Thank you Jim. A couple things come to mind. (as I am here at work, getting things in order so that I can go on vacation tomorrow with a somewhat unfettered mind) I am not sure if I have as much invested in this site as Judy. On the other hand, I do tend to trust my judgments, which many times are snap judgements. And it may be that when I take the time, to look more closely at something, (as I did recently at Judy's prodding), such as whether Robin was being truthful when he said he didn't strike someone, (and the context), then it may be that I modify my position some. But in that exact example a lot of effort was expended for a pretty small adjustment. I think the main complaint I hear about me is that I am too emotional in my judgments. Perhaps I am. On the other hand, it is always nice to have the real world to help you keep score on things. I will read over what you've written and see if anything else comes to mind. But I just don't know if I can come around to seeing Judy in a different light, than what I do. I'll try to keep an open mind. Thanks for your feedback.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > Hey Steve, I've been following this back and forth, for awhile. In terms of how you like to interact here, which I think mirrors your daily life and work, congenial, comes to mind. You and I could probably go to lunch and not mention TM, or any of the FFL topics, and still have plenty to yak about, and have a good time. I enjoy not always winding everything out, too. > > On the other hand, it was my business and skill for many years, to ensure clarity and understanding regarding the design, development, and transfer of very technical knowledge, to engineers and technicians, so that satellites, lasers, large phone switches, and data centers, for example, didn't fuck up. As a result, I can determine, when I want to put the effort into it, now that I don't *have* to, whether or not someone is being illogical, exaggerating, skewing material, has a hidden agenda, etc. Over so many years of analysis, it becomes obvious. > > Judy has a very consistent approach here. She is intent on unraveling the writing of those who are professing to say one thing, and in fact, through the mechanisms I referred to earlier, are saying something quite different. Further, if someone is simply expressing something, is there integrity in the expression? > > We do not have the luxury here to evaluate someone's body language and expressions here. It is all expressed through writing. So, the interactions between us are sometimes less than congenial, because there is no other way to further the thoughts expressed, sometimes, than to take exception. In everyday interaction, a raised eyebrow, or quick joke may suffice to move a conversation along, but here, with writing as the only tool, everything must be spelled out. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ wrote: > > > > Bless you Judy. I am going to take a nod from the Share playbook and > > offer you compassion. > > You'll have to find someone else to play with tonight. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ > > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > sure Judy. Carry on with your truth campaign. as Curtis aptly > > > > > > pointed out: for someone to constantly declare how "dedicated to > > > > > > truth" they are, is not unlike the magician telling everyone > > > > > > repeatedly how "this is a plain, ordinary deck" with which I am > > > > > > going to perform this trick. > > > > > > > > > > Not if the person is in fact dedicated to truth, unlike the > > > > > magician. Curtis isn't, you aren't (as I just got done noting), > > > > > Barry obviously isn't. So it isn't at all surprising that the > > > > > three of you would be anxious to portray a truth-teller as > > > > > a deceiver, is it? > > > > > > Can I assume you're afraid to answer my question, Stevie? > > > > > > And that's you in a nutshell, isn't Judy. You can > > > > fill in the blank, (as you do), > > > > > > Which blank would this be, Stevie? > > > > > > with whomever you determine to be the > > > > liar of the hour, or the day. Usually there is no shortage of > > > > candidates. > > > > > > Actually they don't change much from week to week, Stevie. > > > > > > > And that, pretty much is how you spend your posts here. > > > > > > And that what, Stevie? Your writing is pretty incoherent > > > tonight. I don't think you quite got what I've been saying. > > > > > > But it's obvious you aren't happy about the truths I've > > > been telling, Stevie--you know, like the one about your > > > having blamed DrD for bringing up Barry's brother's > > > suicide when it was actually Barry who did that. And > > > another truth is that you've never retracted your > > > accusation nor apologized to DrD for it. > > > > > > I'm truly sorry that it makes you so uncomfortable, > > > Stevie, but them's the breaks. > > > > > > > And I am glad you have something to aspire towards. Perhaps someone > > > > here will take up your cause and make a nomination. > > > > I think it would make for a fascinating vetting process. > > > > And yikes. Could it be that you could be a possible candidate for > > the > > > > two different awards that have shown up now. > > > > > > Oh, Stevie, you've already forgotten what I said in my > > > earlier post, and you've even quoted it below. See if > > > you can find it. A little practice exercise for you. > > > > > > > > > but this is how you choose to spend your life force, so I > > > > > > hope is gratifying for you. > > > > > > > > > > Not being concerned about the truth, you probably aren't > > > > > aware that there are many people who have dedicated their > > > > > lives to the truth, sometimes even *sacrificed* their > > > > > lives to the truth. Truth and truth-telling have generally > > > > > been highly regarded throughout history, something to > > > > > strive for. > > > > > > > > > > http://www.ridenhour.org/prizes_truth_telling.html > > > > > > > > > > (I wouldn't consider myself to come close to deserving > > > > > such a prize because my efforts have been so limited.) > > > > > > > > > > But there are always those who can't see the importance of > > > > > truth, who find it inconvenient and annoying, not worth the > > > > > effort; and even those who believe truth just gets in the > > > > > way of their needs and desires and whims. And sometimes, of > > > > > course, such people are just cowards who *fear* the truth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" > > steve.sundur@ > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wonder if anyone even reads those rebuttals. But I suppose > > > > > > > > they are gratifying to you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right, the point is to get the truth on the record. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mean, for example, I certainly wouldn't expect you > > > > > > > to retract and apologize for accusing DrD of bringing > > > > > > > up Barry's brother's suicide when, as I pointed out in > > > > > > > one of those posts, it was actually Barry himself who > > > > > > > had done so. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But that error--blaming DrD for Barry's own behavior-- > > > > > > > can't be allowed to stand unrefuted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's just the way it is in this world. Some people > > > > > > > care about the truth, and some don't. The former can't > > > > > > > force the latter to care, so they do the best they can > > > > > > > to ensure the truth is not obscured by those who don't > > > > > > > care about it. > > > > > >
