--- In [email protected], "Joe" <geezerfreak@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Steve. I kind of come and go here depending on whether anything
of interest to me is being discussed or not.
>
> For quite some time, I threw insults here with the best (or worst) of
them. Last year, at some point during a particularly heated exchange
that I was reading, but not participating in, it just hit me how
predictable and boring much of this had become. I stopped throwing the
bombs, and apologized to a few here (including Judy) for having done so.
I guess you used to be a real nemisis of Richard. I remember that. I
say remember because I never really followed it. Makes sense to me to
not invest in that exchange.
I stopped reading WillyTex's posts (other than to occasionally see them
in other people's posts) since I had become bored with imitating his
routine in posts back to him.
>
> Since then I've tried to keep make my comments on a more civil way,
but I'm sure I've strayed over the line here and there.
>
> It's too bad that one of the best writers here, Curtis, no longer
posts. Personally I'm happy that Barry decided to return. I find many of
his posts highly thought provoking. FFL would be a far less interesting
place without him IMO. If that makes me "spineless" so be it. Those who
really know me know different.
I've always enjoyed Barry's posts. Either I've changed or he's changed
or some of both. But the relationship is strained. Not sure if/when it
might get back to a normal.
> Why do I check in on FFL at all, when I left the movement so many
years ago? It's probably for the same reason that many keep up with the
activities at schools they attended or friends they made in their
younger years. In my case, I was 100% committed to MMY and the TMO for a
period of around 8 years or so while I was in my 20s. Seems only natural
to me that I would maintain an interest in the activities of a group
that I had been so involved with for so long during my formative years.
Not to mention that said group has gotten even more cultish than it was
when I was around, and that's saying something.
Sounds like a lot of us.
> I mean, who cannot resist gawking at the rise and fall of rajaism and
much of other wacky stuff that the TMO and/or MMY has fostered over the
years?
Right it just took off on those weird tangents.
> Having said that, I still do TM in the mornings and find it pleasing.
I thank MMY for that and a few other things as well.
>
> --- In [email protected], "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> >
> >
> > Joe, let me just say, that it's nice to have you on board. People
like
> > me stay no matter what. And that's probably not a strength, but a
> > symptom of addictive tendencies I tend to display. But I observe
that
> > others will come to the conclusion, depending on different
> > circumstances, "who needs this shit". But I hope you'll stay around.
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <geezerfreak@> wrote:
> > >
> > > So you're saying I'm "spineless" for not wanting to jumping into
the
> > pit with you two.
> > >
> > > Gee, that's kind of....mean. I guess you know that.
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" jstein@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <geezerfreak@>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > OK,it's good that you acknowledge that. ("For the record"
> > > > > and all.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Do I want to get in the middle of the Judy/Barry wars?
> > > > > Thanks for the invite, but no, I'll pass on that.
> > > >
> > > > Sheesh. You can't even stiffen your spine enough to say,
> > > > "Well, one difference is that he refuses to acknowledge
> > > > ever being mean or intolerant, even on occasion":
> > > >
> > > > [Steve:]
> > > > And what about basic courtesy or tolerance of other people's
> > > > opinions? Is it your objective to poison the site with plain
> > > > old meanness?
> > > >
> > > > [Barry:]
> > > > Please give explicit examples. My bet is that you can't.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's a direct quote from his post, just for the record.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <geezerfreak@>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But Judy, I seem to recall your very recently calling my
> > > > > > > own writings "idiocy"....you've renamed Sal "Stupid Sal"
> > > > > > > in addition to untold numbers of stones thrown in Barry
> > > > > > > and Curtis' direction.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I hope you're not trying to imply that you haven't done
> > > > > > > the same thing you accuse Barry of doing....that is, being
> > > > > > > mean and unpleasant on occasion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (Says Joe, defending Barry again.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Where did you see me implying that I was never mean
> > > > > > or unpleasant?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now, can you think of any significant differences
> > > > > > between what I do and what Barry does?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend"
<jstein@>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "whynotnow7"
> > <whynotnow7@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Agreed. Turq has been an unremitting jerk to many on
here
> > > > > > > > > for awhile; insulting and intolerant. People grow
tired of
> > > > > > > > > it and this is the result. It would be the same if any
of
> > > > > > > > > us acted that way. Has nothing at all to do with TM or
> > > > > > > > > whether or not the gunas act invisibly or whether or
not
> > > > > > > > > Maharishi is enlightened. Turq is just being a mean
jerk
> > > > > > > > > and this is the result. What did he expect, accolades?
:-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The proof that it's Barry's exceedingly unpleasant
behavior,
> > > > > > > > rather than his negative views of TM, that attracts so
much
> > > > > > > > criticism is that there are many others here who express
> > > > > > > > equally negative views of TM who don't get criticized to
> > > > > > > > anywhere near the extent he does, if at all. They're
able
> > > > > > > > to express their views without poisonous insults and
mean
> > > > > > > > putdowns of those who hold different opinions.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend"
> > <jstein@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], turquoiseb
> > <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > > > > > > > > And what about basic courtesy or tolerance of
other
> > people's
> > > > > > > > > > > > opinions? Is it your objective to poison the
site
> > with plain
> > > > > > > > > > > > old meanness?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Please give explicit examples. My bet is that you
> > can't.
> > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that the majority of "lack of
> > tolerance"
> > > > > > > > > > > shown on this forum lately has been aimed
primarily at
> > > > > > > > > > > those who don't buy the TM bullsh...uh...I mean
Party
> > Line.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > He can't really believe this, can he? He can't
possibly
> > > > > > > > > > be unaware of his unrelieved poisonous meanness
toward
> > > > > > > > > > those he doesn't like or doesn't agree with, can he?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > And he can't really believe, in his heart of hearts,
> > that
> > > > > > > > > > others' lack of tolerance for him is for his views
on TM
> > > > > > > > > > rather than *for him* and his arrogant, rude 'tude.
Can
> > > > > > > > > > he? How can he possibly be so lacking in
self-awareness?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > As to examples, we can start with some of the most
> > recent,
> > > > > > > > > > the collection of a dozen or so posts nastily
mocking
> > > > > > > > > > determinists. (Which are quite amusing since he
doesn't
> > > > > > > > > > understand what he's attempting to mock and just
ends up
> > > > > > > > > > making a complete idiot of himself.)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Barry: It isn't your views on TM. It's you, dude.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
