Hi, my point was not that I find some subjects less offensive than others. It 
is that you are a little fast with that trigger finger when anyone other than 
the "known" assholes acts out of line. Please reconsider that perspective, and 
you'll probably see where I am coming from. 

--- In [email protected], "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Jim, you're right.  I have to learn that others can read the same things
> I do and come to completely different conclusions.  To me, making
> insinuations about a person sex life, or imply sexual perversions would
> be an area we would want to stay away from for various reasons, not the
> least of which is that some people are pretty transparant about their
> real identities.  And because of that, you would think that there would
> be an unspoken understanding that we don't tread in these areas for
> gratuitous venting.
> 
> But as is often the case, if it's not affecting "me", then we are less
> concerned about it.
> 
> But obviously that is not a view shared by many others.  And I would not
> hesitate to take a stand against them.
> --- In [email protected], "futur.musik" <futur.musik@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Steve, I didn't begin to cast my vitriol in anyone's direction on
> here until it became clear to me they have zero to contribute, except
> shutting down people's ideas, and being nasty. With Curtis, I like
> Curtis - I am sometimes pointed about my impressions of him. So what? I
> basically respect him.
> >
> > If it turns out that Ravi is out to injure our reputations and does
> this sort of thing regularly, I wont be happy about it, but that is
> quite a leap from here. So far, all I see is him messing around with you
> and others, and creating a disturbance, and being very upfront about it.
> >
> > He doesn't even begin to rise to the level of stupidity and plain
> obnoxiousness as a couple of others here.
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Do I understand this right Jim? You who are the most vitriolic in
> your
> > > comments to Barry, Vaj, and to a lessor extent Curtis, now come in
> with
> > > some philosophical justification of why we don't need to call out BS
> and
> > > dishonesty when and where we see it. I call it hypocrisy.
> > > Yea, it's uncomfortable to have to call out people we like when they
> > > have stepped far out of bounds, but when we don't it's pretty
> obvious,
> > > and doesn't reflect too well on us.
> > > --- In [email protected], "futur.musik" <futur.musik@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Susan, One thing I like to watch on FFL is context. I don't
> know if
> > > you remember even a year ago or less, when one or two of the folks
> here
> > > would write daily screeds against whole groups of people, a low
> level
> > > toxicity on a daily basis - more politically correct certainly, but
> not
> > > dissimilar to having a racist continually rant against black people.
> > > >
> > > > It became the norm. Most of us just laughed it off. Sometimes the
> > > attacks got very nasty, and were always distorted, but almost no one
> > > noticed. This became daily life on FFL. We were used to it.
> > > >
> > > > Then several months ago, a new group of posters showed up and, lo
> and
> > > behold, they are fiercely challenging what has become the status quo
> > > here. Just by showing up they have created an environment closer to
> what
> > > was intended when FFL started; the will to discover, vs. believe.
> > > >
> > > > I for one find it refreshing that it is once again possible to
> talk
> > > about anything at all on here, without having long winded tracts of
> BS
> > > stinking up the place on a daily basis. I don't agree with
> everything
> > > that is said here, but at least now there is variety and vitality.
> > > >
> > > > As for anything said about Curtis, he isn't shy about his opinions
> and
> > > can take care of himself I am sure. Please correct me on that if I
> am
> > > wrong Curtis, though I will cringe if you do...
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "Susan" wayback71@ wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues"
> > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues"
> > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Wow, nothing like hearing an excellent reputation that my
> ass
> > > > > > > > now has to try to live up to! Thanks Marek!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Untethered" is such an excellent word. I think the egging
> on
> > > > > > > > has to do with the fact that some of the new posters
> figured
> > > > > > > > out the social system. If you throw mud at Barry and Vaj
> and
> > > > > > > > myself, certain people will have your back.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Says Curtis, parroting one of Barry's more ridiculous
> > > > > > > excuses, a variant of the one he borrowed yesterday.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wow, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt with that
> reason.
> > > Then you genuinely support Ravi lying about why I left the movement
> on a
> > > public forum, his constant use of a slur against people with mental
> > > disabilities, and and trollish offensive language toward me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey Judy, you know that I like reading you and respect your
> honesty
> > > and common sense. I can't figure out what has been going on with you
> > > and your willingness to overlook what just happened with Ravi, and
> what
> > > has been happening with him. You may dislike Curtis, but come
> on......
> > > Ravi is crossing so many lines here. The only thing I can think of
> is
> > > that you got sucked in to a battle you would normally see through.
> You
> > > can like Ravi all you want, and still call him on things like using
> > > "retard," gratuitous insults, and spreading rumors about Curtis.
> > > Frankly, you and the other fans of Ravi are all feeding into his
> drama -
> > > and I don't see that as a kindness to him. And more important, of
> > > course, it is really lying about someone else's reputation,
> something I
> > > know you would not stand for if Curtis were not the victim..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your double standards goes so much deeper than I imagined.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It was a simple
> > > > > > > > social formula that has shielded some posters from a more
> > > > > > > > unanimous group, WTF? In this particular context I think
> > > > > > > > there is a callus
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (callous, adj.; callus, noun) (This correction is provided
> > > > > > > so Curtis can make a show of thanking me for it while
> > > > > > > pointedly ignoring the rest of what I said.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As always I appreciate these corrections that my robots failed
> me
> > > on. The last time it was the only thing worth commenting on in your
> > > post and it caused such a fuss. The exact one I was trying to avoid
> by
> > > not responding to your taunts in that post.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And unlike Ravi (that is a long A right?) I have a serious
> > > commitment to the integrity of my point of view on the movement
> > > following my participation in it. Unlike you ,whose strongest
> > > connection with the movement is your years of Internet arguments
> about
> > > it, I have a deep history working in the organization and those are
> the
> > > experiences I bring to bear as my creditability when I raise my new
> POV.
> > > So although anyone here may know from where Ravi is pulling this lie
> > > (hint, lack of sun) I don't want to hear this on the next MUM
> student
> > > Youtube from Bobby Roth.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So it matters, and you know it matters to me, but you have
> chosen
> > > your battles. OK, that's how it rolls here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But please don't expect me to view your support for his
> behavior
> > > to be anything less than direct hypocrisy in the exact area you and
> > > others give me the most shit about. So we can now put to rest any
> > > version of your routine about me calling Barry out, right? You are a
> > > fraud and a poseur of virtue, contrived by malevolent convenience.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > disregard for the welfare of this person being played as a
> > > > > > > > pawn. There is something unseemly going on in this
> dynamic,
> > > > > > > > and I appreciate your speaking up.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Do you really not understand that Ravi has actual problems
> > > > > > > that shouldn't be speculated about on the Internet like he
> > > > > > > is our private intellectual toy?"--Curtis to Robin, awhile
> > > > > > > back
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I haven't even begun to speculate on Ravi's situation in
> detail
> > > Judy, I've been pulling all my punches as you well know. But the
> > > situation I am dealing with is of such an obvious nature, nothing
> needs
> > > to be said between me and anyone without your personal agenda.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But I have no reason to pull my punches with you so here goes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ravi's lie about why I left the movement was reframed as a
> "tweek"
> > > by you because you wouldn't mind if such an outspoken critic of all
> > > things Maharishi was plagued by an internet rumor as having been
> > > expelled against his will for immoral conduct. You let it slide in a
> > > demonstration of Carl Rovian tactics against people you disagree
> with.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So now we both have felt these shoes on both feet haven't we
> Judy.
> > > Perhaps now you can understand what I mean when I say I pick my
> battles
> > > here. And you can drop the pretense that you are acting differently
> > > here, running around correcting people for what are obvious, hurtful
> > > lies in the context of obnoxious mean-spirited trolling.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't care if you correct his behavior or not, or why you
> don't.
> > > I don't need you to help him make a fool of himself here. But I
> would
> > > appreciate your understanding where I am coming from a little better
> and
> > > not giving me shit for doing exactly what you are doing here,
> letting
> > > people fight their own battles, and dropping in when you feel like
> > > something interests you or you want to give someone a "tweek".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just stop being such a F'ing hypocrite about it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Si capisce?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have been fascinated by how far people can stretch their
> oft
> > > quoted principles to encourage the enemy of their enemy. It is
> > > revealing many trollish agendas here. But with kind words from some
> > > posters here, like yourself, I feel as if there is another option
> for
> > > those who value it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks man.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "marekreavis"
> > > <reavismarek@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It's not my habit, at least for the last year or so, to
> > > interject my opinion into an ongoing thread, but following FFL for
> the
> > > last month or two, it's amazed me to observe the willingness of some
> > > folks here to glorify and encourage what, in my opinion and
> experience,
> > > appears to be some very untethered behavior by some of the more
> recent
> > > and prolific posters.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And even more inexplicably, to gang up on Curtis, for
> > > attempting, in a straightforward yet still compassionate way, to
> engage
> > > in a reasonable exchange with, and criticism of, those individuals.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > For what it's worth, in my estimation Curtis is a true,
> > > shining example of what I'd always hoped the TM movement to produce.
> > > There's certainly no one on this board from whom I've learned more.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Curtis certainly doesn't need any endorsement from me,
> but I
> > > felt compelled to write, regardless.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to