[quote=“Peter_Morris, post:140, topic:543714”]
OK, well if you feel that you get some value for your money that’s up to you, of course. But if you are letting yourself get riled over something that **Dio **(or whoever) posted, it’s not worth the time and energy, is it?
I don’t care who posted it. It frustrates me every time.
OK… but since it seems to be a recurring issue for you, and there hasn’t been any change in the board’s point of view on the subject, would you not agree that continuing to bang your head against a wall is not the healthiest approach?
I don’t have a dog in this fight at all, (before I opened this thread, I had no idea what a woo-woo was), but I do think that you have gone quite overboard in your protest.
You made your point, it was answered and dismissed, and yet for three pages you keep on about woo-woo’s being vaginas.
Perhaps it would be a good idea to walk away from this thread. I don’t think you will get the satisfaction you desire, perpetuating your frustration, and ultimately causing you more pain over an issue that has been determined to be a non-issue by the SDMB.
Just saying.
It’s also the main chorus to Song 2.
Mods, why not just move this to the Pit? It’s obvious Mr. Morris just wants to let 'er rip.
MODERATOR INSTRUCTIONS
I don’t want this thread to get any further derailed by getting into a yet another discussion of Randi and Peter’s dispute with him (even if the thread did start out as a trainwreck.) Any further discussion of these subjects in this thread is off limits and may be subject to a Official Warning. (If you want to discuss this subject you may take it elsewhere, though I doubt anything new will be said that hasn’t been said a thousand times already.)
Fighting ignorance takes longer than I thought.
Your post #75 was a clear misrepresentation of what Skammer said, as I have previously pointed out.
Funny. I was sitting here thinking the same thing.
Then help me out here.
What term would you prefer we use for those who reject science and embrace nonsense, other than “woo”?
:rolleyes:
And that’s your best example of me misrepresenting things?
Let’s look at what he says.
*
I didn’t even know what “woo-woo” referred to until I followed the link (I thought maybe it referred to a female body part ).*
First point: female genitalia is sometimes called woo-woo. This is a fact. Here is one example of that.
Second point: Skammer says that he thought it might refer to a female body part until he followed the link.
It is utterly obvious, beyond any doubt at all that he had already seen the word used for female genitalia. Do you really think it was just a random guess on his part?
Moderators, please take note. This guy is being a jerk, again.
It’s one of those questions like “Have you stopped beating your wife yet.” I’ hope I don’t have to explain the logical fallacy here.
This is at least the third time he has posted this. He is trying to provoke me. When he failed to get a reaction, he posted it again and again. He is blatantly trying to stir up trouble. And he keeps on trying.
Could you please instruct him to knock it off.l
Moderator Warning
Marley23 has already instructed you to dial it back. Calling another poster a jerk in ATMB is a clear insult (one you’ve already used several times). I don’t see anything that Czarcasm has done as being particularly provocative. This is an official warning.
Seriously? You permit “woo” but obje3ct to “jerk” You really don’t see a double standard there?
Well, Czarcasm, you got me to react after all. Happy now?
Perhaps the mods should consider closing this thread.
“whoo-whoo”! is the sound of the train that is currently going off the rails here.
It’s almost painful to watch. It’s like watching a slow motion car accident. I am guilty of rubbernecking and hanging around for the ambulance.
I need to check out of this thread.
Again I nominate ‘cooter’. It’s the perfect word, as it is the common name for a turtle, an armored, slow-moving reptile that pulls back into a shell when confronted.
ahem
I should mention, I suppose, in the interest of full disclosure, that, coincidentally, the term ‘cooter’ also means vagina, but I’m sure that will never be a problem.
Anyone posting in this thread who is also a frequenter of the JREF, is either being obtuse or a full on troll if they don’t recognise PM’s objection to the words “woo woo”( hee. hee.) in the context to which they are usually used.
“Woo woo” might sound like a cuddly term of endearment, but it is meant to signify that the accused is guilty of thinking in a way only forgivable in those with mental problems. That, to me, is far worse than calling me a vagina, which is amusing, more than annoying.
I imagine that PM’s main concern is that an attitude that is prevalent on another board, might well become firmly embedded in a board dedicated to fighting ignorance.
Would “homo” qualify as hate speech?
Hey now, I see about 30 posts in this thread alone where people call the OP “Peter”. As many of you know, “peter” is slang for penis/dick/cock/etc.
I expect everyone to be warned within the hour and for the OP to be banned on the grounds of having a name that implies hate speech.
Or, you know, the OP can drop what’s a very silly argument. : p
Making the deliberately ignorant a protected class? Is this a joke thread?
The term woowoo has been around in print for a quarter century and is probably much older than that. If it is used on the JREF board - I’ve visited but I don’t frequent it - then it’s only because it is the term universally used for such beliefs. A quick search found woowoo in 76 threads here dating back to 2002.
Woowoo is ignorance. It is a definition of ignorance. Just as conspiracy theorist is. Yes, it’s a pejorative and it’s most certainly meant to be. Hate speech? Sorry, no. Being ignorant or even deliberately stupid doesn’t make you into a protected class. Vagina? Absurd. When one refers to a dog as a “an iron bar driven into a stone or timber to provide a means of lifting it.” you cannot assume that what they’re really saying is “an ugly, boring, or crude person.” That’s lunacy. Although the French may object to being called Frogs, anybody who confused that use with “a small holder made of heavy material, placed in a bowl or vase” or “a recessed panel on one of the larger faces of a brick or the like” has issues.
Words have many meanings, usually independently derived. You cannot arbitrarily shift from one meaning to another to wrench words out of context. That’s practicing hate on speech, yet Peter Morris has done that consistently.