The Last Word On Nothing

The Last Word On Nothing

Posted in the Atheism Forum

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#1 May 3, 2014
http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2014/04/29/t...

This just came to my attention, and I dare to publish it with no further research because it describes a process that seems useful, especially in the context of this forum. The process is called Bullshit Prevention Protocol (BPP). From the aricle:

"... I believe that everyone should practice BPP before publishing. No prior experience is required... its general principles... are simple.

"Here’s how they work in practice.

"1. Who is telling me this?...

"2. How does he or she know this?...

"3. Given #1 and #2, is it possible that she or he is wrong?...

"4. If answer to #3 is “yes,” find another, unrelated source....

"5. Repeat until answer to #3 is “pretty f-ing unlikely.”

Obviously, I've truncated the article down to its bare bones, and its well worth the time it takes to read the whole thing. But given the nature of our discussions in this forum, we see a lot of BS. We'll see less of it if more people will follow this fairly simple protocol or even commit themselves to avoiding BS in our posts.

I don't really want to see BPP used as another excuse for attacking each other personally, but I suppose that's inevitable. I'd rather see people using it to edit their own posts and to decide what to post to other sites and posts from this one.

Also from te article:

"Science says the first word on everything, and the last word on nothing" - Victor Hugo
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#2 May 4, 2014
NightSerf wrote:
http://www.lastwordonnothing.c om/2014/04/29/the-pocket-guide -to-bullshit-prevention/
This just came to my attention, and I dare to publish it with no further research because it describes a process that seems useful, especially in the context of this forum. The process is called Bullshit Prevention Protocol (BPP). From the aricle:
"... I believe that everyone should practice BPP before publishing. No prior experience is required... its general principles... are simple.
"Here’s how they work in practice.
"1. Who is telling me this?...
"2. How does he or she know this?...
"3. Given #1 and #2, is it possible that she or he is wrong?...
"4. If answer to #3 is “yes,” find another, unrelated source....
"5. Repeat until answer to #3 is “pretty f-ing unlikely.”
Obviously, I've truncated the article down to its bare bones, and its well worth the time it takes to read the whole thing. But given the nature of our discussions in this forum, we see a lot of BS. We'll see less of it if more people will follow this fairly simple protocol or even commit themselves to avoiding BS in our posts.
I don't really want to see BPP used as another excuse for attacking each other personally, but I suppose that's inevitable. I'd rather see people using it to edit their own posts and to decide what to post to other sites and posts from this one.
Also from te article:
"Science says the first word on everything, and the last word on nothing" - Victor Hugo
Hear here!:-)
And yet journalists (or owners and editors) still don't see the need to credit sources and keep reporting separate from editorials.

From the comments below the article, quote, "..And if journalists started reporting source links, now so easy when many are online, their absence could become a red flag rather than a too common request for faith."
I'm changing the subject but Journalists should at least try to practice impartiality. Instead we have seen the abandonment of 'reporting' and 'corresponding' for 'story telling' where the muddling of editorial comment and factual reporting is taken for the norm.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#3 May 4, 2014
I note that someone put negative judge icons on Nightserf's post. Do they favor nonsense (i.e. BS)? More likely, as this is the Atheism Forum, perhaps it's some defensive religionist who's aware what a catastrophe for religious faith it would be if people applied BPP to mythology about Abrahamic gods.

Five loaves and two fishes, lol!

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#5 May 4, 2014
EdSed wrote:
I note that someone put negative judge icons on Nightserf's post. Do they favor nonsense (i.e. BS)? More likely, as this is the Atheism Forum, perhaps it's some defensive religionist who's aware what a catastrophe for religious faith it would be if people applied BPP to mythology about Abrahamic gods.
Five loaves and two fishes, lol!
There are a few who put those icons on my posts only because they are mine. Right now its usually jide oni, but there are others. I think it's kind of amusing that the spam icon is so often included. Few people are aware that Topix defines the word in the Terms of Service in this context:

"You understand that no 'spamming' is permitted anywhere on Topix at any time. You will not post or transmit links, identical content, or snippets of identical content to multiple threads in the discussion forums. You will not create more than one thread for your topic, or create multiple threads for a single topic. Transmitting any such identical messages indiscriminately to multiple threads and/or creating multiple threads constitutes an unauthorized use, is in violation of these Terms of Service and is prohibited. You understand Topix may, at any time, in its sole discretion, determine what user activity constitutes 'spamming.' and that Topix reserves the right to employ any means and methods of technology, including, but not limited to rate limiting, content filters, and captchas to prevent automated posting of duplicate content. Any attempt to reverse engineer, bypass, or publicize these systems is similarly prohibited."

Early in Topix history, spamming was a real problem. We would see the same posts on multiple threads in almost every forum. The Terms of Service statement used to be much more detailed than it is now, and I suspect that it's been modified as a result of criticism that many of the terms were too lightly enforced or enforced too unevenly, giving the impression of bias. But they continue to come down very hard on spamming as defined above, and now I almost never see the same post repeated within a thread or across more than one. When I do, I report it.

Since: Jan 14

Ashburn, VA

#6 May 5, 2014
NightSerf,
I so much appreciate your mature style of writing, that I will be the last person to put negative icon on your posts, more so when I have greatly benefited from your critique, except that you are not being sincere with yourself to have conceded that I have evidently brought atheism to its knees.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#7 May 5, 2014
jide oni wrote:
NightSerf,
I so much appreciate your mature style of writing, that I will be the last person to put negative icon on your posts, more so when I have greatly benefited from your critique, except that you are not being sincere with yourself to have conceded that I have evidently brought atheism to its knees.
I've never conceded that, nor is it true. It's just another narcissistic claim, narcissistic because of your insistence on taking credit for a phenomenon that, if it existed, would have to result from the actions of many people, probably numbering in the thousands or millions. But you have failed even to demonstrate that nonbelief has been reduced or that religious belief has been strengthened in any observable or measurable way, much less that you have contributed one iota tot such a trend.

It seems unlikely that some observer who is not writing posts is also following the threads that center on your claims and posting positive icons on your post and negative ones on all of your opponents. It's much more likely that you assertion that you have not been doing so is a lie. Your credibility has taken a new hit.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 hr Bill Dunning 85,772
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 5 hr dollarsbill 5,167
How To Get To Heaven When You Die (Jan '17) Mon Eagle 12 - 115
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Jan 17 ChristineM 4,026
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Jan 16 Into The Night 5,146
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) Jan 15 Dogen 33,127
News Egypt's parliament takes serious actions to com... Jan 14 emperorjohn 1
More from around the web