Elsewhere on the internet...

The League of Reason has some social media accounts! You can find us on Facebook or on Twitter for some interesting links and things.

Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 4 of 27
 [ 533 posts ] 
Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.
Author Message
australopithecusLime TordUser avatarPosts: 4346Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Well, we did need a new Worldquest.
Image
Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:47 am
ProlescumWebhamsterUser avatarPosts: 5009Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:41 pmLocation: Peptone-upon-Sores

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

It occurred to me that the PM exchange between Jason and myself may be of interest to some, being partly available already on Jason's video. It might also clarify what this website is and is not for those wondering.

No, he didn't ask to publish it. No, neither did I.

For posterity. And Asgard.

Prolescum wrote:Jason,
I am the webmaster at The League of Reason, and your recent video about our website contains several errors, and I am sending this to clear up your confusion.

1. The League of Reason is a forum and blog. We are not an "atheist site", we are not affiliated with any "atheist community" real or imagined, nor have we been dishonest. There is no requirement that members be atheists, nor is it only atheists who frequent the site. Its purpose is as a venue for reasoned discussion and self-expression.
2. AronRa offered you our services for the purposes of discussion, although we also offer a sub-forum for one-on-one debates and an IRC channel for live debates had it progressed. His first post on the topic made this clear ( viewtopic.php?p=149382#p149382 ).
3. None of your posts were deleted. Let me repeat that: None of your posts were deleted. You posted several irrelevant articles in full and sequentially. Under most circumstances, this is considered spam, or "flooding". Our administrator, australopithecus, decided to bend the rules (i.e. not give you an official warning) and put these articles within a collapsible frame for the benefit of other readers; you need only click the frame where it says "SHOW MORE" to read the articles. That's right, they are still there.
4. The thread was closed because its purpose was for AronRa to converse with you. It is apparent to all that this was no longer possible. In deference to the possibility you were entirely genuine in your promise, a thread was created specifically for you to post your paper and for our members to critique. You may still do so at your convenience.

It is important to me that you understand the above, so I'd recommend that you read it twice. Whether or not you act upon this information is up to you. I would like you to correct the errors in your video, however.
There is no ultimatum; all that is at stake is your own reputation.

Regards,

Prolescum


AtheismExamined wrote:The League of Reason forum let atheists rip into me in such a disgusting way and never did a thing . Even the moderator was in on it, he also joining in the fun of mocking me . AronRa had no respect from the start. Also my articles and videos are part of my paper and you started to mess with the academic work I was getting ready to show in my paper . Now if you want the title of being a democratic forum that is fair then you should not take sides . What you need to do is get me and AronRa together with you to talk about how we can move in the right way .I have not been consulted once in all the things you have done in relation to me . You close a thread and open a thread without asking my advice but you ask AronRa. Now I ask is this fair? You need to build bridges with me and protect me from abuse and give me the freedom to put down my thoughts but you can only do that if you do not show sides . I'm working on my paper .I will send you a copy at the same time AronRa gets it . Then if you want to open things up for debate great . But from now until the 10th of April you need to make some clear public moves to show you are for democracy and intellectual freedom by making some effort in the public to build bridges with me. If you do not I will see you are part of the problem not the solution. Yours Jay.


Prolescum wrote:"The League of Reason forum let atheists rip into me in such a disgusting way and never did a thing ."

This is incorrect. I myself posted in there to dissuade members from personal attacks. It would be worth bearing in mind that many (read: most) involved in that thread followed YOU to our site. They are YOUR viewers. I trust you saw one of the commenters make this very point.

Worth noting: we have reactive moderation, not proactive. This means that if you take issue with a post, you report it and we will deal with it accordingly. You may use the "report post" function on every post or contact one of the moderators directly. Making videos with erroneous and incomplete information is not the way to go about it.

"Even the moderator was in on it, he also joining in the fun of mocking me ."

Your expressed views and posted videos are open to all comment. Unlike on your channel, so I hear. Correct me if I'm mistaken.
In this case the line was crossed (personal insults are definitely not on), but that will not shield you, or any work you do, from criticism.

"AronRa had no respect from the start."

Respect is not a requisite; it is earned.

"Also my articles and videos are part of my paper and you started to mess with the academic work I was getting ready to show in my paper ."

Citing articles is fine, posting excerpts is fine. As are videos (although why you think these are part of a paper is slightly beyond me). Flooding the thread with complete articles that you will be possibly citing in your paper at some nebulous point in the future ANYWAY is spamming. This is against the rules you agreed to when you joined.
However, rather than admonish you, the Administrator (not a moderator) collapsed those articles for our readers' benefit. He didn't remove them.
You broke the rules and you want us to apologise for accommodating you?

"Now if you want the title of being a democratic forum that is fair then you should not take sides ."

Firstly, our forum isn't democratic. It is privately owned and operated. Equivalent to private property. What the owners say, goes. That's australopithecus and myself. You will not find a "democratic" internet discussion forum. What we ARE, though, is a place where any legal discussion can take place as long as the rules are obeyed. I admit that members have not been their most courteous to you, but neither has your own behaviour been anywhere near exemplary. In fact, your outbursts are on par with those you're complaining about. I can cite them easily if your memory is hazy.
Our moderators and admins are not required to make exceptions, but in this case, they did. For those that followed you from YouTube, and you yourself. Keep this in mind.
Secondly, we do not control the opinions of our moderators or admins; they are as free to their views as members are. Fairness doesn't come into it. Your position rises or falls on the merits (or otherwise) of your arguments.

"What you need to do is get me and AronRa together with you to talk about how we can move in the right way ."

I do not speak for AronRa, nor do I care to facilitate your on-going discussion with him beyond what I already offer; a discussion forum and an IRC channel. He is just a member, albeit one whose contributions are noted in his rank (Contributor).
He made clear his position, I suggest you re-read it.

"I have not been consulted once in all the things you have done in relation to me ."

We are not required to consult you on our decision making processes.
1. You broke the rules, we bent them to allow you to continue posting.
2. The reason you came was "to post an academic paper", there is now a specific thread for this.
3. The original thread was a morass of gibbering pointlessness and can no longer serve the function for which it was created.

You may, as a member, open a new one on any subject.

To put it simply, we have given you a place to open/continue a dialogue with AronRa, that is all we offer.

"You close a thread and open a thread without asking my advice but you ask AronRa."

Again, we don't need your advice, nor your consent, to take action. See 3 above.
AronRa had nothing whatsoever to do with the decision. No input was requested, and no view proffered.

"Now I ask is this fair?"

See above.

"You need to build bridges with me and protect me from abuse and give me the freedom to put down my thoughts but you can only do that if you do not show sides ."

We don't need to build bridges, I don't know or care who you are. It doesn't bother me whether you come back or not. My first and only concern is the errors in your video/s relating to the league.
You still have membership at our forum and are free to post whatever you like within the guidelines. I will make the same promise the league makes to all its members; here is a place for open and honest discussion - you are free to use it.

"I'm working on my paper .I will send you a copy at the same time AronRa gets it ."

That's very kind, many of our members would like to read it, I gather.

"Then if you want to open things up for debate great ."

It is not for me to decide, it is between AronRa and yourself. We facilitate discussion, we do not control it.

"But from now until the 10th of April you need to make some clear public moves to show you are for democracy and intellectual freedom by making some effort in the public to build bridges with me."

I don't think you mean quite the same thing as I would if I used the term "democracy". We are an open forum, you may discuss any legal topic, but we don't cast votes for leadership, and members represent themselves only.
You should concern yourself with intellectual integrity before whining about intellectual freedom (which we won't, nor can we, impinge).
Before I sent the first message, I requested that those involved refrain from personal insults, publicly, although because it is against the rules. We cannot and will not cushion you from criticism.

"If you do not I will see you are part of the problem not the solution."

As may be apparent, I have no intention of taking orders from anyone. If you don't want to be there, that is your prerogative; this isn't a plea for your return, it isn't a request for forgiveness; it isn't part of a conspiracy against you, and it isn't personal.

We allowed you and your viewers some latitude in the first thread when it came to childish behaviour, this will no longer be the case. That's fair, right?


AtheismExamined wrote:Go away silly man


Prolescum wrote:Wow.

The strength of your response is overpowering. As is your maturity.

Is it any wonder people get angry with you?

As I've said, you're still a member of LoR, so you may return or not as you wish.

However, I will ask that you please correct the video/s as soon as possible and alert me upon its completion. I've been nothing but cordial and honest with you, I expect the same in return.

Regards,

Prolescum


AtheismExamined wrote:I just been on The League of Reason and had a look at the new thread . I noticed you have tried to be fair by telling folk not to make comments that are unkind .I'm sorry for calling you a silly man and anything I have said that as upset you i'm sorry.Take care from Jay


Prolescum wrote:I'm not offended, but I appreciate your apology nonetheless.

As I've said, the league is a place to facilitate discussion, not lead it, or contain it, or censor it.

It might interest you to know that "the Magic Sandwich Show" started life as "the League of Reason Show" until we realised that the views of its panel (Tf00t, DPR et al) were being viewed as representative of the league at large. We each represent ourselves, in our own words, thank you very much.
Our latter-day podcast (The league of Reason Presents... available on our YouTube channel and via iTunes/RSSfeed) is created ad hoc by those who want to contribute a particular topic for discussion.

Here is a quote from our "about" page:

"League of Reason, established 2009, is a multi-author blog written by a collection of highly motivated people, and a community forum. We do not represent each other or any kind of organisation. We just happen to come to the same place, where we represent ourselves, and if we disagree with each other we're not afraid to say so.

League of Reason is not a think-tank, advocacy group or corporation. What is consensus among its members is always subject to change, and there is no established policy. The only collective belief of its team is that if constructive debate is allowed to progress, better ideas will ultimately supplant worse ideas."

The point I'm trying to make is that although members may take a stance, even moderators, on a topic, it doesn't represent the league's view. It doesn't have one. This is why it is important to me that you correct your video/s and why I've contacted you directly.

Regards,

Prolescum
if constructive debate is allowed to progress, better ideas will ultimately supplant worse ideas.

Comment is free, but facts are sacred
Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:22 pm
DingoDaveUser avatarPosts: 41Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:59 amLocation: Australia Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

The atheist mafia are coming for Jason Burns.



Leave Jason alone!

Thank goodness that Jason has already blocked more than 9000 viewers on his YouTube channel; otherwise things could have been a lot worse.
Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:54 am
DingoDaveUser avatarPosts: 41Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:59 amLocation: Australia Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

All respect to VenomFangX



...and may God help the rest of us.
Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:14 am
DingoDaveUser avatarPosts: 41Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:59 amLocation: Australia Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

AronRa; 'Cluck, Cluck, Cluck' - from Jason Burns



Squark!
Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:39 am
DingoDaveUser avatarPosts: 41Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:59 amLocation: Australia Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason Burns wins...AronRa loses.



The moral of the story is 'Get there early... be prepared...and if all else fails . . . Run Away!'
Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:28 am
australopithecusLime TordUser avatarPosts: 4346Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Not sure exactly what these videos have to do with his paper. Also, same rules apply as they do to Jason. If you're going to post a stream of videos, use the show more tags and do it in one post.
Image
Fri Mar 29, 2013 10:23 am
RizlaPosts: 23Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:45 pm Gender: Cake

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

australopithecus wrote:Not sure exactly what these videos have to do with his paper...


Foreshadowing :lol:
Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:17 am
DingoDaveUser avatarPosts: 41Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:59 amLocation: Australia Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

australopithecus wrote:Not sure exactly what these videos have to do with his paper.


Dear australopithecus,

I confess that these videos have absolutely nothing to do with Jason's paper, apart from providing some insights into his state of mind.

Please don't take them/him/me too seriously.
Without a bit of Burnsian insanity, this thread would be dead in the water.
If Jason's 'paper ' ever gets released, then consider it a bonus.
Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:49 am
australopithecusLime TordUser avatarPosts: 4346Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

His state of mind isn't relevant to the topic, just as his employment situation and personal appearance weren't. If the price of not sneering at the guy is the thread becomes less active, then so be it.
Image
Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:27 pm
DingoDaveUser avatarPosts: 41Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:59 amLocation: Australia Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

australopithecus wrote:His state of mind isn't relevant to the topic...

In some ways I agree with you.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions: But nobody is entitled to their own facts.

Arguing with a crazy person can have some advantages, in that it can help enhance a feeling of empathy...But so can wrestling with a pig.

AND, as anyone who has ever wrestled with a pig will know... the pig has half a chance of winning, and it will fuck you up in the process if it can.
Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:56 pm
australopithecusLime TordUser avatarPosts: 4346Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

I didn't realise anyone here was privy to his medical records, and any diagnosis of a mental health problem.
Image
Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:27 pm
DingoDaveUser avatarPosts: 41Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:59 amLocation: Australia Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

How very diplomatic of you to say so. You are to be commended for your discretion.
Fortunately, I am not beholden to any particular organisation, so I can categorically state that Jason Burns appears to be stark-raving-mad.

Anyone who disagrees with me is welcome to spend a night in his house, at his invitation.
Tread softly, and carry a big stick.
Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:57 pm
australopithecusLime TordUser avatarPosts: 4346Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Diplomacy has nothing to do with it, it's just ad hominems are fallacious for a reason. Also, while you're not beholden to anything, there are rules here. I'd advise you bear them in mind.
Image
Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:48 pm
*SD*User avatarPosts: 322Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:00 amLocation: Wales, UK Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Hi All,
Just signed up, this forum was brought to my attention by....... Jason Burns! I just caught one of his (many) vids on YT uploaded by a user I am subscribed to. Jason is an interesting character and I have had many exchanges with him on YT, primarily from when he had his old channel "ComingOutOfAtheism" but I didn't realize he was still steaming ahead with multiple daily uploads on other, more recent channels he has created. I read with interest the (now locked) thread where he and AronRa were discussing a debate. As AronRa has rightly pointed out, Mr Burns is not capable of debate, nor does he understand what debate actually is. I had the dubious honor of engaging Jason a few times via Skype, as he used to (maybe still does, I'm not sure) host a BlogTV channel called "The Socratic Club" on iirc Friday evenings (GMT). I wont say too much more at this point as I want to try to catch up on his new videos to see if the same theme persists (I imagine it does) but thought I'd drop in and say Hi to all you guys, I see some old faces from the YT comments section here! Haven't read the FAQ yet but I suppose it's ok to say hi to TsarEnvy and DingoDavid etc. I also want to read some of the other threads on here, this looks like a great forum so I would like to thank Jason for inadvertently leading me to it :)
Admins/Mods - I didn't think this was worthy of a new thread so I posted here, as it's pretty much on-topic anyway.
Great site!
Image
Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:27 am
WWW
ProlescumWebhamsterUser avatarPosts: 5009Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:41 pmLocation: Peptone-upon-Sores

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Welcome. I fear Jason may soon forget he has an account here. I suppose it's easier to "examine atheism" from a sheltered compound than in the trenches...
if constructive debate is allowed to progress, better ideas will ultimately supplant worse ideas.

Comment is free, but facts are sacred
Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:06 am
jskemp1970User avatarPosts: 19Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:47 pm

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

There are a lot of familiar names here, "hi guys".

So this is the new home of the "Jason Burns Appreciation Society".

Nice to have a forum to discuss our love and respect for Jay. Find myself repeatedly banned from his channels.

Lots of new videos on AtheismExamined today, so is it safe to assume that he will no longer be presenting his "World Class Acedemic Paper" on this forum ?
Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:55 pm
HamsterPosts: 83Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 3:54 pmLocation: wisconsin Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

I had hoped that after a few "atheism != evolution" and similar comments that Jason would grasp the concept. Sadly that hasn't happened yet.

At least he has stopped posting videos for the moment.

I wonder if he moved the socratic club ?
Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:14 pm
*SD*User avatarPosts: 322Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:00 amLocation: Wales, UK Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Hamster wrote:I had hoped that after a few "atheism != evolution" and similar comments that Jason would grasp the concept. Sadly that hasn't happened yet.

At least he has stopped posting videos for the moment.

I wonder if he moved the socratic club ?


Jason never grasps any concept - ever. The Socratic Club was fun, I have fond memories of him and his jacket :)
Image
Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:18 pm
WWW
HamsterPosts: 83Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 3:54 pmLocation: wisconsin Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

OOPS , I just checked Jays channel and he is back with Militant atheism, evolution the delusion and something about china.

He has quite a series on Was Jesus a myth Parts 1 to 5 ( I would just have said Yes but Jays a scholar)
Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:33 pm
PreviousNext
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 4 of 27
 [ 533 posts ] 
Return to Religion & Irreligion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests