**** snipped the bulk for redundancy but...

(March 20, 2015 at 6:04 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Hypocrite,
You're lucky I can no longer use sig's, in a way I guess that's protecting you guys from yourselves.

Did you seriously just call me a hypocrite? In what way am *I* being hypocritical? I'd really like to know.

(March 20, 2015 at 6:34 am)Judi Lynn Wrote: Did you seriously just call me a hypocrite? In what way am *I* being hypocritical? I'd really like to know.

No. He was calling me a hypocrite. Which is hilarious, and typical of Huggy. He doesn't see that asking Cinjin "U Mad?" after Cinjin posted in exasperation at Huggy's antics is different than me posting a Jeopardy meme at Parker's Tan as a joke that includes the "U Mad?" trope.

I clearly wasn't trolling, but that doesn't matter to Huggy. This dishonest piece of shit would once again quote mine me and show just the meme. To the outsider that looks like I may have responded to Huggy with that, instead of the context of the quote:

(March 2, 2015 at 11:12 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:

(March 2, 2015 at 10:49 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: I'm going to go with "moron" for a true Daily Double, Alex. Bet it all.

Ahh... I'm afraid you didn't phrase your answer in the form of a question... so...

BTW, that GIF is hilarious. I pat myself on the back for finding it.

(March 20, 2015 at 4:09 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 20, 2015 at 3:45 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: I have not once complained about your name-calling, because I don't give two shits rubbed together what a narcissistic, febrile moron thinks of me or my opinions.

Really?
http://atheistforums.org/thread-30615-po...#pid848277

(January 17, 2015 at 12:39 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: Also, "Muppet" is getting old. Can't you show any creativity at all, or have you run out of insults? Shit, this really is like having a whack at a punching bag. What a scrub. You definitely need to up your game ... you wouldn't make a pimple on a real troll's ass.

The complaint is clearly about the repetitiveness of the insult, not the insult itself. You were being encouraged to vary your insults.

---

(March 20, 2015 at 6:04 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Hypocrite,
You're lucky I can no longer use sig's, in a way I guess that's protecting you guys from yourselves.

It's a way of helping you avoid being permanently banned, I think.

Thank you for the clarification. From his last post it would indicate that he was replying to me, and using other posts, obviously chopped up for his own convenience. So, I took it that he was calling me the hypocrite, which in that case would be a bad thing to do. I know I'm still a noob here and I don't mind that. But I don't have enough posts under my belt for him to even know me enough to call me a hypocrite. But, because most of his posts are jibberish and full of insults in nature, naturally, I thought it was my turn to get insulted.

I was ready.

---

(March 20, 2015 at 9:57 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(March 20, 2015 at 6:04 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Hypocrite,
You're lucky I can no longer use sig's, in a way I guess that's protecting you guys from yourselves.

It's a way of helping you avoid being permanently banned, I think.

Given what I've read of his posts, maybe the other voices inside his head secretly voted for a ban and that remark slipped out.

I've tried really hard over the last few months to steer Huggy in the direction of reason and honesty. Lots of people have. No one has succeeded I'm sad to say. He's not the only one like this, many theists appear to be dishonest so much of the time that they aren't even aware they are doing it anymore. Some of them still don't even know what an atheist is after years of being on an atheist forum. Sadly apologetics is entirely the art of deception because they have nothing to work with. It's just a matter of how honest they are about it. Usually not very.

(March 20, 2015 at 10:11 am)robvalue Wrote: I've tried really hard over the last few months to steer Huggy in the direction of reason and honesty. Lots of people have. No one has succeeded I'm sad to say. He's not the only one like this, many theists appear to be dishonest so much of the time that they aren't even aware they are doing it anymore. Some of them still don't even know what an atheist is after years of being on an atheist forum. Sadly apologetics is entirely the art of deception because they have nothing to work with. It's just a matter of how honest they are about it. Usually not very.

Dumb question but what exactly is apologetics? I see that word and how it relates to the subject of religion and immediately think it means that if you are an apologetic, you are sorry about your religion or your faith and you spend much of the time trying to apologize for the contradictions and problems caused by said religion. Enlighten me please.

Ah yes, I've been meaning to add a glossary to my website! I gotta get on that

Apologetics is speaking in defence of something, in this context we always mean defending religion.

More: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologetics

We have professional ones like William Lane Craig who are basically professional deceivers. They make me sick.

Thank you for the education. And the warning

You're welcome, anytime!

I've kind of immersed myself in the atheist world in the last year or so, before then I didn't know much about any of the details beyond "religion is bat shit insane".

Oh, when I said "we have apologists like WLC" I didn't mean he is on this forum! Probably that was obvious but just clarifying. I meant we have to put up with them. There's a whole bunch of them, all dishonest wankers, getting rich off theists gullibility. All they are really doing is providing an ego massage to theists, and a pretence of appealing to sceptics which very quickly gets dropped.

Steve shives reviews a lot of their books, he's on YouTube, "an atheist reads" series. He tears them to tiny pieces while making us laugh!

(March 20, 2015 at 6:04 am)Huggy74 Wrote: And this one is good also,
"Huggy condones rape!"
"no wait, I slightly misremembered what he said."
as if accusing someone of condoning rape is a minor mistake...

That's interesting, how did you get "Huggy condones rape!" out of a set of quotes where I explicitly said that your position was that no rape occurred? How do you even do that? My contention was that the arguments you were making were ridiculous- a contention where the topic of the conversation is less important than the content of the argument, hence the misremembering being slight- not that you were condoning the behavior. You were bending over backwards to not have to consider the behavior at all.

But hey, keep on misrepresenting people, that always works out so well for you.

With regards to your warning, it was another user who made the report against you, another mod who brought up your sig, and a cumulative vote of six of the staff that decided the punishment. I handed down the warning because nobody else wanted to do it, and though it might chafe your pride, the end result is no different than if anyone else had done so. The ruling was completely fair.