is the rrs dead? [trollville]

skywolf
skywolf's picture
Posts: 67
Joined: 2008-01-16
User is offlineOffline
is the rrs dead? [trollville]

this vid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edited

accuses the rrs of being dead.  Forget the stupid clams about kelly and rook and brian.  the claim i am interested in is about the interwebs death of the rrs.  now Its's been awhile since i have posted but i have doubts.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
 theacrobat wrote:Well, I

 

theacrobat wrote:

Well, I consider it hypocrisy, when you present a movement as one of the most important ones of our time, devout yourself to rallying the masses behind you, because of this importance, enter the public stage to promote this view, and then decide to abandon this movement all together to give old hairy men head for money.

The disgust you have oozes forth in this underlined text.

 

theacrobat wrote:

It's a question of if the whole notion of evangelizing atheism is a delusion, that served as sole purpose of giving a few insignificant lives a cheap sense of meaning, rather than a real and concrete sincerity to save mankind.

This is judgmental and projecting your views of what is significant, which was my point. Who are you to decide what another's priorities are?

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


FreeHugMachine
FreeHugMachine's picture
Posts: 152
Joined: 2009-04-02
User is offlineOffline
Question

Did Kelly ever say she was against prostitution or pornography?  Otherwise I don't see hypocrisy.


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
theacrobat wrote:jcgadfly

theacrobat wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

I guess we chould just hail you as the anti-fanboy you are...no, wait, you're obsessing about something that no one else really gives a shit about.

So being critical of the hypocrisy of a Pope, of prominent Christian leaders, mean that atheist who do so are obsessing over them? 

You're the one that claimed that Ted Haggard is valid topic of discussion because of his supposed hypocrisy, why doesn't Kelly fall under the same standard?

Are you going to deny that she was just a nobody here? Not someone of prominence? Not a significant contributor to this site? Not a founding member? I mean apparently the RRS cared so much about her that she was the one chosen to appear on national television. I mean apparently the RRS cares so much about her to have post and posters routinely banned and edited at the sheer mention of her name after her departure.

Mattshizzle has an entire "official" thread devoted to explaining why he's gone, but not Kelly or Rook? I'm sure this was not because Shizzle was seen as more important than them, but rather discussion about them (particularly Kelly) are deemed as more riskier. 

Quote:
Maybe I should call you super fanboy.

Uhm..yeah...ok. A fanboy attempts shied their beloveds from criticism, and refuses to call a spade a spade.

Because you're the only one who sees the hypocrisy in the RRS?  And you'll keep seeing the hypocrisy because you keep making it up?

And you need to do something with your obsession with Kelly...

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


theacrobat (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic wrote:The

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

The disgust you have oozes forth in this underlined text.

Wow, that's some serous reading into the text. So from "to give old hairy men head for money." you deem that I have some oozing contempt for prostitutes? 

Silly rabbit tricks are for kids.

Now, if I said something like that "whore of a bitch who fucked and spread herpes", then your claim might have sounded some what valid. 

I used to live in the Tenderloin, an area of San Franciso dominated by tranny prostitutes  and I used to sit outside and talk to them all the time, bring them food, and kid with them that my dick was bigger than theirs. I often find myself far more comfortable and at home with those living in that barrel, than with those living with my own skin. You don't find contempt at all here, but rather an endearing affection. And it's why i find something in Jesus' relation to those in that underbelly rather than to the Jewish Temple, or religious leaders to be relatable. He preferred a table with them rather than with royalty, and so would I.

I could have used "prostitute" rather than someone who gives "old hairy men head for money" but it just sounds boring. 

theacrobat wrote:

This is judgmental and projecting your views of what is significant, which was my point. Who are you to decide what another's priorities are?

Smiling

Well, this whole forum is dedicated to deciding what the priorities of the lives of others should be. When you believe that humanity should be converted to disbelief, and this is our great modern endeavor, your proposing that evangelizing atheism is to be a priority, not just for you but for others as well. But regardless what I said is not claiming what Kelly's priorities should be, that her priority should be evangelizing atheism, but that the priority she her self chose.

I'm criticizing her for fleeing the cause she promoted as so important. I'm calling her out as hypocrite for it. 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
theacrobat

theacrobat wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

The disgust you have oozes forth in this underlined text.

Wow, that's some serous reading into the text. So from "to give old hairy men head for money." you deem that I have some oozing contempt for prostitutes? 

Silly rabbit tricks are for kids.

Now, if I said something like that "whore of a bitch who fucked and spread herpes", then your claim might have sounded some what valid. 

I used to live in the Tenderloin, an area of San Franciso dominated by tranny prostitutes  and I used to sit outside and talk to them all the time, bring them food, and kid with them that my dick was bigger than theirs. I often find myself far more comfortable and at home with those living in that barrel, than with those living with my own skin. You don't find contempt at all here, but rather an endearing affection. And it's why i find something in Jesus' relation to those in that underbelly rather than to the Jewish Temple, or religious leaders to be relatable. He preferred a table with them rather than with royalty, and so would I.

I could have used "prostitute" rather than someone who gives "old hairy men head for money" but it just sounds boring.

Fine, hookers are good people. Sorry if I misunderstood your intent.

theacrobat wrote:

I'm criticizing her for fleeing the cause she promoted as so important. I'm calling her out as hypocrite for it. 

Since I saw that she was signed on last night as a member, I wouldn't consider that fleeing.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Well, PJTS, you've either

Well, PJTS, you've either killed or fueled his obsession...


theacrobat (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Since I saw that she was signed on last night as a member, I wouldn't consider that fleeing.

So let's see, so following your logic, I'm signed on, does that mean that I'm fighting the good cause for atheism?

Wow, so she does have time to sign on, but no time to write a post here and there? To tell us that she hasn't abandon the fight contrary to what the circumstance have us believe? She hasn't posted anything in several months, nor even acknowledged her departure. 

It's not rocket science folks, she left, she's gone. She might lurk in here and there to see what people are saying about her, or it may just as well be Sapient or the mods logging on to her account to check and clear out her inbox, or pauljohn could be lying all together about claiming he saw her signed in. Or perhaps he was deluded by false hopes of her returning, that he saw a Kelly in the building when she wasn't there. 

The rational conclusion is that she's abandon the fight, she's not looking to fight another day, but has given up the fight all together. She would rather give head for dollars than be a part of this movement.  I guess that's how "significant" she saw this enterprise to be, less significant than sucking hairy balls. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1477
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
  no one is saying she

  no one is saying she wasn't a founding member or whatever (more for me cant speak for others) just don't care that she left. I don't see the hipocrasy she left a movment so that equals she doesn't care about it? No people have other commitments that they have to put first or perhaps a change or heart? when new evidence comes to the table you change your mind it wouldn't be hipocritical to change your mind about intelligent design would it?would it be hipocritical of me to quit smoking even though I enjoy it? No a comitment to my health is more important. Would it be hipocritical of me to leave the  animal rights group im part of make me a hipocrite? No I just have would have to have more pressing matters atm. If she became a christain then yes I would agree but simplily not being apart of somthing doesn't make you a hipocrite. But with out knowing the reasons I cannot say for sure. But it doesn't matter as I don't think posts about the departure should be deleted unless they are there only to make trouble. It is very strange that kelly and rook didn't get an offital thread though. Its not like i post here because of either one of them so I don't see a reason to care. 

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
theacrobat

theacrobat wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Since I saw that she was signed on last night as a member, I wouldn't consider that fleeing.

So let's see, so following your logic, I'm signed on, does that mean that I'm fighting the good cause for atheism?

Wow, so she does have time to sign on, but no time to write a post here and there? To tell us that she hasn't abandon the fight contrary to what the circumstance have us believe? She hasn't posted anything in several months, nor even acknowledged her departure. 

It's not rocket science folks, she left, she's gone. She might lurk in here and there to see what people are saying about her, or it may just as well be Sapient or the mods logging on to her account to check and clear out her inbox, or pauljohn could be lying all together about claiming he saw her signed in. Or perhaps he was deluded by false hopes of her returning, that he saw a Kelly in the building when she wasn't there. 

The rational conclusion is that she's abandon the fight, she's not looking to fight another day, but has given up the fight all together. She would rather give head for dollars than be a part of this movement.  I guess that's how "significant" she saw this enterprise to be, less significant than sucking hairy balls. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PJTS fueled your obsession....

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
theacrobat

theacrobat wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Since I saw that she was signed on last night as a member, I wouldn't consider that fleeing.

So let's see, so following your logic, I'm signed on, does that mean that I'm fighting the good cause for atheism?

Wow, so she does have time to sign on, but no time to write a post here and there? To tell us that she hasn't abandon the fight contrary to what the circumstance have us believe? She hasn't posted anything in several months, nor even acknowledged her departure. 

It's not rocket science folks, she left, she's gone. She might lurk in here and there to see what people are saying about her, or it may just as well be Sapient or the mods logging on to her account to check and clear out her inbox, or pauljohn could be lying all together about claiming he saw her signed in. Or perhaps he was deluded by false hopes of her returning, that he saw a Kelly in the building when she wasn't there. 

The rational conclusion is that she's abandon the fight, she's not looking to fight another day, but has given up the fight all together. She would rather give head for dollars than be a part of this movement.  I guess that's how "significant" she saw this enterprise to be, less significant than sucking hairy balls.  

 

Kelly has never been a prolific poster so judging she isn't still involved by lack of posts is conjecture on your part.

Responding to the gossip that is out and about only gives legitimacy to those doing the gossip and gives them an unneeded boast to their egos.

I don't care if you accept my claim to have seen her logged on or not. Whether or not she continues to be involved in RRS has no effect on the majority of the members that post here. I don't think I have even exchanged replies with Kelly on any thread at least none that I remember.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:PJTS fueled

jcgadfly wrote:

PJTS fueled your obsession....

It would appear.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


theacrobat (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:PJTS fueled

jcgadfly wrote:

PJTS fueled your obsession....

Smiling

i think you're obsessed with saying i'm obsessed. 


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
theacrobat wrote:jcgadfly

theacrobat wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

PJTS fueled your obsession....

Smiling

i think you're obsessed with saying i'm obsessed. 

 

Obsessed with stating the obvious truth? Pretty damn likely.

Just clean up your keyboard when you're done.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Pulseczar
Posts: 4
Joined: 2009-04-13
User is offlineOffline
*Trying to say this in a

*Trying to say this in a matter-of-fact, non-rude way.*

Kelly looks like she's on meth or something. She looks like she's lost 20 or 30 pounds. And she sounds very high in those porn videos. People tend to go more toward the 'extremes' (stealing, hooking, etc.), as well, when they are on drugs. Not trying to classify what she is doing as wrong. But it's a fact that hooking/porn isn't socially acceptable, and is something that people tend to avoid more when their inhibitions aren't.. inhibited.

I'm not making fun of her. I think it's very sad.


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1477
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Pulseczar wrote:*Trying to

Pulseczar wrote:

*Trying to say this in a matter-of-fact, non-rude way.*

Kelly looks like she's on meth or something. She looks like she's lost 20 or 30 pounds. And she sounds very high in those porn videos. People tend to go more toward the 'extremes' (stealing, hooking, etc.), as well, when they are on drugs. Not trying to classify what she is doing as wrong. But it's a fact that hooking/porn isn't socially acceptable, and is something that people tend to avoid more when their inhibitions aren't.. inhibited.

I'm not making fun of her. I think it's very sad.

It's legal in nirvada so there there is nothing wrong with it. not socially aceptable doesn't mean anything, to eat dogs isn't socially aceptable but what is wrong with eating dogs?  I realise you are not saying it is wrong but even so. Drugs are a personal chioce so i find no reason to be sad unless it is forced but I highly doubt that.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


darkreign
Posts: 11
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
What a fucking shocker, my

What a fucking shocker, my post is deleted by a mod!

 

LOL.


Pulseczar
Posts: 4
Joined: 2009-04-13
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote:Pulseczar

Tapey wrote:

Pulseczar wrote:

*Trying to say this in a matter-of-fact, non-rude way.*

Kelly looks like she's on meth or something. She looks like she's lost 20 or 30 pounds. And she sounds very high in those porn videos. People tend to go more toward the 'extremes' (stealing, hooking, etc.), as well, when they are on drugs. Not trying to classify what she is doing as wrong. But it's a fact that hooking/porn isn't socially acceptable, and is something that people tend to avoid more when their inhibitions aren't.. inhibited.

I'm not making fun of her. I think it's very sad.

It's legal in nirvada so there there is nothing wrong with it. not socially aceptable doesn't mean anything, to eat dogs isn't socially aceptable but what is wrong with eating dogs?  I realise you are not saying it is wrong but even so. Drugs are a personal chioce so i find no reason to be sad unless it is forced but I highly doubt that.

The only thing you said relevant to what I said was the last sentence. So, to that:

You don't think there's anything sad about someone messing themselves up with drugs? Or do you not think someone is capable of messing themselves up with drugs? Do you not think it's sad when someone makes a bad choice that hurts themselves? -- as long as they were able to make the choice themselves? If Betty made the mistake of changing lanes in a car while there was a truck next to her, causing her to wreck and kill herself, that's not a sad event? Of course, an uncaring person wouldn't feel sad over the suffering of others. So that's a possibility.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
darkreign wrote:What a

darkreign wrote:

What a fucking shocker, my post is deleted by a mod!

 

LOL.

Perhaps you should read the rules.

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/the_rational_response_squad_radio_show/the_rational_response_squad/2713

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Pulseczar wrote:Tapey

Pulseczar wrote:

Tapey wrote:

Pulseczar wrote:

*Trying to say this in a matter-of-fact, non-rude way.*

Kelly looks like she's on meth or something. She looks like she's lost 20 or 30 pounds. And she sounds very high in those porn videos. People tend to go more toward the 'extremes' (stealing, hooking, etc.), as well, when they are on drugs. Not trying to classify what she is doing as wrong. But it's a fact that hooking/porn isn't socially acceptable, and is something that people tend to avoid more when their inhibitions aren't.. inhibited.

I'm not making fun of her. I think it's very sad.

It's legal in nirvada so there there is nothing wrong with it. not socially aceptable doesn't mean anything, to eat dogs isn't socially aceptable but what is wrong with eating dogs?  I realise you are not saying it is wrong but even so. Drugs are a personal chioce so i find no reason to be sad unless it is forced but I highly doubt that.

The only thing you said relevant to what I said was the last sentence. So, to that:

You don't think there's anything sad about someone messing themselves up with drugs? Or do you not think someone is capable of messing themselves up with drugs? Do you not think it's sad when someone makes a bad choice that hurts themselves? -- as long as they were able to make the choice themselves? If Betty made the mistake of changing lanes in a car while there was a truck next to her, causing her to wreck and kill herself, that's not a sad event? Of course, an uncaring person wouldn't feel sad over the suffering of others. So that's a possibility.

Sad? Perhaps. It depends on who you speak to - some Christians would take the situations you describe as cause for celebration.

A cause for gosip? No.

 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1477
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Pulseczar wrote:Tapey

Pulseczar wrote:

Tapey wrote:

Pulseczar wrote:

*Trying to say this in a matter-of-fact, non-rude way.*

Kelly looks like she's on meth or something. She looks like she's lost 20 or 30 pounds. And she sounds very high in those porn videos. People tend to go more toward the 'extremes' (stealing, hooking, etc.), as well, when they are on drugs. Not trying to classify what she is doing as wrong. But it's a fact that hooking/porn isn't socially acceptable, and is something that people tend to avoid more when their inhibitions aren't.. inhibited.

I'm not making fun of her. I think it's very sad.

It's legal in nirvada so there there is nothing wrong with it. not socially aceptable doesn't mean anything, to eat dogs isn't socially aceptable but what is wrong with eating dogs?  I realise you are not saying it is wrong but even so. Drugs are a personal chioce so i find no reason to be sad unless it is forced but I highly doubt that.

The only thing you said relevant to what I said was the last sentence. So, to that:

You don't think there's anything sad about someone messing themselves up with drugs? Or do you not think someone is capable of messing themselves up with drugs? Do you not think it's sad when someone makes a bad choice that hurts themselves? -- as long as they were able to make the choice themselves? If Betty made the mistake of changing lanes in a car while there was a truck next to her, causing her to wreck and kill herself, that's not a sad event? Of course, an uncaring person wouldn't feel sad over the suffering of others. So that's a possibility.

Um you said it isn't socially acceptable so I felt the need to show you that it really doesn't matter what is socially acceptable or not but any way onto the uncaring part of it all 

No I don't know her I don't even know if she is on drugs so why would I be sad? If she messes up her life yes it is sad but drugs aren't an automatic life ruiner although thay can be and often are. I don't know if they have messed up her life so I see no reason to be sad. It is quite simple. Yes if she is on heavy drugs it is a very real possiblity but you cannot lump this into 2 boxs and say that is how it is. If you have the money and your job doesn't drug test and you have no problem being on them where is the harm? It is your own body and your own choice

P.S. no personal attack is intended etc.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Sheesh.  Is everybody

 Sheesh.  Is everybody happy now?

RRS doesn't have a position on the sex business.  We never have.  We're not in the business of supporting political agendas.  

RRS doesn't have a position or requirement regarding the occupation of either core or contributing members, past or present.  We never have.

RRS doesn't care about any of this.  We've never claimed to.

Nobody at RRS has ever claimed to be a role model for anybody.  Everybody here is just living their lives.  We've never claimed otherwise.  

RRS is truly sorry for you if you disapprove of any of the above.

I'm going to let this thread continue because some posters apparently can't live without talking about Kelly.  Have fun.  Knock yourself out, or up, or whatever it is you're doing while you're thinking about Kelly.  Just know that we will be deleting duplicate topics, drive by's, and anything else that violates our terms of service.  I'm moving this thread to trollville because nobody fucking cares except the three or four people who are posting.  I'm not locking it, though, so all you folks who think this is important, have a blast.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Sheesh.

Hambydammit wrote:

 Sheesh.  Is everybody happy now?

RRS doesn't have a position on the sex business.  We never have.  We're not in the business of supporting political agendas.  

RRS doesn't have a position or requirement regarding the occupation of either core or contributing members, past or present.  We never have.

RRS doesn't care about any of this.  We've never claimed to.

Nobody at RRS has ever claimed to be a role model for anybody.  Everybody here is just living their lives.  We've never claimed otherwise.  

RRS is truly sorry for you if you disapprove of any of the above.

I'm going to let this thread continue because some posters apparently can't live without talking about Kelly.  Have fun.  Knock yourself out, or up, or whatever it is you're doing while you're thinking about Kelly.  Just know that we will be deleting duplicate topics, drive by's, and anything else that violates our terms of service.  I'm moving this thread to trollville because nobody fucking cares except the three or four people who are posting.  I'm not locking it, though, so all you folks who think this is important, have a blast.

 

Well, Hamby I'm getting lulz watching theacrobat spooging all over himself while denying he's not but that's just me. YMMV.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1477
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Sheesh.

Hambydammit wrote:

 Sheesh.  Is everybody happy now?

RRS doesn't have a position on the sex business.  We never have.  We're not in the business of supporting political agendas.  

RRS doesn't have a position or requirement regarding the occupation of either core or contributing members, past or present.  We never have.

RRS doesn't care about any of this.  We've never claimed to.

Nobody at RRS has ever claimed to be a role model for anybody.  Everybody here is just living their lives.  We've never claimed otherwise.  

RRS is truly sorry for you if you disapprove of any of the above.

I'm going to let this thread continue because some posters apparently can't live without talking about Kelly.  Have fun.  Knock yourself out, or up, or whatever it is you're doing while you're thinking about Kelly.  Just know that we will be deleting duplicate topics, drive by's, and anything else that violates our terms of service.  I'm moving this thread to trollville because nobody fucking cares except the three or four people who are posting.  I'm not locking it, though, so all you folks who think this is important, have a blast.

 

pfft killjoy may aswell of locked it. btw you move things to trollville because no one cares about it? seems a little silly? Im sure you mean you are sending it to trollville because people have been insulting people/core member/ intending to cause trouble.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:pfft killjoy may

 

Quote:
pfft killjoy may aswell of locked it. btw you move things to trollville because no one cares about it? seems a little silly? Im sure you mean you are sending it to trollville because people have been insulting people/core member/ intending to cause trouble.

I'm sending it to trollville for the following reasons:

1) The private lives of members/posters are not legitimate topics, and divulging information about members or otherwise gossiping about them is a breach of the Terms of Service.

2) People are being assholes to others.

3) The RRS has no comment or position on any of this, and has explicitly said that people are welcome to discuss this on other forums that welcome gossip and drama.  Our statements have been ignored.

4) This topic doesn't belong in any other category, and I see no indication that there's any hope of it contributing to a discussion of any of the RRS's goals.

5) This whole conversation is petty and stupid.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Sheesh.

Hambydammit wrote:

 Sheesh.  Is everybody happy now?

RRS doesn't have a position on the sex business.  We never have.  We're not in the business of supporting political agendas.  

RRS doesn't have a position or requirement regarding the occupation of either core or contributing members, past or present.  We never have.

RRS doesn't care about any of this.  We've never claimed to.

Nobody at RRS has ever claimed to be a role model for anybody.  Everybody here is just living their lives.  We've never claimed otherwise.  

RRS is truly sorry for you if you disapprove of any of the above.

I'm going to let this thread continue because some posters apparently can't live without talking about Kelly.  Have fun.  Knock yourself out, or up, or whatever it is you're doing while you're thinking about Kelly.  Just know that we will be deleting duplicate topics, drive by's, and anything else that violates our terms of service.  I'm moving this thread to trollville because nobody fucking cares except the three or four people who are posting.  I'm not locking it, though, so all you folks who think this is important, have a blast.

 

A much deserved fate.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1477
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:

 

Quote:
pfft killjoy may aswell of locked it. btw you move things to trollville because no one cares about it? seems a little silly? Im sure you mean you are sending it to trollville because people have been insulting people/core member/ intending to cause trouble.

I'm sending it to trollville for the following reasons:

1) The private lives of members/posters are not legitimate topics, and divulging information about members or otherwise gossiping about them is a breach of the Terms of Service.

2) People are being assholes to others.

3) The RRS has no comment or position on any of this, and has explicitly said that people are welcome to discuss this on other forums that welcome gossip and drama.  Our statements have been ignored.

4) This topic doesn't belong in any other category, and I see no indication that there's any hope of it contributing to a discussion of any of the RRS's goals.

5) This whole conversation is petty and stupid.

 

meh knew there was more to it than know one cares about it. Fair enough

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Pulseczar
Posts: 4
Joined: 2009-04-13
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote:Um you

Tapey wrote:
Um you said it isn't socially acceptable so I felt the need to show you that it really doesn't matter what is socially acceptable or not

My point was not at all that hooking/porn isn't socially acceptable. My point was that people are more likely to engage in socially-unacceptable behavior when they are on drugs. I was giving more reason as to why I think she's on something.

Tapey wrote:
No I don't know her I don't even know if she is on drugs so why would I be sad? If she messes up her life yes it is sad but drugs aren't an automatic life ruiner although thay can be and often are. I don't know if they have messed up her life so I see no reason to be sad. It is quite simple. Yes if she is on heavy drugs it is a very real possiblity but you cannot lump this into 2 boxs and say that is how it is. If you have the money and your job doesn't drug test and you have no problem being on them where is the harm? It is your own body and your own choice

I personally don't want to see my entire society go to the shit hole, where people are cracked out, and don't know what the fuck they are doing, and every time I turn around there's a druggie stealing from someone (and killing people in some cases) to keep their body at their norm (not even high anymore) of drug dependency. I'm not saying all drugs cause people to act like that. Crack certainly can, and meth I think can.

----------------

Why shouldn't people talk about the RRS? They are quite famous and were/are fairly important. That's part of the price of fame. Don't want people in your business? Don't mix your business in with people. I think you guys are being very biased when you say you don't want people 'gossiping' about RRS members. I don't think you'd care if it was someone else being 'gossiped about', who wasn't friendly/close to you or on your side of some issue. And especially, I don't think you'd care if the members' actions couldn't be construed by many as tainting or discrediting RRS.

I'm certainly not your enemy, RRS. I just think the topic is interesting, and I think you're being biased in your desire to squelch discussion on the [former] members.


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1477
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Pulseczar wrote: Tapey

Pulseczar wrote:

Tapey wrote:
Um you said it isn't socially acceptable so I felt the need to show you that it really doesn't matter what is socially acceptable or not

My point was not at all that hooking/porn isn't socially acceptable. My point was that people are more likely to engage in socially-unacceptable behavior when they are on drugs. I was giving more reason as to why I think she's on something.

Tapey wrote:
No I don't know her I don't even know if she is on drugs so why would I be sad? If she messes up her life yes it is sad but drugs aren't an automatic life ruiner although thay can be and often are. I don't know if they have messed up her life so I see no reason to be sad. It is quite simple. Yes if she is on heavy drugs it is a very real possiblity but you cannot lump this into 2 boxs and say that is how it is. If you have the money and your job doesn't drug test and you have no problem being on them where is the harm? It is your own body and your own choice

I personally don't want to see my entire society go to the shit hole, where people are cracked out, and don't know what the fuck they are doing, and every time I turn around there's a druggie stealing from someone (and killing people in some cases) to keep their body at their norm (not even high anymore) of drug dependency. I'm not saying all drugs cause people to act like that. Crack certainly can, and meth I think can.

----------------

Why shouldn't people talk about the RRS? They are quite famous and were/are fairly important. That's part of the price of fame. Don't want people in your business? Don't mix your business in with people. I think you guys are being very biased when you say you don't want people 'gossiping' about RRS members. I don't think you'd care if it was someone else being 'gossiped about', who wasn't friendly/close to you or on your side of some issue. And especially, I don't think you'd care if the members' actions couldn't be construed by many as tainting or discrediting RRS.

I'm certainly not your enemy, RRS. I just think the topic is interesting, and I think you're being biased in your desire to squelch discussion on the [former] members.

yes and yes I doubt many people want any of that but we are talking about a specific case here. The point still is if you have a job witch doesn't drug test that gives you money for it Im not seeing those things (important that it doesn't interfere wih job performance). Prostitution, legal prostitution doesn't pay as badly as the illegal variety does. and as far as I know there are no drug tests.  so the point stands.

 

btw RRS is a private organisation so they can adopt whatever funny rules they want, everyone has agreed to terms and serivces so if this thread has indeed broken it it belongs here. 

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Pulseczar
Posts: 4
Joined: 2009-04-13
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote:yes and yes I

Tapey wrote:
yes and yes I doubt many people want any of that but we are talking about a specific case here. The point still is if you have a job witch doesn't drug test that gives you money for it Im not seeing those things (important that it doesn't interfere wih job performance). Prostitution, legal prostitution doesn't pay as badly as the illegal variety does. and as far as I know there are no drug tests.  so the point stands.

I'm not really interested in debating this.

Tapey wrote:
btw RRS is a private organisation so they can adopt whatever funny rules they want

True (though not entirely whatever rules they want) but that certainly has no bearing on whether the rules are right.

 


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Posts: 7580
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Currently we're one of the

Currently we're one of the top 10 most frequented/used atheist message boards on the web.  Dealing with a series of family issues and a full time job again simply leaves less time for RRS.  We still broadcast on wednesday nights, and this site is still made up of tons of people who identify with the goals of the RRS. 

You might as well have posted a video of Pastor Rick Warren from Easter Sunday talking about the resurrection of Jesus, and asked if Jesus was real.  Don't believe everything you see on youtube.

Ironically, the more people try snooping into our personal lives (as if that has anything to do with our actual goals) the more we see traffic increase. 

 

In summation: NO.

 

This thread is closed, let's get back to proactive and insightful conversations that our thriving site has to offer.  Can we please chill on the Captain Obvious questions?

 

Please donate to one of these highly rated charities to help impede the GOP attack on America 2017-2019.

Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Posts: 7580
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
theacrobat wrote:She would

theacrobat wrote:

She would rather give head for dollars than be a part of this movement.   

This statement proves how little you know about Kelly, which is just the way we want it.  It's also why I banned you.  Your analysis is a lie.

 

Oh, and what hamby said...

Quote:

RRS doesn't have a position on the sex business.  We never have.  We're not in the business of supporting political agendas.  

RRS doesn't have a position or requirement regarding the occupation of either core or contributing members, past or present.  We never have.

RRS doesn't care about any of this.  We've never claimed to.

Nobody at RRS has ever claimed to be a role model for anybody.  Everybody here is just living their lives.  We've never claimed otherwise.  RRS is truly sorry for you if you disapprove of any of the above.

... except unllike Hamby I won't be leaving the the thread open.  Fuck this conversation, in fact this conversation will get you off for $50, if you'd like.  Will that make god exist?  Will that make the ideas set forth by the people of this website inaccurate?  People should argue that information on this site, argue the price of a blow job on your own website.  Oh yeah... this conversation wants $50. 

If I'm paying for it, I'm certainly not paying to host this shit.  So you donating?  Now excuse me I've gotta get to bed, I have to go to work in the morning.

 

 

 

Please donate to one of these highly rated charities to help impede the GOP attack on America 2017-2019.

Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.