Total posts: 2,627
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
It would certainly be absurd, if true. I don't have any insider evidence on whether it is. Do you?Considering that, by bsh's definition, it's sexual harassment to call someone ugly, I can't say that the accusation really carries much weight.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
Well... definitely one of the reasons we need to have a discussion on. Harassment. If i dislike someone or think what they are saying is poisonous, i will likely reply to them the most often. As weird as that is... but, i would want them to know they are wrong. Now, i don't care as much as goldy does, but we can't fault him for being who he is. So i don't understand how something can be harassment. We are all on forums and if someone is on a forum that i frequent and i vehemently disagree with them... i will let them know. Why in the world would that be harassment? To me harassment would be not answer whatever the person said or posing any questions. Gold always asks questions even if those questions are smart ass ones. So i am not understanding this harassment rule.The other reason is probably bc he calls ideas he disagrees with stupid and other names. I don't think he should be faulted for being who he is... i haven't seen him be malicious. I could be wrong since i haven't read everything... but i did read all the recent posts on science and religion and he was just being mean... typical way he acts.
It sounds like you're saying that we should accept bad behavior as long as the bad behaver is being who they are.
It also strikes me as strange to define harassment as ignoring someone. Or did you mean harassment is when they aggressively respond to your posts without acknowledging any of your points or providing any counterarguments?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
@3RU7AL
Sounds like even making reports anonymous again would require design changes to the mod interface. But I suppose reverting back to a previous build would be easier than making something new.
If Brutal's suggestion was possible I would of course be all for it, but it's hard to imagine that it could be implemented quickly or easily, and it would require extra work for Mike, who already has a heavy workload building the site.
You can check out my post above, where I explain it.As an addition to that, consider that the vote reporting shouldn't have had an adverse affect on the public community. But it did, because a large number of votes were deleted as a response. But let me ask you this:If the votes were legitimately bad votes, should their removal bother the community?If the votes weren't legitimately bad votes, their removal should bother the community, but the ire should be directed at the standard that judged them inappropriate.
It's understandable that people blame trouble on the troublemaker. But the practical demonstration it made of the system's weaknesses cannot be denied. Nor can the strengthened improvements that resulted from it. However I question that this was the best or only way to go about effecting those improvements. Did you try reaching out to the mods first?
Created:
-->
@janesix
Sounds like we come here for similar reasons, then. 🙂
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I confess I'm still not clear on why you were reporting our votes. Forgive me, I'm sure you've already explained it elsewhere. Was it to point out vulnerabilities in the CoC?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
Also, I'd be curious to hear your feedback on Brutal's post here: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/739?page=2&post_number=32
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
@drafterman
Hmm. Currently, I am undecided.
Mike, can you tell me from a technical standpoint what the risks of DDOS attacks or general sabotage would be in an anonymous reporting system?
Created:
Posted in:
I suppose I'm a bit late to the party. But I have no qualms with the decision reached. Too bad I missed another draft/bish cage match. Whatever else one might say of them, they're never boring.
I told Castin, argent_tongue and others that others watch PMs and they laughed at me.
I did not, in fact. Skepticism is not laughter. I'm still skeptical that any of the staff are actively reading our PM's, though I'm fully aware that Mike has the power to read them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Thanks for the thread link. And post 38 was tongue-in-cheek, of course.
Explains why I couldn't remember voting on this before, it was one issue in a list I group approved. I do lean toward anonymity, though I would accept non-anonymity and am willing to put my name to any report I make. I think anonymity would probably encourage more people to report problem behavior without anxiety about personal consequences, and help prevent bias from affecting report handling.
But DDOS attacks are something I hadn't considered, for some reason. I'd like to hear some mod feedback on that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Uh. Why did you @ that to me?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
What thread are you pulling that vote of mine from?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
Not in this thread. Looks like he's counting carryovers or something.
Created:
Posted in:
Eurgh. Summoned by mass invite. I feel so un-special. I may just not vote now. Out of spite. Petty, petty spite. < That should be the title of all my family reunions.
Created:
I'm not really surprised.
Sounds like the major reason for his ban involves evidence I do not, and should not, have. I'll respect that I'm never gonna know everything about this. While the ban wasn't a big surprise, the sexual harassment actually was.
Created:
-->
@janesix
I'm interested in interpretations of the human experience.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
Figured it wasn't something you did. You would've made an announcement.
They just shut you down without warning and say "emergency maintenance", any time they want? Lame. Tickets can make pretty crummy notices, they depend on you checking their webpage instead of the message coming to you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
It's when an experienced debater targets a new and inexperienced debater for an easy win. It and other debate jargon is listed in bish's handy thread.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I like American culture.The only culture liberals hate, is American culture.- Ann Coulter
Not necessarily all of it, of course, but I don't think many people like everything in American culture.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
My hopes are not high.I agree, Castin.It seems the right and the left each have their own agenda each time something like this happens and are unwilling to let the chips fall where they may in a serious evaluation.I'm tired of the games...its time for our government to be occupied by individuals who are not quite so fearful.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
I've just been down this road with you before, gus. What is the point of citing hateful posts of yours when you'll just look at them and say they were telling the absolute truth, not being hateful? It's what you always do.
But if it matters that much to you, I think simply browsing your posting history should give a reasonable person an idea of your behavior. It speaks for itself. You cannot seem to go three posts without contemptuously mocking someone.
I really have no idea why you behave this way because I know you can be an intelligent person who makes legit points. Somewhere along the line you almost completely replaced points with insults.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
I'm sure you don't want to hear more of my opinion on the matter. I wish you happy reveling.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
The descriptions are what people read first and defer to though.
I definitely liked the Anti-Mod Blasters' song.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
I think if you're honest you'll agree that you're not going to acknowledge any problem with any of your posts no matter what I show you. And that futility probably places responsibility on me for potentially hijacking Mhar's thread with a pointless argument. The first step to atoning for that is to stop the pointless argument.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
I can't say I completely understood that post grammatically. But I don't have to think ethang is a perfect angel to take issue with your chronic behavior. Regrettably, if there was a category for "most hateful" up for vote, I would honestly vote for you. It brings me no pleasure to say so.
I was hoping DART would indeed be a "new beginning" for you, as I think I've said before. But you continue to be a satellite in orbit around the objects of your hatred. I know I would stop ignoring so many of your posts if you would just break orbit.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
Oh some people belong to multiple groups, no question.
Both Lurkers and Inbetweeners are described fairly negatively, so I understand having reservations. Also, I can't think of any other groups either but I have a niggling feeling there are more.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
If we are not using his definitions than most of them, at least that i am, fall under the same category.
I'm not sure what you mean here.
Created:
Posted in:
So as opposed to the "chameleon Christians" I've heard Christians complain about?
Created:
-->
@janesix
What qualifies a DART atheist as obsessed, in your opinion? I'd like to know if I qualify. Does just posting in the religion subforum regularly count as obsession? Even if the atheist posts in other subforums just as regularly?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
You are in no position to be judging anyone, gus. Sadly your unceasing hate, contempt, and mockery of your fellow human beings are the reasons it is in fact you I find most worthy of ignoring.He's not threatening me. It's fine.Oh yes he is, it's a part of his narcissistic yet insecure self appraisal. He feels big when he threatens people because unbelievably he thinks he frightens people. His bark is that of a Chihuahua with laryngitis, ignore him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Raltar
I think he's already the lowest ranked active debater, so he doesn't need more losses. He just needs to bide his time... lying in wait... luring in higher ranked debaters... creating so many debates that he's bound to win one or two here or there... and then SNAP suddenly you've lost to him and you're all the way at the bottom of the leaderboards and he's like "MWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!"
/scary tales from the debaters' campfire
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
How the fuck am I trolling here? I genuinely put effort into a really high quality post. Remind me what it is you contribute to the site.
It wasn't trolling imo. It just has a potential for controversy because it paints some people less flatteringly than others. But I'm sure you were aware of that when you made it. It's easy for someone like me to say the thread is awesome because I was painted probably over-flatteringly, but I imagine it may not be well received by alleged Lurkers, Inbetweeners, and perhaps Anti-Mod Blasters.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Concerning #4: The Jewish views on the subject are interesting.Concerning your link above which states :"The Jewish PublicationSociety suggests Abraham's apparent complicity with the sacrifice was actuallyhis way of testing God".Thou shalt nottempt the Lord thy God. The World English Bible translatesthe passage as: ... In full Deut 6:16 reads "Do not test the Lord your God as you did atMassah." This is a reference to the events of Exodus 17:5 where theIsraelites wandering in the desert doubted God was with them.Luke 4:12Jesus answered, "It is said: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'"just a thought ^^^^^
Good catch. Though I imagine the passage in Luke probably doesn't count because I'm guessing the Jewish Publication Society does not recognize the New Testament.
It is a fascinating interpretation though, because it means Abraham was basically saying to God "prove you are righteous and worthy of my worship". That runs so counter to the fearful and unquestioning subservience to God that is thematically enforced elsewhere.
It would be called blasphemy and sacrilege, of course. Testing God means considering oneself worthy of sitting in judgment of God. And if you are a theist who believes God is the ultimate authority on morality, and in fact the very source of all morality, then attempting to hold him to a moral standard probably becomes nonsensical.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I think the writer is presenting a mythical explanation for why the Hebrews - unlike many of their neighbours - sacrificed animals but not their children to their god.
Interesting. I wasn't aware the Hebrews significantly differed from their neighbors in this way. I'm rather ignorant on the cultures of the various -ites of the period. Amalekites, Canaanites, etc.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
The descriptions are generalized and not everyone meets every single trait in their category. Not all Diehard Casuals are active peacekeepers, for instance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I'd like to avoid a flat Earth debate as it will most likely take over the thread, and I made it to simply discuss scientifically fascinating creatures.
But deep-sea gigantism is certainly a documented -- and scary/interesting -- phenomenon.
Created:
Posted in:
Everyone skip to 5:20 in the video I posted and tell me WTF I'm looking at.
Am I crazy or does it look like it's flashing its junk at the submersible in some kind of mating display. "You like? You liiiiike?"
Sadly for the creature, the submersible only liked it as a friend. The creature swam away, heartbroken and emasculated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Ha, no probs. The blobfish has been named the mascot of the Ugly Animal Preservation Society. Lol.
It's blob-like appearance is mostly caused by decompression. It gets caught in deep sea trawling nets and then brought to the surface. This is what it looks like in its natural environment. Much more fish like, but still with a weird face. This image shows the contrast.
The blobfish is a bit how we would look in space without pressurized suits.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
The blobfish has become a downright deep sea celebrity. You can buy a blobfish stuffed animal. Or blobfish slippers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Dude chill. You're gonna win the debate. Even if you'd lost, it would've dropped you from #1 for all of five minutes.
I swear it's like Type1 has an evil genius plan to get his rating as low as possible so he can sabotage the ratings of higher ranked debaters.
Created:
Posted in:
This is, beyond a doubt, one of the strangest looking creatures I've ever seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FUccwdB65s
The video was filmed by a deep sea ROV that was inspecting a pipeline for maintenance. It had the privilege of sighting the rare deepstaria enigmatica.
Biology is endlessly fascinating.
Created:
Posted in:
Moment LOLLow Self Esteem, 9x bannedDuck are dangerous or not (3)bsh's vibratorLeft Wing Censorship vs Right Wing Shithole
I got the head moderator's vibrator added to the list. My work here is done.
I regret nothing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Yep, none of the numbered explanations are made explicit anywhere. As far as I know.
For christians to even acknowledge this brings them great problems simply because the god of Abrams god - as he was named - is a different god to that of the hebrews and the Christians. When Abraham was ordered to up sticks and travel to Canaan. he arrived there neither being Hebrew or Jew.
You lost me here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
i've never seen the difference between not believing in gods and believing there are no gods. Is it possible to do one but not the other?
I've asked this before, and the answer I usually get from other atheists is burden of proof -- if you disbelieve there is no burden of proof on you, but if you believe you must defend and substantiate. Or some such. Personally I've never felt it was a significant difference.
But the thing about the definition in the OP is that it doesn't deal with beliefs, but claims. "True atheism is the affirmative claim that gods indeed do not exist." So this person has basically turned atheism into an assertion of knowledge rather than disbelief. And I say farts to that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
Why does her definition of atheism matter in a broad sense, and why would you think most atheists share her definition? It would be rejected by the vast majority of atheists I know, myself included.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Heh. I liked the movie well enough. But I thought it was like a 6 out of 10, tops. Not 600 out of 10, as pop culture treats it.
Olaf was endearing but I'd have to say my favorite part was when "true love" turned out to be sisterly love instead of romantic love. Such a refreshing deliverance from cliche.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Lololol
He's living my childhood dream.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
I definitely like the arrangement of content in your first link, though not necessarily the aesthetics. I've been pining for a Latest Activity box that shows the most recent thread posts.
A note on moving away from the DDO feel: The fact that this site looks like DDO is arguably one of the biggest reasons it attracted the largest crowd of DDO refugees. It probably continues to be a draw for DDO refugees who sign up. People like what's familiar. Something to keep in mind, even though personally I'd be very interested to see a DART redesign. I was never in love with the aesthetics of DDO.
Created: