Dawkins Forum Implodes

[Iason Ouabache]

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2010/02/richard-dawkins-unleashes-tirade-against-fans.html

Richard Dawkins has something of a reputation for provoking the religious community, but it seems he may have underestimated the atheistic fervour of his own fanbase. Amidst a tsunami of vulgar and vitriolic comments, the 85,000-strong forum on his official website RichardDawkins.net had to be shut down this week.

The implosion appears to have been provoked by an announcement on the website that discussion threads and responses would in future be tightly moderated to help curb irrelevant discussions, frivolous gossip and abuse.

However, the announcement itself created such an explosion of ire that the planned 30-day switch-over period had to be scrapped and the discussion forum locked down immediately. Some members are complaining that their profiles have been wiped out and others have lost access to files and messages that they uploaded onto the website. Not willing to be silenced, many of the former Dawkins fans are continuing to vent their feelings on atheist forums elsewhere on the net.

Chris Wilkins, who has blogged about the row, told me yesterday that one of his acquaintances described the closing of the forum as "feeling like a friend had died".

Dawkins himself is less than sympathetic. In a personal message posted today entitled Outrage, he lets rip at the members of his website:

Imagine that you, as a greatly liked and respected person, found yourself overnight subjected to personal vilification on an unprecedented scale, from anonymous commenters on a website. Suppose [...] that somebody on website expressed a "sudden urge to ram a fistful of nails" down your throat. Also to "trip you up and kick you in the guts." And imagine seeing your face described, again by an anonymous poster, as "a slack jawed turd in the mouth mug if ever I saw one.

(You will also have to imagine the uncensored version of this extract)

He goes on to ponder what could possible be wrong with people who "over-react so spectacularly to something so trivial" and concludes that "there is something rotten in internet culture" and that he is determined to purge his website of this vicious element. And so the battle commences...

[hooplala]

They're all just mad that they don't have a higher power to complain to.

[Payne]

Mother. Fucking. LOL!

[Doktor Howl]

Internets 1

Dawkins  0

[Xooxe]

I found Dawkins' original post from the quote above - http://forum.richarddawkins.net/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=110356

Suppose you found yourself described as an “utter twat” a “suppurating rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum inside a dead skunk that’s been shoved up a week-old dead rhino’s twat.”

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Wowwwww. 

[hooplala]

It's his site and he can do with it as he pleases, but the following quote is rather bullshit if you are interested in free exchange of ideas:

The new discussion area will not be a new forum. It will be different. We will be using a system of tags to categorize items, instead of sub-forums. Discussions can have multiple tags, such as "Education", "Children", and "Critical Thinking". Starting a new discussion will require approval, so we ask that you only submit new discussions that are truly relevant to reason and science. Subsequent responses on the thread will not need approval—however anything off topic or violating the new terms of service will be removed. The approval process will be there to ensure the quality of posts on the site. This is purely an editorial exercise to help new visitors find quality content quickly. We hope this discussion area will reflect the foundation's goals and values.

[0]

This entire implosion was caused when Dawkins' fans realized that he was composed mainly of feces.

[Jean-Lustine d'Hadamard]

The new discussion area will not be a new forum. It will be different. We will be using a system of tags to categorize items, instead of sub-forums. Discussions can have multiple tags, such as "Education", "Children", and "Critical Thinking". Starting a new discussion will require approval, so we ask that you only submit new discussions that are truly relevant to reason and science. Subsequent responses on the thread will not need approval—however anything off topic or violating the new terms of service will be removed.

So it's going to be a bit like Slashdot, right?

The approval process will be there to ensure the quality of posts on the site.

So it's going to be a bit like Slashdot ...right?

This is purely an editorial exercise to help new visitors find quality content quickly.

So it's going to be a bit like Slashdot, right?!

[Cramulus]

interesting. It's funny, because Dawkins GOT that notoriety because of the emotional resonance his rational argument has. He's been pissing off theists for decades now, and he's finally got himiself an internet army. Being gnashed and bleated at is the price of fame. But I can see that he doesn't want that on his own site.

This "internet forum thing" isn't going to last forever. It's already being phased out in favor of more fluid forms of many-to-many communication. Being able to filter out trolling is something that'll be selected in, naturally, as software develops.

[Muir]

You should read the "Articles of Faith" section.  It goes in slightly more detail. That and I find it personally funny that she uses this as "proof" that God exists. :P

http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/2010/02/richard-dawkins-offended-by-atheists.html

[hooplala]

More ammunition for the Xtians... great. 

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Just keeps getting funnier!

[Lies]

At first I was like 

then I was like 

And then I was like 

[Rev. St. Syn, KSC (Ret.)]

I LOL'D, HARD.

Athiests. Forums. Teh funnay could be potentially legendary.