Topic: Sceptical activism! - the International League of Skeptics HQ

[Ole Eivind]

[modbreak=Beleth]

Since traffic has died down for the International League of Skeptics child forum here at SGU, all the posts pertaining to the ILS have been rolled into the Skep/Sci board.

To find them, just do a search for the string "ILS:" in the subject line.

Meanwhile, the permanent home for the ILS is:
http://www.internationalleagueofskeptics.com/

and their forum is:
http://www.internationalleagueofskeptics.com/forum/

[/modbreak]

Introduction
The International League of Skeptics (ILS) is a loose group of people on this forum, who are interested in working together to make skeptical videos. The videos will be uploaded to youtube, on our channel.

How it works
In this thread we'll discuss the ILS in general and suggest new projects. If enough people support an idea for a project, we'll do it. If there are ongoing projects, it'll be added to the list of upcoming projects. How many ongoing projects we can have simultaneously depends on how many people we have working on them.

When a project is begun, a new thread for that project is created and will be linked to in this post under ongoing projects. Ongoing project threads, as well as this one, will be stickied.

MisterMarc nicely summed up what the process might look like: "pick a video....brainstorm ideas/tasks.....volunteer for pre-prod tasks....write/research rebuttals.....volunteer for production tasks....critique/edit/revise.....post to public.....pimp the hell out of it."

Who can join / how can you help
Anyone can join. There are no requirements on skills or knowledge you must have. Neither do you have to commit yourself to every (or any) projects. If you don't have any technical skills you can help by giving feedback, ideas and suggestions. Putting the video together is only part of the process, we also need people to come up with the content.

Of course we do need people with certain skills and equipment. Video editors and graphic artists will certainly be needed, as will people with microphones of good enough quality. What else we need will vary depending on the project, but video cameras and digital cameras can come in handy.

Ongoing projects
Jenny McCarthy's anti-vaccination claims
ILS Website
Steve's wikipedia article

Upcoming projects
SGU wikipedia article (SGU 5x5 and panel members sections)

Completed projects
Rebecca's wikipedia article

Links
ILS website
Youtube channel
Facebook Group
Douchebag 20-somethings for Prop 8 - "NO on prop H8" video development thread (Not an ILS project, but sort of an ancestor)

Original post:

Seeing how much we've done in the last two days in this thread I (and some of the people I talked to on IRC) thought that it could be an idea to have more of these kinds of projects. I think it's a great idea, we can acheive pretty cool things when so many of us are working together.

What do you guys think? Anyone interested? We of course wouldn't all have to work on every single vid, so saying you're interested wouldn't bind you to spending all you time on a project you weren't into.

I could create a youtube account for us, where we could post videos we produce. The "vote no on proposition hate" video could be our first.

If so, what should we call ourselves?

I suggest International league of skeptics (leagueofskeptics is available as a youtube username) any other suggestions?

Or am I just being lame here? 

[Ido]

First, you're not lame. Now, I can't really contribute in any way, partly because I don't have much time, and for one more reason you already know. Anyway, ILS sounds cool.

[DK]

Do we get a badge or a club ring with ILS on it?

I think it's a good idea if we pick out the right stuff. Are you thinking more overdubs, or creating vids?

Be warned, I have no technical knowhow whatsoever.

[Ole Eivind]

Do we get a badge or a club ring with ILS on it?

We could cafépress some, I guess. 

I think it's a good idea if we pick out the right stuff. Are you thinking more overdubs, or creating vids?

Be warned, I have no technical knowhow whatsoever.

Right now I'm not having any specific plans. It could be anything. People could come with suggestions, and if others were interested they'd do it. If we're many we could have multiple projects going simultaniously. I don't think we should have a dictator of any kind.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

If it's going to be political, you probably shouldn't use the word "skeptic" in the group's title.  While I totally agree with your politics on this one -- it is possible for someone to be a skeptic and also be a big-ol' homophobic bigot.  I don't think this is purely "skeptical" activity.

Oh, wait!  I got it... if it's called "Skeptics for a Just Society" or something along those lines, then it advertises that the people who are doing it are skeptics (which is good) but also points out that the goals of the group go beyond simple skepticism (which is also good).

[Faithless Bob]

Oh, wait!  I got it... if it's called "Skeptics for a Just Society" or something along those lines, then it advertises that the people who are doing it are skeptics (which is good) but also points out that the goals of the group go beyond simple skepticism (which is also good).

I like this name. It puts justice front and center, which is what this is really about. But we should probably see how the first vid flies before cranking out a bunch more.

[Ole Eivind]

If it's going to be political, you probably shouldn't use the word "skeptic" in the group's title.  While I totally agree with your politics on this one -- it is possible for someone to be a skeptic and also be a big-ol' homophobic bigot.  I don't think this is purely "skeptical" activity.

I wholeheartedly agree. But I was thinking we would mainly make sceptical vids, not only political ones (if any). Except for certian things like freedom of speech and equal rights, our political opinions vary greatly.

Oh, wait!  I got it... if it's called "Skeptics for a Just Society" or something along those lines, then it advertises that the people who are doing it are skeptics (which is good) but also points out that the goals of the group go beyond simple skepticism (which is also good).

That is indeed a great name! Should we maybe make two groups, one for general scepticsim and one more political? Will it seem weird for the "Skeptics for a just society" to debunk homeopathy for example?

[Kwisatz Haderach]

If it's going to be political, you probably shouldn't use the word "skeptic" in the group's title.  While I totally agree with your politics on this one -- it is possible for someone to be a skeptic and also be a big-ol' homophobic bigot.  I don't think this is purely "skeptical" activity.

I wholeheartedly agree. But I was thinking we would mainly make sceptical vids, not only political ones (if any). Except for certian things like freedom of speech and equal rights, our political opinions vary greatly.

Oh, wait!  I got it... if it's called "Skeptics for a Just Society" or something along those lines, then it advertises that the people who are doing it are skeptics (which is good) but also points out that the goals of the group go beyond simple skepticism (which is also good).

That is indeed a great name! Should we maybe make two groups, one for general scepticsim and one more political? Will it seem weird for the "Skeptics for a just society" to debunk homeopathy for example?

It could be a single logo, but change the name from "Skeptic for a Just Society" to "Skeptics for Critical Thinking" (or something like that) depending on the subject matter of the video.

[Faithless Bob]

Should we maybe make two groups, one for general scepticsim and one more political? Will it seem weird for the "Skeptics for a just society" to debunk homeopathy for example?

It's not inherently weird, because pushing homeopathy rips people off, which is unjust. But I do see your point that it would be good to have a non-political organization. In fact, I would prefer a non-political organization to a political one, which wouldn't preclude us from weighing in on political issues when we are in agreement about them. In any case, having an organization that is separate from SGU would serve as a protection for SGU against any legal claims that could potentially be made against our collective undertakings.

[DK]

Should we maybe make two groups, one for general scepticsim and one more political? Will it seem weird for the "Skeptics for a just society" to debunk homeopathy for example?

It's not inherently weird, because pushing homeopathy rips people off, which is unjust. But I do see your point that it would be good to have a non-political organization. In fact, I would prefer a non-political organization to a political one, which wouldn't preclude us from weighing in on political issues when we are in agreement about them. In any case, having an organization that is separate from SGU would serve as a protection for SGU against any legal claims that could potentially be made against our collective undertakings.

Well, homeopathy actually kills people as well when governments are suporting it over medicine. (South Africa, I'm looking at you!) When people are making bad choices for political reasons, when we know the science is against it, then we should go after them. As long as we're even handed in the approach, then we can't be accused of political bias.

[Faithless Bob]

Should we maybe make two groups, one for general scepticsim and one more political? Will it seem weird for the "Skeptics for a just society" to debunk homeopathy for example?

It's not inherently weird, because pushing homeopathy rips people off, which is unjust. But I do see your point that it would be good to have a non-political organization. In fact, I would prefer a non-political organization to a political one, which wouldn't preclude us from weighing in on political issues when we are in agreement about them. In any case, having an organization that is separate from SGU would serve as a protection for SGU against any legal claims that could potentially be made against our collective undertakings.

Well, homeopathy actually kills people as well when governments are suporting it over medicine. (South Africa, I'm looking at you!) When people are making bad choices for political reasons, when we know the science is against it, then we should go after them. As long as we're even handed in the approach, then we can't be accused of political bias.

Agreed. And I think it behooves us to act conservatively in all cases and not go hunting for things to do videos about just to get attention. We don't want to [slippery slope]turn into PETA here[/slippery slope].

[Ole Eivind]

It could be a single logo, but change the name from "Skeptic for a Just Society" to "Skeptics for Critical Thinking" (or something like that) depending on the subject matter of the video.

Not a bad idea.

I'll wait for more name suggestions, then we can have a vote.

Should we maybe make two groups, one for general scepticsim and one more political? Will it seem weird for the "Skeptics for a just society" to debunk homeopathy for example?

It's not inherently weird, because pushing homeopathy rips people off, which is unjust. But I do see your point that it would be good to have a non-political organization. In fact, I would prefer a non-political organization to a political one, which wouldn't preclude us from weighing in on political issues when we are in agreement about them. In any case, having an organization that is separate from SGU would serve as a protection for SGU against any legal claims that could potentially be made against our collective undertakings.

Well, homeopathy actually kills people as well when governments are suporting it over medicine. (South Africa, I'm looking at you!) When people are making bad choices for political reasons, when we know the science is against it, then we should go after them. As long as we're even handed in the approach, then we can't be accused of political bias.

My concern is that if we have several purely sceptical vids, and then a few political ones, we'll still send a message that the political topics are in fact sceptical topics, even if we have a suiting name. Maybe I'm just overthinking it.

[Faithless Bob]

It could be a single logo, but change the name from "Skeptic for a Just Society" to "Skeptics for Critical Thinking" (or something like that) depending on the subject matter of the video.

Not a bad idea.

I'll wait for more name suggestions, then we can have a vote.

Should we maybe make two groups, one for general scepticsim and one more political? Will it seem weird for the "Skeptics for a just society" to debunk homeopathy for example?

It's not inherently weird, because pushing homeopathy rips people off, which is unjust. But I do see your point that it would be good to have a non-political organization. In fact, I would prefer a non-political organization to a political one, which wouldn't preclude us from weighing in on political issues when we are in agreement about them. In any case, having an organization that is separate from SGU would serve as a protection for SGU against any legal claims that could potentially be made against our collective undertakings.

Well, homeopathy actually kills people as well when governments are suporting it over medicine. (South Africa, I'm looking at you!) When people are making bad choices for political reasons, when we know the science is against it, then we should go after them. As long as we're even handed in the approach, then we can't be accused of political bias.

My concern is that if we have several purely sceptical vids, and then a few political ones, we'll still send a message that the political topics are in fact sceptical topics, even if we have a suiting name. Maybe I'm just overthinking it.

This is a valid concern, but I think the best solution to it is to make sure we don't take on any political issue unless there is an obvious demand that we bring skepticism to it. We would, in essence, have to raise the bar for what we would consider fair game.

[Ole Eivind]

This is a valid concern, but I think the best solution to it is to make sure we don't take on any political issue unless there is an obvious demand that we bring skepticism to it. We would, in essence, have to raise the bar for what we would consider fair game.

I agree. I won't even touch most political issues! I think it's best to stick to skeptical topics.

[Neutral Milk]

So does the Prop 8 video fit that standard?

We could put a disclaimer in the video description "normally we wouldn't take on Political issues, but this one was too good to pass up!"