--- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: <snip> > Robin sashayed into this saloon (FFL) carrying a sack > of his old movies with him. He assumed he was speaking > to an audience who knew all of his old exploits and > would therefore use the past to "weight" anything he > said in the present. He expected them to cut him breaks > they might not cut anyone else, because he, after all, > was the famous Robin Woodrow
Woodsworth. Carlsen, the guy who may > or may not have been enlightened in the past and who > stood up to Maharishi. And Werner Erhardt. And others. > He "confronted" them all. And so he expected to confront > us. Some fell for it, some didn't. > > Try to imagine reading the things he wrote here if you > *hadn't* been cutting him all those breaks. The problem with your take here, Barry, is that you actually read *almost nothing* of what Robin wrote. You repeatedly boasted about that as if it was some kind of sign of virtue or maturity. You can't even get his name right. The *arrogance* of your making an attempt to sum up his tenure here, when you yourself couldn't be bothered to participate in it beyond spitting at him, is just beyond belief. Nothing you say about it is even relevant, let alone insightful. Why don't we try to imagine instead a dialogue between Robin and Barry in which Barry had voiced his impressions (I use the term loosely; "imaginings" is more like it), Robin had responded, and Barry had been able to screw up the courage to *engage* with Robin? For those of us who know Barry, of course, this is literally impossible to imagine. Such an engagement could not have taken place. Barry no longer engages in anything in which there's a chance that his predetermined viewpoint might not triumph.
