MySpace Deletes Largest Atheist Group in the World

From secularstudents.org

Cleveland, OH.— Social networking site, MySpace.com, panders to religious intolerants by deleting atheist users, groups and content.

Early this month, MySpace again deleted the Atheist and Agnostic Group (35,000 members). This deletion, due largely to complaints from people who find atheism offensive, marks the second time MySpace has cancelled the group since November 2007.

For a Wikipedia article on the now defunct atheist and agnostic group (also scheduled for deletion), visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist_and_Agnostic_Group

For links to Pesta’s defunct group and profile, visit http://www.MySpace.com/aiffb

It seems that they did not violate any of the terms of Myspace but haven't been given any reason why they were deleted. Are we safe here?

well tbh myspace is a load of rubbish anyway

and if they got enough complaints, they got enough complaints

perhaps the atheist users should group up and send complaints about another group if they feel that strongly

robindch

I feel persecuted. Time for a persecution thread!

Dades

MySpace?

omg Xianity ftw !!11!


gfy

Zillah

Cunts.

Bebo ftw.

MrJoeSoap

Haha, went onto the Wikipedia link in the OP, and the very first line says:

"This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy."

eoin5

Meh, whats stopping them making a new one under a different name?

Soul Winner

robindch wrote: »

I feel persecuted. Time for a persecution thread!

Ah it could be worse, you could get thrown to lions or be used as a flaming human torch to light up Nero's gardens at night. Now that's what I call real persecution.

toiletduck

robindch wrote: »

I feel persecuted. Time for a persecution thread!

I'm ready to don the victimhood, mine's a lovely red colour.

Soul Winner wrote:

Ah it could be worse, you could get thrown to lions or be used as a flaming human torch to light up Nero's gardens at night. Now that's what I call real persecution.

:rolleyes: You managed to get over all that ok I see?

Myksyk

Maybe they should rename the site www.myspace...butnotatheistbastardsspace.com

robindch

Soul Winner wrote: »

Ah it could be worse, you could get thrown to lions or be used as a flaming human torch to light up Nero's gardens at night.

And the christians are nothing if not good copyists, as any of the victims of the Holy Inquisition would have told you, had they been able to after they'd been treated for their heresy!

Zillah

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

Haha, went onto the Wikipedia link in the OP, and the very first line says:

"This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy."

Its because of the overly generic topic title I'd say. There's no way in hell the wikipedia-people would give in to any variety of outside pressure of the sort myspace did. For three reasons: they're non-profit, they have quite a rational/secular/humanist ethos, and its an encyclopedia.

MrJoeSoap

Zillah wrote: »

Its because of the overly generic topic title I'd say. There's no way in hell the wikipedia-people would give in to any variety of outside pressure of the sort myspace did. For three reasons: they're non-profit, they have quite a rational/secular/humanist ethos, and its an encyclopedia.

I know, just thought it was funny.

Dave!

scumbags

Hivemind187

Typical spinless pandering.

Zillah

Hrhm...

From the discussion page of the wiki article: "Update: 2/1/8, 2:30 p.m. Est. Group Restored! (though regulars appear to still be banned). No one at myspace has contacted me, but someone obviously got the group back. Thanks to all, and myspace. I hope the group can live up to expectations given the strong community support we got re all this.[1]"

lostexpectation

pffbbbb drama queens that's exactly what I said would happen on atheist.ie

Galvasean

It looks like a hack more so than anything to do with the people behind Myspace IMO.

edit: A petition to stop stuff like this happening again.

http://www.packetsmiter.com/cgi-bin/petition/petition.pl

Fallen Seraph

Soul Winner wrote: »

Ah it could be worse, you could get thrown to lions or be used as a flaming human torch to light up Nero's gardens at night. Now that's what I call real persecution.

"Sure it happened to us, why can't we do it to them?"

Lets hope the jews don't start down this line of thought...

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

had a look at palestine lately?

Fanny Cradock

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Typical spinless pandering.

Pandering? Possibly. However, without actually knowing the content of what was contained within the group pages this is only an assumption. I could equally assume that there was some pretty nasty stuff posted there, and it was for that reason that the group was deleted.

Zillah

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Pandering? Possibly. However, without actually knowing the content of what was contained within the group pages this is only an assumption.

The Original Article wrote:

This deletion, due largely to complaints from people who find atheism offensive

Ketchup.

Fanny Cradock

Secularstudents.org - objective reporting at it's finest.

Zillah

Do you actually have any evidence that their reporting is biased or did you just make that up?

robindch

Zillah wrote: »

Do you actually have any evidence that their reporting is biased or did you just make that up?

No, I think we should take Fanny at face value and assume that (s)he's come around to the eminently reasonable position that reporting which is not religiously-aligned is likely to be more objective.

Great to see the conversion! That's our first, isn't it?

Fanny Cradock

Zillah wrote: »

Do you actually have any evidence that their reporting is biased or did you just make that up?

Just for clarities sake, I couldn't give a hoot if atheists have their owm Myspace, Facebook or bebo groups.

I merely put forward the possibility that there was offensive material on the website beyond the normal 'Do you think people who believe in God due to a lack of intelligence?'* threads. A ridiculous thing to postulate, I know!

I have seen other Groups on Myspace that are poorly moderated, if at all. Knowing the propensity for trolls and axe-grinders to descend on such an emotive issue as religion, I wouldn't think it too far a stretch of the imagination to suggest that maybe there was material posted on the Group that wasn't acceptable.





*This thread has bee brought to you by The Derek Zoolander Center For Children Who Can't Read Good And Wanna Learn To Do Other Stuff Good Too.

Zillah

How interesting. You quote me, and then make a little speech that has absolutely nothing to do with what was quoted.

I believe we were discussing your apparently unfounded assumption of journalistic bias on behalf of secularstudents.org. Specifically, the question was "Do you actually have any evidence that their reporting is biased or did you just make that up?" Given your avoidance of it I assume the latter.

Fanny Cradock

You seemed to have missed my point. I was attempting to suggest an alternative viewpoint. I've stated nothing as fact. Now, you can take my off the cuff remark as you like. But in light of robin questioning the impartiality of Christian news sources, I believe it only consistent to apply the same questioning to all forms of reporting. This seems to be a problem for you, though.

Zillah

You implied that secularstudents.org were not objective in their reporting. I would like to know if you have anything to back that up or if its just a baseless assertion.

This really isn't very complicated. You either have evidence or you don't. And you clearly don't, so just admit you made a foolish comment and we can move on.

Fanny Cradock

I asserted nothing, Zillah. I was neither aggressive or forceful in my suggestion that there was possibly some extenuating reasons behind the closure of the group beyond what wasn't reported in your link. Do you think this an impossibility?

As I said before, you can take my off the cuff remark as you like. It doesn't bother me. However, you do seem to be latching on to this remark at the expense of the . It would seem, though, that you are much more interested in attempting to score some points.

Zombrex

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I asserted nothing, Zillah.

Actually you did Fanny

First you asserted that it was simply an assumption on our part that the MySpace page was taken down due to complaints from theists who find atheism offensive.

When the part of the article that stated just that was quoted you asserted that SecularStudents.org was a biased source and should not be trusted.

So that is two things you asserted.

So far both these assertions seem rather baseless. It is not up to Zillah to demonstrate these assertions are wrong, its up you to you to support them or with draw them. If you leave them just hanging out there without doing either of these things of course people are going to "latch on to them"

And arguing that neither is impossible is not supporting them.

Fanny Cradock

If you look up the definition for assert you will see that I didn't claim anything as positively true or press it with force. Surely words like 'possibly' would have made this clear!

If a pro Fianna Fail paper was to publish an article on Bertie I think it only fair to suggest and be mindful that there may be an alternative viewpoint. Do you honestly believe it is wrong to mention that there may be bias involved in any publication from a group with vested interests? The article on Bertie may turn out to be wholly accurate, and so might this story about myspace, but whatever the truth, I believe that I am being slated for reasons other than my suggestion.

I would argue that it is good practice for an interested party to seek out the other side of the story, or better still, an objective source. In truth, I've nott found this source that you desire, Wick. Then again I've not been looking too deeply. Indeed, I've only encountered atheist publications which themselves often quote the secularstudents article.

Admittedly, I'm neither that interested in the story, nor did I think that I'd have to defend what I believe is a reasonable position to hold, i.e. scepticism towards affiliations/ pressure groups that may not be objective. Certainly this position didn't raise such a clamour when it was mentioned by atheists over in the Christianity forum. To refresh your memory, this was in relation to the suggestion by a member of boards (I forget who) that there may be potential for bias in Christian media that reported on the murder of Christians. If you think that there may be more or less to the story than is being reported it would seem like a reasonable enough suggestion, I think. If that suggestion is proven to be false one would imagine that it would be dropped. If this is the case with the myspace/ atheist group saga then I will whole heartily withdraw my suggestion. That won't prevent me from maintaining a healthy touch of scepticism, though.

Anyway, after the last few days I think it best that I step back form the A&A forum for a bit lest I develop a bit of a persecution complex.