C0nc0rdance's new video on PZ

[mick1le2pick]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmMXiqbD9Dc

 

[Gnug215]

I've always liked C0nc0rdance.

Usually when he moves away from making pure science vids to making commentaries about the atheist community, it's usually because something bad/stupid has happened.

That also seems to be the case here. PZ seems to be acting weird, and his star is falling.

 

[Aught3]

I completely agree with Gnug's words and very much like Concordance's videos. However, for me this video highlights the problems with trying to attribute motives to other people's actions online. We could easily think up dozens of explanations for why PZ would want to move video comments to his moderated blog, but the only person who really knows is PZ. Perhaps PZ was interested in substantive discussion around the content of his videos? If he found the majority of the video comments to be about him personally, either Thunderfoot supports attacking him or PZ supporters defending him, I could see PZ wanting to move discussion to his already moderated website. And if the videos were just being downrated because *PZ* made them rather than on the basis of content, that would explain the rating block.

I don't know if my scenario is correct and I don't know if Concordance's scenarios are correct, but blocking youtube comments/ratings hardly seems like a big deal to me.

 

[Gnug215]

I completely agree with Gnug's words and very much like Concordance's videos. However, for me this video highlights the problems with trying to attribute motives to other people's actions online. We could easily think up dozens of explanations for why PZ would want to move video comments to his moderated blog, but the only person who really knows is PZ. Perhaps PZ was interested in substantive discussion around the content of his videos? If he found the majority of the video comments to be about him personally, either Thunderfoot supports attacking him or PZ supporters defending him, I could see PZ wanting to move discussion to his already moderated website. And if the videos were just being downrated because *PZ* made them rather than on the basis of content, that would explain the rating block.

I don't know if my scenario is correct and I don't know if Concordance's scenarios are correct, but blocking youtube comments/ratings hardly seems like a big deal to me.

And I completely agree with most of what you said.

C0nc assigns some value into the blocking of YT comments/ratings, and I can see where he's coming from. Like he says, it's usually only corporations and creationists that do that kind of thing, and it's been something the atheist community has always complained about - and now PZ is doing it, for whatever reason. PZ has his own site, and he could in theory care less about the comment section on his YT channel. He could let dissenters and TF fans vent on YT, while censoring them on his own site. Now, they're censored in both places.

I think that sends a bad signal, as C0nc says, no matter what the motivation is. Perhaps especially when PZ is on (I believe) FreeThought Blogs. Not much free thought there.

But yeah, it's a bit out of character for C0nc, I think, to speculate about PZs motives. I think I can hear on C0nc's voice that he's trying to be slightly facetious or even a bit provocative.

(But now I'm speculating...)

 

[Balstrome]

What is that saying?

To find out who wants to rule you, look to who you are not allowed to criticise.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

What is that saying?

To find out who wants to rule you, look to who you are not allowed to criticise.

Exactly.

 

[Aught3]

What is that saying?

To find out who wants to rule you, look to who you are not allowed to criticise.

Seems like Concordance is perfectly able to criticise PZ as can many other people. I guess that means PZ doesn't want to rule us after all.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

What is that saying?

To find out who wants to rule you, look to who you are not allowed to criticise.

Hrm......

Very interesting Indeed.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

Seems like Concordance is perfectly able to criticise PZ as can many other people. I guess that means PZ doesn't want to rule us after all.

There's a difference in being ABLE to, and them RESTRAINING you from saying things.
For example, if I were to legitimately criticize PZ's actions and he were to ban me from his forums - though completely within his own rights - it would imply that he is effectively sitting down and shutting out all criticism of his character in a format where he has sole control over it.

Think of it like this:
People make videos about ShockOfGod, NephilimFree, VenomFangX, and so on.
But we know where their desires lay because of this exact behavior that is being displayed. They turn their forums into circlejerk hedge-gardens of idiocy where they can play God, effectively banning all dissent and dismissing all criticism that may be brought against them.

Say what you want about those listed above - at least their motives are absolutely clear.

 

[Aught3]

There's a difference in being ABLE to, and them RESTRAINING you from saying things.
For example, if I were to legitimately criticize PZ's actions and he were to ban me from his forums - though completely within his own rights - it would imply that he is effectively sitting down and shutting out all criticism of his character in a format where he has sole control over it.

That's the thing though isn't it? I wouldn't want to see constant criticism of my character especially in a format where what I wanted to see was substantive discussion of ideas. It would probably be worth moderating out that kind of content to promote a broader discussion of important issues. In any case PZ has an unmoderated 'Thunderdrome' on his blog and an publicised email address so he's hardly shutting out all criticism of himself.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

I have to say, I do not disagree with moving comments from YouTube to a different forum. The 500-character limit in the comment section is frustrating and in order to make any argument one needs far more than 500-characters. However, disabling the rating system seems pointless.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

There's a difference in being ABLE to, and them RESTRAINING you from saying things.
For example, if I were to legitimately criticize PZ's actions and he were to ban me from his forums - though completely within his own rights - it would imply that he is effectively sitting down and shutting out all criticism of his character in a format where he has sole control over it.

That's the thing though isn't it? I wouldn't want to see constant criticism of my character especially in a format where what I wanted to see was substantive discussion of ideas. It would probably be worth moderating out that kind of content to promote a broader discussion of important issues. In any case PZ has an unmoderated 'Thunderdrome' on his blog and an publicised email address so he's hardly shutting out all criticism of himself.

The argument would apply if he simply disabled comments.

But ratings?