dmb, Hahaha!!! You do test my patience. :-) Luckily I understand you to be a flow of bits and pieces of ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent and impermanent static patterns: inorganic patterns, biological patterns, social patterns and intellectual patterns of value flowing within the infinite field of Dynamic Quality, rather than a postmodern psychopath, troll, liar, creep, or whatever slur you care to project. I am not interested in your essay, which I find to be more like an unfounded opinion piece.
Marsha > On Sep 20, 2013, at 10:51 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote: > > dmb said to Horse: > ...There may be more examples but that is at least five dismissals and at no > point has Marsha engage with a single word of that essay. And I mean five > dismissals of that one particular essay. This is how it goes down every > single time. That's why Arlo starting calling her Lucy, the cartoon character > famous for never playing fair and always playing tricks. So I'm saying that > Marsha does violate the most important "rule" of this discussion group, it's > main point and purpose. She simply refuses to discuss the MOQ itself. If it's > not one excuse, it's another. And it goes on like this day after day, month > after month, year after year... > > > dmb says: > > Update" now Marsha has dismissed and ignored that one particular essay at > least seven times. > > In one post she's added recently she simply restates the statement (and > nothing but) that I'd already criticized repeatedly as meaningless parroting > that demonstrates no comprehension: "Dynamic Quality is unpatterned value, > static quality is patterned value." To simply repeat it again without > responding to the criticism is to simply ignore the criticism and pretend > there could be no reason to object. She offered this naked paraphrase, with > no explanation of any kind, as proof that she really does understand the > MOQ's central distinction. But that little phrase was never the object of any > criticism, as far as I recall. Again, there is no actual reference to > anything in the essay. Evasion, after evasion. Then, about an half hour > later, I get one of those disingenuous homework assignments, as if she might > finally answer the criticism if only I'd do more to explain what the problem > is (after the fourth of fifth year of such requests I stopped doing more). > > "I am still waiting for you to present reasons why my quoting RMP's statement > that Dynamic Quality should be undefined and using "not this, not that" > (neti, neti), and recommending meditation as a method for obtaining direct > experience represent solipsistic subjectivism?" > > What's worse, it the suggestion that I have objected to quoting Pirsig or > objected to recommending meditation. Both are just fine with me and neither > has anything to do with the objections I actually have raised. > > That makes at least seven (7!) evasions of just one of my posts, one of my > essays. Seriously, how is Marsha any different from a troll who has no > genuine interest in discussing anything of substance? Her relentless stream > of drivel and evasion is a waste of everyone's time, all the time, for > hundreds of moons. When will it ever end? How can it ever end, given her > attitude? She is the Platonic Form of incorrigibility. > > > > > > 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
