What on EARTH has happened to MN lately?

[MrsMerryHenry]

Over the last couple of weeks it's as if there's been an online synchronising of menstrual cycles and everyone has raging PMT!

Okay, not everyone, but surely I can't be the only one to have noticed that there's been a hell of a lot of stroppy teen catfighting and name-calling, and lots of posters seem to be in hypersensitive mode, snapping at the merest indication of dissent or independent thought. I would even describe the atmosphere as vituperative, which makes me think how humiliating it is for DG to have described MN in those terms and then for so many posters to prove her right.

Perhaps things have calmed down now - I haven't been on the site much for a few days, partly because of the unpleasantness and partly because of RL stuff. But if this is how things were pre-Moldiegate I can now see why some MNers felt the need to separate themselves. Which makes me very sad.

your long post was a bit meandering, but the last one was ok!

I agree - I don't mind the frank and open discussion, or even the "I think your opinion stinks" type of post - what I, along with you, object to is "I think your opinion stinks and therefore you must be really stupid because I don't agree with you and I have to be right because I am GOD in my mind. Or I would be if I believed in God which I don't so I only believe in myself".

Or something like that.

there is always a wiser Mnetter who says it so much better

Damm it some else really does say what i was trying to say and failing.

Good advice.

Do i need to stick with bullets - are my posts really that bad?

Thumbwitch - I would like to point out that there are alot of Aetheists who really couldn't care less whether other people have faith or not - and by saying that if someone needs to prove everything before they will believe it they can't increase their knowledge, and that their reasoning must be wrong, not only are you doing exactly the same thing (belittling what someone else thinks), but you are also talking rubbish, as a really great way of increasing knowledge is by your own experimentation.

It's even used in schools y'know

well there you go Godzilla's bumcheek - I am clearly fick because I actually don't understand what you read into my post that made you say that?

Of course experimentation is the best way of improving knowledge - where on earth did I say it wasn't?? I had issue with people who refuse to believe in anything until it has been "scientifically proven" - a very different thing!

Do please explain what you thought I meant?

for moi personally, the only thing more depressing and soul destroying than lots of unnecessary stupidity and vile slagging off on threads is the vast number of threads moaning o why can't we all be niiiiiice to each other, like it was in the good old days?

There is always netmums.

Seriously, if you get upset because some one has a go at you/your views on an anonymous internet forum i think you need to go on some assertiveness course or something similar. It is not a sign of mental health.

In my opinion.

Well, to quote you

"how can you increase knowledge if you only believe in what is tested and proven?"

Which implies, er...that you can't increase knowledge if you only believe what is tested and proven. What's to read into?

it's always like this tho, always has been.

it's a bunch of women going mental on the quiet.

i love it all, bring it on!!!!!!!!

at Spero, who clearly can't be arsed to read my posts.

But that was my point, GBC - that you need to have an open and flexible mind to be a good boundary-pusher/experimenter/knowledge seeker - and to close off a bunch of possibilities because they aren't (yet) proven goes against that - or don't you agree?

Also, I wasn't aiming it at all atheists, or even atheists at all, just people with closed thinking, some of whom happen to be atheists (and some of whom are fundamentalist Christians)

Loving thread. Feel like I've had a rambling conversation with a friend when drunk, by way of having more sex, and believing in Bob Dylan. That's what MN does best. But someone'll disagree or take it too seriously. (Or link to something which proves Bob Dylan does not exist.)

Mrs MH - guilty as charged.

But in my defence, you did appear to set out your stall quite clearly in your first post (which I did read very thoroughly...)

lol, yes, of course you have to be open minded to possibilities to experiment.

But theoretically you would want to prove something with the findings, IYSWIM.

As to the Aetheist comment...ok then, so long as it wasn't aimed at everyone (although you did rather make it sound like it by your last comment implying i called you thick).

Well...from one person who doesn't always read the whole thread to another (I've just owned up to this on another thread ) - if you only read the OP you have to be prepared to look an ass.

I don't think my opinion as stated here makes me an ass. Its validity is general and timeless.

In my opinion.

there you go again - I wasn't "implying that you called me thick", I meant that I felt thick because I couldn't see what you were getting at! Perhaps we have weirdly antagonistic posting styles that mean we read the wrong things into what each other says?

I am going to find a quote that demonstrates a bit more clearly what I mean (as I am not doing a good job of it)...

i wouldn't worry about it, thumbwitch, i know i've got an antagonistic posting style (besides having a migraine which usually means whatever anyone says is highly irritating!)

Besides that, you may as well get a shovel cos you're just digging yourself in deeper, hun

Spero, was this not aimed at me, then:

"for moi personally, the only thing more depressing and soul destroying than lots of unnecessary stupidity and vile slagging off on threads is the vast number of threads moaning o why can't we all be niiiiiice to each other, like it was in the good old days?

There is always netmums.

Seriously, if you get upset because some one has a go at you/your views on an anonymous internet forum i think you need to go on some assertiveness course or something similar. It is not a sign of mental health.

In my opinion."

If not, I apologise. If it was aimed at me...well, then you should read the rest of the thread to see what else I've said. And then agree that you look a right proper donkey.

Spero, can i use that whenever i make an ass of myself?

The validity was general and timeless.

Classic

I am to thick to notice such things....but lolled at Sniggers comment...or should I say I sniggered at it

Yes, yes. I do love the irony of her complaining about "every newspaper, magazine and website is full of women criticising other women for their weight, their shoes, their handbags, their wrinkles - or lack of them" while right next to the article is:

• So how's the diet Kirstie Ally? The actress hasn't shifted any weight
• A job? that's too stressful says Carly Zucker
• and an article slagging off Megan Fox for being stupid.

Ah, the Daily Mail. Always entertaining.

Dear Mrs MH, of course it was aimed at you as you seemed to be quite clearly expressing the view that it was a great shame that we weren't all being nice to each other.

If you have moved on from this view, or have revealed yourself to have being utterly satirical, then i salute you.

But I'm afraid I still can't be arsed to go back and read the whole thread, so I guess I will just have to wear my donkey badge with pride.

Bleh - it did make me giggle as well that she chose the Mail! And then feigned innocence on the webchat this afternoon - she's a very bright media kitten and so can't really pretend to be unaware that the DM is woman-hating trash. It would have been more convincing if she'd said she was hoping to convert the readers from within!

OK, here it is - it's from a book called Alternative Science by Richard Milton, a fabulous book that tells about all sorts of things that were rubbished at the outset, like flying planes, electric lights, the telephone, turbine engines etc. I highly recommend it - it should be compulsory reading for all science students!

"This was a conversation that took place between a Professor of Psychology at a British University and a post-graduate student:
Student: There seems to be a need for good quality research in the field of hypnosis
Prof: I would never allow it in my department
Student: Why not?
Prof: Because hypnosis is not a respectable field of research
Student: Why not?
Prof: Because it has no serious published literature
Student: Why is there no literature?
Prof: Because nobody has done the research
Student: Why has nobody done the research?
Prof: Because it?s not a respectable field of research.

This is typical of a refusal by the scientific establishment to entertain ideas ?outside the box?, in other words, outside of what they already know and accept as ?true?.

Anyway, I think we are agreeing with each other on the fundamental point that an open mind is a necessity for increasing knowledge, aren't we? (genuine )