakes,
I don’t think you’re following along. There is no such thing as a “harassment policy” at FtB. If there is, someone please point it out. That’s the question. Should there be? (And yes, I include other forums like Slymepit). This touches something I’ve been interested in for a while, the democratization of blogs. Much is made of ‘trolls’ as disruptive elements impinging on online forums; however less well recognized is that online personalities, bloggers and other forums, can themselves be centralized “trolls,” do trolling, harass people, etc. To what extent are forums obligated to offer mechanisms for review and redress?

86 Hunt January 27, 2015 at 9:42 am

Ok, so Pharyngula does have its ‘Commenting Rules':

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/rules/

Not quite the same thing.

In addition, many of the things PZ has said was actually external to his blog. But still, I think they could theoretically be addressed through his blog.

87 Hunt January 27, 2015 at 9:51 am

One more comment and I’ll give it a rest.

I think this element of the commenting rules goes to the heart of the matter:


V. Recommended attitudes:

This is a rude blog. Expect rough handling.

Justice is more important than civility. But aspire to be charitable at first.

PZ values “justice” more than civility, scare quoted because offenses against justice will be arbitrated by ultimately by PZ himself. This is the little clause where PZ gives himself permission to be as uncivil as he wants to those he determines to be unjust.

I think the question he needs to ask himself is when does his incivility actually become an injustice? The depressing thing is that I don’t think he really cares.

88 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 10:24 am

@John Morales,

One thing is unclear because it’s unspecified: what email address did Michael use?

noreply@FreethoughtBlogs.com

89 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 10:27 am

Jan Steen, really?

What is provenance of your information?

90 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 10:36 am

John, let’s call it circumstantial evidence.

91 Nelson Devoto January 27, 2015 at 10:41 am

Michael, you may have considered this already but if you get no response from Brayton and FTB, a possible The next level up is their servers/hosters.
The appear to use Cloudfare as a go between but they do not actually host. The host for FTB is a littleharder to ascertain. However the domain is registered with BlueHost. Often, but not always ( I would consider it better practice to keep domain registration and site host separate companies so if you have a dispute with the host you can at least point the domain elsewhere) for convenience, the domain and hosts are often one and the same. If in this case, BlueHost is correct , they do have , as most hosts do, an acceptable host policy. Even if FTB is not hosted on BlueHost , this gives an example of the prohibitions that likely exist for other hosts, they apply to VPS or dedicated hsotign accounts as well. For example BlueHost states the service

…………………..Prohibited Uses.
The uses of Bluehost Services set forth in this section herein below are prohibited. The engaging in any prohibited use as set forth herein by Subscriber or by any affiliate or subscriber of Subscriber (as determined in the sole discretion of Bluehost) constitutes a material breach of these Terms and will subject Subscriber’s account to immediate termination without notice and without any refund….

Profanity.
Profanity or profane subject matter in the site content and in the domain name are prohibited.

Obscene, Defamatory, Abusive or Threatening Language.
Use of the Services to store, post, transmit, display or otherwise make available obscene, defamatory, harassing, abusive or threatening language is prohibited.

http://www.bluehost.com/acceptable-use-policy

They soon enough removed the plagarism of Avicenna in fear of action from affected parties but still not difficult to find examples of obvious profanity but also it is the source of the repeated defamatory remarks against your self and other named individuals.
If Bluehost does not host FTB perhaps someone will know and be able to provide the correct host for you to investigate this line of enquiry if you have not already condidered it ?

92 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 10:42 am

Jan, I call it a very poor attempt at levity.

(The observation stands)

93 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 10:49 am

[meta]

Nelson Devoto @91, given the contents of the comment threads spawned by Michael’s posts on the issue, that is a strategy that might backfire.

94 Nelson Devoto January 27, 2015 at 11:01 am

@John Morales
Use of any profanies aside, the last time I looked Michael had not actually made any potentially defaming comments against any named individuals in his posts, and moderates the comments to remove then, while Myers certainly has, on more than one occasion and allows his commenters to do so without restraint.

95 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 11:02 am

[OT]

PS Jan Steen, @60:

So overall, I’m sad to see him go [to his short-lived private blog digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.co.uk, J.S.]

<snicker>

The significance of 1st of April posts clearly eludes you, eh? 😉

Make of this what you will.

Trust me, I certainly do!

96 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 11:09 am

Nelson Devoto @94, no point telling me. It is neither you nor I who will be making investigations and determinations about the merits of any such potential allegation, I merely offer my opinion as in contrast to yours as to the likely cost-benefit of your suggested course of escalation.

97 Hunt January 27, 2015 at 11:20 am

Prohibiting service on the basis of profanity seems a little severe. I’m guessing bluehost is the exception, not the rule, so it seems likely that neither Nugent’s nor FtB’s host prohibits profanity. Defamation, however, is another matter. Seems likely that both hosts would prohibit that. Granted, it’s an outside shot, but it might be worth shooting them an email to see what happens. At most, though, all that would likely happen is that the offending statements would be removed from FtB, which isn’t a huge result.

98 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 11:49 am

@John Morales,

PS Jan Steen, @60:

So overall, I’m sad to see him go [to his short-lived private blog digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.co.uk, J.S.]

The significance of 1st of April posts clearly eludes you, eh?

In this case I’d rather refer to the insignificance of 1st of April posts. I happily grant Peezus his privilege to play April fool with his acolytes. The world outside his cult may not care as much as they do.

The main reason I cited that post was that it showed that Brayton had by then accepted Peezus in his heart (and evidently decided henceforth not to utter one word about the appalling behaviour of his BFF, which he had condemned so passionately a few years before. But who needs principles of basic human decency if you have to sacrifice them to be friends with PZ Myers?).

But I fear that this more significant point eludes you. You are crawling about with your magnifying glass to spot blemishes in the carpet and in so doing fail to notice that your trousers have become undone and that your arse is showing. Not a pretty sight.

99 Phil Giordana FCD January 27, 2015 at 11:49 am

“Prohibiting service on the basis of profanity seems a little severe.”

Not sure about that. It’s completely acceptable to deny profanities being used on one’s blog.

On the other hand, it’s completely possible to attack one’s persona in the most heinous of ways without using a single profanity.

Case in point: Myers is a small ass. prof. at a small U trying to puff himself up by smearing whoever he likes, thinking there will never be any consequences to his own written words (usually screencapped and archived at the SlymePit. Yes, Myers, I know it hurts, but that’s life).

Not a single profanity in there, still, it stings a lot for narcissists.

Call me a cunt all you like, but don’t call me a rapist.

100 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 11:50 am

Let’s try that again…

@John Morales,

PS Jan Steen, @60:

So overall, I’m sad to see him go [to his short-lived private blog digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.co.uk, J.S.]

The significance of 1st of April posts clearly eludes you, eh?

In this case I’d rather refer to the insignificance of 1st of April posts. I happily grant Peezus his privilege to play April fool with his acolytes. The world outside his cult may not care as much as they do.

The main reason I cited that post was that it showed that Brayton had by then accepted Peezus in his heart (and evidently decided henceforth not to utter one word about the appalling behaviour of his BFF, which he had condemned so passionately a few years before. But who needs principles of basic human decency if you have to sacrifice them to be friends with PZ Myers?).

But I fear that this more significant point eludes you. You are crawling about with your magnifying glass to spot blemishes in the carpet and in so doing fail to notice that your trousers have become undone and that your arse is showing. Not a pretty sight.

101 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 12:15 pm

[meta]

Jan Steen @100:

In this case I’d rather refer to the insignificance of 1st of April posts. I happily grant Peezus his privilege to play April fool with his acolytes. The world outside his cult may not care as much as they do.

Leaving aside that it was Ed Brayton rather than PZ (“Peezus” to you) whose April fool’s post you quoted, you sure pretended you found it significant.

(Most amusingly, the eponymous Digital Cuttlefish is yet another blogger at FTB)

The main reason I cited that post was that it showed that Brayton had by then accepted Peezus in his heart (and evidently decided henceforth not to utter one word about the appalling behaviour of his BFF, which he had condemned so passionately a few years before. But who needs principles of basic human decency if you have to sacrifice them to be friends with PZ Myers?).

But you just wrote that it was insignificant!

(Consistency is the bugbear of small minds, right?)

But I fear that this more significant point eludes you. You are crawling about with your magnifying glass to spot blemishes in the carpet and in so doing fail to notice that your trousers have become undone and that your arse is showing. Not a pretty sight.

Oh, I don’t know… I find your fears a pretty pathetic sight.

102 piero January 27, 2015 at 12:17 pm

Isn’t it interesting that the phlockers have not put forward any plausible reason for Brayton’s failure to respond to Michael Nugent’s messages? I believe they have referred to every irrelevant issue they could find, but somehow they’ve invariably managed to evade the point under discussion.

Police officer: “You are under arrest for murdering this porcupine.”
John Morales: “Officer, allow me to point out that your badge is upside down.”

103 Hunt January 27, 2015 at 12:20 pm

Clarifying this thing about blog “harassment policy”, or something analogous to it, it’s important to realize that what’s not being requested is some kind of blog “blasphemy law,” or a place to complain about people calling you insulting names. And it would also not be a place to complain that your made-up definition of harassment (e.g. a satirical photoshop) has been leveled at you.
The perplexing things is this: suppose someone has done what Myers has done to Nugent in the present online environment. What do you do? Particularly if you’re not in a position to launch a transatlantic lawsuit? There is no established avenue of redress. In other words, there is no process that even guarantees a response. If the party in question simply decides to stonewall you, there is no way to even get a statement, in words, that others might evaluate.

Personally, I think this is a massive gaping hole in the present online environment. Every reputable blogging network should have some mechanism that you can use to establish a conversation like that.

104 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 12:21 pm

Isn’t it interesting that the phlockers have not put forward any plausible reason for Brayton’s failure to respond to Michael Nugent’s messages?

That´s what you´re looking for? A plausible reason? Seriously? Here you are:
He considers an interaction with Michael to be an utter waste of time.

You´re welcome.

105 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 12:24 pm

Looks as if you dropped your magnifying glass, John. You can’t see clearly anymore and are now clutching at straws.

106 john welch January 27, 2015 at 12:46 pm

If you know it’s “[OT]” why even post it.

Oh right, distractions are valuable when you’re supporting hypocritical nonsense.

107 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 12:46 pm

[meta]

Piero @102:

I believe they [phlockers*] have referred to every irrelevant issue they could find, but somehow they’ve invariably managed to evade the point under discussion.

Police officer: “You are under arrest for murdering this porcupine.”
John Morales: “Officer, allow me to point out that your badge is upside down.”

How your second paragraph relates to your first is obscure to me; I certainly have no reason to dispute that, earlier on the same day he posted this blog entry on his personal blog, Michael Nugent emailed the specified text to an address he believed would reach Ed Brayton — nor did I give any indication that I had such a reason.

(My observation still stands)

* Such parochialism!

108 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 12:47 pm

@Arakes,

That´s what you´re looking for? A plausible reason? Seriously? Here you are: He considers an interaction with Michael to be an utter waste of time.

Hey, I can do that “reading the mind of Ed Brayton” spiel too.

Why doesn’t Brayton respond to Michael Nugent?

Here you are: Because Brayton is a moral failure, a coward who knows exactly how his friend PZ Myers operates, but is afraid to make his cash cow angry.

109 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 12:51 pm

[OT]

john welch @106:

If you know it’s “[OT]” why even post it.

Your comment in response to mine is no less off-topic, but a salient difference is that you don’t indicate that with markup, as I do.

(Surely you did not imagine your comment was on-topic! 😉 )

Oh right, distractions are valuable when you’re supporting hypocritical nonsense.

I bow to your expertise.

110 Phil Giordana FCD January 27, 2015 at 12:55 pm

Sorry, I have to say it:

John Morales uses those very stupid and irrelevant tags [OT] or [meta] all the frigging time! [OT] I could understand (although not condone), but that [meta] stuff is right out of my league. And apart from brain-wanking, I have no idea where it would come from.

Cut that shit, JM, maybe? It’s really annoying.

111 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 12:58 pm

Jan Steen:

Hey, I can do that “reading the mind of Ed Brayton” spiel too.

I´m sure you can.

Here you are: Because Brayton is a moral failure, a coward who knows exactly how his friend PZ Myers operates, but is afraid to make his cash cow angry.

That´s of course a possibility – it´s just a very stupid one because the revenue that Brayton makes has jack shit to do with Peezus, even if 99.9% of the FtB pageviews would be on Pharyngula (which would mean that PZ gets 99.9% of the revenue), it still wouldn´t cost Brayton anything to kick Pharyngula off FtB.

112 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 1:04 pm

@Arakes,

Do you know which financial agreements Myers and Brayton made when they set up FTB? Even if your information is correct, it still would leave FTB a barren wasteland if Pharyngula were to be expelled.

113 Phil Giordana FCD January 27, 2015 at 1:05 pm

Arakes:

[OT], [meta]

Stop defending the indefensible, maybe?

Myers stated some nasty shit encompassing both Michael and the posters at the SlymePit. If Brayton was in the least bit honest, he would address this problem.

Or maybe you have proofs that some people posting on the Pit are rapists?

No?

Then it’s a smear at least, libel if we want to get all legal, or one of the worst forms of lying shit hypocrisy since Nixon and McCarthy. Ken Ham doesn’t even feature in that scope.

Pick your choice.

114 Phil Giordana FCD January 27, 2015 at 1:08 pm

Sorry Michael, but I will have to give up on your automatic moderation of words that pertain to l.i.e, l.y.i.n.g, l.i.ar…

Some of these people do exist. Naming and labeling them as such is not a crime.

Calling someone a rapist is.

115 Aheydis Vaakenjab January 27, 2015 at 1:11 pm

Arakes and John Morales:

I see you two have taken time out of standing in front of your telescreens to post here. Congratulations.

[OT] Morales… I know. [meta] too perhaps. But it’s certainly [appropriate].

So, the standards you two have walked by are clearly the standards you two support – In that there is zero evidence either of you denouncing calling named people rape enablers, harassers, rape apologists by PZ Myers and the utter failure on Brayton’s part to even give an “FU” response to MN.

That’s all I need to know about you two and I will take my leave from this comment thread.

Have a nice day and I hope either of you two don’t one day have your IRL names smeared and find yourselves with little to no recourse in the matter.

116 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 1:13 pm

[meta + OT]

Phil Giordana @110:

Sorry, I have to say it:

John Morales uses those very stupid and irrelevant tags [OT] or [meta] all the frigging time! [OT] I could understand (although not condone), but that [meta] stuff is right out of my league. And apart from brain-wanking, I have no idea where it would come from.

Cut that shit, JM, maybe? It’s really annoying.

Your grammatical shift from the third person to the second amuses me mildly, but your neediness amuses me more.

(If my brain is wanking, why does it use you as a sock?)

117 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 1:13 pm

Do you know which financial agreements Myers and Brayton made when they set up FTB?

They claimed that the revenue is split proportionally among the bloggers based on how much traffic each blog attracts. And given that none of the bloggers who have left the network disputes this information, including those that left on hostile terms, I see no reason to doubt this.

Even if your information is correct, it still would leave FTB a barren wasteland if Pharyngula were to be expelled.

In that case you would have to modify your suggested “plausible reason” for Brayton´s silence to:
“Because Brayton is a moral failure, a coward who knows exactly how his friend PZ Myers operates, but is afraid [that FtB might get less overall traffic without Pharyngula, although this reduced traffic will have no impact on his revenue].”

118 John Morales January 27, 2015 at 1:16 pm

[ OT]

Aheydis Vaakenjab @114:

Have a nice day and I hope either of you two [Arakes and John Morales] don’t one day have your IRL names smeared and find yourselves with little to no recourse in the matter.

Thanks! I probably shall, and I appreciate your encomium.

(Also, your hopes are exceedingly likely to be realised, so there’s that to sustain you)

119 Michael Nugent January 27, 2015 at 1:27 pm

Phil,

The distinction I make is between saying that someone has said something that is clearly untrue, which I am fine with, and saying that someone is lying, which I am not okay with.

The reason that I am not okay with saying that someone is lying is because it is making a factual assertion about their intentions – it is saying that they are knowingly saying something untrue.

While that may be the case, we cannot know what is going on inside someone’s mind. Many people sincerely believe absurd things that are clearly untrue, yet they are not lying when they say those untrue things.

120 Nialler January 27, 2015 at 1:58 pm

I’m not sure what remedies are available to Michael Nugent.

Libel laws strongly favour the defendant in the US.

121 MosesZD January 27, 2015 at 2:00 pm

I see, once again, there is no substantive answer to a post that carries anywhere but with the purveyors and consumers of the double-think, in-group FTB bloggers and blog followers.

1. Calling a group of people ‘rapists’ because you can is a slander. Period. No ifs, ands or buts UNLESS there is full-on evidence of their conduct — through confession or trial.

Not rumors. Not allegations. Not fiction and fantasy and what you want to believe because you’ve decided your ‘enemies are bad people and probably do that stuff’ and you want to demonize them in your warped sense of ‘justice.’

It is, in our Western Society immoral and unethical. To the point that even the US, where slander and libel are difficult to move forward with, it is given, by OPERATION OF LAW THAT THOSE CHARGES ARE AUTOMATICALLY SLANDER in all 50 States.

It’s so strict (in one of the least strict countries in the west) that news organizations, who are extremely protected by the first amendment, law and custom, (far more than the individual citizen) must still write alleged when they publish a news story on this subject until a confession or conviction has occurred.

2. Extending it to Michael Nugent, his blog, his work his career further compounds the slander and immoral acts.

3. Refusing to recant, when politely asked and doubling down further compounds the slander and immoral acts.

4. Showing the conduct of PZ Myers, who has a long and sordid history of the demonization of out-groups further compounds the slander and immoral acts as it indicates this is not a ‘one time’ error, but a long pattern of verbally abusing others. This further compounds the slander and immoral acts as a single mistake in the heat of the moment is forgivable, but a career of being a jerk is not.

The problem is PZ Myers and his conduct towards anyone who disagrees with him and his, frankly, unfounded and unscientific PoMo world view. This is compounded by his followers who simply excuse this destructive and toxic bullying because they choose to be part of his odious in-group of trolls and assholes.

122 Jan Steen January 27, 2015 at 2:41 pm

@Arakes,

In that case you would have to modify your suggested “plausible reason” for Brayton´s silence to:
“Because Brayton is a moral failure, a coward who knows exactly how his friend PZ Myers operates, but is afraid [that FtB might get less overall traffic without Pharyngula, although this reduced traffic will have no impact on his revenue].”

Leaving aside that we don’t really know what happens with the revenues of FTB, or how the advertisers would respond when their only popular blog disappears, there is another plausible reason for Brayton’s silence that I can think of:

Because Brayton is a moral failure, a coward who knows exactly how his friend PZ Myers operates, and is afraid to become Witch of the Week (declared a rape apologist, etc.) when he stands up to him.

123 JackSkeptic January 27, 2015 at 2:48 pm

@Nialler (120)

This issue also goes outside the US, possibly anywhere else the potentially libelous statements can be read depending on the local law.

In any event being able to enforce a law to extract a remedy is not the same as getting a positive result from it, which would be legal confirmation that a libel occurred. Often the result is what matters as that can be used to redress the damage to some extent even if that confirmation happens outside the US.

In any event legal remedies are not being discussed right now.

As to the supporters of Myers I can’t believe that anyone would find their comments any more than asinine distractions which bear no relationship at all to the matter at hand. Their arrogant self declared ‘conscience’ seems to go out of the window as and when it suits them. They even resort to victim blaming and all the other silly memes they love to throw at others to shut down conversation.

I have been forced to buying irony meters in packs of 50 when reading some of the comments here.

If Myers wishes to respond he can do it himself. He a grown up with a responsible job and I see no reason why he is not here even to make a simple response. Hopefully he could make a much better job of defending himself that the laughable responses I have seen so far. But his modus operandi has always been attack and run with his sycophants covering his behind so I doubt that will happen any time soon.

It’s about time some people grew up and learned to simple truth that actions can have consequences.

124 Richard "The King" Sanderson January 27, 2015 at 3:10 pm

Arakes: The question should be “don´t you care what Slymepit Ireland considers to be a trivialization of rape?!”.

I repeat, falsely accusing blogs of hosting rapists trivialises rape, especially when the accuser has shown he can’t back up his claims. Even more especially when there is an ACTUAL child rapist given a safe haven at Pharyngula. So, you walk back your rape apology back to Pharyngula, old boy.

If Ed considers it to be an utter waste of time to interact with Michael, then he is perfectly entitled to ignore him.

It is an official complaint, and if FTB can;t follow basic complaint procedures, how can it be trusted to review other complaints about harassment/rape, etc. Remember, FTB are some of the loudest moaners about “anti-harassment guidelines” and complaints procedures. Funny how they have forgotten. Also, I don’t believe Ed considers it a waste of time. Ed is frightened because he knows Michael is in the right, and PZ is wrong. Ed is willing to make public his complete lack of integrity to protect someone who has being exposed as dishonest.

I understand, that´s why I don´t care.

That’s fine. I always knew Pharyngulites, FTB Baboons, and #FTBullies didn’t care about rape. I said it all along.

125 Richard "The King" Sanderson January 27, 2015 at 3:15 pm

Arakes: He considers an interaction with Michael to be an utter waste of time.

You remind of the police attitude to rape victims. “Go away, we don’t believe you, and you are wasting our time that could be used up eating doughnuts”. Yeah, I see where people like you come from.

126 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 3:58 pm

I repeat

I know, and you´ll do it until you are blue in the face.

It is an official complaint

Cry Ed a river. Seriously, write him that he is not just ignoring a complaint but rather an OFFICIAL complaint, that´ll show him.

Also, I don’t believe…

How very interesting.

127 Lancelot Gobbo January 27, 2015 at 4:21 pm

On top of piero’s question:

Isn’t it interesting that the phlockers have not put forward any plausible reason for Brayton’s failure to respond to Michael Nugent’s messages?

Arakes dumped this:
That´s what you´re looking for? A plausible reason? Seriously? Here you are:
He considers an interaction with Michael to be an utter waste of time.

You´re welcome.

Once again I have to point out the utter poverty, not to say the fatuous nature of an FTB-defender’s reply with some grounding in reality. (I know, reality sucks, but it’s all we have unless you prefer fantasy.) When attempting to both read the mind of Mr Brayton and adjudge on his behalf which matters should be worth his valuable time, you might try comparing real-world achievements of Ed Brayton and PZ Myers with those of Michael Nugent. Which of them can point to a consistent track record of lobbying governments? Of lobbying supra-national bodies such as the EU? Of bringing about actual change in the law? Of numerous media appearances pushing forward the agenda of secularism? Of doing all this in the no-man’s-land of Irish politics where it has been all too easy to get your kneecaps blown off for looking sideways at the wrong person? And all the while doing so in a fair, polite and non-confrontational manner?

Alternatively, consider which of them has managed to make money from a blog that is deliberately contentious? Abused and insulted others gratuitously? Skirted the very edge of civil liability for libel by publishing scurrilous and unproven rape accusations? Published his quintum organum (as the putative and self-proposed fifth horseman) but defrauded purchasers by selling them recycled blog posts?
Oh, and in case I’m leaving out Ed Whatsisname: who has failed as a stand-up comedian? Grown a moderately respectable beard? (Yes! All shall have prizes!)

Now, to return to the substantive matter of Mr Brayton failing to reply. You might be completely accurate in writing that you believe he feels the courtesy of a reply is ‘an utter waste of time’ – either because he knows he is in the wrong if he defends P.Z.Myers’ unconscionable accusations, or because he feels Mr Nugent has no recourse against him, and it matters not whether he replies or no. However, it is not just ‘Slymepit Ireland’ as you so delightfully phrase it, that is reading about this. Every day that Myers and Brayton fail to defend their position is a day in which their reputation suffers, and deservedly so. Yeah, reality does indeed suck.

128 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 4:26 pm

Once again I have to point out the utter poverty, not to say the fatuous nature of an FTB-defender’s reply…

FTB-defender? I didn´t defend FTB and I´m not going to.

When attempting to both read the mind of Mr Brayton and adjudge on his behalf which matters should be worth…

Your reading comprehension is abysmal.

129 piero January 27, 2015 at 4:36 pm

The best thing about Michael’s posts is their incontrovertible nature. Plain facts speak much louder than the hollow affectation of John Morales [meta], or the kindergarten-level taunts of Arakes. These comment threads are a compendium of everything that is wrong with social justice warriors, from their cultish in-group mannerisms to their blatant hypocrisy.

For good measure, Arakes provides us with this gem:

Cry Ed a river. Seriously, write him that he is not just ignoring a complaint but rather an OFFICIAL complaint, that´ll show him.

That reply would be undignified for a 5-year old; yet somehow people of this intellectual calibre like to think of themselves as saviours. Of course, they have no effective strategy to actually improve anything, busy as they are concocting a myriad petty, insubstantial and downright idiotic rules to the sole purpose of constructing an imaginary enemy. Apparently, their only source of gratification is constructing beehives and labeling their cells with little paper flags. They are completely oblivious to the reality that surrounds them, and are wholly incapable of seen themselves from without, as it were. If they could do that, they’d realise how amazingly idiotic their little word games appear to everybody else.

130 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 4:40 pm

piero

That reply would be undignified for a 5-year old; yet somehow people of this intellectual calibre like to think of themselves as saviours. Of course, they have no effective strategy to actually improve anything, busy as they are concocting a myriad petty, insubstantial and downright idiotic rules to the sole purpose of constructing an imaginary enemy. Apparently, their only source of gratification is constructing beehives and labeling their cells with little paper flags.

Hmm… delicious. Got some fries with that word salad?

131 Lancelot Gobbo January 27, 2015 at 4:41 pm

Arakes,
In what way can you begin to suggest my reading comprehension is abysmal? When you wrote:

He considers an interaction with Michael to be an utter waste of time.

were you actually informed by Mr Brayton that this was the case? Or am I correct in assuming you were surmising this to be so in the light of your own prejudices?

132 Phil Giordana FCD January 27, 2015 at 4:49 pm

Michael @119:

Again, your castle, your rules. Fair enough.

But there seems to be some semi-dynamic elements to these Myers threads, and having one’s comment in moderation for the crime of using any utterance of “l.i.e” and such is burdensome and blocks the dynamic of the talk.

Like, I’ve had a comment blocked in moderation before for using “underl.y.i.n.g”, and it seems less constructive than it should, as a quick reaction to particular smears is vital to the health of the discussion itself.

It is just my personal opinion that you should drop this rule from your moderation policy. Any libel posted could be dealt with afterwards.

But, your castle, you rules. So I’ll accept them (and try my darnest to circumvent them. It does my vocabulary some good :p)

133 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 4:51 pm

Lancelot Gobbo

In what way can you begin to suggest my reading comprehension is abysmal?

I look at you writing stuff like:

When attempting to both read the mind of Mr Brayton and adjudge on his behalf which matters should be worth…

– then I remember that my comment specifically adressed piero´s inability to think of any “plausible reason” for Brayton´s behaviour (right at the beginning: “That´s what you´re looking for? A plausible reason? Seriously?”), and then I realize that only someone with abysmal reading comprehension could understand that as me “adjudging on his behalf which matters should be worth his time”.
And now, I´ll add the necessity of me spelling this out for you as further evidence for your reading comprehension being almost non-existent.

134 piero January 27, 2015 at 5:10 pm

@Arakes:
There’s a difference between being unable to understand and being unwilling to understand. In your case, I think the latter applies, because you chose to interpret “plausible” in its most general meaning, ignoring the context in which my question was posed, i.e. Michael’s official complaint to a committee presumably composed of responsible adults. “Plausible” in such a context does not include the possibility that said committee is composed by arseholes; that’s the conclusion that can be arrived at when no plausible explanation is forthcoming.

But you seem to enjoy the infantile pleasure of pretending not to understand in order to score worthless points. Carry on, please.

135 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 5:41 pm

piero

you chose to interpret “plausible” in its most general meaning, ignoring the context in which my question was posed, i.e. Michael’s official complaint to a committee presumably composed of responsible adults. “Plausible” in such a context does not include the possibility that said committee is composed by arseholes

A helpful link for you:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/
This is a tool that you can use to look up the meaning of words you don´t know, like “plausible”.

136 Phil Giordana FCD January 27, 2015 at 5:45 pm

So, dictionaries are fine now?

Who would have thought!

137 KennyD January 27, 2015 at 5:46 pm

@ Lancelot Gobbo #127

^^^^^^^^^^^^Once again I have to point out the utter poverty, not to say the fatuous nature of an FTB-defender’s reply with some grounding in reality. (I know, reality sucks, but it’s all we have unless you prefer fantasy.) When attempting to both read the mind of Mr Brayton and adjudge on his behalf which matters should be worth his valuable time, you might try comparing real-world achievements of Ed Brayton and PZ Myers with those of Michael Nugent. Which of them can point to a consistent track record of lobbying governments? Of lobbying supra-national bodies such as the EU? Of bringing about actual change in the law? Of numerous media appearances pushing forward the agenda of secularism? Of doing all this in the no-man’s-land of Irish politics where it has been all too easy to get your kneecaps blown off for looking sideways at the wrong person? And all the while doing so in a fair, polite and non-confrontational manner?^^^^^

Are you trying to say that because of Michael Nugent’s accomplishments from long ago he is infallible and above all criticism from “lesser” people like PZ Myers, and it is also ok for him to viciously attack others for no reason? This is rubbish!

The biggest problem, among so many others on this blog and at the Slyme Pit is this: The PZ Myers talked about on this blog is a fictional character that bears no resemblance whatsoever to the REAL PZ Myers. The fictional PZ Myers was invented to rally the troops to further a sick, misogynist, racist agenda. It hasn’t been as successful as they had hoped, so now a fictional Ed Brayton had to be invented, to join the fictional PZ Myers, fictional Rebecca Watson and others.

138 Lancelot Gobbo January 27, 2015 at 5:46 pm

Upon what grounds, Arakes, did you come up with something ‘plausible’ except by imagining what would have both occurred to Mr Brayton, and been considered reasonable in his view? Either you attempted to imagine the machinations of his mind (in which case I might justly criticise your offereing) or you randomly pulled something out of thin air (in which case I see no reason to pay any attention to you).

Now, please address my point about the track records of these individuals and how that should influence the attention or respect we accord them.

139 Guestus Aurelius January 27, 2015 at 5:57 pm

KennyD, are you referring to the same “fictional PZ Myers” that Ed Brayton “invented” back in 2006? You know, the the “biggest asshole [Ed has] ever known”? The “[l]iar” and “first class, double-barrelled, fully automatic asshole”? Is that the “fictional PZ Myers” you’re talking about?

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2015/01/27/ed-brayton-complaints-pz-myers

140 Guestus Aurelius January 27, 2015 at 5:59 pm

(minus a “the”)

141 Patrick January 27, 2015 at 7:44 pm

KennyD @137,

The fictional PZ Myers was invented to rally the troops to further a sick, misogynist, racist agenda.

You mean the fictional PZ Myers who said “It’s not about what he thinks, but what he’s doing: defending & providing a haven for harassers, misogynists, and rapists.” and then doubled down when challenged to support his defamatory smear?

I almost hesitate to ask, given the derailing likely to follow, but do you plan on providing evidence of the “sick, misogynist, racist agenda” you mentioned or, like Myers, have you moved beyond skeptical values and common decency?

142 A Bear January 27, 2015 at 7:45 pm

Arakes wrote:

FTB-defender? I didn´t defend FTB and I´m not going to.

You are attempting to defend slanderous behavior?
Maybe you are just bored and get a thrill out of trying to derail conversations on the internet?
Promoting dictionary use?
What are you trying to do?

143 Arakes January 27, 2015 at 7:55 pm

A Bear

What are you trying to do?

Making the rifts as wide and deep as possible of course!

144 John Greg January 27, 2015 at 9:40 pm

Michael, please ignore the second comment above; it was posted as as to testing the moderation in hand … so to speak.

145 Aratina Cage January 27, 2015 at 10:43 pm

@KennyD #59

“@Aratina Cage #44

This is probably the most constructive advice that has been offered to Michael Nugent in his series of attacks against PZ. I really think Michael should consider following Brayton’s example. Contrary to what other people are saying, there is nothing “spineless” or “cowardly” about Brayton forgiving PZ and working with him. I think it requires more strength to forgive than to continue with this hate campaign.

Follow Ed Brayton’s example and you both could come out winners.”

Good point! In addition to that, sometimes people we respect (as I do Brayton and Myers) have terrible, heated interpersonal conflicts. It isn’t always easy to not take sides, but we don’t have to join in with the degradation on either side. We don’t even have to take one person’s side in the conflict.

While I’m not as familiar with Michael Nugent’s writing as I was with the FTB overlords, I believe Nugent is likely a thoughtful and respectable and informative person as well. I had heard nothing but good things about him previously, so I am inclined to believe that this conflict will be cleared up eventually.

146 Michael Nugent January 27, 2015 at 10:43 pm

John, one of the names you used sent it into moderation. I’d rather not have that derail start up again.

147 John Greg January 27, 2015 at 10:52 pm

Michael: understood. And good point. Thanks.

148 piero January 27, 2015 at 11:49 pm

@Arakes:

This is a tool that you can use to look up the meaning of words you don´t know, like “plausible”.

Thank you, Arakes. Of course, I already knew the link, but I appreciate your good intentions. I do not, however, usually refer to Merriam-Webster’s, which is not particularly good. But as a gesture of goodwill I’ll make an exception this time:

1: superficially fair, reasonable, or valuable but often specious
2: superficially pleasing or persuasive
3: appearing worthy of belief

The Collins dictionary agrees:

1 apparently reasonable, valid, truthful, etc.
2 apparently trustworthy or believable

And Collins Cobuild (for learners) agrees too:

1. adjective An explanation or statement that is plausible seems likely to be true or valid.

So the definition of plausible is, I believe, non-controversial.

Now we need to exercise a bit of judgement, which you may find somewhat stressful. In what context was the word used? Obviously, the context is Michael’s post, the preceding comments and the existence of two opposing parties, one which defends Myers & Co. no matter what they do (henceforth to be referred to as “the phlockers”), and another which does not exhibit the same proclivity (henceforth, “the wise persons”).

What can a wise person mean when he/she asks a phlocker for a plausible explanation of Brayton’s behaviour? Certainly not “He considers an interaction with Michael to be an utter waste of time,” which would be an admission of Brayton’s frivolity and impoliteness. What is required of the phlocker is to provide an explanation for Brayton’s behaviour which does not presume moral turpitude. In other words, wise persons do not need phlockers to tell them that Brayton is an arsehole.

On the other hand, if you really are convinced that Brayton’s moral turpitude and all-round arseholeness is a plausible explanation for his behaviour, then you might as well renounce the phlock and come over to the bright side.

149 A Bear January 27, 2015 at 11:59 pm

piero@148 That is a good, detailed explanation but with all that detail in there you just left a lot of words for Arakes to misunderstand, whether he pretends to misunderstand them or really doesn’t get it.

150 john welch January 28, 2015 at 1:39 am

morales jabbering on at 109:

[OT]

john welch @106:

If you know it’s “[OT]” why even post it.

Your comment in response to mine is no less off-topic, but a salient difference is that you don’t indicate that with markup, as I do.

Clearly indicated attempts to derail things into your neverland of pointlessness are still derailing attempts. The fact they are clearly indicated make them no less a waste of space.

You’re a good little Clear though, so there’s that.

Still more morales @116

Your grammatical shift from the third person to the second amuses me mildly, but your neediness amuses me more.

Oh, you’re doing the “Superior Nerd” schtick! Now tell us about your girlfriend who lives in canada! Is that next, or do you have to warn us about your beast first? I can never keep the order of stupid tripe correct. It’s a real failing of mine.

KennyD @137:

The biggest problem, among so many others on this blog and at the Slyme Pit is this: The PZ Myers talked about on this blog is a fictional character that bears no resemblance whatsoever to the REAL PZ Myers. The fictional PZ Myers was invented to rally the troops to further a sick, misogynist, racist agenda. It hasn’t been as successful as they had hoped, so now a fictional Ed Brayton had to be invented, to join the fictional PZ Myers, fictional Rebecca Watson and others.

I’m sorry, is there some reality where PZ didn’t say that there were rapists commenting on this blog and when asked to provide proof by someone who was not Michael, said that there were people from the Slymepit commenting here? Therefore there must be rapists because that’s what people who comment on the slymepit are?

Because if there is such a reality, and their must be, as you clearly live in it, what is the gravitational constant on your planet, and what is the value for c in a vacuum?

Aratina @145:

Good point! In addition to that, sometimes people we respect (as I do Brayton and Myers) have terrible, heated interpersonal conflicts. It isn’t always easy to not take sides, but we don’t have to join in with the degradation on either side. We don’t even have to take one person’s side in the conflict.

BAAAAAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAAAAAAAHAHAHAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA…..[INHALE]HAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA….

oh holy shit, now I know there’s no god.

Michael @146:

when talking to “john”, you might want to use a last name. There’s multiples of us. 😀

One more thing. I may be misreading this, but I don’t see Arakes defending PZ et al as much as pointing out the obvious; that neither Brayton nor PZ give a shallow shart about Michael’s complaints. If Arakes is guilty of anything, it’s being blindingly obvious without giving us a chance to get our sunglasses on first.

I’m pretty sure Michael knows this as well. Anyone who grew up in Ireland when he did is well aware of how despicable people can be to each other.

But, I also don’t think this is for PZ or Brayton. Anymore than I think anyone who agreed with Abbie waaaaaaay back on her “Bad Form Rebecca Watson” post thought Watson actually gave a nipple ring about what people who don’t agree with her blindly think, and that she would somehow realize what a dick move she’d pulled on McGraw.

It’s more about the other people going “Hey…that seems kind of fucked up…and I don’t think it’s just me thinking that.”

Nope, it’s not just you. The shit PZ, Watson, Zvan, and all the rest of the L. Ron Fanclub pull is in fact, not just kind of fucked up, but very fucked up. And it’s not wrong to think that.

151 Richard "The King" Sanderson January 28, 2015 at 2:58 am

Arakes: I know, and you´ll do it until you are blue in the face.

Quite happy to keep repeating that you, PZ Myers, Aratina, Ed Brayton, Stephanie Zvan and others are all trivializers of rape.

You can cry and you and mope…

152 Richard "The King" Sanderson January 28, 2015 at 3:08 am

I’d encourage everybody to link examples of Ed Brayton’s, Stephanie Zvan’s, and PZ Myers’ unprofessional conduct to the organizers and attenders of conferences and events they attend/speak at.

153 John Morales January 28, 2015 at 9:18 am

john welch @150:

Clearly indicated attempts to derail things into your neverland of pointlessness are still derailing attempts. The fact they are clearly indicated make them no less a waste of space.

Perceived as a derail, not indicated — but it’s interesting you ostensibly imagine that your off-topic response to my off-topic response to an off-topic comment are “clearly indicated” “attempts to derail things”.

What’s to derail? Michael emailed what he thinks is FTB’s Ed Brayton, and additionally posted the contents of his email here.

(You want to comment about that, feel free!)

You’re a good little Clear though, so there’s that.

Your fantasy world amuses me.

Still more morales @116

Your grammatical shift from the third person to the second amuses me mildly, but your neediness amuses me more.

Oh, you’re doing the “Superior Nerd” schtick! Now tell us about your girlfriend who lives in canada! Is that next, or do you have to warn us about your beast first? I can never keep the order of stupid tripe correct. It’s a real failing of mine.

I’m just being me, but your perception of that as being superior to you provides further amusement to me.

(You’re still doing what I noted, and it befits you)

154 John Morales January 28, 2015 at 9:22 am

Richard “The King” Sanderson:
Richard “The King” Sanderson @152:

I’d encourage everybody to link examples of Ed Brayton’s, Stephanie Zvan’s, and PZ Myers’ unprofessional conduct to the organizers and attenders of conferences and events they attend/speak at.

You would, would you?

(So… why don’t you?)

155 Carrie January 28, 2015 at 1:18 pm

It is interesting that PZ’s friends are apparently happy with the way in which he has used the word rape in his tweets about Michael. I am not sure why. If they think that he was being serious, then why don’t they believe that he should provide actual evidence for his accusations or apologise? If he was not being serious, then surely they can see that he was using the word rape lightly, and he needs to apologise not just to Michael and those of the Slymepit who post here, but also to his own commentariat and friends. The Skepchicks plus their FtB friends PZ Myers and Co don’t approve of trivialising rape by making jokes. They have made this clear on their blogs; here are just a couple of examples.

_http://skepchick.org/2012/07/ask-surly-amy-how-to-deal-with-hate/

I firmly believe we need some more leaders in this movement to make a stand and speak out publicly to enforce the message that behavior that encourages violence against women and minorities, be it rape threats or supposed jokes about rape, death or violence should not be tolerated in a rational, humanistic, secular society.

_http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/22/rationalia-isnt/comment-page-1/#comments there is much of interest in this comment thread. For instance:

Caine (previouusly called Ing) says:

I know, I know that feeling. It’s a terrible one, too, because of the powerlessness it induces. It increases that feeling of being surrounded, of never being safe. The major thing people like that refuse to get is that for every “joke”, it’s one more trivialization of rape, it’s one more brick in sustaining rape culture and finding a way to excuse it as nothing more than “inconvenient sex” on the part of the person who was raped.


PZ Myers says:

What Ing said. Rape is not a light-hearted subject for a casual atmosphere.

In that thread you can also see that PZ cannot see the difference between freedom of speech and doxxing:

_http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/22/rationalia-isnt/comment-page-2/#comments

PZ Myers (to Pappa’s comment)

“Something you all need to understand is that while I am 100% supportive of matters of equality, I also absolutely support the right of free speech, even when it is extremely distasteful.”
Oh, wait. Then why did you write to me demanding that I remove that comment that disclosed your name and address*, under threat of taking legal action against me? I don’t think that word “absolutely” means what you seem to think it means.
*Which I did before I saw your email, by the way, at the behest of other commenters here, and because I would have done so as soon as I saw it anyway.

Interesting also to note that although he requires that others apologise, and many do (including Pappa in that thread), PZ neither forgives them when they do nor does he do so himself (unless forced to).

156 Mick January 28, 2015 at 6:55 pm

Wait a minute PZ Myers suggested you were in league with Rapists? Really?…. I’m lost now… either
A. He’s utterly gone ga-ga and not in a songful way…. OR….
B. You utterly misinterpreted what he said….

To be honest from the murmurings I’m hearing then a trip to a psychologist if only to have a’ little chat’ would not be out of the question for Myers…. Nobody would hold it against him…

Can anyone give me a nice neat line of what went on here in sequence? This is too funny to ignore…

157 john welch January 28, 2015 at 7:55 pm

Morales @153:

I’m just being me, but your perception of that as being superior to you provides further amusement to me.

You would think that means I think you’re superior. You’d be wrong of course, as per usual. “Superior Nerd Schtick”, which mind you, you’re still doing, is that lovely bit of coverup nerds do when they don’t have any facts to argue on, (and you’ve yet to do that whatsoever, just lame rebuttals) and so they start talking, endlessly, about how the people they are arguing with “amuse them so” or variants.

Usually, at some point it devolves further into some form of virgin shaming leading to claims of a girlfriend who lives in Canada, and if the nerd is pissed off enough, there’s some form of reference to “the beast” and a completely made-up tale about how one time in [High School|Jr. High|College] a [Jock|Gang Member|Really big guy who could normally kick their ass] pushed them too far and they “snapped” and the “beast came out”, leading them to almost kill the [High School|Jr. High|College] a [Jock|Gang Member|Really big guy who could normally kick their ass] but at the last moment [a friend intervened|they snapped out of it|the person they were about to kill ran away|the person they were about to kill begged enough for mercy that it was granted] and so you better watch it, because the beast is ALWAYS THERE.

it’s another standard online nerd trope. Ogvorbis pulled the beast one to get his hugs. The superiority one that you’re currently pulling is a sign you don’t have any legitimate arguments or points, but just want to have the last word.

I play along, because that’s kind of my job in many cases. I deal with the distractions so the other folks can actually have a discussion. It’s a valuable service. Kind of like being a sewage worker, except the turds I manage are virtual. Also, much less useful to society.

Oh, and as anyone from the ‘pit can attest to, I’m perfectly willing to be a one-eyed pit bull with a bad case of lockjaw in the most remarkably idiotic conversations. It’s relaxing. I may have actually been the person on the most ignore lists on the ‘pit. On a good day, I could get added to at least ten.

158 John Morales January 28, 2015 at 10:21 pm

john welch, it’s cute you think I am a nerd.

Usually, at some point it devolves further into some form of virgin shaming leading to claims of a girlfriend who lives in Canada, and if the nerd is pissed off enough, there’s some form of reference to “the beast” and a completely made-up tale about how one time in [High School|Jr. High|College] a [Jock|Gang Member|Really big guy who could normally kick their ass] pushed them too far and they “snapped” and the “beast came out”, leading them to almost kill the [High School|Jr. High|College] a [Jock|Gang Member|Really big guy who could normally kick their ass] but at the last moment [a friend intervened|they snapped out of it|the person they were about to kill ran away|the person they were about to kill begged enough for mercy that it was granted] and so you better watch it, because the beast is ALWAYS THERE.

<snicker>

(I like the degree of detail)

it’s another standard online nerd trope. Ogvorbis pulled the beast one to get his hugs. The superiority one that you’re currently pulling is a sign you don’t have any legitimate arguments or points, but just want to have the last word.

Heh.

I play along, because that’s kind of my job in many cases. I deal with the distractions so the other folks can actually have a discussion. It’s a valuable service. Kind of like being a sewage worker, except the turds I manage are virtual. Also, much less useful to society.

You see yourself as a volunteer discussion facilitator, an activity in which you are now engaged.

Oh, and as anyone from the ‘pit can attest to, I’m perfectly willing to be a one-eyed pit bull with a bad case of lockjaw in the most remarkably idiotic conversations. It’s relaxing. I may have actually been the person on the most ignore lists on the ‘pit. On a good day, I could get added to at least ten.

Ah, I see whence “the beast”.

(Me, I’m just a puppy with a chew-toy)

159 Shatterface January 29, 2015 at 3:50 am

Hey Deepak, still going to defend Myers now that he’s threatening to kick you off FTB?

160 john welch January 29, 2015 at 5:08 am

Morales not getting it at 158:

john welch, it’s cute you think I am a nerd.

you post in multiple internet forums including one that theoretically has something to do with science. You use tags in your own posts to indicate…well, no one’s really sure there, you’ve never actually said anything. Unsurprising, given how far your head is up your own ass. far enough you go full klein bottle, and are able to get up PZ’s as well.

I also think you’re a jackanape who hasn’t been honest in any single thing you’ve posted here. You’ll say and do anything you can to make PZ Ron Hubbard look good. That’s your only purpose in being here. Everyone knows it. You’re the only one who seems to think you’re hiding it somehow. If only you were half as smart as you think you are and not twice as stupid as you think we are.

You see yourself as a volunteer discussion facilitator, an activity in which you are now engaged.

more like a honeypot, at least in terms of purpose. It’s kind of hard to facilitate a discussion with you, I’m quite sure you have no real clue as to what one is.

Ah, I see whence “the beast”.

hardly. It’s a personality defect, not some imaginary thug lyfe shit designed to make me look all attractive to teh laydees or get me equally bogus sympathy.

(Me, I’m just a puppy with a chew-toy)

Well, you certainly do defecate everywhere you go, but again, puppy shit would be more useful than what you put out. That at least would make good fertilizer, depending on what you feed the puppy. You’re not even that useful.

161 John Morales January 29, 2015 at 7:40 am

john welch:

you post in multiple internet forums including one that theoretically has something to do with science. You use tags in your own posts to indicate…well, no one’s really sure there, you’ve never actually said anything. Unsurprising, given how far your head is up your own ass. far enough you go full klein bottle, and are able to get up PZ’s as well.

Ah, you think I’m a nerd because of my manifold talents.

I also think you’re a jackanape who hasn’t been honest in any single thing you’ve posted here. You’ll say and do anything you can to make PZ Ron Hubbard look good. That’s your only purpose in being here. Everyone knows it. You’re the only one who seems to think you’re hiding it somehow. If only you were half as smart as you think you are and not twice as stupid as you think we are.

This time what amused me was your shift in plurality.

You see yourself as a volunteer discussion facilitator, an activity in which you are now engaged.

more like a honeypot, at least in terms of purpose. It’s kind of hard to facilitate a discussion with you, I’m quite sure you have no real clue as to what one is.

Your heroic efforts as a volunteer discussion honeypot are in full exhibition, I see — but you did earlier claim that it was to permit others to have a discussion that you practiced your professed avocation.

Ah, I see whence “the beast”.

hardly. It’s a personality defect, not some imaginary thug lyfe shit designed to make me look all attractive to teh laydees or get me equally bogus sympathy.

You don’t consider “some imaginary thug lyfe shit designed to make me look all attractive to teh laydees or get me equally bogus sympathy” to be a personality defect? OK, noted.

Well, you certainly do defecate everywhere you go, but again, puppy shit would be more useful than what you put out. That at least would make good fertilizer, depending on what you feed the puppy. You’re not even that useful.

Hey, it’s making you feel useful (if less so than a “sewage worker”), so there’s that.

162 Phil Giordana FCD January 29, 2015 at 10:22 am

Can everybody move on to the new thread? I’m getting out of browser tabs.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2015/01/27/ed-brayton-complaints-pz-myers/#comments

163 Lancelot Gobbo January 29, 2015 at 5:01 pm

KennyD wrote:
Are you trying to say that because of Michael Nugent’s accomplishments from long ago he is infallible and above all criticism from “lesser” people like PZ Myers, and it is also ok for him to viciously attack others for no reason? This is rubbish!

The biggest problem, among so many others on this blog and at the Slyme Pit is this: The PZ Myers talked about on this blog is a fictional character that bears no resemblance whatsoever to the REAL PZ Myers. The fictional PZ Myers was invented to rally the troops to further a sick, misogynist, racist agenda. It hasn’t been as successful as they had hoped, so now a fictional Ed Brayton had to be invented, to join the fictional PZ Myers, fictional Rebecca Watson and others.

“Long ago” – how about ‘current and ongoing’ as a more accurate description of his achievements?
“Viciously attack” – how about ‘defend himself against defamation’ as a non-judgemental way of describing the situation?

“the REAL PZ Myers” – oh, yes! Do tell us more! Does he fly, faster than a speeding bullet? Does he wear his underpants outside his trousers? Does he rescue sick kittens in distress? Or does he simply hurl insults from his blog at anyone that refuses to conform with his peculiar view of the world?

Do tell, O KennyD, we are all agog.

164 Lancelot Gobbo January 29, 2015 at 5:03 pm

By the way, I still want Arakes to address the substantive question I asked him/her in #127. I have little hope, but beyond hope, what do any of us really have?

165 john welch January 29, 2015 at 9:53 pm

morales @161:

Ah, you think I’m a nerd because of my manifold talents.

Wishful thinking on your part. “habits” would be a better descriptor, along the same line as a small child constantly picking its nose for snacks.

This time what amused me was your shift in plurality.

When you have no valid point, bag on grammar. Coming from someone who did a bang-up job of fucking up block quotes, the schadenfreude is nice. When you’re going to bag on grammar, make sure your shit is straight.

You don’t consider “some imaginary thug lyfe shit designed to make me look all attractive to teh laydees or get me equally bogus sympathy” to be a personality defect? OK, noted.

It seems to be something you think of as admirable, given how much you approve of Oggy et al using it. But, unlike you, I own my shit, for good and bad. You just pretend everything you and your side does is good and wonderful, and that any disagreement must always be incorrect.

I don’t make up crapola about some “beast” lurking inside me. I don’t pretend to have committed horrible crimes to get internet hugs. You know, i can’t decide what’s worse: Oggy’s delusions of danger, or the fact you egg him on and encourage him. You seem to think yourself an empathic and caring sort, yet you encourage that kind of bullshit behavior.

I’m an asshole, but that’s just cruel. And here you are defending it as proper behavior. Something broken in that.

Hey, it’s making you feel useful (if less so than a “sewage worker”), so there’s that.

Sewage workers are far more useful than really, anyone.

166 John Greg January 29, 2015 at 10:27 pm

Whoops.

167 Lancelot Gobbo January 30, 2015 at 12:13 am

Believe it or not, John, I am an ex-sewage worker. Possibly the most useful job I have done, since London drank my product the next day. However, medicine paid more so there I am.

168 John Morales January 30, 2015 at 10:42 am

john welch @165:

morales @161:

Ah, you think I’m a nerd because of my manifold talents.

Wishful thinking on your part. “habits” would be a better descriptor, along the same line as a small child constantly picking its nose for snacks.

I stand corrected; you think I’m a nerd because of my manifold talents habits, at which you consider I lack talent.

This time what amused me was your shift in plurality.

When you have no valid point, bag on grammar. Coming from someone who did a bang-up job of fucking up block quotes, the schadenfreude is nice. When you’re going to bag on grammar, make sure your shit is straight.

You stated an opinion, I responded to your statement.

(You imagine you made some sort of argument that required refutal?!)

It seems to be something you think of as admirable, given how much you approve of Oggy et al using it. But, unlike you, I own my shit, for good and bad. You just pretend everything you and your side does is good and wonderful, and that any disagreement must always be incorrect.

I don’t dispute how it seems to you, but it was you who introduced the concept under the misapprehension that it was applicable to me.

To me, it seems like your humblebragging was rather revealing, in light of that which you decried.

I don’t make up crapola about some “beast” lurking inside me. I don’t pretend to have committed horrible crimes to get internet hugs. You know, i can’t decide what’s worse: Oggy’s delusions of danger, or the fact you egg him on and encourage him. You seem to think yourself an empathic and caring sort, yet you encourage that kind of bullshit behavior.

I’m an asshole, but that’s just cruel. And here you are defending it as proper behavior. Something broken in that.

Terrible people, we, so says a professed asshole.

Right.

Sewage workers are far more useful than really, anyone.

In that case, it was otiose to aver that you were less useful than they, no?

169 John Morales January 30, 2015 at 11:57 am

Lancelot Gobbo:

Believe it or not, John, I am an ex-sewage worker. Possibly the most useful job I have done, since London drank my product the next day. However, medicine paid more so there I am.

That’s informative, though its relevance to the post topic eludes me.

(Still, in the spirit of sharing, I inform you that I facilitate bureaucratic processes for a living, the utility of which some find arguable, though modern society is complicated)

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: