Page 1 of 2

URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:13 pm
by mick1le2pick
I know a lot of you don't like him but still.

It seems to have blown over. Can someone close this thread?

IT'S CRUCIAL AT THIS JUNCTURE TO FOLLOW MY SOCIAL MEDIA, as it may soon be the only way I have to communicate with you.
Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/YoutubeTAA
Tumblr - http://amazingatheist.tumblr.com/
Twitter - https://twitter.com/#!/amazingatheist

The following videos have been removed:
Stupid Christian Comics
The Origin of Islamic Extremism - Howard Bloom
The Placebo God
DEBATING ENTROPY - Howard Bloom
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES
Can Men Talk About Feminism?
33 Reasons NOT to be a Feminist! (A Refutation)
CHRISTIANITY'S ICE AGE - REFUTING "THE THAW"
FEMINISM vs. FREEDOM OF SPEECH
STOMP ON JESUS!
DIFFERENT POPE; SAME SH*T
It's Only Sexist When Men Do It
Everything Is Offensive

SCREENCAP OF ONE OF THE REMOVED VIDEOS
http://i.imgur.com/a6EiPa8.jpg

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:07 pm
by Inferno
For the sake of free speech I hope it remains open, but gosh am I glad he could get removed. Or got videos removed. Whatever.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:40 pm
by mick1le2pick
Inferno wrote:For the sake of free speech I hope it remains open, but gosh am I glad he could get removed. Or got videos removed. Whatever.

That's shows how much you really beleive in free speach.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:47 pm
by Inferno
mick1le2pick wrote:That's shows how much you really beleive in free speach.


And that's shows how much you laick a braain.

Oh sorry, I thought we were playing "throw around grammatically incorrect and stupid insults".

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 11:16 pm
by Prolescum
Can he post his crap somewhere that isn't YouTube? Can he bitch about it?

If the answer to either of these questions is yes, his freedom of speech isn't being infringed.

I'm sick and tired of this utterly inane hyberbole that seems to pop up every few months just to get on my nerves.

Mickey, it seems like you have a very cursory understanding of freedom of speech and how it actually applies. Let's look at an example: you technically don't have freedom of speech on this privately owned and managed discussion forum. Do you know why that is?

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:21 pm
by mick1le2pick
Inferno wrote:
mick1le2pick wrote:That's shows how much you really beleive in free speach.


And that's shows how much you laick a braain.

Oh sorry, I thought we were playing "throw around grammatically incorrect and stupid insults".

It was in no way even an insuly my point was that if you're not in favour of free speach for all then you're not in favour of free speach.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:28 pm
by Inferno
mick1le2pick wrote:It was in no way even an insuly my point was that if you're not in favour of free speach for all then you're not in favour of free speach.


I already said: It's a shame he might get silenced, but he's an insolent idiot with nothing of value to say, so on that point I'm glad he might soon be gone. That's not anti-free-speech, it's glee at another person's misfortune or "Schadenfreude". Learn to distinguish between the two. Furthermore, Prolescum already pointed out that his freedom of speech is in no way impaired, he might just have to shift to a different medium, one where you don't constantly have to be reminded of his ugly mug. Big fucking deal.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:03 pm
by Prolescum
Hmm.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 1:21 am
by mick1le2pick
Inferno wrote:
mick1le2pick wrote:It was in no way even an insuly my point was that if you're not in favour of free speach for all then you're not in favour of free speach.


I already said: It's a shame he might get silenced, but he's an insolent idiot with nothing of value to say, so on that point I'm glad he might soon be gone. That's not anti-free-speech, it's glee at another person's misfortune or "Schadenfreude". Learn to distinguish between the two. Furthermore, Prolescum already pointed out that his freedom of speech is in no way impaired, he might just have to shift to a different medium, one where you don't constantly have to be reminded of his ugly mug. Big fucking deal.

He's unlikely to have the same success in another medium, and for videos YouTube dominates.
Inferno wrote:For the sake of free speech I hope it remains open, but gosh am I glad he could get removed. Or got videos removed. Whatever.

Hmm becuase text strips things of their tone I think there is more thing than one that this could mean
Also I never said you were antifree speach I just said you didn't value it very high which you took as an insult, when you've made that mistake I don't think you have any right to smugly rave about how I need to learn to distinguish between someone being happy at someone elses misfortune and not strongly beleiving that said misfortune is wrong.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 11:41 pm
by australopithecus
TAA is more useless than a dry turd, and his disappearance from any sphere which may intersect mine can only be described as a joyous occasion. This has nowt to do with free speech, I just hope he never makes another video.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 1:18 pm
by Prolescum
Seeing as you didn't feel it necessary to respond to my lovely post above...

mick1le2pick wrote:He's unlikely to have the same success in another medium, and for videos YouTube dominates.


So what? He isn't entitled to "success". His speech isn't being infringed, so the question still remains: what are you on about?

mick1le2pick wrote:Hmm becuase text strips things of their tone I think there is more thing than one that this could mean
Also I never said you were antifree speach I just said you didn't value it very high which you took as an insult, when you've made that mistake I don't think you have any right to smugly rave about how I need to learn to distinguish between someone being happy at someone elses misfortune and not strongly beleiving that said misfortune is wrong.


You said he didn't value free speech highly, despite being informed that this was never a free speech issue (and why). The implication is that you still believe it is.

Also, do you actually know what a right is? You say "I don't think you have any right to smugly rave about how I need to learn to distinguish between someone being happy at someone else's misfortune and not strongly believing that said misfortune is wrong".

This is as incorrect as your belief that this issue is one of free speech. The wrongness applied here is fractal.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:44 pm
by mick1le2pick
I think the issue was something with the flagging system though I'm not to sure.
Prolescum wrote:Seeing as you didn't feel it necessary to respond to my lovely post above...

mick1le2pick wrote:He's unlikely to have the same success in another medium, and for videos YouTube dominates.


So what? He isn't entitled to "success". His speech isn't being infringed, so the question still remains: what are you on about?

mick1le2pick wrote:Hmm becuase text strips things of their tone I think there is more thing than one that this could mean
Also I never said you were antifree speach I just said you didn't value it very high which you took as an insult, when you've made that mistake I don't think you have any right to smugly rave about how I need to learn to distinguish between someone being happy at someone elses misfortune and not strongly beleiving that said misfortune is wrong.


You said he didn't value free speech highly, despite being informed that this was never a free speech issue (and why). The implication is that you still believe it is.

Also, do you actually know what a right is? You say "I don't think you have any right to smugly rave about how I need to learn to distinguish between someone being happy at someone else's misfortune and not strongly believing that said misfortune is wrong".

This is as incorrect as your belief that this issue is one of free speech. The wrongness applied here is fractal.

Okay right was the wrong word I was pretty tired when I wrote that.
A couple of errors is hardly fractal.
Also I can't be bothered talking about the definition of free speach, but just becuase he could do something elsewhere doesn't mean this goes against freespeech.
"the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint"

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:25 pm
by Prolescum
mick1le2pick wrote:Okay right was the wrong word I was pretty tired when I wrote that.
A couple of errors is hardly fractal.
Also I can't be bothered talking about the definition of free speach, but just becuase he could do something elsewhere doesn't mean this goes against freespeech.
"the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint"


:facepalm:

YouTube is privately owned, they don't owe chuckles a platform. It in no way affects his FoS. What's most depressing about this thread is that, even now, you think I'm wrong.

Maybe TJ could set up his own video website. Again. Perhaps without all the fraud this time, though.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Thu Aug 29, 2013 8:24 am
by australopithecus
He doesn't have "the right" to use YouTube. You see how this is different to freedom of speech? If someone locks him up in a small dark room for ever because of what he says, you'd have a point.

As it stands some videos that can be freely displayed elsewhere have been removed. This is not a violation of FoS because he still has the freedom to carry on speaking.

Knee jerk hyperbole is only 0.3% less annoying than flaggers.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Thu Aug 29, 2013 6:02 pm
by WarK
What was the point of this sub-forum? I can't remember. Wasn't it started because of votebots and false DMCAs on youtube?

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Thu Aug 29, 2013 9:26 pm
by Inferno
WarK wrote:What was the point of this sub-forum? I can't remember. Wasn't it started because of votebots and false DMCAs on youtube?


IS it a false DMCA though? I haven't watched the video because I really don't care, but there has yet to be any indication of this.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 9:07 pm
by mick1le2pick
Prolescum wrote:
mick1le2pick wrote:Okay right was the wrong word I was pretty tired when I wrote that.
A couple of errors is hardly fractal.
Also I can't be bothered talking about the definition of free speach, but just becuase he could do something elsewhere doesn't mean this goes against freespeech.
"the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint"


:facepalm:

YouTube is privately owned, they don't owe chuckles a platform. It in no way affects his FoS. What's most depressing about this thread is that, even now, you think I'm wrong.

Maybe TJ could set up his own video website. Again. Perhaps without all the fraud this time, though.

What part of the definition of freespeach or censorship etc. exempts anything privately owned?
If it is legal or illegal it's still cenorship.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 10:52 pm
by australopithecus
Utter bullshit. YouTube are not obligated to give him a venue for his videos, and he can upload his videos elsewhere. His right to free speech has not been taken away. You are clueless.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 11:36 pm
by Prolescum
Micky,

The ability of proprietors to set rules of conduct on their property or when using their facilities is long-standing.
For example, we here at LoR don't tolerate people trying to promote businesses to our members, so we deactivate those accounts and put their IPs in the naughty list. We catch all of them before their posts are made public.
Are we infringing their right to free speech? No, this is private property and the rules are set by us. No selling stuff. Instant banning.
Of course, we are a public board (open to the public), but we are not a public space. The same applies to YouTube.

It really isn't a difficult concept to grasp.

Just in case it needs pointing out, this site is dedicated to fomenting open and honest discussion, and its staff do not censor its users. They might tell them to stop cussing each other, though.


I have no idea what your last sentence means or how it is related.

Re: URGENT! AMAZING ATHEIST CHANNEL IN DANGER! PLEASE WATCH!

PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 8:34 pm
by mick1le2pick
Prolescum wrote:Micky,

The ability of proprietors to set rules of conduct on their property or when using their facilities is long-standing.
For example, we here at LoR don't tolerate people trying to promote businesses to our members, so we deactivate those accounts and put their IPs in the naughty list. We catch all of them before their posts are made public.
Are we infringing their right to free speech? No, this is private property and the rules are set by us. No selling stuff. Instant banning.
Of course, we are a public board (open to the public), but we are not a public space. The same applies to YouTube.

It really isn't a difficult concept to grasp.

Just in case it needs pointing out, this site is dedicated to fomenting open and honest discussion, and its staff do not censor its users. They might tell them to stop cussing each other, though.


I have no idea what your last sentence means or how it is related.

While YouTube are allowed to do this it doesn't change the fact it's still censorship, on top of that as far as I can tell it was a flaw in the flagging system.