A&A Feedback

Ickle Magoo

A search for "backslap" brings back 11 results - the only self-proclaimed atheist who is a regular[ish] poster I can see among those is me...and my post refers only to the particular topic being discussed in that thread...

If it isn't that post, "back-slapping forum" returns 40 odd pages of results to trawl through to try and find the post in question..."back-slapping" returns over 700...vague is right.

Hotblack Desiato

This one, perhaps? (only result when searchng for backslapping athiest [sic] )

Edit: get 14 results if I spell atheist correctly :rolleyes: :pac:

RDM_83 again

In relation to rrobindch post, I don't see how bolding something that removes the fact that he's referring to the average religious person (which is why I used it as an example). Do you think that religious people are stupid/fanatics because thats what implying the average religious person has a belief in divine personal intervention that will protect them "from whatever happens by" is doing. Irelands 80% religious* I think our mortality rate would be a lot higher if everyone is wandering around certain that God will protect them :rolleyes:

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Couldn't be asked tbh. My point was apparently an atheist poster complained somewhere or other that A&A was nowt but a mutual backsplapping fest but didn't feel the need to state that in the A&A Feedback thread so another poster pops in to tell us about it and use it as the basis of criticism. Smacks of the school yard to me.

Its not any of the ones linked to BTW.

I explained why I posted here, I read the forum feedback threads* and "discussion of the rules" ones and I've not seen a feedback/discussion on the rules thread with that little dissension which I found strange and it reminded me that a poster in a previous thread I had read described it in that way. My view would be that a certain amount of complaint and dissension is a good sign (within limits) and indicative of a diverse community.

If you look at my posting record you will see i've been on the very rare occasion a poster here including a few days ago on a separate thread. If people think I'm being a deliberate flamer I'l PM the post to a mod if they promise to respect that users privacy and it will be pretty clear that I haven;t been out searching for anti-atheist posts when I saw that comment.
Also I've seen other forums insulted/stereotyped in here by users so I don't see why its so unbelievable.

* I've way to many posts in feedback for my total posts (and thats with restricting myself)

** I know this figure will be called into question but self designation is the only valid way of considering these types of traits, and its as valid for me to call into question the number of Gay/Traveller people in Ireland as it is for a member of this forum to call into question the belief figures. But I'm guessing it wouldn;t be a popular move to say something like but half those people aren;t really gay under what I would consider gay

fitz0

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I explained why I posted here, I read the forum feedback threads* and "discussion of the rules" ones and I've not seen a feedback/discussion on the rules thread with that little dissension which I found strange and it reminded me that a poster in a previous thread I had read described it in that way. My view would be that a certain amount of complaint and dissension is a good sign (within limits) and indicative of a diverse community.

Could it be that most users are happy with how the forum is moderated? There are plenty of fierce debates within the forum amongst the regular posters here. There is no issue of there not being enough debate in this forum but the one thing most of us agree on is that when things get too heated, Dades and robindch will show up and give us a friendly mod warning. I'm not sure why our appreciation of the moderation is seen as a negative by you.

Bannasidhe

RDM_83 again wrote: »

In relation to rrobindch post, I don't see how bolding something that removes the fact that he's referring to the average religious person (which is why I used it as an example). Do you think that religious people are stupid/fanatics because thats what implying the average religious person has a belief in divine personal intervention that will protect them "from whatever happens by" is doing. Irelands 80% religious* I think our mortality rate would be a lot higher if everyone is wandering around certain that God will protect them :rolleyes:



Its not any of the ones linked to BTW.

I explained why I posted here, I read the forum feedback threads* and "discussion of the rules" ones and I've not seen a feedback/discussion on the rules thread with that little dissension which I found strange and it reminded me that a poster in a previous thread I had read described it in that way. My view would be that a certain amount of complaint and dissension is a good sign (within limits) and indicative of a diverse community.

If you look at my posting record you will see i've been on the very rare occasion a poster here including a few days ago on a separate thread. If people think I'm being a deliberate flamer I'l PM the post to a mod if they promise to respect that users privacy and it will be pretty clear that I haven;t been out searching for anti-atheist posts when I saw that comment.
Also I've seen other forums insulted/stereotyped in here by users so I don't see why its so unbelievable.

* I've way to many posts in feedback for my total posts (and thats with restricting myself)

** I know this figure will be called into question but self designation is the only valid way of considering these types of traits, and its as valid for me to call into question the number of Gay/Traveller people in Ireland as it is for a member of this forum to call into question the belief figures. But I'm guessing it wouldn;t be a popular move to say something like but half those people aren;t really gay under what I would consider gay

I have no doubt whatsoever that someone said it somewhere ( indeed that several someones have said it several places) but they did not say it here in the thread dedicated to Feedback so I am wondering about your motivations for alluding to it.

If you think we are all happy clappy back slappy -say so.

Perhaps the lack of complaint and dissension is simply because the vast majority who took the time to post feedback here are happy with the way the forum is run.

If you look in the various threads you will find a great deal of debate - including people taking Atheist Ireland to task for what some perceive as using the term 'Atheist' to serve a political agenda all atheists do not share or are uneasy about the word being redefined to mean something other than a lack of belief in a deity.

I would say that the number of practicing religious (i.e. those who follow most if not all of the tenets of their particular faith) is a lot less than claim to be religious while the number of people who are actually attracted to the same gender are lot more than those who openly identify as being Gay.

RDM_83 again

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I have no doubt whatsoever that someone said it somewhere ( indeed that several someones have said it several places) but they did not say it here in the thread dedicated to Feedback so I am wondering about your motivations for alluding to it.

If you think we are all happy clappy back slappy -say so.

----
I would say that the number of practicing religious (i.e. those who follow most if not all of the tenets of their particular faith) is a lot less than claim to be religious while the number of people who are actually attracted to the same gender are lot more than those who openly identify as being Gay.

I do think its a bit happy clappy to be honest I thought that was obvious, look at the first two stickies in this forum (below this one) and think what an impression this creates to an external observer! I'm an a la carte Catholic or whatever though so I don;t think its my opinion is particularly valid even though as what might be termed as an Agnostic Catholic I could potentially be a candidate as a user (though i have seen that the idea of a separate agnosticism forum has been rejected).


You would be allowed to say it and you might be right however its no more valid than what I said even though your statement is much more acceptable on this board (my point is not against homosexuality more that it is acceptable to make assumptions about peoples faith in a way that isn't about people sexuality even though both are personal matters of self-identification!)

philologos

The forum is a bit of a backslapping forum, but then again what do you expect? Any forum on this site which is about a particular topic or a particular worldview will usually have a lot of people who agree with that worldview. Therefore, it is likely that most atheists will agree with eachother than not (with the exception of the Atheism+, Skepchick stuff).

ShooterSF

I don't agree that it's a backslapping forum at least not in some type of clique. Indeed many regulars on the forum share a lot of similar views and will agree with each other a lot but no one here pulls their punches when we disagree on a subject. I know myself my reply has never to do with who I'm replying to but rather the content of their post(s).

The Black Oil

I can kinda see where phil is coming from as sometimes things seem to trip into circle jerk territory*, usually when a topic has run its course, but I can't point to specific examples this second as I've a bad memory, and pop in here semi-regularly. I think a lot of it is just humour, though, not necessarily that people fully agree on core arguments about a particular topic. And maybe it's just superficial 'Pat Rabbitte disagrees with bishops - url is posted, fap fap fap', etc that can come across this way. I am not well-read enough on atheism to drift into some of the topics here myself, but I've seen some disagreements, so I'd say you're comments are reasonable, Shooter.

*I'd say that it's a boards wide thing, though. OK, enough with the masturbation talk...

philologos

The Black Oil wrote: »

I can kinda see where phil is coming from as sometimes things seem to trip into circle jerk territory*, usually when a topic has run its course, but I can't point to specific examples this second as I've a bad memory, and pop in here semi-regularly. I think a lot of it is just humour, though, not necessarily that people fully agree on core arguments about a particular topic. And maybe it's just superficial 'Pat Rabbitte disagrees with bishops - url is posted, fap fap fap', etc that can come across this way. I am not well-read enough on atheism to drift into some of the topics here myself, but I've seen some disagreements, so I'd say you're comments are reasonable, Shooter.

*I'd say that it's a boards wide thing, though. OK, enough with the masturbation talk...

It affects every special interest forum. Most people accept base criterion before posting. Here, Christianity, LGBT, and so on. The disagreement is more limited than usual because of the fact that most people here are atheists or agnostic.

It's not intended as criticism it's how I'd expect it to be.

Dades

I absolutely agree.

That's why sometimes less familiar users feel ganged up on when they say something that most of the forum regulars disagree with.

But, as mentioned, that's Boards and niche forums. We're open to any and evey argument but if a majority of people agree with one particular stance there's not a lot you can do to stop them expressing it.

What people have to realise coming in here is that there is a pervasive worldview (i.e. that religions are made up) and that claiming otherwise you will to have your work cut out for you. That's not to say everyone is not welcome - far from it - we need all sorts to keep this place interesting.

robindch

Dades wrote: »

we need all sorts to keep this place interesting

Excellent idea.

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

Excellent idea.

More like we need these





ok, ok - I admit it. I hate allsorts.

yuck

@ allsorts

HURRAY for heroes

robindch

bluewolf wrote: »

yuck @ allsorts

Have a look at the image name above -- haven't been able to eat more than one or two of those infernal things since I downed half a kilo years ago, then went for a long and very bumpy sail way south of Cork harbour.

Corkfeen

robindch wrote: »

Have a look at the image name above -- haven't been able to eat more than one or two of those infernal things since I downed half a kilo years ago, then went for a long and very bumpy sail way south of Cork harbour.

How could you have ever have thought that would end well? :eek:

Bannasidhe

Corkfeen wrote: »

How could you have ever have thought that would end well? :eek:

These things happen...



Personally, I will never be able to even look at a glace cherry again after the incident with the banana boat

Turtwig

Anybody else getting malicious links warning in the hazards of beliefs thread? My Kaspersky is being a little pushy and has for the first time in my memory actually blocked a link from the site.

Suspect post.

Suspect URL

Obliq

Jernal wrote: »

Anybody else getting malicious links warning in the hazards of beliefs thread? My Kaspersky is being a little pushy and has for the first time in my memory actually blocked a link from the site.

Suspect post.

Suspect URL

Nope. I TOTALLY see Jack Nicholson as the Librarian :cool:

5uspect

Jernal wrote: »

Anybody else getting malicious links warning in the hazards of beliefs thread? My Kaspersky is being a little pushy and has for the first time in my memory actually blocked a link from the site.

Suspect post.

Suspect URL

What?

Dades

Never flagged anything on a laptop or iPad.

I think there was some messing in that thread a while back but it was cleared up.

wench

Jernal wrote: »

Anybody else getting malicious links warning in the hazards of beliefs thread? My Kaspersky is being a little pushy and has for the first time in my memory actually blocked a link from the site.

I am seeing it on that post too, also using Kaspersky.

Handsome Bob

The forum is doing fine, but not as good as it used to be.

What disappoints me is seeing a lot of threads started by visitors (who are too quickly labelled as trolls) descend into obnoxious backslapping and thanks whoring.

Lingua Franca

Nostalgia is never what it used to be.

I take it from this feedback that you don't think the mods in this forum are doing their jobs correctly. I beg to differ, since I often see the mods requesting that posters respond fairly to the OP or refrain from accusations of trolling. If, however, you're just voicing your disappointment in the posters of this forum might I suggest that you yourself try posting in an encouraging manner in said threads?

Dades

Handsome Bob wrote: »

What disappoints me is seeing a lot of threads started by visitors (who are too quickly labelled as trolls) descend into obnoxious backslapping and thanks whoring.

Unfortunately we get a lot of driveby posters who quickly show no interest in actual discussion. Once it becomes obvious that people have wasted their time, then threads inevitably fall into disrepair.

I'd be interested to see if you can find an example of a poster who tried, but was not given a fair shot at supporting their proposition, and also very surprised.

Lingua Franca

I clicked through a couple of threads in this section which were started by posters I didn't recognise and a lot of them were started by closed accounts and banned members, and some are clearly just digs at atheists rather than topics for debate and discussion. Although the word troll does get bandied about quite a bit, this forum really does attract a large amount of trolls so it's really no wonder that the regular posters are on guard.

Dades

I agree about throwing out the word "troll" - though I'd be loath to suggest it becomes an official offence given how much it usually takes to get a card around here.

Just ease off on it, troll-callers!

Genghiz Cohen

Dades wrote: »

Unfortunately we get a lot of driveby posters who quickly show no interest in actual discussion. Once it becomes obvious that people have wasted their time, then threads inevitably fall into disrepair.

And biscuit debates.

Doctor DooM

Sometimes, this forum comes under heavy attack from trolls and extreme views from t' other side. Usually there's a little in the background, but sometimes, usually when religion is in the news a lot (like now) there's a lot.

A + A has developed the same self defence mechanism that feedback used to use when I first came to boards. This forum doesn't ban people for simply being a troll: the posters tend to tear their argument apart in case anyone else who's genuine is reading then in order to prove the irrelevancy of coming here and trying to ruin the place they veer off (for a while it was dinosaurs and transformers, now it's all about the cake. In feedback it used to be cat pics).

While it can get tiring, imo it serves an important purpose. This forum doesn't need to ban dissenting thought or trolls. If someone wants to come here and discuss, they will find open discussion waiting. If they're an obvious time waster they don't get what they want as the thread gets twisted beyond all recognition into something amusing for the locals. All the while maintaining a freedom to post on topics that many a/religious forums could really learn from. It's a natural defence system.

Brown Bomber

Dades wrote: »

Unfortunately we get a lot of driveby posters who quickly show no interest in actual discussion. Once it becomes obvious that people have wasted their time, then threads inevitably fall into disrepair.

I'd be interested to see if you can find an example of a poster who tried, but was not given a fair shot at supporting their proposition, and also very surprised.

Here is an example.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056767747