<snip>
> Absolutely. Judy started attacking Curtis *before*
> he first posted here, back when his name was first
> brought up with regard to his music site.
As did others, of course. E.g.:
"Curtis Mailloux...one of the truly great TM Nazis the TMO ever
produced. After he left the fold, he became as vehemently against as
he had been pro before. In his time, though , he was awesome. He
would regularly "report" people for the most minor TM infractions
(such as wearing jeans to the Center--horrors!) as well as work on
occasion to keep people off courses, TTC, etc. You name it, he
reported it. Must have satisfied some primal urge for power, or
something. His defection really came as not much of a
surprise...that level of stress most people just can't keep up for
very long. I've wondered over the years what became of him too."
> She even went so far as to post a link to an old thread on
> a.m.t.,
Because someone requested it, you forgot to add.
so that people could go there and form a
> bad opinion of him.
This is just silly. I had characterized those
discussions rather harshly. Posting the link
gave people an opportunity to see whether they
were as bad as I said. The person who had
requested the link, in fact, decided they were
not.
> There is simply no QUESTION about who was trying
> to goad whom into an argument.
That's right. It was Curtis. I met him more than
halfway when he made his first post--my response to
it was a lot more cordial than he had been--and then
after he had replied with his faux "compliment," I
tried to discourage him from taking it any further.
He ignored that recommendation.
That she does not
> see this is really, really fuckin' scary, IMO the
> sign of a person who needs serious psycholgical help.
Barry Wright, master of projection.
> > Was I off the beam?
>
> Your short description was the most accurate so far.
>
> > Who seems to be the aggressor here?
>
> No question about it. Curtis has shown humor and
> good faith, and Judy has shown her normal traits.
>
> I admittedly haven't read all the posts,
> > so maybe I happened to read a selection that gave me a
> ? wrong impression. But my impression was, and still is,
> > that Curtis was being courteous and letting bygones be
> > bygones, while you were trying to reignite an old feud.
>
> That is exactly correct.
Couldn't be more inaccurate.
> > His comment that getting pissed off by your posts
> > resulted in a healthy exploration of assumptions an
> > judgments was a compliment, not an insult. He
> > was thanking you for being his "petty tyrant" (a term
> > from the Carlos Castañeda books).
>
> Exactly.
No, not exactly. As I've already noted, he did *not*
say it resulted in a "healthy exploration of
assumptions and judgments," merely that he was moved to
articulate those assumptions and judgments in more
detail. His views most certainly did not change in
the slightest as the result of my challenges. To the
contrary, they hardened.
Reasonable people can disagree as to whether he
actually paid me a compliment. I would maintain
that thanking someone publicly for being a pain in
the ass does not meet the criteria for a sincere
compliment.
I asked anybody who thought he had paid me a
compliment to say what they thought he was
complimenting me *for*. Nobody was able to do
that, not even Curtis.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
SPONSORED LINKS
| Maharishi university of management | Maharishi mahesh yogi | Ramana maharshi |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
