You're full of it, Buck. You don't even seem to know what spam is. FFLers post 
things like it all the time here, on a range of different subjects. Net 
neutrality is a big issue for folks who use the Internet; it's not as if it had 
never been mentioned or discussed here before. Ask Bhairitu. 

 And as I said, you know who raunchydog is--she isn't some stranger who busted 
in here trying to advertise a product or service. You just felt like throwing 
your weight around without any good reason.
 

 

 

 

 

 Sure seems like it was dropped in here like some spam to dilute out the flow 
of the interest of this list here. Yes, on FairfieldLIfe most any topic goes 
related to the interest of seekers (and finders) of truth and liberation 
everywhere. This post coming without any attempt at context related to 
Fairfieldlife clearly did not seem to relate to anything here, just like spam.
 

 On Fairfieldlife we often discuss the trials and tribulations of the TM 
Movement. Discussions also draw from diverse teachers such as Ammachi, Eckhart 
Tolle, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Byron Katie, Dalai Lama, Jesus Christ, Buddha, 
Ramana Maharshi, Shankara, etc. Yes we all have delete keys, however towards 
the higher levels of our subject integrity on this Fairfieldlife list we do 
keep moderators on hand to guard and protect us as a community from spammers.
 

 We all should be on guard to report spam like that post to the Moderation here 
to keep track of.
 Thank you for your concern,
 -Buck    
 

 authfriend writes:

 GET OFF IT, BUCK. You know who raunchy is; you know it isn't "spam"; and you 
know we're free to post anything here that others may find of interest, and 
that most certainly includes net neutrality  Stop trying to intimidate would-be 
posters who don't know any better into thinking they can only post "spiritual" 
stuff. 



 Is this drive-by Spam?  What exactly does this have to do with the Spiritual 
Regeneration and FairfieldLife? -Buck
 

 

 raunchydog@...> wrote :
 
 Email to Tom.Wheeler@... supporting net neutrality by Sandy Dockendorff:











Reply via email to