[FairfieldLife] Re: My Third Post: Wisdom of Crowds!
If the Asian woman at 2:00 had kept her 80K, the result would've been 4702, instead of 4515... ~:0 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Cardemaister, I was blown away by this and told my pastoral counselor about it. She wondered if it had been replicated. Anyway, thanks for posting. From: card cardemaister@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 7:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] My Third Post: Wisdom of Crowds!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=982E49KAMyw
[FairfieldLife] Auroras now!
http://aurora.fmi.fi/public_service/
[FairfieldLife] Healing Codes!
How it all started: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFL6I3WlmWs
Re: [FairfieldLife] parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Oh don't fuck with me Aunt Share - is the pastoral counselor as hot as this girl - http://youtu.be/2ZzK5P_0Lsk or this one - https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpagev=YSDX2EM17lI#t=159s On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** dear Ravi, she must be hot. She keeps that dang office cold enough! And I'm supposedly pure pitta! Guess the old Share circulation is not what it once was. Anyway, she is happily married so rein in. Now onto Descartely parsing my offer: it was a joke in the sense of ludicrous because Ravi is in San Diego and I and my appt are in Iowa it was a Judy style correction for Judy who forgot that my appt is on Sunday afternoon* it was a suggestion that given his rants, Ravi might also benefit from a wonderful pastoral counselor it was only partially an offer as most likely I would prefer to have the appt to myself. Does this make it a lie? I think not. *This is a mercy since my significant other of 15 years and I used to talk on Sunday afternoons until he died in fall 2009. Dear Robin, I can tell you for sure that on Oct 6, 2009 around 2 pm Central I was totally out of contact, nay in total denial of reality when I found out, via his older brother phoning from London, that Gere was dead at the age of 46 from a heart attack. All I could say over and over was, it's not true, it's not true, like a totally crazy person. So, I know what it is to be out of touch with reality. And I am grateful to you for your continued efforts on my behalf in this matter. Neither Robin Irony nor Defensive Irony present. BTW you weren't here in January so you might not know about my Christmas epiphany in which I realized that if I was lucky I had 30 more years to live and that I did not want those years to be filled with conflicts such as I experienced on FFL after our Sept 6 upset. So I told Ann and Emily that I would not be entering into any discussions that seemed to be carrying the grudge energy into 2013. I haven't kept to this perfectly but I aim to do so. Consequently I am enjoying FFL a lot more. My not carrying the grudge energy into 2013 also is applied to you as best as I can in any given moment. So no need to be concerned about psychological rape on my account. It seems that you don't remember that AWB also compared our exchanges to verbal aikido (-: Sorry, yahoo is still being wonky and sometimes I forget to look at Message View. I missed your first posting of the poignant poem about talking in bed. It touched me and my sentimental heart. I hope you can, in relation to me, adopt Curtis' style of gentle acceptance. Meaning that each of us is simply being himself or herself. And life reality, dear Robin, knows just how much contact we can experience in any moment. I am content to trust life reality about this. And I am grateful for your good wishes on my behalf. -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sunday, April 7, 2013 7:00 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE LOL.. the useless pastoral counselor would be so sorry he ever met me - but is that, by any chance a she? And is she hot? If so I am totally in baby. On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** dear Ravi, would you like to share my appt this afternoon with my pastoral counselor? love, BirchyShare -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:56 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi
[FairfieldLife] My Extremely Important Post: Graphene!
Apologias megalomanias... http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/04/07/graphene-the-miracle-substance.aspx
[FairfieldLife] Whipped cream?
Anyone tried making whipped cream: http://www.creamchargersuk.co.uk/cream-chargers.html ROFLOL!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: My Third Post: Wisdom of Crowds!
Apologies in advance, Cardemaister (-: but are you saying what I think you're saying? That this was all an Asian plot to mess with already addled Western brain cells? From: card cardemais...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 1:00 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: My Third Post: Wisdom of Crowds! If the Asian woman at 2:00 had kept her 80K, the result would've been 4702, instead of 4515... ~:0 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Cardemaister, I was blown away by this and told my pastoral counselor about it. She wondered if it had been replicated. Anyway, thanks for posting. From: card cardemaister@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 7:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] My Third Post: Wisdom of Crowds!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=982E49KAMyw
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. It also cheapens the significance of the apology. If someone is constantly apologizing for insignificant or nonexistent offenses thinking it will make themselves look good, what will an apology from this person mean for something that really requires an apology? If an apology costs nothing to make, it's worthless to the person to whom it is given. It would cost Share something to apologize for calling Robin a psychological rapist. But she isn't willing to give that much of herself to right the grievous wrong for which she was responsible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: xTED, Fairfield, Iowa's Our Conscious Future
In the center of it all is a deeper understanding of consciousness. Learn how the latest advances in mind, body society are converging to create new paradigms for humankind. Brilliant minds (and hearts) presenting cutting-edge knowledge that can enrich your life and change the world. Our Conscious Future. A Visionary Conference April 20, 2013 Fairfield, Iowa Featured speakers in the TED-style. Thought leaders from around the globe will be converging here to explore the new paradigms shaping a more unified vision for humankind. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: Dear Fairfield Community, I would like to warmly invite the entire community to a visionary conference eventOur Conscious Futureon April 20 at MUM. Thought leaders from around the globe will be converging here to explore the new paradigms shaping a more unified vision for humankind. xTED. Dateline: the Fairfield Weekly Reader this week: ...the challenges continued on the scientific rigor of some talks as well an underlying theme of consciousness present in some presentations. the whole field of consciousness was a hot issue and a red flag for the TED community. .. They challenged our subtitle- Consciousness and Transformation-TED, as I found out later, they were at the center of a consciousness controversy TED pulled videos of such scientists as Rupert Sheldrake, , the next week, the TEDxWestHollywood event-also with a consciousness-oriented theme... -had their license revoked just two weeks prior to their event. , Silver Lining. Consciousness is so intrinsic to much of life in Fairfield... chosen to reframe this TEDx experience as an opportunity to restructure our event [without] TEDx. X-TEDx: creating a platform where we can freely express a consciousness-based orientation, an orientation of richness, subtlety, and depth. April 20th - Our Conscious Future. xTED ... consider this as an opportunity to re-affirm our own core values, as we explore the emerging paradigms shaping our conscious future. xTED
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sanskrit: speech and splendour!
http://sanskritdictionary.com/%C4%81bh%C4%81sa/29184/1 http://sanskritdictionary.com/%C4%81bh%C4%81sa/29184/1 nice ÄbhÄá¹£aá¹a à¤à¤à¤¾à¤·à¤£ http://sanskritdictionary.com/word.php?q=%C4%81bh%C4%81%E1%B9%A3a%E1%B9%\ 87at=1d=29175 http://sanskritdictionary.com/word.php?q=%C4%81bh%C4%81%E1%B9%A3a%E1%B9\ %87at=1d=29175 my dear card player dear shine upon-illuminate to throw light upon-exhibit the falsity of anything -Cardemaister (-: [;)] could it be just ïºïº`ﻬïºØ³à¤à¤à¤¾à¤¸ ÄbhÄs, fancy; thought; impression, idea; intention, purpose,semblance, likeness; semblance of a reason; (John T. Platts) just saying in typing [:D] BTW could be also just any living entities who have the appearance(o.m.mere appearance, fallacious appearance) see AabhAa(aa-bhaa) =2 f. splendour, light; a flash; colour, appearance, beauty a reflected image, outline; likeness, resemblance in other word (alpha -betically)Ann,Emily,Judy,Raunchydog, Share,Susan etc etc combined? [:x] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon: Search Results 1 AbhASa m. speech , talking ; addressing R. ; a saying , proverb ; introduction , preface L. 2 AbhAsa m. splendour , light R. Veda1ntas. 195 ; colour , appearance R. Sus3r. Bhag. ; semblance , phantom , phantasm of the imagination ; mere appearance , fallacious appearance Veda1ntas. S3a1n3khS3r. ; reflection ; intention , purpose ; (in log.) fallacy , semblance of a reason , sophism , an erroneous though plausible argument (regarded by logicians as of various kind) ; ifc. looking like , having the mere appearance of a thing Gaut. Sa1h. c. (Can you spot the difference between those two words? LOL!)
[FairfieldLife] The much abused goddess of plenty
The much abused goddess of plenty By Yogi Ashwini 17th March 2013 12:00 AM Back in 1993, the spread of the mad cow disease took a toll of many across the globe. As a result, many stopped consuming beef products. However, not eating beef does not guarantee an escape from the disease and infection that comes with abusing the cow. Cattle by-products today find their way into almost everything around us. Gelatine is made by treating the bones of a cow with acid and finds its way into gel capsules, food products such as jellybeans, marshmallows and instant gelatine; as a setting agent for ice-creams and cheesecakes; as a coat on tablets and even to bind photo film. Fat from the dead cow is used in making soap, toothpaste as well as automobile tyres and also in asphalt. Glycerin derived from cow fat is used in manufacturing cosmetics. In war time, it's used in the explosive nitroglycerine. Its hooves and horns adorn our shirts as buttons and also make up the foam of fire extinguishers. Its blood goes into making plywood and fertilisers. Its hide becomes leather shoes or sporting goods while the foot oil obtained by boiling dead cows' feet is used to dress the leather. The root gland of the tongue yields pregastric lipase, which is used in cheese-making. Tissue from its small intestines is used for tennis racket strings and also as surgical sutures. Its nasal septum goes into making medicine for arthritis; from its lungs and intestines the anticoagulant drug heparin is made, and the cow's adrenal gland gives epinephrine. Catalase from its liver is used in lens-care products. The cholesterol, which is used to make artificial male sex hormones, comes from the cow's spinal cord, a tissue that contains prions -- the rogue protein that causes mad cow disease. Ironically, vaccines are grown in foetal calf serum. So, whether you are a vegetarian or non-vegetarian, a Hindu, a Muslim or a Christian, the hands of all are stained with the blood of the cow. It is said that what goes around, comes around. Abusing the cow is coming back to us not just as mad cow disease, but also as a plethora of other health risks posed by cattle products. Beef is heavy on the heart, reproductive system, immunity, progeny and even on the chance of your survival! Beef sold in the market is saturated with Omega 6 fats that promote heart disease. It is implanted with heavy doses of diet supplements, hormones, drugs and antibiotics that play havoc with your immune system and are often responsible for cancer, premature puberty and falling sperm counts. Beef is irradiated many times, exposing you and your progeny to radioactive material and harmful gamma rays. This beef has also been found to contain significant quantities of dioxin that is linked to diseases such as cancer and reproductive defects. E. coli O157:H7 that resides in the intestines of healthy cattle foster acute hemorrhagic diarrhoea and abdominal cramps in humans. Beef and other cattle by-products are often contaminated with heavy metals, pesticides and chemicals used in cattle farming. One look at any local garbage dump is enough to convince anyone of the various deadly wastes that fill the stomachs of the animals that forage around. These deadly wastes find their way through the above mentioned products into your homes and your body. These days there is a misconception among people that cow meat promotes physical strength and muscle power. There is not one Indian wrestler who consumes beef. In fact, Dara Singh who was a champion of his times was largely a vegetarian. The only thing you can gain from meat is the bad karma of inflicting pain on an evolved being. Research suggests that frequent meat eaters are twice as likely to get colon cancer and nine times more likely to be obese compared to non-beef eaters. It has also been found that at the age of 65, the average eater of meat suffers twice the bone loss of their vegetarian counterparts. Alongside the dangers that traditionally-raised beef pose to your health are the dangers they pose to your environment. A UN report places meat production at top two or three contributors to serious environmental problems. It accounts for about 20 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions. It takes around 20 times more fossil fuel to grow meat compared to the equivalent weight of vegetables. An astounding amount of water is used to raise meat adding to the problems of water scarcity. The vast amounts of petrochemicals, pesticides and chemical fertilisers used in meat production find their way into waterways, threatening aquatic life. The over-grazing of beef cattle and usage of land to grow animal feed contribute to soil erosion, food shortages (as the land and grains used to feed cattle that feed the affluent competes with the grains meant for men), and global warming (from the loss of plant life that would otherwise absorb CO2). Cattle-farming is also the
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Extremely Important Post: Graphene!
..and its not pyrolytic graphite?? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/339782 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/339782 but OTOH Highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) is a man- made material which is polycrystalline with highly oriented graphene sheets ..It's about flying---again... [;)] Didn't MMY said again and again if you want to fly ..take an aeroplane [:D] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vV8IAOojoAA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vV8IAOojoAA --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: Apologias megalomanias... http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/04/07/graphene-the-miracle-su\ bstance.aspx
[FairfieldLife] The Western Mystic
Apex of spiritual Western learning, Summary: God is Transcendent... The opportunity to Transcend exists always... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9Ug_ojd9n8
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Thanks for the reply. See below for some further thoughts: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. But wonder if an apology was not necessary? That is really what my point was about. It wasn't about what you do in addition to uttering the words of I'm sorry, it is the fact that these words seem to be said by you for things that are not even remotely requiring an apology. Things like making a joke or attributing some positive remark to someone even though someone else said it (mistaking Raunchy's positive assessment of your early dialogue with Robin with my own, for example). These are not grievous actions requiring you to prostrate yourself in anguish before someone you feel was maligned or hurt. I have to agree with Judy here when she says that the frequency of your apologies tend to cheapen them. How can/should one value an apology when someone gets them all the time for such little things, or sees that you say I'm sorry all the time for non-transgressions. It is not a huge thing Share, it maybe doesn't even matter, but so many of these apologies seem like deflection, a means to shield yourself from harm in the form of hurt and negativity which may or may not be projected back towards you. If you are unsure if something will hurt someone, or has hurt someone, then maybe edit what you are inclined to say and then perhaps you can avoid feeling so unsure afterwards. If in doubt, don't do it. It is strange, in a way - many here couldn't gag out an apology if their life depended upon it and you dispense them so freely it is almost comical.  Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. Again, this is not what I was referring to but thanks for the explanation. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. Confession is very different than an apology. They are not remotely alike or the same thing. Confessions often don't include apologies and apologies are not always a confession, especially when used so frequently and without good reason beyond deflecting possible negativity from oneself. From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. It also cheapens the significance of the apology. If someone is constantly apologizing for insignificant or nonexistent offenses thinking it will make themselves look
[FairfieldLife] 'Iron Lady' Prime Minister, Dead at 87
http://abcnews.go.com/International/margaret-thatcher-britains-iron-lady\ -dead-87/story?id=13644011#.UWLN90oozDk http://abcnews.go.com/International/margaret-thatcher-britains-iron-lad\ y-dead-87/story?id=13644011#.UWLN90oozDk It is with great sadness that Mark and Carol Thatcher announced that their mother Baroness Thatcher died peacefully following a stroke this morning, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEREJpOvNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEREJpOvNo
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. It also cheapens the significance of the apology. If someone is constantly apologizing for insignificant or nonexistent offenses thinking it will make themselves look good, what will an apology from this person mean for something that really requires an apology? If an apology costs nothing to make, it's worthless to the person to whom it is given. It would cost Share something to apologize for calling Robin a psychological rapist. But she isn't willing to give that much of herself to right the grievous wrong for which she was responsible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: My Extremely Important Post: Graphene!
dear merudanda, thank you for making me laugh after flying (-: From: merudanda no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 8:16 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: My Extremely Important Post: Graphene! snip ..It's about flying---again... or as Richard would say: so it's all about flying LOL snip --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: Apologias megalomanias... http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/04/07/graphene-the-miracle-substance.aspx
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. It also cheapens the significance of the apology. If someone is constantly apologizing for insignificant or nonexistent offenses thinking it will make themselves look good, what will an apology from this person mean for something that really requires an apology? If an apology costs nothing to make, it's worthless to the person to whom it is given. It would cost
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sanskrit: speech and splendour!
How about some ABBA? How could I ever refuse, I feel like I win when I lose. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FsVeMz1F5c ABBA Waterloo Eurovision on youtube Just in case url acts wonky From: merudanda no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 7:50 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sanskrit: speech and splendour! http://sanskritdictionary.com/%C4%81bh%C4%81sa/29184/1 nice ─Бbh─Бс╣гaс╣Зa рдЖрднрд╛рд╖рдг http://sanskritdictionary.com/word.php?q=%C4%81bh%C4%81%E1%B9%A3a%E1%B9%87at=1d=29175 my dear card player dear shine upon-illuminate to throw light upon-exhibit the falsity of anything -Cardemaister (-: could it be just я║Бя║`я╗мя║О╪│рдЖрднрд╛рд╕ ─Бbh─Бs, fancy; thought; impression, idea; intention, purpose,semblance, likeness; semblance of a reason; (John T. Platts) just saying in typing BTW could be also just any living entities who have the appearance(o.m.mere appearance, fallacious appearance) see AabhAa(aa-bhaa) =2 f. splendour, light; a flash; colour, appearance, beauty a reflected image, outline; likeness, resemblance in other word (alpha -betically)Ann,Emily,Judy,Raunchydog, Share,Susan etc etc combined? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon: Search Results 1 AbhASa m. speech , talking ; addressing R. ; a saying , proverb ; introduction , preface L. 2 AbhAsa m. splendour , light R. Veda1ntas. 195 ; colour , appearance R. Sus3r. Bhag. ; semblance , phantom , phantasm of the imagination ; mere appearance , fallacious appearance Veda1ntas. S3a1n3khS3r. ; reflection ; intention , purpose ; (in log.) fallacy , semblance of a reason , sophism , an erroneous though plausible argument (regarded by logicians as of various kind) ; ifc. looking like , having the mere appearance of a thing Gaut. Sa1h. c. (Can you spot the difference between those two words? LOL!)
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
snip --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you are wrong about them too. It is YOUR lack of ability to see his internal processes in them. If anything it comes through more simply in those. He comes across much more complexly in his less focused posts. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. Can't you just see that in some posts he is peevishly dismissing things that annoy him. You are reading too much into it because some of them are focused on you. But even the infamous C posts were completely comprehensible in terms of his POV and thinking process. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF A REAL RESPONSE TO THOSE FOUR POSTS TO YOU OF YESTERDAY (where I did say everything I could want to say) is an extraordinary thing. You have, I must assume, answered my four posts by this post. This certainly is WHAT YOU WANT THIS POST TO DO FOR YOU. Don't you EVER get tired of attempting this kind of mindfuck Robin. Seriously, it is so lame. What I want this post to do is to express ideas I am interested in expressing. I think it may very well work in the majority of those FFL readers who come upon this; especially right after reading Barry's posts from Paris of today. Paris is not The Stupid Cunt category. Stream of consciousness? That has nothing whatsoever to do with my analysis, Curtis It has to do with mine. In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. This is the most ludicrous and dishonest and absurd thing you have ever said about me, Curtis. Each word is a lie--and the entire meaning of this, it has no application, for example, to my four posts I wrote to you yesterday. Actually it does but you will never hear it. I know that now. You are the most beautiful liar I know, Curtis. Mindfuckery statement. Did this used to work for you in the old days with younger minds? I suppose I should, just for purposes of not excluding any possibility, hold before me the notion that this last paragraph is the performance of irony which exceeds anything we have read on FFL. If it is this--and from some perspective I think it could be argued that this is indeed what you are doing here (I believe I could make the case for this reading of this passage, Curtis)--then I think it brilliant. But you are ever the shrewd scheming fellow, Curtis (when it comes to controversy over truth or human motives or what is real--once the fight begins). But in the context of my having written all that I wrote to you yesterday, for this to be your first attempt at answering me (and you want this post to do the work of this, Curtis), well you have (if you were not being deliberately ironic) proven that those four posts are unanswerable. Dude, enough with the word flood posts. I read most of them and I have nothing to say. You are impervious to feedback and they were too long...again. Tighten up you shit if you want me to respond to you. I am not your editor. Better yet, send all your posts to Judy first. I am perceptive, Curtis, and my four posts addressed to yourself yesterday touch upon reality. As does my analysis of Barry Wright. I know you believe this. It is part of your wall to any feedback. I would never
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: snip The rest of the piece just amplifies this impression. You believe only a word flood can answer a word flood, I do not. You know, Curtis, the dismissively loaded phrase word flood may have had some impact the first time you used it, but it doesn't wear too well with constant repetition. About all it conveys now is that you're at a loss to deal with detailed reasoning. You know what wears even less well? Getting word flooded by a person who refuses to ever edit his writing to fit into a remotely normal person's ability to interact here. And you as a professional editor should know better. I am calling it as I see it. A tactic of wearing someone down with an unrealistically long flood of words. Eventually he posts 3 more than I could be reasonably expected to answer, and this is called to attention by both of you. Winning through attrition in a game I am not playing. You are a bit of a word flooder but not even in the same league as Robin. With you the righting is tight but it extends longer and longer because you never get enough of the specific interaction even after the person had made their points and is done. If you walked a few posts in my shoes you might be more sympathetic. It is a sensation of drowning in too much unedited ideas that could never be answered because they grow exponentially with each post. Only you two do this here. But you have never gone head to head with Robin in the way that I have so your charge of my being unable to deal with detailed reasoning is crap. If you had understood what Robin wrote, you could have made an appropriate succinct comment. The one you did make about stream of consciousness was irrelevant. Not to me or the actual author of the post in question, Barry. We both thought it was a good description of how he posts, and the absurdity to claim that he doesn't reveal himself in some unique way that only Robin can detect. Too bad you didn't think of this ploy the first time you tried to argue against the post. Then, according to you, Robin couldn't see Barry's experience of himself in his posts because Barry isn't open to being vulnerable to people he doesn't like. That was also true and reveals a common cognitive problem you have. (snicker) Right, Curtis. It's my cognitive problem that I am able to spot your inconsistencies. I am playing to the balcony here. I know you will absorb nothing of this. Your framing this behavior this way prevents it. Since I have interacted with you on an Internet forum this is your most maddening trait. You gut hung up on something that has no relation to the whole, and the meaning of the post gets derailed. I used to think it was deliberate but now believe that you really can't help yourself. This is how you experience the world. Take our last go around that seemed to fascinate you beyond any other point in my discussion with Robin, that I was ACTUALLY referring to some irrelevant past relationship Robin had with Share before the whole post exchange we were discussing. Most obviously it had to do with his predisposition to enter this exchange with the unfriendly agenda of shocking her into facing the reality that is Robin approved. But you couldn't get off it. You had to create a cockamamie theory of me being motivated to lie about my actual intended meaning once I clarified it. It made no rational sense outside your imagination of my dark intentions. It was weird. And it was a derailment. I could post 100 more examples but it will all be the same in the end. You cannot help this. I am not sure about Robin yet. But the point it derailed was about how Robin entered into the interaction with an unfriendly agenda. That was my point that got lost in this idiotic word parsing based on your imagination that I would be motivated to LIE about something so stupid,rather than accept my correction of YOUR misunderstanding. You cannot hold to different ideas in your mind together. Hint:One deals with his direct communication with someone and one is a general writing piece for people like me who enjoy them. Robin was explicit that his analysis *excluded* the latter And his analysis was wrong about that too, but I will address that to him. Neither attempted refutation has much of anything to do with Robin's actual analysis, which is considerably more subtle and complex than you've been able to grasp (or at least wanted anybody else to grasp). Jesus Robin will you plze throw some holy water on this long suffering disciple. I liked the little insinuation that I can magically control how other people view Robin by expressing an opinion. I didn't mean to suggest you're *successful* at it. I wonder if you believe you have such magical powers? (Barry's response to your post is amusing. To support your
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
I find people who insist on getting apologies to be very tiresome. It's s form of aggression. In this case, it is not even the wronged person who is insisting on it, but his self-appointed protector. Authfriend reminds me of a mother hen protecting one of her chicks, without noticing, apparently, that her chick is a full-grown rooster who can and does out-crow anyone on the block. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. It also cheapens the significance of the apology. If someone is constantly apologizing for insignificant or nonexistent offenses thinking it will make themselves look good, what will an apology from this person mean for something that really requires an apology? If an apology costs nothing to make, it's worthless to the person to whom it is given. It would cost Share something to apologize for calling Robin a psychological rapist. But she isn't willing to give that much of herself to right the grievous wrong for which she was responsible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Thanks Curtis, Good summary post. I didn't have time to read all these posts last week. I appreciate the cut to the chase. Except for a pile on which may come, Is this argument about over? Best Regards, -Buck in Fairfield --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: snip --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you are wrong about them too. It is YOUR lack of ability to see his internal processes in them. If anything it comes through more simply in those. He comes across much more complexly in his less focused posts. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. Can't you just see that in some posts he is peevishly dismissing things that annoy him. You are reading too much into it because some of them are focused on you. But even the infamous C posts were completely comprehensible in terms of his POV and thinking process. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF A REAL RESPONSE TO THOSE FOUR POSTS TO YOU OF YESTERDAY (where I did say everything I could want to say) is an extraordinary thing. You have, I must assume, answered my four posts by this post. This certainly is WHAT YOU WANT THIS POST TO DO FOR YOU. Don't you EVER get tired of attempting this kind of mindfuck Robin. Seriously, it is so lame. What I want this post to do is to express ideas I am interested in expressing. I think it may very well work in the majority of those FFL readers who come upon this; especially right after reading Barry's posts from Paris of today. Paris is not The Stupid Cunt category. Stream of consciousness? That has nothing whatsoever to do with my analysis, Curtis It has to do with mine. In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. This is the most ludicrous and dishonest and absurd thing you have ever said about me, Curtis. Each word is a lie--and the entire meaning of this, it has no application, for example, to my four posts I wrote to you yesterday. Actually it does but you will never hear it. I know that now. You are the most beautiful liar I know, Curtis. Mindfuckery statement. Did this used to work for you in the old days with younger minds? I suppose I should, just for purposes of not excluding any possibility, hold before me the notion that this last paragraph is the performance of irony which exceeds anything we have read on FFL. If it is this--and from some perspective I think it could be argued that this is indeed what you are doing here (I believe I could make the case for this reading of this passage, Curtis)--then I think it brilliant. But you are ever the shrewd scheming fellow, Curtis (when it comes to controversy over truth or human motives or what is real--once the fight begins). But in the context of my having written all that I wrote to you yesterday, for this to be your first attempt at answering me (and you want this post to do the work of this, Curtis), well you have (if you were not being deliberately ironic) proven that those four posts are unanswerable. Dude, enough with the word flood posts. I read most of them and I have nothing
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: I find people who insist on getting apologies to be very tiresome. It's s form of aggression. In this case, it is not even the wronged person who is insisting on it, but his self-appointed protector. Authfriend reminds me of a mother hen protecting one of her chicks, without noticing, apparently, that her chick is a full-grown rooster who can and does out-crow anyone on the block. I am not sure apology and aggression are related. Is MAKING an apology a form of aggression or just HOPING for one (theoretically speaking)? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. It also cheapens the significance of the apology. If someone is constantly apologizing for insignificant or nonexistent offenses thinking it will make themselves look good, what will an apology from this person mean for something that really requires an apology? If an apology costs nothing to make, it's worthless to the person to whom it is given. It would cost Share something to apologize for calling Robin a psychological rapist. But she isn't willing to give that much of herself to right the grievous wrong for which she was responsible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote: Thanks Curtis, Good summary post. I didn't have time to read all these posts last week. I appreciate the cut to the chase. Except for a pile on which may come, Is this argument about over? Best Regards, -Buck in Fairfield Dear Buck in Fairfield. Does pile on refer to more than one person engaging in conversation on the same subject? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you are wrong about them too. It is YOUR lack of ability to see his internal processes in them. If anything it comes through more simply in those. He comes across much more complexly in his less focused posts. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. Can't you just see that in some posts he is peevishly dismissing things that annoy him. You are reading too much into it because some of them are focused on you. But even the infamous C posts were completely comprehensible in terms of his POV and thinking process. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF A REAL RESPONSE TO THOSE FOUR POSTS TO YOU OF YESTERDAY (where I did say everything I could want to say) is an extraordinary thing. You have, I must assume, answered my four posts by this post. This certainly is WHAT YOU WANT THIS POST TO DO FOR YOU. Don't you EVER get tired of attempting this kind of mindfuck Robin. Seriously, it is so lame. What I want this post to do is to express ideas I am interested in expressing. I think it may very well work in the majority of those FFL readers who come upon this; especially right after reading Barry's posts from Paris of today. Paris is not The Stupid Cunt category. Stream of consciousness? That has nothing whatsoever to do with my analysis, Curtis It has to do with mine. In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. This is the most ludicrous and dishonest and absurd thing you have ever said about me, Curtis. Each word is a lie--and the entire meaning of this, it has no application, for example, to my four posts I wrote to you yesterday. Actually it does but you will never hear it. I know that now. You are the most beautiful liar I know, Curtis. Mindfuckery statement. Did this used to work for you in the old days with younger minds? I suppose I should, just for purposes of not excluding any possibility, hold before me the notion that this last paragraph is the performance of irony which exceeds anything we have read on FFL. If it is this--and from some perspective I think it could be argued that this is indeed what you are doing here (I believe I could make the case for this reading of this passage, Curtis)--then I think it brilliant. But you are ever the shrewd scheming fellow, Curtis (when it comes to controversy over truth or human motives or what is real--once the fight begins). But in the context of my having written all that I wrote to you yesterday,
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: snip The rest of the piece just amplifies this impression. You believe only a word flood can answer a word flood, I do not. You know, Curtis, the dismissively loaded phrase word flood may have had some impact the first time you used it, but it doesn't wear too well with constant repetition. About all it conveys now is that you're at a loss to deal with detailed reasoning. You know what wears even less well? Getting word flooded by a person who refuses to ever edit his writing to fit into a remotely normal person's ability to interact here. Who are we talking about here, Barry or Robin? And you as a professional editor should know better. I am calling it as I see it. A tactic of wearing someone down with an unrealistically long flood of words. Eventually he posts 3 more than I could be reasonably expected to answer, and this is called to attention by both of you. Winning through attrition in a game I am not playing. You are a bit of a word flooder but not even in the same league as Robin. With you the righting is tight but it extends longer and longer because you never get enough of the specific interaction even after the person had made their points and is done. If you walked a few posts in my shoes you might be more sympathetic. It is a sensation of drowning in too much unedited ideas that could never be answered because they grow exponentially with each post. Only you two do this here. But you have never gone head to head with Robin in the way that I have so your charge of my being unable to deal with detailed reasoning is crap. If you had understood what Robin wrote, you could have made an appropriate succinct comment. The one you did make about stream of consciousness was irrelevant. Not to me or the actual author of the post in question, Barry. We both thought it was a good description of how he posts, and the absurdity to claim that he doesn't reveal himself in some unique way that only Robin can detect. Too bad you didn't think of this ploy the first time you tried to argue against the post. Then, according to you, Robin couldn't see Barry's experience of himself in his posts because Barry isn't open to being vulnerable to people he doesn't like. That was also true and reveals a common cognitive problem you have. (snicker) Right, Curtis. It's my cognitive problem that I am able to spot your inconsistencies. I am playing to the balcony here. I know you will absorb nothing of this. Your framing this behavior this way prevents it. Since I have interacted with you on an Internet forum this is your most maddening trait. You gut hung up on something that has no relation to the whole, and the meaning of the post gets derailed. I used to think it was deliberate but now believe that you really can't help yourself. This is how you experience the world. Take our last go around that seemed to fascinate you beyond any other point in my discussion with Robin, that I was ACTUALLY referring to some irrelevant past relationship Robin had with Share before the whole post exchange we were discussing. Most obviously it had to do with his predisposition to enter this exchange with the unfriendly agenda of shocking her into facing the reality that is Robin approved. But you couldn't get off it. You had to create a cockamamie theory of me being motivated to lie about my actual intended meaning once I clarified it. It made no rational sense outside your imagination of my dark intentions. It was weird. And it was a derailment. I could post 100 more examples but it will all be the same in the end. You cannot help this. I am not sure about Robin yet. But the point it derailed was about how Robin entered into the interaction with an unfriendly agenda. That was my point that got lost in this idiotic word parsing based on your imagination that I would be motivated to LIE about something so stupid,rather than accept my correction of YOUR misunderstanding. You cannot hold to different ideas in your mind together. Hint:One deals with his direct communication with someone and one is a general writing piece for people like me who enjoy them. Robin was explicit that his analysis *excluded* the latter And his analysis was wrong about that too, but I will address that to him. Neither attempted refutation has much of anything to do with Robin's actual analysis, which is considerably more subtle and complex than you've been able to grasp (or at least wanted anybody else to grasp). Jesus Robin will you plze throw some holy water on this long suffering disciple. I liked the little insinuation that I can magically control
[FairfieldLife] Shocking Bikram Sex Scandal Should Shock No One - The Daily Beast
http://www.thedailybeast.com/witw/articles/2013/04/06/shocking-bikram-sex-sc andal-should-shock-no-one.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he
[FairfieldLife] Shocking Bikram Sex Scandal Should Shock No One - The Daily Beast
http://www.thedailybeast.com/witw/articles/2013/04/06/shocking-bikram-sex-sc andal-should-shock-no-one.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Is it disturbing that fragile world peace vibe you guys are cranking out in the cornfields? As much as one kid taking a bong hit? It makes me wonder if your good vibes are really gunna reach that 1950's looking kid dictator in North Korea if you don't have the dharana chops to focus on what works for you here and ignore the rest. I always thought peace started with the individual, but now I see that it takes a village to maintain a mood...I mean peace. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote: Thanks Curtis, Good summary post. I didn't have time to read all these posts last week. I appreciate the cut to the chase. Except for a pile on which may come, Is this argument about over? Best Regards, -Buck in Fairfield --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you are wrong about them too. It is YOUR lack of ability to see his internal processes in them. If anything it comes through more simply in those. He comes across much more complexly in his less focused posts. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. Can't you just see that in some posts he is peevishly dismissing things that annoy him. You are reading too much into it because some of them are focused on you. But even the infamous C posts were completely comprehensible in terms of his POV and thinking process. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF A REAL RESPONSE TO THOSE FOUR POSTS TO YOU OF YESTERDAY (where I did say everything I could want to say) is an extraordinary thing. You have, I must assume, answered my four posts by this post. This certainly is WHAT YOU WANT THIS POST TO DO FOR YOU. Don't you EVER get tired of attempting this kind of mindfuck Robin. Seriously, it is so lame. What I want this post to do is to express ideas I am interested in expressing. I think it may very well work in the majority of those FFL readers who come upon this; especially right after reading Barry's posts from Paris of today. Paris is not The Stupid Cunt category. Stream of consciousness? That has nothing whatsoever to do with my analysis, Curtis It has to do with mine. In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. This is the most ludicrous and dishonest and absurd thing you have ever said about me, Curtis. Each word is a lie--and the entire meaning of this, it has no application, for example, to my four posts I wrote to you yesterday. Actually it does but you will never hear it. I know that now. You are the most beautiful liar I know, Curtis. Mindfuckery statement. Did this used to work for you in the old days with younger minds? I suppose I should, just for purposes of not excluding any possibility, hold before me the notion that this last paragraph is the performance of irony which exceeds anything we have read on FFL. If it is this--and from some perspective I think it could be argued that this is indeed what you are doing here (I believe I could
[FairfieldLife] Mercedes Kirkel: New Interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump - 04/08/2013
blog updates from Buddha at the Gas Pump http://gallery.mailchimp.com/e709a491029b04e745834d34d/images/star.gif published 04/08/2013 168. Mercedes Kirkel http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=1b0a36e20be=16e07f16fe Apr 07, 2013 08:09 am | Rick Mercedes Kirkel is an author and channel for Mary Magdalene and other beings of light. In July of 2010, Mary Magdalene began coming to Mercedes daily, giving extraordinary messages for humanity’s evolution and spiritual growth. That was the birth of … Continue reading http://batgap.us2.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=da0b8e72f8e=16e07f16fe → The post 168. Mercedes Kirkel http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=86c6112288e=16e07f16fe appeared first on Buddha at the Gas Pump http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=db31821e10e=16e07f16fe . http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/images/mime-type/mp3.png 168_mercedes_kirkel.mp3 http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=dbfe6de7cbe=16e07f16fe 60.1 MB comments http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=7305dfc68ae=16e07f16fe | read more http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=20c7d7ee1de=16e07f16fe http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=16c699f2b8e=16e07f16fe http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=11f6560b0ce=16e07f16fe http://batgap.us2.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=c98a9bf1cee=16e07f16fe http://gallery.mailchimp.com/e709a491029b04e745834d34d/images/frond.gif Elsewhere * http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=7a9776d3afe=16e07f16fe Visit My Blog * http://us2.forward-to-friend.com/forward?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=a8aaacb972e=16e07f16fe Share This with a friend * http://batgap.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=68bae41876e=16e07f16fe Follow me on Twitter * http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=fa02a412aae=16e07f16fe RSS feed http://gallery.mailchimp.com/e709a491029b04e745834d34d/images/shim.gif view email in a browser http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=a8aaacb972e=16e07f16fe | Regular announcement of new interviews posted at http://batgap.com. Buddha at the Gas Pump 1108 South B Street Fairfield, Iowa 52556 Add us to your address book http://batgap.us2.list-manage1.com/vcard?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=b0e5d0d53a Copyright (C) 2013 Buddha at the Gas Pump All rights reserved. http://www.mailchimp.com/monkey-rewards/?utm_source=freemium_newsletterutm_medium=emailutm_campaign=monkey_rewardsaid=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5afl=1 http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/open.php?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=a8aaacb972e=16e07f16fe
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. And you are welcome to your opinion of how he acted in person as I am to mine about how he shows up here. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. That seems kind of funny charge sine Robin is complaining that I am not responding to his 3 part word flood posts. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Yes we often choose to interact here. So your point is? Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Oh, characterizing my interaction with him as whining and complaining is such an unfriendly judgement. Does that apply only to me? Does it apply to Judy's part in the interaction? Should everyone here just ignore each other and let you have the board to yourself? Sorry you find my opinions here inconvenient. I suggest you should perhaps take your own advice in regards to my interactions with other posters here. And stop your whining and complaining about how I choose to post here. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8,
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. No, Curtis, that isn't what happened. To start with, this was a minor conflict between Share and Robin--due to a misunderstanding by Share of something quite innocuous that Robin had said--a conflict which *you did your damndest to exacerbate*. Here's what Share said at the time to Robin: As for what my feelings were, I didn't suffer or feel insulted. Nor did I think you were being hurtful or cruel. I simply did not want to pursue the theme of whether or not I was being the real me. Nor the theme of my alleged hyper positivity. We've been down those rabbit holes plenty. This reflected her *misunderstanding* of what Robin had said. He had practically turned himself inside-out trying to explain to her what he had really meant and apologizing profusely *himself* for not having been clear. But notice that she didn't suffer or feel insulted. That was when you, Curtis, jumped in and started the process of trying to convince her she had something major to complain about, which ultimately--*a month later*--culminated in her psychological rape accusation. *A month later*. Not when this first came up. It took quite a bit of time to talk her into making that flamboyant accusation. This accusation, Curtis, *was your doing*. I believe you had some help from LordKnows as well, behind the scenes, in your project of getting Share to smear Robin for something that she initially hadn't been that bothered by. And now you're doing your best to perpetuate the smear. This is, of course, what you were referring to when you claimed Robin had had an unfriendly agenda with Share from the outset, your disingenuous denials notwithstanding. I wrote two posts documenting in detail Share's amazing progression from not suffering or feeling insulted to believing she had been the victim of psychological rape. I'll dig them up if necessary. Now read Curtis's version of what happened, bearing in mind the *facts* I outlined above. His dishonesty is appalling: I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Shocking Bikram Sex Scandal Should Shock No One - The Daily Beast
This is no scandal - he has gone on record saying he has sex with his students - he claimed that sometimes gurus have to cuz the students threaten to kill themselves or make false allegations if the guru doesn't accede to the students demands - that's what he said. From: Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 11:44 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Shocking Bikram Sex Scandal Should Shock No One - The Daily Beast http://www.thedailybeast.com/witw/articles/2013/04/06/shocking-bikram-sex-scandal-should-shock-no-one.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Thanks Curtis and feste for weighing in on all this. I'm aiming to avoid anything to do with last year's upset between me and Robin unless HE wants to discuss it offline. I have no desire to subject other FFL posters to all that again. As for the current upset, I've apologized and offered to make amends so I think the next step is Robin's. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 9:40 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: (snip) I wrote two posts documenting in detail Share's amazing progression from not suffering or feeling insulted to believing she had been the victim of psychological rape. I'll dig them up if necessary. Here's one of them, from October 2 of last year: - Having read all the relevant posts, I am utterly baffled and appalled at Share's use of this term [psychological rape] to describe her interactions with Robin. I'd be very curious to know where she got it from. Did someone suggest it to her? This is such a serious charge, it's really important to review some of the background. In her post today, Share writes: Just for the record, this is exactly why I got so upset initially with Robin about the Russian flash mob post. Being psychologically raped didn't feel good then just as it doesn't feel good now. Here is Share's initial comment to Robin about his reaction to her remarks about the flash mob video (September 4): Yes I will excuse your presumption if you excuse my not going down this particular rabbit hole againSo no problemo. Sigh, btw, I notice I'm feeling grumpy this morning. Blaming it on the sugar I ate yesterday. Somehow I've become very sensitive to sugar. Anyway, Robin, apologies for taking it out on you. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/319178 And here is what she wrote to Robin on September 9 concerning this interaction: As for what my feelings were, I didn't suffer or feel insulted. Nor did I think you were being hurtful or cruel. I simply did not want to pursue the theme of whether or not I was being the real me. Nor the theme of my alleged hyper positivity. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/319500 So at the time that it happened, Share felt a little grumpy and apologized to Robin. Four days later, Share affirmed that she had not been insulted, did not suffer, did not think Robin was being hurtful or cruel. [This was the point at which Curtis jumped in.--JS 4/8/13] Today, four weeks later, it was psychological rape. Something isn't right here. Somehow Share has become convinced that what at the time had caused no more than a little grumpiness on her part (which she attribted to eating sugar anyway) was a terrible act of emotional violation equivalent to rape. (She had completely misinterpreted Robin's remarks in any case, and he had practically stood on his head explaining himself in the kindest possible manner.) The charge was made in public about an FFL member. I think we need an explanation. What, or who, caused Share to change her mind so drastically? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/321696
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Dear Curtis, I am going to pay tribute to you. Your guile is so immaculate, so indefatigable, that the only final answer to you is: DO IT, CURTIS. DO IT. WE ARE JUST GOING TO WATCH. In some way I'd almost say you are as inspired as Christ. Your dishonesty is becoming one of the Ten Wonders of the universe. There is no intelligence, no power, no love, no reason existing anywhere which could ever cause to issue from you a tremor of humility. I feel triumphant here--in a rather quiet and unusual way--in doing something anti-climactic (you are rejuvenated after yesterday, right?): writing to you, Curtis, to tell you your murderously conscientious determination to keep bullshitting on this forum (when it comes to matters of interpersonal truthfulness) can finally only be met by a simple: I will leave you alone. Still, you will never answer those four posts from Saturday. Your are hilarious in the seriousness with which you want to wound anyone who decides to carry the truth forward in the teeth of your foul and perverse opposition. But there is a need for mercy here, because, it would seem, you are acting the part you were cast to play. In my senior Shakespeare course at university, we analyzed the characters in his plays. You are one character in a bigger play than Shakespeare ever imagined, Curtis. You show us who you are. And you make Iago seem like a child. And you force analysis by how you behave. [It you were a character in a Shakespeare play I would look forward to writing an essay about what you reveal about who you are in your actions. In this case, the stage is this forum.) I respect your philosophy, Curtis; and your performance (at all times); but I am more inspired to know you will never go out of character than I am certain that God, as he once existed, has decided to leave what he created. Had I not known what I knew before I met you, Curtis, I would have become religious from reading how you argue here on FFL. You don't quite get the same sensation in your heart when you lie as someone who does not lie, but nevertheless it is a sensation that goes to the sublime. You understand what I am saying here, Curtis: to oppose you is to draw out the real person. Curtis. That person does not know even in his imagination what it feels like to be someone who cannot help but let life form them, alter them, make them, break them, exalt them. You are seemingly self-made from the beginning, Curtis. You have secured what seems to me to be an imperishable place in creation. No one can see what you are doing, Curtis. Only you. CURTIS'S ANSWER TO ROBIN'S RANT: Curtis: Robin, no one is afraid of you anymore. You think you can lay down your trip on others--but it ain't going to fly, Robin. We see through your game. This torrent of abuse will not make true what is not true. You can't have your way around here, Robin. I am not going to let you get away with it. I have been honest and forthcoming from the beginning with you, Robin; but you don't take criticism well--and I have yet to see you respond to the intelligent feedback I keep giving you. Don't you see the irony of all this, Robin? Those who are defending you have deprived themselves of the integrity (they don't realize they have done this, mind you; their self-righteousness tells us this) that I have decided will remain in my possession. You just don't like it when people disagree with you, Robin. And your four posts from yesterday: word flood gets it, Robin. There was nothing there-I read through all of it carefully enough--for me to answer. You were just having your own experience of yourself, imprisoned in your own egotism--although I grant you: you don't think this is the case. But it is, Robin. Do you really believe you can win this thing, Robin? Those who come to my defence here on FFL, to a person they are brave and sincere. You just are not used to having an adversary who will not be intimidated, Robin. Robin, I wish you could hear this. For all your pretensions of objectification of first person subjectivity you fail to make the grade. Hardly anyone understands you, Robin; and believe it or not, Barry's criticism of you which you reposted below, it is felt deeply and passionately--by more persons than just Barry. Robin, you won't like this: But Barry's reaction to you says something real about you. I must stop here, Robin, else you will accuse me of what you do almost all the time: word flood. I think the most gracious thing I can say to you, Robin is: You are flawed, you are eccentric, you are very blind, you are very arrogant, and you are--I mean this, Robin, my friend--almost pathetic. I don't really respect either your intelligence or your philosophy. You need a wake-up call, Robin. I am trying to give that to you. I expect you just to say: You are lying here, Curtis. You don't really believe any of this. There. I said it for you, Robin. And you are wrong. And I have just
[FairfieldLife] Transcendental Music
Transcendental Music http://transcendentalmusic.org/?utm_source=Newsletter%2Butm_medium=Emailutm_content=Website%2BIntro%2BVideoutm_campaign=April%2B2013
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
You really needed that many words to express that? Your postings here are not an interaction with other people. It is all going on inside your own head. I am under orders from Ann to ignore you now, but you apparently are free to rant away. Man you must have done a number on her up at that mic. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: Dear Curtis, I am going to pay tribute to you. Your guile is so immaculate, so indefatigable, that the only final answer to you is: DO IT, CURTIS. DO IT. WE ARE JUST GOING TO WATCH. In some way I'd almost say you are as inspired as Christ. Your dishonesty is becoming one of the Ten Wonders of the universe. There is no intelligence, no power, no love, no reason existing anywhere which could ever cause to issue from you a tremor of humility. I feel triumphant here--in a rather quiet and unusual way--in doing something anti-climactic (you are rejuvenated after yesterday, right?): writing to you, Curtis, to tell you your murderously conscientious determination to keep bullshitting on this forum (when it comes to matters of interpersonal truthfulness) can finally only be met by a simple: I will leave you alone. Still, you will never answer those four posts from Saturday. Your are hilarious in the seriousness with which you want to wound anyone who decides to carry the truth forward in the teeth of your foul and perverse opposition. But there is a need for mercy here, because, it would seem, you are acting the part you were cast to play. In my senior Shakespeare course at university, we analyzed the characters in his plays. You are one character in a bigger play than Shakespeare ever imagined, Curtis. You show us who you are. And you make Iago seem like a child. And you force analysis by how you behave. [It you were a character in a Shakespeare play I would look forward to writing an essay about what you reveal about who you are in your actions. In this case, the stage is this forum.) I respect your philosophy, Curtis; and your performance (at all times); but I am more inspired to know you will never go out of character than I am certain that God, as he once existed, has decided to leave what he created. Had I not known what I knew before I met you, Curtis, I would have become religious from reading how you argue here on FFL. You don't quite get the same sensation in your heart when you lie as someone who does not lie, but nevertheless it is a sensation that goes to the sublime. You understand what I am saying here, Curtis: to oppose you is to draw out the real person. Curtis. That person does not know even in his imagination what it feels like to be someone who cannot help but let life form them, alter them, make them, break them, exalt them. You are seemingly self-made from the beginning, Curtis. You have secured what seems to me to be an imperishable place in creation. No one can see what you are doing, Curtis. Only you. CURTIS'S ANSWER TO ROBIN'S RANT: Curtis: Robin, no one is afraid of you anymore. You think you can lay down your trip on others--but it ain't going to fly, Robin. We see through your game. This torrent of abuse will not make true what is not true. You can't have your way around here, Robin. I am not going to let you get away with it. I have been honest and forthcoming from the beginning with you, Robin; but you don't take criticism well--and I have yet to see you respond to the intelligent feedback I keep giving you. Don't you see the irony of all this, Robin? Those who are defending you have deprived themselves of the integrity (they don't realize they have done this, mind you; their self-righteousness tells us this) that I have decided will remain in my possession. You just don't like it when people disagree with you, Robin. And your four posts from yesterday: word flood gets it, Robin. There was nothing there-I read through all of it carefully enough--for me to answer. You were just having your own experience of yourself, imprisoned in your own egotism--although I grant you: you don't think this is the case. But it is, Robin. Do you really believe you can win this thing, Robin? Those who come to my defence here on FFL, to a person they are brave and sincere. You just are not used to having an adversary who will not be intimidated, Robin. Robin, I wish you could hear this. For all your pretensions of objectification of first person subjectivity you fail to make the grade. Hardly anyone understands you, Robin; and believe it or not, Barry's criticism of you which you reposted below, it is felt deeply and passionately--by more persons than just Barry. Robin, you won't like this: But Barry's reaction to you says something real about you. I must stop here, Robin, else you will accuse me of what you do almost all the time: word flood. I think the most
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Iron Lady' Prime Minister, Dead at 87
Cher fans on Twitter were agitated apparently: #nowthatchersdead http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-worried-cher-1818681 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda no_reply@... wrote: http://abcnews.go.com/International/margaret-thatcher-britains-iron-lady\ -dead-87/story?id=13644011#.UWLN90oozDk http://abcnews.go.com/International/margaret-thatcher-britains-iron-lad\ y-dead-87/story?id=13644011#.UWLN90oozDk It is with great sadness that Mark and Carol Thatcher announced that their mother Baroness Thatcher died peacefully following a stroke this morning, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEREJpOvNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEREJpOvNo
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Huh? No he doesn't. Curtis is often on here and he always actually brings something worth reading, unlike Robin who just seems to bring his mental health problems for an airing. Like Judy, the guy is obsessed and it's fucking weird to watch. I also can't imagine still being impressed with Robins empty cult. Is only lasting an hour at the mic something to be ashamed of then? Seems there is a lot of ego involved there
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: I find people who insist on getting apologies to be very tiresome. It's s form of aggression. Exactly. In this case, it is not even the wronged person who is insisting on it, but his self-appointed protector. Authfriend reminds me of a mother hen protecting one of her chicks, without noticing, apparently, that her chick is a full-grown rooster who can and does out-crow anyone on the block. For the record, the technical term for this type of person is fag hag. Contrary to popular belief, this term has nothing to do with whether the people being protected are gay or not, only that the self-appointed protector seeks to gain power and adulation from them by stepping in as their savior as often as humanly possible, thus demonstrating that they are unable to protect themselves. Continuing in my usual subtle way to describe how I perceive this whole tempest in a pisspot, I would describe the seem- ingly neverending demand from some on this forum that others APOLOGIZE as a form of Castaneda's petty tyrant behavior. It's a power play. As you suggest, it's aggressive, and its whole intent is to BE aggressive. This particular petty tyrant scenario IN MY OPINION takes two forms. The first (at least as it is acted out on this forum) takes the form: I don't like something (anything... the particulars really don't matter) you said about me, in this case you calling me a cunt when I was acting like one. Therefore I invoke my God-given right to continue to act like a cunt and harass you any way I can think of until you apologize publicly. The second form of petty tyrant behavior takes the form: I don't like something you said about someone else on this forum. I'm not *in the least* involved in this, but because I don't like you, I'm *still* going to continue to act like a cunt and harass you any way I can think of until you apologize publicly. You can thank me for expressing the whole scenario this succinctly and more accurately later. My work is done here. There is a tremendous advantage in working a day job all day and not being able (for the most part) to plow through all of this infantile FFL crap until I get home. Once I do get home, after dealing with adults all day, I'm really not in a mood to pussyfoot around and pretend that what I perceive as childish idiocy ISN'T childish idiocy. I call it like I see it. This is how I see it. Your mileage may vary, and if it does I really don't give a shit. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
On 04/08/2013 10:57 AM, salyavin808 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Huh? No he doesn't. Curtis is often on here and he always actually brings something worth reading, unlike Robin who just seems to bring his mental health problems for an airing. Like Judy, the guy is obsessed and it's fucking weird to watch. I also can't imagine still being impressed with Robins empty cult. Is only lasting an hour at the mic something to be ashamed of then? Seems there is a lot of ego involved there Yeah, I can't believe the adolescent hoo-ha gets the patients in the Funny Farm Lounge going. Guess we need to up their meds. ;-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Man what hypocritical bullshit. If it's Barry and Curtis it's all impartial, monotonous set of POV's, it's a rap, it's stream of consciousness, it's harmless likes and dislikes, just benign preferences. If its others it's mindfuckery, it's unpleasant, unfriendly, unwelcome word flood, it's toxic energy directed at strangers, it's trollish behavior - even psychological rape's now approved by His Holiness. A master of deception at work. On Apr 8, 2013, at 7:40 AM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: (snip) Take our last go around that seemed to fascinate you beyond any other point in my discussion with Robin, I was fascinated by all of it, actually. that I was ACTUALLY referring to some irrelevant past relationship Robin had with Share before the whole post exchange we were discussing. Right. That irrelevant past relationship that you just spent a whole post making a huge (and thoroughly, documentably disingenuous) deal of. That is what you were referring to. Most obviously it had to do with his predisposition to enter this exchange with the unfriendly agenda of shocking her into facing the reality that is Robin approved. It was not at all obvious that this is what you were talking about, first of all, even if you're telling the truth (which I do not believe you are). Second, Robin entered this exchange with one of his ironic posts, commenting on *Share's* extremely unfriendly remarks about his posts to Barry and you. There was no agenda to shock Share. In reply to her response, he simply pointed out that it made no sense--as any of us might have done, including you, if someone had responded to something we had written with a post that was illogical. You were and are attempting to perpetuate the psychological rape smear from back in October of last year. Your ridiculous overreaction when Robin pointed out that his initial exchanges with Share had been extremely friendly, your refusal to acknowledge any ambiguity in what you had written, is the tell that you had gotten caught. But you couldn't get off it. You had to create a cockamamie theory of me being motivated to lie about my actual intended meaning once I clarified it. I stand by my theory that your clarification was a walkback from having been caught out. It made no rational sense outside your imagination of my dark intentions. You have the darkest of intentions vis-a-vis Robin. You are determined to bring him down because he sees through you. And you have no hesitation about using irrational means to do so. The trains you manufacture and send off into the wild blue yonder *need* to be derailed. It was weird. And it was a derailment. I could post 100 more examples but it will all be the same in the end. You cannot help this. I am not sure about Robin yet. But the point it derailed was about how Robin entered into the interaction with an unfriendly agenda. That was my point that got lost in this idiotic word parsing based on your imagination that I would be motivated to LIE about something so stupid,rather than accept my correction of YOUR misunderstanding. As I noted above, Robin entered into the interaction with an ironic post commenting on *Share's* unfriendly agenda. There was nothing there to be derailed except your deliberate misrepresentation. And yes, you had plenty of motivation to lie about what you meant when you got called on it. You thought you could invoke that past psychological rape upset to support your thesis about Robin's purportedly unfriendly agenda with Share, except that you forgot (or hoped others would have forgotten) that their initial conversations--quite a few of them, until Share's misunderstanding--were unquestionably very friendly. You cannot hold to different ideas in your mind together. Hint:One deals with his direct communication with someone and one is a general writing piece for people like me who enjoy them. Robin was explicit that his analysis *excluded* the latter And his analysis was wrong about that too, but I will address that to him. His analysis *didn't deal with Barry's general writing pieces*. There's nothing for you to address (nor any different ideas for me to hold in my mind, since there's only one relevant one). In any case, I think you need to address all of it with Barry, given that Barry has seen fit to helpfully confirm Robin's analysis: Barry: In fact, the less awareness of self I have, the better the writing seems to flow. Self 'gets in the way.' Robin: ...does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself...
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Huh? No he doesn't. She's right, salyavin. It's happened more than once. Curtis is often on here and he always actually brings something worth reading, unlike Robin who just seems to bring his mental health problems for an airing. Robin has made many valuable contributions to FFL when he isn't being harassed by those who find him threatening. Like Judy, the guy is obsessed and it's fucking weird to watch. I also can't imagine still being impressed with Robins empty cult. Hard to be impressed by something you don't know anything about. Is only lasting an hour at the mic something to be ashamed of then? Seems there is a lot of ego involved there
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: Man what hypocritical bullshit. If it's Barry and Curtis it's all impartial, monotonous set of POV's, it's a rap, it's stream of consciousness, it's harmless likes and dislikes, just benign preferences. If its others it's mindfuckery, it's unpleasant, unfriendly, unwelcome word flood, it's toxic energy directed at strangers, it's trollish behavior - even psychological rape's now approved by His Holiness. A master of deception at work. So true, Kapati, so true. Please continue... On Apr 8, 2013, at 7:40 AM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
No salyavin baby if you can move past your fascination, obsession, envy for chins and your obsession for Venn diagrams you can make your idiotic brain think straight. On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:57 AM, salyavin808 fintlewoodle...@mail.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Huh? No he doesn't. Curtis is often on here and he always actually brings something worth reading, unlike Robin who just seems to bring his mental health problems for an airing. Like Judy, the guy is obsessed and it's fucking weird to watch. I also can't imagine still being impressed with Robins empty cult. Is only lasting an hour at the mic something to be ashamed of then? Seems there is a lot of ego involved there
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Yeah, I can't believe the adolescent hoo-ha gets the patients in the Funny Farm Lounge going. Guess we need to up their meds. ;-) Did you forget - It's radiation Uncleji that clouding your mind. Don't let all this distract you - you are the pride of all Bay Area conspiracy theorists - don't let them down !!! On Apr 8, 2013, at 11:01 AM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote: Yeah, I can't believe the adolescent hoo-ha gets the patients in the Funny Farm Lounge going. Guess we need to up their meds. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I find people who insist on getting apologies to be very tiresome. It's s form of aggression. Exactly. In this case, it is not even the wronged person who is insisting on it, but his self-appointed protector. Authfriend reminds me of a mother hen protecting one of her chicks, without noticing, apparently, that her chick is a full-grown rooster who can and does out-crow anyone on the block. Good description of Robin. However, that he can protect himself just fine doesn't mean I can't have my own issues with the behavior and ethics of some of the people here. For the record, the technical term for this type of person is fag hag. Contrary to popular belief, this term has nothing to do with whether the people being protected are gay or not Actually, contrary to Barry's belief, the term has nothing to do with anybody protecting anybody; it refers to a woman who tends to hang out with gay men. only that the self-appointed protector seeks to gain power and adulation from them by stepping in as their savior as often as humanly possible, thus demonstrating that they are unable to protect themselves. By Barry's definition of fag hag, then, it applies to both Curtis and himself as well as a few others of their fans who rush to protect them whenever they're criticized. (snip) You can thank me for expressing the whole scenario this succinctly and more accurately later. My work is done here. Yes, thank you for making it so clear that you believe Curtis is unable to protect himself. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Dear Curtis, I have spent the last half hour assuming you, Share, Barry, Salyavin, Bhairitu (they are many others, I know) are all onto something when it comes to me. The thought experiment. Now an existential one. I have, then, to repeat, decided you are essentially right about me (as are other critics). What I am troubled by now, however, is whether to approach myself as if I have mental problems (as Barry and Salyavin would have it) or whether it is something that can be changed by adopting an entirely different attitude towards persons who disagree with me [there is one person who stands out in this regard as you know]--And perhaps more importantly, altering my attitude towards myself: viz. I am blind when it comes to knowing my motives, blind when it comes to understanding who I am, blind when it comes to understanding when criticism (about myself) is valid, blind when it comes to estimating how perspicuous my posts are. But what I need to know, Curtis, is: is this mental health problem or a philosophical problem (as it were: I am subject to personal amendment via examination of self)? Because if it is clinical, that is more than depressing. As I shall have to seek professional help. If you decide I need to do this, is there some way we could keep this private between you and me? Let's say that if you do not deem my problem to be psychopathological, you will just say: You are nuts, Robin. And if you deem my problem to in fact be psychopathological, you will just say: You are fine, Robin. I promise to cease posting if you oblige me in this way. I mean, unless you choose to answer those four posts from Saturday. (Then, whether crazy or not, I think you will understand my desperate need to have some way of preserving my reputation on FFL as someone who never gives in, or gives up--Oops! that just may decide which kind of problem I have, what I just wrote there. I see that now, Curtis. Still, I am not going prejudge this matter.) I think we should just wipe the slate clean here, Curtis. Until you say something bad about me, I won't say anything bad about you. This, then, will be my last word on FFL until I hear from you as to how I should proceed. Believe it or not, I *am* feeling better. Thank you, Curtis. Robin --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Curtis1: Sorry Robin, I'm gunna have to let your word flood posts stand on their own without commentary. I think that does you the most justice because Judy has informed me that when I respond I can keep others from seeing the truth of your post. Hey great job on deflecting the feedback. Not a drop ever reached you. I guess you must have ascertained that I really didn't believe what I wrote so you could dismiss it out of hand. Robin1: Well, since you *didn't* believe what [you] wrote, I feel it would have been naive of me not to have dismiss[ed] it out of hand. But I have not, Curtis. I wrote four posts to you yesterday. Those four posts, each one of them, constitutes a comprehensive response to what you wrote to me this morning, which I just responded to now. We are talking about a Curtis Principle. But I think I might not forget *this*: I guess you must have ascertained that I really didn't believe what I wrote so you could dismiss it out of hand. Orgasm. You came, Curtis. I finally got you to come. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Dear Robin, Thank you for your letter. I really don't understand your relentless attacks on me, Robin. I disagree with you about things you take very seriously. Why the problem? Look, Robin, the fact that I have a different POV than you do about something does not mean you have to try to find out some psychological reason why I would come to a different conclusion about this. I am simply responding to you, Robin, and it seems you don't like this. But I am starting to feel badly on your behalf. For someone to rage away, trying to find what is wrong with the other person's psyche which would explain their difference of opinion on some matter--Robin, this is bizarre. I have only done one thing: I have called you on this. And you give plenty of evidence why you don't like this. Once again, I make a simple request (you are just being your ironic asshole self in your letter below: you are not serious about the clinical versus philosophical prescription; I shall pass over that): You express your POV; I will express mine. And if you are offended that I refuse to be converted to your POV, *live with it*, Robin. Don't you see what I and others have found out about you? You don't wish to be contradicted, Robin. The moment someone opposes you, you start to analyze their inner motivation (For not collapsing their different POV, and folding into you own--Is this what you did in those seminars, Robin? Ah, fuck it. Don't answer that. I have had enough of that shit from Ann today). You have to stop doing this, Robin. Almost everyone on FFL liked me, respected me, admired me (with a few exceptions; but you are familiar with those who have determined to be my enemy--and Barry's--for as long as there is life) before you came on board. You have essentially confused and disturbed people with your word floods, Robin. They don't help the cause of truth-finding on this forum. You have to get this through your swelled (still some hallucinatory effects there, Robin?) head. Once you do--and I know you are being facetious and mocking with your proposed thought experiment (yes, now become existential--Funny, that, Robin)--there will be more sunlight here on FFL, Robin. You are the one--you are not going to like this, Robin--who darkens the skies here. I am only interested in letting in more `reality' [sunlight], Robin. You are the person who stirs everything up. I don't like it. Barry doesn't like it. Salyavin doesn't like it. And Bhairitu doesn't like it. Many more would echo this sentiment, Robin. Look, I have made a huge compromise in writing the way I have here. I am almost (please consider this a psychological favour, Robin; I think my ordinary prose is just too hard-hitting for you; I prefer your more effeminate style--and I mean that in a good way; don't fret) imitating your style here, Robin. That's about it, Robin. I appreciate your reading this. Good rap so far today. I enjoyed it. Curtis --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: Dear Curtis, I have spent the last half hour assuming you, Share, Barry, Salyavin, Bhairitu (they are many others, I know) are all onto something when it comes to me. The thought experiment. Now an existential one. I have, then, to repeat, decided you are essentially right about me (as are other critics). What I am troubled by now, however, is whether to approach myself as if I have mental problems (as Barry and Salyavin would have it) or whether it is something that can be changed by adopting an entirely different attitude towards persons who disagree with me [there is one person who stands out in this regard as you know]--And perhaps more importantly, altering my attitude towards myself: viz. I am blind when it comes to knowing my motives, blind when it comes to understanding who I am, blind when it comes to understanding when criticism (about myself) is valid, blind when it comes to estimating how perspicuous my posts are. But what I need to know, Curtis, is: is this mental health problem or a philosophical problem (as it were: I am subject to personal amendment via examination of self)? Because if it is clinical, that is more than depressing. As I shall have to seek professional help. If you decide I need to do this, is there some way we could keep this private between you and me? Let's say that if you do not deem my problem to be psychopathological, you will just say: You are nuts, Robin. And if you deem my problem to in fact be psychopathological, you will just say: You are fine, Robin. I promise to cease posting if you oblige me in this way. I mean, unless you choose to answer those four posts from Saturday. (Then, whether crazy or not, I think you will understand my desperate need to have some way of preserving my reputation on FFL as someone who never gives in, or gives up--Oops! that just may decide which kind of problem I have, what I just
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Dear Robin, you left out laughinggull who called you a performer and feste who called you the rooster who could out crow all others. As for me, I believed you when you told Curtis that you want to help insert more of me into me. I think you want to help people have more contact with reality. And who knows, maybe you're accomplishing just that. But I do think we're ALL helping each other in this way. Some of us are just less identified with that role. Anyhoo, I also think that you have that Saraswati nadi situation going on. Beyond that I'm not prepared to make any diagnosis. As I said in another post this morning, I have apologized to you for misinterpreting you about turq and Curtis and I have offered to make amends. Also I am willing to discuss any issues from last year with you, but offline so as to spare the FFLers. Judy has been making a valiant effort to lure posters down that particular rabbit hole, which as far as I can tell goes all the way to China. But I wouldn't call it the most scenic route IMHO. Would you? Share Dear Curtis, I have spent the last half hour assuming you, Share, Barry, Salyavin, Bhairitu (they are many others, I know) are all onto something when it comes to me. snip Believe it or not, I *am* feeling better. Thank you, Curtis. Robin
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: snip Also I am willing to discuss any issues from last year with you, but offline so as to spare the FFLers. Judy has been making a valiant effort to lure posters down that particular rabbit hole, which as far as I can tell goes all the way to China. It goes all the way to your and Curtis's dishonesty and hostility, Share, but no further than that. It's no wonder you want to take it offline.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
If you are reading this please understand that I ma dealing with an internet troll who has put my name on something I did not write in an attempt to get a response from me. This is my response. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... Thank you for your letter. I really don't understand your relentless attacks on me, Robin. I disagree with you about things you take very seriously. Why the problem? Look, Robin, the fact that I have a different POV than you do about something does not mean you have to try to find out some psychological reason why I would come to a different conclusion about this. I am simply responding to you, Robin, and it seems you don't like this. But I am starting to feel badly on your behalf. For someone to rage away, trying to find what is wrong with the other person's psyche which would explain their difference of opinion on some matter--Robin, this is bizarre. I have only done one thing: I have called you on this. And you give plenty of evidence why you don't like this. Once again, I make a simple request (you are just being your ironic asshole self in your letter below: you are not serious about the clinical versus philosophical prescription; I shall pass over that): You express your POV; I will express mine. And if you are offended that I refuse to be converted to your POV, *live with it*, Robin. Don't you see what I and others have found out about you? You don't wish to be contradicted, Robin. The moment someone opposes you, you start to analyze their inner motivation (For not collapsing their different POV, and folding into you own--Is this what you did in those seminars, Robin? Ah, fuck it. Don't answer that. I have had enough of that shit from Ann today). You have to stop doing this, Robin. Almost everyone on FFL liked me, respected me, admired me (with a few exceptions; but you are familiar with those who have determined to be my enemy--and Barry's--for as long as there is life) before you came on board. You have essentially confused and disturbed people with your word floods, Robin. They don't help the cause of truth-finding on this forum. You have to get this through your swelled (still some hallucinatory effects there, Robin?) head. Once you do--and I know you are being facetious and mocking with your proposed thought experiment (yes, now become existential--Funny, that, Robin)--there will be more sunlight here on FFL, Robin. You are the one--you are not going to like this, Robin--who darkens the skies here. I am only interested in letting in more `reality' [sunlight], Robin. You are the person who stirs everything up. I don't like it. Barry doesn't like it. Salyavin doesn't like it. And Bhairitu doesn't like it. Many more would echo this sentiment, Robin. Look, I have made a huge compromise in writing the way I have here. I am almost (please consider this a psychological favour, Robin; I think my ordinary prose is just too hard-hitting for you; I prefer your more effeminate style--and I mean that in a good way; don't fret) imitating your style here, Robin. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Dear Curtis, I have spent the last half hour assuming you, Share, Barry, Salyavin, Bhairitu (they are many others, I know) are all onto something when it comes to me. The thought experiment. Now an existential one. I have, then, to repeat, decided you are essentially right about me (as are other critics). What I am troubled by now, however, is whether to approach myself as if I have mental problems (as Barry and Salyavin would have it) or whether it is something that can be changed by adopting an entirely different attitude towards persons who disagree with me [there is one person who stands out in this regard as you know]--And perhaps more importantly, altering my attitude towards myself: viz. I am blind when it comes to knowing my motives, blind when it comes to understanding who I am, blind when it comes to understanding when criticism (about myself) is valid, blind when it comes to estimating how perspicuous my posts are. But what I need to know, Curtis, is: is this mental health problem or a philosophical problem (as it were: I am subject to personal amendment via examination of self)? Because if it is clinical, that is more than depressing. As I shall have to seek professional help. If you decide I need to do this, is there some way we could keep this private between you and me? Let's say that if you do not deem my problem to be psychopathological, you will just say: You are nuts, Robin. And if you deem my problem to in fact be psychopathological, you will just say: You are fine, Robin. I promise to cease posting if you oblige me in this way. I mean, unless you choose to answer those four posts from Saturday. (Then,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
You did not make Ann an example of Robin's behavior - God this is hilarious !!! You are hilarious in the seriousness with which you want to wound anyone who decides to carry the truth forward in the teeth of your foul and perverse opposition. If I were you I would call this an incoherent tirade. On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:23 AM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote: You really needed that many words to express that? Your postings here are not an interaction with other people. It is all going on inside your own head. I am under orders from Ann to ignore you now, but you apparently are free to rant away. Man you must have done a number on her up at that mic. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: Dear Curtis, I am going to pay tribute to you. Your guile is so immaculate, so indefatigable, that the only final answer to you is: DO IT, CURTIS. DO IT. WE ARE JUST GOING TO WATCH. In some way I'd almost say you are as inspired as Christ. Your dishonesty is becoming one of the Ten Wonders of the universe. There is no intelligence, no power, no love, no reason existing anywhere which could ever cause to issue from you a tremor of humility. I feel triumphant here--in a rather quiet and unusual way--in doing something anti-climactic (you are rejuvenated after yesterday, right?): writing to you, Curtis, to tell you your murderously conscientious determination to keep bullshitting on this forum (when it comes to matters of interpersonal truthfulness) can finally only be met by a simple: I will leave you alone. Still, you will never answer those four posts from Saturday. Your are hilarious in the seriousness with which you want to wound anyone who decides to carry the truth forward in the teeth of your foul and perverse opposition. But there is a need for mercy here, because, it would seem, you are acting the part you were cast to play. In my senior Shakespeare course at university, we analyzed the characters in his plays. You are one character in a bigger play than Shakespeare ever imagined, Curtis. You show us who you are. And you make Iago seem like a child. And you force analysis by how you behave. [It you were a character in a Shakespeare play I would look forward to writing an essay about what you reveal about who you are in your actions. In this case, the stage is this forum.) I respect your philosophy, Curtis; and your performance (at all times); but I am more inspired to know you will never go out of character than I am certain that God, as he once existed, has decided to leave what he created. Had I not known what I knew before I met you, Curtis, I would have become religious from reading how you argue here on FFL. You don't quite get the same sensation in your heart when you lie as someone who does not lie, but nevertheless it is a sensation that goes to the sublime. You understand what I am saying here, Curtis: to oppose you is to draw out the real person. Curtis. That person does not know even in his imagination what it feels like to be someone who cannot help but let life form them, alter them, make them, break them, exalt them. You are seemingly self-made from the beginning, Curtis. You have secured what seems to me to be an imperishable place in creation. No one can see what you are doing, Curtis. Only you. CURTIS'S ANSWER TO ROBIN'S RANT: Curtis: Robin, no one is afraid of you anymore. You think you can lay down your trip on others--but it ain't going to fly, Robin. We see through your game. This torrent of abuse will not make true what is not true. You can't have your way around here, Robin. I am not going to let you get away with it. I have been honest and forthcoming from the beginning with you, Robin; but you don't take criticism well--and I have yet to see you respond to the intelligent feedback I keep giving you. Don't you see the irony of all this, Robin? Those who are defending you have deprived themselves of the integrity (they don't realize they have done this, mind you; their self-righteousness tells us this) that I have decided will remain in my possession. You just don't like it when people disagree with you, Robin. And your four posts from yesterday: word flood gets it, Robin. There was nothing there-I read through all of it carefully enough--for me to answer. You were just having your own experience of yourself, imprisoned in your own egotism--although I grant you: you don't think this is the case. But it is, Robin. Do you really believe you can win this thing, Robin? Those who come to my defence here on FFL, to a person they are brave and sincere. You just are not used to having an adversary who will not be intimidated, Robin. Robin, I wish you could hear this. For all your
[FairfieldLife] Robin's Four Posts to Curtis
These are my four posts to Curtis. If you wish to understand the dispute between Curtis and myself I hardly think you will understand anything really significant without reading these posts. They are a response to a Curtis post. They are, then, interactive (Curtis vs Robin) from beginning to end. I have put all of myself into each one of them. If they are faulty, or inadequate--or unfair--I would like to know why. For as I say, I can be judged as to my motives and my character (as revealed on FFL at least) by these four posts. Curtis has thus far chosen not to address any of the four posts. If he does, there is always the chance I will realize that I was fundamentally wrong in my judgment of the soundness of his own arguments and the felt truth of his animadversions. Those who make critical comments about this serious conflict between Curtis and myself--without reading these posts--are not in a position to say anything which means much. Although there will be those of you who will immediately quarrel with my having said this. These posts, then, represent the conversation between Curtis and myself. If you come down on Curtis's side after reading them thoroughly--and can explain your reasons--that is a pretty good bet that you have something significant to say. And I will read it, and if possible, respond to it. Contrary to what other posters have said, I believe the issues we are controverting here are extremely significant, and will go to the meaning of what is contained in that event when we have to give an account of ourselves--That is, at the end of our life here inside the physical world. Should this happen. That is the place, then, from which I composed each of these four posts (April 6, 2013). http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/340243 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/340259 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/340286 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/340308
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Huh? No he doesn't. She's right, salyavin. It's happened more than once. You're in your own little world. Curtis is often on here and he always actually brings something worth reading, unlike Robin who just seems to bring his mental health problems for an airing. Robin has made many valuable contributions to FFL when he isn't being harassed by those who find him threatening. Perplexing, perhaps. Long winded and egotistical, for sure. But threatening? I think that must be a projection of yours. And obsessed, definitely. He said he wanted to fight Curtis yonks ago and now he pops up to do just that and wow is it boring. But not to you obviously, because you're obsessed with Curtis too and like having someone to play with. I'm just glad I'm normal. Like Judy, the guy is obsessed and it's fucking weird to watch. I also can't imagine still being impressed with Robins empty cult. Hard to be impressed by something you don't know anything about. Is only lasting an hour at the mic something to be ashamed of then? Seems there is a lot of ego involved there
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Huh? No he doesn't. She's right, salyavin. It's happened more than once. You're in your own little world. Let me say it another way: She's right, salyavin. It's happened more than once. Curtis is often on here and he always actually brings something worth reading, unlike Robin who just seems to bring his mental health problems for an airing. Robin has made many valuable contributions to FFL when he isn't being harassed by those who find him threatening. Perplexing, perhaps. Long winded and egotistical, for sure. Valuable. But only if you read them, of course. But threatening? I think that must be a projection of yours. Er, who am I threatened by, do you think, salyavin? And obsessed, definitely. He said he wanted to fight Curtis yonks ago and now he pops up to do just that Actually he popped up to post his analysis of Barry after Barry had left one of his particularly loathesome posts. When both of them have been here, he and Curtis have fought on a regular basis since they had their big disgreement back in 2011. Where have you been? And you appear to have forgotten that it was Curtis who started it this time (as he frequently does--not always, but frequently). Opsie! and wow is it boring. But not to you obviously, because you're obsessed with Curtis too and like having someone to play with. I'm just glad I'm normal. Try getting into a hostile discussion with Curtis sometime. You'll see quickly what the problem is. Like Judy, the guy is obsessed and it's fucking weird to watch. I also can't imagine still being impressed with Robins empty cult. Hard to be impressed by something you don't know anything about. Is only lasting an hour at the mic something to be ashamed of then? Seems there is a lot of ego involved there
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
On Apr 8, 2013, at 11:23 AM, laughinggull108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: Man what hypocritical bullshit. If it's Barry and Curtis it's all impartial, monotonous set of POV's, it's a rap, it's stream of consciousness, it's harmless likes and dislikes, just benign preferences. If its others it's mindfuckery, it's unpleasant, unfriendly, unwelcome word flood, it's toxic energy directed at strangers, it's trollish behavior - even psychological rape's now approved by His Holiness. A master of deception at work. So true, Kapati, so true. Please continue... Wrong. Krishna is the real kapati - But Rakshasaas are also kapati. What's the difference dear LG Shishyaa?
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: Try getting into a hostile discussion with Curtis sometime. You'll see quickly what the problem is. Priceless! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Huh? No he doesn't. She's right, salyavin. It's happened more than once. You're in your own little world. Let me say it another way: She's right, salyavin. It's happened more than once. Curtis is often on here and he always actually brings something worth reading, unlike Robin who just seems to bring his mental health problems for an airing. Robin has made many valuable contributions to FFL when he isn't being harassed by those who find him threatening. Perplexing, perhaps. Long winded and egotistical, for sure. Valuable. But only if you read them, of course. But threatening? I think that must be a projection of yours. Er, who am I threatened by, do you think, salyavin? And obsessed, definitely. He said he wanted to fight Curtis yonks ago and now he pops up to do just that Actually he popped up to post his analysis of Barry after Barry had left one of his particularly loathesome posts. When both of them have been here, he and Curtis have fought on a regular basis since they had their big disgreement back in 2011. Where have you been? And you appear to have forgotten that it was Curtis who started it this time (as he frequently does--not always, but frequently). Opsie! and wow is it boring. But not to you obviously, because you're obsessed with Curtis too and like having someone to play with. I'm just glad I'm normal. Try getting into a hostile discussion with Curtis sometime. You'll see quickly what the problem is. Like Judy, the guy is obsessed and it's fucking weird to watch. I also can't imagine still being impressed with Robins empty cult. Hard to be impressed by something you don't know anything about. Is only lasting an hour at the mic something to be ashamed of then? Seems there is a lot of ego involved there
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
On Apr 8, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com wrote: On Apr 8, 2013, at 11:23 AM, laughinggull108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: Man what hypocritical bullshit. If it's Barry and Curtis it's all impartial, monotonous set of POV's, it's a rap, it's stream of consciousness, it's harmless likes and dislikes, just benign preferences. If its others it's mindfuckery, it's unpleasant, unfriendly, unwelcome word flood, it's toxic energy directed at strangers, it's trollish behavior - even psychological rape's now approved by His Holiness. A master of deception at work. So true, Kapati, so true. Please continue... Wrong. Krishna is the real kapati - But Rakshasaas are also kapati. What's the difference dear LG Shishyaa? God I fucked up, even Krishna fucks up LOL. Anyway, once again what's the difference Bhakta?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
God - you are paranoid. But then again with a fan following of the likes of Steve, Share, Barry one should always err on the side of caution. On Apr 8, 2013, at 1:00 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote: If you are reading this please understand that I ma dealing with an internet troll who has put my name on something I did not write in an attempt to get a response from me. This is my response. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... Thank you for your letter. I really don't understand your relentless attacks on me, Robin. I disagree with you about things you take very seriously. Why the problem? Look, Robin, the fact that I have a different POV than you do about something does not mean you have to try to find out some psychological reason why I would come to a different conclusion about this. I am simply responding to you, Robin, and it seems you don't like this. But I am starting to feel badly on your behalf. For someone to rage away, trying to find what is wrong with the other person's psyche which would explain their difference of opinion on some matter--Robin, this is bizarre. I have only done one thing: I have called you on this. And you give plenty of evidence why you don't like this. Once again, I make a simple request (you are just being your ironic asshole self in your letter below: you are not serious about the clinical versus philosophical prescription; I shall pass over that): You express your POV; I will express mine. And if you are offended that I refuse to be converted to your POV, *live with it*, Robin. Don't you see what I and others have found out about you? You don't wish to be contradicted, Robin. The moment someone opposes you, you start to analyze their inner motivation (For not collapsing their different POV, and folding into you own--Is this what you did in those seminars, Robin? Ah, fuck it. Don't answer that. I have had enough of that shit from Ann today). You have to stop doing this, Robin. Almost everyone on FFL liked me, respected me, admired me (with a few exceptions; but you are familiar with those who have determined to be my enemy--and Barry's--for as long as there is life) before you came on board. You have essentially confused and disturbed people with your word floods, Robin. They don't help the cause of truth-finding on this forum. You have to get this through your swelled (still some hallucinatory effects there, Robin?) head. Once you do--and I know you are being facetious and mocking with your proposed thought experiment (yes, now become existential--Funny, that, Robin)--there will be more sunlight here on FFL, Robin. You are the one--you are not going to like this, Robin--who darkens the skies here. I am only interested in letting in more `reality' [sunlight], Robin. You are the person who stirs everything up. I don't like it. Barry doesn't like it. Salyavin doesn't like it. And Bhairitu doesn't like it. Many more would echo this sentiment, Robin. Look, I have made a huge compromise in writing the way I have here. I am almost (please consider this a psychological favour, Robin; I think my ordinary prose is just too hard-hitting for you; I prefer your more effeminate style--and I mean that in a good way; don't fret) imitating your style here, Robin. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Dear Curtis, I have spent the last half hour assuming you, Share, Barry, Salyavin, Bhairitu (they are many others, I know) are all onto something when it comes to me. The thought experiment. Now an existential one. I have, then, to repeat, decided you are essentially right about me (as are other critics). What I am troubled by now, however, is whether to approach myself as if I have mental problems (as Barry and Salyavin would have it) or whether it is something that can be changed by adopting an entirely different attitude towards persons who disagree with me [there is one person who stands out in this regard as you know]--And perhaps more importantly, altering my attitude towards myself: viz. I am blind when it comes to knowing my motives, blind when it comes to understanding who I am, blind when it comes to understanding when criticism (about myself) is valid, blind when it comes to estimating how perspicuous my posts are. But what I need to know, Curtis, is: is this mental health problem or a philosophical problem (as it were: I am subject to personal amendment via examination of self)? Because if it is clinical, that is more than depressing. As I shall have to seek professional help. If you decide I need to do this, is there some way we could keep this private between you and me? Let's say that if you do not deem my
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: On Apr 8, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: On Apr 8, 2013, at 11:23 AM, laughinggull108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@ wrote: Man what hypocritical bullshit. If it's Barry and Curtis it's all impartial, monotonous set of POV's, it's a rap, it's stream of consciousness, it's harmless likes and dislikes, just benign preferences. If its others it's mindfuckery, it's unpleasant, unfriendly, unwelcome word flood, it's toxic energy directed at strangers, it's trollish behavior - even psychological rape's now approved by His Holiness. A master of deception at work. So true, Kapati, so true. Please continue... Wrong. Krishna is the real kapati - But Rakshasaas are also kapati. What's the difference dear LG Shishyaa? God I fucked up, even Krishna fucks up LOL. Anyway, once again what's the difference Bhakta? Raviji, as one deals, He'll also...He reciprocates. That is Krsna.
[FairfieldLife] Bootleg UK TM teachers
Anyone know of a TM teacher in the Birmingham, UK area who is teaching independently, and thus inexpensively?
[FairfieldLife] Wanna push yer luck??
How about buying some NOK? http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/nok/real-time#.UWM_apOpVPY Seeking Alpha: Seeking alphan kommentti sivuilta poimittua, BB vs. Nokia. Sanoisin että oheinen kommentoija antoi täysilaidallisen BB porukalle, täystyrmäys, knock down. Ei mitään lisättävää. It is remarkable to see so many BBRY shareholders bash Nokia, fighting the idea of NOK being a much better turnaround play than BBRY. I studied both stocks for some time now, but there are some strong advantages of NOK over BBRY. 1. BB.. platform is decreasing as we speak. WP is growing. WP already is the third mobile platform. http://bit.ly/XJyx5f WP has a richer ecosystem, with more apps as compared to BB. WP is the easiest platform, BB the most difficult. http://tcrn.ch/XCn8Dh 2. WP8 has the same kernel as Windows 8, dominating the pc market, aiming at the tablet market. Software programmed for W8 is also suitable for WP8, that way being more attractive for app developpers. 3. Nokia is dominating the Windows Phone market with a market share of 78%. http://bit.ly/WVJopq 4. Nokia makes many high quality native WP apps, like HERE prime places, Nokia City Lens, Nokia Transport, Nokia Music, etc. Nokia is the only phonemaker allowed to tweak the WP OS. 5. Because of its mapping and location based services, which come with the WP, Nokia gets paid fees for every WP device sold by their competitors. 6. Nokia offers high quality smartphones (Lumia's) at all price points, which makes it less sensitive to the highly competitive high end market. 7. There are many reviews simply concluding that the half year old Nokia Lumia 920 is a better smartphone than the freshly released Z10. There is none, declaring the opposite. The Lumia 920 has a better camera, super sensitive touch screen, motion pixel plus, better mapping, wireless charging, better microphones and a more stable and more fluid OS than BB10. http://bit.ly/15AXY9u http://bit.ly/Z3NKhb The successor of the Lumia 920, EOS, is already rumoured to make an appearance at the end of this summer. 8. Nokia offers also the Asha (feautere/ smartphone) family at sub $ 100 price points, giving Nokia the strongest foothold in emerging markets. The Asha family still offers a better price to quality ratio as compared to its direct competitor Samsung Rex series. http://bit.ly/17824cP http://bit.ly/YUUlrO 9. Nokia still has the biggest sales network of all phone manufacturers. 10. Nokia has the most patents (+ 20.000) of all companies in the mobile tech sector. Nokia cashes in nearly 700 million yearly on IP royalty payments. This amount is still increasing. Amongst others Apple and Blackberry are paying Nokia for every phone they sell. 11. Nokia Siemens Networks, soon the second largest vendor of telecom equipment is another division within the Nokia group, attributing for about 47% of Nokia's sales. 12. Nokia owns HERE, the best mapping service in the world, available in 4 out of every 5 modern cars and used by many world class companies, like Oracle, Amazon, Yandex, Nikon, Garmin, Microsoft, Yahoo, Groupon, etc. 13. Nokia keeps on to be leading in RD, camera technology, location based services, unique material application, a.o. graphene. http://bit.ly/1782b84 14. Nokia has more financial means and RD power to develop new models and software upgrades. In the time Blackberry developed the Z10 phone, Nokia developed the whole Lumia WP7 series as well as the whole Lumia WP8 series. Muoks. onkin lisättävää, jotain tärkeää unohtui. BB:n verrattuna Nokialla on vielä yksi merkittävä valttikortti yritysasiakkaista kilpailtaessa. Office integraatio. MS:n valtava asiakaspohja jotka toimii windows ympäristössä. Viestiä on muokannut: deflaatiopeikko 8.4.2013 23:44
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Iron Lady' Prime Minister, Dead at 87
[http://inspiyr.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/negative-self-talk-head-i\ n-hands-statue.jpg] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-twitter-outr\ age-1818555 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-twitter-out\ rage-1818555 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-facebook-cam\ paign-1818341 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-facebook-ca\ mpaign-1818341 [http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6_K6DQvVHB4/TNHf2xW-j8I/AXk/Q9VT2tuW3\ FQ/s400/pelosi-witch.jpg] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQtvBxsuSO4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQtvBxsuSO4 [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A_OtTeVCcAEjsAi.jpg] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost1uk@... wrote: Cher fans on Twitter were agitated apparently: #nowthatchersdead http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-worried-cher\ -1818681 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda no_reply@ wrote: http://abcnews.go.com/International/margaret-thatcher-britains-iron-lady\ \ -dead-87/story?id=13644011#.UWLN90oozDk http://abcnews.go.com/International/margaret-thatcher-britains-iron-lad\ \ y-dead-87/story?id=13644011#.UWLN90oozDk It is with great sadness that Mark and Carol Thatcher announced that their mother Baroness Thatcher died peacefully following a stroke this morning, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEREJpOvNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEREJpOvNo
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. Here, Here. I second this motion from the man from D.C. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. It also cheapens the significance of the apology. If someone is constantly apologizing for insignificant or nonexistent offenses thinking it will make themselves look good, what will an apology from this person mean for
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Your blind is showing again Ann. Glaringly so. I don't know how that could be possible, but it is. Your pulling rank here is pretty nonsensical. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 12:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons
[FairfieldLife] RRRobin and His Fag Hags??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2S-AcqVz24 ROTFLMFAO!
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. And you are welcome to your opinion of how he acted in person as I am to mine about how he shows up here. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. That seems kind of funny charge sine Robin is complaining that I am not responding to his 3 part word flood posts. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Yes we often choose to interact here. So your point is? Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. Oh, characterizing my interaction with him as whining and complaining is such an unfriendly judgement. Does that apply only to me? Does it apply to Judy's part in the interaction? Should everyone here just ignore each other and let you have the board to yourself? Sorry you find my opinions here inconvenient. I suggest you should perhaps take your own advice in regards to my interactions with other posters here. And stop your whining and complaining about how I choose to post here. Big (Ann) blind spot revealed here. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step last year. And it seems we're not getting to it again. But I've made my offer and stand by it. As for frequency, it could be from my Catholic upbringing. In those days many people went to confession every week. Also I say it just in case I've hurt someone's feelings. The better I know FFL people the more I'll dispense with that. From: authfriend authfriend@ To:
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shocking Bikram Sex Scandal Should Shock No One - The Daily Beast
Stay in your lane big boy. You got enough going with the big M. Don't overextend yourself. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson mjackson74@... wrote: This is no scandal - he has gone on record saying he has sex with his students - he claimed that sometimes gurus have to cuz the students threaten to kill themselves or make false allegations if the guru doesn't accede to the students demands - that's what he said. From: Rick Archer rick@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 11:44 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Shocking Bikram Sex Scandal Should Shock No One - The Daily Beast  http://www.thedailybeast.com/witw/articles/2013/04/06/shocking-bikram-se\ x-scandal-should-shock-no-one.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Judy, I've got to say, I love you. I just do. You tickle my funny bone so when you launch into this retrieval mode. I mean I can follow Robin's posts for a minute or so, but I derive all the satisfaction I can handle as soon as I see, Back when or something to that effect. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: (snip) I wrote two posts documenting in detail Share's amazing progression from not suffering or feeling insulted to believing she had been the victim of psychological rape. I'll dig them up if necessary. Here's one of them, from October 2 of last year: - Having read all the relevant posts, I am utterly baffled and appalled at Share's use of this term [psychological rape] to describe her interactions with Robin. I'd be very curious to know where she got it from. Did someone suggest it to her? This is such a serious charge, it's really important to review some of the background. In her post today, Share writes: Just for the record, this is exactly why I got so upset initially with Robin about the Russian flash mob post. Being psychologically raped didn't feel good then just as it doesn't feel good now. Here is Share's initial comment to Robin about his reaction to her remarks about the flash mob video (September 4): Yes I will excuse your presumption if you excuse my not going down this particular rabbit hole againSo no problemo. Sigh, btw, I notice I'm feeling grumpy this morning. Blaming it on the sugar I ate yesterday. Somehow I've become very sensitive to sugar. Anyway, Robin, apologies for taking it out on you. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/319178 And here is what she wrote to Robin on September 9 concerning this interaction: As for what my feelings were, I didn't suffer or feel insulted. Nor did I think you were being hurtful or cruel. I simply did not want to pursue the theme of whether or not I was being the real me. Nor the theme of my alleged hyper positivity. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/319500 So at the time that it happened, Share felt a little grumpy and apologized to Robin. Four days later, Share affirmed that she had not been insulted, did not suffer, did not think Robin was being hurtful or cruel. [This was the point at which Curtis jumped in.--JS 4/8/13] Today, four weeks later, it was psychological rape. Something isn't right here. Somehow Share has become convinced that what at the time had caused no more than a little grumpiness on her part (which she attribted to eating sugar anyway) was a terrible act of emotional violation equivalent to rape. (She had completely misinterpreted Robin's remarks in any case, and he had practically stood on his head explaining himself in the kindest possible manner.) The charge was made in public about an FFL member. I think we need an explanation. What, or who, caused Share to change her mind so drastically? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/321696
Re: [FairfieldLife] Wanna push yer luck??
On 04/08/2013 03:07 PM, card wrote: How about buying some NOK? http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/nok/real-time#.UWM_apOpVPY Seeking Alpha: Seeking alphan kommentti sivuilta poimittua, BB vs. Nokia. Sanoisin että oheinen kommentoija antoi täysilaidallisen BB porukalle, täystyrmäys, knock down. Ei mitään lisättävää. It is remarkable to see so many BBRY shareholders bash Nokia, fighting the idea of NOK being a much better turnaround play than BBRY. I studied both stocks for some time now, but there are some strong advantages of NOK over BBRY. 1. BB.. platform is decreasing as we speak. WP is growing. WP already is the third mobile platform. http://bit.ly/XJyx5f WP has a richer ecosystem, with more apps as compared to BB. WP is the easiest platform, BB the most difficult. http://tcrn.ch/XCn8Dh 2. WP8 has the same kernel as Windows 8, dominating the pc market, aiming at the tablet market. Software programmed for W8 is also suitable for WP8, that way being more attractive for app developpers. 3. Nokia is dominating the Windows Phone market with a market share of 78%. http://bit.ly/WVJopq 4. Nokia makes many high quality native WP apps, like HERE prime places, Nokia City Lens, Nokia Transport, Nokia Music, etc. Nokia is the only phonemaker allowed to tweak the WP OS. 5. Because of its mapping and location based services, which come with the WP, Nokia gets paid fees for every WP device sold by their competitors. 6. Nokia offers high quality smartphones (Lumia's) at all price points, which makes it less sensitive to the highly competitive high end market. 7. There are many reviews simply concluding that the half year old Nokia Lumia 920 is a better smartphone than the freshly released Z10. There is none, declaring the opposite. The Lumia 920 has a better camera, super sensitive touch screen, motion pixel plus, better mapping, wireless charging, better microphones and a more stable and more fluid OS than BB10. http://bit.ly/15AXY9u http://bit.ly/Z3NKhb The successor of the Lumia 920, EOS, is already rumoured to make an appearance at the end of this summer. 8. Nokia offers also the Asha (feautere/ smartphone) family at sub $ 100 price points, giving Nokia the strongest foothold in emerging markets. The Asha family still offers a better price to quality ratio as compared to its direct competitor Samsung Rex series. http://bit.ly/17824cP http://bit.ly/YUUlrO 9. Nokia still has the biggest sales network of all phone manufacturers. 10. Nokia has the most patents (+ 20.000) of all companies in the mobile tech sector. Nokia cashes in nearly 700 million yearly on IP royalty payments. This amount is still increasing. Amongst others Apple and Blackberry are paying Nokia for every phone they sell. 11. Nokia Siemens Networks, soon the second largest vendor of telecom equipment is another division within the Nokia group, attributing for about 47% of Nokia's sales. 12. Nokia owns HERE, the best mapping service in the world, available in 4 out of every 5 modern cars and used by many world class companies, like Oracle, Amazon, Yandex, Nikon, Garmin, Microsoft, Yahoo, Groupon, etc. 13. Nokia keeps on to be leading in RD, camera technology, location based services, unique material application, a.o. graphene. http://bit.ly/1782b84 14. Nokia has more financial means and RD power to develop new models and software upgrades. In the time Blackberry developed the Z10 phone, Nokia developed the whole Lumia WP7 series as well as the whole Lumia WP8 series. Muoks. onkin lisättävää, jotain tärkeää unohtui. BB:n verrattuna Nokialla on vielä yksi merkittävä valttikortti yritysasiakkaista kilpailtaessa. Office integraatio. MS:n valtava asiakaspohja jotka toimii windows ympäristössä. Viestiä on muokannut: deflaatiopeikko 8.4.2013 23:44 So why didn't Nokia build an open source platform like Android? Greed or a lame CEO or both? Anyone could have done an Android like OS. Maybe it was just karma?
[FairfieldLife] NCAA Men's Basketball Championship Tonight!
Anyone watching???
[FairfieldLife] A flood of word floods
Your word flood will continue long after I am gone. Robin is obscuring very simple concepts in a word flood. You lost me on your initial word flood. So that is my opinion and I don't need to word flood you about it. I have a few people, mostly offline, who might have the interest in navigating this combined word flood, but very few here. She doubles down again, piling on more insults in a rabid word flood frenzy. You believe only a word flood can answer a word flood, I do not. Getting word flooded by a person who refuses to ever edit his writing to fit into a remotely normal person's ability to interact here. A tactic of wearing someone down with an unrealistically long flood of words. You are a bit of a word flooder but not even in the same league as Robin. Sorry Robin, I'm gunna have to let your word flood posts stand on their own without commentary. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Dude, enough with the word flood posts. Robin is complaining that I am not responding to his 3 part word flood posts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oYGv4D2Qr4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oYGv4D2Qr4 http://litemind.com/10-strategies-improve-vocabulary/ http://litemind.com/10-strategies-improve-vocabulary/
[FairfieldLife] Re: A flood of word floods
Once again we find that the transgression is the use of the descriptive term, rather than the behavior that gave rise to its use. Although I certainly can understand your being so personally touchy about the phrase, but you have never tried to engage Robin to see if there could ever be enough words to appease the flood and make it stop. I have. Take it away Charley: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72oQy_M7h4Q Well, backwater done rose all around Sumner now, drove me down the line Backwater done rose at Sumner, drove poor Charley down the line Lord, I'll tell the world the water, done crept through this town Lord, the whole round country, Lord, river has overflowed Lord, the whole round country, man, is overflowed You know I can't stay here, I'll go where it's high, boy I would goto the hilly country, but, they got me barred Now, look-a here now at Leland river was risin' high Look-a here boys around Leland tell me, river was raisin' high Boy, it's risin' over there, yeah I'm gonna move to Greenville fore I leave, goodbye Look-a here the water now, Lordy, Levee broke, rose most everywhere The water at Greenville and Leland, Lord, it done rose everywhere Boy, you can't never stay here I would go down to Rosedale but, they tell me there's water there Now, the water now, mama, done took Charley's town Well, they tell me the water, done took Charley's town Boy, I'm goin' to Vicksburg Well, I'm goin' to Vicksburg, for that high of mine I am goin' up that water, where lands don't never flow Well, I'm goin' over the hill where, water, oh don't ever flow Boy, hit Sharkey County and everything was down in Stovall But, that whole county was leavin', over that Tallahatchie shore Boy, went to Tallahatchie and got it over there Lord, the water done rushed all over, down old Jackson road Lord, the water done raised, over the Jackson road Boy, it starched my clothes I'm goin' back to the hilly country, won't be worried no more --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: Your word flood will continue long after I am gone. Robin is obscuring very simple concepts in a word flood. You lost me on your initial word flood. So that is my opinion and I don't need to word flood you about it. I have a few people, mostly offline, who might have the interest in navigating this combined word flood, but very few here. She doubles down again, piling on more insults in a rabid word flood frenzy. You believe only a word flood can answer a word flood, I do not. Getting word flooded by a person who refuses to ever edit his writing to fit into a remotely normal person's ability to interact here. A tactic of wearing someone down with an unrealistically long flood of words. You are a bit of a word flooder but not even in the same league as Robin. Sorry Robin, I'm gunna have to let your word flood posts stand on their own without commentary. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Dude, enough with the word flood posts. Robin is complaining that I am not responding to his 3 part word flood posts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oYGv4D2Qr4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oYGv4D2Qr4 http://litemind.com/10-strategies-improve-vocabulary/ http://litemind.com/10-strategies-improve-vocabulary/
[FairfieldLife] Re: NCAA Men's Basketball Championship Tonight!
Of course. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@... wrote: Anyone watching???
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
That was pretty funny Curtis - although I bet some here won't appreciate the humor. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 8, 2013 11:43 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE Is it disturbing that fragile world peace vibe you guys are cranking out in the cornfields? As much as one kid taking a bong hit? It makes me wonder if your good vibes are really gunna reach that 1950's looking kid dictator in North Korea if you don't have the dharana chops to focus on what works for you here and ignore the rest. I always thought peace started with the individual, but now I see that it takes a village to maintain a mood...I mean peace. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote: Thanks Curtis, Good summary post. I didn't have time to read all these posts last week. I appreciate the cut to the chase. Except for a pile on which may come, Is this argument about over? Best Regards, -Buck in Fairfield --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you are wrong about them too. It is YOUR lack of ability to see his internal processes in them. If anything it comes through more simply in those. He comes across much more complexly in his less focused posts. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. Can't you just see that in some posts he is peevishly dismissing things that annoy him. You are reading too much into it because some of them are focused on you. But even the infamous C posts were completely comprehensible in terms of his POV and thinking process. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF A REAL RESPONSE TO THOSE FOUR POSTS TO YOU OF YESTERDAY (where I did say everything I could want to say) is an extraordinary thing. You have, I must assume, answered my four posts by this post. This certainly is WHAT YOU WANT THIS POST TO DO FOR YOU. Don't you EVER get tired of attempting this kind of mindfuck Robin. Seriously, it is so lame. What I want this post to do is to express ideas I am interested in expressing. I think it may very well work in the majority of those FFL readers who come upon this; especially right after reading Barry's posts from Paris of today. Paris is not The Stupid Cunt category. Stream of consciousness? That has nothing whatsoever to do with my analysis, Curtis It has to do with mine. In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. This is the most ludicrous and dishonest and absurd thing you have ever said about me, Curtis. Each word is a lie--and the entire meaning of this, it has no application, for example, to my four posts I wrote to you yesterday. Actually it does but you will never hear it. I know that now. You are the most beautiful liar I know, Curtis. Mindfuckery statement. Did this used to work for you in the old days with younger minds? I suppose I should, just for purposes of not
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Iron Lady' Prime Minister, Dead at 87
Another fascist pig meets their destiny in hell. She destroyed the British working class. On 04/08/2013 03:09 PM, merudanda wrote: [http://inspiyr.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/negative-self-talk-head-i\ n-hands-statue.jpg] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-twitter-outr\ age-1818555 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-twitter-out\ rage-1818555 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-facebook-cam\ paign-1818341 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-facebook-ca\ mpaign-1818341 [http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6_K6DQvVHB4/TNHf2xW-j8I/AXk/Q9VT2tuW3\ FQ/s400/pelosi-witch.jpg] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQtvBxsuSO4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQtvBxsuSO4 [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A_OtTeVCcAEjsAi.jpg] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost1uk@... wrote: Cher fans on Twitter were agitated apparently: #nowthatchersdead http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-worried-cher\ -1818681 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda no_reply@ wrote: http://abcnews.go.com/International/margaret-thatcher-britains-iron-lady\ \ -dead-87/story?id=13644011#.UWLN90oozDk http://abcnews.go.com/International/margaret-thatcher-britains-iron-lad\ \ y-dead-87/story?id=13644011#.UWLN90oozDk It is with great sadness that Mark and Carol Thatcher announced that their mother Baroness Thatcher died peacefully following a stroke this morning, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEREJpOvNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEREJpOvNo
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Tue 09-Apr-13 00:15:02 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 04/06/13 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 04/13/13 00:00:00 284 messages as of (UTC) 04/08/13 21:16:18 43 authfriend 24 seventhray27 22 curtisdeltablues 21 Robin Carlsen 18 Share Long 16 card 16 Ann 13 Buck 11 Ravi Chivukula 11 John 10 turquoiseb 9 Richard J. Williams 9 Bhairitu 8 laughinggull108 8 feste37 7 Michael Jackson 4 merudanda 4 Yifu 4 Mike Dixon 4 Emily Reyn 3 Rick Archer 2 sparaig 2 salyavin808 2 nablusoss1008 2 emilymae.reyn 2 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 2 Jason 2 Duveyoung 1 merlin 1 azgrey 1 PaliGap 1 Dick Mays 1 Alex Stanley Posters: 33 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
[FairfieldLife] Swami Lakshmanjoo and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4SdkYo2pTk
[FairfieldLife] US President Barack Obama throws weight behind yoga
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-04-01/us/38189016_1_yoga-activity-ancient-indian-practiceUS President Barack Obama throws weight behind yogaChidanand Rajghatta, TNNApr 1, 2013, 12.33AM IST(It is not the first time that…)WASHINGTON: TheWhite Househas wholeheartedly embraced Yoga as a worthy physical activity at a time some schools inAmericaare railing against the ancient Indian practice, saying it promotes Hinduism.The White House announced last week that PresidentBarack ObamaandFirst Lady Michelle Obamawill include a 'yoga garden' for children and their parents who attend the traditionalEasterEgg Roll festivities on Monday. "Come enjoy a session of yoga from professional instructors," the White House exhorted thousands of workaday Americans parents and their kids from across the country who will troop into the Presidential lawns, reminding participants that the event's theme is 'Be Healthy, Be Active, Be You!'It is not the first time that Obama's residence has hosted a yoga garden for Easter, but this year's event is significant because of an ongoing lawsuit in California challenging the teaching of yoga in schools. In fact, the case came up for hearing in aSan Diegocourtroom on Thursday with a mirthful opening.In an indication of how deep-rooted mainstream yoga has become in the US, it turned out that the presiding judge himself is a yoga practitioner. "Does anybody have a problem with that?" San Diego Superior Court Judge John Meyer was reported asking at the start of the case.Dean Broyles, representing parents suing the Encinitas Union School District in a lawsuit that has gained international attention, said he was fine with Meyer presiding over the case if the judge can keep an open mind about the plaintiff's argument regarding spiritual connections to yoga, according to reports in the local media.At theheartof the case is the argument by some parents that yoga is inherently religious, a contention most Americans, including the judge, seem to disagree with. Judge Meyer is reported to be a practitioner ofBikram Yoga, likening it to simple stretching exercises. "If you think there's something spiritual about what I do, that's news to me," he was quoted as saying.The White House meanwhile is stretching every muscle and sinew to get Americans, including children, to get more concerned about the decline in the nation's overall well-being and its soaring healthcare bill. The drive is led by Michelle Obama, a health and fitness, and herself a yoga enthusiast.The yoga garden is conducted by Leah Cullis, a certified yoga teacher who the White House reached out to in 2009 as soon when the Obamas came to office. Cullis, whose husband, event producer John Liipfert, handled Obama's Presidential inauguration, selects yoga instructors from all over the US to put parents and children through basic yoga drills."The mission of the event is to share ways where families and children can use simple tools for an active lifestyle — tools that require no props and no money and which they can go home and do it themselves," Cullis told TOI, speaking of her association with the White House initiative.In fact, the White House has taken its yoga driveone step— or one stretch — further. It has now initiated a Presidential Active Lifestyle Award (PALA), aObamaWhite House Challenge designed to motivate Americans to make physical activity andhealthy eatingpart of their everyday life. In embracingthe practice, the White House also dismissed any specific religious connotation sought to be attached to yoga."Yoga has become a universal language of spiritual exercise in theUnited States, crossing many lines of religion and cultures," the White House said without any reference to the ongoing controversies and lawsuit. "Every day, millions of people practice yoga to improve their health and overall well-being. That's why we're encouraging everyone to take part in PALA, so show your support for yoga and answer the challenge."
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bootleg UK TM teachers
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote: Anyone know of a TM teacher in the Birmingham, UK area who is teaching independently, and thus inexpensively? The same fellow who puts all the funds in his own pockets, prevents his students from taking advanced techniques and stops them from going to international courses ?
[FairfieldLife] Re: NCAA Men's Basketball Championship Tonight!
Yes. IMO, Louisville will win. They're big and can shoot better than Michigan. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@... wrote: Anyone watching???
[FairfieldLife] Still got the Yahoo mail delay blues
Posts via email are still having delay issues in the 2-4 hour range, so I'll manually run the post count script tomorrow morning.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
On Apr 8, 2013, at 2:43 PM, laughinggull108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: Wrong. Krishna is the real kapati - But Rakshasaas are also kapati. What's the difference dear LG Shishyaa? God I fucked up, even Krishna fucks up LOL. Anyway, once again what's the difference Bhakta? Raviji, as one deals, He'll also...He reciprocates. That is Krsna. Awesome, yes Krishna meets love with love and humility and deception with deception and arrogance. Dear LG - You have been awarded the Best Bonafide Bhakta of the Kali Yuga by the Kaliyuga Kapati Krishna - Yaay !!! Love you LG XOXO.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A flood of word floods
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Once again we find that the transgression is the use of the descriptive term, rather than the behavior that gave rise to its use. Actually I don't think either is a transgression. I didn't make the post because I thought the phrase word flood was a transgression. How absurd. You're becoming more pompous by the day, and you seem to have completely lost the ability to laugh at yourself. I think it's hilarious when you become so fond of one of your psychobabbly terms that you use it over and over, each time supremely confident that you're delivering a tough, stinging indictment, even after you've used it so often that it's long past its sell-by date and has lost whatever impact it had to start with (not much, IMHO). Although I certainly can understand your being so personally touchy about the phrase, (chuckle) but you have never tried to engage Robin to see if there could ever be enough words to appease the flood and make it stop. Once again we find that the transgression is the flood of words, rather than the behavior that gave rise to it. One of the reasons I've never had to deal with a word flood from Robin is that I've never been anything but completely straightforward with him. The flood of words from Robin never bothered you when they were admiring. I have. Take it away Charley: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72oQy_M7h4Q Well, backwater done rose all around Sumner now, drove me down the line Backwater done rose at Sumner, drove poor Charley down the line Lord, I'll tell the world the water, done crept through this town Lord, the whole round country, Lord, river has overflowed Lord, the whole round country, man, is overflowed You know I can't stay here, I'll go where it's high, boy I would goto the hilly country, but, they got me barred Now, look-a here now at Leland river was risin' high Look-a here boys around Leland tell me, river was raisin' high Boy, it's risin' over there, yeah I'm gonna move to Greenville fore I leave, goodbye Look-a here the water now, Lordy, Levee broke, rose most everywhere The water at Greenville and Leland, Lord, it done rose everywhere Boy, you can't never stay here I would go down to Rosedale but, they tell me there's water there Now, the water now, mama, done took Charley's town Well, they tell me the water, done took Charley's town Boy, I'm goin' to Vicksburg Well, I'm goin' to Vicksburg, for that high of mine I am goin' up that water, where lands don't never flow Well, I'm goin' over the hill where, water, oh don't ever flow Boy, hit Sharkey County and everything was down in Stovall But, that whole county was leavin', over that Tallahatchie shore Boy, went to Tallahatchie and got it over there Lord, the water done rushed all over, down old Jackson road Lord, the water done raised, over the Jackson road Boy, it starched my clothes I'm goin' back to the hilly country, won't be worried no more --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Your word flood will continue long after I am gone. Robin is obscuring very simple concepts in a word flood. You lost me on your initial word flood. So that is my opinion and I don't need to word flood you about it. I have a few people, mostly offline, who might have the interest in navigating this combined word flood, but very few here. She doubles down again, piling on more insults in a rabid word flood frenzy. You believe only a word flood can answer a word flood, I do not. Getting word flooded by a person who refuses to ever edit his writing to fit into a remotely normal person's ability to interact here. A tactic of wearing someone down with an unrealistically long flood of words. You are a bit of a word flooder but not even in the same league as Robin. Sorry Robin, I'm gunna have to let your word flood posts stand on their own without commentary. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Dude, enough with the word flood posts. Robin is complaining that I am not responding to his 3 part word flood posts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oYGv4D2Qr4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oYGv4D2Qr4 http://litemind.com/10-strategies-improve-vocabulary/ http://litemind.com/10-strategies-improve-vocabulary/
[FairfieldLife] Peter Lorre with cats
1944 http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/8/77996.jpg
[FairfieldLife] Jaya Jaya Arthi Nityananda
(Nityananda, Guru of Muktananda): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6V4c6gLY7I
[FairfieldLife] Sri Guru Gita in Ganeshpuri
Ganeshpuri - location of Ashrams of Muktananda and Nityananda. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJQvVbpU3Eg
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: Your blind is showing again Ann. Glaringly so. I don't know how that could be possible, but it is. What is a blind? Your pulling rank here is pretty nonsensical. No, there is no pulling rank. I am simply stating that if Curtis does not enjoy what Robin writes, or the position he feels he is being put in he should just stop engaging. Even his good buddy Barry has told him that time and time again. Life is nonsensical, all the time. Can you make heads or tails of it? I can't. And anyway, I have lots of scars to show as a result of my time around Robin. Some were inflicted by him, some by my friends and some by myself. It is a simple fact: I went through a kind of war and I wear those scars as badges of honour. I admit it - I am happy that I experienced all of it, grew as I emerged and am the person I am now. There is no rank pulling. We have all been through our personal wars our suffering, our growth our battles. What was your greatest personal achievement? Does this engender any kind of pride or satisfaction in your idea, you perception of yourself? I certainly hope you can say it does. Life can exact a heavy toll, survivors have earned the right to a certain level of self satisfaction at simply remaining upright and coherent. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still gets the predictable pile on for feeling this way. Note to Share: You will never be able to appease this unfriendly agenda no matter what you say. It is s double bind where the sincerity of even an unnecessary apology will be judged by them. And again you will lose because that is how the formula works. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nothing you have to say, Share, about apologizing or making amends is the least bit credible as long as you have not apologized for calling Robin a psychological rapist. In that case you and Robin never got to the second step because you never took the first step. I'm virtually positive that second step would be forthcoming from Robin as soon as you were to take the first step: he would forgive you if you apologized sincerely. That you have not yet done so is a terrible blot on your character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy and Ann, as in 12 Steps, I tend to focus on the making amends part of an apology. Even in our recent exchange I asked Robin how I could make amends for misunderstanding him about his turq post and Curtis exchange. For me it is the making amends that is the sine qua non of an apology and this is where the cost comes in. And of course the cost or amends is meant to address the actual consequences. Such as a restitution of money in the case of a compulsive gambler who lost the family savings for example. But the first step is to offer apologies and amends and the second step is up to the other person. Robin and I did not get to the second step
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: Your blind is showing again Ann. Glaringly so. I don't know how that could be possible, but it is. What is a blind? spot (my bad) Your pulling rank here is pretty nonsensical. No, there is no pulling rank. I am simply stating that if Curtis does not enjoy what Robin writes, or the position he feels he is being put in he should just stop engaging. Even his good buddy Barry has told him that time and time again. I think you might be missing the spirit of the exchanges here. The purpose is that hopefully we communicate in such a way that maybe we have little breakthroughs. That maybe we further our understanding about things. And I think that can be a pretty persistent hope, so one continues to post in that spirit even when it doesn't seem to be happening. Does that make sense to you, or are you one for throwing in the towel at the first sign of resistance. I don't believe for a second for that to be the case. I find Curtis to be extremely patient. And for whatever reason I find him to be the reasonable one in these discussions. I perfectly understand if you don't, but I reserve the right to comment if I feel that you, or anyone else is a little off base. And certainly you do that with me. So, let's live and let live. Life is nonsensical, all the time. Can you make heads or tails of it? I can't. And anyway, I have lots of scars to show as a result of my time around Robin. Some were inflicted by him, some by my friends and some by myself. It is a simple fact: I went through a kind of war and I wear those scars as badges of honour. I admit it - I am happy that I experienced all of it, grew as I emerged and am the person I am now. There is no rank pulling. That's all neat. But it was some time ago, and now a new chapter has emerged. And in many ways it seems quite similiar to what has been described previously. That does make me sad a little. But it also interesting to see it play out in a new way. It bothered me to hear Curtis call Robin a troll, but it is also dumb to make a post as another person. It seems the only reason to do that was to elicit some response he wasn't getting any other way. We have all been through our personal wars our suffering, our growth our battles. What was your greatest personal achievement? Is it too lame to say that I've made it through another day? Sort of that one day at a time philosophy. I guess to answer your question, it would be being a parent, raising a family, running a small business, and trying to stay totally honest with myself, and staying on the spiritual path, that seems to be laid out before me. Does this engender any kind of pride or satisfaction in your idea, you perception of yourself? I certainly hope you can say it does. Life can exact a heavy toll, survivors have earned the right to a certain level of self satisfaction at simply remaining upright and coherent. Yes, I agree --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would have lasted about an hour at the mic. And even during all that time I wouldn't have characterized it as 'psychological rape. I could and would and did call it lots of other things but never quite that. Still, you have the option to stop reading, stop responding but you don't. I noticed recently that when you have been absent for a while and Robin intermittently shows up so do you. So somewhere, somehow, for some reason, you keep gravitating toward the opportunity to interact with him. Now either stop whining and complaining or ignore him and all things 'him' totally. In my view it would be Robin who would owe the apology for acting in a way that would make someone think this term was the best way to describe it. And instead of taking the feedback of how far over the boundaries line he had crossed... she got and still
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
See Steve, this is why I appreciate you. And I will tell you something that might make you blush because, actually, I believe you are a healthy, gently, reasonable person PLUS I think you are one of the more courageous posters here. Why? Because you NEVER hesitate to answer a post, to go into the lion's lair or what may not turn out to be a dangerous place but still COULD be. You will take a chance and you will respond. Whether people agree with you or think you are a blundering fool is not the point. The point is I believe you to have integrity and strength that is born of a gentle spirit. If I have told you once I have told you ten times: you are a good man. And never forget it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: Your blind is showing again Ann. Glaringly so. I don't know how that could be possible, but it is. What is a blind? spot (my bad) Your pulling rank here is pretty nonsensical. No, there is no pulling rank. I am simply stating that if Curtis does not enjoy what Robin writes, or the position he feels he is being put in he should just stop engaging. Even his good buddy Barry has told him that time and time again. I think you might be missing the spirit of the exchanges here. The purpose is that hopefully we communicate in such a way that maybe we have little breakthroughs. That maybe we further our understanding about things. And I think that can be a pretty persistent hope, so one continues to post in that spirit even when it doesn't seem to be happening. Does that make sense to you, or are you one for throwing in the towel at the first sign of resistance. I don't believe for a second for that to be the case. I find Curtis to be extremely patient. And for whatever reason I find him to be the reasonable one in these discussions. I perfectly understand if you don't, but I reserve the right to comment if I feel that you, or anyone else is a little off base. And certainly you do that with me. So, let's live and let live. Life is nonsensical, all the time. Can you make heads or tails of it? I can't. And anyway, I have lots of scars to show as a result of my time around Robin. Some were inflicted by him, some by my friends and some by myself. It is a simple fact: I went through a kind of war and I wear those scars as badges of honour. I admit it - I am happy that I experienced all of it, grew as I emerged and am the person I am now. There is no rank pulling. That's all neat. But it was some time ago, and now a new chapter has emerged. And in many ways it seems quite similiar to what has been described previously. That does make me sad a little. But it also interesting to see it play out in a new way. It bothered me to hear Curtis call Robin a troll, but it is also dumb to make a post as another person. It seems the only reason to do that was to elicit some response he wasn't getting any other way. We have all been through our personal wars our suffering, our growth our battles. What was your greatest personal achievement? Is it too lame to say that I've made it through another day? Sort of that one day at a time philosophy. I guess to answer your question, it would be being a parent, raising a family, running a small business, and trying to stay totally honest with myself, and staying on the spiritual path, that seems to be laid out before me. Does this engender any kind of pride or satisfaction in your idea, you perception of yourself? I certainly hope you can say it does. Life can exact a heavy toll, survivors have earned the right to a certain level of self satisfaction at simply remaining upright and coherent. Yes, I agree --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding so far beyond your ability to even conceive of such a thing that it makes me smile, just a little. And boy, you think he can mess with you now, 30 years ago you would
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: See Steve, this is why I appreciate you. And I will tell you something that might make you blush because, actually, I believe you are a healthy, gently, reasonable person PLUS I think you are one of the more courageous posters here. Why? Because you NEVER hesitate to answer a post, to go into the lion's lair or what may not turn out to be a dangerous place but still COULD be. You will take a chance and you will respond. Whether people agree with you or think you are a blundering fool is not the point. The point is I believe you to have integrity and strength that is born of a gentle spirit. If I have told you once I have told you ten times: you are a good man. And never forget it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: Your blind is showing again Ann. Glaringly so. I don't know how that could be possible, but it is. What is a blind? spot (my bad) Your pulling rank here is pretty nonsensical. No, there is no pulling rank. I am simply stating that if Curtis does not enjoy what Robin writes, or the position he feels he is being put in he should just stop engaging. Even his good buddy Barry has told him that time and time again. I think you might be missing the spirit of the exchanges here. The purpose is that hopefully we communicate in such a way that maybe we have little breakthroughs. That maybe we further our understanding about things. And I think that can be a pretty persistent hope, so one continues to post in that spirit even when it doesn't seem to be happening. Does that make sense to you, or are you one for throwing in the towel at the first sign of resistance. I don't believe for a second for that to be the case. I find Curtis to be extremely patient. And for whatever reason I find him to be the reasonable one in these discussions. I perfectly understand if you don't, but I reserve the right to comment if I feel that you, or anyone else is a little off base. And certainly you do that with me. So, let's live and let live. Life is nonsensical, all the time. Can you make heads or tails of it? I can't. And anyway, I have lots of scars to show as a result of my time around Robin. Some were inflicted by him, some by my friends and some by myself. It is a simple fact: I went through a kind of war and I wear those scars as badges of honour. I admit it - I am happy that I experienced all of it, grew as I emerged and am the person I am now. There is no rank pulling. That's all neat. But it was some time ago, and now a new chapter has emerged. And in many ways it seems quite similiar to what has been described previously. That does make me sad a little. But it also interesting to see it play out in a new way. It bothered me to hear Curtis call Robin a troll, but it is also dumb to make a post as another person. It seems the only reason to do that was to elicit some response he wasn't getting any other way. We have all been through our personal wars our suffering, our growth our battles. What was your greatest personal achievement? Is it too lame to say that I've made it through another day? Sort of that one day at a time philosophy. I guess to answer your question, it would be being a parent, raising a family, running a small business, and trying to stay totally honest with myself, and staying on the spiritual path, that seems to be laid out before me. Does this engender any kind of pride or satisfaction in your idea, you perception of yourself? I certainly hope you can say it does. Life can exact a heavy toll, survivors have earned the right to a certain level of self satisfaction at simply remaining upright and coherent. Yes, I agree --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you have anything on my experience with Robin, not even close, not even in the same ballpark. Three and a half years around him physically up to 10-15 hours a day just puts my exposure to his mindfuckery, his word flooding
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: Your blind is showing again Ann. Glaringly so. I don't know how that could be possible, but it is. What is a blind? spot (my bad) Your pulling rank here is pretty nonsensical. No, there is no pulling rank. I am simply stating that if Curtis does not enjoy what Robin writes, or the position he feels he is being put in he should just stop engaging. Even his good buddy Barry has told him that time and time again. I think you might be missing the spirit of the exchanges here. The purpose is that hopefully we communicate in such a way that maybe we have little breakthroughs. That maybe we further our understanding about things. And I think that can be a pretty persistent hope, so one continues to post in that spirit even when it doesn't seem to be happening. Does that make sense to you, or are you one for throwing in the towel at the first sign of resistance. I don't believe for a second for that to be the case. I am only advocating Curtis stop responding to Robin, not because I think he should, but because he keeps saying that he doesn't want to get pulled into Robin's game, his repetitiousness, his mind games, his word floods, his rants. He has said time and time again that he has no interest in pursuing this never-ending revolving door of what Curtis feels is a no-win game of semantics. And it goes on. You've read what he has said time and time again. I think it might be great if the two of them kept talking but Curtis evidently doesn't want to so all I am saying is he should shit or get off the pot (to put it rather crudely). I am making no value judgements here about the quality of the discourse or even the value of it. It is just that Curtis keeps coming back for more all the while lamenting his predicament. I am just tired of hearing him whinge, that's all. Either he should get on with it or move along to the next subject. I find Curtis to be extremely patient. And for whatever reason I find him to be the reasonable one in these discussions. I perfectly understand if you don't, but I reserve the right to comment if I feel that you, or anyone else is a little off base. And certainly you do that with me. So, let's live and let live. Absolutely. I have not commented on whether I believe Curtis to be patient or not patient, reasonable or not reasonable, deluded or not deluded. In fact, the only thing I was saying was what I outlined above, I don't need to say it again and I won't. Life is nonsensical, all the time. Can you make heads or tails of it? I can't. And anyway, I have lots of scars to show as a result of my time around Robin. Some were inflicted by him, some by my friends and some by myself. It is a simple fact: I went through a kind of war and I wear those scars as badges of honour. I admit it - I am happy that I experienced all of it, grew as I emerged and am the person I am now. There is no rank pulling. That's all neat. Well, I wouldn't have put it quite like that. But it was some time ago, and now a new chapter has emerged. And in many ways it seems quite similiar to what has been described previously. That does make me sad a little. But it also interesting to see it play out in a new way. It bothered me to hear Curtis call Robin a troll, but it is also dumb to make a post as another person. It seems the only reason to do that was to elicit some response he wasn't getting any other way. Let them both go at it. No problem, just don't complain about it if you chose to put fingers to keyboard, that's all I'm sayin'. We have all been through our personal wars our suffering, our growth our battles. What was your greatest personal achievement? Is it too lame to say that I've made it through another day? Nope, not lame at all. Just think of all the little personal miracles we accomplish within a 24 hour period. Just being able to swallow food, suck in oxygen, walk down a flight of stairs. Sort of that one day at a time philosophy. I guess to answer your question, it would be being a parent, raising a family, running a small business, and trying to stay totally honest with myself, and staying on the spiritual path, that seems to be laid out before me. Worth at least three medals. But your reward seems to be in the fact that you seem like a genuine and happy man. This does not happen arbitrarily. You have evidently been doing a few things right. Does this engender any kind of pride or satisfaction in your idea, you perception of yourself? I certainly hope you can say it does. Life can exact a heavy toll, survivors have earned the right to a certain level of self satisfaction at simply remaining upright and coherent. Yes, I agree --- In
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Yes I agree - I think this is the only way idiots can make a difference, by being courageous, outrageous, brazen bravado is the key. This is the only way they can create the illusion that their views, support have an equal weight on this forum and force a response from others. All idiots should look up to Steve, being restrained, shy will surely lead them to doom. I think MJ's entry into FFL with his brazen, moronic, Appalachian swagger has definitely rubbed off on Steve, helped his confidence - he's got that extra zing after dealing with an even bigger idiot than him. On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: ** See Steve, this is why I appreciate you. And I will tell you something that might make you blush because, actually, I believe you are a healthy, gently, reasonable person PLUS I think you are one of the more courageous posters here. Why? Because you NEVER hesitate to answer a post, to go into the lion's lair or what may not turn out to be a dangerous place but still COULD be. You will take a chance and you will respond. Whether people agree with you or think you are a blundering fool is not the point. The point is I believe you to have integrity and strength that is born of a gentle spirit. If I have told you once I have told you ten times: you are a good man. And never forget it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: Your blind is showing again Ann. Glaringly so. I don't know how that could be possible, but it is. What is a blind? spot (my bad) Your pulling rank here is pretty nonsensical. No, there is no pulling rank. I am simply stating that if Curtis does not enjoy what Robin writes, or the position he feels he is being put in he should just stop engaging. Even his good buddy Barry has told him that time and time again. I think you might be missing the spirit of the exchanges here. The purpose is that hopefully we communicate in such a way that maybe we have little breakthroughs. That maybe we further our understanding about things. And I think that can be a pretty persistent hope, so one continues to post in that spirit even when it doesn't seem to be happening. Does that make sense to you, or are you one for throwing in the towel at the first sign of resistance. I don't believe for a second for that to be the case. I find Curtis to be extremely patient. And for whatever reason I find him to be the reasonable one in these discussions. I perfectly understand if you don't, but I reserve the right to comment if I feel that you, or anyone else is a little off base. And certainly you do that with me. So, let's live and let live. Life is nonsensical, all the time. Can you make heads or tails of it? I can't. And anyway, I have lots of scars to show as a result of my time around Robin. Some were inflicted by him, some by my friends and some by myself. It is a simple fact: I went through a kind of war and I wear those scars as badges of honour. I admit it - I am happy that I experienced all of it, grew as I emerged and am the person I am now. There is no rank pulling. That's all neat. But it was some time ago, and now a new chapter has emerged. And in many ways it seems quite similiar to what has been described previously. That does make me sad a little. But it also interesting to see it play out in a new way. It bothered me to hear Curtis call Robin a troll, but it is also dumb to make a post as another person. It seems the only reason to do that was to elicit some response he wasn't getting any other way. We have all been through our personal wars our suffering, our growth our battles. What was your greatest personal achievement? Is it too lame to say that I've made it through another day? Sort of that one day at a time philosophy. I guess to answer your question, it would be being a parent, raising a family, running a small business, and trying to stay totally honest with myself, and staying on the spiritual path, that seems to be laid out before me. Does this engender any kind of pride or satisfaction in your idea, you perception of yourself? I certainly hope you can say it does. Life can exact a heavy toll, survivors have earned the right to a certain level of self satisfaction at simply remaining upright and coherent. Yes, I agree --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bootleg UK TM teachers
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote: Anyone know of a TM teacher in the Birmingham, UK area who is teaching independently, and thus inexpensively? The DLF has a UK branch now, and there are scholarships/grants available through the DLF to bring the pricing down to more sane levels. L
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: You did not make Ann an example of Robin's behavior - God this is hilarious !!! You are hilarious in the seriousness with which you want to wound anyone who decides to carry the truth forward in the teeth of your foul and perverse opposition. If I were you I would call this an incoherent tirade. On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:23 AM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: You really needed that many words to express that? Your postings here are not an interaction with other people. It is all going on inside your own head. I am under orders from Ann to ignore you now, You are? No, you can and will do what you want but how come you keep doing what you claim you want to stop doing? Maybe you just can't help yourself or maybe you don't really know what you want. Either way carry on your jousting with Robin but just try and quit your bellyaching. but you apparently are free to rant away. Man you must have done a number on her up at that mic. Let's see, a number on her is not clear to me in what you mean. It could mean that I am still under some sort of Robin spell, even now. It could mean I was damaged beyond repair. It could mean you are really pissed and came up with what you thought would 'get' me. Other than that I am not sure what it meant. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Dear Curtis, I am going to pay tribute to you. Your guile is so immaculate, so indefatigable, that the only final answer to you is: DO IT, CURTIS. DO IT. WE ARE JUST GOING TO WATCH. In some way I'd almost say you are as inspired as Christ. Your dishonesty is becoming one of the Ten Wonders of the universe. There is no intelligence, no power, no love, no reason existing anywhere which could ever cause to issue from you a tremor of humility. I feel triumphant here--in a rather quiet and unusual way--in doing something anti-climactic (you are rejuvenated after yesterday, right?): writing to you, Curtis, to tell you your murderously conscientious determination to keep bullshitting on this forum (when it comes to matters of interpersonal truthfulness) can finally only be met by a simple: I will leave you alone. Still, you will never answer those four posts from Saturday. Your are hilarious in the seriousness with which you want to wound anyone who decides to carry the truth forward in the teeth of your foul and perverse opposition. But there is a need for mercy here, because, it would seem, you are acting the part you were cast to play. In my senior Shakespeare course at university, we analyzed the characters in his plays. You are one character in a bigger play than Shakespeare ever imagined, Curtis. You show us who you are. And you make Iago seem like a child. And you force analysis by how you behave. [It you were a character in a Shakespeare play I would look forward to writing an essay about what you reveal about who you are in your actions. In this case, the stage is this forum.) I respect your philosophy, Curtis; and your performance (at all times); but I am more inspired to know you will never go out of character than I am certain that God, as he once existed, has decided to leave what he created. Had I not known what I knew before I met you, Curtis, I would have become religious from reading how you argue here on FFL. You don't quite get the same sensation in your heart when you lie as someone who does not lie, but nevertheless it is a sensation that goes to the sublime. You understand what I am saying here, Curtis: to oppose you is to draw out the real person. Curtis. That person does not know even in his imagination what it feels like to be someone who cannot help but let life form them, alter them, make them, break them, exalt them. You are seemingly self-made from the beginning, Curtis. You have secured what seems to me to be an imperishable place in creation. No one can see what you are doing, Curtis. Only you. CURTIS'S ANSWER TO ROBIN'S RANT: Curtis: Robin, no one is afraid of you anymore. You think you can lay down your trip on others--but it ain't going to fly, Robin. We see through your game. This torrent of abuse will not make true what is not true. You can't have your way around here, Robin. I am not going to let you get away with it. I have been honest and forthcoming from the beginning with you, Robin; but you don't take criticism well--and I have yet to see you respond to the intelligent feedback I keep giving you. Don't you see the irony of all this, Robin? Those who are defending you have deprived themselves of the integrity (they don't realize they have done
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Thank you. I do feel its important to answer a post, and not act as if you don''t see it. Judy does this as well, as do you. I notice that many others do not. They have their own reasons of course, but you are right, I will go into the lions lair knowing that it may be a rough go. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: See Steve, this is why I appreciate you. And I will tell you something that might make you blush because, actually, I believe you are a healthy, gently, reasonable person PLUS I think you are one of the more courageous posters here. Why? Because you NEVER hesitate to answer a post, to go into the lion's lair or what may not turn out to be a dangerous place but still COULD be. You will take a chance and you will respond. Whether people agree with you or think you are a blundering fool is not the point. The point is I believe you to have integrity and strength that is born of a gentle spirit. If I have told you once I have told you ten times: you are a good man. And never forget it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: Your blind is showing again Ann. Glaringly so. I don't know how that could be possible, but it is. What is a blind? spot (my bad) Your pulling rank here is pretty nonsensical. No, there is no pulling rank. I am simply stating that if Curtis does not enjoy what Robin writes, or the position he feels he is being put in he should just stop engaging. Even his good buddy Barry has told him that time and time again. I think you might be missing the spirit of the exchanges here. The purpose is that hopefully we communicate in such a way that maybe we have little breakthroughs. That maybe we further our understanding about things. And I think that can be a pretty persistent hope, so one continues to post in that spirit even when it doesn't seem to be happening. Does that make sense to you, or are you one for throwing in the towel at the first sign of resistance. I don't believe for a second for that to be the case. I find Curtis to be extremely patient. And for whatever reason I find him to be the reasonable one in these discussions. I perfectly understand if you don't, but I reserve the right to comment if I feel that you, or anyone else is a little off base. And certainly you do that with me. So, let's live and let live. Life is nonsensical, all the time. Can you make heads or tails of it? I can't. And anyway, I have lots of scars to show as a result of my time around Robin. Some were inflicted by him, some by my friends and some by myself. It is a simple fact: I went through a kind of war and I wear those scars as badges of honour. I admit it - I am happy that I experienced all of it, grew as I emerged and am the person I am now. There is no rank pulling. That's all neat. But it was some time ago, and now a new chapter has emerged. And in many ways it seems quite similiar to what has been described previously. That does make me sad a little. But it also interesting to see it play out in a new way. It bothered me to hear Curtis call Robin a troll, but it is also dumb to make a post as another person. It seems the only reason to do that was to elicit some response he wasn't getting any other way. We have all been through our personal wars our suffering, our growth our battles. What was your greatest personal achievement? Is it too lame to say that I've made it through another day? Sort of that one day at a time philosophy. I guess to answer your question, it would be being a parent, raising a family, running a small business, and trying to stay totally honest with myself, and staying on the spiritual path, that seems to be laid out before me. Does this engender any kind of pride or satisfaction in your idea, you perception of yourself? I certainly hope you can say it does. Life can exact a heavy toll, survivors have earned the right to a certain level of self satisfaction at simply remaining upright and coherent. Yes, I agree --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Back when this first came up I supported Share's flamboyant choice of words to sum up how it feels to be the focus of Robin's assumption that you are not aligned with reality and his writing is going to jolt you into an ability to face life in a Robin approved more real way. I call it mindfuckery, but Share's term conveys more how invasive this unfriendly assumption feels from the receiving end. Combined with the word flooding it is quite unpleasant. Neither of you
