Official Warning – Pitchguest


This is an official warning to Pitchguest.

As many readers know that in all of FTB, I have one of the more relaxed comment policies here. Despite many myriad claims to the contrary, the people who have been banned or been warned have gotten such warnings due to breeching EVEN the more generous comment policy that I do have.

I normally do not  post such letters in the blog, however knowing that Pitchguest is part of the Slymepit has effectively forced my hand. Should I post this solely via E-Mail, my words can be twisted to fit the narrative that FTB is filled with blood sucking ghosts and howling demons of the wastes.

Everyone gets a chance here, to be kicked off my blog you really have to break the rules and be unrepentant about it. The people who have been banned have all received warnings and failed to change. The only person who was outright banned was clearly unlikely to change his ways and directed a series of personal attacks on me and my family. To be banned here is to be realise

Melody Hensley is an executive director of CFI who’s called other people shit, too, including trying to get a YouTube video deleted by throwing her followers at it.

Judging by the photoshop brigade and their current work you will forgive me for assuming that said video was probably not all that nice and probably breeched various rules of youtube and/or good taste.

She’s called other women “sister punishers” and when it came to emphatise with a blind man at a CFI sponsored convention, when the blind man complained about lack of accomodation for the disabled she said, and I quote, “I know how it’s like be disabled because I once broke my ankle and I couldn’t go upstairs.” Granted the blind man comes off as a whiny diva who seems to expect things on a silver platter, but that still doesn’t excuse Hensley on just how enormously stupid that comment is.

And this means it is acceptable to not only conduct a campaign of harassment but also to pretend to be a charity and utilise the good works of the charity to denigrate and bully another person?

An utterly incompetent woman who’s unable to take criticism in any form, whose psyche is so sensitive she develops PTSD from Twitter. PTSD? Pretty damn serious. You don’t fuck around with claims of PTSD. So if Melody says she has it, we better believe it. However, if she has it, and her ailment originated online of all places – Twitter, specifically – then maybe she should stay away from Twitter? Moreover, soldiers who come back from warzones who’ve developed PTSD get panic attacks from fireworks. (Or as you say, from the various things you say the trigger first came from.) So how is it Melody can safely browse online, on Twitter, on Storify (which she has claimed is a tool for harassing people [like from @Elevatorgate]), respond and sometimes even address her so-called “harassers” and be completely fine?

Did you read my post?

There are soldiers who survived  the worst that war could throw at them and who broke down at the sight of something as common place as an abandoned toy. PTSD is not about a single traumatic incident but can be about the slow grind of your mental state.

And you did not read my post. How you fight your monster is upto you. There is no hierarchy of PTSD. My PTSD is not better than hers. We do not engage in debates to rank the validity of trauma.

I am triggered by fireworks because I have come from a warzone. I however have responded to therapy and indeed dealt with my triggers in my own way. I avoid that which I can but I am not averse to setting off fireworks despite not enjoying them to the level of others.

Soldiers who came back from warzones do retreat from public life to avoid their triggers and it isn’t healthy for many. If the trigger for  an individual is something banal then there is nothing they can do to change it. If it is something specifically aimed at them such as the people who terrified me when I was a lot younger by bursting balloons then such behaviour is not normal but a special set of circumstances designed by the art of human hand to trigger. Soldiers who fear explosions may not be able to stop Bonfire Night but they can at least expect people to not chuck cherry bombs at their feet while walking through town.

And we call that bullying.

Must I force you to face your fears solely because you are a jerk?

As for sensitive psyche?

I may have PTSD but it is not indicative of a sensitive psyche. It is indicative of experienced trauma and the association of things with the memory of trauma and reasonable anxiety associated with the trauma being expressed on a permanent basis.

I know for a fact that most people cannot do what I do. They may say that they can but there are enough people who have tried and failed or tried and decided to just give up. PTSD does not mean your psyche is weak and I know that I have not only lived through things that are horrible but also still do so.

We do not know anything about Melody. We really do not. You are making a grandiose assumption about her PTSD as an untrained layman. I would not make assumptions that you do as a trained medical person and I am sure that a specialist in the field of psychiatry and indeed traumatic psychology would not make such a clearly layman guess at the aetiology of her PTSD.

You have been defending the actions of someone or a group of people who thought it was acceptable to use the victims of acid attack to harm and harass a person just because they disagreed with her and her friends.

You didn’t care about ASTI. Do you think this is just about the atheist or about them too? You didn’t care about the charity in question, the things the victims of vitriolage have faced or their struggles. Do you even understand why I am irritated by this and why people think it’s bad?

ASTI to the people who made this and by extension you due to your defence of them are not an organisation that does great work but  a tool to beat down someone you didn’t care for. You may say that you care for the victims of acid attacks but frankly your actions seem like you only care for them unless you need to win an argument on the Internet then they are just another acceptable tool.

You may think Melody deserves this and that’s bullying at it’s simplest.

But you never really stopped to think whether ASTI deserve it.

I know the anti-FTB lot will yell “FREE SPEECH” and other things but here is the long and short of it. You may personally have not engaged in bullying but you are justifying the bullying of someone else by others who you affiliate with. The utilisation of ASTI and your ignoring of that problem is probably because you have no real defence for that thing.

This is an official warning. Knock it off. You are harming a lot of people.

Comments

  1. johngreg says

    Raging Bee said:

    A Slymepitter tried to damage Avi’s career….

    That is simply a bald-faced lie with literaly no support whatsoever to back it up.

  2. says

    1. There seems scant proof to support her claim to having PTSD…

    The proof would be confidential health records, which are none of your fucking business to peruse. By your faux-skeptical reasoning, NO ONE is able to prove ANY mental-health condition to your satisfaction. Your “skepticism” is nothing but a dishonest and childishly-self-serving excuse to be an asshole while pretending to be Sherlock Holmes.

    4. If she really has PTSD, why does she continue to daily play on the place she supposedly developed it from…

    Maybe she continues to use Twitter because it’s how she communicates with her friends. Why is that a problem for you?

    …and why do supposed friends continue to encourage her to do so.

    Because she has EVERY FUCKING RIGHT to communicate with other people, that’s why. The fact that some hateful assholes bullied her on a ceratin medium, does not mean she no longer has a right to use it. If you started getting hateful obscene phone calls, would your friends tell you to stop using phones?

    johngreg, you’re nothing but another predictable victim-bashing asshole, making up transparently ridiculous rationalizations for your assholery. You have nothing worthwhile to contribute here. Go back to your soiled playpen and quit pretending to be a grownup.

  3. says

    That is simply a bald-faced lie with literaly no support whatsoever to back it up.

    My accusation is supported by Avi’s word, which is far more reliable than yours, johngreg.

  4. brive1987 says

    Couple of points.

    Firstly a disproportionate number of people in the SJ world appear to suffer from a range of society induced afflictions. It is natural to be skeptical given the outlier nature of this trend and its corelation with the sufferers (non typical) ideological views. More so when a claim appears to appropriate a serious label. This is not bullying, it’s common-sense at a general level.

    Secondly Melody is not just someone in the playground. She has positioned herself in the public space and is attempting to set agendas and influence opinion. Her claiming PTSS from twitter and her (temporarily) believing equivalency between broken feet and blindness all go to her ideological narrative – regardless of their truth. They define her credentials and they directly feed into efforts to progress the SJ agenda.

    On that point alone people are jusified in questioning their basis.

  5. A Hermit says

    Secondly Melody is not just someone in the playground. She has positioned herself in the public space and is attempting to set agendas and influence opinion.

    You’re not suggesting that suffering from PTSD disqualifies one from participating in the public space, are you?

    `cause that’s sure what it sounds like.

  6. brive1987 says

    Bee:

    “the Earth is round, the sky is blue, water is wet, the Holocaust really happened, and Slymepitters have nothing worthwhile to contribute to any grownup dialog”

    You do see you shifted into a question of opinion / values there don’t you? Nup, didn’t think you would.

    That’s the basis of SJW ridiculousness neatly encapsulated.

    You literally cannot see that your world-view is not the real deal, but rather a subjective values based interpretation informed by personal experience. One of many.

    Strangely enough all the silos and mind fences in the world will not make it any more objectively correct.

  7. Beaker says

    @Johngreg: “Giliell, I am not dismissing Hensley’s claim to have PTSD; I am approaching her claim with skepticism and critical thinking to try and winnow out the veracity of her claim.”

    Well, that’s a bold-faced lie if ever there was one. You have no insight in her medical records, nor in the treatment path that her psychologist / psychiatrist has recommended her. I’m going to make the guess that you are not yourself a psychiatrist or psychologist, but even if you were, you don’t have the requisit information to make that judgment. If you were truly skeptical, you’d say you don’t know and leave it at that. You don’t, you dismiss her claim. You do so right in the post where you posted the line I have quoted.

    Regarding your claim on her twitter usage, you are saying that she should deny herself a way of contact with other people that apparently is of (possible large) value to her. Instead of condemning the people that make it harder for her to use that medium. That is just extremely shitty behavior from your side. But let me give you an alternative scenario: It might be that she has discussed using twitter with her psychologist, that she, together with her psychologist has weighed the benefits and costs of stopping to use twitter versus being exposed to possible new triggers and has been provided with ways to avoid or deal with the triggers twitter might give her.

    @brive1987: “Firstly a disproportionate number of people in the SJ world appear to suffer from a range of society induced afflictions.”
    Feel free to provide the relevant data for that claim, ie:
    – the rate of mental illnesses within the atheist social justice community
    – the rate of mental illnesses among people within the general population who are exposed to a vehement backlash from within their own community for things they have advocated.

    “Secondly Melody is not just someone in the playground. She has positioned herself in the public space and is attempting to set agendas and influence opinion.”
    Sorry, but none of that or what you wrote here justifies the type and amount of bullying she received. Being in the public space and attempting to set agendas does not justify you being bullied.

    “On that point alone people are jusified in questioning their basis.”
    Euhm, no actually, they are not.

  8. brive1987 says

    No Hermit, I’m saying her broadcasting her PTSD as part of her public persona and professional message puts it on the table – especially given my point 1.

    Any other would be thought-leader / ideolog gets the fact that this role comes with greater scrutiny and some baggage.

    I’d also note that there is a difference between questioning her twitter PTSD and the manner in which the question is phrased or conclusions communicated.

    I’d argue there is no basis to close down discussion on the former in this case, the latter – well that’s a more complicated question.

    Our brave new world of on-line activism appears to come with a unique set of tone rules which defy simple parameters. Naturally my “robust criticism” is their “bullying”. “Their” safe-place in-group jests and ridicule are my public outrage etc. And that goes for porcupines as well as ‘shops.

  9. Pitchguest says

    Sigh. What a mess. Okay. First Avi, then the rest.

    It does not amaze me here that in the past 15 hours, no one’s been able to stay on topic.

    Yeah, well, with shit-stirrer numero uno on the case (coincidentally he’s number *two* on the list; fitting), they can’t not.

    The entire problem here is that Pitchguest was justifying the bullying of someone because he thinks she deserved it.

    No, I did not. And there is no bullying.

    That’s the battle cry of bulllies everywhere. Why did you push F over and kick him in the shins. Well sir! F is being an insufferable tosser and that sorted him out!

    EVEN if Melody fit the description of the horrific person as presented by the anti-FTB brigade, do you think the response is to turn her experience online into a hell of harassment? If this sort of behaviour is considered bullying in children it’s considered bullying in adults.

    But She Deserves It, is not a reason but a rationalisation. It is an excuse.

    How can we as atheists proudly shout with solidarity that “It gets better” when we ourselves are busy bullying each other in the same way that kids who are different are?

    Criticism? I think your shirt doesn’t match and doesn’t fit you that well.
    Bullying? I think your shirt fucking sucks! Did your blind dog dress you up? That’s it! You deserve to never use twitter again because your fashion sense will doom us all.

    Oh, stop. Just stop. Melody knows full well the name of the name and she’s played it loads. When Harriet Hall was being harangued by people for the shirt she wore at TAM, she joined in. When Sara Mayhew was being called ‘sister punisher’, on Skepchick and on FtB, she joined in. When Justin Vacula faced a campaign to remove him from his newly appointed position as co-chair in a SCA chapter in Pennsylvania, she joined in. She called Miranda Celeste Hale a ‘sister punisher’ and insinuated (on Twitter) that nobody gave a shit about her until she went after Rebecca Watson.

    She instigated a false flagging campaign for a YouTube user she didn’t like, for a video she didn’t like. She threatened to call someone’s employer to someone whom she accused of stalking her (he didn’t) like she’s in the fucking mafia.

    She is executive director of CFI-DC. Frankly, I’m concerned about her being in a leadership position when this is the kind of mindset she has (particularly about her assigning ‘sister punisher’ to certain women with impunity) and whether this cuts into her vetting process for inviting potential speakers.

    She’s no angel. No saint. She’s not even a samaritan. She is, as far as I’m concerned, an opportunistic, narcissistic whiner who can’t take it when she’s getting dished back. It’s not bullying. It’s pushback. It’s not justifying; it’s taking responsibility for her actions.

    It sounds ridiculous but frankly….

    What do you think this looks like to me? I have been working for the past 12 odd hours and I have to come back to a thread that couldn’t even stay on topic arguing over whether or not it’s acceptable to bully someone by writing fake messages from a charity organisation. Never mind the charity or the victims of the charity.

    Get real. No one is hurt by that photoshop. No one. Not the charity, not the victims of the charity and not Melody. Please.

    Pitchguest tried to justify bullying. It’s why he is being warned.

    I was bullied as a child. I was bullied as a teenager – and in college. I was bullied a lot. As a consequence, I wouldn’t wish that on anyone. However, also as a consequence, I don’t like it when it’s being misused or co-opted to make a spurious point, especially when it makes light of victims of actual bullying. This is not bullying. Not even close. And to be honest, if you think this bullying, then what of the ones Melody herself has wronged? Are they invisible to the harm inflicted on Melody because she developed PTSD and they did not?

    Oh, and because I have to, the reason I think Melody’s full of shit is because her actions are not consistent with her words. She claims that her PTSD was induced by Twitter, but instead of avoiding Twitter – as PTSD sufferers tend to avoid the things that triggered their PTSD in the first place – she treats it like business as usual. Not to mention that her friends frequently (and deliberately) send her stuff that might be potentially triggering, like a blog or forum post insulting her, ON Twitter. It doesn’t add up. If she really has PTSD and it did, indeed, originate on Twitter, then she should take steps to avoid it, no?

    I mean, I don’t suffer from PTSD. I’ve heard and seen what happens to people who do, however, and I would never mock it. Is it really that simple to just put it on the backburner?

  10. brive1987 says

    Beaker, to be blunt it would be easier to try and identify (especially on some blogs here) regular commentators who haven’t experienced a traumatic life experience outside the realm of most.

    Re “Being in the public space and attempting to set agendas does not justify you being bullied” – we are back to world peace are we?

    The world is a big ugly place. Put yourself in front of it and what is justified or not rapidly becomes pragmatically irrelevant. There is also that fine line between sustained robust criticism and bullying. Would you care to define it? Is it frequency, bad words? Does a public leader get to rope off personal aspects? Which ones? What if they use personal info in their public cause – directly or indirectly? Wow. What a messy place.

    But wait all I have to do is identify what I think are the answers, wrap this up in a word (bully) and demand others fall into line.

    You at least seem to have a comfortable view of the world.

  11. Steersman says

    A Hermit said (#56):

    You’re not suggesting that suffering from PTSD disqualifies one from participating in the public space, are you? `cause that’s sure what it sounds like.

    You’re not suggesting that suffering from PTSD precludes having to take responsibility for what one is saying and doing, are you? ’Cause that’s sure what it sounds like.

    While one might reasonably argue that the afflicted – whether physically or emotionally handicapped for one reason or another – should get some special consideration – for examples, “preferred” parking places – it seems you and Avi and a number of others are suggesting that that is some kind of “get-out-of-jail-free” card. Which seems rather much of “a bridge too far”.

  12. Pitchguest says

    #2 oolon:

    Melody also tweeted the broken ankle thing was not correct (_twitter.com/MelodyHensley/status/404378651942084609). Not that this is likely to mean anything to PG and the pitters, they have a good story so they’ll repeat as if true forever.

    Look at the timestamp. Melody’s tweet didn’t exist before my post on Avi’s. Bit difficult to affirm it before then, isn’t it?

    Come on, James. I thought truth was important to you. Besides, the blind man (or Chris Hofstader) hasn’t recanted his story. Despite having a talk with Melody and acknowledging that he had “somewhat mischaracterized her” in his prior blog post (titled “The Invisible Blind Man”) and gone back and edited it to put her in a better light, the statement with the broken ankle still remains. So, who’s lying?

    Also a great example of how to respond to criticism, Melody apologised profusely, but much more important promised to fix for WIS3 (We will see!). As far as I know this is the only public mistake Melody has made in her job and she handled it as well as anyone could be expected to.

    If you don’t count the various gaffes on Twitter, Facebook, and so on. Yeah.

    Not a lot of defensiveness even though she thought things were wrong in the post, presumably the ankle being one of them. _twitter.com/Laura_Rhymes/statuses/338002024849358848

    Presumably. Yes.

    Anyway given “the blind man” as PG calls him, otherwise known as Chris Hofstader is clearly a hero to the slyme. We should have some of his words …

    Oh my. You’re right. Chris Hofstader, not “the blind man.” I am so sorry. Anyway, “the blind man” is a whiny diva who seems to be stuck with a silver spoon in his gob. Er, which I believe I did say, if you can read.

    Perfect example of how PG and pals work, an example that paints Rebecca and Amy in a very good light is only ever referenced to prove how shitty Melody is. Confirmation bias in action.

    You’re part of a commentariat that thinks the word “skeptic” is toxic, that takes the words of anything bad regarding the Slymepit at face value (including yours), that go to town on people right off the bat that happen to dissent and then claim *they* are the ones being insulting (despite one the main tenets of Pharyngula is the want for it be uncivil) [see: ImprobableJoe] – confirmation bias is your life’s blood.

  13. says

    Pitchguest…

    Sara Mayhew’s the one who complained about me and Greta fundraising for stuff from our readers and calling us lazy… Sara also claimed that work I do was not important. Not like her TED fellows.

    Sara then proceeded to launch her kickstarter for a comic that would go towards keeping her in the lap of luxury when compared to me. Sara’s attacks on anyone with FTBully status have been nothing but puzzling and bizarre.

    And do You Seriously Think Calling Her a SIster Punisher is as bad as people’s constant usage of the word cunt about her? Seriously?

    Oh and Pitchguest, the creation of the image mocking her PTSD is BULLYING. It is bullying in the USA and would come under cyberbullying and in the UK it would be the same. It is a clear attempt to create content to belittle a person by denigrating the affliction she has as not serious.

    ASTI have NOT said anything like this and I am sure would not want to be associated. People who do work with ASTI are not amused with this. They do not want to be associated with this bullying. This is part of a greater trend and it portrays ASTI as a bunch of dicks who make up stupid photoshop images to harass people they don’t like. Seriously? It does harm them and considering it uses official fonts and logos it is associating them officially with the bullying of Melody and that is not acceptable. I would NOT allow A Million Gods logos to be used for such.

    Kids go through this every single day and we classify it as bullying. So I repeat, this is not up for discussion. It’s simple and plain bullying. And it’s worse because it is pretending to be a charity that does amazing work when the bully cannot speak in an official capacity for them.

  14. Beaker says

    “Beaker, to be blunt it would be easier to try and identify (especially on some blogs here) regular commentators who haven’t experienced a traumatic life experience outside the realm of most.”
    In other words, that’s a no to the answer of my question. You have no idea

    “Re “Being in the public space and attempting to set agendas does not justify you being bullied” – we are back to world peace are we? ”
    Huh?

    “The world is a big ugly place. Put yourself in front of it and what is justified or not rapidly becomes pragmatically irrelevant.”
    Our reaction to it does not. That the world is an ugly place does not mean we have to justify ugly behavior. We can condemn bad actions, regardless of how shitty the place is. Even stronger, given that the world is a shitty place, it is incumbent on us to condemn bad actions so we can improve it.

    “There is also that fine line between sustained robust criticism and bullying. Would you care to define it? Is it frequency, bad words? Does a public leader get to rope off personal aspects? Which ones? What if they use personal info in their public cause – directly or indirectly? Wow. What a messy place.”
    No, there is not. There is a very big gap between sustained, robust criticism and bullying. Photoshops like the one Avi presented that belittle the mental health of a person are bullying.

    “But wait all I have to do is identify what I think are the answers, wrap this up in a word (bully) and demand others fall into line.”
    I have never asked you to stop disagreeing with Hensley if you do. Disagree all you want. Just don’t bully. You can disagree without obsessively following someone on the internet, without making nasty photoshops, without threatening, and without excusing such actions.

    “You at least seem to have a comfortable view of the world.”
    què?

  15. Pitchguest says

    #4 oolon

    Do you do this shit on purpose just to be an asshole Steersman? You know perfectly well she retracted that and said she was wrong to make the comparison. You also know it annoys Ophelia when you and the assorted liars from the pit keep repeating what you know is a lie. So it just looks like a childish game from where I’m sitting, how many digs can you get at the FTBullies, regardless of truth or accuracy.

    Oh be quiet. Regardless of truth or accuracy? You still bring up the Jerry Conlon thing for fuck’s sake, despite it being refuted time and time again. *You* started the egregious rumour that the ‘pit was responsible for making a false rape accusation against Avicenna and relished it when Avi pinned Rich Sanderson as the culprit due to a misunderstanding. ‘Truth’ and ‘accuracy’ doesn’t even exist in your dictionary. Shut the fuck up.

    And Ophelia’s statement is textbook simile. Even though she didn’t say Nazi Germany, Germany in 1936 was governed by Nazis – the National Socialist Worker’s Party – and had already by then begun purging the Jewish population. She compared the treatment women get at TAM to Jews in Germany 1936. How is this not making a direct comparison between TAM and Nazi Germany?

  16. Steersman says

    Avi said (#64):

    Oh and Pitchguest, the creation of the image mocking her PTSD is BULLYING. …. People who do work with ASTI are not amused with this. They do not want to be associated with this bullying.

    You have a ruling from a lawyer to that effect? You have an e-mail from ASTI confirming that?

    Methinks you have your thumb on the scales, that you’re projecting your own biases and opinions there. Rather hard to believe that anyone would seriously think that that image was actually sourced by ASTI, that it was any reflection at all on them.

  17. Beaker says

    Pitchguest: “Chris Hofstader, not “the blind man.” I am so sorry. Anyway, “the blind man” is a whiny diva who seems to be stuck with a silver spoon in his gob.”
    And excusing the bullying of Melody Hensley is of course not enough. If you are someone like PG, you have to belittle other people at the same time.

  18. Pitchguest says

    Avicenna:

    Sara Mayhew’s the one who complained about me and Greta fundraising for stuff from our readers …

    …I’m sorry. This is confusing. Are you attempting to justify Sara’s treatment?

    I’m not sure if you’ve figured it out, but I’m not trying to paint either of them as someone’s sainted mother. I’m trying to say that if one of them has made it clear they can and want to dish it out, then they should be prepared to get dished in return. Neither of them, Sara or Melody, have skirted when it comes to insults, so how is it only one of them can be called a culprit and the other a victim? The only difference I see is that Sara seems to have embraced this position, while Melody seems content to act like the perpetual victim.

    As for the fundraiser, I only know what I personally felt about it: that one of your fellow bloggers (at the time) was at the risk of becoming homeless, meanwhile you and Greta were fundraising for a (pricey) laptop and (as we would later find out) $300 shoes. It didn’t seem right.

    Sara also claimed that work I do was not important. Not like her TED fellows.

    Sara’s attacks on anyone with FTBully status have been nothing but puzzling and bizarre.

    Puzzling and bizarre? The way you blanket blamed the Slymepit for a false rape accusation because you took someone’s words at face value was puzzling and bizarre.

    And do You Seriously Think Calling Her a SIster Punisher is as bad as people’s constant usage of the word cunt about her?

    Excuse me?

    Oh and Pitchguest, the creation of the image mocking her PTSD is BULLYING. It is bullying in the USA and would come under cyberbullying and in the UK it would be the same. It is a clear attempt to create content to belittle a person by denigrating the affliction she has as not serious.

    Mocking her PTSD? It is a tongue in cheek jab at Melody’s continued use of Twitter despite her PTSD originating on Twitter. Effectively it is reminding us that PTSD is a serious disorder and should not be taken lightly. Again, I ask, is PTSD like a tap or valve that you can just turn on and off whenever you feel like it? Because it seems in Melody’s case, she can still browse on Twitter no problem without even a hint of panic. Is it?

  19. brive1987 says

    “In other words, that’s a no to the answer of my question. You have no idea”

    I have yet to see a black swan. I will let you know when one swims by, but for now all I see is white.

    ………..

    “it is incumbent on us to condemn bad actions so we can improve it”

    Mine was an opening premise; that it’s unreasonable to become a public figure and not expect robust push back and even bullying behaviour from some quarters. You call this ‘snowflakism’ . Now ‘bad’ that’s a value statement requiring a bit more thought and texture.

    ………..

    “There is a very big gap between sustained, robust criticism and bullying”

    Please elaborate or I will do a Nerd on you.. What is acceptable robust criticism? Can I use the PZ Myers template? The Nerd? AnthonyK? The Pope? Your local kindergarten teacher? Really you have left me hanging. Maybe it depends on the context and environment? What is the environment that Melody has plunged into?

    ………..

    ” … belittle the mental health of a person are bullying”

    Well the opening question here is how to react to the claim of an ‘active’ ideolog that she has Twitter Induced PTSD. And what the implications are of this claim for her continued leadership.

    I personally don’t grant the condition. More importantly I don’t grant the cotton wool response you apparently expect. You don’t get to put yourself out there and then draw circles around yourself based on such a doubtful proposition (Twitter). If this snowflake has melted then it should drain away from the public stage. At that point she can have all the privacy she needs as she is no longer (professionally) pushing and defending a contentious agenda.

    Really, next Obama will have media related PTSD and be immune to the full spectrum of criticism.

    The next issue is the use of your word ‘bully’
    ………..

    “Disagree all you want. Just don’t bully. You can disagree without obsessively following someone on the internet, without making nasty photoshops, without threatening, and without excusing such actions.”

    Well we don’t have an agreed definition of bullying yet. But I assume a public leader’s twitter feed is open to all who wish to remain informed – esp if it is used to conduct business? In any case Twitter stalking appears to be the very life force of certain blogs.

    Point me to the photoshops that have been aggressively directed towards her and I will make the decision for myself whether they constitute parody, insult or threat (‘nasty’ is such an imprecise term). I’m sure they run a spectrum and have a context that your blanket request ignores.

    Direct physical threats? Yuck if they are outside the accepted norm of the medium in which she operates. Normally there is an option to have authorities intervene at that point.

    But are they outside the norm of our wonderful civil polite online arena? Or are are they the proverbial “fuck you”s, “fuck off and die”s and other flashpoint insults (cunt) that pepper this debate – each side then categorising the other as bullying, the form and function of the insult an outrageous violation of objective values? Are they in fact often crude banter in safe zones not directed specifically at public figures but mined for effect?

    ………..

    I guess I will have to wait for you to provide me the definitive universal handbook on polite criticism; when inappropriate tone crosses the line to rudeness, rudeness becomes insult and insult becomes bullying. I think PZ is well advanced on this exercise with Thunderdome – you could start there. But for now I wouldn’t be the public face of either side of this ideological debate if you paid me (which apparently is a different conclusion than that reached by Melody).

  20. A Hermit says

    No Hermit, I’m saying her broadcasting her PTSD as part of her public persona and professional message puts it on the table

    So if she talks about her PTSD that makes it OK to mock her and belittle her problem and tell her she should just stay off twitter?

    Yeah, that seems reasonable…!o.O

    You pathetic little fuckers just hate it when someone, especially a woman, stands up to you and your ridiculous self serving petty little complaints.

  21. Al Dente says

    Pitchgeek says he was bullied as a child and in college and that he would never bully anyone else. He then bullies someone else while pretending he’s not bullying her. Pure Slymepit mentality.

  22. brive1987 says

    Proposition = A Hermit is a moron

    “puts it on the table” = “mock her and belittle her problem and tell her she should just stay off twitter?”

    QED

    ………………………………………………………………………

    She can stay on Twitter all she wants. She can remain a vocal, some would say aggressive paid advocate for a certain brand of feminism. She can also complain Twitter gave her PTSD and demand a hall pass.

    She can’t have all three and retain credibility. It also follows the latter (if true) is inconsistent with the initial two options. It also follows any leader in this SJ nirvana on either side (hello DJ, in fact, hello every white male leader and chill girl) will cop shit and have to deal with the various layers of said ‘robust criticism’.

    Needless to say, Twitter induced mental illness is not a sustainable response to the demands of the job.

    (now there’s a sentence I never thought I’d type)

    I know, I know. I write and you read “blah blah blah “

  23. says

    Firstly a disproportionate number of people in the SJ world appear to suffer from a range of society induced afflictions. It is natural to be skeptical given the outlier nature of this trend and its correlation with the sufferers (non typical) ideological views. More so when a claim appears to appropriate a serious label. This is not bullying, it’s common-sense at a general level.

    What are you trying to justify with that bit of empty nonsense?

    You do see you shifted into a question of opinion / values there don’t you?

    No, I “shifted” to an OBSERVATION of Slymepitter behavior — two years of corroborated observation and counting.

  24. brive1987 says

    Bee:

    Actually you made a values based assessment that Slymepitters had nothing “worthwhile” to contribute. The basis for this opinion may well be two years of lurking on the site. Your view is a legitimate interpretation of your observations synthesised through your values systems. It is hardly objectively “true”.

    The historical fact of the Holocaust is a somewhat different proposition.

    As for the “nonsense of the gaps” –

    It is my opinion, based on a similar methodology to yours, that FtB regulars suffer a disproportionally large number of ‘society inflicted’ pains and tribulations. This leads me to conclude that it’s possible they have a slightly different, dare I say looser, definition of these problems.

    That’s why the concept of ‘Twitter assault’ sending Melody into a nightmare of PTSD appears to me open to other interpretations.

    Opinions form the basis for discussions. The rush to objective truth is where all these discussions breakdown.

  25. says

    Myspace api is employed by much more than 100k programs over web and graph improving day by day..
    What else you can expect than having many of
    dependable clients base.. yes that the majority will soon be market-oriented and result creating..

    The truth is an extremely most useful of possible accountable process you will get and tag for whole company.

  26. says

    Despite having a talk with Melody and acknowledging that he had “somewhat mischaracterized her” in his prior blog post (titled “The Invisible Blind Man”) and gone back and edited it to put her in a better light, the statement with the broken ankle still remains. So, who’s lying?

    False dichotomy worthy of a conspiracy soaked pitter, the other option is neither is lying. Not that it really matters, more derailing to justify your bullying of her.

    If you don’t count the various gaffes on Twitter, Facebook, and so on. Yeah.

    You keep making a big deal of her being a CFI-DC employee therefore you can bully her all you want. You provide the evidence of her doing things wrong in her job. Even if she has disagreements and fallings out with her fellow skeptics and atheists, this has nothing to do with her job. Where is your evidence PG?

    You’re part of a commentariat that thinks the word “skeptic” is toxic

    Newp, actually being a skeptic and using critical thinking skills is the gold standard in the “commentariat” that I am part of. You are toxic with your pretensions to skepticism while being solely focused on petty personalities to derail from an argument you cannot win. You think the FTB-brand feminism is wrong, how or in what way is like nailing a jelly to a board. None of you can even coherently define what is wrong and what the alternative is. So to rationalise your unwarranted egos you spend all your time trying to trash the people that hold the views you disagree with. Because you cannot attack the views with any level of rational argument. Said it before, you tried (atheistskepticdialogue.com) and failed, miserably.

  27. says

    Actually you made a values based assessment that Slymepitters had nothing “worthwhile” to contribute.

    An assessment based on years of observation, for which I make no amendment or apology. It is an OBSERVABLE FACT that Slymepitters are dishonest, bigoted, hypocritical, uneducated, and uneducable. That’s not a “value judgement,” it’s an observation of behavior. Your lame attempt to pretend it’s just an opinion, only shows how childish you are.

    It is my opinion, based on a similar methodology to yours, that FtB regulars suffer a disproportionally large number of ‘society inflicted’ pains and tribulations.

    An opinion so vaguely worded as to be meaningless. You have no clue what you’re talking about, and are, as usual, making up pseudoinellekshal talking-points to hide your cluelessness.

  28. A Hermit says

    I know, I know. I write and you read “blah blah blah “

    No, I read the usual distortions. Helnsley isn’t claiming that she has “twitter induced mental illlness”, for fucks sake; she has PSTD from being harassed and monitored by abusive bullies, which triggers memories of past abuse.

    It is typical of you assholes to minimize and ignore the facts to suit your self serving narrative and excuse your childish behaviour.

  29. says

    Pitchgeek says he was bullied as a child and in college and that he would never bully anyone else. He then bullies someone else while pretending he’s not bullying her. Pure Slymepit mentality.

    He also goes on to say that his experience fo being bullied gives him the right to decide what is and is not bullying when it happens to someone else. I’d love to see his reaction when someone who suffered even worse bullying pulls the same stunt on him.

  30. says

    She can’t have all three and retain credibility.

    Lectures about credibility don’t mean shit when they come from people who have none.

    Needless to say, Twitter induced mental illness is not a sustainable response to the demands of the job.

    You’re not signing any paychecks, asshole, so you don’t get to tell us what “the demands of the job” are.

    So, Avi, when are you going to finally follow through on your promise and start banning these morons? They’ve been proving for years that they have nothing to offer but relentless pretentiousness, repeated lies, and explicit refusal to act like adults. They already have their own designated toxic-waste containment facility, so there’s no use letting any of their effluent leak out of it.

  31. Pitchguest says

    #19 Holms:

    – You noted that this user has a trend of maliciousness.

    What? No, he did not note a trend of maliciousness in the user. I don’t even know how you got that from what he said.

    – You note that a complaint was made that this video matches the trend.

    Again, there was no trend. And complaints are made to videos on YouTube all the time.

    – Youtube sided with the complainee and deleted the video.

    Heh. “YouTube sided with the complainee.” Shows a deep ignorance of the inner workings of YouTube.

    Melody instigated a false-flagging campaign. Hundreds of videos that didn’t violate the ToS have gotten removed, reinstated and removed again, because of false-flagging campaigns. (That’s when several people agree to flag the same video despite it not violating the ToS.) Even if you’ve done nothing wrong, if you get flagged enough times you get a warning. It happens again, another warning. Three times and you’re out. YouTube “[siding] with the complainee” means fuck all.

    – You remain sceptical …why? Everything is right there matching an established pattern that you were clearly already aware of. But OH NO! It might not be so unless we directly witness it!

    Good ol’ hyperscepticism when it suits you; you are living up to slymepit standards.

    Nothing what he said matches the strawman of what you think he said and evidently you haven’t even made an effort check into the veracity of Melody’s claims, like the exercise of false flagging videos on YouTube, just believing them without question. Let me guess: another one of those who think the word ‘sceptic’ is toxic?

    And people wonder why Slymepitters are reviled! Here we have examples of sexism, xenophobia and plain assholery all in one.

    He’s not a Slymepitter. Has never posted on the Slymepit nor is he a member of the Slymepit. Nice bit of freethought there, genius.

    But I see the bugle has been sounded over there and the brave internet warriors are mustering for some brave anonymous name calling, so conversation here is likely to be fruitless. Avi, once you warn / ban one, the rest come in droves. Get your banning finger ready!

    Hear hear! Spoken like a true FtBer.

  32. Pitchguest says

    #35 Holms:

    Uhhhhhhh an unscrupulous bastard from the slymepit tried to fuck with a stranger in order to make a point in an argument against another stranger, all because they happen to belong to FTB. I fail to see how the actions of someone from the slymepit reflects badly on the FTB group.

    Tell you what. Maybe you could use that privilege we call ‘The Internet’ and actually research the incident he’s referring to instead of just assuming things out of wholecloth?

    But then again, I guess I can’t ask you to use your brain for a change. Wouldn’t want you to overexert yourself.

  33. says

    Melody instigated a false-flagging campaign….

    Really? The woman who was vilified for showing weakness on the Internet and complaining about the bullying, is now being vilified for using overwhelming power to silence people on the Internet? Make up your mind, jackass — is she a “professinal victim” or a scary FtBully mastermind? She can’t be both.

    Pitchguest, even aside from the laughable implausibility I see in this story, do you really expect anyone to take your whiny paranoia seriously, after all the stupid dishonest shit you’ve said here? You’re nothying but a self-pitying despicable attention-hogging loser.

  34. says

    Tell you what. Maybe you could use that privilege we call ‘The Internet’ and actually research the incident he’s referring to…

    Why don’t YOU use the Internet to back up your own claims instead of pompously demanding everyone else do it for you? It’s not our job to back up your babyish hateful accusations, you little shit.

  35. Pitchguest says

    #45 Raging Bee:

    BTW, Avi, for what my opinion is worth, I really don’t think you need to give any explicit warnings to the ‘pittiful — it only gives them more of the attention they crave, without deterring them from being the assholes they enjoy being. And it’s not like you’re telling us anything about Pitchguest that we don’t already know. We don’t need it explained why you’re banning well-known pond-scum like Pitchguest or Thunderf@rt — it’s one of those questions that can be considered “settled.” As in, the Earth is round, the sky is blue, water is wet, the Holocaust really happened, and Slymepitters have nothing worthwhile to contribute to any grownup dialog and there’s no point in letting them hog our attention in any venue outside of their own designated toxic-waste dump.

    Right. So we “Slymepitters” are childish, stupid, and have “nothing worthwhile to contribute to any grownup dialog.”

    To which I’d like to ask: Thunderf@rt?

  36. says

    Pitchguest I repeat. You are still justifying the bullying of someone using rather the logo and work of a charity and pretending to “be” that Charity.

    We are witnessing an entire wall of people defending this tactic ranging from your “It’s harmless!” and “She had it coming!” to the incredibly daft suggestion someone had that it’s only a problem until ASTI lawyer up.

    None of you can stay on target. However Pitchguest is pushing the limits of what I find acceptable.

    I don’t know what’s worse. The possibility that you are angling for a ban to be some sort of FTBully Martyr and tell people about how horridly I stood all over your free speech rather than trying to hold you to account for the free speech you had. You are showing no responsibility of speech.

    Or that you really cannot see why this entire picture is a problem.

    I suggest we all take a break from here.

    All that’s been done is made me realise yet again that despite claims by the Slymepit and the anti-FTB group of people to the contrary, the beliefs of people who belong to said group are rather distasteful.

    And no. I am not walking away from my blog. This is a labour of love and something I have worked long and hard on. Consider I put out a post a day or atleast try to and I work 12 to 15 hour shifts and STILL try and post because I like to write. So no, I will not take the advice of the people who insist that I should go away and not blog for my own good and will instead suggest to them that we should clean up our act for OUR own good.

    I repeat.

    Must atheists be sued and have our actions be paraded before the harsh light of the law before we rectify our ways? Must we get taken to the cleaners by a damn charity for being dicks? Would you tolerate your name being used for the bullying of kids?

    Then why do you think ASTI would somehow agree with you?

    I am calling this thread over. Pitchguest, take a break mate. If you still want to defend your position then defend it elsewhere. I am done with this, I cannot believe I have to explain to grown fucking adults why bullying is wrong, what bullying is and why the usage of someone else’s name to bully others is bad particularly when it’s utilising the victims of a terrible crime to beat down someone else.

    No buts. I have given you a lot of rope and rather than chose to climb up you chose to hang yourself with it.

    You dragged your friends from the Slymepit over to play but the unfortunate side effect is all you managed to do is prove to me that both factions are not equally stupid. That the slymepit justifies it’s bullying of others while it keeps portraying itself as victims.

    I mean for fuck’s sake people and this is both sides… We were here to discuss whether or not it’s acceptable to use a Charity to Bully Someone.

    No. This Conversation Is Over. You don’t have to go home but you can’t stay here. I am treating you like adults so behave like one. If I have to shut this thread down I will.

  37. Pitchguest says

    #72 Al Dente:

    Pitchgeek says he was bullied as a child and in college and that he would never bully anyone else. He then bullies someone else while pretending he’s not bullying her. Pure Slymepit mentality.

    Pitchgeek? One, you seem to be under the impression that I take offense to the word ‘geek’ or that I would be offended to be called a geek, and two, once more I must question the so-called “grownup dialog” that supposedly takes place here.

    #73 WithinThisMind:

    No evidence has been presented that Pitchguest has been bullied, thus we must be skeptical of such claims and treat them as though they are wholly untrue.

    Ah. Seems you missed the point. While my being bullied wasn’t really relevant to Melody’s claims of PTSD (meaning you can question or even dismiss my bullying as many times as you want for all I care), if I claimed that I had developed PTSD by being bullied from, say, a particular place, and then went to great lengths to frequent that particular place (even making it my go-to spot for conversation), you might be inclined to call me a bullshitter.

    I don’t dismiss the seriousness of PTSD (nor have I attempted to minimize it), so when Melody says that her PTSD derived from Twitter but then continues spending time on Twitter, and if PTSD isn’t just like a tap or valve that you can turn off and on at your leisure, I might be inclined to think she’s full of shit. And I do. If she does have PTSD, fine. But it clearly did come from Twitter as she claims and I would appreciate it if she would stop bullshitting and start taking it seriously. She’s making light of other victims of PTSD.

  38. Pitchguest says

    #89 Avicenna:

    Oh, piss off with your moralising, sanctimonious babbling. I am not bullying anyone. I am not justifying bullying or even commiting proxy bullying. You keep saying it’s insulting that I doubt Melody’s claims about her disorder. Well, I think it’s insulting that you keep using the word ‘bullying’ to signify my actions. As I said, I suffered through it and I wouldn’t wish that anyone. Not to mention that you actually ignored where I said that Melody herself has engaged in bullying behaviour, like joining in with various crowds insulting people, and starting her own crowd insulting people. Like, does this even register on your hypocrisy scale or are you just content in defending her no matter what?

    I repeat, she is no saint. She is no samaritan. The facts are, she’s a public figure, on a public stage, she’s said and done things people vehemently disagree with and she is as culpable as any other on that stage to be held responsible for their actions. (This is equally true of Sara Mayhew, also a public figure, also on a public stage.) How in the hell am I BULLYING her? Stop calling it bullying. It’s fucking insulting, to me and to other victims of bullying. And stop going on about that stupid photoshop. I didn’t make the fucking thing.

    All that’s been done is made me realise yet again that despite claims by the Slymepit and the anti-FTB group of people to the contrary, the beliefs of people who belong to said group are rather distasteful.

    What a load of codswallop.

    I am calling this thread over. Pitchguest, take a break mate. If you still want to defend your position then defend it elsewhere. I am done with this, I cannot believe I have to explain to grown fucking adults why bullying is wrong, what bullying is and why the usage of someone else’s name to bully others is bad particularly when it’s utilising the victims of a terrible crime to beat down someone else.

    What the fuck are you talking about? *You* cannot believe? You took it upon yourself to unequivocally accuse Rich Sanderson of making false rape accusations against you with no proof and then when it turns out it was just a misunderstanding, you didn’t even recant or update the blog post to reflect this but instead made another blog post implicating the Slymepit as well. You want to talk about grown fucking adults? Don’t make me laugh. As for me, *I* cannot believe you keep insulting victims of actual bullying with your spineless pandering. I mean, ironically, several people in this thread have ganged up on me and said mean things about me; am I being bullied? Well?

    No buts. I have given you a lot of rope and rather than chose to climb up you chose to hang yourself with it.

    No, you haven’t. You have ignored my main arguments, you haven’t addressed the PTSD issue (whether it’s as simple as turning it off and on), you keep going on about the photoshopped image even though none of us have said anything about it (and as far as I’m concerned, it’s irrelevant) and you keep insisting what I do is bullying despite me you showing evidence to the contrary. Forget rope; you haven’t even thrown me a bone.

    You dragged your friends from the Slymepit over to play but the unfortunate side effect is all you managed to do is prove to me that both factions are not equally stupid. That the slymepit justifies it’s bullying of others while it keeps portraying itself as victims.

    What? I dragged my friends over? How? They knew about it before I did. Err. Huh?

  39. says

    While my being bullied wasn’t really relevant to Melody’s claims of PTSD…

    Then why did you mention it in response to Melody’s claims? Answer: You did it to give yourself an excuse to justify the bullying.

    I don’t dismiss the seriousness of PTSD (nor have I attempted to minimize it)…

    You explicitly did both in comment #60, you lying little turd.

    And then on top of those whiny whoppers, you have the gall to deny that Avi has given you a chance to state your case? Seriously? After he FAILED to carry out his threat to ban you? Did someone say “professional victim?”

    Pitchguest, you’re nothing but an overgrown uneducable ungrateful selfish (INCOMPETENTLY selfish, I might add) spoiled brat, clearly incapable of any thought above the third-grade level. You’ve proven (again) that nothing you say can be taken seriously. Go the fuck to bed.

  40. Pitchguest says

    A slight addendum to my #90 comment.

    It should be, “But it clearly did NOT come from Twitter as she claims.” Forgot the ‘not’.

  41. Pitchguest says

    #92 Raging Bee:

    While my being bullied wasn’t really relevant to Melody’s claims of PTSD…

    Then why did you mention it in response to Melody’s claims?

    I didn’t? I mentioned it because of Avi’s superflous misuse of it. Because he’s seriously insinuating that Melody is a victim of bullying when it couldn’t be further from the truth, thus minimising actual victims of bullying. The one who mistakenly made the connection to my mention of being bullied and my apprehension to Melody’s claims of getting PTSD from Twitter (or rather mistakenly thinking they had any relevance to eachother, or that I thought they had any relevance to eachother) was WithinThisMind.

    You can’t really blame me for the narrative blunders of one of your own. But then something tells me that you don’t much care for facts. Sensationalism is more your game.

    I don’t dismiss the seriousness of PTSD (nor have I attempted to minimize it)…

    You explicitly did both in comment #60, you lying little turd.

    You mean when I explicitly said, “I don’t suffer from PTSD. I’ve heard and seen what happens to people who do, however, and I would never mock it.” I am such a turd. Oh, and “turd”? Where is this “grownup dialog” you speak of?

    I have said and I will keep saying it, but the one who’s minimising the seriousness of PTSD is Melody Hensley right now with her croning about having got it from Twitter and then continuing to frequent Twitter. I’ve repeatedly asked if PTSD is a disorder that you can just easily put on the backburner whenever you feel like it but I’ve yet to receive an answer, but until I have I’m going to assume that it’s not and that Melody Hensley is full of shit. Apparently calling out someone for their bullshit is bullying and mocking them for their bullshit is bullying.

    Shall we take a stroll down memory lane and see if anything like this comes up in your comment history?

    That is, calling someone out on their bullshit and mocking someone for their bullshit. I have a feeling I don’t have to go back very far.

    And then on top of those whiny whoppers, you have the gall to deny that Avi has given you a chance to state your case?

    No… that’s… that’s not what giving someone a lot of rope means. But I suppose I shouldn’t knock it; his moderation policy is way better than the rest of the fainting couch brigade. So yeah, he has. He’s given me a chance to state my case, more than most on here, and I appreciate that very much. But not much else.

    Seriously? After he FAILED to carry out his threat to ban you? Did someone say “professional victim?”

    Huh, well, I guess NOT banning someone is anything short of a miracle in your world.

    Pitchguest, you’re nothing but an overgrown uneducable ungrateful selfish (INCOMPETENTLY selfish, I might add) spoiled brat, clearly incapable of any thought above the third-grade level. You’ve proven (again) that nothing you say can be taken seriously. Go the fuck to bed.

    Projecting much?

  42. johngreg says

    Raging, you really, really do have a major reading comprehension problem. You are so angry all of the time, and so deeply embedded and devoted to you ideology, that you can no longer read the words for the overall content — and vicey versey for that matter.

    You are willfully seeing nothing but rotten elms in a multi-layered deciduous forest. Time for remedial English reading me boyoh; pony up.

  43. says

    Because he’s seriously insinuating that Melody is a victim of bullying when it couldn’t be further from the truth, thus minimising actual victims of bullying.

    You explicitly said Melody was not being bullied, and now you accuse HER of “minimising actual victims of bullying?” Are you even grown-up enough to see how hypocritical you are? Take your stupid crybaby axe-grinding hatred and stroke it somewhere else.

  44. Pitchguest says

    Because he’s seriously insinuating that Melody is a victim of bullying when it couldn’t be further from the truth, thus minimising actual victims of bullying.

    You explicitly said Melody was not being bullied, and now you accuse HER of “minimising actual victims of bullying?” Are you even grown-up enough to see how hypocritical you are? Take your stupid crybaby axe-grinding hatred and stroke it somewhere else.

    You know. If you’re accused of having a major reading comprehension problem and you deny that, it might work better in your favour if you don’t proceed to prove him right. Just saying.

  45. MattP (must mock his crappy brain) says

    @ Pitchguest and assembled ‘pitters
    Avi has said it several times but you still do not appear to be getting the message:
    The dickish behavior of using ASTI’s name and the victims of acid attacks in a faux official image to ‘criticize’ another person is the entire fucking point of the last two posts and comment threads. It does not fucking matter if MH has PTSD or not, or even if she really is leading some sort of crusade against the pit; you and your fellow shitkickers have been attempting to justify the appropriation of the voices of victims, and the charity that aids them, in someone’s shitty and unimaginative attempt to belittle another human you do not like. There is no justification. You lose. Move on.

    TL;DR: Ensure you and your buddies use your own fucking voices to express criticism, or kindly go off and fuck yourself with a rake.

Trackbacks

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>