Response to AndromedasWake and the League of Reason

[MrBogosity]

The following is a response to AndromedasWake's comments at the League of Reason blog, here: http://www.leagueofreason.co.uk/youtube/with-regards-to-shanedk-and-masterghostknight/

I'd like to thank AndromedasWake for his comments. I'd also like to take this opportunity to apologize for my error stating that the video was in any way sanctioned by the League of Reason site.

I would, however, like to  criticize a few things he said in his post:

MasterGhostKnight did not post his video under the auspices of the League of Reason. In actuality, he posted a video with the logo attached. And that's it. Anyone is free to include the logo in their video, as it is intended merely to advertise the site to a wider audience...MasterGhostKnight is not a contributor. He is not listed as a contributor. Even if he was, videos made by him would not automatically reflect LoR policy.

I'm sorry, but I don't think you can have this both ways. How is someone supposed to know, when they see that opening, whether the video is an official release by the LoR as opposed to some luser with Windows Movie Maker who's just spitballing? It seems to me that, from this statement, you're wanting the additional recognition such use of the logo gives you while absolving yourself of any and all consequences stemming from its use.

Might I suggest a modified version, with some added text such as "an informal member of" at the top, to distinguish from actual LoR releases?

In his video, shanedk also accuses the site of being completely misnamed. Once again, I maintain that our contributors are strong proponents of reason...Our forum provides a facility for a wide variety of people with a wide variety of opinions to discuss and debate any topic they like. They are not required to do anything other than obey the forum rules, which permit the most zealous of unreasonable folk to make their case, provided it is not copypasta spam.

Then, with respect, it's not a League of Reason--it's a League of People Saying Whatever the Fuck They Want, and there are plenty of those on the internet!

A League of Reason should be just that: a place where free discussion can flourish without degeneration into pointless attacks and flame wars. With all the humility that comes from being such a small site (we currently have a mere 66 members, as opposed to the 3400+ of the LoR), I would suggest that Da Rules over at the Bogosity.TV forums are a much better model to keep these problems at bay while not stifling free speech. As someone who has been on the Internet since before it was called the Internet, I am very familiar with how these problems occur; flame wars and other forms of thread-killing are an impediment to free and open discussion, and should not be tolerated on any forum dedicated to reason.

By extension, one could suggest that the Richard Dawkins network message board is completely misnamed if any of the posters disagree with his beliefs and opinions, or to take it further if a single user is not called Richard Dawkins. This is clearly ridiculous.

I agree that your strawman version of my argument is ridiculous. Now, if I may fix your comparison so that it properly matches my argument, go to the RichardDawkinsDotNet channel on YouTube and look at one of the RDF-TV videos. Imagine that someone―say, a creationist―were to take that logo and put it in front of a video, where a very scientific-looking person was saying that there are no transitional fossils and that evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Or, imagine that they did it to make a video saying something completely ridiculous, so they could use it to mock and discredit Dawkins later on. How would the Foundation respond to that? I hardly think they would be as blasé about it as you are.

So, while I offer my sincerest apologies for stating that a relationship existed where none did, I will not be returning to the League of Reason forums if all I can expect there is the same treatment I can get anywhere else on the internet.

[MrBogosity]

And no sooner do I post it in there, than MGK comes in and accuses me of this: "I would like to add that it is with great hypocrisy that ShaneDk comes back into this board trying to poison to people into vilifying my character and the League of Reason itself."

When I was RESPONDING to AW, even issuing an apology.

Fuck.

[Travis Retriever]

I've just read some of the posts you responded to, along with the last two (21, 22) and wow...Talk about one sided views...

I get the impression that, knowing you, if there wasn't all the cyberbullying/stalking/harrasing/defamation, you wouldn't have come back there in the first place other than to accept AW's apology and then left, never to return.
Damn.

[IceSage]

I actually thought at first, that the creator of the video, MGK, was trying to shove the logo in as to make it seem like he was making the video on behalf of the website. (Even though it was clear that nobody even cared about his video over there in the first place.)

I too would believe that if someone posted a logo at the beginning of a video, that it would seem like they were trying to represent or speak on behalf of, that person in the logo, or use the logo to fuel that they have some more "you should take this video seriously because I'm from this website" type of thing.

The Richard Dawkins thing is a good example. I wouldn't want creationists plugging Richard Dawkins into their videos about how there are no transitional fossils, etc. That would make people think that Richard Dawkins and the people at the website think the same thing.

If he wanted to plug the League of Reason in, he could put it at the end of the video, put it on the sidebar, etc.

[MrBogosity]

I get the impression that, knowing you, if there wasn't all the cyberbullying/stalking/harrasing/defamation, you wouldn't have come back there in the first place other than to accept AW's apology and then left, never to return.

AW offered no apology for me to accept. I apologized to him. And now I'm regretting doing it.

[MrBogosity]

Here's AndromedasWake's original video on the founding of the League of Reason:

[yt-wide]SUmsK8yqJbo[/yt-wide]

Now here's what's being said today by monitoradiation:

We're not a support group for those who're fighting false DMCA's.

If monitoradiation is correct, then I say the entire site is a sham.

[MrBogosity]

Well, apparently no one at the LoR knows what "ad hominem" means.

[Travis Retriever]

My reply to AtomicNumber86:

"I DO understand--I understand the meaning of ad hominem."

Clearly you don't

"HE accused ME of disrupting the thread (which WAS an ad hominem, by the way)"

First of all, Monitor adresses that statement to both you and MGK, by stating it is a screaming match.
I.e. You calling people assholes.

So the fact that Shane first posted to apologize, where MGK comes in and whines about him being hypocritical had nothing to do with that.  Besides, it's still not an ad hominem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Common_misconceptions_about_ad_hominem

"I pointed out that it was MGK who came in and did the very things he accused ME of doing. I then said what I said to indicate that he was being a sycophant. That's NOT an ad hominem; that's a DIRECT evaluation of his behavior."

First MGK apologized. Then he said that when you do not like the answer, you will call them a liar.
And that was all he said to this moment in time.
When exactly did he come with ad hominems?
The first entry is not ad hominems. You did try to poison this board.

How did you come to that conclusion, is what is boggling me.

He was addressing the use of the board's logo in a video used to try and discredit him.  That's not poisoning, so much as more of a redress of grievances.

"Now, will you get off the gay thing?"

Yes, when you admit it was an ad hominem. There was no reason for you to call them butt-buddies.

"Geez...do you react this way when someone's accused of being an ass-kisser or a brown-noser?"

If it is a lie, yes..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Common_misconceptions_about_ad_hominem

"I criticized YOUR post. The fact you made the same mistakes as someone else changes nothing."

I have not made any mistakes. I am just stating my opinion on the matter. With your own words against you

Well for one, you don't know what an Ad hominem is.

"YES IT IS!!! He made a DIRECT accusation of me! I dealt with THAT accusation! I pointed out HIS hypocrisy and double-standard! There is NO WAY that could POSSIBLY be an ad hominem!!!"

Close to Pratchett's law. 3 exclamation marks..
See that was an ad hominem. (Even thou it has basis)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Common_misconceptions_about_ad_hominem

It was addressed at both of you, but since you started it on this forum, it was mostly addressed at you.

Because you never ever ever ever acused him, right?

Ad hominem insults by you, on the first page:
..Official release by the LoR as opposed to some luser with Windows Movie Maker who's just spitballing?
..it's a League of People Saying Whatever the Fuck They Want..
The fact that you even have the audacity to CALL yourself a skeptic should offend every genuine skeptic here to his very bones!
You fucking assholes...your motto is, "No good deed goes unpunished,"
Pathetic, disgusting, lying WORMS!!!
You're a disgusting LIAR, nothing more.
I don't think you have it anywhere in you to abide by Da Rules, as reasonable as they are.

It was of the first post Shane asked for, and again:  "Gratuitous verbal abuse or "name-calling" itself is not an argumentum ad hominem or a logical fallacy. The fallacy only occurs if personal attacks are employed in the stead of an argument to devalue an argument by attacking the speaker, not personal insults in the middle of an otherwise sound argument or insults that stand alone." Wikipedia on the subject
Besides, considering the constant double standard of people allowing folks like you, MGK Improbable Joe and others to look the other way when they're assholes to him, but give him hell when he fights back, doesn't say good for the board.

[Travis Retriever]

AW offered no apology for me to accept. I apologized to him. And now I'm regretting doing it.

I meant to say, "to offer your apology to AW and then leave, never to return."
in that last bit.
My bad.

[FSBlueApocalypse]

I've been really troubled with the direction the whole "Youtube Atheist" community has been going lately. If anyone has seen the episode of South Park where Kyle's family moves to San Francisco, it seriously reminds me of that.

[11mc22]

I've been really troubled with the direction the whole "Youtube Atheist" community has been going lately. If anyone has seen the episode of South Park where Kyle's family moves to San Francisco, it seriously reminds me of that.

The hybrids and the fart smelling episode?

[Travis Retriever]

The hybrids and the fart smelling episode?

Yes.
The title is "Smug Alert" for those wondering.

[Travis Retriever]

From a forum webmaster on LoR to ShaneDK, MasterGhostKnight and the rest of us:

Actually, the fact that this thread has gone on as long as it has is a kind of testament to shanedk's point. Since Thiswasatriumph stopped posting there has been a distinct lack of moderation on this site. Even so the site's integrity has held up pretty well, but perhaps it is time to appoint some new moderators or make sure the old ones hang around a bit more often.

There has been a distinct lack of moderator activity lately and I have already broached the subject. A shake up is going to be necessary, especially if this thread is anything to go by. Breach of rules and decent conduct has been broken repeatedly. Please please be aware that the number of users on this forum is only the number of people who have registered, not the number of active visitors, the number of active members is much less than 3400, the number of moderators we have is adequate for the number of active members, but only if those moderators are on here as often as possible.

What has most angered me is the shear number of insults being thrown around, personal attacks will and should not be tolerated in any rational discussion.

This thread has gone way of out hand and how it got to 5 pages long is beyond me.

shanedk: You have repeatedly decided to tar every single member of this forum with the same brush when in reality only a very small number of members have even participated in this farce of a 'discussion' or have had any dealings with you at all. You have been overly aggressive and insulting to everyone involved and even those who haven't had anything to do with this, which includes me and I will take it personally and I feel that I have every right to given the amount of time and effort I have put into helping this community. Now, I can understand your frustrations as you feel victimised and that people are ganging up on you but you are not helping yourself by lashing out in such an irrational and sometimes childish manner.

Although I never responded to your thread when you were attacked by votebots I did go through and vote up your videos, I was happy to do it and have been a subscriber for some while. Now, at this time, votebot attacks were particularly common and nobody should be expected to jump on every single channel that gets attacked and vote like hell to help it recover. People did try to help you, I am certain of this, but short of launching our own votebot to help put your ratings back up (which would be extremely hypocritical of us) you can only count on what effort people are willing to put in. Also, not EVERYONE got the 'full rally' for the same reason you didn't. Maybe LoR should have put the word out more, maybe I didn't do enough to make sure it was known that you were having such a hard time. If that is the case I apologise deeply and can only say that if I have in some way worsened things by inaction that it was most likely down other commitments in my 'real life'.

As a senior member of LoR I accept your original apology, although I suspect you would sooner withdraw it. You have good points in your criticism of elements of how someone can give the impression they are speaking on behalf of LoR and I will attempt to address that when I am able by releasing new creatives for those who do not speak for LoR on an 'official' basis (if there is such a thing in this regard) that clearly shows that their opinions are their own and do not reflect the collective opinion of LoR.

Master_Ghost_Knight: I also accept your apology and understand that you didn't intend for this kind of backlash against LoR. From my perspective I didn't see the LoR logo in your video as anything more than what I intended it to be, an advertisement, but I can see how to others it might not appear that way. I am not going to tell you how to go about your other internet business but if you do have a quarrel with shanedk, I would appreciate it that you both discuss it in a civilised manner on these boards, either in a thread or by using the debate functionality I developed some time ago (that nobody has used yet) where the only participants allowed to post are those assigned to the thread and moderators to ensure it keeps on track or if either of you are unable to discuss your differences in a civilised manner that you keep it off these boards and not drag LoR into it.

Everyone: Personal insults will not be tolerated, they are unnecessary and do nothing to perpetuate the discussion in an organised and rational manner. By using insults in your "argument" you are deliberately trying to provoke an emotional response which does not contribute to the topic at hand, it only causes a cascade of more insults and emotional responses as I'm sure you can see. If this kind of shit continues in this thread or others you will be warned and the topic may be locked if there appears to be no other alternative. Also... IF YOU HAVE NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE TO SAY, DON'T BOTHER SAYING ANYTHING AT ALL.


In regards to the original purpose of this website... LoR has grown organically, as with any site that relies on predominantly user driven content, it fits the purpose of those who frequent it. So yes, it has changed, not drastically in my opinion but to encompass more than its original reason(s) for being. Votebot attacks don't appear to be getting reported nearly as often as they did, I am unsure if they are as frequent or not but if people don't report them, then nobody can be expected to help.

Finally, I have missed out large chunks of this thread as I have seen enough flame wars in my time on the internet to know what one looks like, but I apologise if I have misrepresented or ignored anyone because of this.


P.S. I am very tired, really quite cranky, and have had enough of this bullshit.

For those that haven't seen it.

[Travis Retriever]

Well, here's my 2 cents.

While I respect CosmicSpork's opinion on this, he apparently, hasn't witnessed Shane's...History with MGK, ImprobableJoe, and the others...
I don't think it's too big of a leap for Shane to ascrib, or "tar" the entire board when, as far as I could tell, hardly anyone said anything against the instigators:  in short, they condoned it.
Also, he can't have it both ways by saying that the board:
1.  has more than its original purpose and
2.  it reflects what the people on it are willing to do (being a user generated site).
As those two, can and do contradict (one of the members saying, "This isn't a support group for people dealing with False DMCA claims").

Also, Shane, it might not be a bad idea to seriously consider putting MGK, ImproableJoe, etc on your ignore list on that forum.
Same goes for youtube.  It may just be a good idea to call what MGK has pulled as harassment, say that it has been taken too far to be tolerated and block him (at some point).  Granted, obviously, it's up to you if/when you do that.

[Travis Retriever]

I take it you won't be heading back to that forum any time soon.
At least this little un-reason fest is over.