dear Laughing Checker, someone told me that once a student mentioned to the teacher that some people thought his teaching was brain washing. He replied, and here I'm paraphrasing: some brains needs washing. So dear Laughing Checker, since cavorting is a celestial experience for me, I don't think it is MY brain that needs washing with regards to that. Et tu Brute? As for your ordinary lay meditators, are they related to Emily's laywomen by any chance?!
________________________________ From: laughinggull108 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 8:52 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Cliff Notes Robin [previously Re: Men only] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > dear Laughing One Jelly Bean please do not be hurt that Ravi has totally > forgotten the plot line of your Garden of Eden saga in which Xeno was NOT the > one with whom I was cavorting in the bushes. Now hold on there just a daggone minute Missy Dirty Mind! 'Cavorting' in the bushes? Where do you come up with these ideas? Let's look at it again, this time with a pure mind: It had been a really long, long time since you had been checked (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), and seeker Steve, being the 'exceptional' checker that he is (of course, I wouldn't know from personal experience) was more than willing to oblige. The bushes along the river provided the privacy needed, and the springy patches of moss provided comfortable seats. However, the first attempt was interrupted (commonly referred to as checkus interruptus*) when seeker Xeno stumbled upon yours truly selling water by the river. As a result, seeker Steve was very anxious to get back at it because, being the 'exceptional' checker that he is, knows that coming out of a checking session too quickly and without completion can lead to a condition commonly referred to as Krishna butterballs* for the checker and lackus fulfillmentitus* for the checkee. (It's also worth noting that he tries never to end a checking prematurely.) However, nature was supportive in the end and both of you were able to have a nice, long uninterrupted checking in which seeker Steve, I guess one could say, checked your brains out. (And he chose to stay and meditate with you rather than quietly leave the bushes.) It is easy? You experienced how easy it is? Now this is how we will meditate morning and evening... *these are sacred terms learned only on a qualified TTC, and are not available for use by ordinary lay meditators. Raviji, like jelly beans, also comes in many flavors, including cinnamon. > Obviously the San Diego sun and southern CA ambiance has addled his brain, > which he, meaning Ravi of course, doesn't even like us to talk about! His > brain I mean. Neuroscience and all that bullocks. Anyway, more evidence > of this addling is his being stuck in the past with talk of psychological > rape and inauthenticity. Dear LOJB, isn't that just so so LAST year?! And > all the effing this and effing that. One is sorely tempted to urge Nephew > to get some new material for gosh sakes! It's a new year. Even in Western > astrology. Even in the Chinese system. It's a new season. It's almost a > new month. Get with the new program, Newphew! Sorry couldn't resist that > lame pun smiley faces all around. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Ravi Chivukula <chivukula.ravi@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 11:20 PM > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Cliff Notes Robin [previously Re: Men only] > > >  > "Everyone on this forum is just text on a screen to me." > > Thank you Guru Xeno - this is what I like about you. You are at least honest > - and admit you are a cold-hearted, emotionless, distant, dead man basically, > of dead beliefs, of inane platitudes - having sexual orgies in your mind with > words, even your hard-ons while you are having sex with words might be just a > word in your mind called "hard-on". It really reflects in your writing - > everytime I read you it's astonishing, it's as if you are a zombie. And then > equally hilarious is when I see someone like Share react to you - it's as if > she actually had sex with you and you made her come. I'm always tempted to > ask you and Share to take your orgies offline. > > Hail to Guru Zombie Xeno !!! > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <anartaxius@...> > wrote: > > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote: > > > >> Ok, that was silly. I went to your link and typed in some text. I made it > >> longer and played with the percentage to keep or edit. All it did was > >> randomly leave in or take out stuff. I don't get why you need a program to > >> do this. Many of us do it naturally by the way we read, which is often > >> sloppy or, because of pre-conceived notions about things, we fail to take > >> in half of what anyone is actually saying. All of us are text compactors > >> already and I don't think it benefits us all that much. I don't require a > >> computer to do it FOR me! > > > > > This kind of software is designed to produce 'executive summaries', and well > designed programs do not use random selection. However the sample of Robin's > was huge, and the compression was to about 5% which is really far too much. > Normally you get reasonable results with 25% to 50% compression. Some manual > editing might be needed. The software works better if the original document > has a well defined structure. > > > >'HOW IT WORKS' > > > >'After text is placed on the page, the web app calculates the frequency of > >each word in the passage. Then, a score is calculated for each sentence > >based on the frequency count associated with the words it contains. The most > >important sentence is deemed to be the sentence with the highest frequency > >count.' > > > >'Obviously, human readers may disagree with this automated approach to text > >summarization. Automated text summarization works best on expository text > >such as textbooks and reference material (non-fiction). The results can be > >skewed when a passage has only a few sentences. Text Compactor is not > >recommended for use with fiction (i.e., stories about imaginary people, > >places, events).' > > > >As the result with that post was not particularly good, I conclude Robin and > >his exposition is the result of an imaginary person writing about imaginary > >places and events, though Ann and Curtis seem reasonably real. But of course > >I can't be sure. Everyone on this forum is just text on a screen to me. > > > > >
