" I hope that will include many of you ... " Did you see my raised hand, Molly ! I trust I am included and hope you found at least a few of the ( more intelligible ) posts I made on this Group worthy of your blog.
I find this Group ' ownership ' business laughable anyway. I come and post on this Group because it is I who find the behaviour here acceptable to me. The posts I make here are mine, unpaid ; hence, no one but me should be having a right to its copy. I do not come here for the owner or the moderators, since I owe them nothing, except for the posts they make from time to time. I must say, however, I 've found them very reasonable so far, and have always had thanks for them, for making such a good forum available online, where I have met such good minds and great souls, and have had the priviledge of participating in some truly inspiring and liberating dialogues of my life. Copyright issues are essentially rooted in commercial values, something not there even in the other side of the horizon of my mind while I am on here ! It has all been about knowing and interacting with contemporaries I love, respect, and have great regard for. On Jul 25, 5:41 pm, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the deep, heartfelt laugh, Justin. The truth of what you > say in not lost in the amusement. Games of domination are not > uncommon in this group, are they? And you are right, I apologize to > no one for my good blog and the way I have conducted myself in this > group. Thanks for pointing out that the original accusations were > libelous, I wondered how folks felt about that. As for myself I have > seen far worse in group dynamic, and I think you have too, knowing > your history. It is a marvel to me always, the need within a group, > even one with all the intelligence of this one, to deconstruct and > enter into combat. Aggression coming from the admin is notable. > > Your good post reminded me of a two and a half men > episode:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7h9z9FXVL8 > > Thankfully, aside from the occasional impulse to yell "blow it out > your ass," I am not afraid, although I find myself shaking my head in > disbelief from time to time. > > What it all means to the future of this group, I cannot say. I do > think when crap like this comes up, we lose good members who can't be > bothered with the BS. I know that I will continue to write, and enjoy > people and live the good life. I hope that will include many of you > as time goes on...but this may be one of those random, out of control > (ya think?) occurrences that I would not have desired or predicted, > yet is real enough to create a turning point. Only time will tell. > > Power games aside, the laws and rules of the internet are changing so > quickly that this kind of stuff is probably happening all over. There > are some truly vicious, ridiculous groups on the web that flourish > while the members eat each other alive. There is also a proliferation > of use of internet material on blogs that falls into the grey area of > rules and law. Somewhere between the anarchists and the control > freaks, sanity will reign because the PC is not integral to our > lives. I suspect that the google attorneys will be pivotal to this > process, and it sounds to me like they favor open access for now > anyway. > > It is a fascination to me that this issue came up in a strong way as > soon as I posted a thread on control. Perhaps the universe is > responding specifically with this good demonstration for all of us. > > Thanks for the smile and camaraderie. > > On Jul 24, 9:35 pm, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The admins are discussing this at the moment, but I'd suggest holding back > > > from re-posting any more content until we're totally clear on the rules > > > and > > > their implications. Craig is a lawyer, so confident we'll get to the > > > bottom > > > of it. > > > So are you saying that what is said here is irrelevant because the “ > > admin” or "moderators" are "talking about this over email"? Why should > > she hold back and refrain? It just wastes valuable time! > > > Why aren't these so-called "admins" posting here so we all can see? If > > they’ve got something to discuss... well bring it up! Who the hell are > > they to be talking about this behind our backs. My uncles only > > brother’s only son is a lawyer and I’m calling him because I believe > > that listening and then talking about what was said (in email) is > > plain and simple a form of cutting and pasting. And into a > > conversation that is not even on the INTERNET! A private conversation! > > An “un-moderated” conversation. How dare they! I hope that that are > > not actually talking literally about what we say. Between themselves? > > Without us? Cutting our words and pasting them into their private > > conversation - sneakily - instead of leaving them in the public on > > their blogs?! On the INTERNET! Our words...in public where WE PUT > > THEM! Taking them private there's the harm. Sneaky little devils eh > > what? > > > Excuse me if I am slightly sane Alice but aren’t you saying she cut un- > > copyrighted material out of one place ON THE INTERNET and pasted them > > into another place ON THE INTERNET? > > > But then, no use in us "discussing it". Because the *moderators* are > > "talking about this over email".... ahhh... the moderators...the > > admin. > > > Glad I am not in a group that is actually political. I'd be scared. In > > fact, I am getting a little frightened right now...yes... I can feel > > the fear... way down there... oh there it is... yesss... now I am > > getting scared. > > > How about you, Molly. Aren't you "scared"? Just a little? How's it > > feel when "they" cut you out of the herd. Can't you just feel the > > predation? > > > Can you describe what it felt like to see those posts... little like > > seeing a rattle snake? Aww common you can work up some fear can’t you? > > A rattlesnake with a green polyester leisure suite and a toupe? > > > Listen to the tone in this post: > > > "Molly, I have mentioned this before. My words are clear. You accept > > them or you don't." > > > “You accept them.... or....” > > > You... um... er... accept them.... or .... well Molly dearest... he > > did say .... “or you don’t”. Kind of sneaky the way the slip that > > principle of non-contradiction in subliminal like no? “Either you > > accept them or you don’t” That phrase....its either the principle of > > non-contradiction itself or else its a threat. What do YOU think? > > > Here’s my opinion. Forget the words, listen to the tone. It is what > > betrays them all the time. What you are witnessing is a primate threat > > display. Oh yes, it’s veiled as it always is. It’s actually quite > > modern. Couched in reasonableness and authority. It’s practically an > > archetype. You, dear, are being threatened! Now it would be a little > > less hilarious, (and I would have a little less trouble maintaining my > > fearfulness, I am trying, for the sake of the play you see), if we > > could just see what they are threatening you with and what they are > > threatening you for and how they can sustain their seriousness in the > > face of this hilarity. But its so much better this way no? Sort of > > Kafka for Shirley Temple? A harmless charade....Nicht vahr? > > > Now listen to your tone Molly! After all you are not guiltless! > > Copying! Pasting! You bad little girl! You should have used a > > typewriter... Here is what you are guilty of: > > > Molly:“I do not make money on it and have not received complaints > > until now. It does > > no harm, is not a secret, and I am told, is interesting and sometimes > > helpful.” > > > (Really Molly, READ Alexander Soljenitsyn. Really READ him: Gulag > > Archipelago. The chapter on being arrested. “It must be a mistake!” > > Did you know that when he was arrested his captors got lost and he led > > them back away from enemy lines! “There must be some mistake!” “I was > > just....” Forget the words, Molly, hear the tone. And Soljenitsyn, > > like they all did, and like you are, apologizing and insisting there > > must be a mistake... because they did nothing wrong! Just don’t play > > with them dear. It’s not whether you did something wrong at all. It’s > > about how they establish dominance. No need to apologize. None at all. > > Really. None. No need to even sound like you are apologizing or even > > hint that you could...one cold day in hell...maybe... After all “There > > might be something I could have done but I am a good person....bla bla > > bla”...the pattern! Look at the pattern!) > > > Try something like: “I have done nothing wrong and if you insinuate > > that I have that is slander”... then quote a link that defines the > > legal meaning of the term. > > > Way.... way... too submissive dear. You should have come out > > fighting....”Sometimes” its helpful? Better to write something like > > “The world depends on my Blog! Hell, lots of people would not have > > read what is written here if they didn’t read it on My blog! Are you > > crazy! Do you want to stop the culture of the world! Its critical that > > I get the word out! EVERYONE knows that!” (Use the first person > > singular as often as possible, its stronger than the first person > > plural. Puff yourself up like when you meet a bear in the woods!) > > > That word “sometimes”.... "sometimes"?... and.... "your are told"?... > > "its useful"...It is just too submissive, Molly. Say: “It’s damn > > useful!” Curse a little. Here is a better phrasing: > > > Bug off! (I left the –ger off of Bug out of respect for your > > positiveness Molly, - you are so positive and kind- but really, if > > YOU had said it with the –ger in there it would have been so much > > better.) BUGGER OFF! Nimwit! GadZooks Pinhead! Are you stupid! Are you > > crazy? Don’t you know I HAVE to cut and paste! I don’t have TIME to > > type it all in! (Strawman them a little) There is so little TIME and I > > have so much to DO! So “pleeeassseee” go play on a beach, and pound > > sand, or something. > > > Now that’s the tone Molly. No conciliation there! (But you lack the > > instinct for the jugular, dear. More of a dear deer than a wolf! A > > deer in the headlights. But no real car headed your way behind those > > headlights!!!! That's the great thing here! Eh! Its all just a play! A > > little sideshow! We don’t even have to be careful!) > > > Although I have to admit you scored by showing your understanding of > > fair use etc. But really? When was the last time someone copyrighted > > some material and then published it on a Google group for God’s sake? > > I mean...GOOGLE... really! Have to be an idiot.... > > > You are accusing her of WHAT! Cutting out of a group and pasting into > > a blog?! Lions and Tigers and Bears OH MY! “I’ll get you and your > > little dog too!” (To the moderators I typed that. I did not cut it out > > of the movie and paste it here so don’t come get me... ok... I hardly > > know her. ) > > > I think you should sue just for the insinuation. Criminal false > > insinuation or something. Compounded by a wanton lack of clarity and a > > failure to take things > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
