North Korean IT venture company makes country’s first (maybe) video game »« Staver/Barbar: California law turns sexual abuse victims into gays and transgender

Well that escalated quickly.

This is kinda screwed up, though with this post I will consider the matter resolved for the time being. If you get triggered on anything bordering on stalkerdom or obsession, consider this a trigger warning and don’t click through.

Back on Jan 1st, I got an email from a name I hadn’t ever seen before: one Camomile Lox.

Yahoo answers question? (read, pretty please? -.-)
Camomile Lox
Jan 1 (9 days ago)

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130101151159AAQpONj

I think it should be obvious which answer is mine but if not I’ll tell you. Maybe you can do a mini post on that? Especially hana’s answer. (note that the guy said the mother DID ask the father)

Also about the false rape thing, were you charged and acquitted or did it just not even go through? Do acquittals show up online?

I didn’t recognize the name. The question about the false rape claim made me both wonder what search brought this particular person to my blog, and what they thought I could contribute to a totally unrelated Yahoo Answers question. I ignored the email and mentally filed the name away as someone to watch.

Apparently this person’s been commenting in several places recently though, like here at FtB, as Eucliwood — named after an anime character, I guess. I had no way of knowing they were the same person. Eucliwood uses a different email address, and the email headers for Camomile Lox were showing a 10.x IP addy (which you should know is not internet-routable, e.g. an internal network).

So Eucliwood recently did her usual thing (and I only say usual based on seeing her do the same thing at Stephanie’s and Ed’s blogs) of pointing out when I’m being unfair to men while discussing sexism (heh). We got in a fight because she hadn’t watched the video that my blog post was a comment on and jumped to ridiculous conclusions. I presumed sliminess, though only based on the assumption that she’d actually read AND watched what she was commenting on.

After I put her into moderation and started heading toward bed, my phone kept buzzing with each new comment she left. I approved them all, because they were demanding that I address her apology. The entitlement was staggering, but I still didn’t know Eucliwood and Camomile Lox were the same person. So when I figured out the commenter with the sudden sense of entitlement, whom I’d seen being… let’s say “prolific”… in other places, was the same person asking uncomfortable legal questions about my first girlfriend when I was 16 years old, out of the blue, with no prior contact, I got a bit creeped out.

The way I figured it out, was because she told me she had emailed something to me. The only person who’d contacted me, outside of others I was expecting for non-blog-related reasons, was Camomile Lox again.

Permission to use actual name?
Camomile Lox
Jan 8 (2 days ago)

I’m writing crappy fiction in order to help me deal with my frustrations involving ftb topics, etc, I don’t agree with. Usually I wouldn’t ask but you guys are into legal things and I don’t want my mother to have to go to court for me so I’m wondering if I can use your actual name in the fiction or if I should just use a different name… but I would prefer to use the first name Jason because I can’t thnk of any other good J names.

Please don’t ask what some of it will be about. It’s for your own good. I wouldn’t want you vomiting (plus I’d be offended at your vomit reaction).

Since I’d never responded to the first one from that name, and since I didn’t realize she and Eucliwood were the same person til I asked and she confirmed, putting them together gave me that creep-out frisson. I didn’t know what was going to be in this story, but I’d like to control — at least somewhat, knowing total control is impossible — what nonsense gets associated with my real name wherever possible. (And for this I suppose I should thank the slimepitters for calling me everything from Tibbydiedoh to Thimbledick to Justin Bieber — thanks for helping me out! Though, you should know it’s pronounced the same as Tim Tebow’s.)

I didn’t have to read what the actual story was to know that there was the potential for too much damage here, and a budding obsession that was disconcerting but (to that point) harmless.

I decided to try to make my boundaries extremely clear, regardless:

Jason Thibeault
5:23 PM (20 hours ago)

I would like you to cease all attempts to communicate with me, whether by email, blog or any other means.

Thank you.

A screenshot of the two emails to show the time frame:
Camomile Lox - Screenshot from 2013-01-10 13:03:48

This did not stop her from posting further comments on my blog, claiming I had not told her to back off. Nor did it keep her to her promise to use a different name.

Nor did it keep her from publishing her opus over at the Slyme Pit ( http://slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=225 ).

Yes, that Slyme Pit, where even the slimepitters are tiring of her twee spammings, and some have even stepped up to say that her nonsense aimed at me is stalkerish and unacceptable. Of course, now that I’ve praised those folks among them for this, I’m sure they’ll flip to “Wow, Thimbledick is such a pussy, those letters weren’t even threatening.”

For posterity, in case the slimers DO decide to ABROGATE HER FREEDOM OF SPEECH ban or moderate her from their forum (because I understand they’re debating it), I include her opus below.

The Slymepit • View topic - Conflict Tension Release Daydreams thread

For screen readers, in text without any formatting changes because I can’t be arsed to cut out all the border nonsense from a Ctrl-A Ctrl-C (I may return to change it later):

The Slymepit
Gleefully Tap Dancing on the Grave of A+Theism (in Designer Shoes Bought With Dodgy Money!)

Skip to content

Advanced search
Board index ‹ “FreeThought Blogs” and the FC5 ‹ The Sweaty Bollocks of Nostradamus
Change font size
Print view
FAQRegisterLogin
Conflict Tension Release Daydreams thread
Post a reply

2 posts • Page 1 of 1
Conflict Tension Release Daydreams thread
by Eucliwood » Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:12 pm • [Post 1]

Daydreams must have a positive ending element in them. No daydreams in which you simply want to torture them.

Example:

ooo.. this calls for an image… okay, okay, so he’s talking to Svan about it, being all dishonest, and I march in and set it straight, and they’re all calling me a liar and shit, and I storm off, totally tearless. But then I’m banging branches on the ground and breaking them like hulk before I collapse in a tearful hypoglycemia-destroyed mess and he finds me like that and he’s staring at me, and then Im like “fuck you, jason. You know that’s not what happened.” and he’s like “fine, psh, stay there” and Im all trying to crawl away and then I fail miserably and collapse like a doe that cant yet walk and he has to pick me up and I just look at him with a defeated expression on and I ask him “why.” and he refuses to answer but just takes me into his car and he’s all “okay. I’m driving you to the hospital.” and Im like “no, I dont need the hospital for hypoglycemia, I just need a bagel or something.” and hes all “no, hospital (paraphrase)” and Im like “NOPLZNOHOSPITAL. youve done enough tonight” and he’s like “okay, fine.” and then I get to fall asleep in his lap or something until he gets me some food…

TO BE CONTINUED.

authentic daydream of mine. fck yes.

Example:

Okay. But really, what would cuddle time be like with him? Or sex? Or all of that, + talking about common ground in our differences or how much our differences suck. OR OR OR… mmaybe I find him injured and I take him home and nurse him back to health and he asks me who I am and I say I’m that girl who comments on his posts who doesn’t really like FtB and I hardly want to say anything to him because he’s sort of a lame person in my eyes but the tension grows smaller and smaller as I tend to his wounds and we talk and stuff…
damn, why is so easy to imagine but so hard to gather up and translate on text? that’s not exactly what I was imagining. Bleh. ONE DAY… I will write an indepth fiction piece after lucid dreaming it or something so its so vivid it doesn’t get lost in translation in text where I can’t recall what exctly I was imagining.

Another authentic daydream.
I cannot do anything about the # of posts I already made. My post count will always be above average due to this. So stop reading the count for something to whinge about.

Eucliwood

Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:25 am
Top
Pregnant with his baby..but he’s married. crappy fiction
by Eucliwood » Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:35 pm • [Post 2]

Okay, forget the positive ending rule. Express as you wish.

“My wife and I arrived home at 1:30am to a house with no food, short one bag.”

Wow, he has a wife? I wonder how FtB she is. I wouldn’t want to be seen married to him.

oooo… this calls for a steamy mistress image. Not that he would actually “cheat” (strictmonogamyisforlosers) on his wife.
The pregnantbythibeault image just got a lot more interesting.

OKAY OKAY lemme add onto it… hes mad that hes pregnant with my baby cos his wife doesn’t like it when hes pregnant by other people, right??
He’s all “omg, abort ittt, damn, I dont want your kid! We dont even like each other!”
and Im all “but maybe having my baby would teach you something in the process! Ill raise it on my own! No adoption or abortion for JASON THIBEAULT II.”

and he’s all like “omg no do not name the child after me! dont tell my wife its mine. Please don’t.”
and Im all “Like I want to deal with that old hag? I was kidding anyway. I’m not sure if I’ll keep the baby.”
And he’s like “wow.. I can’t believe you’re pregnant. We should have used a condom. In fact, we shouldn’t have done it at all.”

“You know, I don’t regret our intimate time.”

“What? Why the hell not. You don’t like me. You think I’m a total femtheist, and everything.”

“Well, you still have a nice side to you, and I was hoping to take the femtheist out of you.”

“Um, no. I’m fine the way I am. If you don’t like me for me, fuck you. I am no femtheist. I’m a feminist.”

“Right… no, you’re a femtheist, not that I expected you to consider yourself as such. You have a religion.”

“What? So becase you’re a misogynistic ass, w-”

“Whoa. Did you seriously use the AbuseLabels move on me? I want to dig your baby out with a FORK.”

“First you compliment me, and then you say you want to dig my baby out with a fork. You’re nuts. And you can’t change me. Like I said, if you don’t like me for me, fuck you.”

“Which is what you did last week. You don’t like my views either, but we had sex last week, and I bet you wish I was a femtheist like you, don’t you? But my wish is valid, I’m the better person here.”

“Seriously? Fuck you.”

-He attempts to storm out… I run and bump him with my baby bump, not that anyone can see a bump yet-

for the hell of it, I think, but I really really wish I could deconvert him!

“What the hell? What do you want?”

I can’t think of anything to do, so I get down on the floor and grab his calf.

“What the fuck?”
I cannot do anything about the # of posts I already made. My post count will always be above average due to this. So stop reading the count for something to whinge about.

Eucliwood

Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:25 am
Top
Hide Reply Options[Hide] POST A REPLY
Display subject
Display BBCodes
Display smilies
Quote last message
Disable BBCode
Disable smilies
Don’t auto-parse URLs

Username:

Type the all letters except vowels in the word interferon, in order, no spaces, and add the number 324 at the end:
This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.

Display posts from previous: Sort by
Post a reply
2 posts • Page 1 of 1
Return to The Sweaty Bollocks of Nostradamus

Jump to:
WHO IS ONLINE
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Board indexThe team • Delete all board cookies • All times are UTC – 8 hours
Support the Pit with a donation via PayPal

USD

GBP

CAD

AUD
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

So yeah.

That happened.

Eucliwood is in permanent moderation now. I post this only to keep everyone informed as to what happened, and why I’m cutting all ties with this person. I never, in my wildest dreams, thought I’d be made into a Mary Sue fantasy by someone ideologically opposed to my feminism, so I thought I’d share the whargarbl.

I consider, as I’ve said, this matter to be closed for the time being. Any further contact will be sent to the authorities.

Oh, and for what it’s worth, a more appropriate response from another slimepitter you might remember as claiming to be a feminist who I was blocking because I’m horrible to women:

codelette wrote:

cunt wrote:
So am I the only one who thought the Eucliwood/LousyCanuck slashfic was funny as fuck? I hope that’s what she sent to him.

I was nauseated. Not because of how graphic the messages were, but because LC totally dries up all my mucous membranes and just seeing his pic makes me vomit a little inside my mouth.

Yeah. Thanks, codelette. Right back atcha.

Comments

  1. says

    She (?) is right about one thing: she does write crappy fiction. REALLY crappy fiction. And it’s how she deals with FTB topics she doesn’t agree with? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?!

    And now she’s found a lot of new “friends” in the slymepit, who appear to be just as creepy and unhinged as she is. Kindred spirits and all that! Yet another reason to build a huge firewall around the slymepit and treat it as a toxic waste site.

  2. says

    For what it’s worth and from someone who participates in the Slymepit, I thought that was creepy as well. Anytime someone invades your email with things you’d prefer not to deal with is a spammer at best and a stalker at worst. My 2 cents.

  3. says

    @ Renee

    Don’t worry. We know you’re a pitter. Your viscous twitter comments have been well documented.

    Forgive me if I doubt your ability to discern what’s “creepy”.

  4. Anthony K says

    The important thing is that they’ve all managed to find a place where it’s junior high forever.

    Remember when Al Stefanelli said the ‘pit was like nothing he’d been led to believe?

  5. sheila says

    Yes, that’s creepy.

    I think your stalker might be a minor. “I don’t want my mother to have to go to court for me” plus the writing style reads like about 14.

    Or maybe just yanking chains. In a creepy way.

  6. says

    Having dealt with someone who invaded my email, contacted my friends and my loved ones, and decided to contact employers…yeah, I think I have a pretty good handle on “creepy” not to mention stalkery. But go ahead and just rate my comment *solely* on the fact that I participate in a forum you all don’t approve of. I’m sure many of you participate in things others don’t approve of – just saying.

  7. says

    Hi Jason,

    I think it’s highly likely Eucliwood/Camomile Lox is under legal age, from the implication of her second e-mail where she mentions that her mother would be obliged to defend her in court, should that transpire. So in one sense, she is deserving of legal protection from the full consequences of her actions, and perhaps greater responsibility from adults to limit any potential harm she’s doing.

    Another thing in that e-mail is she says ‘I’m writing crappy fiction…’ but in fact the ‘crappy fiction’ was already written and posted over at the SPit. That’s an entirely immature behaviour, to do something you perhaps know you shouldn’t do, and then go about asking for the permission you need to go about retrospectively making it okay.

    BTW, I seriously doubt they’re considering banning her over at t’Pit (that would infringe their views on Freeze Peach) but a few of them view her as a pest and use the Ignore feature which is available on phpBB forums. They’ve also set up a poll (also in the ‘Sweaty Bollocks of Nostradamus’ sub-forum — hmm, Mabus/Markuze theme noted) asking SPitters to answer if Eucliwood is a troll, a naïve newbie, in need of Ritalin, clueless, a version of Archie the Cockroach on crack, or one of the mice from the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. Partial url, viewtopic.php?f=32&t=213&view=viewpoll

  8. says

    I think your stalker might be a minor. “I don’t want my mother to have to go to court for me” plus the writing style reads like about 14.

    I agree. Plus, in another comment of hers (maybe on “back from vacation”?) she said that she’s not an adult. All the more reason to shut it down quickly and cleanly.

  9. says

    Yes — I suspected underage from the get-go. Doesn’t change any of the other facts at present, though. Nor the response, honestly. It would have ended here too even if she was my age.

  10. jenniferphillips says

    Holy Crow, Jason, that’s disturbing as hell.
    I agree with Sheila above–based on the content of this post and the comments Eucliwood left on the ‘Back From Vacation…’ post, stating that she is not an adult.

    She may be pretending, of course, for additional creeper value. If she is really a juvenile, though, surely her ‘adults’ need to know what she’s up to online? Brrrrr.

  11. says

    Okay, found it – her comment #10 on Back From Vacation – http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2013/01/07/back-from-vacation-need-a-vacation/#comment-96682

    It’s just like my Adults deciding they should come down in a middle of a conversation (sometimes not even knowing what happened) and yelling at me with their two cents in when it only takes one Adult. (I am not an adult, to explain.)

    But, you’re right – whether she’s 15 or 25, it’s creepy, and the response is appropriate.

  12. says

    If she’s a minor, shouldn’t the ‘pitters (pitties? Pittards? Pittites?) be banning her, with or without a kind word of advice to avoid places on the Web where she’d have to write crappy fiction to deal with the issues that get stirred up?

  13. says

    Howdy Jason, SlimePitter here. Just want to say that on this issue of what Eucliwood has written to and about you, that I’m totally on your side. By that, I mean that I consider her (or his, who knows?) actions/behaviour to be authentic harassment, and of a sexual nature as well.

    Rather than just being some internet bravado insult or button-pushing pseudo-threat, I think she really does have these ‘fiction’ fantasies, and also that she is pushing this graphic stuff on you uninvited by taking it to email.

    I don’t call incidents stalkerish or sexually harassing easily. I’m kind of known for that, even. But, that’s what you’ve got here.

  14. AbsurdWalls says

    If she is really a juvenile, though, surely her ‘adults’ need to know what she’s up to online?

    Are you suggesting Jason contact Eucliwood’s parents? Just in case here are three reasons not to:
    1) It would be one hell of a weird and awkward thing for Jason to have to say: “Hi, you’ve never heard of me, but your daughter* is posting fantasies about me online.”
    2) It would be doxxing.
    3) (related to * above) We can’t rule out that Eucliwood might be trans*, or that she might have other issues that are secret from her parents (she has mentioned being a member of mental health forums, for instance). I think “outing” aspects of her online personality to her parents could be a very unfair thing to do.

    It is easier and safer just to ignore her. Block or ban her if you have to.

  15. says

    Raging Bee, indeed they should. However (as I just mentioned on the Back From Vacation thread) measures such as asking someone whether they’re 18 years old or over in order to gain access to a forum require honesty on the part of the person answering. I’ve got a fairly good idea that Eucliwood started posting on another forum recently without answering the critical question about her age truthfully — since disclosing that you are under 18 years old usually bars the user from posting, until they’ve supplied a message from a guardian that they approve of the child interacting on the site.

  16. says

    Hi Xanthe and Raging Bee, one of your fave Pitters here, heheh. :)

    As far as I know, there is no way to tell for certain if indeed she is underaged. If that can be proven, the mods at the Pit would likely ban her. Even if the mods have her email and IP, that doesn’t prove anything. She might be dumb enough to admit it though, and if so, I will be suggesting she be banned. It’s an adult site in my opinion due to the topics discussed and the uncensored adult words we use.

    We do give Eucliwood (and anyone else) free speech, but very few of us want to read her posts. Most have her on ignore, plus she’s been now told she must post that fiction/fantasy stuff in a separate thread and keep it off the main one. Mabus, while he was visiting us for a while, was required to do the same thing.

  17. says

    Renee Hendricks: No, I think they were rating your comment based on shit like this. But keep maintaining the delusion that you’re only being judged on your associations, and not on your own self-directed actions.

    No more derailing, now.

    Henceforth, everyone discuss the status of their mucous membranes, k? Mine are pretty dry. Coz of Codelette, see.

  18. says

    However (as I just mentioned on the Back From Vacation thread) measures such as asking someone whether they’re 18 years old or over in order to gain access to a forum require honesty on the part of the person answering.

    Yeah, but in this case, she’s already admitted she’s underage.

  19. AbsurdWalls says

    I’ve got a fairly good idea that Eucliwood started posting on another forum recently without answering the critical question about her age truthfully

    By that do you mean “She got bounced from A+ and landed in the Slymepit”?

  20. jenniferphillips says

    Absurdwalls,
    yeah, you’re right. I’m thinking like a mom who is supportive and involved, and would want to know if any kid of mine was troubled to the point that they’d exhibit this sort of online behavior. Absent any info about Eucliwood’s domestic situation, I agree that it wouldn’t be wise to pursue it directly. Blocking/ignoring sorts it all out for me, of course. I just wish there was some course of action that would be better for HER than turning a blind eye. Sigh.

  21. says

    I do wish there was something that could be done for her, but more in the sense of opening her eyes to the nonsense she’s internalized and on dealing with appropriate responses, than in the taking-her-to-the-hospital or letting-her-curl-up-on-my-lap sort of way.

  22. nakarti says

    sheila makes a good point I hadn’t noticed either about the ‘mother to have to go to court for me’ thing: only minors’ and invalids’ behavior would force their parent to go to court.

    Crappy slashfic fits in with the high school attitude as well, from what I remember of it (I wrote crappy fantasy, fwiw.)

  23. Anthony K says

    I’m kind of known for that, even.

    Well, that’s one way of broadcasting your lack of value to the world.

  24. jackiepaper says

    Anyone else having Kathy Bates in “Misery” flashbacks?

    “He didn’t get out of the cockadoody car!”

    *shivers*

  25. KatieNotAnImposter says

    “And now she’s found a lot of new “friends” in the slymepit, who appear to be just as creepy and unhinged as she is. Kindred spirits and all that! Yet another reason to build a huge firewall around the slymepit and treat it as a toxic waste site.”

    Oh, come on, that’s not fair at all. She’s commented at FtB, too, and the Atheism Plus forums. All three have come to the same conclusion about her. The two comments at the end of the blog are two people out of a possible 100+ per day who lurk or participate there.

    That’s what you guys don’t realize about it. No one agrees with everyone else there and there are many battles fought each day. It’s a free speech forum where one can bring up controversial subjects and views and not get slammed with labels just for asking. Just because FtB trends toward homogenous ideology and banning of people who disagree doesn’t mean that’s the way the rest of the world works.

  26. says

    Hi Scented Nectar, if it wasn’t patently obvious from her writings that she’s young and immature, elsewhere she voluntarily admitted to not being an adult (and has been neatly quoted by sisu, at comment #26 here). So I don’t know — or even want to know — what Eucliwood’s parent(s)/guardian(s) are doing in respect of preventing her from making mischief on the Internet, so it is entirely sensible for people or sites to block her if necessary — not to contact those responsible for her.

    The reply (to Jennifer Phillips) by AbsurdWalls at comment #30 suggests several reasons why it would not be wise to contact them (which I don’t entirely agree with, but mostly do so). Contacting them would needlessly escalate the problem (beyond the point it already has, with this blog post drawing attention to the inappropriate behaviour). I think it would be highly desirable for Eucliwood that Jason terminates the comments at some point to prevent this thread dribbling on to the point of inanity (and freeze peach be damned). It also sounds like to would be good for Eucliwood to go find some other hobby that doesn’t involve doing stupid stuff on the Internet and pushing at other people’s personal boundaries.

    And to answer comment #36 addressed by AbsurdWalls to me, all of the events to answer that question happened back in December. The screenshot from the SPit shows “Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:25 am”.

  27. says

    KatieNotAnImpostor: everyone keeps saying they’re banned for mere disagreement, and yet when the same behavior shows up on THEIR doorstep, the Freeze Peach criers are exactly as quick to /ignore, ban, block or unfriend. Homogeneity claims don’t real.

  28. AbsurdWalls says

    @Thibeault

    I don’t think what’s going on with Eucliwood is comparable to the vast number of bannings from A+, FTB, etc. In addition, she is not banned from the Slymepit and would only likely be banned if it was decided that there were issues with keeping her there beyond upsetting or annoying people (i.e. complications arising from her being a minor).

    Still, the people over in the Slymepit like to be there in-part because there is very little chance of being banned for disagreeing or losing your temper. The other places online that do moderate more strictly such as A+ and FTB both say “This isn’t a free speech issue because these people can just go somewhere else and share their ideas.” which is fine. What is… less fine… is then claiming that the people who decide to go to those places are tainted by their association with them. Not something I’ve seen you do, but it’s hardly rare on FTB.

  29. Anthony K says

    Just because FtB trends toward homogenous ideology and banning of people who disagree doesn’t mean that’s the way the rest of the world works.

    “banned for disagreeing”
    “guilt by association”
    “FtB is a cult”

    You folks sure are homogeneous in your use of buzzwords. It’s as if you’re not actually that freethinking at all.

    But more to the point: the rest of the world isn’t obsessive fucking stalkers.

    Don’t lecture people on what the rest of the world does, you fucking lifeless, photoshopping, wouldn’t-have-a-purpose-in-life-if-it-weren’t-for-FtB-hate dipshits. You haven’t a clue as to what the rest of the world is like.

    In the rest of the world, people find their own purposes. You people are parasites. You’re nothing like the real world.

  30. KatieNotAnImposter says

    Anthony K, right on time proving my point.

    To address Jason: there is no “ban” over there. When the forum creator started in on the idea of banning her, there was a resounding “no.” What we have is a handy “ignore” button, so that each person can decide for themselves if they don’t want to see what she posts. That is a big difference with deciding for everyone that they won’t be seeing her posts, which a ban would do. One is ignoring and the other is silencing.
    FtB had a right to do it their way, granted, but that doesn’t mean you won’t be criticized for the practice bu people who see it as useless and potentially harmful to the free exchange of ideas. That’s all.

  31. Anthony K says

    Anthony K, right on time proving my point.

    Can you ask the person with their hand up your colon to take the puppet off and write something that isn’t standard internet boilerplate?

    Or is mouthing worn clichés the best you can do?

  32. Anthony K says

    FtB had a right to do it their way, granted, but that doesn’t mean you won’t be criticized for the practice bu people who see it as useless and potentially harmful to the free exchange of ideas.

    Criticism =/= repeating the same old tired lies your masters feed you

    “Banned for disagreeing” is one of those.

  33. KatieNotAnImposter says

    No, I’d say twitter is about the same as ignoring. I was talking more about comment sections of certain blogs. That being said, the threshold for ignoring someone on twitter or on a forum should be more than one comment or question expressing a different view. Also, take note that when the feminist atheist crowd here and on twitter call someone a name after an exchange it’s “shark,” but when the Slymepit does it, it’s harassment.

  34. Sassafras says

    So exactly how many times does someone have to call me a cunt on Twitter before my blocking them is OK? Once apparently isn’t enough, so twice? Three times? What if they call me a cunt once, and a bitch once, do both those count together or do they have to say each more than once? Can I block them if they call my friend a cunt multiple times instead of me directly? I really don’t want to be a poisonous enemy of freedom and rationality, so it would be helpful to know the rules.

  35. leni says

    Wow Jason, that is definitely creepy.

    KatieNotAnImposter, Stephanie has actually banned me from her blog. (It was for saying that I think it’s ok to call Rush Limbaugh anything he calls someone else. You and I would probably agree about that more than Stephanie and I would, but so what? That doesn’t mean I can’t agree with her about lots of other things. Or that she’s evil incarnate. Or that you are evil incarnate because I think this bullshit crusade is bullshit.)

    Here’s the deal though, I don’t really care that she banned me. I was surprised because it seemed like overkill to me, but whatever. Not my blog and not everyone is like me. She doesn’t have to let me post there and more importantly, I don’t need to. After she said “leave my blog” I sent one comment saying “fine, but I’ll continue read because I’m interested in what you write”, which is exactly what I did. The point is that it was zero skin off my back. If I want to bitch about Rush Limbaugh in terms Stephanie doesn’t approve of, I don’t need to do it at her blog. Why the fuck is that so hard for some people to understand? I can photoshop him into some donkey porn or something and post it at the pit. (Not that I would, but I could. I have lots of options!)

    I didn’t Twitter stalk her, email her, I don’t argue and bitch endlessly about it on other people’s blogs while pretending I’m some kind of freedom fighter. In fact, I only mention it now so I can underscore how fucking ridiculous some of (Cough**Renee**Cough) you are. I’m sure there are some great people there, but the ones that show up here?

    Mostly assholes who are kind of stalkery and harassy and seem to think the world owes them unrestricted access to their spaces.

    More than that, I think Renee Hendricks is a total jackass from what little I’ve seen of her. Which is why I don’t go to places she does, click on her link, stalk her on twitter, publicly victim blame her, or photoshop her into porn with someone who I think would be a good visual approximation of Justicar. I look at this wave of bullshit and I’m just… what the fuck is wrong with you people?

    Go back to your stupid pit and put FtB on ignore. Choose freedom!

  36. Anthony K says

    That being said, the threshold for ignoring someone on twitter or on a forum should be more than one comment or question expressing a different view.

    So, you’re going to keep asserting, to these people’s faces, who know what their reasons for banning people from their blogs are, that those reasons are actually that the bannee wrote one comment or question expressing a different view?

    Do you know what strawmanning is? Do you know what lying is?

  37. Anthony K says

    the threshold for…should be

    Listen up, everyone. Pay attention. KatieNotAnImposter is laying down the rule for what the threshold should be.

    Because freedom.

  38. tkmlac says

    “So exactly how many times does someone have to call me a cunt on Twitter before my blocking them is OK? Once apparently isn’t enough, so twice? Three times? ”

    *sigh* Block those people if you want. What I’m talking about is honest to goodness difference of opinion. There have been a lot of people who have been dogpiled on or stifled on blogs for “JAQing off.” Here’s a screenshot of Ryan Long’s one comment on PZ’s blog. Ryan has never been on the Slymepit: http://i.imgur.com/5D6iN.jpg

    Look at the knee-jerk reaction of Anthony K. Tribalistic hubris and hyperbole is all he can spout.

    If it weren’t for the stated intention to co-opt the movement and marry it to feminism while “drumming out” people who aren’t in their clique, or take down leaders of the skeptic/atheist community for either saying something that could use some criticism or the high crime of disagreeing with a woman, I, too, wouldn’t give a shit. It’s doubly sad because most of us would agree on most of these social issues, but because we disagree on how to implement certain changes or what protections should be in place, suddenly we’re all misogynistic MRA’s. You can’t tell me this is GOOD for the movement or skeptical in any way. Online petitions? Calling people’s schools and workplaces? Telling organizers they won’t come to a convention if so and so is there? Seriously?

    Ben Zvan, I don’t even need to respond to you. I tried reading your wife’s blog and she is one of the meanest people Ive ever seen. Sure, she might not use curse words, but sticking rose petals up your butt doesn’t mean your shit don’t stink.

  39. says

    Jason
    That is creepy as hell.
    I agree that she’s probably a minor. Maybe it is possible to contact her parents? I wouldn’t want my kids to behave like that on the internet and I would definetly have to act if I found out she was having sex/pregnancy fantasies about a guy twice her age on the web. Because damn there’s guys out there who would use her naivety and stupidity against her.

    +++
    Having said that, funny how many slimepitters stand up the minute a guy is the target of unwanted sexual attention but think that “she can suck my dick” is just polite disagreement and freeze peach.

    +++
    leni
    Thank you for being an adult.

  40. says

    @leni, I agree entirely since I got banned by PZ for “just disagreeing” what have I lost? I still read his blog and it would take monumental ego and self absorption to think PZ or the Pharyngula comment section lost anything by my absence! Which is apparently the pitter way… My freeze peach trumps all and what I have to say is so monumentally important *everyone* needs to listen to MEEE!

    @KatieNotAnImposter, on the pitter side hypocrisy reigns. What exactly is the functional difference between “ban” on FtBs and “ignore” on the pit? Everyone ignores Eucliwood what is the difference between that and a ban? None. Well apart from dragging out the “relationship” to ridiculous levels as “she” posts on there when no one is looking!
    Reap Paden banned me on his blog for “just disagreeing”, something he and PZ have in common :-)
    On Twitter Renee Hendricks blocked me after one polite exchange, Mykeru after one or two piss taking / macho exchanges.
    —> One key reason I could not be a pitter; being a “professional victim” about my treatment by the #FTBullies or having my freeze peach defrosted really doesn’t seem at all worthwhile.

  41. mildlymagnificent says

    I’m not so sure about the parent thing.

    Her parents might be terrific people who don’t know what their fool of a kid is up to and would do the best thing for her if they found out. They might also be the reason why she’s so inclined to talk online to not-a-parent people and would make things even worse for the kid if they found out about this.

    Ignoring, blocking or banning her is the only thing bloggers and forum admins can do, I would think.

  42. says

    Mildlymagnificent true, but
    A) what she writes doesn’t sound like “horribly terrified”. She’s worried about her mum having to go to court, not about her mum finding out
    B) she’s apparently a minor on the internet with no sense about privacy and security whatsoever. There’s predators out there. Just imagine what Jason could have done if he weren’t a decent human being, the amount of power she handed him. That’s fucking dangerous.

  43. Anthony K says

    KatieNotAnImposter, why are you ignoring me when I just have a different view than you do?

    Wy won’t you come clean and provide evidence of this “banned for disagreeing” you keep parroting?

    And fuck off with that tribalism bullshit: all you’ve done is repeat Slymepit talking points. It’s rank.

  44. leni says

    @ Gilliel- You’re welcome!

    Sarcasm aside, if someone as openly, bald-facedly juvenile as I am can happily go about my business even if one blogger banned me, then perhaps the restrictions really aren’t so onerous. I suppose I have the advantage of not seeing it as an attack my personal freedom so that helps.

  45. garnetstar says

    Congratulations, Jason! You have acquired a stalker.

    You’re probably doing this already, but will just say, the recommended response (I think it’s the FBI’s method) is complete disengagement. No response to emails, ever again, complete silence. Getting them to bounce back that they’ve been rejected. Banning her from the blog. If a stalker has their victim’s phone number, keeping it and getting a new one for their use. Then never check or answer the first number, just compile the messages left and turning them over to the authorities. If they send snail mail, refusing it and returning it unopened. You get the idea.

    Apparently total stonewalling works with some stalkers: they get bored by the absence of you in their lives and go somewhere else. Not with every stalker, though.

    Anyway, I’m sure you are already doing this, but just thought I’d say.

  46. KatieNotAnImposter says

    Oolong, the difference is that in the ignore function, each person can say whether or not they want to see said user’s posts. They can still post a rebuttal in the forum. Banning decides for everyone that they won’t be seeing anymore posts and the person is unable to defend themselves. Yeah, the trolls who come on here with insults and calling people names and what-not should be dealt with, but look at the image I posted in my last comment. Ryan Long on PZ’s blog. Did he say anything you think warrants a ban? Or is it not what we said, but rather that he’s friends with Reap Paden on the internet?

  47. kaboobie says

    @73 So blocking on the Slymepit is just like blocking on Twitter. You won’t see the blocked user, but they can still post whatever they want. So why are Slymepitters hounding Amy, Jen, Melody et. al. for blocking them on Twitter, claiming it’s a “free speech” issue, when many of them are doing exactly the same thing to Jason’s stalker?

  48. Stacy says

    Hey, let’s all start trolling the Slymepit and demand that they stop denying the right to FREE SPEECH of this creepy internet fantasist by ignoring her. Because freedom.

    –Nah, that would be pretty stupid.

  49. KatieNotAnImposter says

    Slymepitters are hounding them on twitter for blocking them on twitter? How are they doing that if they are blocked? As far as I know, people who have been blocked by said people on twitter just laugh at how easy it is to be blocked. Amy, et al claim it’s because of trolls and name calling, but there are countless examples of people trying to have civil discourse who get blocked right away, or who are pre-blocked before they’ve ever tweeted at a person. In your world, you can be judged and blocked just for what accounts you follow. It’s Red Scare paranoid. I just saw an exchange today where one FtBer claimed Christians wouldn’t donate to an atheist’s fundraiser and another a twitter account provided a link proving otherwise and was blocked after said FtBer had to move the goal post and claim the Christians who donated were only looking for someone to convert. It’s maddening. Do you really think this kind of behavior doesn’t deserve to be laughed at?

  50. Stacy says

    Yes, KatieNotAnImposter, we know that the slime are obsessively following “FtBer’s” every move. No need to remind us.

    And we understand your ethical priorities. Blocking someone on Twitter: “Red Scare Paranoid.” Monitoring and controlling one’s own blog and Twitter account: Bad behavior.

    Obsessive harassment of bloggers you don’t like: Freedom fighting.

    Amy, et al claim it’s because of trolls and name calling

    Claim? O.o

    [Anecdote]—>Do you really think this kind of behavior doesn’t deserve to be laughed at?

    …No words.

  51. Sassafras says

    Slymepitters are hounding them on twitter for blocking them on twitter? How are they doing that if they are blocked?

    Because, you know, blocking someone on twitter totally prevents them from being able to make new accounts, impersonation accounts, getting their friends who haven’t been blocked yet to harrass, hounding through email and blog post comments, etc.

  52. Utakata says

    *De’lurks of a late to the party entry*

    …in the world of “it takes an otaku to know an otaku”, there occasionally comes a “hey, that name looks familiar” moment:

    Eucliwood is Eucliwood Hellscythe (which Jason pointed out correctly) of *Kore ha Zombie Desu ka? (Is this a Zombie?). Which is slated as ecchi by mangafox and appears harem’esque upon my unfortunate brief viewing of said manga. (It’s also not very good, I’ll add). Noting as well ecchi in the shounen sense can be incredibly creepy as in makes light of what many would reasonably consider sexual assault, amoung other creepy things and factors. (I’m not sure I want to get into the other things and factors).

    *Souce: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is_This_a_Zombie%3F

    The point is, this Eucliwood maybe is living in that world where those things are acceptable, this would explain this person mindset upon the examples of her work noted above. This would also strongly suggest that this person really needs professional help (something I don’t say lightly), as her (or his) understanding of constitutes as fantasy and real maybe blurred at best. This is sometimes a disturbing trend among otaku’s which I have managed to avoid. But it is not considered healthy in anyway shape or form.

    *Now goes back to lurking while reaching for brain bleach*

  53. John Morales says

    KatieNotAnImposter:

    Yeah, the trolls who come on here with insults and calling people names and what-not should be dealt with, but look at the image I posted in my last comment. Ryan Long on PZ’s blog. Did he say anything you think warrants a ban? Or is it not what we said, but rather that he’s friends with Reap Paden on the internet?

    Your indignant stance amuses me greatly.

    (You didn’t realise PZ’s blog is, um… PZ’s blog — that is, a personal blog rather than a public utility? ;) )

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>