gabby...your troll character is abundantly clear. Cease and desist.
On Mar 9, 2:31 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > ... speaketh the man who proclaims that ultimately all is one ... Seriously, > orn, has it ever occurred to you that this ultimate could be here and now? > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 4:22 AM, ornamentalmind > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > Perhaps you could just start your own group... > > > On Mar 8, 7:39 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I would suggest to expand Ian's posting guidelines and add "no killer > > > phrases allowed" in order to get a decent discussion style going here. > > > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 3:18 PM, ornamentalmind > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > Such a fantasy about 'control mechanisms' is just that... > > > > > On Mar 8, 6:06 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Where have the control mechanisms gone that prevent one single loony > > > > > autocrat having his shaky fingers on buttons and triggers? My friend > > says > > > > > it's the boy's mother's fault. She is a girls' mother. I would say > > that > > > > this > > > > > view is too narrow. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 2:19 PM, ornamentalmind > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > gabby 'baby'...when it comes to 'form' your opinion is noted and > > not > > > > > > agreed with at all nor is your 'expertise' found to be of value nor > > > > > > interest. > > > > > > > I need no help at all, thank you very much and did think twice > > before > > > > > > putting you on moderation this time. > > > > > > > Your incessant badgering has been addressed ad nauseam. Cease and > > > > > > desist. > > > > > > > On Mar 8, 2:57 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > No sulking, please, orn. We very much appreciate your expertise, > > only > > > > the > > > > > > > form is sometimes a little inadequate. > > > > > > > > So what about BB47's complaint about being moderated? And yes, > > who is > > > > > > > presently in charge of the moderating and deleting spam business? > > Do > > > > you > > > > > > > need help? > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:52 AM, ornamentalmind > > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > I guess this means you won't respond to my questions PSK, > > right? > > > > > > > > > On Mar 7, 4:17 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > :) > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 5:39 PM, gabbydott < > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Where did Poly ask for your judgement, orny baby? Has the > > mod > > > > god > > > > > > job > > > > > > > > gone > > > > > > > > > > to your head the wrong way up? She asked for opinions. Mind > > the > > > > > > > > difference. > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:39 PM, ornamentalmind < > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> “i guess ..i meant a secular rather than a religious or > > > > > > theological > > > > > > > > > >> mode of > > > > > > > > > >> understanding things...the world.... “ – PSK > > > > > > > > > > >> Well, that does point towards an area of your beliefs so > > > > thanks > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > >> this much. Perhaps you could be even more specific? > > > > > > > > > > >> As far as I’ve found out…reviewing human thought over the > > > > ages,… > > > > > > > > > >> secular and religious views often are at the very least > > > > > > intertwined. > > > > > > > > > > >> On the other hand, perhaps you are being much more literal > > > > when > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > >> use the notion of “…mode of understanding things…”. If > > this is > > > > the > > > > > > > > > >> case, a more specific unpacking of what the two apparently > > (to > > > > > > you) > > > > > > > > > >> different modes would be of value, OK? > > > > > > > > > > >> I’ll suspend judgment until I hear more. > > > > > > > > > > >> On Mar 7, 3:01 am, "pol.science kid" < > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > i guess ..i meant a secular rather than a religious or > > > > > > theological > > > > > > > > mode > > > > > > > > > >> of > > > > > > > > > >> > understanding things...the world.... > > > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:21 PM, ornamentalmind > > > > > > > > > >> > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > “…revolution in knowledge and philosophy…” – PSK ??? > > > > > > > > > > >> > > To continue the discussion, one would need to know > > what > > > > you > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > here. > > > > > > > > > >> > > Would you unpack it a bit? > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Before actually knowing what you mean, I see little if > > any > > > > > > > > > >> > > ‘revolution’ in this context. Yes, there is a process > > of > > > > > > change in > > > > > > > > > >> > > thought over the millennia yet such general ‘change’ > > > > doesn’t > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > >> > > progression towards a more accurate view. Case in > > point – > > > > you > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > >> > > apparently using the dialectical view of one view > > being in > > > > > > > > > >> > > contradiction with another. While many do apprehend in > > > > this > > > > > > way, > > > > > > > > in no > > > > > > > > > >> > > way is that an indicator of the accuracy of such a > > view. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > As best as I can see, both can be known > > consubstantially. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > On Mar 7, 2:25 am, "pol.science kid" < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > I was thinking .... i agree with what yuo guys say > > > > ....could > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > >> be > > > > > > > > > >> > > the > > > > > > > > > >> > > > revolution in knowledge and philosophy...when it was > > > > > > > > > >> questioned....what > > > > > > > > > >> > > > can an INdividual know.....it kind of pitts one > > against > > > > the > > > > > > > > whole in > > > > > > > > > >> this > > > > > > > > > >> > > > struggle to know...or salvation through > > knowledge...what > > > > > > say.... > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:01 PM, pol.science kid < > > > > > > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > > > > > > >> > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > True we have come a long way..and the word has > > been > > > > taken > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > granted....but i would like an opinion of each one > > of > > > > you > > > > > > > > ...on > > > > > > > > > >> the > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Sanctity of Freedom.... it is also my casual > > inference > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > that....individuality ...the modern obsession > > with > > > > > > it....how > > > > > > > > come > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > some primitive tribes...hold the community at a > > level > > > > > > above > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > individual....while it is not quite so in our > > > > > > > > 'modernised'...or > > > > > > > > > >> rather > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > westernised world.....are there concepts of > > > > radicalised > > > > > > > > > >> individuality > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > in the oriental philosophy..... need your > > opoinions > > > > > > fellows > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > -- > > > > > > > > > >> > > > \--/ Peace > > > > > > > > > > >> > -- > > > > > > > > > >> > \--/ Peace > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > \--/ Peace
