Now that the new blog is up and running, I’d like to ask your opinion on the policies. Although I may or may not agree, I’d like to hear your ideas:1) Should all posts be OK’d before published, to make sure there is no preaching or the like? This would mean a delay before your post showed up. Is that good or bad?2) Should Christians or other religious people be allowed to post? Some have complained I am lax on this issue, and let certain regular religious posters do so at their, um, phree will, but I think they inspire returns and encourage debate.n Your thoughts?3) Should members of American Atheists be allowed special privilege or moniker? Would it encourage you to join? 4) Any other policy input?
Tuen- Yes, there is a word for you, it’s “atheist!” To you and to neowolfe, I would suggest you look at this article on the AA website:
http://atheists.org/Agnosticism%3A_The_Basis_for_Atheism
whoops! I clicked “enter” before I meant to!
Anyway, of course you can certainly call yourself whatever you’d like. Because “atheist” has a bad connotation for some people, some non-believers choose to call themselves humanist, agnostic, Bright, Pastafarians, or whatever.
I like “Atheist” because it is a term that is immediately understood. I used to call myself an agnostic and people were forever confused about what that meant. Someone once asked me if that meant that I believed in everything!
quantum_flux mentioned keeping posts on-topic. I really don’t agree with this. Yes, I think in general it is good to discuss the topic, but sometimes we have our best discussions when we wander off-topic.
1) No
2) Absolutely. People are entitled to an opinion, argument(s), and to give or propose ideas
3) Mixed feelings. But my first reaction is no special privileges
4) I agree with godless sodomite: ‘Can you allow posts to be edited?’
Contrarily, American Atheists has an agenda to push and it is silly to go off topic. Thus, the trolls need to abide by the rules of saying something relevant. We don’t need a phreekd response about how young earth creationists found Adam’s fossilized puberleaf every time Dave posts about how churches need to pay their taxes or how the pope unlawfully protects pedophiles.
Give them hell. wait that doesn’t sound right but you get the point.
1) NO! Silly
2) Sure why not, they are our entertainment
3)What was question #3 again?
3a) Oh! yeah we should separate the sheep from the wolves
4) Only on Wednesdays
Tuen made this comment:
We need to know our antagonists better than they know themselves.
Well said, my post just got so long I didn’t have the time and space to make the point without being tiring at the least.
But he also said:
“Agnostic ambiguity is too mild for me. I am on the very periphery”
To answer, agnostism is diliberately abiguous, because it is faced with a question that, as yet, has no answer. Science says it is a theory until it is proven to the satisfaction of the scientific community as a whole. I know I’m an outlaw in this regard, but given the eventuality of a single cell organism that started evolution, consider that that cell had the ability to reproduce itself, and it’s offspring had the ability to evolve. That doesn’t support creationism, it just lends doubt to a purist belief that nature is an accident. To be a free thinker you need accept all the evidence, and the lack of it.
There’s nothing wrong with being undecided when the evidence is not in.
NeoWolfe
1. I’d rather not have mandatory approval for posts. This is not to say that crazy posts shouldn’t be sent to the great oblivion, but I’d like to assume most posts on here are just a little bit relevant.
2. Yes. As phreeky (pardon me) as things can get with them, I think the occasional blast of fundamentalism can keep things in perspective, and remind us what we’re facing.
3. It seems fair for members of AA to get something for their support, but it wouldn’t encourage me to join. I have been reading for far longer than I have been posting, and I plan to join AA when it becomes more financially convenient for me. I’m your stereotypical broke college student, and every dollar counts. I will do all I can to support a secular agenda, but my wallet is stripped bare as is.
4. Keep up the good work Dave! You do our home state proud.
Holy mackerel, overnight a functioning “Delete” icon (that apparently anyone can use to indiscriminately delete anyone else’s posts) has appeared on all threads… I guess it was only a matter of time before the thought police finally gave the masses what they wanted… I wonder how long it will be before my (and phreedm’s) posts will start to disappear?
thanks pixel and NeoWolfe and sorry Dave if OT,
I’m comfortable with the following quote per pixel’s link but still understand where you’re coming NeoWolfe
- Agnosticism is not an alternative to Atheism, let alone a compromise between Atheism and Theism, but rather the very foundation upon which reasoned Atheism stands -
How’s this? Andy changes?
Remember — CTRL+ increases the font size!
On a Mac, that’s COMMAND=
And COMMAND- reduces the font size again.
I was going to comment on the atheist/theist/agnostic question, but got sidetracked by David Eller’s rambling, confusing discourse, and now my eyes are glazed over.
Has Christmas come early this year?
You’re doing great work, Dave. The old forum did well without preapproving posts. Don’t create more work for yourself via more active moderation. You have a day job anyway, right?
Really, this is ridiculous. Apparently, anyone can edit or delete anyone else’s posts??? And what’s with all the extra features provided for editing a comment, but not for composing the comment in the first place? And the emoticons don’t work, anyway.
Dave…you got some ‘splaining to do.
fixed it. My fault. Sorry.
ALl I asked for was the ability to edit my own posts! I dont want the pwer to edit anyone elses or vice versa.
Yah I get that. Workin on it!
I was just previewing a very long answer to Dave’s questionnaire. I decided to edit out something, and as soon as I hit the delete key, the whole post disappeared!
Dave, please fix that.
(1) Screening causes a delay, and that delay will slow down the conversational aspect of a blog.
(2) Let them in. Believers tend to make US look smarter and superior.
(3) Yes! Differentiate members versus non. It’ll help the members who care to just cruise past the believers points. Some of us don’t care what they have to say (we’ve heard it all before.)
(4)I think you should only let members start a new topic.
There’s my 2 cents
atheistgoddess,
Actually, with rare exception, only Dave can start a new topic – though you can always ask him to address something specific.
David,
My old eyes and I thank you for the “control +” advice. It worked! I had tried going to my “view” menu and then clicking on “text size” but that didn’t work.
It’s really ridiculous that I didn’t know how to do this. My husband is a computer engineer! I try to figure out my computer problems on my own, but I go to him if I can’t figure something out. I just never thought to ask him about this.
Anyway, thanks again for the advice.
NotSoFast said,
“The agnostic atheist comes, looks both ways, and if he sees no traffic coming, crosses the road.”
I hope not to read into what you said, something you did not intend, but, as the cutting edge of science moves forward, there are things we can accept as fact, that organized religion as a whole is a fraud, a corrupt movement, meant to enslave the minds of the ignorant and the fearful for power, money, and prestige. Rejection of this presence in society is a basic idea of free thought. But, somehow, I have never seen that as proof positive that no force of life exists that manifests itself in unimaginable places like near boiling water near volcanic vents deep in the ocean, and in the coldest parts of the polar caps. There is not only life there but thriving ecosystems. The tenacity of life is absolutely amazing!!!
While evolution is a fact, the mechanism, the ability to evolve has been built into lifeforms of every type. But, ninety five percent of all species which ever existed on this planet are now extinct, doesn’t sound much like a loving god does it? More like a madly driven insatiable machine.
NeoWolfe
neowolfe ,
What did you read into what I said? I was just using the putative danger of crossing a road as a metaphor for belief in god, to contrast my interpretations of the 5 different thinking modes. I’ve no idea how that stimulated the thoughts you express below:
Because religion is a human institution with no supernatural protection against the corruption of self-interest. And not just religion, but any human institution.
And the freethought movemment is also a human institution. Let’s hope we remain vigilant against those corrupting influences.
“But”? You see this statement as contradicting the previous ones somehow?
“Force of life” — Do you see that as some mystical property of “life” as opposed to “non-life” a la Star Trek?
Yes, the evolutionary process is largely random, therefore mad. But it’s not a physical “machine”, just a description of the way certain physical objects behave. And the life forms that display that amazing tenacity are all descended from the 5% that were luckier than the 95% that went extinct.
Dave,
On your questions 1), 2), and 3): What everybody else is saying.
On 4): How about a permanent open thread, where anybody can post anything without messing up a regular thread with off-topic comments?
And on my previous problem: I think I figured it out. I must have selected and tried to delete something in the preview panel instead of in the typing field.
The religious should be allowed to post since we do not fear them and are by nature open to interpretation, discussion, new ideas or in their case really old ideas.
I think members like me should have a moniker which says we are members.
It would be great if all the members could sign in since my e-mails go ignored. But i paid my dues a month ago and do not belong to the site yet.
1) Censorship is wrong. Don’t do it. How could you suggest such a thing while we fight for the right to be represented! Delete spam though.
2) Let them preach. They’re not selling anything here and it’s good sparring practice. If someone’s fragile feelings get hurt by a troll, that’s not your problem, it’s theirs. You should have better things to do with you life than reviewing comments. Besides, doesn’t George W Bush illustrate the quality of thought that occurs in an echo chamber? If an atheist says something illogical, let the trolls have at him or her.
3) Perhaps a brain icon next to the post. It gets taken away after your first ad homimem attack and you have to say 4 logical things to get it back.
4) A focus on the future of atheism and a strategy for how/if we can save the world from the religion virus.
NotSoFast made this comment:
“Yes, the evolutionary process is largely random, therefore mad. But it’s not a physical “machine”, just a description of the way certain physical objects behave. And the life forms that display that amazing tenacity are all descended from the 5% that were luckier than the 95% that went extinct.”
No offense, NotSo, but, you totally missed the point. The point that ninety five percent of the species that ever existed on earth are extinct, is an obituary to every species, including ours. There is only one thing in nature that never changes, and that is the constant flow of change. When living conditions change, either a species adapts, or it goes extinct, but when it adapts it becomes a new species, therefore, extinction is inevitable.
My point about a “machine” is that nature has no conscience. It does not feel sorry. It does not feel the need to offer bailouts to species with real potential. It just coldly marches over the bones of those who evolved the wrong way to cope with the next big change.
That was my contrast with the idea of a “loving god” who is sympathetically trying to rescue us from sin which was thrust upon us by our forefathers”.
To me common sense does not close the idea of inteligent participation in the origin of life, but the idea that nature has a conscience, or pity, or tolerates any flaw is an absolute denial of obvious fact.
And I believe that organized religion is the most dangerous force threatening the survival of our species. Can I get a witness? Can I get an amen? Damn, this crowd sucks.
NeoWolfe
Evolutionary science has known this almost from the beginning. Far more potentially beneficial mutations die out soon after they arise, than become fixed in a population.
And I believe that religion is at least as much a symptom as a cause of human evil. Get rid of religion, and watch something else just as bad take its place.
NotSoFast,
You shocked me with this flash of insight:
“And I believe that religion is at least as much a symptom as a cause of human evil. Get rid of religion, and watch something else just as bad take its place.”
Wow! Excelent comment. History backs you up in spades. Communist Russia set up the Russian Orthodox religion as the state religion, while simultaneously outlawing teaching religion to children. I guess the enlightenment required to outlaw religious education to children is one of the things that I have always admired about the communist movement, but, exactly as you stated, a whole new box of evil followed in it’s footsteps. You are right, it’s a question of the human condition, religion is as much a symptom as a cause. Our need to know why we are here, and how we got here, and hoping for some guidance while we are here, are stupid irrelevent questions we all ask, but do so because we are driven by our nature to do so. Excelent post, I underestimated you.
NeoWolfe