What Needs to Change?

Hemant,

I am a usually a quiet reader. I don’t feel the need to argue to often, but this I must argue. Your site is one of very few I frequent. I’m more of the surfer type, but I keep coming back to check your wit and positive atheism. Despite what some people might think, satire is still a form of peaceful conflict. (If that’s possible). Continue what you’re doing, we are in a cold war and every bit of info is necessary.

Not about the website, but concerning the question to the students: there are some things they’ll always say, especially “less homework” and “more review before tests.” I’m not saying to disregard these comments, just know that you can feel certain that you assigned exactly the right amount of work and devoted a perfect amount of time to review and still get students singling those out.

This is my favorite atheist blog. I do like the dialog with Mike and probably will with Lindsay even though I don’t know her yet. I guess I would like a more prominent display of who is writing each post so I don’t get confused. I hate when people call me Rebecca on skepchick, and yet I find myself here thinking I’m reading something that you’ve written when it’s really someone else! Also, perhaps at the beginning of the posts by the non-atheists some sort of general note about what is the intention of the post in reference to us atheists, so we know what they would like to talk about in the comments. I am very interested in dialog, but I am not at all interested in debates.

As I mentioned in my comment on the post about why I blog, I am getting sick of PZs attitude and I certainly don’t want to see this blog echo that (even though I do it myself sometimes), nor would I like to see it merely be another forum for repeating the same topics that PZ covers. PZ fans can hang out at his blog as much as they want to.

I don’t care if you make fun of religion because you are not mean when you do so. Christians (from my experience) tend to have no sense of humor, so they will probably get pissed. They need to learn to laugh at themselves. That said, we should also be able to make fun of ourselves as well.

Positive posts about atheism and humanism are also always interesting so you can’t go wrong by going in that direction, I don’t think. We should always be questioning our own assumptions, even about atheism. But when you post things that go in that direction, as well as when you post things that look at even liberal religion in a positive light, you will get some negative comments. That’s unavoidable and it if leads to a good discussion, I think it’s OK. You can’t control what people say in the comments without starting to censor, which I think would be completely the wrong direction to take.

Hemant, you are doing a great job and I look forward to continue reading this blog. I hope we can meet f2f some day, too!

Donna

Actually, the baby jokes are simply not funny. There has been more than one time when I have not shared a post on Google Reader because off an ill-placed baby joke.

I’m perfectly OK with religion bashing, jokes, and videos, though. And I really like the comics.

One thing I’ve noticed that may be a long, long trend from the last year or so that I’ve been reading: You don’t seem to post much of your personal thoughts and ideas about atheism and religion any more. Most of what I see is either short posts with pictures/video/links, or longer presentations of atheism/religion related news with some commentary. But I can get both news and funny links from other sources–what I’d like to see more of is original thoughts and discussions. Your book was excellent, because you were discussing your experiences with churches, and your philosophy and attitude as an atheist–things that are unique and original and that I can’t find anywhere else. Granted, you still do that, but not in as high of a proportion as you did a year or so ago. I understand the time and effort it takes to do this, compared to basing a post off a news item (though that also takes a great deal of thought), and you are busier now than you were then, but it’s still something I’d like to see more of.

Also, as a huge math nerd, planning to be a college professor, I’d like to hear more about your math teaching experiences. Not exactly atheism-related, I know, but still…

Hemant,

Like Brian (the first to comment here), I never really comment, but just enjoy reading your entries. However, I must wholeheartedly disagree with anyone who says this blog has gotten mean-spirited or is outright religion-bashing. Have these people been to other atheist blogs? This is by far the nicest of them all, and I think it’s at a perfect level. Don’t get me wrong, I love PZ’s and the other more ‘aggressive’ blogs for what they are, but I think yours is the perfect tone for what you’re trying to be– friendly! So you make some jokes about religion, little *poke poke, nudge nudge*s and the kind, but there’s never anything hateful or degrading here.

As they say: People who don’t like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn’t have such funny beliefs.

Please, keep up the great work!

As I said in the forums, as this blog becomes more popular, Hemant will receive more and more stories from readers. Rather than posting more and more, I think it would be better to exercise more discretion in what kind of things are picked out.

Which is not to say we should leave out the silly and offensive stories. Half of the focus here is meaningful dialogue between theists and atheists, but the other half is meaningful dialogue between different kinds of atheists. For that to happen, offensive stories are necessary. I think problems arise when Hemant makes a category error, and treats an offensive story as if it were a silly one.

Your blog is one of the few that I really look forward to reading…just the way it is. Don’t change it for others. If the direction of your blog is changing (and I’m not sure exactly how much, since I haven’t been a subscriber for too terribly long), then let it evolve (no pun intended).

As I was reading the comments from people saying that your blog has gotten mean-spirited, etc. I couldn’t help but think about those with dogmatic christian beliefs. It is this type of thinking (’I don’t like what you are saying/how you are saying it! or what you are thinking!” that encourages limitation on thoughts, style, ideas, and presentation of one’s beliefs…the very limitations that many atheists broke away from. Whenever I hear someone shout “mean-spirited” I always assume that some personal beliefs are shoving to the fore-front (e.g. your hurting someone’s feelings…errr…mine). If they don’t like, let them find another blog or start one themselves if they think you’re so bad at it.

Which is crap, because your blog is good.

Hemant – I think I’m the first theist commenter here… unless I missed one while reading. But, for what it’s worth, here’s a few thoughts:
1) I think the comments about Christians having no sense of humor are accurate and worth noting. Sometimes people need to just learn to lighten up and laugh at themselves a bit. (I’m hoping to read Daniel Radosh’s new book Rapture Ready in the next few weeks for this very reason.) Further, I think you often do an excellent job of providing thoughtful commentary from a non-religious perspective. And inviting Mike and Lindsay to contribute is an excellent way of adding diversity here. (That said, making the author’s name more prominent on each post would be helpful. I’ve read a few of Mike’s posts thinking they were yours and was rather confused initially ;). )

2) That said, I think you need to ask yourself what your goals are for the blog and let that guide your decision about the satire and humor. If you’re serious about dialoging with theists, then you may need to rein the humor in a bit, so as not to offend theist readers. (“Theist Reader” – it sounds like some kind of radar for detecting religious people or something.) It sucks – I’m a columnist for the newspaper at my university so I know all about cutting a favorite line so as to avoid offending readers – but if you want to be a place for dialogue between religious and non-religious folks, you might have to do it. (Or perhaps you don’t want easily-offended religious folks posting here? If so, I can certainly understand that desire.)

3) Last thing – I remember in your book you talked about how it was offensive to you as an atheist when Christians talked about you as being, “lost.” However, as a Christian I feel the same way when you say things like, “I’m just thrilled that religion no longer has a stronghold on her. It would be nice if she threw off the shackles of God altogether, but this is still a significant change of mindset for someone.” Granted, the comment came in the midst of a post where you said you didn’t care that this person wasn’t a full-fledged atheist, but all the same, I don’t see a great difference between a well-intentioned Christian calling you “lost” and you referring to a belief that has brought such peace and joy to my life as “shackles” or “a stronghold.” Both smack of an attitude of superiority, as if the speaker has been enlightened and everyone who disagrees needs to catch up with them and their superior intellect. I don’t think it’s meant that way in either case, but I think it comes across that way.

I hope this doesn’t like I’m just being another overly-sensitive Christian, I like to think I can laugh at myself (I love the Family Guy where Peter creates the Church of the Fonz) but – like any other human being – there are certain things I value tremendously and to see them maligned can be quite hurtful.

Thanks for the transparency and honesty here, it’s something a lot of Christian bloggers could learn from!

Hemant, you won’t please everyone. I like this blog. It’s not mean; it often has thought-provoking articles and commentary. It’s got variety. It reflects your “friendly” approach. I don’t appreciate everything here, but so what–you can’t judge everything by my view of things. I have my blind spots like anyone else. For example, if I had my preference, I wouldn’t make a space for a Mormon blogger to present her doctrines. But, that’s me: I don’t care about Mormonism, I know all I need to know by now, and I find it annoying.

Biggest thing you can change? Fix your site’s theme!! Unless it looks this way on purpose??!!!

I’ve always been satisfied with your content and look forward to your postings everyday. Don’t change anything in that department.

So, what would I change? Less outright religion-bashing. Every other Atheism site already has that, and the word “friendly” has always been in the title of this blog. I’m all for poking a bit of fun, but I think everyone knows exactly when it stops being fun and starts being mean (I’m talking way more about commenters here than contributors).

I’m the one who started the post in the forum, and this was my #1 concern. About 95% of the posts here seem instructional, informative, thought-provoking and right on topic. But occasionally there’s a post that simply mocks a religious practice with no constructive commentary or a cartoon/joke that basically says “Atheists are better/smarter than theists, nah nah nah!” These posts tend to attract comments that are even more snarky and bullying.

I think those rare posts can scare off theists who are offended by being grouped with fundamentalists or creationists, etc. The theists who are most likely to want friendly dialogue and the sharing of ideas might not always have a sense of humor that extends to them being accused of narrow-mindedness or stupidity, simply because they believe in a religion.

We laugh about sites that accuse atheists of being amoral, baby-eating monsters, but few of us would frequent a site that grouped us together and called us stupid or ignorant. I think that cuts both ways.

I love this blog, but that’s the area where I feel there’s a bit of room for improvement.

As some have mentioned above, not all of us have the time to check out several atheist blogs/websites and know what gets cross-posted. In that sense, there’s no issue with content that can be found elsewhere to me.. I stay here because I enjoy getting it from your site (and your insight on it).

And it’s tough, while I can see the merit behind some people finding the playful jabs at religion unnecessary here.. my wife and I really enjoy those, so I’d rather they not go away.

I appreciate your candor and looking out for your readers, but as far as this one’s concerned, nothing needs to change.

Jeff Meador’s comment was excellent. While I understand his chafing at lines like “I’m just thrilled that religion no longer has a stronghold on her,” it is the point of view of many atheists, myself included, that religion is something people should get out of, but are simply unable to because of early conditioning and attachment. The line is similar to a theist expressing joy that an atheist began attending church.

There’s also a distinction to be made between religion-bashing and deserved criticism or religion-motivated action. Certainly an atheist blog should maintain a generally critical attitude toward religion, regardless of the additional attitude of tact and conciliation. And friendliness can be extended towards more “unfriendly” atheists every once in a while, eh? I got into this because of Richard Dawkins. I can’t just ignore the guy.

Like the above commenter, I can’t say I think anything needs to change either.

You totally knew my comment was coming.

What needs to change on this blog?

I think you need a more constant writer who will pose questions in regards to religion. Someone who will actively work at creating discussion between readers on different philosophical and religious ideas. Not just christianity, but all faiths and religions. And this person should be heavily active within the comment threads.

I realize you’re only one person – and I don’t think it should primarily be you anyway, because I like what you post a lot. You’re hilarious and you find really entertaining things. But if you could find someone to do those meaty discussion that would be sweet.

What do you want to see more of?

Baby jokes… and a focus on the social/political dealings of different secular organizations. …Like the FAC getting their radio show syndicated internationally, CFI’s social programs, how the SSA is helping gazillions of students, HAC funding the Darwin exhibit in Canada, the One School System project, CFI-O’s new initiative of working with the multifaith center, student groups doing faith panels and the outcomes… the list goes on and on. And it’s all interesting and all positive dealings with atheist organizations.

I completely disagree that you should stop the satire and the humor. Even as someone who is really really concerned (educatedly devoted, even) to the discussion of religion and atheism I think that stopping all the satire and humor would make your blog REALLY boring. But I think adding some more philosophical/discussion oriented posts would most definitely counteract the satire – because it would give theists a place to throw their voice in more regularly.

What do you never want to see?

Lindsay. hahaha I’m kidding!

The blog is great.

I agree that you could use a little more depth, as long you don’t cut back too much on the media and fun stuff.

The content of your site’s great; it’s one of my favourites.

The formatting of posts could use some minor tweaks to improve readability, though.

If you only make one change, make your post’s headings larger. Be big, be bold.

When two posts are back-to-back there’s so much clutter in between (an unstructured mess of Technorati tags, a Share This link, a popularity rating (which never seems to say anything but “1%”), an inscrutable squiggly thing (FSM? who could tell?), a Permalink and a Comments link (each with their own inscrutable icon), then, sometimes, a light grey date, then a heading (that’s lost in all this junk), then another inscrutable (FSM?) icon, Posted in (followed by random categories), a time-stamp and a name. That’s a lot of administrivia.

Exacerbating this is the fact that the stuff that follows each post (Technorati tags to Comments link) is actually closer to the following post, which makes it look like it belongs to the one below, rather than the one above. Argh.

All this is bad enough in a regular web browser, but on devices like the iPod touch or the iPhone, each post’s heading is actually the same size — or smaller than — the rest of the text (plus, it’s a link, so it’s a mid-tone colour, which makes it harder to see than the surrounding text), and it’s quite hard to tell where one post ends and the next begins. And I have 20/20 eyesight.

Last point, while I’m being well-intentioned but arrogant-sounding-designer-guy™: the masthead photo. It’s a nice, friendly, portrait, but what’s up with the dithering (all the little dots, due to the restricted colour palette)? 1994 called; they’d like their dithered GIF back. Please replace with JPEG or PNG of same.

Recap: mercilessly cull the inter-post clutter as much as you can; make headings bigger, and no dithering!

And keep up the great blog, Hemant — you rock.

Of course you can accept constructive criticism and suggestions; but speaking from experience, if you start listening to too many suggestions (and I see there are plenty already), your own vision can somehow become unclear.

These are the words I should have used when I said “it shouldn’t be you” who writes the new depthy discussiony posts.

I wouldn’t change a thing, honestly. I think your blog has the perfect balance of nice introspective stuff and snarky little jabs. I know some people get upset over the latter, but come on. Even when you say something sarcastic, it’s hardly offensive. I came here from Pharyngula because PZ was just too abrasive and outright nasty for me. He seemed to have the goal of pissing off people in mind, while you’re usually just making a witty comment. If wit and humorous insight offend people, maybe they rethink why they’re so offended.

Sorry for the little rant, but I’d hate to see this blog get watered down. I mean, you’re already super nice…any nicer and it’ll just seem a bit too sugary and unrealistic.

Oh, though one thing: Your top banner kinda sucks. Why so pixelly? There, fix that =P

I wouldn’t change a thing, honestly. I think your blog has the perfect balance of nice introspective stuff and snarky little jabs.

I agree. It’s nice to have a place to go where I don’t feel like I’m just one of the angry atheist mob. (I do think religion is silly, I do get upset with creationists interfering with educational integrity and I do think they need to be challenged often and insistently. Even laughed at occasionally. I mean, Ray Comfort and the banana thing…how could you not?)

If I want excessively strident, I can always go over to PZ’s blog, and I do. But there I feel like a visitor. Here I feel like I’m home and I like it that way. And I think the site is fine, grainy banner and all.

So keep up the good work. You’re doing great.

I’ve been a fan of this site for quite a while, and I hope you keep up the good work.

I like that you believe that Christians and Atheists need to work together. However I hope you will continue to stand up for atheists and why we believe what we believe.

I don’t mind the humor, though you might want to consider focusing more on the people who want to impose their religion on the rest of us. That way other Christians might feel more comfortable visiting.

Ideally, I’d like this blog to be a space where atheists can talk and joke about what they don’t like about religion, but at the same time, they don’t consider religion to be the great evil that must be eliminated. It can also be a space where Christians can laugh at themselves, and learn that we’re not immoral evil people.

Of course this is your blog, and I’m sure I’ll be along for the journey. 🙂

This is only one of two blogs I actively read. I really enjoy your commentary and how you keep me up-to-date on current events related to those with and without faith. So long as you keep the friendly tone and good humor, I’ll keep coming back.

I suppose any criticism I can think of would be to focus more on the nutcases (Pastor Hagee, people thinking C-14 dating is Satanic, throwing babies off buildings, etc.) than the harmless religious practices that may seem weird to us.

– Matt

I’ll still hang out here, with Linda

Awwww… Thanks, Jen!! 🙂

I also think the baby jokes are not funny. They are simply stupid and disgusting.

Otherwise, I like FA a lot, one of my personal faves. I’ve been on a trip abroad but still found time to stop by a couple times. Always lots of information, links, etc. I would like to see more in depth discussions…maybe skip the really superficial stuff.

This is one of two blogs that I read each and every day. I really don’t have any complaints. There is going to be snark, whether it’s in something you post, or from someone else in the comments-this is the internet, snark is to be expected.
As for what I’d like to see more of-more constructive criticism of atheist ideas, alongside constructive criticism of religious ideas. I thought it was great of you to comment on PZ’s post (even though I’m a big fan of his blog as well), and we atheists shouldn’t be afraid to be critical of each other. I frequently read stuff on other atheist blogs that I think crosses a line.
The reason I like this blog so much is that there seems to be a much more accpeting group of people here. You set the standard, and for the most part, you’ve attracted a group of people here that see the benefit in having a blog where we can have thoughtful conversation about that middle ground (between the secular and religious.) I think this blog is much more in line with the real world-where we have to interact respectfully with religious people on a regular basis-than most atheist blogs.

I don’t have a problem with people explaining their beliefs to us outsiders so we have a better understanding of where they are coming from (no trying to get converts, however), but I reserve the right to make fun of them or poke holes in them if they are absurd. It’s perfectly acceptable for religious people to make fun of or poke holes in absurd things that atheists believe as well. Although atheism in itself is just the idea that no gods exist, so the stupid things some of us may believe are not because we’re atheists, but just because we’re humans. Whereas many of the stupid things religious people believe are the core doctrines of their religions.

That doesn’t mean we have to be rude or mean, but many religious people will think we are being rude and mean just because there’s been that unspoken law for so long that it is not acceptable to criticize religion, at least large, established religions like Christianity. Well, um, too bad. As someone said above, if you don’t want to be laughed at, don’t believe stupid things. I can get on board with the love your neighbor stuff, but believing that a virgin had a baby or that people rise from the grave is just as crazy as scientology or the other religions that it’s acceptable to make fun of.

The part to remember is that we are talking to real people when we post here. So we shouldn’t post anything we would not say to someone face-to-face, and we shouldn’t use a tone that we would not use in person. That keeps the conversation civil, I think.

My advice:
Just keep blogging.

Keep questioning (both yourself and others) while remaining true to yourself.

Your site is generally one of three sites I commonly go to, the other being PZ’s and Richarddawkins.net. (Daylight Atheism comes in a close fourth) I like PZ’s because generally he holds no punches, and Richard’s because it can be a wild and woolly ride through the comments. I come to yours because it seems to be generally a ‘safe’ haven, and there is usually nothing wrong with being safe as long as you have good reason to be so inclined. (Though it is sometimes good to step outside the box.)

If this site should ever become a chore, just walk away. You can always walk back.

slut: “I also think the baby jokes are not funny. They are simply stupid and disgusting.”

I always thought of the baby jokes as an ironic joke on the perception of atheists as eeeeeeeeeeeeevil.

For what it’s worth, Hemant, I like the content and tone of your posts here — expressing at least 95% “friendly” atheism, by my purely offhand estimate, and about 5% snark or indignation reserved for those particularly heinous things done in the name of religion or by those hypocrites who profess their religion-based moral superiority.

Unlike some atheist-friendly (as opposed to “friendly atheist”) blogs or websites that tend to be about 95% snark (or just plain abuse) aimed at religious hypocrisy and lunacy, you tend to run a very civil ship, and I find that respectfulness and restraint extremely refreshing. (Some of the passengers here occasionally get a little bit carried away with the religion-bashing, but I don’t see that as your fault — and your example tends to keep this place from developing into Godflame Central.)

I think that, if anything, you sometimes try a little too hard to be “friendly” toward theists and theism in this respect, and give benefit of the doubt even when it is not, in my own opinion, particularly warranted — but, as I said, snark isn’t at all hard to find elsewhere, so this means that your blog isn’t just going along with the rest of the atheist or anti-theist flow, but pursues its own independent and reason-driven course. Kudos to you for having that integrity, and for having the pleasant disposition to do things in a positive manner instead of a negative one.

~David D.G.