# Zoid, a full response to your lame-ass analogy **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 4, 2014, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456 "2014-09-04T07:35:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/21 "2014-09-04T13:15:53Z")
I mean, atheists can say "God is a fictional entity’ elsewhere can’t they? Or are believers so at risk of crumbling into tiny pieces at the inferences they draw regarding _what the speaker might mean, and be thinking inside_, that we have to gag atheists from voicing their honest opinion? ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/22 "2014-09-04T13:25:21Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > I mean, atheists can say "God is a fictional entity’ elsewhere can’t they? Or are believers so at risk of crumbling into tiny pieces at the inferences they draw regarding _what the speaker might mean, and be thinking inside_, that we have to gag atheists from voicing their honest opinion? IMO, they can say it in any appropriate thread. But if you have a thread about "The best way to make a perfect angel food cake that will be served with hand-picked blueberries and 20 Year Tawny Port, it’s wildly inappropriate for an emotionally stunted moron run into the thread and say “_ANGEL_ food cake? Angels aren’t REAL man. IT’S ALL LIES!!! I just ROCKED your little world” and run off. Or…what if there was an IMHO thread saying something like “Atheists: How can we make our arguments stronger and more persuasive?” and a similar emotionally stunted moron pops into the thread and dumps something like “All atheists are going to hell. Only by the love of JESUS CHRIST can your souls be saved. You’re all Communists and you probably rape little boys too.”? Again, equally inappropriate. Imagine a bunch of grownups at a fancy cocktail party. Everyone’s chatting, conversation is on grownup topics, there’s the occasional conversational drift, but the conversation is flowing organically. Then the host’s emotionally stunted 15 year old son stomps into the middle of the room, drops his pants, squats and dumps a steaming heap of shit in the middle of the floor and screams “I go poo right here! I just BLEW your minds you SQUARES! You can’t handle how REAL I am!” as he toddles off to the side of the room to see what happens. The conversation at that point is shot to hell. People won’t be going back to talking art, literature, current events, sports, whatever…they’ll be discussing the incident. It’s not got anything to do with religion per se, it has to do with emotionally stunted posters who habitually threadshit their pet issues into unrelated discussions where grownups are trying to talk. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/23 "2014-09-04T13:28:48Z")
**Mangetout** , I’ve read your posts before. You’re not stupid. I think you know very well what’s going on here. I think you know very well why the post got a mod note. What I don’t understand is why you are borrowing a page out of **Czarcasm’s** book and have started pretending you don’t. I’m not going to play hypotheticals with you. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/24 "2014-09-04T13:33:50Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > It’s not got anything to do with religion per se, it has to do with emotionally stunted posters who habitually threadshit their pet issues into unrelated discussions where grownups are trying to talk. I agree threadshitting should be dealt with. That is not the topic of this discussion. This discussion is about whether it is reasonable to wring out a whole bunch of escalating imaginary injuriy from a single driveby comment. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/25 "2014-09-04T13:36:35Z")
> [@armedmonkey](#): > > **Mangetout** , I’ve read your posts before. You’re not stupid. I think you know very well what’s going on here. I think you know very well why the post got a mod note. What I don’t understand is why you are borrowing a page out of **Czarcasm’s** book and have started pretending you don’t. I’m not going to play hypotheticals with you. There is nothing hypothetical about anything I have said. The ridiculous characterisation of a person offended by imaginary slights, in my little script in the OP, is based almost verbatim, on arguments **Zoid** _actually posted_ in the linked thread. I’m not making analogies or talking hypotheses. I’m saying it’s fucking ridiculous to act the wounded party, when the severity of the assault took place entirely in your own imagination. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/26 "2014-09-04T13:36:42Z")
Again, **Mangetout** , you know very well what is going on. Stop pretending you don’t. ETA: I agree **Zoid** posted a bullshit analogy. I said so in my first post here. My concern is your position that we should just sweep **Czarcasm’s** bullshit under the rug. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/27 "2014-09-04T13:48:38Z")
> [@armedmonkey](#): > > Again, **Mangetout** , you know very well what is going on. Stop pretending you don’t. I am not pretending anything. Stop saying that. > [@](#): > > ETA: I agree **Zoid** posted a bullshit analogy. That’s what this thread is about. > [@](#): > > I said so in my first post here. My concern is your position that we should just sweep **Czarcasm’s** bullshit under the rug. Did you notice how much of a problem it _simply didn’t cause_ in the original thread. Some idiot stuck his head through the door and said something irrelevant. Conversation moved on as if it had never happened. People post irrelevant, off-topic bollocks in threads all the time. (off-topic for this thread) If any off-topic bollocks in a thread causes a derailment **(which this did not)**, I agree, that would be a problem to be dealt with. (on topic for this thread) If any off-topic bollocks in a thread is offensive **(which this was not)**, I agree, it might need to be kept in check. It was a non-problem. Not a small problem. A **non-problem**. Not a problem at all. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/28 "2014-09-04T14:00:16Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > It was a non-problem. Not a small problem. Not a problem at all. Oh, shut the fuck up. You can’t say that now. **Zoid’s** lame ass analogy was in response to you saying that we should just ignore problems. By posting that you are tacitly admitting that there is an actual problem to be ignored. Look, I understand the thinking behind: > [@Manetout](#): > > They are, or would be, a very small problem if they were just ignored. It’s basically saying “don’t feed the trolls”. The problem is that never works. And it really shouldn’t. There is nothing that can be posted, regardless of subject, that should just get a free pass. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/29 "2014-09-04T14:11:35Z")
OK, if you wish to be pedantic; the ‘problem’ I am describing is that of someone making a lame, pointless post in a thread. Not actually worth calling a problem. If you think I have some agenda here, out with it. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/30 "2014-09-04T14:13:58Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > (off-topic for this thread) If any off-topic bollocks in a thread causes a derailment **(which this did not)**, I agree, that would be a problem to be dealt with. > > (on topic for this thread) If any off-topic bollocks in a thread is offensive **(which this was not)**, I agree, it might need to be kept in check. > > It was a non-problem. Not a small problem. A **non-problem**. Not a problem at all. The problem is that there’s a precident for just ignoring trolls who throw a threadshit in which gets ignored. > [@Tomndebb](#): > > [Typically, Der Trihs fails to actually hijack threads. Most posters read his stuff, see the boilerplate condemnations rooted in a set of inflexible assertions, see the byline “Der Trihs,” shrug their shoulders, and move on.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10656767&postcount=28) > > As such, his rants are not really disruptive to the board. > \< snip \> > Der Trihs is sufficiently ignored that he does not fall into the disruptive category at this time. lekatt, whose views provide something of a counterweight (or counterweightlessness) to Der Trihs, did fall into the disruptive category. It is probably not fair to put restrictions on lekatt’s posts that are not applied to those of Der Trihs, but it will not make it more fair to do the same thing to Der Trihs, So by ignoring threadshitting of the sort Czarcasm does all the time, the case could be made that he’s a “not really disruptive” failed troll like Der Trihs and he’ll get a free pass going forward which means that we’ll get non-stop threadshits from him (I mean, moreso) like we got from Der Trihs. ETA: I’m not debating Tomndebb’s ruling. I’m simply posting it as a factual cite. I take no stance on whether it’s a good or bad ruling. Just that it exists. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/31 "2014-09-04T14:23:43Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > OK, if you wish to be pedantic; the ‘problem’ I am describing is that of someone making a lame, pointless post in a thread. Not actually worth calling a problem. > > If you think I have some agenda here, out with it. I’m not being pedantic, I’m just not a fan of posters weaseling out of shit they actually said. You are pitting **Stoid** over her response to a post you made. When I look at **Stoid’s** post, I am also going to look at yours. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/32 "2014-09-04T14:24:24Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > So by ignoring threadshitting of the sort Czarcasm does all the time, the case could be made that he’s a “not really disruptive” failed troll like Der Trihs and he’ll get a free pass going forward which means that we’ll get non-stop threadshits from him (I mean, moreso) like we got from Der Trihs. > > ETA: I’m not debating Tomndebb’s ruling. I’m simply posting it as a factual cite. I take no stance on whether it’s a good or bad ruling. Just that it exists. That is a possibility - and I guess if it increased in volume to a ridiculous level, it would represent a problem just by virtue of its bulk effect, and would need dealing with. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/33 "2014-09-04T14:27:43Z")
In response to the hypothetical posed in the OP, I think you’re missing the point here. Yes, someone who is offended by a random person coming in and saying “God doesn’t exist” is overly sensitive. And if that offended person then goes and whines to the teacher and to his parents to make a big fuss about it, then they’re making a mountain out of a molehile. But let’s take a slightly different approach to the situation. Let’s say I’m a teacher in this situation, I’m in the room where your son is discussing Superman and that kid comes in and says that. How should I react? If I were that teacher, I think an appropriate action is along the lines of “Knock it out.” It’s not even a response to whether or not someone saying that is offensive or not, it’s just rude behavior. Not even the kid saying it thinks it’s relevant to the conversation, because if he were actually interested in the conversation, he wouldn’t just interject with a controversial situation. The most reasonable motivations for that sort of behavior in my estimation is either to get people riled up who disagree with the controversial statement or to derail the conversation that others are enjoying; both of those are jerkish motivations. And, again, there’s nothing inherently offensive about the idea that God doesn’t exist. I’m a theist myself, and I can quite enjoy a good discussion about the existence and nature of God. But if I’m talking about Superman, other than perhaps the obvious messianic allusions inherent in the design of the character, I’m not in the same frame of mind to discussion faith and religion. To me, it’d be no different than someone interjecting a politically controversial statement into that discussion, like “Obama is a socialist” or whatever other irrelevant nonsense. And in that regard, I think the idea that God is a fictional character is a disingenuous characterization in order to justify this sort of behavior. The stories of religion, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, etc. are myths. In that regard, I think it’s a fair statement in that context–though still missing the point–to say God doesn’t exist, Zeus doesn’t exist, Xenu doesn’t exist, whatever. But let’s say we’re discussing fiction, say Clash of the Titans, in what way does it add to the discussion to say that Zeus doesn’t exist? Well, that’s all find and good, but as far as the world in which the movie takes place is concerned, he does exist. That’s not any different that telling me that James Bond isn’t real or Superman isn’t real. Hell, all of us can even agree on that, and yet it doesn’t make that point any more relevant to the discussion. Or in reverse, if we were talking about Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, it’s equally irrelevant to argue that the real Lincoln didn’t actually hunt vampires, as if anyone who saw that actually believed he did. To a certain extent, it may be relevant to say that, when perhaps discussing 300, that certain things Leonidas did in that film didn’t happen historically, which is important for context. But the equivalent of that would be mentioning that in Troy, they deliberately do not discuss Achilles being dipped in the River Styx as a baby in mythology, and that he’s just shot there in his death scene in the film; it is not equivalent to saying Achilles didn’t exist. So, in all of this, I think it’s fair to discuss God as a fictional character as portrayed by Morgan Freeman in Bruce Almighty. I think it’s fair to make comparisons between his portrayal and the obvious mythological source for him, Yahweh. But the fact of whether or not he may or may not actually exist is just utterly irrelevant. And, as such, I think anyone interjecting that in the conversation is, at best, a minor distraction, and possibly a derailment, and should be asked to stop. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/34 "2014-09-04T14:34:50Z")
So let me get this straight. Y’all don’t buy that I intended my post to refer to fictional depictions of God in various forms of the media(although some of you would have allowed such a submission from another poster), because I drop into threads unrelated to religious debate all the time and threadshit? _Bull shit._ Speaking of “free passes”, **Fenris** , it’s about time you quit hiding your sniping in ATMB and took it to The Pit, but now that you’re here, why don’t you put up or shut up and come up with all those examples of off-topic threadshitting you’re whining about? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/35 "2014-09-04T14:43:39Z")
> [@jimbuff314](#): > > Cool! A British pitting. This should be bloody classy! With hands-on experience for moral guidance as well. I can tell. 😉 Will tea be served at some point? ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/36 "2014-09-04T14:46:16Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Speaking of “free passes”, **Fenris** , it’s about time you quit hiding your sniping in ATMB and took it to The Pit, but now that you’re here, why don’t you put up or shut up and come up with all those examples of off-topic threadshitting you’re whining about? Your posts are my cite. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/37 "2014-09-04T14:51:55Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > Your posts are my cite. Try again, lame ass. Use _both_ your brain cells to come up with a better excuse to explain to everyone why you’ve got nothing. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/38 "2014-09-04T14:58:36Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > So, in all of this, I think it’s fair to discuss God as a fictional character as portrayed by Morgan Freeman in Bruce Almighty. I think it’s fair to make comparisons between his portrayal and the obvious mythological source for him, Yahweh. But the fact of whether or not he may or may not actually exist is just utterly irrelevant. And, as such, I think anyone interjecting that in the conversation is, at best, a minor distraction, and possibly a derailment, and should be asked to stop. Absolutely. If **Czarcasm** had come in and talked about how God is a more popular fictional character than Sherlock Holmes because He shows up in a lot of movies and has been portrayed by Morgan Freeman, George Burns, and even Alanis Morristte, it would be fine. He shows in books like _Good Omens_ and _Towing Jehovah_ (He’s dead in that last one). Shoot, I could make a decent case along those lines. But **Czarcasm** really didn’t do that. His intention was pretty fucking obvious. Everybody ignored it, because they wanted to talk about who is a more popular fictional character than Sherlock Holmes - which is why they were in the thread to begin with. However, just because it was ignored doesn’t mean it should be excused. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/39 "2014-09-04T15:01:38Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Having read the full original thread (that is time I’m _never_ getting back) I can say with certainty that having someone simply opine that a God is a fictional character is in no way, shape or form, bullying It depends on how that opinion is expressed. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456/40 "2014-09-04T15:03:04Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > So let me get this straight. > Y’all don’t buy that I intended my post to refer to fictional depictions of God in various forms of the media(although some of you would have allowed such a submission from another poster), because I drop into threads unrelated to religious debate all the time and threadshit? That’s pretty much it, yes. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zoid-a-full-response-to-your-lame-ass-analogy/697456.md?page=3)