--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > <all anybody > else has to do to see what the problem is, is to get > into a hostile debate with you,
I just couldn't make this stuff up! Is that all they have to do? Maybe everyone else isn't hostile Judy. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > Sometimes you hit comedy gold here: > > > > Judy: > > <To everyone else,> he appears to be perfectly reasonable.> > > > > The problem is with EVERYONE ELSE! > > That's pretty funny, Curtis, but it's your "comedy gold," > not mine. > > Unfortunately it works only if you snip the rest of the > paragraph. Here it is in full: > > > > It's his standard M.O. in any contentious discussion. And > > > he's very, very good at it. As I've pointed out here before, > > > you can only see what he's doing when it's *your* context > > > he's erasing and replacing with his own. To everyone else, > > > he appears to be perfectly reasonable. > > The problem is with you, not anybody else. All anybody > else has to do to see what the problem is, is to get > into a hostile debate with you, as I've pointed out so > many times now. > > Notice that Curtis is unable to address anything I said > in the post he's responding to. > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Carol I believe you have a much better way to asses the kind > > > > of person I am beyond Judy's filter. > > > > > > Right, ignore what Judy says and look through Curtis's > > > filter instead. > > > > > > > I have nothing to do with John Knapp or his perspective, > > > > > > I concur that Curtis has nothing to do with Knapp or his > > > perspective (aside from their mutual antipathy to Maharishi > > > and the TMO). And Knapp's and Curtis's psychopathologies > > > are different in many respects; Knapp's does not serve him > > > nearly as well as Curtis's serves him. > > > > > > > and in fact have my own stories which I am really not > > > > interested in sharing on a public board. > > > > > > > > Robin and I really enjoyed communicating on this board for > > > > a long time and I think we both feel that period was a > > > > highlight in our posting history here. The complex reasons > > > > that lead to our falling out are not even clear to either > > > > of us, and we have both processed some of them openly here > > > > on this forum. > > > > > > > > The risk of doing that is that someone with ill will toward > > > > one of us can use specific statements for their own goals. > > > > > > What Curtis is referring to here is a specific statement > > > he made a few days ago to Barry about an exchange between > > > him and Robin from the very beginning of their conversations. > > > > > > That statement by Curtis was documentably false; it > > > misrepresented what had transpired in that early exchange, > > > and the misrepresentation was clearly in the interest of > > > Curtis's current goals. > > > > > > In this case Curtis's goal was to portray his > > > conversations with Robin as having fallen apart because > > > Robin would not tolerate Curtis's skepticism about > > > Robin's claim to have experienced Unity Consciousness > > > decades previously. > > > > > > That portrayal by Curtis was also knowingly false, > > > massively and maliciously so. Robin's claim about his > > > past enlightenment experiences was not what his > > > disagreements with Curtis were about. > > > > > > In more general terms, Curtis's intention with those > > > false statements--and others--was to make Robin look > > > like a loon, someone so insistent on his purported > > > delusions of past grandeur that he'd bust up an > > > otherwise very rewarding friendship because the other > > > person wouldn't buy into them. > > > > > > That is *so* appallingly untrue and unfair, and it's > > > purely malicious on Curtis's part. > > > > > > > That is the nature of a public forum and the evaluation > > > > of it's risk reward balance is always a continual > > > > assessment for me. > > > > > > Hopefully Curtis is now assessing whether the risk of > > > making those knowingly false statements to Barry was > > > worth the reward. He's having to do damage control, > > > and that's very difficult because everything is on the > > > record. > > > > > > > Judy's view of what went on between Robin and me is not > > > > some clear "truth" about it. > > > > > > Happens to be very close to Robin's view of what went > > > on between himself and Curtis, however. And since Robin > > > was one of the two participants, his view would seem to > > > carry some significant weight. Plus which, it's > > > supported by the record of what has been posted here. > > > > > > > It is her very unflattering opinion of me which has been > > > > a consistent theme for a very long time. > > > > > > And which is shared by Robin, albeit for a shorter period, > > > since he only encountered Curtis for the first time back > > > in June of 2011. > > > > > > > The topic changes, but the narrative is the same. > > > > > > Which might be because I'm a nasty person who simply > > > wants to lash out at other people, or because Curtis's > > > dishonest and unfair behavior has been consistent since > > > I first ran into him in the late '90s on alt.m.t. > > > > > > > Although I don't have a very flattering view of Judy > > > > either, I am not interested in making a case for my > > > > opinion by fighting a war of quotes with her here. > > > > That is not a statement of me conceding that her view > > > > is accurate. > > > > > > Curtis is making a case for his opinion in this post to > > > Carol by doing what Robin has dubbed "legislating reality"--substituting > > > his own context for mine and Robin's by fiat, > > > without ever actually confronting or addressing or even > > > acknowledging the differences. > > > > > > It's his standard M.O. in any contentious discussion. And > > > he's very, very good at it. As I've pointed out here before, > > > you can only see what he's doing when it's *your* context > > > he's erasing and replacing with his own. To everyone else, > > > he appears to be perfectly reasonable. > > > > > > Poor Knapp could only dream of having this kind of subtle > > > skill. > > > > > > The fact remains that no amount of skill in legislating > > > reality can overcome the actual evidence of the record of > > > what has been posted to FFL. Besides the false statements > > > I noted above, there's a host of other misstatements of > > > fact in Curtis's recent posts. Curtis does not want to > > > "fight a war of quotes" because he knows what the quotes > > > will show. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I owed you that explanation at least. > > > > > >
