I am working harder at expressing myself minus any inflammatory style as such hostile language unfortunately seems to become the target of attention at the expense of my actual message.  That doesn't mean that I am forfeiting a direct approach.   I will observe decorum but I won't allow myself to become someone's emotional punching bag.

No, that is simply NOT a threat.  I don't know which planet you're from (honest), but trying to get an on-going conflict to wind-down and letting the other party(ies) know they are being given an invitation to wind-down a conflict is simply =not= a threat on any planet I've ever lived on.  It's obvious I can give as good as I get, and you're being offered a chance for something a lot better.

I mean, I'm threatening to be =nice= to you as much as I'm threatening to be =mean=.  I don't see you screaming bloody hell that I'm going to be nice to you if you're nice in exchange.

 Good let's go back to begging redneF to come back and talk some more shit about Capt Pineapple.

redneF come back and block Brian37.  

No. Too little. Too late.

And you're not listening. Half the obstacle in 'problem solving' is admitting there's a problem.....to begin with.

You've not gotten to that stage yet, for whatever reason.

Had the forum software had that feature, it probably would have prolonged the inevitable, because I wouldn't have to wade through the walls of quoted posts of Brian37's where he quote an entire wall because he's too fucking lazy to break apart posts like the rest of us, so he can go on his insane tangents and rants based off of one sentence, or even one single word that are sometimes not even germane to the conversation.

The great thing about debating in forums in writing is that you can't escape what you wrote in black and white, but what opens the door to trolls like Caposkia being able to try and get away with denying that he was beaten, is to allege that he never was, and that puts the onus on you to provide the evidence to back your claim.

It's difficult enough to do when it's just between 2 or 3 posters, but when a moron like Brian37 does what he does, the posts you need to 'prove' that Caposkia is not correct in not getting beaten, is buried in pages and pages of Brian37's insanity and bad posting habits.

I am relaxed, Bob. That's precisely what took so long for me to finally come to the conclusions of why I can't be on any team that has Brian37 for a member.

I'm an extremely patient person.

Just not for long....lol

The shit has been brewing since Day 1, with Brian37's utter ignorance on virtually everything from business and interpersonal relations, to just about anything in an encyclopedia.

When he won't even grant the painfully obvious axioms like 'supply and demand', or 'what the market will bear', when you're debating business, you're dealing with a complete imbecile.

It's like arguing with a mentally retarded 6 yr old.

Brian37 epitomizes everything I would never want to be in this lifetime. I will reject any and all allegations that I'm being too hard on him. I'm what I am today, and what I'll be tomorrow, for being much harder on myself, than I could ever be on him, because he just doesn't have the potential, nor the discipline.

So, this is what I call an 'intervention'.

Maybe nobody has ever told Brian37 the cold hard facts, but he's a waste.

What really set this off is Caposkia once again using the tactic to place the burden of proof on me that I did prove him wrong (as I claimed), which would have me on a wild goose chase wading through the pages and pages of complete horseshit posts of Brian37's because he takes every bait that Caposkia throws at Brian37.

This is a common forum debate tactic. Padding posts to bury your defeats as far back in a thread as possible. Except that Caposkia baits Brian37 into doing the padding for him, with Brian37's patented insanity of 'Quote A Wall Of Post' in response to 1 itty bitty thing.

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/15111?page=52#comment-364191

I have little doubt that the main difference in Brian37's style of argument is that he used a magic marker to add a 'NOT' to his 'God Does Exist' T Shirt, as well as his rhetoric and hyperbole of 'absolute' claims, when the majority of intelligent 'atheists' understand that when we can't know everything, we are really arguing about probabilities.

Brian37 won't grant that.

He is being just as dogmatic as he probably was when he was a theist. This adds credibility to the theory that 'atheism' can be a religion and a dogma, and undermines 'Positive Atheism' as a whole.

These kind of people have serious issues. I can spot them a mile away, and I can play them like a fiddle.

When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I baited him with one comment that could have nothing in common with how he misconstrued it, and brought his issues out to the forefront, for everyone to see.

Delusional thinking and paranoia.

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/15111?page=52#comment-364316

"I don't get physical with people. This isn't high school and we are not in a street gang. If you were face to face with me and you laid one hand on me you'd be in the back of a cop car. Adults don't settle beefs with fists. Words are one thing, but to even imply violence, is beyond the scope.

You can call me a dick, an asshole, whatever. But you will not get away with threatening me with violence. Do so and I will call the authorities and report you.

If anyone is taking this too far you are. This is a debate to me, nothing more. If it gets a believer to snap out of their delusion, great. If it does not, at least it gives both sides a venue to speak their mind uncensored.

I am going to let this veiled threat slide because I think you simply need a break to calm down. But do not ever threaten me again." : Brian37

Brian37 is now at the point where he thinks he has some control, except that he's out of control completely (he thinks he's controlling whether I get to 'slide' or not) and he's now giving me orders (to not ever threaten him again, or else!!).

It's clear to me that a lot of people would knee jerk and defend and sympathize with Brian37, and go with the best defense (a strong offense) and attack me, since defending him would be more difficult. That's human nature for the vast majority of people. Sympathy.

It's obvious I don't need it, or want it. So, it manifests itself with circling the wagons to defend the one who appears to be being 'preyed' upon.

Kinda like defending a god, dontcha think?

Doesn't actually matter if (by and large) the 'god' is a douche, the impulse is to defend the 'prey' against attack, even if the 'attacker' is 'right' in their 'attacks'.

The bottom line is that I'm logical and rational in how Brian37 actually is, and what he represents as a 'team member'. Exaggeration is not needed. It would hardly be possible.

I'm not defending myself to any of you, because it's not something I actually want or need. I'm just pointing out the obvious.

Speaking out against religious bullshit has become valuable to me, but only to some extent. Only because I'm feeling generous. I did without it quite well, and it would actually make my life easier and more personally and financially rewarding if I just walked away from 'Positive Atheism', which I'm actually going to contemplate.

I'm actually lucky in that I can stay in bed and still make money, but, I can make more money when I'm focused on work instead of staying in bed, or 'Positive Atheism'.

Here's the other type of moron that I don't want to be associated with. Atheists who build nothing but men of straw with 'straws' that weren't alleged, or stated, and aren't even germane to the topic.

Argumentum from the Painfully Obvious

Duhhh...

Duhhh....

Didn't say that he did. Duhhh...

That's exactly what I stated I would do. Duhhh....

Duhhhh...

I stated exactly how I do handle it. Duhhh....

That does not follow.

When it allows me to do what I want and eliminate those I don't want to associate with, so easily, why would I want to avoid the incredible power that it affords me?

I can make you clowns disappear from my world. Just like Paris Hilton and how I will with Brian37.

Are you and Brian37 related?

Because, just for the record, dimwits like you only add to my reasons to want to look for a different team, to fight against religious bullshit.

I've gone hammer and tongs against a number of 'team members' on this site, probably the hardest with Vastet, but, aside from the topics where I think he's clear off his nut (in personal opinion) he's earned my respect as an extremely intelligent person.

Maybe this is the silver lining for the RRS in this whole debacle.

Now people will be able to block out 10's of thousands of posts of sheer stupidity.

You've lost more than you know, Sapient.

And I'm not talking about me.

You're losing many intelligent atheists who lurk here before (they do as I did, and join with reckless abandon and begin investing with this 'team') they leap.

I've branched out in a number of forums and chat rooms, and invited other really bright atheists to the RRS, and they were turned off for the very reasons I bring up, and that you aren't willing to acknowledge are something that needs to be addressed.

Obviously, there's a differing of opinion. All I'm willing to do is bring it up a bit, and then I'll let it go.

I don't need the headache, or the argument, and you're free to do what you want, even if it's undermining you personally, the RRS, and Positive Atheism as a whole.

I agree with you fully on Cpt_.

And I've been going hammer and tongs at her with her clear and obvious double standard of being 'objective' and 'scientific'.

I suspect that she could very well be feigning having become an atheist, and using this as a tactic to try and *cough* add validity to fallacious theories that atheists are every bit as 'dogmatic' and 'irrational' in their 'beliefs' as the most rabid theist.

She fails at the 'get go'. But she's relentless. And it's tiresome. She would not last till lunchtime on some SAE and ASME type sites that I'm a member on. They have very strict policies on debating spuriously, with blatant double standards, and contradictory reasoning. It's just not tolerated. 3 strikes and you're out, permanently. IP banned and blocked.

Like I told you just recently in a PM, I have nothing but respect and admiration for what it's cost you personally in your own personal quest for Positive Atheism, and that you've done is something I couldn't and wouldn't have done, which is lay it all on the line.

But, that doesn't change that I think it could have been done differently, without all the damage, and netted you better results in the long run, all around.

Unless you'd rather I leave ASAP, I'd really just like to finish off a few pending arguments that I promised to do in my 1 on 1 debates, to show where I think I've clearly won the debate among these fallacious apologist polemics.

Just to be clear, I'm not in any way upset with you at all. If I'm upset at anyone, it's that I didn't just leave the RRS when I first came across Brian37 in my first few posts.

That was my fault, and I have no one to blame but myself for that. The reason I stayed was because of the exceptional content from some of the founding and early members of the RRS, and (ironically) Bob Spence, who is now in defense mode lobbing attacks at me...lol.

I'm not angry with him either, just for the record. I admire both his knowledge and his intelligence, and even a bit envious of how succinct he can argue and how well he can articulate concepts that are difficult to condense.

I just don't think his tolerance and defenses of Brian37 are a virtue that I would not want to mimic this aspect of him. That's just enabling.

Thanks, Vastet.

And everyone else, that can understand that I have principles that I cannot go against. They are what defines me, and I won't go against them, no matter how I or others might feel emotionally, because I think they are objective, sound, and valid reasons.

I like and respect a lot of you guys and gals. Furry in particular has quickly become someone I like and respect very much, even though she's a feisty theist.

I think that's the 'moral' of this whole story, it's about being objective. This about about how people are at their very 'core', and not about what 'team' they're on, or what they believe about 'god'.

This is about 'core' issues. And I'm at odds with others, and it seems like what the RRS will tolerate. Brian37 defends the way he is, as do Sapient and others.

Something (for me) needs to change drastically (because of my principles), and I'll never have a problem being the one that gets off the 'island', even if I have to vote myself off.

That's the long and the short of it, in case any of you were really interested...

awkward....  I get the fact that you have strong principles... and I'm willing to let the judgment call on Brian37 slide, it's a subjective opinion and you're very much entitled to it.  I just don't understand why you feel compelled to leave the forum because of it.  

Personally, if I ever got this worked up about someone I dislike, I would see it as a personal weakness and challenge to overcome.  I always try to understand, and more so when there is conflict.  

In the end, you will do what you think suits you best, but it comes down to what you expect to take away from this forum.  For me it's a chance to learn, and engage irrational people.  Sometimes they are theists, sometimes they just aren't worth bothering with.  For the record, I also had a run in with Brian back when I started.  It was about the style of rhetoric of a certain atheists video.  I commented how it seemed militant and may be misunderstood by people sitting on the fence.  Myself preferring a more rational and less emotional style.  Brian used that opportunity to "educate" me on how we're not militant enough and some other stuff... I forget the rest and it's really not worth digging up.  The point of this boring recount is to mention that I have since rarely engaged or read most of his posts.  As time progressed I have learned a bit about Brian's personal life and challenges and having a bigger picture helped me understand where he is coming from.  

I concentrated on a few debates that I thought went well, and I have gained a considerable amount of information on philosophy, apologists and freethinking in general.  It helped me question my position, and to me, that's worth more then any personal annoyance.  I take that away from this forum, from time to time, there is the one off debate that actually makes me think.  Has staying power and helps me focus my intellect for a few days.  Everything else is just the filler that keeps the "family" together to enable this environment.

I hope you stick around, for what it's worth, but if you don't, take care.

P.S.  Do you by chance know anything about TG Baker?  

See, Brian =is= useful for something, even if he likes the Redskins

                                                                  Thank you Furry.

Furry, this website is not an epic fail at all. Now you are new here, and as much as I like you, it usually is not a good idea to jump into the middle of a pit bull fight, like you said, disagreements have always happened on the net, and you are right in that they always will. This is not even the first nuclear explosion I have seen either. The last one I saw was over a rebel flag and I was the one as a mod trying to play mediator. Brian does not need advice about how to handle this site, and if he wants it he asks for it. In this case with Red and I he has done what he feels best and that is all any of us can ask.

Now, with you, I am not picking on the Jew. Lets get something straight here. I fight all god claims, not just you or the Jewish label. I've also had it out with supporters of Palestine trying to convey to them that I would support a state if it's goal wasn't a theocracy or to wipe out Israel. I have criticized Israel for it's far too often over reaction. I have criticized even non religious woo in the form of even si fi woo in claims of the transporter being a possibility.

I do not think any label of religious or political stripe deserves a taboo ever. No human deserves a monopoly on what can or cannot be criticized. No human deserves a right to say "never pick on me because I am the only one who knows what suffering is'.

Violence and suffering, much less the mere arguments on the net, have been going on since the start of our species. Rednef and I are just two people who happened to lock horns. It happens. But I am not special, he is not special, and neither are you.

Believe me I don't just pick on your claims for sport and especially not because of the claims of some believers and some atheists that somehow by doing that I am a bigot. If I was, I wouldn't be talking to you at all. I'd say you'd find more bigots in Palestine and Iran, but you most certainly cannot falsely say "pick on the Jew" to even imply such.

EVERY human deserves the dignity of safety in not fearing the physical harm of others, Red, You, me. But our claims as CLAIMS ONLY, do not. If we valued taboos, you wouldn't be here posting what you did just now. Other politically correct theists websites and even some atheist websites do that. This one does not. You'd get banned from the start many other places. So to claim I pick on you for sport is silly. Please learn to separate yourself from your claims, that will do you a lot of good in understanding that we are merely just as human as you.

It seems this issue has been settled. Red is happy, I am happy that I don't have to hear ultimatums or be equated falsely to real bigoted nuts. And believe me, out of all the atheists sites you could hang out at, I have no doubt that this one is the most tolerant and forgiving you can ever find.

I think you paid that person to magically show up a day ago just to disprove what I formed as a belief many days ago

For the most part, I stand by what I said.  There's simply too much yelling and "challenging" and not enough educating.  And being open-minded goes both ways -- more in the next paragraph.

That sounds about right.  The Redskins are more likely to win a billion Superbowls in a row than Yahweh existing.  If you're talking about a generic deistic God... I'll give you this... your god is just as likely as a purple snarfwidget and invisble pink unicorn that created everything we know today.