Oh, you're attempting coherence again. Good boy!
On Oct 20, 2010, at 2:59 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: > John Carl > aan moq_discuss > > details weergeven 19:23 (27 minuten geleden) > > Greetings, adrie. > > To the first part, I will simply take you to be chiming in with dan's > critique of my style. Ok. Got you. duly noted and when the audience is > unhappy, the tomatoes rain from the balconey even, then certainly the artist > must bow out, duck behind a curtain, stay off the stage. Understood. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > (Adrie) > Nope,engaging is not chiming in, and no, its not about Dan's critique on > your style. > Its about sneaking out on the presented subject, by deviating the > conversation > to the subject of Bo,on a moment in time badly chosen, and solely for the > purpose > of deviating to something you want to throw in, clearly to associate Dan > with the > Bo-subject. > Its a mechanism, like the mentionings in your last what? 50 posts of Horse's > name-,completely > off context-off topic, and without filling in the field, pointing the other > listers attention > to think about Horse as cause of your trouble, cause off Bo's trouble. > Guiding the attention by association, suggestion and autosuggestion. > You work the same way now , throwing in Mary's name, Marscha, Bo, > Platt,...in the silent hope that > they wil feel adressed and advocated on their behalfs, and hopefully will > chime in to rescue you. > Suggestion/autosuggestion.Trying to shelter in their armpits > > No? > > How many names are following after this? , in the following answers you > gave? > can you count? > > Same goes for the deviation on the issue here, you deviate to the question > about > individuals to be excluded, but this was not the issue,and mind this, i made > no question > what so ever to exclude Bo, nor he is booted out, like you are implying > here, very suggestive. > Tell me, doe you like to know my opinion, Horse his opinion, or do you like > to shove Bo's > opinion, or mary's or marsha's up my ass?, ... > Or is there, in the fog out there , a better answer?...like this , this is > not the current issue!. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Second part, I would deal with the following construction on your part: > > Adrie: > > To be quit honest, i think you are trying to shelter in Bo's armpit, or > Ham's, or platt's, . > > John: > > You think Adrie? Or even Marsha's perhaps? After all, it really isn't > "bo's" beef anymore, is it. He isn't here, and Marsha has adopted it. So > individuals might be excluded, but ideas evolve and persist. An interesting > phenomena, don't you think? Perhaps we ought to really deal with it? With > Intellect, as defined, we have a big problem that Bo pointed out. Not just > Marsha. But Platt, Mary and I also saw the problem, although I went on a > different tack. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > (Adrie) > The defenitions of intellect. > these are , in dictionary's, condensed models to formulate some aspects, > hopefully the most important ones, but they will always remain condensed > models. > If Bo like's to attack a defenition in a dictionary, its his call, not mine. > But again, hoping marsha, Mary or Bo will chime in because their points or > issue's are raised, > is your goal here. > I cannot agree upon "we saw the problem," nope, Bo created the problem, you > and mary tried to > exploit it, export it, attaching value to it , in the hope to please Bo. > It is merely a mindfucking game, delusional/obsessive and very recurrent. > Once you have an obsession, its very difficult to get rid of it. > > > * deal with it? , in the absense of the promotor? to become obsessive? no > thanks. > trying to shelter in a case that is not a case, hoping Bo will chime in, > .... > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > John > I do that, sometimes. Take an unexpected tack, go off on my own tangent or > follow my own individual urges. You know what I don't do, Adrie? I don't > shelter in anybody's armpit. I stand on my own thoughts and words and you > can shove your "armpit" up where the son don't shine. > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Adrie: > > Ps , i'm not very confident anymore that you even did read or understand > "LILA", same goes for Bo, what Dan is saying, and Dave > about the lilac's is true, and i was aware of it,. > > John: > > You think knowing something is all about sniffing the lilacs Adrie? This is > so tiresome, to repeat myself and have to explain the same thing over and > over. > > So I won't. > > I'll let you test me, instead. Ask me a question about Lila. See if I > understand it. Judge according to your skill and understanding, MY > conceptions of Lila - what each passage portends, ask me the meaning of a > narrative that seemingly wanders, goes so far astray, we start with Indians > and we end up with a woman of questionable morals, picked up in a bar. What > could be the possible meaning of such a narrative? How is it that an > ongoing enquiry can be so easily led astray? > > A struggle just as alive today and in us, as anything else we "experience". > > > Go ahead, Adrie. Ask me about Lila. O double-dog dare you. > > Adrie: > > .i strongly suspect that > you will try to advokate Bo back in to make YOU look like a lesser fool. > > > John: > > You look like a fool to suggest such a thing. How could I look like a > lesser fool than a be a man who praises foolishness? duh? > > I advocate Bo back because I believe in Loyalty and Community and Bo put > more of himself into MD for more years than almost anybody. Sure, it could > be annoying to always have this strong windy opinion blowing, but any sailor > knows that a strong dependable wind can be a good thing. > > Unless it's blowing out of the exactly wrong direction. Which I guess is > debatable. Which is why Marsha's point is worthy of more debate. Imo. > > Not that the opinion of a clown means anything, admittedly. > > Adrie: > > Don't bother to try, you can never reach to Bo's knees > > John: > > At last you speak wisdom. I cannot attain to his stature. I can attain > foolishness. I aim for the possible. > > > You watch your aim and I'll watch mine. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > (Adrie) > only in this last part i can see some honesty, i did not comment on it , nor > on the one-liners, > nor on the duh's, i know you like to read yourself, so i left them intact. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > 2010/10/20 John Carl <[email protected]> > >> Greetings, adrie. >> >> To the first part, I will simply take you to be chiming in with dan's >> critique of my style. Ok. Got you. duly noted and when the audience is >> unhappy, the tomatoes rain from the balconey even, then certainly the >> artist >> must bow out, duck behind a curtain, stay off the stage. Understood. >> >> Second part, I would deal with the following construction on your part: >> >> Adrie: >> >> To be quit honest, i think you are trying to shelter in Bo's armpit, or >> Ham's, or platt's, . >> >> John: >> >> You think Adrie? Or even Marsha's perhaps? After all, it really isn't >> "bo's" beef anymore, is it. He isn't here, and Marsha has adopted it. So >> individuals might be excluded, but ideas evolve and persist. An >> interesting >> phenomena, don't you think? Perhaps we ought to really deal with it? With >> Intellect, as defined, we have a big problem that Bo pointed out. Not just >> Marsha. But Platt, Mary and I also saw the problem, although I went on a >> different tack. >> >> I do that, sometimes. Take an unexpected tack, go off on my own tangent or >> follow my own individual urges. You know what I don't do, Adrie? I don't >> shelter in anybody's armpit. I stand on my own thoughts and words and you >> can shove your "armpit" up where the son don't shine. >> >> >> Adrie: >> >> Ps , i'm not very confident anymore that you even did read or understand >> "LILA", same goes for Bo, what Dan is saying, and Dave >> about the lilac's is true, and i was aware of it,. >> >> John: >> >> You think knowing something is all about sniffing the lilacs Adrie? This >> is >> so tiresome, to repeat myself and have to explain the same thing over and >> over. >> >> So I won't. >> >> I'll let you test me, instead. Ask me a question about Lila. See if I >> understand it. Judge according to your skill and understanding, MY >> conceptions of Lila - what each passage portends, ask me the meaning of a >> narrative that seemingly wanders, goes so far astray, we start with Indians >> and we end up with a woman of questionable morals, picked up in a bar. >> What >> could be the possible meaning of such a narrative? How is it that an >> ongoing enquiry can be so easily led astray? >> >> A struggle just as alive today and in us, as anything else we "experience". >> >> >> Go ahead, Adrie. Ask me about Lila. O double-dog dare you. >> >> Adrie: >> >> .i strongly suspect that >> you will try to advokate Bo back in to make YOU look like a lesser fool. >> >> >> John: >> >> You look like a fool to suggest such a thing. How could I look like a >> lesser fool than a be a man who praises foolishness? duh? >> >> I advocate Bo back because I believe in Loyalty and Community and Bo put >> more of himself into MD for more years than almost anybody. Sure, it could >> be annoying to always have this strong windy opinion blowing, but any >> sailor >> knows that a strong dependable wind can be a good thing. >> >> Unless it's blowing out of the exactly wrong direction. Which I guess is >> debatable. Which is why Marsha's point is worthy of more debate. Imo. >> >> Not that the opinion of a clown means anything, admittedly. >> >> Adrie: >> >> Don't bother to try, you can never reach to Bo's knees >> >> John: >> >> At last you speak wisdom. I cannot attain to his stature. I can attain >> foolishness. I aim for the possible. >> >> >> You watch your aim and I'll watch mine. >> >> >> John >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org/md/archives.html >> > > > > -- > parser > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html ___ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
