What Happens at the Slime Pit…

I am ever so helpfully informed sometimes that I shouldn’t complain about the kind of crap that gets posted about me at the slime pit. After all, these self-described rational people say, I don’t have to go there to see it.

Then things like this happen:

How lovely.  Your “healing the rift” effort required a sharing of email addresses at least one of which has been distributed to Ophelia Benson, who, as I type this, is gleefully doxxing an atheist woman who’s not ‘out’ in her real-life community.

And this:

You replied to a different email address than the one Skeptickle usually posts here with. She hasn’t used the one you emailed for on this blog for approximately a year. Why did you reply to her with that email address rather than the one she currently uses to post here?

The first was a comment left on Michael Nugent’s blog last week. The second was a comment left for Ophelia on a post documenting the lies of the first comment. Then came this, on my blog:

First, you betrayed a trust. Skep participated in Nugent’s talks in good faith, as did you. You may think that is just fine to break that trust and dishonor that good faith, but you have sent a clear message to anyone who is not already squarely in your camp that you cannot be trusted with sensitive information.

I’d already said in that comment thread that I’d recommended Eliza for the dialogue by name to Michael as someone who served on an atheist group’s board, so this continued insistence that I’d taken her information from the dialogue was bizarre. There was an ongoing insistence from apparent multiple parties that there had been something nefarious done in order to get Eliza’s identity into Ophelia’s hands (there wasn’t), and specifically, that I had used the dialogue process to gain and spread Eliza’s identity.

Funny aside, because this post could use a moment of humor. Know how I found out who Eliza was? One morning, I woke up to a comment that ended, “If you want to discuss it further, face to face, “like a man” so to speak, I think Stephanie or Josh can tell you where you can find me. -Skep tickle (aka skeptixx)” First time anyone called “Skep tickle” or “skeptixx” had left a comment on my blog. I had probably seen “skeptixx” in the Twitter frenzy over the Atheism+ forum. Probably. Maybe.

I was supposed to know who this person was and be able to set up a face-to-face meeting? How? Was this someone I knew in real life? So I did some quick research based on the email and IP addresses, found another comment she’d left under the name “Eliza”. When I was done all I knew was that this was some OB-GYN from Seattle who was or had been on her local atheist board. I still didn’t know her. I was halfway through a comment with all that information when I realized Eliza probably didn’t mean it. I deleted it when I realized, but I had almost outed her eight months ago accidentally. Now, I would guess that I was supposed to know that Eliza had moved into the slime pit, but what can I say, I hadn’t had any coffee yet.

Tonight, however, after seeing a pattern in the comments, I had a pretty good idea where to go. Based on the timing of the comments above, I even knew the date I was going for. And lookie what I found from Eliza:

Okay, so let’s just say that Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn’t the one under which I posted at her site, one which I haven’t used it at FtB in many months (if not a year or so), and in that email addresses me by my professional title & last name, chastising me for my post(s) at her site today.

If that happened, would it be fair game for me to post the content of that email here? (With her email address, and mine, redacted. But without having sought, or gained, her permission to post it.)

*It’s also not the email address I use for communication about the Nugent site…but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm…

Then just a little further down the page:

I would guess that Stephanie Zvan was Ophelia’s source (but that’s just a guess).

I’d used my full name in communications behind the scenes with Michael Nugent & Monette Richards for Nugent’s atheist/skeptic dialogue site, and know that each of them communicated with Stephanie Zvan about various aspects of the process. I also posted maybe 2-3 times more than a year ago at Stephanie’s site using my real first name and, I think, the email address Ophelia used. (The one I’ve used at FtB for posting since then is long-defunct; I confirmed that before posting her email above. And she didn’t use the email address I’d used for the Nugent effort.)

Seems less likely to have come from remote other posts at FtB, or from PZ’s interactions with the group I belong to that had him give a talk here a couple of months ago.

Just a guess posted to the site that manufactures narratives about me, Ophelia, and a few other people daily. Just a guess posted to the site where, once it’s been said, it will be passed around as the gospel truth no matter what the actual facts of the matter are.

What happens in the pit doesn’t stay there, because the pitters are evangelically anti-us. They don’t just sit around and get their hate on, though they do plenty of that. Once they’ve gotten themselves or each other worked up, they wander around spreading their favorite stories, better to them than the truth.*

Then, if that happens to you and you want to able to demonstrate the origin of the myth, you go to the pit. When you go to the pit, you trip over crap like this:

I’m going to do my bit for the pit pr campaign.

A fact fucking cunt, is, a fat fucking cunt. Insane staffy is a fat fucking cunt.

That’s supposed to be talking about me, in case you hadn’t figured it out. Had Ophelia gone to the pit to check out the weirdness showing up in her comments, this is what she’d have seen:

Regarding Skep Tickle, I am too dense/do not read enough to have seen the alleged subtle outing of you already, but FUCK YEAH. EXPOSE THAT DRIED UP VAGINA TO THE WINDS OF TRUTH, AND WATCH THEM SCOUR AWAY THE DUST OF AGES.

Ahem. Or something.

So, no, we don’t have to go to the pit to be affected by it. The pit comes after us. And if we go to look at how the stories have been cobbled together out of quote mines, failures of reading comprehension, wishful thinking, and long games of telephone, that’s what’s waiting for us. So let’s knock off this “It isn’t harassment if it happens in the pit” nonsense yesterday.

*Okay, one more funny story. Did you know that I my name is a pseudonym? You can totally tell it’s true by the fact that two first-time commenters showed up in the last couple of days to suggest I’d never say what I say if I were using my real name. Or you can go over to the pit and see the idea be proposed, rejected, and retconned into the shape it showed up here. Cute, huh?

What Happens at the Slime Pit…

79 thoughts on “What Happens at the Slime Pit…

  1. 1

    Yes, and even that’s not all. Now they’re sending Open Letters to Michael Nugent demanding that he “take a stand” against me – and, presumably, disinvite me from the Dublin conference in 3 weeks, since it would surely be tricky to “take a stand” against me but still allow me to speak at the conference. Nugent said on Twitter that he would reply to these open letters – no doubt to take the demanded “stand” against me. That should be interesting.

    But hey. Someone who has an ancient dried up vagina can’t be allowed to speak at conferences. Obviously.

  2. 4

    Every day the slimepit is looking more and more like a real cult. The sheer denial of reality that goes on over there is astounding and sickening. We don’t need any more dialog with them. They need an intervention.

  3. 5

    After 30 minutes of perusing the slymepit and about two minutes of googling, I was able to determine who Skep TIckle is. She hasn’t exactly made her identity secret. Should we out her and attack her? Of course not. But accusing Ophelia of “doxxing” her is just laughable.

  4. 6

    These ‘doxxing’ claims are such ridiculous bullshit that I suspect the slymepitters must be suffering from a bad case of ‘rhetoric inflation’. It is obvious that Eliza registered two accounts at A+ — ‘Skep tickle’, and after being banned the first time, she tried sockpuppeting posting again under another pseudonym of ‘Skip teckle’ — what may not be so transparent is that any of the moderators or admins there were (and are) capable of looking at the registered e-mails for either account (I’m sure I did at one point last year); and I well remember when this whole farrago blew up currently, that the real life name that was being mentioned accorded with my recollection of one (or possibly both) of those e-mail addresses. Guess what, e-mail addresses could have been disclosed – but they have not. It’s obviously only as much of a ‘secret’ as far as the goodwill of the forums and websites which she’s been trolling extends, seeing as her usual Gravatars are very probably tied to those two e-mail addresses.

  5. 7

    Yeah the narrative seems to be that “FfTBs” doxxed her despite her name not appearing anywhere other than by me posting a link to heathen hub where her full name is outed by Maxwell Smart… Not a word of complaint over there for her name being mentioned, the first time it’s mentioned in fact. Who doxxed her?

  6. 8

    Also, I would like to know how allowing your name to be posted on a web page of a prominent atheist organization is not “outing” yourself. If I was mentioned prominently on the web page of the National Fish Squashers web page, and I was not an avowed fish squasher, then I would demand that they take my name off it.

    So Skep Tickle, how do you respond to that?

  7. 9

    I note that anyone using “(skep tickle’s real name) atheist” as a google search brings her up on the first page of results. Can she really think that she is not out? You can’t serve this prominently and not be obvious.

  8. 11

    BTW “retcon” is the perfect name for it… Followed the links to the pit for once, nothing changes there, Dick Strawkins and PitchGuest are the fools retconning the pseudonym bullshit into a nice narrative. Given how unforgiving they are of even their own imagined mistakes by “FfTB’ers” you’d think they’d die of embarrassment with the amount they get wrong on a daily basis.

  9. 15

    Jason, the pointlessly baroque third-person text is messing you up. She does say she’s skeptixx. Lesson: Don’t try to read Eliza before the coffee hits.

  10. 16

    Oh right, “as I am she.” Hooray for pointless baroqueness.

    I only skimmed the comment this second time. I’m sure now that when it was posted, I let it through the first-time moderation without hesitation because of that line.

  11. 17

    Again, using the same real-name email addy.

    God damn. Not only are they assholes, they’re hilariously incompetent assholes. Troll fucking 101: Don’t use your real name on email addresses. Troll 102: Don’t use the same email for sockpuppets that you do for your primary account.

    Kids these days can’t troll for shit. Why, back when I was a 4Channing Dramatician, we would make fake Hotmail accounts all day long, in blizzards, and uphill both ways! And by Moot, we damn well liked it!

    Get off my lawn, Slymepit.

  12. 19

    Ophelia Benson emails me at an email address* that isn’t the one under which I posted at her site

    but it IS the email I use for the Slyme pit. Hmmm…

    I would guess that Stephanie Zvan was Ophelia’s source


  13. 20

    we would make fake Hotmail accounts all day long, in blizzards, and uphill both ways

    HA! You were lucky – you had hotmail! Back in my day we had to configure uucp using bearskins stretched between two tin cans! And we were GLAD OF IT!

  14. 21


    A jib is the triangular sail on vessels between the foretopmast head and the jib boom. Different countries had different styles of jibs, so merely looking at the jib, a sailor would be able to know under which country the vessel was sailing and also their opinion of that vessel’s place of origin.

    So liking the cut of someone’s jib means you kinda think they’re a swell person.

  15. 22

    Wrong. She did use it at my site. So then that became the issue – how dare you use an address I used in the past instead of the one I used more recently?!!

    Well the newer one looked like a fake address, that’s how.

  16. 24

    @Katherine Lorraine: Thanks for that. I thought the phrase had originated with sails. And I definitely used it for Shplane because I thought that was a swell message. As I read the phrase back to myself, though, it sounded, well, suggestive.

  17. 25

    She did use it at my site. So then that became the issue – how dare you use an address I used in the past instead of the one I used more recently?!!

    Well the newer one looked like a fake address, that’s how.

    As I recall, you said that explicitly on your blog just after Eliza twisted the whole thing into the Big Lie she is now pushing:

    To: Joanne York

    Ah yes, the other email address. I had to look it up to check. (How would you know that? Does “Skep tickle” confide these things in you? Has she been pouring it all out on the slime pit?)

    I didn’t use that email address because it’s a string of gibberish followed by what looks like a joke email account – in other words, a fake. Lots of commenters use fake email addresses. I figured it would be wasted effort to use that one so I looked to see if she’d used another one. That’s why.

    Why do you ask? Is that supposed to be another crime? What bullshit. “Skep tickle” dropped in here to accuse me of being crazy. What does it matter which of her email addresses I used?

    And then again later to another slimepitter:

    @ 75 – I said exactly why I used a different email. Try to keep up.

    No, I’m not telling lies.

    I didn’t use an email address other than the one used to register/comment here, I used one that was used to comment here in the past.

    And what do you mean “would be noticed”? By whom? The world at large doesn’t know what email address I used to email “Skep tickle”! Nobody knows except “Skep tickle”…and anyone she told. I don’t assume she bothered to tell anyone what email address I used. It didn’t occur to me that it was significant until this ludicrous “Joanne” person showed up to make a stink about it.

    That’s how it really went. Now, what kind of people do not correct their understanding of history when faced with more accurate information that falsifies old beliefs?

  18. 27

    God damn. Not only are they assholes, they’re hilariously incompetent assholes.

    I know, it’s not bad enough that they’re a bunch of nasty lying trolls, but they’re also really, really bad at it.

  19. 28

    Given that they’re currently trying to get Ophelia’s invitation to the Empowering Women Through Secularism conference revoked, how about you hold off laughing and calling them incompetent until you see which way Michael Nugent jumps. He’s gone out of his way to be hospitable to them and to insist that we have to treat them like rational, honest actors. Other Atheist Ireland representatives have made up their minds on what’s going on based on crappy, incomplete versions of events. Who knows what they’ll decide to do here.

    I’m certainly not laughing.

  20. 29

    @13: How long until “Jason Thibeault lied about Skep tickle sock-puppeting the A+ forums” becomes ‘pitter dogma despite comments 14 and 15?

    Was the time it took “Ophelia doxxed Skep tickle” to become unquestionable doctrine better measured in days or hours?

  21. 31

    Yeah, how on earth would anybody in their right mind think that just because you didn’t use an e-mail on a site for time X that it’s gone from the system?
    Hello-ooooo, the 21st century is kindly inviting you to take the introductory tour.

  22. 32

    Stephanie, I have a half-baked theory about what’s happening. I’m hypothesizing that atheist and skeptic events used to be safe spaces for most white men, and now you’re spoiling that. You can’t imagine how bad that makes us feel! With so much equality going around, we’ve already lost a lot of our safe spaces, and now you’re taking this one away from us. We have to rage about it, because men aren’t suppose to cry.

  23. 33

    Given that they’re currently trying to get Ophelia’s invitation to the Empowering Women Through Secularism conference revoked…

    These are the same people who will whine and cry that their FREEEESPEEEEECH is being violated when someone blocks them on Twitter…

  24. 34

    Oh, I forgot. Besides raging about it, we have to try to stop you from taking over our safe spaces any more than you already have That’s why we have to try to defame and stigmatize you, so we can demand for you to be excluded from speaking at conferences. We were pretty impressed when you used that technique, so we decided to try it too. Only we couldn’t find anything bad enough that you actually did, so we had to make something up.

  25. 35

    I have to confess, I can’t keep up with this one. The twisted logic is so convoluted that I’m having trouble figuring out what the outrage is supposed to be.

    1) Ophelia sent this person an e-mail.
    2) Ophelia told no one what address she used.
    3) The address was logged at her site.
    5) ?????
    6) Doxxing!

    There’s something awesomely narcissistic in expecting that a site proprietor is fully informed of a poster’s preferred method of doing business at any given moment: She uses her a psuedonym, then her first name, then a psuedonym, then a different psuedonym, then one e-mail, then another, then a joke account…

    How dare Ophelia not be up to speed on which of these many representations are the ones that are to be used RIGHT NOW. Maybe Skepxxtickleliza should send out a memo every time she adopts a new handle.

  26. 36

    Zvan @27:

    Given that they’re currently trying to get Ophelia’s vitation to the Empowering Women Through Secularism conference revoked, how about you hold off laughing and calling them incompetent until you see which way Michael Nugent jumps.

    Agreed, sadly. It’s depressing to know some of your fellow skeptics take glee in blindly spreading lies and hatred towards other skeptics they disagree with, and doubly so to know some people helming skeptic organizations will lend them an ear.

  27. 37

    @Stephanie Zvan #27

    I get what you’re saying, but I dunno. I think if they actually manage that, it doesn’t so much mean that the ‘pitters are competent as it does make Michael Nugent an unfortunately easy mark.

  28. 38

    If they get what they want, I don’t see the point of discussing whether they used an elegant strategy or just kept pressing (for two years) until something broke.

  29. 40

    Fair enough. It’s not really a relevant thing, I was just noting that the part of me that used to take pride in that sort of thing is just like “whaaaaaaat”. They’re terrible people and the shit they’ve caused is awful either way.

  30. 41

    Aratina Cage @4:

    Every day the slimepit is looking more and more like a real cult.

    I was just thinking that the other day. The rank hypocrisy–“Doxxing is bad, except when Vacula & Paden do it!” “You tried to get people fired & banned from conferences, but it was okay when we tried to get the SGU to kick Rebecca Watson out, and now when we’re trying to get Nugent to kick out Ophelia!”–combined with the way memes propagate so quickly and so completely through the hive–“Zvan is a pseudonym! Ophelia’s doxxing! Rebecca cried rape!”–without any questioning, leading to the waves of drive-by comments that sound as though they’re working from a script, it’s reminiscent of Scientology’s “fair game” practices, right down to similar language–silencing oppressors vs. suppressive persons.

  31. 42

    Well, I’m glad to know who she is since we’re in the same city and I want to be able to avoid her nasty, lying ass. Especially professionally. Maybe she isn’t as horrible a doc as she is a drama-monger, but she’s dismissive enough of women that I don’t want her anywhere near me or my coochie.


    @Ben Zvan (#18)
    Clearly, Stephanie is the mastermind behind the pit. She created it to become the biggest professional victim the world has ever seen.

  32. 43

    I’m starting to get quite angry with Nugent. The fact that he gives any of the anti-feminist reactionaries the time of day is mind boggling to me. I just don’t get it and probably never will.

  33. 48

    Delurking to say that I clicked on Jason’s link @13 to skeptixx’s comment (dated October 6, 2012). Without really paying attention I clicked on the “View Complete Profile” link for skeptixx’s avatar (I was vaguely curious about the photo). This took me to the page “en.gravatar.com/eeesutton”. Of course, the *first* *page* of Google results for that username contains the full name, e-mail address, home city, activism, etc. Not very anonymous at all.

  34. 53

    I de-lurk very infrequently, but I wanted to just pipe up and say that I sent an email to CFI about the Lindsay address and this “great rift” in the skeptic/atheist community. I basically made it clear that, though I have very little time for activism and few resources to spare monetarily, what little I can muster will not go to them. It’ll go to David Silverman and those like him who stand up and vocally take on the irrational nitwits we’ve seen crawl out of the slyme over the last few years.

    Not sure why I picked this thread for this comment… guess I was moved by the continuous crap you and others like you go through routinely…

    I’m sure there are lots more like me out here. Keep doing what you do!

  35. 54

    All I can say is that if Michael Nugent and “Atheist Ireland” dis-invite Ophelia Benson, because of the controversy and not wanting the conference to be mired in “other issues”, then I hope that a lot of other speakers dis-invite themselves as well in order not to be mired in “other issues”.

    It is time for conferences, and by the way, leaders of said conferences to take a stand. We know where JREF stands, so I will never be attending TAM. Now, I want to know where other conferences stand so that I can avoid those conferences as well.

    My money, my rules.

  36. 56

    I’m always amazed about how delighted certain people are to discover and reveal my real identity given that I have never made the slightest secret of it and openly display my name and place of work on my site, which my twitter account links to.

    Several people have *delighted* in revealing my not at all secret name (it is Rob Smith in case you can’t be arsed to look at my profile). Be as delighted as you like, the main reason you found my name is that I actually told you what it is. Oh, and where I work, which is Leeds University.

    So well done with outing me.

  37. 57

    Funny about miring in other issues. I certainly don’t want the Dublin conference to be mired in other issues! Nugent’s got serious, important stuff in mind, such as the surge in both opposition and support for Ireland’s terrible abortion law (based on the 8th amendment to its constitution). I would hate to see other issues distract from that.

    But that wouldn’t even have been an option if Nugent himself hadn’t decided to invite the people who harass us to dump their “grievances” on his blog for months on end. It’s Nugent who caused the other issues to get entangled with his conference. Strange, isn’t it.

  38. 58

    @latsot, well somehow I missed your name despite reading your blog… I seem to remember someone alluding to your name and where you live/work bit by bit on Twitter. Oh yes, I remember now! It was that lovely defender of the “bravehero” ElevatorGate and hater of #FTBullies everywhere -> AmbrosiaX

    Luckily she has the power of telepathy and could divine that you were not using “latsot” as a pseudonym for a good reason.We were being rather argumentative with her and “just disagreeing” it could have been seen as a threat of a dox. But then they never do that so it must be my mistake.

  39. 59

    All I can say is that if Michael Nugent and “Atheist Ireland” dis-invite Ophelia Benson, because of the controversy and not wanting the conference to be mired in “other issues”, then I hope that a lot of other speakers dis-invite themselves as well in order not to be mired in “other issues”.

    They can always invite Wooly Bumblebee and Vacula instead…

  40. 60

    Ophelia: you are correct. Michael Nugent has created this mess by attempting to straddle two sides of the issue. Now, he must make a choice. That choice must not be avoided the choice through asking speakers to dis-invite
    themselves for “the sake of the conference”. He has a choice to make. I hope that he makes the right choice.

    My financial support goes to conferences (SkepChickCon) and organizations (kiva.org) that I believe in. Speaking of which, would you consider creating an Amazon wishlist of books that you would like to read, or books that you would accept to donate to causes in areas that you support?

    I like the idea of supporting you through sending you books, so that you can spend your free time (when not writing) surrounded in (more) books. Plus, the visibility of showing support to you visible on an Amazon wishlist will make the pit scream in …… [fill in the blank].

    Just an idea…

  41. 61

    I don’t get it.

    I’m pretty easily “found”, my ‘nym leads to my blog leads to my facebork, not a huge deal.

    I suppose, though… if one were engaging in unethical and unprofessional behavior (as the Slymies do), it might be…. inconvenient… if they were ever outed as the bullying douchenozzles they are. I mean, if I found out my doctor was posting anti-feminist comments or contributing to the harassment of women, I’d question hir dedication to my health and well-being…

  42. 62

    Before Nugent hosted the Dialogues, as the ‘pitters took over the comments section of his blog, I predicted that he was a compromised arbitrator, and that the ‘pitters would feel as though they had gained an ally that they could manipulate to pursue their own spiteful vendettas.

    Nugent has failed to live up to his own standards, in no small part because he has failed to consistently demand that other adhere to those standards to be a part of his process and the space he creates. He very much needs to draw lines in the sand if he is to rescue his own credibility, and he very much needs to take a position, because his continued pretence of impartiality is simply not tenable. One cannot claim to be a moderator when persistently failing to effectively moderate the behaviour of parties to your process, it must be that the process itself (of which you are a part) is broken, or the parties are not honest actors, or both.

  43. 63

    Just posted to Michael’s facebook page:
    I’ve heard some harassers are petitioning you to dis-invite Ophelia Benson from the upcoming Empowering women conference.
    Could you confirm you will not give in to this pressure? The complaints are quite manufactured and I quite look forward to meeting her. I personally will be attending the conference (coming from the Netherlands)

  44. 64

    @41 I’m with you A Noyd. I want to know who is behaving badly and harassing people. I feel better knowing that I can successfully avoid Skeptickle now that I know her identity. I’m local, too. The vast majority of the time, I use my real name when I comment on blogs and I use my FB account to sign in here. It keeps me more rigorous and cautious in arguments. It helps me keep my temper in check sometimes, too. 🙂

    BTW, wasn’t there a comment she had left a long time back on one of the FTBs where (under the nym Skeptickle) she signed her RL first name and then linked to a blog post about being on the board of SA?

    Or am I thinking of something else?

  45. 65

    Well, this will be interesting. It’s literally impossible for Nugent to stay neutral now. He has a clear choice and can’t avoid making it.

  46. 66

    A Noyd and Deanna Joy Lyons-Mentioner of Patriarchy

    We should get together and form our own club! We could hang out and buy Ophelia and Jen cookies and beverages when they hang out with us!

    Funny Diva
    A Nother Local.

    Deanna, I’m pretty sure you are, indeed, thinking of Dr Skeptickle. iirc that got mentioned in one of the recent posts on the subject at B&W. “lies” or “Meet Skep…”

  47. 67

    WMD Kitty–Survivor

    Glad I’m not the only one who’d be uncomfortable being treated by a doctor who behaves the way this one does outside of clinic!

  48. 68

    Hey, a club, I like it.

    Donnie @ 58 – yes, I’ve been meaning to do that (others have suggested it too) – the Amazon wish list. That would be great. I’ll get on it.

  49. 70

    I thought he [Nugent] was one of the good ones. Of course, Ron Lindsay wrote for Amy’s series as well (something I brought up in my letter to the CFI board) and it was clearly just empty rhetoric.

    You know that quote from one of the Politico founders? “Drudge rules our world”?

    Well, the Slymepit is our Drudge. And the bullshit that starts there, eventually gets repeated by the posters that go to Nugent’s and other such blogs — our equivalent of the Fox News reporters at press conferences.

  50. 72

    #69: Oolon: That is a well-measured response by Michael Nugent. As Ophelia said, the focus of the conference is, and should be, on Ireland’s abortion laws and should solely focus on that topic. In my opinion, Michael basically said, “Stop with the juvenille ‘open letters’. I did not read his links, yet. I will look at it this weekend.

    His proposal for face-to-face meetings would be a disaster, for I think that is the path that Cuttlefish laid out with his arson poem. How many times is someone allowed to call someone else a ‘cunt’? Is there a middle ground between ‘none’ and ‘freeze peach’.

    I feel that he did take a stand, and it was ‘STFU with the calls for dis-inviting’.

    @Ophelia: Please get the Amazon wish list together, I am sure that there are quiet a few books that will substain you during an International flight from your home to Ireland and back….

  51. 73

    Donnie (#70)

    That is a well-measured response by Michael Nugent.

    The hell it is. A well-measured response would acknowledge that both sides are not just as bad or just as good as one another. All he did yet again was estimate where the center point is between the two sides and took it as if it makes him better than everyone.

  52. 74

    And provide yet one more place for libel and one more place for those likely to be libeled to monitor and petition for the inevitable libel to be taken down instead of actually getting work done.

  53. 75

    omg i don’t know why I followed the link to Nugents commentary on the open letters.

    damn near passed out from the oopidstay.

    Unless you are really in the mood for a dose of ‘more-of-the-same-but-dumber’ with an extra helping (or two?) of ‘Eu’


  54. 76

    Unless you are really in the mood for a dose of ‘more-of-the-same-but-dumber’ with an extra helping (or two?) of ‘Eu’

    FYI, ‘Eu’, aka Evangeline Claire, has been stalking and harassing members of the A+ forum and even some of their family members (one of my close friends made the mistake of friending her on FB) after she (as “Robitussin”) got banned.

    Toss it out there, please, if she’s shitting up those comments. I resolved to unmask her today after reading “The Ethics of Unmasking” and talking to my close friend, and now…this =/ and here I’d heard the Slymepit had declared her beyond the pale and turned her out.

  55. 78

    ugh. I have no interest in trotting back there – what I remember was her typical 3 posts one after another, supporting those using gendered slurs, and i don’t remember if she was repeating misinformation – i got fed up and left because of the blind willingness to pile on Ophelia over the Skep whosiwhatsis. It’s just the same crap over and over – nothing surprising, just tiresome and fired up about it.

  56. 79

    Thanks, Oolon, I just read Nugent’s response. Why the fuck does this guy insist on blathering about “perceived sides?” Is he still trying to pretend the conflict isn’t real? Or is he just trying to pretend he’s the grownup and everyone else is just a bunch of screaming kids who don’t really mean (and won’t long remember) any of what they say?

    He did the right thing by explicitly ruling out any possibility of disinviting anyone; and I don’t have that big a problem with his trying to stay focused on the original objective of his conference; but can’t he do any of that without sounding like such a pompous doubletalking jackass?

Comments are closed.