I think this was Rick's experiment in letting the inmates run the
asylum. He also probably figured Buck would fail and which would end
his pestering Rick to be moderator all the time.:-D
On 06/13/2015 10:28 AM, [email protected] [FairfieldLife] wrote:
Imagine my surprise...
So my question is, who exactly is the person Rick put in charge of
"protecting and enforcing the civility" here, the faux persona "Buck"
or the actual person behind the schtick?
And whose personal sensibilities are we to avoid (what Rauncy used to
refer to as) the peal clutching reaction to things people write here?
Am I supposed to write as if the strict movement fundamentalist "Buck"
might be offended as part of his act, or am I supposed to imagine what
the real person behind the put-on might think about what I write? And
who is that guy anyway since I have read so much more from the mask
creature.
Can I perhaps use the same artifice to express feelings I have, for
example castigating any person who would suggest that perhaps this
easily offended person should just "grow a pair" and stop trying to
control what other people express here? Would I be protected if I said
that I am vehemently opposed to anyone who might suggest that perhaps
this whole ruse was just an attempt by a person who doesn't have the
ability to generate meaningful content here to exert power over people
with creative ability?
Would a post heading of "Why I believe that Maharishi was wrong about
everything" be grounds for me being expelled for hurting the tender
feelings of people with weak intellectual boundaries? (Would the
suggestion that some posters here HAVE weak intellectual boundaries be
enough to bring the Church Lady down on my ass? Could referring to the
persona "Buck" as the Church Lady be seen as hurting tender feelings
or would it just fit into his Movement schtick and be exempt from his
mighty power?
So many questions...
FFL was one of the most wonderful writing resources in my life. It
encouraged me to write enough to express all the changing perspectives
I had on the movement through a long period of time. And although to
some, my vi! ews might be seen as not going through an evolution, I
can assure you they did. Not about fundamentals like whether
Maharishi's model of development of consciousness has merit, but in
how I relate to people who still maintain what I view as a fantasy
equivalent to the Christian concept of being saved, getting
"enlightened." There was even a period after Maharishi died where I
experimented with TM again to give it another consideration from my
perspective today, on its own without the belief hype. And although I
concluded that as enjoyable as the experience is, it does not serve a
value for my life today, I loved taking that trip down Mantra-Memory Lane.
FFL became unsafe for me to post on a while back when people decided
that going after my personal life would be the best way to stop me
from voicing my opinions here. It worked and they won. I accept that.
But before I accept that the whole place has jumped the shark with
regard to freedom of expression for everyone I want to say this:
I am completely against anyone who would flip the bird to this
self-appointed feeling-level policing of FFL. If anyone suggested that
this is an example of a fragile ego gone wild and allowed to fulfill
his fantasy of being in charge of what other people express, as well
as being a complete pain in the ass to even have to think of what this
person's idiotically tiny perspective might be about what I write...
I would report this person to the moderator right away to protect the
tender feelings of what (and again I oppose this view completely so
try to keep up) might be charitably referred to F'n crybabies whose
beliefs are so unsupportable and fanciful that they cannot accept any
challenge.
