Talk:Slymepit

	This Internet related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Editorializing

^{— Unsigned, by: Contributions/ / [[User talk:|talk]]} Just removed "unhinged" used as an adjective describing some threads that are cited as the origination of "slymepit".

Such a clearly partisan and judgmental description doesn't really belong in a rational wiki. In fact it has a negative impact on the rational wiki.

If the threads were unhinged, as claimed, simple cite the specific threads, via a quote or a link and expose the content, specifically citing the unhinged bits.

This will not only expose those threads for what they are, it removes the clearly partisan, non-neutral taint from the wiki entry.

Please do not add the word back in. Use better judgement.

Grumfan (talk) 11:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to RationalWiki! You may enjoy RationalWiki:What is a RationalWiki article? - David Gerard (talk) 12:21, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Abbie "ERV" Smith

This article leads the reader confused about what role (if any) she played in the formation of this community. It says it started with discussion threads on her blog; what that doesn't make clear, is whether she actively supported those threads, or simply tolerated them out of a laissez-faire approach to comment moderation. This smells like a bit of guilt-by-association to me. Blacke (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern! - David Gerard (talk) 09:05, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

It was formed because Greg Laden and others of PZ Myers side harassed her, hence it was moved to a separate forum. She has an account in the Slymepit and continues to post in it, but not very frequently. While PZ Myers community was secular-movement-famous for its abhorrent nastiness "rudeness" and its rape-charged rotten porcupine and rusty knife memes (yep, rapey-popular. see Pharyngula Wiki), rape-insults, and who even scared away the one and only co-blogger; Abbie Smith's endless thread was merely lightly moderated. — Aneris ✻ {talk/ideas} 15:17, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit war

Does anyone know enough to sort this edit war? Who is right? Who is wrong? Proxima Centauri (talk) 14:55, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

There are ^{[citation needed]} for the use of the terms "white knights" or "beta cucks".--Kugelschreiber (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I've did a search of their forum, and they indeed use those terms. Typhoon (talk) 15:35, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Is this a bad joke? A Google search link as a reference?--Kugelschreiber (talk) 15:35, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, which thread should I link specifically? Coz it's all over their forum. And it's only Aneris that is denying this. Typhoon (talk) 15:36, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Where a (regular) member of the forum uses these terms unironically without facing significant backlash?--Kugelschreiber (talk) 15:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

There's lots of those, as can be seen from the search. Which one in particular you want to feature? Typhoon (talk) 15:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Pick some.--Kugelschreiber (talk) 15:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I've picked them all. Typhoon (talk) 15:45, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Stop this bullshit. A damn Google link is no source.--Kugelschreiber (talk) 15:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Even when the results of the google search are more complete? Oh well. You know, you could have picked one yourself instead of losing your temper in here. But whatever. Typhoon (talk) 15:56, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Dude, do not fucking prevaricate. Go to the Google search. Pick through the whole first page of links. Enjoy the unironic use of those terms. Because the next thing that will happen, just to put a bug up your ass, will be 50 links to 50 different forum posts, all nicely put in the Ref for your convenience. If you want to be an asshole and try to use wikilawyering and pedantry to stan for your Slymepit bros, go right ahead. But don't complain when the inevitable occurs. --Castaigne2 (talk) 16:55, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Don't be paranoic. I have no Slymepit bros, I just don't like people being to lazy to edit an article properly. I'm very in favor of these 50 or over 9000 links, so go ahead.--Kugelschreiber (talk) 17:05, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

According to Google, the website "RationalWiki.org" mentions the term "stormfront" about 257 times, and "Nazi" about 1760 times. It's also homophobic as it mentions the term "faggot" 103 times. So who's updating the RationalWiki article? Nobody cares about Typhoons/Queex/Castaigne's cat piss men topics, and all this gender warrior nonsense. Here's a screenshot from the board what kind of terms are actually used. So you have to be an incredibly warped soul to delete my edit that is accurate, and insert their nonsense terms. It's not like the article turns super positive that way, since "SJW" is also frowned upon here. And it's still about as accurate as AnswersInGenesis, but you can overdo it. No, they want to shoehorn at all cost their icky manosphere thing, which is laughed out generally over there, see the comment in the screenshot. One out of three that mentions "beta cuck" says: "If I ever use the phrase 'beta cuck', someone please kill me" which gives you a general idea. How do 3 comments that mention the phrase compare to 20,000 times SJW in its various permutations (singular, plural, written out, abbreviated)? Generally, Typhoon and similar people should be auto-reverted. ~ Aneris ✻ 17:23, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Before you decide that you're sure what you're asking for, remember the parable of the Jackass Genie. --Castaigne2 (talk) 02:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

File:TimHuntStarWars.jpg

Falls under fair use b/c [1] educational and [2] criticizing. No? oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 03:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, technically. But since he's a fellow and asked to not use it here, I like to honour his request. ~ Aneris ✻ 04:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Seemed useful for demonstrating the "buttfuck"-ingly awful humor. But meh. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 04:38, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I liked it, but it's not like there's an editors meeting and revisions. ~ Aneris ✻ 04:41, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Complaint about Typhoon's edits

When did that happen? Love the irony. Grognard/nazi/military geek Typhoon removes ca. a third of souces from the FGM article, comes here and disingeniously lies about sources. That's rich. ~ Aneris ✻ 19:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Stop making stuff up, please. We're not much interested in your own personal reality. Queex_{chthonic murmurings} 09:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)