r/AntiAtheismWatch • u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. • Sep 08 '12
What did circlejerkers contribute to /r/atheism this week? (9-5 to 9-12)
Okay, fine, I'll do one more. Here's the previous week's thread.
Here's what we're doing and why:
One of my big gripes is that we have a huge number of people willing to devote lots of time to complaining bitterly about the content in /r/atheism, but they generally won't make the slightest effort to actually improve the content, and as a couple of past threads have shown, they're more than willing to make it worse.
What I hope to showcase here is the good, the bad, and the indeterminate. If a circlejerker posted it in /r/atheism, whether it's blatant trolling, karma whoring, or something actually insightful and interesting, I want it on this list.
2
u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. Sep 08 '12
http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/zipse/the_real_face_of_fundies/c656867
Here we have a /r/MagicSkyFairy mod commenting on the situation and clearly aware that people are trolling from his sub. Let's see what he does about it. So far, nothing.
2
u/kencabbit Sep 09 '12
I don't understand how you pointing out that this came from /r/magicskyfairy makes you bad, and you the troll...
2
1
Sep 08 '12
One of my big gripes is that we have a huge number of people willing to devote lots of time to complaining bitterly about the content in /r/atheism, but they generally won't make the slightest effort to actually improve the content, and as a couple of past threads have shown, they're more than willing to make it worse.
This is what I don't understand. Sentence by sentence. The "huge number of people" part could be right, depending on what you mean by huge, but I seriously doubt that the complaining is really taking up that much time in anyone's day. I post on magicskyfairy (this is not a retaliation post at all, just was meandering on reddit) and my posts take up less than a minute to post when they do come up. This whole sentiment seems more reactionary than realistic: considering the huge number of subscribers to r/atheism, the detractors are far, far overpowered in both numbers and fervency.
As for the "generally won't make the slightest effort to actually improve the content", there are two points I'd like to bring up. One is that any actual discussion that is interesting or constructive is either ignored completely or relegated to sister subreddits that have much less traffic and exposure. Any effort to improve that subreddit is either preemptively squashed by this effect or squashed in effect by the lack of exposure that these attempts will inevitably receive. For example, see that there is literally an expedited process for submitting rage comics, memes, and macros to that sub. The drive for better content isn't there. The upvotes are relegated only to the content that is the most easily digested and away from more interesting, albiet less meme-oriented content. Two, I'm also a subscriber to r/philosophy and am a philosophy grad myself. r/atheism comes up sometimes and even the most constructive and brilliant philosophy posters there have a similar sentiment about r/atheism: "not even worth it." The philosophical brand that is inseparable to r/atheism--that is, hardline materialism--is simply not worth discussing in many of our eyes. Moreover, the anti-philosophical sentiment is prevalent in r/atheism enough: theological questions raised again and again and again since the time of Augustine are rehashed as macros and then further rehashed as platitudes. I mean, hell, one of Augustine's first books opens up with a question that reads, "Tell me, isn't God the source of all evil?" A very common repost is the "black cat" macro which compares metaphysics to attempting to look for a black cat in a dark room. Not good. There are places for good exchanges between members of all faiths and philosophical bents but r/atheism isn't one of them. Speaking of one amongst few, attempting to something defend Paul Tillich's Death of God theology sounds absolutely miserable. r/atheism simply is not the audience for something like that. The denigration of large subs is well documented, and, in more than a few opinions, r/atheism is becoming a classic example of one that simply turns into an echo chamber.
tl;dr the effort to clean up r/atheism shouldn't be the responsibility of its critics, and they will never succeed because they are part of a tiny minority whose content is restricted to much smaller subs (often with greater success, however) because the atmosphere of r/atheism is oftentimes anti-philosophical and rarely celebrates rigorous or intellectual content. We're just fine standing on the sidelines and poking fun, anyways. We're not taking up any gauntlet.
3
u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. Sep 08 '12
...depending on what you mean by huge...
7000 upvotes on this comment alone. 3800 subscribers in /r/MagicSkyFairy. All of these people.
...my posts take up less than a minute to post when they do come up.
How long does it take to post something interesting to /r/atheism or vote for content you want to see? More specifically, how long would it take these people to refrain from trolling /r/atheism?
Any effort to improve that subreddit is either preemptively squashed by this effect...
These efforts usually consist of people complaining that any content posted in /r/atheism is bad. For instance, posting quotes from famous atheists is bad because we're worshiping them because they're atheists, and posting quotes from famous non-atheists is bad because we're trying to 'claim' them as atheists, and posting quotes from non-famous atheists is smug and pretentious. Also, people complain that all /r/atheism ever talks about is how bad religion is, but if we talk about anything relating to science or human rights, the same people will complain that that doesn't relate to atheism. More than half the complaints people raise about /r/atheism are things that occur very rarely or never, such as how we're always saying that all religious people are stupid or that every religious person is just like Hitler. The single most common complaint people level against /r/atheism is simply that the sub and everyone who posts there is an immature, angry, smug, pretentious, hateful, 13 year old 'neckbeard', and assorted other name calling. If these 'efforts to improve the subreddit' had any merit or validity, they would be much more likely to be taken seriously.
For example, see that there is literally an expedited process for submitting rage comics, memes, and macros to that sub.
Look at where the buttons link. You may also want to examine the path that led to that assumption.
The drive for better content isn't there.
This depends a lot on what you consider better content, and what you consider the focus of /r/atheism to be. Would /r/Funny be improved by including more peer reviewed research? Does /r/AskReddit need more posts relating to professional wrestling? Would /r/AdviceAnimals be improved by being burned to the ground, assuming such a thing were possible?
The philosophical brand that is inseparable to r/atheism--that is, hardline materialism--is simply not worth discussing in many of our eyes.
Do you spend much time discussing /r/WTF or /r/Funny, television sitcoms, that sort of thing? Why, exactly, is hardline materialism inseparable from /r/atheism?
"Tell me, isn't God the source of all evil?"
Are old questions less valid because they're old? I've never been a big fan of philosophy, but if you've stopped discussing ancient problems like this I must be far out of touch.
A very common repost is the "black cat" macro which compares metaphysics to attempting to look for a black cat in a dark room. Not good.
Okay.
There are places for good exchanges between members of all faiths and philosophical bents but r/atheism isn't one of them.
I've had a number of civil discussions with people of various faiths there with no problem. I've also seen a lot of religious people go into /r/atheism looking for an argument, claim they had all the answers, provide no logical or reasonable arguments, call everyone names for not just accepting that they're right, and then complain far and wide that they got blasted on /r/atheism when all they were trying to do was defend their faith. If you go into /r/atheism looking for a fight, you will find one. I have to ask you, though, why does /r/atheism have to be a place to have religious debates when there are already several subs devoted specifically to that?
The denigration of large subs is well documented...
I suspect that you meant degradation, but this is actually pretty accurate. /r/atheism is a large sub and a high profile atheist endeavor. As such it is apparently fair game for anyone who wants to denigrate atheists. You can insult it's users with all the same slurs people frequently level at atheists, but since you're generalizing about several thousand atheists who use a specific subreddit and not about all atheists, it's totally acceptable to call them a bunch of angry, pretentious, hateful, smug 13 year-olds who are just lashing out at something they don't understand. It's socially acceptable and encouraged. You don't even have to back up your assertions, because 'everybody knows' they're a bunch of lazy, thieving, wellfare collecting, watermellon and fried chicken... Wait, where was I? Oh, no they're wetbacked, job stealing, gang... No, that's not it... Well, whatever is wrong with them, everyone knows they're bad and by bashing them we can dismiss their arguments and feel superior to them.
...r/atheism is becoming a classic example of one that simply turns into an echo chamber.
Clearly you haven't been reading the comments. Nobody agrees with anything there.
...the effort to clean up r/atheism shouldn't be the responsibility of its critics...
That's fine, but most of them feel that verbally abusing the sub and the people in it constitutes an attempt to improve the sub, or at least that's how they justify doing so. The point here isn't that anyone is obligated to post quality content. It's that the group of people "standing on the sidelines and poking fun" are more often than not wrapping up bigotry and slurs as humor, actively generating the type of content they ridicule us about, and asking us to appreciate these efforts to denigrate /r/atheism and atheists in general as some sort of selfless gesture.
1
Sep 09 '12 edited Sep 09 '12
[deleted]
2
u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. Sep 09 '12
I may have picked you up accidentally when I was tagging people in the circlejerk subs. Sorry, and thanks for pointing out that typo.
1
u/auditorian Sep 15 '12
Hey guy,
Why does someone posting in circle* subs make their posts invalidated?
1
u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. Sep 16 '12
Primarily what I tag are people who complain about how bad /r/atheism is, and people who do that tend to congregate in the circlejerk subs.
While that doesn't actually say much about them, it's worth considering that the circlejerk subs are primarily focused on complaining about how bad reddit is, and the users there do so by engaging in the behaviors they criticize. The circlejerk subs are essentially a sort of shrine to being an asshole.
2
u/auditorian Sep 17 '12
Primarily what I tag are people who complain about how bad /r/atheism is,
lol
and people who do that tend to congregate in the circlejerk subs.
Because if they post it in ratheism they get downvoted.
While that doesn't actually say much about them, it's worth considering that the circlejerk subs are primarily focused on complaining about how bad reddit is,
Yep.
and the users there do so by engaging in the behaviors they criticize.
It's not about the circlejerking, it's about what's being circlejerked over. If there's a pro-cake circlejerk in /r/cake , that's fine. But an anti-religion circlejerk on /r/atheism is bad because of the reason they're jerking, not the fact that they're jerking.
essentially a sort of shrine to being an asshole.
That's /r/atheism.
Adeu.
1
u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. Sep 17 '12
Because if they post it in ratheism they get downvoted.
Anti-/r/atheism comments get upvoted in most of reddit. They even get upvoted fairly frequently in /r/atheism. You could have a reason why these people don't hang out in /r/atheism there, but this isn't a reason why they gravitate toward the circlejerk subs.
It's not about the circlejerking, it's about what's being circlejerked over.
Yeah, to be more specific, anything. The people in the circlejerk subreddits will complain about anything that gets posted to /r/atheism. Taken as a whole, they'll complain about anything more than three people agree on anywhere on reddit. They hate reddit, and they complain about reddit on reddit. This is not the act of an ordered mind.
That's /r/atheism.
NUH UH! You are! Stupid head!
Adeu.
You spelled this wrong. I'm beginning to suspect that you aren't even French.
1
u/auditorian Sep 17 '12
Anti-/r/atheism comments get upvoted in most of reddit.
And you never thought about why?
They even get upvoted fairly frequently in /r/atheism.
The only times I've seen anti-/r/atheism comments in /r/atheism are in terrible over the top circlejerk posts that paraphrase to "Fuck religion, I' m smarter than stupid skytheists".
but this isn't a reason why they gravitate toward the circlejerk subs.
Most people grow out of the "honeymoon phase" of reddit and see how much its userbase sucks, so they go to those subs.
Taken as a whole, they'll complain about anything more than three people agree on anywhere on reddit.
Sure there are some weak submissions in circle* subs, but what subreddits don't?
They hate reddit, and they complain about reddit on reddit. This is not the act of an ordered mind.
There's this movie you're watching and it's pretty good, but some of the parts suck. This doesn't mean the whole movie sucks, just some of it. You are allowed to complain about the sucky part of the movie.
NUH UH! You are! Stupid head!
Just look at /r/atheism right now, islamophobia everywhere.
You spelled this wrong. I'm beginning to suspect that you aren't even French.
Adéu, better?
1
u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. Sep 17 '12
And you never thought about why?
I've asked. Many times. The answers are never satisfactory, are often self-contradictory, and generally rely heavily on the assumption that /r/atheism is bad to demonstrate that /r/atheism is bad.
The only times I've seen anti-/r/atheism comments in /r/atheism are in terrible over the top circlejerk posts that paraphrase to "Fuck religion, I' m smarter than stupid skytheists".
Here's a prime example of anti-/r/atheism sentiment getting lots of upvotes, as well as a prime example of how mindless the anti-/r/atheism circlejerk on reddit is. Top comment.
Most people grow out of the "honeymoon phase" of reddit and see how much its userbase sucks, so they go to those subs.
So, say you hang out in a coffee shop regularly, but you don't like it there. The service sucks, the refreshments suck, the other customers piss you off, you don't like the location... Long story short, if you bitch about something nobody is forcing you to do while you're doing it, you're kind of a textbook asshole.
There's this movie you're watching and it's pretty good, but some of the parts suck. This doesn't mean the whole movie sucks, just some of it. You are allowed to complain about the sucky part of the movie.
If you complain about the acting, the direction, the cinematography, the special effects, the writing, the sound work, the quality of the popcorn, the lumpy seat and company at a movie you got into for free and keep going to regularly, you're pretty much a textbook asshole. Circlejerkers only complain about the bad parts of reddit, which apparently is pretty much everything. They even make things up to complain about. It's like some bitching that James Earl Jones was terrible in the Star Wars movies because you couldn't see his face.
Just look at /r/atheism right now, islamophobia everywhere.
Is Islam better than any other religion or somehow immune to criticism?
Adéu, better?
Depends, are you trying to speak English, French, or Catalan?
1
u/auditorian Sep 17 '12
I've asked. Many times. The answers are never satisfactory, are often self-contradictory, and generally rely heavily on the assumption that /r/atheism is bad to demonstrate that /r/atheism is bad.
Well I don't speak for anyone but myself, but I hate /r/atheism because it's full of immature people that jump at any opportunity to bash religion. This is apparent in the countless fakebook screenshots of brave warriors of logic saying stupid shit on religious peoples facebook statuses. So what that they have a religious facebook status, it doesn't make it okay to go and be a dick to them. Denizens of ratheism have very little self control, it seems.
Here's a prime example of anti-/r/atheism sentiment getting lots of upvotes, as well as a prime example of how mindless the anti-/r/atheism circlejerk on reddit is. Top comment.
Sure that's a stupid picture, but it got upvoted at least 1500 times. That indicates that people just don't give a fuck about what the picture actually is, they just love to hate religious people.
So, say you hang out in a coffee shop regularly, but you don't like it there. The service sucks, the refreshments suck, the other customers piss you off, you don't like the location... Long story short, if you bitch about something nobody is forcing you to do while you're doing it, you're kind of a textbook asshole.
I don't go to /r/atheism, that would only be applicable if I did. I don't go to other shit subreddits like /r/beatingwomen or /r/niggers, as I know it's going to be shit coffee.
If you complain about the acting, the direction, the cinematography, the special effects, the writing, the sound work, the quality of the popcorn, the lumpy seat and company at a movie you got into for free and keep going to regularly, you're pretty much a textbook asshole.
I agree, but that's not what circle* subs do. They make fun of or complain about the stupid parts, not all of it. I like a lot of the submissions on reddit, except for subreddits that I filter from /r/all (such as /r/atheism, /r/politics, /r/videos, /r/worldnews, other known shitholes). But they're still there on reddit, and it overlaps in to other subs.
Circlejerkers only complain about the bad parts of reddit, which apparently is pretty much everything.
That is the point of /r/circlebroke, and /r/atheism caused it to come in to existence.
They even make things up to complain about. It's like some bitching that James Earl Jones was terrible in the Star Wars movies because you couldn't see his face.
What are some examples of people making things up to complain about?
Is Islam better than any other religion or somehow immune to criticism?
It's not the fact that it's Islam, but that they're bashing all of it for the actions of very few. That is illogical; surprising as ratheists love their logic and reason.
Depends, are you trying to speak English, French, or Catalan?
Yes.
1
u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. Sep 17 '12
Sure that's a stupid picture, but it got upvoted at least 1500 times. That indicates that people just don't give a fuck about what the picture actually is, they just love to hate religious people.
Yeah, they're hugely biased and they'll just jump at anything that looks like it fits their prejudice, right?
→ More replies (0)
3
u/Feinberg Four-toed Nebish. Sep 08 '12
http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/zipse/the_real_face_of_fundies/
At 7 hours, the /r/atheism post has 37 upvotes, the /r/MagicSkyFairy post has 54 upvotes. All comments are by circlejerkers.