Thanks Steve.
You stated: "I made my point that when drawing conclusions, its best to get 
info from the original sources and not from a second interpretation."
I agree..and I think most folks would.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" <steve.sundur@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Something seems to be working for you, because you come off as someone
> who has gone through difficult times and managed to sort it out in the
> end.  So, not for me to make any judgements.  I made my point that when
> drawing conclusions, its best to get info from the original sources and
> not from a second interpretation.  That's all.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <jchwelch@> wrote:
> >
> > Hey seventhray...Yes there is that risk.
> >
> > And I imagine it would take me quite a bit longer than 15 to 20
> minutes. It isn't the recent discussion that would take awhile; but
> rather, the history behind the recent discourses. That history appears
> to involve multiple relationships. And I'm not one to jump to quick
> conclusions...so my analytical skills (as limited as they may be) take
> time to process and think and weigh and compare. Do I want to put that
> much energy into this? At this point and time, I do not. But maybe
> later, I will.
> >
> > This next statement is not directed at you seventhray. ...It occurred
> to me some time ago that the word analyze begins with anal. I've
> sometimes thought of it as anal-eyes since entering the world of
> internet forums in 2006. I was late to the scene.
> > **************
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "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.
> > >
> > >
> > > > 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.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to