Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Slashdot.org

Journal TechnoLust's Journal: No_More_Trolls zoo spinoff 55

Journal by TechnoLust
Apparently this guy is going around friending all the atheists and foeing all Christians. I assume it is to give the friend of friend and foe of friend modifiers. That's kind of silly in my book, because some of my friends/fans are atheist. Anyway, the GOOD thing that came out of it was that I looked at his foes list and found this person who seems to make some interesting comments. Maybe we can pull her into the Journal circle. :-)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

No_More_Trolls zoo spinoff More

No_More_Trolls zoo spinoff

Comments Filter:
  • I'd be offended about being lumped in with Brett and Chacham, but that's just me.

    I also seem to recall at least a few of the people on the "Fans" list professing to have spirtual beliefs.

    In any case some of the most interesing things I've read from you have been about your beliefs. This dispite the fact that my own beliefs are probably closest to Secular Humanism or some Unitarians.
    • I think it's funny to sort people into 'Christians' and 'Atheists' as if those were the only two potential belief systems. What about the Jewish, Taoist, and Buddhist folk?? And those are just a few major religions. How on *earth* will he classify the Lapsed Catholics, Jews for Jesus, and Polytheists?

      Further, I read the few posts the account has made, and the definition of atheism is a little weird. The NULL set? I don't think so -- atheism is a belief which states that there is no god. From webster

      • Presumably, they will leave non-Christians and non-Atheists as grey balls. As for the Null set issue, there's an inconclusive debate about it in my journal's comments from two days ago.:)
        • Presumably, they will leave non-Christians and non-Atheists as grey balls

          Athiests will be friended.
          People who are intolerant of views different from their own (specifically atheism) will be foed. This does not mean all Christians or all Jews or all women or all bald people. Hatred can come from any or all these.
          People who are tollerant or I just can't figure where to place them will be the gray balls of indecision, but I do wish to acknowledge and thank those who are open-minded..
      • I think it's funny to sort people into 'Christians' and 'Atheists' as if those were the only two potential belief systems.

        I agree. Too bad TechnoLust is so closed-minded and ignorant as to assume this is the case.

        How on *earth* will he classify the Lapsed Catholics, Jews for Jesus, and Polytheists?

        Well, they can't be friended if they aren't atheist. So long as they are not intollerant they wouldn't be foed. If they are open-minded I would like to acknowledge this and thank them and extend my full
    • Well, I don't like being "lumped in" with ANYONE, but mostly I've found that people who like to label everyone to fit into little categories aren't someone who's opinion is going to matter to em anyway. But I see your point. :-)
    • i'm brett. if i piss you off, that's fine. but please, please, do not confuse me with brent metzeler.

      also, chacham isn't a christian, but is a theist. he's a jew, which means mel gibson is out to get him. still, i don't want to be lumped in with that guy either
      • Sorry my apollogies, I ment Brent.

        I don't recall you ever pissing me off.

        Thanks for the tip on Chacham, I hadn't read his stuff enough to know what his religion was. His views may not be nearly as extreme as Brent's but he manages to be even more close minded.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • To whomever started that "Bible Study Journal?" The "Lady's" comments are just as bad as this guy fanning/foeing based upon religion. Why would anyone log on to /. and only make comments pertaining to religion? Both the Lady and Atheist accounts seem like an additional accounts made by trolls.
    • I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of /. accounts are troll accounts. I wouldn't be surprised if there were only a few thousand real people on slashdot.

      Just the other day, someone found out that a user was posting book comments from Amazon. All the user did was cut & paste. I was quite disappointed to say the least.

      I must say, though, it should be interesting to see what happens with this account. Since I'm on his list, then he must know me. I honestly wonder who this guy is.
  • Well, I decided to feed the troll and friended the dastard. Might remove it later.:)
    • Same here - mostly so I don't have to look up the link again later if it does wind up being as useful as 'No_More_Trolls'. In case ya'll are wondering - yeah, I'm an atheist too.
  • I'm going to create an account called "alcoholics" and will friend all people that like to drink and foe all people that are tea-totallers.

    How childish... some people need to get a life... uhm, wait, I'm still posting here. Perhaps I should get one too ;-)

    • I'm going to create an account called "alcoholics" and will friend all people that like to drink and foe all people that are tea-totallers.

      While that is interesting I fail to see the relation. Drinking alcohol does not make one an alcoholic. Similarly, even with TechnoLust's hateful assumptions being Christian does not make you a foe of this "atheits" account.

      There is the set A of all atheists that can be identified. There is the set B of all those who hate those in set A. There is the set C of all
      • Ah, that makes sense now. However, I think that the Christians in the set C might just be offended the be put in a group called "atheists", because they are not. Just like you might be offended because I saw that you like a nice cold beer on a sunny afternoon, and then put you in my "alcoholics" group. That's the whole point.

        What about the close minded atheists? There might be atheists that don't even want to listen to the arguments of a Christian because as an atheist they know they are right and tha

        • I know full well there will be babies and bathwater in set A. Meaning, I know there will be millitant close minded atheists in set A. I'm not even going to get into the thinking about the different types of atheists, their backgrounds, the people they have interacted with.

          As to knowing what set you are in:

          Now, a clever man would put the atheist into his own set, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the setin fr
          • Nice way weasling out: making no choice at all. Well, I can't stop you from marking people as atheists, I just found it somehow a bit chidish. That's probably just me.

            So, all I can do, is wish you good luck in your quest for atheists. May your quest be enteraining.

            • Nice way weasling out: making no choice at all.

              Looking at the friends/foes list and seeing it does not contain the set of all /. account minus you must imply your not being friended/foed is hardly a sticking point. You haven't declared yourself atheist (that I can find) nor have you espoused close-minded views. As for right now I think you belong in set C, my appologies for not explicitly stating this earlier when you asked, I thought the lack of classifying in set A or B implied this.

              My view is that e

  • And I wouldn't call myself an atheist. I do believe in the existence of a Deity (though I reject theism), though I believe that the position that there is no Deity is 100% rationally defendable (ie it's impossible to have knowledge of the divine), which might qualify under some definitions of agnosticism.

    I'll take it, and will friend this guy anyway, pursuant to my normal policy of friending my fans.

  • *laugh* i'm not a christian, i'm not an atheist!! guess i don't count!!! (I am, however, a devout sceptic!)
  • I don't know what it is with many athiests, why many feel the need to be so hateful and spiteful. I'm sure there are deep psychological reasons for this, but actually I don't give a fuck. If they are hateful people, and just want to make life miserable for others, then hey, fuck 'em, they will die alone and affraid***.

    Oh that was nice blinder.

    Anyway, as for myself. I can't honestly say what I believe in. The idea of religion and faith and God are all very confusing to me. I actually envy those who have re
    • If they are hateful people, and just want to make life miserable for others, then hey, fuck 'em, they will die alone and affraid

      Seems to me this applies to everyone, atheist or religious alike.

      • i think that's what blinder was getting at. if someone's an atheist, let them be an atheist. but they don't have to spend huge amounts of energy persecuting all the heretics that dare believe.

        nothing against the concept of people being atheists. lots of my friends are atheists, but they aren't jerks about it. i let them be with their beliefs, they let me be with mine.
        • but they aren't jerks about it. i let them be with their beliefs, they let me be with mine.

          See, this is being open minded about things. That is good! I debated about friending those are are open minded, but that would be too large a set to be meaningful. The friends list is specifically for atheists, fans of all types are welcome, the foes are specifically for those who have problems with atheists, this too is an equal opportunity category.
          • Then how did I make the foe list? I don't have a problem with atheists, unless they are trying to tell me I'm a fool for believing the way I do. But I have a problem with ANYONE telling me I'm a fool because of what I believe.
        • nothing against the concept of people being atheists. lots of my friends are atheists, but they aren't jerks about it. i let them be with their beliefs, they let me be with mine.

          Make up your freaking mind, I can't decide to foe you or not!

          (Contrast the above with:

          i can't decide whether fundamentalists or atheists are the most intollerant evangelists i've encountered.

          post here [slashdot.org] )
          • there's no contradiction. the point i was trying to make was that there are jerks on both sides. being an atheist doesn't seem to prevent some people from evangelizing. i don't evangelize back, but i do ask them to tone it down and accept that i see things differently.

            the only difference i can think of is that fundamentalist theist evangelists tend to ask about my beliefs before they lay in. but that's just an excuse to follow up with all the reasons i'm wrong. to me it's the same to have a close-mind
      • Seems to me this applies to everyone, atheist or religious alike.

        Yup. While I'm sure some atheists that are hateful will make it onto my friends list this does not mean they speak for me. Similarly I do not speak for them when I support non-atheists that just happen to be open-minded.
    • like nomeansno said (sang) in rags and bones, "if i could choose to believe or not to believe, i would choose not to. but i can't choose."

      i think the important thing is being true to yourself. one who believes simply because he's told to isn't doing that anymore than someone who battles to tame their faith into disbelief in the name of rationality. be true to what you feel and what you believe or don't believe.
  • foeing all Christians

    No, those who dislike atheists and are closed-minded can come from all sorts of different backgrounds, not just Christianity. The account isn't nammed "Anti-Christians" or something, it instead for atheist discussions and to identify those who are closed-minded, such as yourself (which you are clearly demonstrating). While some people on the friends list may be Anti-Christian this is far from the point.

    While there may end up being a good number of Christians on the foes list, this
    • How I am being closed minded? I may have made a false assumption by thinking that you were foeing all Christians, but I didn't have a lot to go on when I discovered your account. But you can believe what you want, and people can friend you or foe me or whatever. The people that know me know better [slashdot.org]. I just think that it is childish to want to give "Bonus points" to people who believe the way you do and censor those who don't. If you were really doing and open-minded/closed-minded thing, why isn't the na
      • If you were really doing and open-minded/closed-minded thing, why isn't the name on the account openminded?

        The name on the account is "atheists." The does not imply closed-minded to anyone but the intollerant. I neve said I was friending all of the open-minded, but I wish there was some way to acknowledge them other than my simply extending my thanks here and in other posts. What I said was that I am friending the atheists (and I know there will be some closed-minded millitant atheists that go along fo
    • I'm an atheist (although not areligious), and whilst I don't see eye to eye with TL on many of his beliefs, I've never found him to be pushy with them.

      He regularly shares his beliefs with the /. world, but I've not seen him berating people on such matters, getting into the sorts of arguments some do. I've seen people getting spiteful and petty and filled with hate over their differences with others, but in my experience, TL is not such a person. For that matter, I don't think Eugene is either (though I can

      • Thanks for that Tomble. I've been called a lot of things (Jesus Freak, Fundamentalist, hypocrit (usually by Christians who think alcohol is a one way ticket to hell), Bible thumper, netevangelist, etc.) but never closed minded. But I doubt it will do any good. This guy seems to have made up his mind about me and doesn't seem open to others' opinions of me. (Heheh, ironic isn't it?) But I appreciate the words. As I said, someone's beliefs doesn't determine the value of their words.

        I really am a live

        • This guy seems to have made up his mind about me and doesn't seem open to others' opinions of me. (Heheh, ironic isn't it?)
          Yes, and yes.

          As for the rest, right on. That's why you're on my friends list. ;)
      • I'm an atheist (although not areligious),

        Nice to hear it.

        and whilst I don't see eye to eye with TL on many of his beliefs, I've never found him to be pushy with them.

        That's fine. You and I don't always have to see eye to eye simply because we share similar beleifs about a god or religion. I don't pretend to speak for all atheists, all of this account's friends or fans, or anyone else. This account is simply to have discussions about atheism, identifying who is who is a good first step. On that no
    • Yes, there are some aspects of Christianity that promote hatred of all non-Christians, but it is up to the individual to make their own decision to follow those ideas or not.

      There aren't any aspects of Christianity that promote hatred of all non-Christians. There are people who think they are Christians who promote hatred and there are those that think that Christianity means promoting hatred of all non-Christians. The truth is that Christianity is based on the love of all people but intolerance of sin
      • This is the book I live by and even though it was written a long time ago, I still believe it should be applied completely today (and not buffet-style as some would like).

        I'm putting this quote at the top because it's highly relevant to this post.

        There aren't any aspects of Christianity that promote hatred of all non-Christians.

        I think that god [gospelcom.net] respectfully [gospelcom.net] disagrees [gospelcom.net].

        There are people who think they are Christians who promote hatred and there are those that think that Christianity means promoting
        • I'd provide a rebuttal, but you need to go read and understand the Bible before you reply next time. Citing scriptures in Leviticus about killing adulterers when clearly Jesus stopped a near-stoning of Mary Magdalene in the New Testament should make it clear (and the Bible also says this) that the New Testament is the new law. If you would read and understand the Word you'd know that all of your answers to my statements are Biblically false.
          • I'd provide a rebuttal, but you need to go read and understand the Bible before you reply next time.

            You mean you'd provide a rebuttal but you can't. You couldn't respond to even a single point. I think what you mean is that I need to read the bible with a desperate need to believe and a corresponding willingness to ignore the obvious.

            Citing scriptures in Leviticus about killing adulterers when clearly Jesus stopped a near-stoning of Mary Magdalene in the New Testament should make it clear (and the B

            • Taken from the NIV Study Bible:

              Jesus is not speaking against observing all the requirements of the Law but against hypocritical Pharisaical legalism. Such legalism was not the keeping of all details of the law but the hollow sham of keeping laws externally to gain merit before God while breaking them inwardly. It was following the letter of the Law while ignoring its spirit. Jesus repudiates the Pharisees' interpretation of the Law and their view of righteousness by works. He preaches a righteousnes

              • Taken from the NIV Study Bible:

                There's a fair amount of controversy over whether or not the NIV is a valid translation; some christians think it's the work of the devil. I don't think we need to get into that though. Let's just look at the quote you've provided.

                Jesus is not speaking against observing all the requirements of the Law but against hypocritical Pharisaical legalism. Such legalism was not the keeping of all details of the law but the hollow sham of keeping laws externally to gain merit be

Slashdot Top Deals

I never cheated an honest man, only rascals. They wanted something for nothing. I gave them nothing for something. -- Joseph "Yellow Kid" Weil

Close