You know Judy, Vajra boy always has the habit of flubbing when things are going well for him. Maybe deep inside he has a propensity for self-goal or auto goal as they say in latin america.
Uncle Tantra the bumble boy hasn't come to his rescue yet. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote > > > > Well Robin - that's a good start, for you given you're totally > > > > still hiding behind a false email address! Is that legal on > > > > Yahoo!.com? > > Yes, I was aware of that, but it is not his actual email address > > nonetheless. Therefore it is impossible to contact him and > > therefore it is impossible to answer offlist questions. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > Right. Vaj was aware that Yahoo provides the no_reply > email address. That's why he wondered aloud if it was > "legal" on Yahoo (see above). > > There are only two possibilities here. > > One is that Vaj had somehow not noticed, in all the > years he's been on FFL, that many people have the > no_reply address, and mistakenly thought it was one > Robin had dreamed up and was probably using in > contravention of Yahoo's rules. If that's the case, > he's now pretending to have known all along because > he doesn't want to look stupid. > > The other possibility is that he knew perfectly well > what the situation was and was hoping he could mislead > readers to think Robin had dreamed up the no_reply > address and was using it in contravention of Yahoo's > rules. > > Either he was being deliberately deceptive in the > original post, or he's being deliberately deceptive > now. The only way he could possibly have honestly > speculated that the address was illegal is if he > was unaware that it was provided by Yahoo. And if he > *was* aware of this, as he now claims, then his > speculation about its illegality was dishonest. > > Readers can make up their own minds about which was > the attempted deception. It isn't possible for both > of his posts to have been honest. > > I'm going with the more malicious attempt, to > mislead readers to think Robin was breaking Yahoo's > rules, because it's so vastly unlikely he didn't > know the address was provided by Yahoo. > > Liars so often convict themselves out of their own > mouths. This is a classic example. It's a relatively > trivial lie, but so revealing because it was so > unnecessary and so stupid. Chronic liars never expect > to be caught, and when they are, they typically > think they can cover it up, but in most cases the > attempted coverup just makes it worse, as it does here. > > Let's recall what Vaj declared two days ago: > > "There are people on this list (often the liars themselves) > who call people liars time after time (as if repeating lies > about others somehow makes it true) so you do tend to get > used to such false accusations. If you actually know the > truth behind the matter, after a while you just roll your > eyes at the liars calling you liars. I've had to listen to > it, so has Curtis, so has Barry, Sal and many others. For > me it merely casts a dark shadow on the validity of the > person making the false claims and the dark side of > meditation-induced pathology. Certain folks are screaming > out loud examples of such pathology like Ravi, while others > are more sinister and calculating." > > In light of Vaj's current self-exposure as a liar, the > above is a serious contender to challenge Barry's long- > held title of Master of Inadvertent Irony. >
