BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Policy & Help >

Banning thread: Epop

  
  

Page: 12(3)45678... 9

 
 
Ticker
14:13 / 09.04.07
I'm wondering if Epop is aware of the PM system? He doesn't seem to be responding to any of mine either.
 
 
penitentvandal
14:37 / 09.04.07
I'm going to rescind my initial pro-banning opinion for the time being. I've had a think about this and decided it's worth trying to engage with Epop positively one last time, and have sent him a PM myself to this effect, outlining what I see as some positive features in his posts and suggesting he make further moves in these directions. I'm going to wait and see if this helps before throwing my black ball in the pot.
 
 
Glenn Close But No Cigar
14:59 / 09.04.07
Will it help him stop calling me a chick and normalising/trivialising gender stereotypes and rape? (Talks to Strangers)

I guess you think not. My point was that he has already been rightly taken to task for doing so, by numerous different posters, and this doesn't seem to helped him stop. What I was suggesting was some time out in which he might, if he decides to, reflect on the offensiveness of his posts, and perhaps even apologise for them. I suspect that if he continues to be taken to task he might think 'fuck it' and go out in a blaze of trolling glory, which is crap for Barbelith, and crap for him. It would almost certainly involve him spouting more of the deplorable nonsense you mention, which I can't imagine you want.

"Grow up, People: The Abyss Slipped Me its Winky, and I Farted on its Balls"?


Is disrespectful and hurtful to a rape survivor and while I suspect you didn't intend it to be read that way please take that reading into consideration. (XK)

Thanks for pointing that out. For the record, I was referring to Epop's staring-down-the-dark-gods boasts, but I appreciate that, if he is indeed a rape survivor, this might be interpreted as being disrespectful / hurtful. Epop, if you are, and if you took it that way, my apologies.
 
 
The Falcon
15:09 / 09.04.07
Also, should he be - to read him as entirely true to his own posts - pretty much the most incredible guy in the entire world, I'd be very sorry to see him go. However, given the many, wonderful and varied careers, some in science apparently, I have a real hard time believing this is anything more than a tragic, delusory fantasist dressing up some nasty, very ordinary and dull gender-essentialism poorly in teh wizard's hat.

There may be any number of reasons for this, but I can't see that it is this community's job to address them, merely to reject. A ban, one for, is I.
 
 
panthergod
16:27 / 09.04.07
cut and paste from the first thread.

I like how alot of the time when people who consider themselves to be 'tolerant' and 'open minded' encounter someone with whom they deeply disagree, they try to stifle that voice at the first opportunity.

Frankly, much of what Epop said makes sense, from a surface standpoint, his problem is that he lacks nuance in alowwing the legitimacy of other expereinces, and comes across as too aggressive, arrogant and unlikable in approach for his legitimate arguments to be objectively considered by those put off by his net 'personality'.

For one, I can't see how Motherhood isn't an inherent aspect of being a woman, whether or not a woman decides to or is able to have children or not. To me, that smacks of intellectual dishonesty and denial on a massive scale. Forgive me if this comes across as asshole-ish, I truly don't mean to sound that way.

But then, I'm only a man.


Please, don't ban me for agreeing 100% with the majority. I recognize that by virtue of my being a man in today's world, I am to an extent inherently sexist(seriously, that's not sarcasm).
 
 
Saint Keggers
16:43 / 09.04.07
Ban.
 
 
*
16:45 / 09.04.07
For one, I can't see how Motherhood isn't an inherent aspect of being a woman, whether or not a woman decides to or is able to have children or not. To me, that smacks of intellectual dishonesty and denial on a massive scale. Forgive me if this comes across as asshole-ish, I truly don't mean to sound that way.

Hi, panthergod. Excuse me but I want to assist you in clarifying your language. Since you agree that Epop's style is a problem, you probably want to avoid style problems in your own writing, right?

I see you trying to ask for clarity about something you don't understand, which I really appreciate and support. In doing so, though, you have accidentally (I assume) called people who do not view Motherhood as an inherent aspect of being a woman "intellectually dishonest" and "in denial." You have then tried to moderate this gaff by putting a "to me" in front of it and a "forgive me" at the end of it.

This doesn't work. To wit:

"For one, I can't see how being a firefighter isn't an inherent aspect of being a man, whether or not a man decides to or is able to fight fires or not. To me, if you say being a firefighter is not an inherent aspect of manhood, you are either a lying bastard or too stupid to see it. Forgive me if this comes across as asshole-ish, I truly don't mean to sound that way."

Following the outward forms of politeness doesn't change the fact that I've just said people who disagree with me are stupid or liars. I'm exaggerating in my example here to make it more obvious how this is a form of attack—you've not called people "stupid", but "in denial"; you've not said people are "lying" but being "intellectually dishonest".
 
 
Ticker
16:45 / 09.04.07
Please, don't ban me for agreeing 100% with the majority. I recognize that by virtue of my being a man in today's world, I am to an extent inherently sexist(seriously, that's not sarcasm).

Dude, go read my replies in the Temple threads. I think you and I and (probably some other folks) can talk about these things productively. Let's leave this thread to focus on Epop.
 
 
Ticker
16:47 / 09.04.07
ah x-post with id.
 
 
Glenn Close But No Cigar
16:47 / 09.04.07
panthergod, I very much doubt than anybody will call for you to be banned on the basis of the above.

They might, though, ask you to think a bit harder. About this, for example:

For one, I can't see how Motherhood isn't an inherent aspect of being a woman, whether or not a woman decides to or is able to have children or not.

Y'see, it puts the notion 'woman' in orbit around the notion 'Motherhood', and fails to recognise that, somewhere in this infinite universe of ours, this pattern might not apply.

To paraphrase Bill Clinton, on Barbelith 'It's plurality, stupid'.
 
 
Spaniel
16:54 / 09.04.07
Everything that needs to be said has been said.

Ban
 
 
electric monk
16:56 / 09.04.07
I like how alot of the time when people who consider themselves to be 'tolerant' and 'open minded' encounter someone with whom they deeply disagree, they try to stifle that voice at the first opportunity.

Before you head too far down that chain of logic:

Epop said:

"By and large, the women are out having kids and stuff."

to which TtS replied

I am reading this comment as a deliberate attempt to give offence. Is that what you intended? If not, would you care to, as the local jargon has it, unpack a little?

I'm pretty sure this is where it started. I think you'll want to take a look at the Ultraculture Journal thread and the Sexism in Magic thread again, where you might notice that people have attempted to engage this poster on a few levels. In the main and generally speaking, they've been told to grow up or told to provide evidence to counter Epop's non-existant evidence. Or ignored. Hardly "stifling", as you put it.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
17:07 / 09.04.07
panthergod, I very much doubt than anybody will call for you to be banned on the basis of the above.

Meh. It would probably save time and effort in the long run to airlock anyone who came out with that tired old passive aggressive "oh I suppose I'm not ALLOWED to say that, am I?" schtick - apart from anything else, think how much briefer and yet also more entertaining these discussions would be if as soon as someone said that, the answer was a swift "nope!" and a ban. Great comic timing! It would never get old.

This is all pretty academic though. Has anyone been in direct contact with Tom yet, or are people just painting symbols on the side of the mountain and waiting for the mothership to swoop down and rescue us?
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
17:31 / 09.04.07
I'm going repeat this: the reason being suggested for a ban keeps moving around.

First, it's misogyny. I answer that accusation.

Then, sexism. I answer that accusation, particularly pointing out that in many species, males and females are quite different, and that observing these differences is not unreasonable and often quite important: cows and bulls, for example, are quite different.

Then somebody yanks my chain about the comment I made about income inequality, and I explain that also.

Leaving the rest of the thread, which has devolved into "we don't like the way that you said that."

On the question of if it's 10% or 2% - I'm very interested in the data and will have comments once this storm in a teacup has blown over.

I think I explained pretty well why I was on barb. Firstly, life wasn't always like this - I came up through the ranks like pretty much anyone, although I was lucky to have access to very strong teachers.

Secondly, I came here to tell you that Barbelith has stalled out because Grant is not producing sufficiently high quality material that you can continue to use as an aid to co-initiation. The early buzz around his work was because the man was generating significant amounts of power from an extremely robust practice and really breaking through some shit. I've met Grant and spent some time with him discussing the issues and props to him: for somebody without a major teacher to guide him his work is incredible. I don't know who could take him higher given that he just grew the way he is now, as far as we know.

Anyway, I think I've answered all charges other than "we don't like the way you said that" and, in fact, if we start in on close reading of **what I actually said** I think that we'll find most of it is pretty inoffensive if you aren't deeply entrenched in notions of political correctness.

Anybody want to argue that the case I'm making isn't broadly accurate and plausible? I saw some stats on Ham Radio - yes, as expected, it's male dominated. So is painting little lead figures. YL *used* to be a gesture of genteel respect for female hams. XYL is a newer development that I had not heard of. The point remains, however: many of these things are simply way way way more appealing to men than women because men and women are - on average - wired differently.

If you want to start talking magic, really getting into the nitty gritty of things, you know where to find me.
 
 
illmatic
17:36 / 09.04.07
I came here to tell you that Barbelith has stalled out because Grant is not producing sufficiently high quality material that you can continue to use as an aid to co-initiation

That's fucking rubbish. The reasons Barbelith has stalled are well detailed in this very fora, and are in some part technical, in some part managerial. You don't need cosmic drama to explain this - or most things.
 
 
Feverfew
17:44 / 09.04.07
While I can see how you as a person could find this discussion problematic - no-one wants to see their own banning thread, after all - do you not realise just how patronising that last post is? Even if you don't intend it to be?

Can you step back and see how other people may be offended when you take a position that says, and I summarise;

I) Why are you trying to ban me? Why do your reasons keep changing?

II) Look, I have come here to tell you that that this board is stale - And I've met Grant Morrison.

III) I'm the person to talk to about real magic.

I realise I'm being slightly glib, but that is how your last post tends to come out - is this just a function of being defensive?

The position I would take is this; You are entitled to your opinion, just as everyone else is; and therefore everyone else is entitled to their opinions on your opinions. Which is why this community works; you can say what you like, but you have to be able to defend it with provable or adequate evidence. People are expressing their opinions on your opinions (sorry, this is getting unwieldy) and yours have caused this thread as a reaction.

Ask yourself; why is this? Don't just defend yourself as a person, defend your opinions more so.
 
 
Ticker
17:44 / 09.04.07
oh and before I forget:

I recognize that by virtue of my being a man in today's world, I am to an extent inherently sexist(seriously, that's not sarcasm).

...is an inherently sexist statement about men. It's a long weird road but the trick is to stay away from absolutes and generalizations.
 
 
Ticker
17:47 / 09.04.07
Epop you haven't answered anything to my satisfactionand it appears other people's.

Then, sexism. I answer that accusation, particularly pointing out that in many species, males and females are quite different, and that observing these differences is not unreasonable and often quite important: cows and bulls, for example, are quite different.

Using the vague differences of other mammals says nothing useful about humans. Saying women are raising children and not doing magic is your opinion, which happens to be sexist. I am a woman doing magic and not raising children so your definition leaves me out. When I ask you not to do this you ignore me or dismiss my request. This is just rude.
 
 
Spaniel
17:47 / 09.04.07
Has anyone been in direct contact with Tom yet

Yup. I have.

Epop, if you were, perhance, to start upon a close reading of what others have *actually said*, then you might be in with a chance here. Sadly I suspect you are incapable of doing so.
 
 
Ticker
17:50 / 09.04.07
again sorry for multipost-ness...

Then, sexism. I answer that accusation, particularly pointing out that in many species, males and females are quite different, and that observing these differences is not unreasonable and often quite important: cows and bulls, for example, are quite different.

Observing differences is completely different than deriving meaning from those differences. Almost all bulls naturally have horns, some types of cows don't. What meaning I derive from this needs to be grounded in something useful not glossed over to justify my assertion that some cows are more bull-like than others.
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
17:51 / 09.04.07
See, this is how it works.

When I say something controversial about gender - and people have attacked me for being down on both men and women, missing the point that I'm simply observing differences - then I'm attacked for how I choose to express myself. "Oh, you were offensive" etc.

When I instead argue results: yes, I've done these things, and I know what I'm doing about - then it switches again... "it's not about what you are, it's about what you say."

I don't see much push back here on the arguments. The "misogynist" thing seems to have gone away when I asked people to point out these statements specifically.

Likewise, sexist I think I've answered.

Now we're down to "we don't like the way you said that" and "don't argue from authority, basically."

Well, look, magic is a skill. I'm world class.

Oh, you may say, no you're not, you're a doofus and a failure.

Given that, for the most part, magic isn't easy to demonstrate and certainly presents real challenges without a fair degree of personal intimacy, how could we tell what the real deal is?

I've explained some of what I'm doing in the world so that, if I appear to be arrogant, you might realize that its backed up by result.

I'm making arrangements later today to have somebody you know and trust around here, and that I think will help me out on this without disclosing my identity, confirm at least the material facts regarding refugee issues, contributions to the environmental field, and so on.

I'm not sure that'll go through - asking somebody to vouch for you under conditions like this is a lot - but if it does, then we'll have a lot more to go on in terms of assessing whether or not I'm full of shit, or whether I'm the real deal.

If I'm the real deal, then you might want to consider whether I have anything that you might be able to use. If I'm not - well, I show up on Barb very infrequently and am unlikely to show up with a sword in my hand again.
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
17:59 / 09.04.07
As a protocol for that exchange here's the format I'm suggesting. I make three or four statements about my work, and somebody with long history here of my choosing is disclosed evidence of those claims.

They come back with a "yes, this is true" or a "no, this is not."

If it's "yes, this is true" nobody hounds them for details - enquiries to me personally, and, yes, I'll start reading PMs.

None of this answers questions about tone, of course, but I think that demonstrating some bona fides might allay a few fears and smooth further communication.

Does this seem reasonable in principle? I apologize for taking such a formal approach, but my journey from gutter dwelling sorcerer to has put me in a position where not having my real name exposed so you could individually verify claims is a good idea. I may be being overcautious, I may not, but I'm learning to play those aspects of my life much more carefully these days.

I'll see if I can get this arranged later.
 
 
Glenn Close But No Cigar
18:00 / 09.04.07
Secondly, I came here to tell you that Barbelith has stalled out because Grant is not producing sufficiently high quality material that you can continue to use as an aid to co-initiation

Actually, I suspect Epop has a point here. I think we should all start wanking over Wild C.A.T.S. like some great, angry orchestra.

I've met Grant and spent some time with him discussing the issues and props to him: for somebody without a major teacher to guide him his work is incredible. I don't know who could take him higher given that he just grew the way he is now, as far as we know.

What's great about this is that while pretend Ipsissimus types usually tell the board how disappointed Grant Morrison would be with us, Epop pulls a 180 and is here to tell us that we should be disappointed in Grant.

Brilliant, when you think about it.
 
 
Spaniel
18:07 / 09.04.07
If you're the real deal perhaps you could, you know, come up with a bloody evidence base for some of your claims? Claims which when presented as uncontestable fact function as misogynistic, sexist and, frankly, a tad irrational, especially when couched in all this the-great-I bollocks.
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
18:07 / 09.04.07
Oh, and XK, I said pretty clearly at one point: saying black people are on average taller than chinese people is

1> True

and

2> Tells you nothing about the height of a given individual of a given race.

Even within the brute biology there's plenty of unusual stuff going on: extra gender chromosomes like XXY and XYY, what ever is going on with Jamie Lee Curtis, the extremely widespread and seemingly paradoxical prevalence of homosexuality in mammals (really, seriously, the best damn argument against evolution is "why are there gay monkeys?" - *nobody* in evolutionary biology has a handle on it, and on the surface it makes a mockery of everything we understand about reproductive selection.)

So, yeah, anyway it's real enough to work with the biological substrates, and complicated enough not to go from these general situations to inferences about specific individuals.

There is a *WORLD OF DIFFERENCE* between saying "this is probably why rape happens at a biological level" - in the abstract, about species level evolutionary forces - to "THIS IS WHY YOU WERE RAPED."

I understand that line very, very clearly, and am not one to cross it. I hope that line is clearly drawn for you also.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
18:07 / 09.04.07
Hey, panthergod! Watch this!

You know what I like? I like it when I bend over backwards, choking down a stomach full of bile and misery and pain and all-too-familiar anger in one more vain attempt to engage someone in a meaningful dialogue only to have them throw the attempt back in my face with a side order of extra spite and prejudice causing me to lose my rag and a little bit more of my much-eroded faith in human nature, and then someone dawdles in afterwards to tell me what a horrid nasty lady I am for not being nicey nice to Mr. Sexist Git 2007.

I also like lazy, passive-agressive, whiny-arsed posts about how any attempt to keep this board relatively low on bigotry shored up with crappy pseudoscience is a violation of frea speach. I like it even better when the person making said passive-aggressive etc post takes care to remark that ze'll probably get BANNED TOO for speaking out (why yes, ze does happen to have that rare degree of moral courage, ze's just too modest to mention it).

See? I can do it too, look!

The more I think about it the more I reckon leaving the pub in the early hours of Sunday morning was a terrible error of judgement on my part, really.
 
 
This Sunday
18:12 / 09.04.07
Epop, you can have whomever vouch for accomplishment, but nobody can vouch for rudeness or antagonist behaviour. You either do it, and be aware you're doing it, or you do it, recognize it, and apologize and/or amend your ways.

You don't come to the table with sword-in-hand for communications and dialogues. You come to control, to preach or pontificate, but not to talk. And this is a talking, communicating and dialoguing place.

Nobody else is drawing a sword, so to speak, so you think maybe there's a reason for that? It's not because nobody's got them. And, y'know, one person gets out their sword - to show us how big, dangerous, and well-kept it is - and next, somebody's got out a tank or bomb or a monkey full of discomforting viruses.

So, yeah, anyone can come and vouch for your sword, but they can't vouch for you whipping it out and swinging it around messing up the curtains and getting nicks in the tabletop.
 
 
Ticker
18:16 / 09.04.07
Oh, and XK, I said pretty clearly at one point: saying black people are on average taller than chinese people is

1> True


Please provide a link to the study of which groups you are talking about. Thanks.



and

2> Tells you nothing about the height of a given individual of a given race.

Or anything at all really. This is the problem I'm having with your posting style. It isn't communicating anything except white space and your opinions.



Even within the brute biology there's plenty of unusual stuff going on: extra gender chromosomes like XXY and XYY, what ever is going on with Jamie Lee Curtis, the extremely widespread and seemingly paradoxical prevalence of homosexuality in mammals (really, seriously, the best damn argument against evolution is "why are there gay monkeys?" - *nobody* in evolutionary biology has a handle on it, and on the surface it makes a mockery of everything we understand about reproductive selection.)

Let's look at some quotable science rather then pure speculation, shall we?



So, yeah, anyway it's real enough to work with the biological substrates, and complicated enough not to go from these general situations to inferences about specific individuals.

There is a *WORLD OF DIFFERENCE* between saying "this is probably why rape happens at a biological level" - in the abstract, about species level evolutionary forces - to "THIS IS WHY YOU WERE RAPED."

I understand that line very, very clearly, and am not one to cross it. I hope that line is clearly drawn for you also.

Ok so can you understand why your posts read to me and other people as 'reason X is the reason Y happened to you' and therefore why we are asking you to stop posting in this manner?
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
18:23 / 09.04.07
Actually, I think if you check this, you'll find that I was *quite* impressed with Mordant Carnival's grasp of the Real Territory - go back a ways, and you'll see that post.

http://barbelith.com/topic/26898/from/35#post691559

Mordant said something that struck me as having a lot of durable personal experience attached to it and I agreed wholeheartedly.

In fact, you'll see that this whole thing started when I observed that:

1> Many female magicians are occupied with raising children, which falls in general much more heavily on women than men because of both biological factors (gross morphological changes associated with pregnancy and birth) and cultural factors (not something we got into.)

2> Men have a strong tendency to geek out into absolutely pointless activities like building model railways, in a way that far fewer women do.

Neither of these things strikes me - even now - as a controversial thesis. I think that it's pretty clear if you look at the world around you that women have are putting more resources into raising kids than men are, and than men geek out. You can find counterexamples, but we're talking averages here. People were complaining about a perceived absence of females writing in the book and my suggestion was that, in general, they were busy doing other things.

I'd still stand by that. I don't see how you can call an observation about the world around us misogyny or sexism. The world may be these things, but an honest observation about that world is neither.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
18:26 / 09.04.07
saying black people are on average taller than chinese people is

1> True


A proper scientist wouldn't compare "black" and "Chinese", I think. Too many variables. Which is why I am slightly confused about this latest offer. Would knowing that Epop is indeed all that he has so far claimed to be, in terms of world-changing achievements, passage through the Abyss, world-class magical powers, invalidate the request that, for example, he substantiate his claim that women who are being forced to have sex through physical coersion are more likely to have orgasms than women who are being emotionally coerced into having sex? Well, maybe. There is a noun missing in his statement, above, that:

I apologize for taking such a formal approach, but my journey from gutter dwelling sorcerer to has put me in a position where not having my real name exposed so you could individually verify claims is a good idea.

It is possible that this missing noun is "saviour" or "messiah", in which case it sort of does make sense - as a fully realised exemplar of the divine, Epop should not need to substantiate any claim, as he may be incapable of not speaking the complete truth. Thus, when he says that women who are emotionally coerced into sex do not have orgasms "as far as he can tell", this is a _figure of speech_, meaning that as far as one with a complete and perfect view of the universe can tell - that is, in absolute reality - this does not happen.

This may sound sarcastic, but is not intended to. It does strike me, however, that having an avatar of the Divine Spirit on Barbelith might cause some adminstrative problems.
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
18:26 / 09.04.07
XK - people are responsible for their own reading of texts. The author is dead, remember?

And, you know, black people are on average taller than asians. I'm not going to look that up, but if you want to contest the point, please feel free.
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
18:28 / 09.04.07
yeah, I found myself pondering the noun to use there. What I'd intended to type was "where I am now."

I tend to drop words when multitasking.

And, at the end of the day, it's a question of proof.
 
 
Haloquin
18:30 / 09.04.07
Oooh, I liked this;

Epop; "I came here to tell you that Barbelith has stalled out because Grant is not producing sufficiently high quality material that you can continue to use as an aid to co-initiation."

Grant who?

No, seriously, I'm not sure I want to listen to someone 'tell me' that this forum with its wonderful posters has only one source of 'material' and are, obviously, incapable of developing their own work.

I see no reason to repeat what others have said re:sexism/inability to communicate ideas in a non-sexist manner etc. although I've been consistently intrigued by the emphasis on average men and women. As though an 'average' represents anything other than a mathematical point. To get an average of 5 you can have ten 1s and ten 10s, none of these fit the 5 bracket. But I digress. And I can sift through those posts and quote exactly which bits mentioned 'average people' if necessary, but I'd rather not.

I'm bemused by this person and would very much like for Epop to 'grow up'. Preferably quietly.
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
18:31 / 09.04.07
And, dude, the world is full of magicians who did real shit.

Parsons, and the Jet Propulsion Lab is a good example.

It should not be *UNUSUAL* for a magician to stand up and say "I changed the fucking world" or, even better, "I am changing the fucking world **RIGHT NOW**."

If this stuff is real, if it works like the books say it does, these results should be possible for any of us who put in the world and don't waste too much effort in dead ends etc. It may just be effort, it may be some combination of effort, good tools and luck, but it should not be *that rare.*

The fact that it's a big deal for me to stand up and say "I've punched holes in three or four major world issues" - not *solve* - but made really significant, palpable and generally attested contributions is not that big a deal.

Any human being who embraces a magical and spiritual life ought to be able to do these things.
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
18:33 / 09.04.07
Haloquin, at least one other person on the board seems to say the general consensus on the board is that it stalled out for administrative etc. reasons - it's a few messages back.
 
  

Page: 12(3)45678... 9

 
  
Add Your Reply