9/26/09

ExChristian.Net Has Been X’d, part 1

Please note that this essay will now be housed in True Freethinker’s section on ExChristian.Net
Share |

TwitThis

Posted by Ken
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

17 comments:

  1. BrianSeptember 26, 2009 at 7:32 AM

    I guess comment moderation is turned on now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousSeptember 26, 2009 at 12:15 PM

    "I was not aware that there was some sort of atheist ethic against commenting on posts that were more than an undefined number of years old."

    There is point of Netiquette not to post on old threads especially if there is no way for others to know you have done so (no email notification for example).

    Make you look like last-word-freak.

    ReplyDelete
  3. tiMrc geopSeptember 26, 2009 at 1:23 PM

    "... TOP TEN SIGNS YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN FUNDY. What I do know is that, for some odd reason, all of the comments in the TOP TEN posts have mysteriously disappeared."

    They havent you lieing basterd. Their are still there all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  4. BenYachovSeptember 26, 2009 at 1:48 PM

    Hey Mariano,

    It seems to me all these New Atheists have done is replaced one fundamentalist belief system with another.

    This is your brain on Dawkins. Any questions?

    Really New Atheist Fundies would it kill ya to read an intelligent coherant Atheist like Quinten Smith or Thomas Nagil for once in your sad lives?

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousSeptember 26, 2009 at 2:00 PM

    Mariano you really shouldn't waste your time on that site. It is a useless webpage where some very bitter people try to isolate themselves from the real world. All in all you could find much more worthy opponents. In fact when I asked about you on that site they said you had run scurrying away with your tail between your legs.

    Oh and to those who might be readers from that site I was on for only two days as matthewST so some of you might recall who I am. I've just decided that its not worth my time. Much like Conservipedia.

    ReplyDelete
  6. MKSeptember 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

    It seems to me all these New Atheists have done is replaced one fundamentalist belief system with another.

    Projecting much?

    Really New Atheist Fundies would it kill ya to read an intelligent coherant Atheist like Quinten Smith or Thomas Nagil for once in your sad lives?

    So many "sic" to insert ... so little time. But fortunately I'm not Mariano.

    ReplyDelete
  7. MKSeptember 26, 2009 at 3:42 PM

    Mariano you really shouldn't waste your time on that site. It is a useless webpage where some very bitter people try to isolate themselves from the real world.

    I think it is Mariano's tactic of sorts:
    He finds some obscure website, preferably with comments containing lot of spelling mistakes, so he can show his intellectual superiority by chopping them to death with "sics". Ha ha

    ReplyDelete
  8. KenSeptember 26, 2009 at 4:49 PM

    First anon.,
    I must a admit that 1) I was not aware 2) I know not how to keep up on the latest netiquette 3) did not bother checking the date 4) they did have email notifications.

    MK,
    Think what you will, but you are simply mistaken.

    Also, there are quite enough accusations of misquotations going around so I make sure to do the scholarly thing and alert the readers to the fact that I am quoting as is and the error is in the original. Spelling has nothing to do with intellect (believe me, English is my second language and I am dyslexic so I more than empathize).

    Focusing on the age of a post and on being alerted to "sic" are merely ad hominems and red herrings.

    Interesting that none of you seem bothered by the content of their comments and the fact that the comment section has been whipped (on one the post containing the more involved discussion) so that now I cannot inform those participants via auto-email notification.

    aDios,
    Mariano

    ReplyDelete
  9. MKSeptember 26, 2009 at 5:40 PM

    Also, there are quite enough accusations of misquotations going around so I make sure to do the scholarly thing and alert the readers to the fact that I am quoting as is and the error is in the original.

    I call BS Mariano.

    Scholarly thing to do would be just to leave comments as they are without all the "sics" (which btw makes them harder to read) or even rephrase them omitting spelling errors (which is what people do with [...]).

    Interesting that none of you seem bothered by the content of their comments and the fact that the comment section has been whipped

    There is nothing to respond to yet (maybe in future episodes). They were rude to you... big deal.
    [wiped out comment section] Well they have accused you of trolling:
    a)you posted the same response on 2 separate threads)
    b)you have posted your "EvilBible is dead" link under old and unrelated article

    I'm not surprised they have deleted one of them.

    English is my second language

    Mine too but I was never so petty as to point out to someone I disagree with, that he or she wrote "dont" instead of "don't". What is that suppose to accomplish?

    Focusing on the age of a post and on being alerted to "sic" are merely ad hominems and red herrings and I cannot inform those participants via auto-email notification.

    You try to make yourself to look like a victim because nobody takes you seriously (I am not surprised after reading your articles about science).

    I have noticed you never reply to anything else.

    Example: you took comments from EvilBible thread, (not bothering to reply to people under your own articles) and created completely new thread (I may add full of "sics") with only selected replies (your rightful choice) which makes hard to reply in any orderly fashion to you.

    Don't you think it's little strange?

    ReplyDelete
  10. MKSeptember 26, 2009 at 6:33 PM

    Also, there are quite enough accusations of misquotations going around so I make sure to do the scholarly thing and alert the readers to the fact that I am quoting as is and the error is in the original. Spelling has nothing to do with intellect[...]

    One of many examples to the contrary:

    Mariano:They also wrote,

    Some guy: Also, Mariano(edit) are you a sexist? A follower of the bible must be so. You know Eve and the original sin, all that crap.


    Mariano:
    No, Mariano (edited or unedited) is not a sexist and neither must a follower of the Bible.

    This one was just from the last part (5). In other places you were posting someone's incorrect html tags, missing apostrophes (that happened about 568 times), capitalization errors etc. etc. etc.

    The fact is you are doing this to sound intellectually superior.

    ReplyDelete
  11. AnonymousSeptember 27, 2009 at 11:01 AM

    Fact is that its a terrible website. I think thats all anyone really needs to say.

    ReplyDelete
  12. AnonymousSeptember 28, 2009 at 12:04 AM

    I've been to Ex-Christian, and it's far more reasonable and open than this implies. This is a misrepresentation of the site.

    There's are several sections devoted to discussion with Christians. They are welcome and encouraged to discuss and debate topics in those areas. There are several who do regularly.

    Why is it they've not managed to get themselves banned? Could it be that the problem isn't on their end, but yours?

    They ask that Christians not post preaching or religiously motivated posts in certain sections, that includes links to Christian websites and apologetic arguments. Any who do are met with hostility, but all have been well warned in advance. There's several pinned posts that explain this and they're hard to miss.

    There is also a section devoted to other faiths. It's not composed entirely of Atheists at all. In fact, quite a few members are of other religions, Buddhists, pantheists, and other types of believers. There are a large number of Atheists on the site, but it's not devoted to Atheism. It's 'Ex-Christian', and that doesn't necessarily mean Atheists.

    Cherry picking quotes can make any forum look bad. It's a large group of people, and some are more well mannered and reasonable than others.

    I challenge you to find any such group that doesn't contain it's share of unpleasant or surly members on the internet or anywhere else for that matter.

    If you want to discuss your religion or talk about God with them, there is a place for it. You can even choose the level of discourse based on which area you post in. Anything from a full blown argument, to a formal debate with rigid etiquette rules.

    Put simply, you ignored the TOS posted on the site and you got banned because of it, and no other reason. It's your own fault, and I don't believe for a moment that you were victimized.

    If you got beat down like this, it was because you were breaking the rules and putting things in places you shouldn't have. The mods there are reasonable and tolerant of anyone staying within the TOS. It's a well moderated site, and they enforce their rules like they should.

    Just sounds like you didn't pay attention, and either ignored or never bothered with reading the rules of the site before posting and got what you deserved for it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. KenSeptember 28, 2009 at 8:16 AM

    MK said,
    More red herrings and you are wrong; I am responding to everything that they wrote—not that you would know since the deleted the comments—and not “only selected replies” moreover, categorizing the comments makes for a more manageable response.

    I have no idea what you are talking about with the “Mariano(edit)…Mariano (edited or unedited)”—I simply do not know it means to write “edit” or “edited or unedited” next to someone’s name (how then can I be intellectually superior) so I reproduced it as is as it may be of importance to them.

    Since I am not seeking to sound intellectually superior there is one thing that I can guarantee you: you will not succeed in getting me to believe something that is not true, or to believe that you know the contents of my mind better than I, but you are merely demonstrating that you have made up your mind on another red herring and are now reading into it.

    Anon (just above),
    If you have found them to be reasonable that is just fine.
    In this case, it is your subjective experience against mine.
    As I state quite clearly: this is what happened to me—not that you would know since the deleted the comments.
    If you want to make excuses for their basic inability to engage in reasoned discourse while picking on me for noting that and also going on to respond to their every red herring…what can I say?

    aDios,
    Mariano

    ReplyDelete
  14. billwalkerSeptember 28, 2009 at 10:55 PM

    Atheism is not only not dead, it is alive, well & growing prodigously. It is Christianity that is shrinking. The freethought & atheist groups to which I belong are growing beautifully since I joined them 20 plus years ago. Like five to ten fold to use a biblical term. It's death id but the wishful thinking of religionists of many colors.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Cedric KatesbySeptember 29, 2009 at 7:00 AM

    Atheism is dead? When did this happen?
    Why hasn't somebody alerted the media?

    ReplyDelete
  16. AnonymousSeptember 30, 2009 at 3:20 AM

    And Islam is growing even faster than Atheism.

    If there's something the Christians should be threatened by, it's Islam, not Atheism.

    I do wonder why there's so many Christian sites about working against such a small minority when they have a much bigger, and very serious, threat to the existence of their faith with it's nose up their rear.

    Seems like a waste of time to bother with such a small percentage of the population given there's a much bigger group that's a lot more aggressive looming just over their shoulders.

    Atheists don't cause atrocities and slaughter nonbelievers. Islamic religions have as much history of doing that as Christianity does, they just haven't had time to build up the impressive numbers Christianity has for it yet, but they're catching up fast.

    It makes me thing that Christians that devote so much time to making anti-Atheist websites don't have their priorities straight.

    Beating up on such a small group that's never caused problems is just being a bully. Beating up on someone who's telling you they want your head, is a direct threat, and really is out to get you is self defense.

    Where's 'Islam is Dead'? It would seem to me that would be a better way to spend your time considering the reality of the situation.

    Atheism is just a tiny portion of Nonreligious groups. Most are Agnostic in nature. Nonreligious counts for 16% of the world's beliefs. Atheism itself would be about one half of one percent of the world. While it does have a larger percentage in several countries, such as the US 13% and Australia 15%. So why bother when there's much bigger and far more important fish to clone and hand out to the masses?

    Compared to Islam, and it's 21% and growing to Christianity's 31% and dwindling, it's not even a minor annoyance to Christians, much less a threat.

    Instead, there are far more sites like this one. Putting attention in the wrong place for no good reason aside from Atheist being a much smaller and less threatening group. Guess that makes them easier to pick on.

    Why defend your faith against a minority from near the bottom of the tier when #2 isn't shy about telling you to your face it's out to get you?

    Doesn't make sense to me.

    ReplyDelete
  17. KenSeptember 30, 2009 at 7:28 PM

    Billwalker and Cedric Katesby,
    Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts.
    If you have not seen it by now, please note that ExChristian.Net Has Been X’d, part 2 deals with the issue you have raised.

    aDios,
    Mariano

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)