You would say that Ravi.  She's not nearly as attractive as Judy.  No
accounting for taste.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
>
> Beautiful picture Stevie - what an uncanny, striking resemblance to
Judy - damn !!!
>
>
> On Apr 17, 2013, at 3:09 PM, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@... wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Gonna tell you right now Ravi. This is my kinda woman!
> >
> > And I'll tell you what brotha, you couldn't handle her, no way, no
how. So just step aside and let those who are able take care of
business.
> >
> > Stay at a safe distance, and I'll fill you in on any details. I
don't want you to get hurt.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
> > >
> > > On Apr 17, 2013, at 2:06 PM, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Ha - you don't see any difference in Share's post and some
curious questions by MJ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway love to hear on what you think Kali is :-).
> > > > >
> > > > > I know you are not the smartest so here's a clue to help you -
Kali's not a vile, vindictive bitch.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Excellent Ravi. Excellent. See, you're not as dimwitted as some
people make you out to be. And I'm going to point this out when people
accuse you so. Yes I am.
> > >
> > > You are cracking me up Steve - I have never met people like that,
not even remotely, regardless of whether they love or hate me. But of
course some idiots like you may want to really convince themselves, I
say all power to you - whatever helps you cope :-)
> > >
> > > You never answer my question - so again - oh Steve baby enlighten
us on Kali - clue, she's not a vile, vindictive bitch.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Apr 17, 2013, at 12:20 PM, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Share, you got your Kali out, and I like it immensely. But
even your Kali is always tempered with a big dose of realism and
compassion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Did you notice the other day when Ravi was conversing with
Michael and (to a lesser extent), me in a, what you might call, "normal"
fashion. Just some back and forth. No lording over, no "I AM THIS, THAT,
AND THE OTHER, thing going on. I thought it was pretty cool. But I
figured it wouldn't last long, and sure enough, it didn't.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm gonna go back and read his comment that elicited this
response on your part.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ravi, the first week you were in San Diego, you sounded
happy. But the longer you stay there, the more miserable you
sound. And sadly you've just about totally lost your sense of
humor. I hope your project there ends soon and you can return home
and be happy again.Â
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > BTW I agree that Robin does not have to dumb down his
brilliance for anyone and I think that many of us feel the beauty of his
words sometimes. I'm talking about the other times when one needs
a buzzsaw to cut through the jungle of words and phrases to get to the
conceptual oasis. And don't even get me started on the
Irony! For that one needs as reading assistant, the two headed
Hydra, one head parsing for the straight forward meaning and one for the
Descartian doubt technique meaning.Â
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > > > From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@
> > > > > > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:28 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes
was HITLER'S VALENTINE
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Â
> > > > > > > OMG - hilarious stuff dear Share - what a clueless,
dishonest person you are. Judy has exposed your lies several times - yet
you are unwilling, unable to see it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No - Robin doesn't have to dumb down his brilliance for
you, Barry, LG and Steve, all you need is a dictionary, a heart to feel
the beauty of his words.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I will get to your garbage when I have some time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Apr 17, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Share Long sharelong60@
wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Â
> > > > > > > >laughinggull I want to say that sometimes I find Robin's
writing simple and clear. But very often I find it unclear and
voluminous which for me adds up to unreadable. IMO Judy
demonstrates a certain kind of co dependent arrogance every time she
berates people for not getting off their butts, putting in the effort,
etc. to understand Robin's writing. Other posters here manages
many times to be both clear AND profound. Why can't Robin?Â
Ok, ok, people have a right to have their unique voice. And I
actually enjoy all the different writing styles. But if a person
wants to be understood, wouldn't they make an attempt to write more
clearly for their audience? Especially given that at other times
they are able to do so?  Â
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >________________________________
> > > > > > > > From: laughinggull108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > > >Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 10:25 AM
> > > > > > > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was
HITLER'S VALENTINE
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Â
> > > > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
authfriend@ wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108
wrote:
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Aw shucks, dumbass, I was rooting for ya not only
that you
> > > > > > > >> > *would* do it but *could* do it...very similar to the
"dog
> > > > > > > >> > ate my homework". Well, Steve, it'll remain in the
holy
> > > > > > > >> > archives that you *did* try, just as others here have
> > > > > > > >> > asked those "in the know" to interpret the writings
of you
> > > > > > > >> > know who.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Uh-oh, LG, you're going the route of the other
prevaricators
> > > > > > > >> around here. One of their tricks is not to use names,
which
> > > > > > > >> they think makes it safe for them to seriously distort
an
> > > > > > > >> incident in which these pseudo-anonymous folks have
been
> > > > > > > >> involved, making it sound shifty.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >My purposeful removal of names, as in this case, was so
as not to bring more attention to those that probably crave it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> We know who "you know who" is, of course. But "others
here"
> > > > > > > >> refers to Xeno and "those 'in the know'" refers to me.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >"Others here" now includes Steve, and also includes me as
I've asked Robin on at least one occasion to explain in language that I
can understand without all the other stuff that merely confuses the
point he is making. "In the know" now includes dumbass, and might also
include Ann, RD, and Emily who on several occasions have indicated that
they understand what he has written.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Here's what really happened: Xeno demanded that I
interpret
> > > > > > > >> some post of Robin's *in order to prove* that I
understood
> > > > > > > >> him, and I refused to do any interpreting on that
basis. I
> > > > > > > >> considered it insulting, given that I had already spent
a
> > > > > > > >> huge amount of time explaining Robin to people
(including
> > > > > > > >> Xeno) who couldn't take the time to read his posts, or
at
> > > > > > > >> least to put any effort into absorbing what he had
said.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > The evidence seems to be leaning towards nobody
really
> > > > > > > >> > knows what he's talking about.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> No, there's no such evidence. I think what you mean is
> > > > > > > >> that *you* have trouble understanding him. We know he
> > > > > > > >> confuses Steve and Xeno and Barry and Share as well,
but
> > > > > > > >> the five of you aren't everybody.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >You are correct...I have great trouble understanding him.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Too bad as I was really
> > > > > > > >> > hoping that we had a saint in our midst.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Well, that was pretty silly, wasn't it? You know, since
> > > > > > > >> Robin himself would be the first person to discourage
the
> > > > > > > >> notion. Nor did DrD suggest such a thing. Robin is
> > > > > > > >> REEEEEELY REEEEELY smart, but he ain't no saint.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >That was the final snarky jab there. While maybe not a
saint, I'm always hoping I can learn something from everyone who
comments here.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Also, it appears neither you nor Steve read what DrD
> > > > > > > >> wrote with attention. He was suggesting that folks try
> > > > > > > >> validating his analysis of Robin's writing for
themselves,
> > > > > > > >> not offering to do it for them.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Hmm, now I'm beginning to see what's behind this. You
and
> > > > > > > >> Steve don't want to risk the attempt, because if you
tried
> > > > > > > >> and couldn't see what DrD describes, you'd be hesitant
to
> > > > > > > >> report your failure lest it appear that it was due to
your
> > > > > > > >> lack of comprehension, rather than DrD's analysis being
> > > > > > > >> faulty.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> So your cowardice in this regard leads you to imply
that
> > > > > > > >> DrD and I have been posturing and that Robin has said
> > > > > > > >> nothing of any significance.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> I would expect that kind of craven maneuver from Steve.
> > > > > > > >> I'm surprised to see you engaging in it, LG.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >It's not deliberate by any means but rather arises from a
sense of frustration in not being about to understand what someone is
writing. BTW, Robin's not the only one whose writing I don't get. I'm
open to understanding but none of you are helping other than to say get
off your ass, put some work into it, or provide links to the posts so we
can go back and read them again. Don't you see how circular this is? And
your explanations are by no means succinct nor easy to understand.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Perhaps one of my motives *is* to prove you wrong but for
the life of me, I don't know why. I guess I have some work ahead.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> The really interesting thing is that Robin isn't all
that
> > > > > > > >> hard to understand for those willing to put a little
effort
> > > > > > > >> into it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >But is the effort worth the reward?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >[snip]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a
New Topic Messages in this topic (320)
> > > > > > RECENT ACTIVITY: New Members 1
> > > > > > Visit Your Group
> > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to:
> > > > > > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Or go to:
> > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> > > > > > and click 'Join This Group!'
> > > > > > Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe
• Terms of Use • Send us Feedback
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New
Topic Messages in this topic (329)
> > > > RECENT ACTIVITY:
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to