Ravi, A little advice mano a mano. Stick with posting animal videos. That's more inline with your core competency.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula <chivukula.ravi@...> wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 9:13 PM, seventhray27 steve.sundur@...wrote: > > > ** > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Carol" jchwelch@ wrote: > > > > > > I'm only a lurker in this dialog. I haven't read all the exchanges that > > have gone on in the latest conflict. Until these last few posts, I knew > > next to nothing about what you have expounded here Judy. Thanks for filling > > in some history for me. I don't know if I will go back and read all of the > > recent conflict or the prior history, but at least I have a place to start > > if I decide to. > > > > Think twice about this Carol. Going back and reading the raw feed on your > > own could be dangerous. You may arrive at a conclusion that could be a > > variance with what you have been spoon fed here. Evidently Judy was right > > about John Knapp, so it might be safer just to go with assumption that's > > she's right here, rather than putting in the fifteen to twenty minutes of > > examining the posts from a few days ago that might allow you to form your > > own opinion. They are pretty easy to find. But there is that risk of > > having to bring to bear your own analytical skills rather than rely on > > those of others. > > > > How hilarious is your response oh seventhray - there is no evidence of > anyone "spoonfeeding" her, if you read her message you can clearly see that > she's not passing any definitive judgement - merely stating her opinion > based on Judy's take on Knapp - are you fucking dumb, read her line below - > "Could she (Judy) be right again?" > > You do not show any analytical skills let alone basic comprehension - what > a hypocrite you are to question her analytical skills, clueless, pathetic > LOL.. > > I question you once again - do you think your frivolous, careless, reactive > posts demand an equal footing with posters like Emily or in this case Carol? > > > > > > > > > > > Reading the bit I have as I have lurked, the dialog is all too familiar > > within the anti-cult circles I've had brushes with. Projection. > > Sidestepping accountability for one's words. Speculating of other people's > > motives. > > > > > > As I've read, I've not been sure who to believe and wondered why I even > > care. I thought how I sometimes long for innocence and wish to be an > > ostrich...as trite and childish as that may sound. > > > > > > I wrote some thoughts earlier after reading Judy's initial post today, > > trying to work through some of the muddle in my own head as I've read bits > > of this recent conflict. > > > > > > In writing those thoughts, I wondered why am I muddled? Why does this > > stuff even matter to me? Should I state anything publicly? Will I sound > > foolish? What if I do sound foolish, what difference does it really make? > > Has some of the dialog 'triggered' my own stuff that I am still working > > through after my involvement in a 'cult' and certain anti-cult 'cults?' > > > > > > I questioned my own biases and fairness. Do I judge other's motives? How > > much do I project? How much do my biases play into reading others? Like > > others, my own experiences have caused me to be less trusting of others; I > > already had been well trained to not trust my self and was gaining much > > ground in that area until the Knapp crap. I have picked up many of those > > pieces, but reading this recent dialog brought some of that stuff up again. > > > > > > Years ago, Judy had read Knapp correctly and called him out. I won't go > > into how I had rationalized the Knapp I thought I knew when I first came to > > FFL in 2010(?) or maybe it was 2009(?) and read some of Judy's posts > > calling Knapp out. I would never (at that time) have imagined she would be > > so spot on. But she was. Could she be right again? > > > > > > I'll stop here... > > > > > > A few of my muddled thoughts...for what they're worth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" authfriend@ wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula <chivukula.ravi@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for this, you knew Curtis was twisting here since > > > > > they were full of mutual admiration back then. Robin was > > > > > certainly a very fascinating character but I couldn't > > > > > understand Robin's fascination and admiration for Curtis > > > > > when he came on board but then figured he would have to > > > > > figure Curtis out for himself, which he did. > > > > > > > > Curtis was on his very best behavior, at his most charming, > > > > with Robin at first. Their dialogue was really scintillating, > > > > some of the best I've seen on any Web forum. It was beautiful > > > > to see how much Robin was enjoying himself after his bleak > > > > quarter-century in virtual exile. He just expanded like a > > > > flower. > > > > > > > > I had no clue what was going to happen down the road. Even > > > > after they first began to fall out, reading their exchanges > > > > was like watching a highly competitive contest between two > > > > extremely skilled players. After each post, you couldn't wait > > > > to see how the other guy could possibly top it. > > > > > > > > > I don't believe you and I ever interfered in their > > > > > correspondence, I certainly never did > > > > > > > > At one point toward the end I became a topic of their > > > > arguments, and I had to step in and correct some things > > > > Curtis said about me that were not accurate. But > > > > otherwise I just soaked up their brilliance. > > > > > > > > > and had zero interest in their dialogue at that point - I > > > > > used to be too high anyway. > > > > > > > > Yeah, you were doing your own thing. If you ever have a > > > > dull patch, though, go back and take a look at their > > > > exchanges. Terrifically entertaining, and heart-wrenching > > > > to watch it crash and burn. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
