US Controversy over canceled sex talk at hacker convention

[ledboots]

Oh no, don't worry about us mods. Das_nut isn't one of us. Though I can see how you could confuse him for one, the way he talks about moving posts and trying to control discussions on here. I remember when he tried to tell us we shouldn't discuss birth control in the private women's section. Now that I see what he's been up to, I can only wonder what it is about women discussing birth control that he feels he needs to be a witness to.

Maybe now that he has disrupted our little forum and broken the sense of community and trust around here his pimp daddy will reward him and make him a mod there, if he isn't already.

Oh good I did think he was a mod because of the moving threads thing.

 

[Muggle]

Oh good I did think he was a mod because of the moving threads thing.

Only mods (red names) can move threads/posts in any thread on VV. Oh and stewards (purple names) have mod powers (can edit/delete/move/whatever posts/threads) in their forums but I don't think any of us have ever done that. We can warn people in our forums as well but, personally I would always double check with the mods in the mod forum before doing that. (Not that I've even needed to do that, or use any of my steward powers.) Here's the mod and steward list: http://forum.veggieviews.com/XenStaff/ and FortyTwo has control over the Arcade.

Normal members can delete their posts if they wish to, although mods (and stewards if the deleted post is in their forum) can view the deleted post if they wanted to.

 

[das_nut]

But it is pertinent to every thread you post in, das_nut. You betrayed the trust of people on this board by mocking their thoughts on another board with someone they have known for years. Do you really expect people to feel the same way about you as they did before they found out that you talk crap behind their backs?

Do you really think I'm the only person who would ever discuss VV in anything else than a public discussion at VV?

Really? Do you think anyone else has never griped about another poster in a PM, or on facebook, or in an IM, or face-to-face with another person?

Anyways, look on the bright side - I'm unlikely to judge you based on what you wear, what your real name is, or if you decide to give a speech to a predominately male audience. Which is more than what some can claim in this thread.

I'm very glad that I never talked in pms or anonymously while under the impression that all the mods here were to be trusted.

Wait, I'm not a mod here, and I don't believe I was ever a mod.

And just FYI, unless this board's software is quite unusual, mods tend not to be able to read PMs.

 

[das_nut]

I do have to add this little tempest in a teapot is a great way for some people to distract us from such issues as advocating that a specific woman's outfit at a con is designed to titillate because: clowns, and they are a sex worker because they have "Blue" in their name, and the first association such people seem to make is "blue means porn!"

Y'know if I ever tried such BS as that (and yes, it is BS), some of the same people would not hesitate to jump down my throat.

 

[Pickle Juice]

I just thought I would share this here, so people know where some folk get their debate tactics from.

Tame follows these following guidelines when he posts on internet forums when he wants to **** people off without being downright nasty. The guidelines certainly remind me of the way he posts so I think he probably does follow them pretty closely. Sometimes I even suspect that he himself wrote them.



1.) Catch phrases. They are your friend. Use them often, but wisely. If done correctly, they become board catch phrases, and you can become an icon.

Example: " Thanks for coming out! Keep us posted. Let us know how that works out for ya!"



2.) Nicknames. Always a crowd pleaser. Twists on another member's name are nice when allowed. If those are not allowed by the TOS, "sunshine", "buttercup", and "cha-cha" always are good for sending someone over the edge, even though you are just being friendly. Nothing jacks the passive-aggressive types better than a well placed "sunshine".



3.) Source. Yep. Just one word, and throw in a question mark. "Source?" When used correctly, you can make a google-monkey jump through hella hoops. Then, question the source. Ask for citations, peer-reviewed of course. Always a winner.



4.) Self-deprecation. You have to keep the masses on your side. By bringing yourself down a peg before someone else can, you utilize an age-old comedic art that helps your audience connect with you, even if they are mind-boggling stupid twats who are something you would normally scrape off of your shoe.



5.) Post dissection. Nothing makes a net geek go ape poop quicker than a line by line filleting of the drivel that they just spewed onto your monitor. Two opposing styles are equally effective:

a.) Answering long diatribes/questions with one word answers.

b.) Long, tedious replies following every single sentence they post. If they post 7 lines, you hit back with 7 sets of 5 line answers.



Finally...

6.) Kill' em with kindness. "Please..." "Thanks!" "Would you be so kind..." Yup, you may be an *******, but if Emily Post approves, how can they complain?

I'm not the author. I do recognize a lot of these techniques. Looks like a few new ones have been developed since this was written. Hopefully this will clarify things for people.

 

[Freesia]

I just thought I would share this here, so people know where some folk get their debate tactics from.



I'm not the author. I do recognize a lot of these techniques. Looks like a few new ones have been developed since this was written. Hopefully this will clarify things for people.

How strange, that he went to all that trouble to even write that list. Some people need to think more of positive things to do with their lives instead of wasting their time thinking of how to make things more negative. The mind boggles.

 

[Moll Flanders]

I do have to add this little tempest in a teapot is a great way for some people to distract us from such issues as advocating that a specific woman's outfit at a con is designed to titillate because: clowns, and they are a sex worker because they have "Blue" in their name, and the first association such people seem to make is "blue means porn!"

My Nan (RIP) might have used the term "blue" to describe language with a lot of swearwords but I don't think it is a common word nowadays. It didn't occur to me that Violet Blue was in any way supposed to be a raunchy name.

 

[das_nut]

How strange, that he went to all that trouble to even write that list. Some people need to think more of positive things to do with their lives instead of wasting their time thinking of how to make things more negative. The mind boggles.

Actually, it seems that Diana posted that originally on Veggieboards, if google is any indication.

Pickle Juice helpfully copied the entire post to this forum. It seems that Pickle Juice engages in (and assumingly approves of) copying entire posts from another forum for discussion, even if intent of copying that post is clearly derogatory towards someone who isn't a member here.

 

[Freesia]

Actually, it seems that Diana posted that originally on Veggieboards, if google is any indication.

Pickle Juice helpfully copied the entire post to this forum. It seems that Pickle Juice engages in (and assumingly approves of) copying entire posts from another forum for discussion, even if intent of copying that post is clearly derogatory towards someone who isn't a member here.

I just read the link you posted. Diana, whoever she is, did not originally write that post at all, the link says so.

And I think Pickle Juice only posted that list to prove her point.

 

[das_nut]

I just read the link you posted. Diana, whoever she is, did not originally write that post at all, the link says so.

I stated that Diana posted that originally. That's the earliest reference to that which I can find on google. It could come from somewhere else (it seemed to have been on WikiHow in 2006 as well). I wouldn't be surprised if it was kicking around the web.

But of course, no matter who posted it, Pickle Juice seemed to have no problem copying it from another forum to repost here.

And I think Pickle Juice only posted that list to prove her point.

If the point was that it's okay to copy content from another forum to discuss someone who isn't a member here, than the point is proven.

Of course, it's not that Pickle Juice is the only one who likes to talk about people behind their backs, on a forum they aren't even a part of. Posts in this local Veggieviews thread is full of VV members posting things other people said, with members here commenting. A quick glance at the thread seems to indicate nobody taking offense at this habit.

How does that saying go again? "One rule for thee, another rule for me".

 

[Muggle]

I stated that Diana posted that originally. That's the earliest reference to that which I can find on google. It could come from somewhere else (it seemed to have been on WikiHow in 2006 as well). I wouldn't be surprised if it was kicking around the web.

Tame wrote it years ago in a thread on GB.

 

[ledboots]

I stated that Diana posted that originally. That's the earliest reference to that which I can find on google. It could come from somewhere else (it seemed to have been on WikiHow in 2006 as well). I wouldn't be surprised if it was kicking around the web.

But of course, no matter who posted it, Pickle Juice seemed to have no problem copying it from another forum to repost here.



If the point was that it's okay to copy content from another forum to discuss someone who isn't a member here, than the point is proven.

Of course, it's not that Pickle Juice is the only one who likes to talk about people behind their backs, on a forum they aren't even a part of. Posts in this local Veggieviews thread is full of VV members posting things other people said, with members here commenting. A quick glance at the thread seems to indicate nobody taking offense at this habit.

How does that saying go again? "One rule for thee, another rule for me".

Just because you think the stos thread is gossipy doesn't make your actions any less nauseating. No one in the stos thread is making fun of specific omnis that have a years-long history with the board for the amusement of omni trolls.

You are just floundering around because you are uncomfortable having been caught out. And people now know your motives for your holier-than-thou poor downtrodden men shtick.

 

[mlp]

Just because you think the stos thread is gossipy doesn't make your actions any less nauseating. No one in the stos thread is making fun of specific omnis that have a years-long history with the board for the amusement of omni trolls.

You are just floundering around because you are uncomfortable having been caught out. And people now know your motives for your holier-than-thou poor downtrodden men shtick.

Let's suppose I belonged to two social groups that had some overlap. And let's say that Group A amused themselves by making fun of Group B, and while I was hanging out with Group A I said a bunch of stuff about some of the people in Group B that I was too chickenshit to say in the hearing of Group B. And let's say that at the same time, while hanging out with Group B, I acted all holier than thou about a lot of the kind of stuff that I was participating in while hanging out with Group A.

I don't think I'd feel real comfortable about what I was doing. And I think that, if I was found out, I'd be feeling pretty apologetic rather than twisting myself into a pretzel to justify my actions.

But I guess that all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

 

[das_nut]

Just because you think the stos thread is gossipy doesn't make your actions any less nauseating. No one in the stos thread is making fun of specific omnis that have a years-long history with the board for the amusement of omni trolls.

You know what my latest "making fun" of people was before this entire thing was blown out of proportion? It was a passing gripe about how I didn't expect this thread to develop into judging women on how they dress or what names they go by.

All in all, it was three comments, two by me, one by another poster.

Once again, this is a tempest in a tea pot.

I do like how you are finely splitting hairs though. First thread in the "Stupid Things Omnis Say", someone is making fun of something their mother said - and you liked that post.

I guess you have different standards if it affects you personally.

Let's suppose I belonged to two social groups that had some overlap. And let's say that Group A amused themselves by making fun of Group B, and while I was hanging out with Group A I said a bunch of stuff about some of the people in Group B that I was too chickenshit to say in the hearing of Group B.

Quite frankly, I'm not "chickenshit" (as you said) to tell you to your face (after all, you are still a member of that forum).

So stop pretending otherwise.

 

[ledboots]

You know what my latest "making fun" of people was before this entire thing was blown out of proportion? It was a passing gripe about how I didn't expect this thread to develop into judging women on how they dress or what names they go by.

All in all, it was three comments, two by me, one by another poster.

Once again, this is a tempest in a tea pot.

I do like how you are finely splitting hairs though. First thread in the "Stupid Things Omnis Say", someone is making fun of something their mother said - and you liked that post.

I guess you have different standards if it affects you personally.



Quite frankly, I'm not "chickenshit" (as you said) to tell you to your face (after all, you are still a member of that forum).

So stop pretending otherwise.

Are you talking about post #35 in that thrwad? That is the first thing I 'liked' in that long thread. It is a post where a.f. is quoted quoting her mom on the phone with a restaurant "What are your options? vegan, vegetarian, and normal?"
To which someone had posted this picture. I liked that post. I don't think it has jack all to do with your actions.
:

 

[Spang]

That picture is awful.

 

[ledboots]

That picture is awful.

Yes, it is. I didn't thumbs up it because I actually *liked* the picture, but because it summed up the situation so well.

 

[Renee1]

You are just floundering around because you are uncomfortable having been caught out. And people now know your motives for your holier-than-thou poor downtrodden men shtick.

I honestly wasn't aware that people didn't know this before this shitstorm started.

 

[ledboots]

I honestly wasn't aware that people didn't know this before this shitstorm started.

I admit I'm about the most gullible person on the planet, so I'm easily trolled.

I thought it was annoying that every other thread was transformed into a "poor men, mean women" discussion, but I just thought it was the result of his having had a bad divorce or something.

Fool me once, shame on you.

 

[Pickle Juice]

This "tempest in a teapot" so dismissively mentioned isn't about gossip, venting, or griping, at least not the kind of talking about people that takes place in the Stupid Things Omnis Say thread.

A thread from which I am conspicuously absent, may I add.

This is about a misogynistic homophobe doing his best to cloud the real issues people want to discuss in an attempt to appear morally superior to the rest of us, and trying to fool people he surely thinks of as "mind-boggling stupid twats who are something you would normally scrape off of your shoe" into thinking he's a champion of women's rights.

And yes, once he's fooled those twats, to go back to a forum hostile to us to have a good laugh with his misogynistic homophobic friend.

That's my problem, anyway. I admit I have an emotional reaction to the use of homophobic slurs. I also have zero tolerance for them, and for the people who use them. I deal with it by direct confrontation. I realize that's not everyone's cup of tea.