Somebody is RIGHT on the Internet!!!!11!!
…I would like to start by apologising for our handling of this situation. We have not communicated well with our forum volunteers and users (for example in my insensitive ‘Outrage’ post, which was written in the heat of the moment). In the process we have caused unintended hurt and offence, and I am very sorry about that. In a classic case of a vicious circle, some of the responses to our announcement also caused considerable hurt and distress to us, and in the atmosphere of heightened emotion that followed, some of our subsequent actions went too far. I hope you will understand the human impulses that led to this, and accept my apology for them. I take full personal responsibility….
Click here to read the whole thing
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
Glad to know my respect for RD is well placed.
Greg, the man is not a hero just because he realised just in time that his mate Timonen fucked stuff up and caused damage to RDF.
The apology is no more sincere of that that a politician who got caught screwing up.
Richard showed his contempt for the masses, but someone told him, “But Richard, this could cost your Foundation MONEY!”, and he coughed up the apology.
Who cares? Seriously? Some people need to get a life.
Greg is right. To stop an argument on the Internet someone has to be extraordinarily gracious, and Richard Dawkins was that someone. He sounds nothing like the politicians and preachers who cough up weasel-worded or mealy-mouthed “not-pologies”.
If ‘Outrage’ was written in the heat of the moment, then Richard Dawkins must be a very measured man indeed.
I have to agree with Monado; this was a very gracious apology that conceded his mistakes while still holding firm on his objectives.
Though in the end, I think IanW is right. People care about all this just a little too much.
But nothing has been resolved, the site is still a mess, the Foundation is still a mess, the New Atheism is still a mess, etc etc etc. Dawkin’s isn’t cut out to be the Pope of Atheism.
The site has failed to do what it was created for as stated in “God Delusion” and should therefore be dismantled.
Aww, the pointless blog drama has been resolved before I got to run in and throw gas on the train wreck.
Oh well, there will be more drama somewhere eventually. Such is the nature of the ‘tubes.