[FairfieldLife] RE: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, AnnTheClueless wrote: I think Share (hi Share) is having a lot of fun with this and to me there is nothing that fun about it. She seems to be acting like it is not only a joke but is taking pleasure in the discord and adding to it in only the way she can. Sorta the way YOU do when you pile on to the get Share fests, eh? Barry is doing the usual which is to apparently not close his eyes to even sleep while there is a chance to get Judy and keep adding imaginary fuel to the fire. Xeno quoting Shakespeare is a small reprieve however. But I am sensing a tad bit of sadism in our dormouse, which I had not seen before. The fact that our alleged 'victim' of PR is having fun right now is revelatory. As you're doing right now, in fact. What you're missing is the delicious irony of all this. The person who has called more people Liar! than anyone else in Internet history got peeved that anyone would even infer such a thing about *her*, and threw a tantrum. She declared that she would never have any discussions with the offending person until he either documented his inference or retracted it. He did neither, and in effect *thanked* her in advance for no longer bothering him with her discussions. She went fuckin' CRAZY, first backpedaling to claim that her statement didn't mean that she couldn't comment on his posts, and then set forth to make several posts in which she addressed him directly and tried to provoke a reply, clearly an attempt at discussion. In other words, the person who *specializes* in calling other people liars on this forum PROVED HERSELF TO BE A LIAR. I'd call that fun. You, caught up in your Mean Girl crush on the only person on the forum bitchier than you, can call it whatever you want. :-)
Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Dear Share, re: Best simply to ride the wave and let it pass. You inserted yourself into the conversation between Xeno and Judy and made multiple (count the number, Share) posts to Judy demonstrating that you woke up on the wrong side of the bed (you might consider asking Barry to stop stealing the covers - perhaps you aren't getting enough sleep at night?). Is *your* behavior, initiated by *you,* demonstrating what you state above? From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:22 PM Subject: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods At a certain point on Monday morning, Xeno and Judy both seemed more light hearted about it and that is what I was enjoying. Nothing sadistic about that IMO. And I have noticed that these arguments do come and go on a regular basis. Best to simply ride the wave and let it pass. From: awoelfleba...@yahoo.com awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:08 PM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It's not Share's fault that she doesn't understand the conceptual difference between the two - she has never tried to have a discussion. I think Share (hi Share) is having a lot of fun with this and to me there is nothing that fun about it. She seems to be acting like it is not only a joke but is taking pleasure in the discord and adding to it in only the way she can. Barry is doing the usual which is to apparently not close his eyes to even sleep while there is a chance to get Judy and keep adding imaginary fuel to the fire. Xeno quoting Shakespeare is a small reprieve however. But I am sensing a tad bit of sadism in our dormouse, which I had not seen before. The fact that our alleged 'victim' of PR is having fun right now is revelatory. From: Share Long sharelong60@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:51 AM Subject: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Ok, Judy, you made a distinction between discussing with Xeno and commenting on what he said. Seems a bit hair splitty to me but there you are: different strokes for different folks. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:23 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods FWIW, there was no change of mind on my part. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: turq, even in Funny Farm Lounge, to change her mind is a woman's perogative. But I don't think of that as lying. I'd have to agree with you here Share, but I'll take it one step further and say it is anyone's prerogative to change their mind without being branded a liar. Something as trivial as saying the equivalent of, I'm not going to eat any chocolate cake because I'm on a diet. and then changes their mind after deciding it looks too good to resist is hardly someone to be reviled for having not predicted their future actions correctly. Now, speaking of cake... From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. All while having a discussion with the person she claimed only yesterday she was never going to discuss *anything* with until he either documented something or retracted it. He did neither. And she thinks HE's dishonest? Chortle.
Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Yes, Whole Foods is in many places. That article Barry posted from Huffington Post re: Whole Foods was hilarious, btw. Richard, just read that and then let it go. It's going to be O.K. Shop there as much as you like. And, as far as Texas is concerned, I think Corpus Christi might be the only really tolerable town. From: awoelfleba...@yahoo.com awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:23 PM Subject: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Check out Ann, the bottom poster, and her reply to my post about home security! Good example of prejudice: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/358450 On 9/22/2013 8:13 PM, awoelflebater@... wrote: Ha, Richard, the guy who says he has to protect himself from gays, transgendered men and women and lesbians (not to mention skinheads). Who's the prejudiced one? But he's right, I think I hate Texas. So, you hate Whole Foods Market because it's a Texas company and I hate neo-Nazi skinhead bikers breaking into my house. Er, what is Whole Foods? We don't have them up here. Also, I never said I hated it or that I hated companies (presumably health food stores) that reside in Texas but seem to be chains all across the US of A according to FFL's recent posts. So are they really a Texas company? No, I just don't think I like Texas, the state, and I am thinking I don't like you much either. But don't put words in my mouth because I'm a stickler for misrepresentation and I'll drive you crazier than you already seem to be. Go figure.
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Ann opines: Bob Prices' later post which I just read before bothering to respond to you is FUN. Maybe you better go and read that a few times, Pinocchio. Now that man can deliver and he often has his facts straight. You don't want to mess with him, and you know it. If you want to give me some real FUN, I would love to see you engage him one on one - go ahead, I really, really dare you. Not gonna happen. Bob's a troll, and a grudge- holding one at that. If you're looking for someone to knock you out of the #2 Bitch position, he *is* a likely candidate, but I'm not gonna interact with him. If that's your idea of fun, you go for it. :-)
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
[FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Listen to me carefully, Uncle Tantra. It took years for Judy and et all, to find out your true colors. Bob Price found that out in just a few minutes time.!! Would you admit that the intellect of Bob Price is far superior to anybody else here? You got what you deserved Unc. Bob Price would outwit Rama Lenz in an intellectual argument any day. Please don't fudge the issue at hand by calling him a troll. He isn't one. Everybody knows that. I want you to look at him in the eye, and admit your error. Ann opines: Bob Prices' later post which I just read before bothering to respond to you is FUN. Maybe you better go and read that a few times, Pinocchio. Now that man can deliver and he often has his facts straight. You don't want to mess with him, and you know it. If you want to give me some real FUN, I would love to see you engage him one on one - go ahead, I really, really dare you. --- turquoiseb turquoiseb@... writes: Not gonna happen. Bob's a troll, and a grudge- holding one at that. If you're looking for someone to knock you out of the #2 Bitch position, he *is* a likely candidate, but I'm not gonna interact with him. If that's your idea of fun, you go for it. :-)
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
[FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
You're a troll, too, in posts like this. You're seeking a reactive response from me, as if you've said something that (in your mind) struck home. In other words, you're Doing A Judy. Bob's not worth pissing on, much less replying to. If you're hoping to emulate him, you're doing a good job so far. :-) Speaking of trolls, however, have you noticed that you and a number of other people are now going somewhat crazy trying to get Barry, simply because I deigned to reply to some of you? Maybe it's time to go back to ignoring the lot of you. It'd be better for your collective mental health. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason jedi_spock@... wrote: Listen to me carefully, Uncle Tantra. It took years for Judy and et all, to find out your true colors. Bob Price found that out in just a few minutes time.!! Would you admit that the intellect of Bob Price is far superior to anybody else here? You got what you deserved Unc. Bob Price would outwit Rama Lenz in an intellectual argument any day. Please don't fudge the issue at hand by calling him a troll. He isn't one. Everybody knows that. I want you to look at him in the eye, and admit your error. Ann opines: Bob Prices' later post which I just read before bothering to respond to you is FUN. Maybe you better go and read that a few times, Pinocchio. Now that man can deliver and he often has his facts straight. You don't want to mess with him, and you know it. If you want to give me some real FUN, I would love to see you engage him one on one - go ahead, I really, really dare you. --- turquoiseb turquoiseb@ writes: Not gonna happen. Bob's a troll, and a grudge- holding one at that. If you're looking for someone to knock you out of the #2 Bitch position, he *is* a likely candidate, but I'm not gonna interact with him. If that's your idea of fun, you go for it. :-)
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Judy, I don't know what you're talking about here. I thought the thread was about you obsessing on *if true* and ignoring all the great stuff Xeno wrote yesterday. What does turq have to do with it?! From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 9:13 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Barry is lying; everyone who has been following this knows he's lying. He knows they know he's lying. Even Share knows he's lying. Somebody please explain to me what the point is. What does a person get out of lying when they know they aren't deceiving anybody? What do they get out of advertising that they're a liar, over and over again (six times, so far, in this case)? Why would they want to be known as a liar? And a malicious liar, at that? I've never understood this. What's the payoff? (snip) What you're missing is the delicious irony of all this. The person who has called more people Liar! than anyone else in Internet history got peeved that anyone would even infer such a thing about *her*, and threw a tantrum. She declared that she would never have any discussions with the offending person until he either documented his inference or retracted it. He did neither, and in effect *thanked* her in advance for no longer bothering him with her discussions. She went fuckin' CRAZY, first backpedaling to claim that her statement didn't mean that she couldn't comment on his posts, and then set forth to make several posts in which she addressed him directly and tried to provoke a reply, clearly an attempt at discussion. In other words, the person who *specializes* in calling other people liars on this forum PROVED HERSELF TO BE A LIAR. I'd call that fun. You, caught up in your Mean Girl crush on the only person on the forum bitchier than you, can call it whatever you want. :-)
RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
[FairfieldLife] [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Just to reply for my grandfather's sake, not Bob's or #2 Bitch's :-), he did work with Einstein, as did half of the theoretical physicists in America, on the *theoretical* side of the physics involved in the Manhattan Project. Neither of them were ever in New Mexico to my knowledge, and neither ever worked on the practical side of blowing people up. Their theoretical work was read and utilized by the build-it guys. Which would have suited my grandfather just fine, because he was a Quaker. :-) As for the Bobster, both Curtis and I wrote him off long ago, and nothing he has posted since (the little of it I've skimmed, that is) has convinced me that anything has changed. If he's you're idea of an intellectual giant, I have even less respect for you than before. As for your dreams of me, that's just fuckin' pathetic. I *never* dream of anyone on FFL. I don't like interacting with many of them on the physical plane, much less fucking up my dreams with them. :-) Buh-bye... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Ann opines: Bob Prices' later post which I just read before bothering to respond to you is FUN. Maybe you better go and read that a few times, Pinocchio. Now that man can deliver and he often has his facts straight. You don't want to mess with him, and you know it. If you want to give me some real FUN, I would love to see you engage him one on one - go ahead, I really, really dare you. Not gonna happen. Bob's a troll, and a grudge- holding one at that. If you're looking for someone to knock you out of the #2 Bitch position, he *is* a likely candidate, but I'm not gonna interact with him. If that's your idea of fun, you go for it. :-) Dear Barry, I was afraid you were going to decline the opportunity to engage with Mr Price. Of course, I don't blame you. But I am in a position of safety because he is an official member of the MGC of which I am also a member so he has to be nice to me but if I wasn't in the same club I wouldn't take him up on any intellectual or moral or experiential challenges either. You are a wise man, Barry; my advice is to try and stay clear of Bob. He seems to be one of those underhanded types who does his research, can back it up and is not afraid to let you know when you've made an error. And he often accompanies his 'corrections' with funny youtube videos to embellish his point. All in all a formidable character and if I'm not careful he will probably try and move his way into the top MG position of which I am rather fond so that would irk me a little if he were to usurp me in any way. Now, if you change your mind about engagement with BP, I will be the first to congratulate you on your decision and I would love to purchase front row tickets. (BTW, I think you were a tad off base to have called him a troll. That term is just so, well, pedestrian.) BTW, I had a dream about you the night before last. You were rather loving in that dream although it did not involve sex. But you did insist on cuddling up to me and I was wondering if you were including me in some lucid dream experiment so I went along with it at the time. Then, I realized the time differences between our countries would not have made that likely (as likely as that scenario in the dream actually was, which wasn't very).
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Ann, I thought about informing Share why her statement below is nonsense, backing it up with documentation, making her mad by using the acronym IMHO, but I'm going to start the day off on a different tack and say a little prayer for her. I am thrilled however, Ann, that Barry said buh bye, if even for a day. He sounded like he was about to wet his pants. Bless you. From: awoelfleba...@yahoo.com awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:36 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, I don't know what you're talking about here. I thought the thread was about you obsessing on *if true* and ignoring all the great stuff Xeno wrote yesterday. What does turq have to do with it?! Oh dear Share, I think I noticed that there is another CD caught in your player. Maybe you should attend to that for the time being; you had some success yesterday extricating the one that was stuck. Maybe that or join the folks for some bananagrams at Revelations. Emily? From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 9:13 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Barry is lying; everyone who has been following this knows he's lying. He knows they know he's lying. Even Share knows he's lying. Somebody please explain to me what the point is. What does a person get out of lying when they know they aren't deceiving anybody? What do they get out of advertising that they're a liar, over and over again (six times, so far, in this case)? Why would they want to be known as a liar? And a malicious liar, at that? I've never understood this. What's the payoff? (snip) What you're missing is the delicious irony of all this. The person who has called more people Liar! than anyone else in Internet history got peeved that anyone would even infer such a thing about *her*, and threw a tantrum. She declared that she would never have any discussions with the offending person until he either documented his inference or retracted it. He did neither, and in effect *thanked* her in advance for no longer bothering him with her discussions. She went fuckin' CRAZY, first backpedaling to claim that her statement didn't mean that she couldn't comment on his posts, and then set forth to make several posts in which she addressed him directly and tried to provoke a reply, clearly an attempt at discussion. In other words, the person who *specializes* in calling other people liars on this forum PROVED HERSELF TO BE A LIAR. I'd call that fun. You, caught up in your Mean Girl crush on the only person on the forum bitchier than you, can call it whatever you want. :-)
RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Obbajee, I'm here but I've been avoiding the temptation to ask you for juicy details about Rahu/Sani with Shukra thrown in the mix. Surely you knew what THAT combo could indicate?! Guess it depends on which graha is graced by said combustible combo LOL. For a Libra lagna it's meant walking pneumonia with cough. Go figure! From: obbajeeba no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 11:04 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods IMHO, for which I have an IMHO, Barry is wet dreaming and he also cannot control who he dreams about even when he tries to google avatars and images on google to attempt the guess to what the girls look like who post here on FFL. IMHO and ROTFLMAO TMI and other acronyms I think Share loves to play and enjoys the attention here on FFL, IMHO. Nice to see Emily, and I am getting used to this and may miss a subject from time to time or when I see fit, whichever happens. Takes me a bit to get back into this writing form, so I apologize for typos. Although you all are used to it. :) IMHO. Where is my Share bear? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Ann, I thought about informing Share why her statement below is nonsense, backing it up with documentation, making her mad by using the acronym IMHO, but I'm going to start the day off on a different tack and say a little prayer for her. I am thrilled however, Ann, that Barry said buh bye, if even for a day. He sounded like he was about to wet his pants. Bless you. From: awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:36 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, I don't know what you're talking about here. I thought the thread was about you obsessing on *if true* and ignoring all the great stuff Xeno wrote yesterday. What does turq have to do with it?! Oh dear Share, I think I noticed that there is another CD caught in your player. Maybe you should attend to that for the time being; you had some success yesterday extricating the one that was stuck. Maybe that or join the folks for some bananagrams at Revelations. Emily? From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 9:13 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Barry is lying; everyone who has been following this knows he's lying. He knows they know he's lying. Even Share knows he's lying. Somebody please explain to me what the point is. What does a person get out of lying when they know they aren't deceiving anybody? What do they get out of advertising that they're a liar, over and over again (six times, so far, in this case)? Why would they want to be known as a liar? And a malicious liar, at that? I've never understood this. What's the payoff? (snip) What you're missing is the delicious irony of all this. The person who has called more people Liar! than anyone else in Internet history got peeved that anyone would even infer such a thing about *her*, and threw a tantrum. She declared that she would never have any discussions with the offending person until he either documented his inference or retracted it. He did neither, and in effect *thanked* her in advance for no longer bothering him with her discussions. She went fuckin' CRAZY, first backpedaling to claim that her statement didn't mean that she couldn't comment on his posts, and then set forth to make several posts in which she addressed him directly and tried to provoke a reply, clearly an attempt at discussion. In other words, the person who *specializes* in calling other people liars on this forum PROVED HERSELF TO BE A LIAR. I'd call that fun. You, caught up in your Mean Girl crush on the only person on the forum bitchier than you, can call it whatever you want. :-)
RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Well, Obbajee, since I don't know exactly what THIS is, I can't really offer any insights. Oh, there's been a really bad jyotish thing happening. All the grahas between rahu and ketu. But that's easing up now. It has a name but I can't find it. From: obbajeeba no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 12:13 PM Subject: RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Actually, Share, I had NO IDEA that SHANI RAHU SHUKRA could cause THIS!! WTF and that is beyond IMHO! More like WTF is this?!! Share, please do tell what you know about this. I am sorry you are going into the sickness thing. I better count my lucky stars then. .HOLY GOD MOTHER OF JESUS! Catholics can be a bit um... PRAISE the LORD? Please, Share, because this is not funny. Please give insight. Details for which you are tempted to ask, well, let's say I need an Exorcism Intervention now! Totally sober and not on any drugs or alcohol. Did not see this coming and I hope I make it to the other side alive. The other side of this conjunction of grahas force feeding me too much attention and too close to my living arrangements making convenience, a convenience. SOS ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Obbajee, I'm here but I've been avoiding the temptation to ask you for juicy details about Rahu/Sani with Shukra thrown in the mix. Surely you knew what THAT combo could indicate?! Guess it depends on which graha is graced by said combustible combo LOL. For a Libra lagna it's meant walking pneumonia with cough. Go figure! From: obbajeeba no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 11:04 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods IMHO, for which I have an IMHO, Barry is wet dreaming and he also cannot control who he dreams about even when he tries to google avatars and images on google to attempt the guess to what the girls look like who post here on FFL. IMHO and ROTFLMAO TMI and other acronyms I think Share loves to play and enjoys the attention here on FFL, IMHO. Nice to see Emily, and I am getting used to this and may miss a subject from time to time or when I see fit, whichever happens. Takes me a bit to get back into this writing form, so I apologize for typos. Although you all are used to it. :) IMHO. Where is my Share bear? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Ann, I thought about informing Share why her statement below is nonsense, backing it up with documentation, making her mad by using the acronym IMHO, but I'm going to start the day off on a different tack and say a little prayer for her. I am thrilled however, Ann, that Barry said buh bye, if even for a day. He sounded like he was about to wet his pants. Bless you. From: awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:36 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, I don't know what you're talking about here. I thought the thread was about you obsessing on *if true* and ignoring all the great stuff Xeno wrote yesterday. What does turq have to do with it?! Oh dear Share, I think I noticed that there is another CD caught in your player. Maybe you should attend to that for the time being; you had some success yesterday extricating the one that was stuck. Maybe that or join the folks for some bananagrams at Revelations. Emily? From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 9:13 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Barry is lying; everyone who has been following this knows he's lying. He knows they know he's lying. Even Share knows he's lying. Somebody please explain to me what the point is. What does a person get out of lying when they know they aren't deceiving anybody? What do they get out of advertising that they're a liar, over and over again (six times, so far, in this case)? Why would they want to be known as a liar? And a malicious liar, at that? I've never understood this. What's the payoff? (snip) What you're missing is the delicious irony of all this. The person who has called more people Liar! than anyone else in Internet history got peeved that anyone would even infer such a thing about *her*, and threw a tantrum. She declared that she would never have any discussions with the offending person until he either documented his inference or retracted it. He did neither, and in effect *thanked* her in advance for no longer bothering him
RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Argue-Bot, vowing not to start future arguments with victim: Why don't you fuck off? I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you've documented your accusations, or withdrawn them. Victim, calling her bluff: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! This should be interesting. Judy either LIED above about not discussing anything with this particular victim du jour, or she didn't. What's the FFL consensus? That is, how long until she's ragging on him again, trying to get him to respond to her, and thus get sucked into her eternally-dueling-egos Tarbaby scenario? She *did*, after all, specify I'm not going to discuss ANYTHING with you until... He's clearly not going to jump through hoops, fall for the taunt, and cater to her demands. So if she writes to him in the future, she LIED. Simple as that. Can you say, Hoist on one's own petard? I think you can. :-)
Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods. And even in this argument, Xeno sounds like a philosophical friend. In such circumstances, can't 2 little words *if true* be given a positive spin by you? Or at least a neutral one?! Your sort of knee jerk response feels like you're wasting a potential friendship with Xeno. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 4:53 PM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. I am looking for an explanation of why you think this. But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples. I am not devious, I am as straightforward as it gets, so it's going to be pretty difficult. and extended argumentation, which is an intuitive and subjective evaluation by which I come to this conclusion. You kind of remind me of the tenant portrayed by Michael Keaton the movie 'Pacific Heights'. You begin with the appearance of being on the level, and then Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments I have been known to start an argument. So have you, so have many others here. Since when is this a sign of a pattern of deviousness? or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. Yeah, I don't do any of that. And I'm quite sure you know it. And in fact, I undoubtedly engage in some of the same when I am arguing with you; there does not seem to be much choice if one wants to continue the discussion. I do not like to sow discord, but it inevitably happens when we get into a discussion. Do I ever lie? The answer is yes. Even M recommended lying under certain circumstances. This world of illusion is rotten to the core. Do you ever lie? Of all the people currently on FFL, you accuse others of lying more than anyone. That is of course, my other reason for suspecting you of a lack of integrity. That's not a rational reason, of course. And I don't just accuse, I document my accusations. Certain people seem to manage to create the aura of integrity without insisting others prove their own or without asking others to apologise for doubting theirs. The late Senator Moynihan from New York comes to mind, a rarity in the political world. In my world, the personal aspect of life really cannot have integrity; only the whole of life has integrity, but that is not the integrity arrived at by conforming to a model of behaviour; it is simply it cannot be compared to anything else. Blablabla...more irrelevant bafflegab. I just find it disingenuous that you try to ride the moral high horse, from which you have fallen long ago Please give the specifics of this claim (including when this falling purportedly happened). you are rather lifting the tail of a dead one. I never really could ride a horse myself. As an individual body, there is always something corruptible when compared to some fictional higher standard. If you want to discuss philosophy or science or music, fine. But this issue of your alleged, self-promoted integrity and the incredible lack of it in others is not a viable subject. As I reminded Curtis when he tried this ploy, the only time I promote my integrity is when I'm accused of having a lack of it. It's not an uncommon response from people I've caught being dishonest, but never has anybody been able to make it stick. Rarely is an example even given, just the vague charge. Vaj used to do that a lot. Why don't we discuss Mozart? Why don't you fuck off? I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you've documented your accusations, or withdrawn them. You bit off a lot more than you can chew here.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
My statement about Judy being prejudiced toward anyone living in Texas still stands. Let's see, how many times did she address me as 'willytex', AFTER I told her my name was Richard at least six times? Judy hates people from Texas so ergo, she hates George W. Bush. So, she called him a liar. Judy is a hateful hypocrite. It's no coincidence that Whole Foods is headquartered in Texas so she told a fib about visiting the store in New Jersey. I guess she thought she could get away with fibbing, but I caught her lying. Now she's really upset - can't deal with it, I guess. Case closed. On 9/23/2013 6:45 AM, Share Long wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods. And even in this argument, Xeno sounds like a philosophical friend. In such circumstances, can't 2 little words *if true* be given a positive spin by you? Or at least a neutral one?! Your sort of knee jerk response feels like you're wasting a potential friendship with Xeno. *From:* authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sunday, September 22, 2013 4:53 PM *Subject:* RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods *Xeno wrote: * Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. *I am looking for an explanation of /why/ you think this.* But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness *OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples.* * * *I am not devious, I am as straightforward as it gets, so it's going to be pretty difficult.* and extended argumentation, which is an intuitive and subjective evaluation by which I come to this conclusion. You kind of remind me of the tenant portrayed by Michael Keaton the movie 'Pacific Heights'. You begin with the appearance of being on the level, and then Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments *I have been known to start an argument. So have you, so have many others here. Since when is this a sign of a pattern of deviousness?* or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. *Yeah, I don't do any of that. And I'm quite sure you know it.* And in fact, I undoubtedly engage in some of the same when I am arguing with you; there does not seem to be much choice if one wants to continue the discussion. I do not like to sow discord, but it inevitably happens when we get into a discussion. Do I ever lie? The answer is yes. Even M recommended lying under certain circumstances. This world of illusion is rotten to the core. Do you ever lie? Of all the people currently on FFL, you accuse others of lying more than anyone. That is of course, my other reason for suspecting you of a lack of integrity. *That's not a rational reason, of course. And I don't just accuse, I /document/ my accusations.* Certain people seem to manage to create the aura of integrity without insisting others prove their own or without asking others to apologise for doubting theirs. The late Senator Moynihan from New York comes to mind, a rarity in the political world. In my world, the personal aspect of life really cannot have integrity; only the whole of life has integrity, but that is not the integrity arrived at by conforming to a model of behaviour; it is simply it cannot be compared to anything else. *Blablabla...more irrelevant bafflegab. * I just find it disingenuous that you try to ride the moral high horse, from which you have fallen long ago *Please give the specifics of this claim (including when this falling purportedly happened).* you are rather lifting the tail of a dead one. I never really could ride a horse myself. As an individual body, there is always something corruptible when compared to some fictional higher standard. If you want to discuss philosophy or science or music, fine. But this issue of your alleged, self-promoted integrity and the incredible lack of it in others is not a viable subject. *As I reminded Curtis when he tried this ploy, the only time I promote my integrity is when I'm accused of having a lack of it. It's not an uncommon response from people I've caught being dishonest, but never has anybody been able to make it stick. Rarely is an example even given, just the vague charge. Vaj used to do that a lot.* Why don't we
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
On 9/22/2013 8:13 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On 9/22/2013 10:17 AM, Jason wrote: Holy mother Ganges!! You must have really offended both of them (Barry Judy). I wonder what exactly you did, for both of them to shun you. It's not complicated - they are both prejudiced against people that live in Texas - they've said as much since 1999. Barry and Judy have been encouraging everyone to shun me for years. Go figure. I probably posted 3,000 on-topic posts to alt.m.t. for five years before I received a single reply from Judy. Then, when I challenged her assertion that Bush lied - now she really hates me for proving that John Kerry is a liar. John Kerry did NOT spend Christmas of 1968 in Cambodia! In Barry's case, he is still mad at me for poking fun at the Zen Master Rama - but he pokes fun at MMY all the time. Go figure. Yes, it is surprising to find out that some TMers are so fixated on a person's birth circumstances. What's really funny is that Judy has never been to Texas and Barry is from Texas. LoL! Check out Ann, the bottom poster, and her reply to my post about home security! Good example of prejudice: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/358450 Ha, Richard, the guy who says he has to protect himself from gays, transgendered men and women and lesbians (not to mention skinheads). Who's the prejudiced one? But he's right, I think I hate Texas. It was a joke Ann, get a life. I don't care who they are if they try to break into my house. authfriend: Thank you, Richard, you have provided a perfect demonstration over the past few days for everyone to see that what I said about you to Michael: you are a troll and a liar. --- punditster punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: If you don't like it, just ignore me like you've been doing since 1999. LoL! You don't have to respond to every single post here - if you don't live near a Whole Foods just say so. Just cut the crap, Judy, and stop the lying about it. And you don't need to put others down just for wanting to eat a few organic oranges at a local health food store. We're not all poor people and I don't spend my 'whole paycheck' at the market - I probably earn more retired than you do working all day. Go figure.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
At 11:53pm yesterday (my time) Judy wrote to Xeno: Why don't you fuck off? I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you've documented your accusations, or withdrawn them. At 5:38am today (my time) Xeno made it clear that he was not going to do either, and thus expected Judy to keep her word and cease all attempts to have discussions with him: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! At 2:28 today (my time), Judy broke her word and wrote to Xeno *directly*, after claiming she wouldn't, addressing him directly and calling him either very dishonest or very stupid. In other words, having realized the bind she'd placed herself in, she backpedalled like crazy and claimed that she'd never said she wouldn't comment on things he posted. She's NOT commenting in this later reply, she's addressing Xeno *directly*, and thus attempting to have a discussion with him, the very thing she said she'd not do unless he did what she wanted. In other words, Judy LIED. In Judyworld, addressing a person directly, calling them names, and attempting anything she can possibly think of to lure them back into an argument is NOT discussing things with them. Doing this with someone who had made it clear that he was *happy* that she will no longer be attempting to discuss things with him is -- in her mind -- NOT discussing things with him. It's something else. Insanity, maybe? :-) :-) :-) Xeno wrote: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
[FairfieldLife] RE: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
dear Richard, I'm happy to call you whatever your preference is. I notice a lot of the guys call you by the WT name. I enjoyed calling you punditster sir with various spellings. Anyway, hope all your new equipment is working great (-: From: Richard J. Williams pundits...@gmail.com To: Richard J. Williams FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:30 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods My statement about Judy being prejudiced toward anyone living in Texas still stands. Let's see, how many times did she address me as 'willytex', AFTER I told her my name was Richard at least six times? Judy hates people from Texas so ergo, she hates George W. Bush. So, she called him a liar. Judy is a hateful hypocrite. It's no coincidence that Whole Foods is headquartered in Texas so she told a fib about visiting the store in New Jersey. I guess she thought she could get away with fibbing, but I caught her lying. Now she's really upset - can't deal with it, I guess. Case closed. On 9/23/2013 6:45 AM, Share Long wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods. And even in this argument, Xeno sounds like a philosophical friend. In such circumstances, can't 2 little words *if true* be given a positive spin by you? Or at least a neutral one?! Your sort of knee jerk response feels like you're wasting a potential friendship with Xeno. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 4:53 PM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. I am looking for an explanation of why you think this. But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples. I am not devious, I am as straightforward as it gets, so it's going to be pretty difficult. and extended argumentation, which is an intuitive and subjective evaluation by which I come to this conclusion. You kind of remind me of the tenant portrayed by Michael Keaton the movie 'Pacific Heights'. You begin with the appearance of being on the level, and then Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments I have been known to start an argument. So have you, so have many others here. Since when is this a sign of a pattern of deviousness? or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. Yeah, I don't do any of that. And I'm quite sure you know it. And in fact, I undoubtedly engage in some of the same when I am arguing with you; there does not seem to be much choice if one wants to continue the discussion. I do not like to sow discord, but it inevitably happens when we get into a discussion. Do I ever lie? The answer is yes. Even M recommended lying under certain circumstances. This world of illusion is rotten to the core. Do you ever lie? Of all the people currently on FFL, you accuse others of lying more than anyone. That is of course, my other reason for suspecting you of a lack of integrity. That's not a rational reason, of course. And I don't just accuse, I document my accusations. Certain people seem to manage to create the aura of integrity without insisting others prove their own or without asking others to apologise for doubting theirs. The late Senator Moynihan from New York comes to mind, a rarity in the political world. In my world, the personal aspect of life really cannot have integrity; only the whole of life has integrity, but that is not the integrity arrived at by conforming to a model of behaviour; it is simply it cannot be compared to anything else. Blablabla...more irrelevant
[FairfieldLife] [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
In other words, she's saying, Yes, I LIED, and yes, I'm insane. :-) Judy tries to bullshit herself out of the trap she set for herself: See what I mean? Once he's been shown to have hoisted himself on his own petard in an attempt to get me, what does he do? He tries to save face by hoisting himself even higher on that petard. Xeno, I'm guessing, will shortly join Barry for his own second hoist. The biggest problem both of them have is overestimating their intelligence and underestimating that of their readership. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: At 11:53pm yesterday (my time) Judy wrote to Xeno: Why don't you fuck off? I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you've documented your accusations, or withdrawn them. At 5:38am today (my time) Xeno made it clear that he was not going to do either, and thus expected Judy to keep her word and cease all attempts to have discussions with him: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! At 2:28 today (my time), Judy broke her word and wrote to Xeno *directly*, after claiming she wouldn't, addressing him directly and calling him either very dishonest or very stupid. In other words, having realized the bind she'd placed herself in, she backpedalled like crazy and claimed that she'd never said she wouldn't comment on things he posted. She's NOT commenting in this later reply, she's addressing Xeno *directly*, and thus attempting to have a discussion with him, the very thing she said she'd not do unless he did what she wanted. In other words, Judy LIED. In Judyworld, addressing a person directly, calling them names, and attempting anything she can possibly think of to lure them back into an argument is NOT discussing things with them. Doing this with someone who had made it clear that he was *happy* that she will no longer be attempting to discuss things with him is -- in her mind -- NOT discussing things with him. It's something else. Insanity, maybe? :-) :-) :-) Xeno wrote: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is.
Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Judy, are you saying that Xeno accused you of lying twice?! Once with *if true* and once about Whole Foods?! Xeno's intention seemed friendly to me even tho he got it wrong about your alleged desire for privacy. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:00 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods BTW, Share, another thing you missed is that there was no desire for privacy on my part in my exchange with Richard; that was purely Xeno's notion. As I explained to Xeno, Richard already knew where I live, because I've mentioned it here before. And because Richard had looked up the locations of Whole Foods stores in New Jersey, he knew there was one quite close to me (he even posted the address). My point was Richard's flagrant dishonesty in (among other things) claiming the nearest one was a long bus ride and two hours distant. It was one of his stupid and petty attempts at trolling. It didn't warrant any discussion other than as a way of highlighting Richard's behavior here. There was no reason for Xeno to intervene; although it became clear later why he did: to suggest that I might be the one who was lying. Ironically, that was also a stupid and dishonest troll on Xeno's part. Share wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods.
Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Judy, in his initial response, Xeno said something like that it's a phrase that indicates that one has no supporting evidence, sounding like his usual philosophical self. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:40 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods. And even in this argument, Xeno sounds like a philosophical friend. In such circumstances, can't 2 little words *if true* be given a positive spin by you? Or at least a neutral one?! Your sort of knee jerk response feels like you're wasting a potential friendship with Xeno. Xeno has foreclosed on the possibility of friendship with his false accusations. I gave him the chance to explain if true, initially without interpreting the phrase, and he (finally, after several attempts to avoid the issue) confirmed that those 2 little words were neither friendly nor neutral; he meant them to cast doubt on my honesty. When I think you might have something to contribute to how I manage my relationships here, I'll ask you. I doubt that will happen, though, unless you become a lot smarter than you demonstrate with your comments above. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 4:53 PM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. I am looking for an explanation of why you think this. But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples. I am not devious, I am as straightforward as it gets, so it's going to be pretty difficult. and extended argumentation, which is an intuitive and subjective evaluation by which I come to this conclusion. You kind of remind me of the tenant portrayed by Michael Keaton the movie 'Pacific Heights'. You begin with the appearance of being on the level, and then Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments I have been known to start an argument. So have you, so have many others here. Since when is this a sign of a pattern of deviousness? or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. Yeah, I don't do any of that. And I'm quite sure you know it. And in fact, I undoubtedly engage in some of the same when I am arguing with you; there does not seem to be much choice if one wants to continue the discussion. I do not like to sow discord, but it inevitably happens when we get into a discussion. Do I ever lie? The answer is yes. Even M recommended lying under certain circumstances. This world of illusion is rotten to the core. Do you ever lie? Of all the people currently on FFL, you accuse others of lying more than anyone. That is of course, my other reason for suspecting you of a lack of integrity. That's not a rational reason, of course. And I don't just accuse, I document my accusations. Certain people seem to manage to create the aura of integrity without insisting others prove their own or without asking others to apologise for doubting theirs. The late Senator Moynihan from New York comes to mind, a rarity in the political world. In my world, the personal aspect of life really cannot have integrity; only the whole of life has integrity, but that is not the integrity arrived at by conforming to a model of behaviour; it is simply it cannot be compared to anything else. Blablabla...more irrelevant bafflegab. I just find it disingenuous that you try to ride the moral high horse, from which you have fallen long ago Please give the specifics of this claim (including when this falling purportedly happened). you are rather lifting the tail of a dead one. I never really could ride a horse myself. As an individual body, there is always something corruptible when compared to some fictional higher standard. If you want to discuss philosophy or science or music, fine. But this issue of your alleged, self-promoted integrity and the incredible lack of it in others is not a viable subject. As I reminded Curtis when he
Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:28 AM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com authfriend wrote: Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. I am looking for an explanation of why you think this. But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples. I am not devious, I am as straightforward as it gets, so it's going to be pretty difficult. and extended argumentation, which is an intuitive and subjective evaluation by which I come to this conclusion. You kind of remind me of the tenant portrayed by Michael Keaton the movie 'Pacific Heights'. You begin with the appearance of being on the level, and then Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments I have been known to start an argument. So have you, so have many others here. Since when is this a sign of a pattern of deviousness? or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. Yeah, I don't do any of that. And I'm quite sure you know it. And in fact, I undoubtedly engage in some of the same when I am arguing with you; there does not seem to be much choice if one wants to continue the discussion. I do not like to sow discord, but it inevitably happens when we get into a discussion. Do I ever lie? The answer is yes. Even M recommended lying under certain circumstances. This world of illusion is rotten to the core. Do you ever lie? Of all the people currently on FFL, you accuse others of lying more than anyone. That is of course, my other reason for suspecting you of a lack of integrity. That's not a rational reason, of course. And I don't just accuse, I document my accusations. Certain people seem to manage to create the aura of integrity without insisting others prove their own or without asking others to apologise for doubting theirs. The late Senator Moynihan from New York comes to mind, a rarity in the political world. In my world, the personal aspect of life really cannot have integrity; only the whole of life has integrity, but that is not the integrity arrived at by conforming to a model of behaviour; it is simply it cannot be compared to anything else. Blablabla...more irrelevant bafflegab. I just find it disingenuous that you try to ride the moral high horse, from which you have fallen long ago Please give the specifics of this claim (including when this falling purportedly happened). you are rather lifting the tail of a dead one. I never really could ride a horse myself. As an individual body, there is always something corruptible when compared to some fictional higher standard. If you want to discuss philosophy or science
Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
I'm chuckling as I post this bit from Eckhart Tolle on the pain body, imagining FFL posters telling each other that their pain body has taken over: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcYrm7h86Rk From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:52 AM Subject: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods I thought Jason's description of your and Judy's dysfunctional relationship, was spot on. Any time one of you begins to modify your behavior to stop this ego rivalry, the other one will quickly send out a baited message, to perpetuate it. Pretty fucking dumb, by both of you, is all I can say. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Argue-Bot, vowing not to start future arguments with victim: Why don't you fuck off? I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you've documented your accusations, or withdrawn them. Victim, calling her bluff: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! This should be interesting. Judy either LIED above about not discussing anything with this particular victim du jour, or she didn't. What's the FFL consensus? That is, how long until she's ragging on him again, trying to get him to respond to her, and thus get sucked into her eternally-dueling-egos Tarbaby scenario? She *did*, after all, specify I'm not going to discuss ANYTHING with you until... He's clearly not going to jump through hoops, fall for the taunt, and cater to her demands. So if she writes to him in the future, she LIED. Simple as that. Can you say, Hoist on one's own petard? I think you can. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. All while having a discussion with the person she claimed only yesterday she was never going to discuss *anything* with until he either documented something or retracted it. He did neither. And she thinks HE's dishonest? Chortle.
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
turq, even in Funny Farm Lounge, to change her mind is a woman's perogative. But I don't think of that as lying. From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. All while having a discussion with the person she claimed only yesterday she was never going to discuss *anything* with until he either documented something or retracted it. He did neither. And she thinks HE's dishonest? Chortle.
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
What did I get? That you called Xeno dishonest in a convoluted way? But you claim to be the most straight forward poster! From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Very good, Share, you got that at least. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:28 AM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com authfriend wrote: Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. I am looking for an explanation of why you think this. But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples. I am not devious, I am as straightforward as it gets, so it's going to be pretty difficult. and extended argumentation, which is an intuitive and subjective evaluation by which I come to this conclusion. You kind of remind me of the tenant portrayed by Michael Keaton the movie 'Pacific Heights'. You begin with the appearance of being on the level, and then Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments I have been known to start an argument. So have you, so have many others here. Since when is this a sign of a pattern of deviousness? or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. Yeah, I don't do any of that. And I'm quite sure you know it. And in fact, I undoubtedly engage in some of the same when I am arguing with you; there does not seem to be much choice if one wants to continue the discussion. I do not like to sow discord, but it inevitably happens when we get into a discussion. Do I ever lie? The answer is yes. Even M recommended lying under certain circumstances. This world of illusion is rotten to the core. Do you ever lie? Of all the people currently on FFL, you accuse others of lying more than anyone. That is of course, my other reason for suspecting you of a lack of integrity. That's not a rational reason, of course. And I don't just accuse, I document my accusations. Certain people seem to manage to create the aura of integrity without insisting others prove their own or without asking others to apologise for doubting theirs. The late Senator Moynihan from New York comes to mind, a rarity in the political world. In my world, the personal aspect of life really cannot have integrity; only the whole of life has integrity, but that is not the integrity arrived at by conforming to a model of behaviour
Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
I have no control over which posts of mine you read, Judy, ergo I have no control over how you spend your time on FFL. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:58 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, if you want to know what I'm saying, go back and read the exchange from the beginning, because I've said it all there already. Don't waste my time with stupid questions, please. And I'm not the least bit interested in how things seem to you. As you may have noticed, I don't exactly hold your ability to evaluate what happens on FFL in high esteem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, are you saying that Xeno accused you of lying twice?! Once with *if true* and once about Whole Foods?! Xeno's intention seemed friendly to me even tho he got it wrong about your alleged desire for privacy. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:00 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods BTW, Share, another thing you missed is that there was no desire for privacy on my part in my exchange with Richard; that was purely Xeno's notion. As I explained to Xeno, Richard already knew where I live, because I've mentioned it here before. And because Richard had looked up the locations of Whole Foods stores in New Jersey, he knew there was one quite close to me (he even posted the address). My point was Richard's flagrant dishonesty in (among other things) claiming the nearest one was a long bus ride and two hours distant. It was one of his stupid and petty attempts at trolling. It didn't warrant any discussion other than as a way of highlighting Richard's behavior here. There was no reason for Xeno to intervene; although it became clear later why he did: to suggest that I might be the one who was lying. Ironically, that was also a stupid and dishonest troll on Xeno's part. Share wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods.
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Dudy, you told ME not to waste YOUR time! Duh! How can I possibly waste YOUR time?! As Spock would say: your logic is weak. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:12 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share tried a blather instead of a blither: I have no control over which posts of mine you read, Judy, ergo I have no control over how you spend your time on FFL. I don't believe I said you did, Share. What you do have control over is whether you ask stupid questions. Oh, wait... From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:58 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, if you want to know what I'm saying, go back and read the exchange from the beginning, because I've said it all there already. Don't waste my time with stupid questions, please. And I'm not the least bit interested in how things seem to you. As you may have noticed, I don't exactly hold your ability to evaluate what happens on FFL in high esteem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, are you saying that Xeno accused you of lying twice?! Once with *if true* and once about Whole Foods?! Xeno's intention seemed friendly to me even tho he got it wrong about your alleged desire for privacy. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:00 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods BTW, Share, another thing you missed is that there was no desire for privacy on my part in my exchange with Richard; that was purely Xeno's notion. As I explained to Xeno, Richard already knew where I live, because I've mentioned it here before. And because Richard had looked up the locations of Whole Foods stores in New Jersey, he knew there was one quite close to me (he even posted the address). My point was Richard's flagrant dishonesty in (among other things) claiming the nearest one was a long bus ride and two hours distant. It was one of his stupid and petty attempts at trolling. It didn't warrant any discussion other than as a way of highlighting Richard's behavior here. There was no reason for Xeno to intervene; although it became clear later why he did: to suggest that I might be the one who was lying. Ironically, that was also a stupid and dishonest troll on Xeno's part. Share wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods.
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Share, you need to learn how to process your own emotions - you are bleeding heavily again. Does meditation help you with this? Did you meditate before you launched your brain on FFL this morning? Did you have a cup of coffee (one of the super foods in the article you posted the other day that I got a good laugh at)? What *are* you trying to achieve here this morning? Ask yourself this. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:19 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Dudy, you told ME not to waste YOUR time! Duh! How can I possibly waste YOUR time?! As Spock would say: your logic is weak. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:12 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share tried a blather instead of a blither: I have no control over which posts of mine you read, Judy, ergo I have no control over how you spend your time on FFL. I don't believe I said you did, Share. What you do have control over is whether you ask stupid questions. Oh, wait... From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:58 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, if you want to know what I'm saying, go back and read the exchange from the beginning, because I've said it all there already. Don't waste my time with stupid questions, please. And I'm not the least bit interested in how things seem to you. As you may have noticed, I don't exactly hold your ability to evaluate what happens on FFL in high esteem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, are you saying that Xeno accused you of lying twice?! Once with *if true* and once about Whole Foods?! Xeno's intention seemed friendly to me even tho he got it wrong about your alleged desire for privacy. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:00 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods BTW, Share, another thing you missed is that there was no desire for privacy on my part in my exchange with Richard; that was purely Xeno's notion. As I explained to Xeno, Richard already knew where I live, because I've mentioned it here before. And because Richard had looked up the locations of Whole Foods stores in New Jersey, he knew there was one quite close to me (he even posted the address). My point was Richard's flagrant dishonesty in (among other things) claiming the nearest one was a long bus ride and two hours distant. It was one of his stupid and petty attempts at trolling. It didn't warrant any discussion other than as a way of highlighting Richard's behavior here. There was no reason for Xeno to intervene; although it became clear later why he did: to suggest that I might be the one who was lying. Ironically, that was also a stupid and dishonest troll on Xeno's part. Share wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods.
Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Emily, join in the fun, why don't you? From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:24 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, you need to learn how to process your own emotions - you are bleeding heavily again. Does meditation help you with this? Did you meditate before you launched your brain on FFL this morning? Did you have a cup of coffee (one of the super foods in the article you posted the other day that I got a good laugh at)? What *are* you trying to achieve here this morning? Ask yourself this. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:19 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Dudy, you told ME not to waste YOUR time! Duh! How can I possibly waste YOUR time?! As Spock would say: your logic is weak. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:12 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share tried a blather instead of a blither: I have no control over which posts of mine you read, Judy, ergo I have no control over how you spend your time on FFL. I don't believe I said you did, Share. What you do have control over is whether you ask stupid questions. Oh, wait... From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:58 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, if you want to know what I'm saying, go back and read the exchange from the beginning, because I've said it all there already. Don't waste my time with stupid questions, please. And I'm not the least bit interested in how things seem to you. As you may have noticed, I don't exactly hold your ability to evaluate what happens on FFL in high esteem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, are you saying that Xeno accused you of lying twice?! Once with *if true* and once about Whole Foods?! Xeno's intention seemed friendly to me even tho he got it wrong about your alleged desire for privacy. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:00 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods BTW, Share, another thing you missed is that there was no desire for privacy on my part in my exchange with Richard; that was purely Xeno's notion. As I explained to Xeno, Richard already knew where I live, because I've mentioned it here before. And because Richard had looked up the locations of Whole Foods stores in New Jersey, he knew there was one quite close to me (he even posted the address). My point was Richard's flagrant dishonesty in (among other things) claiming the nearest one was a long bus ride and two hours distant. It was one of his stupid and petty attempts at trolling. It didn't warrant any discussion other than as a way of highlighting Richard's behavior here. There was no reason for Xeno to intervene; although it became clear later why he did: to suggest that I might be the one who was lying. Ironically, that was also a stupid and dishonest troll on Xeno's part. Share wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods.
RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Check yourself Share - it's only Monday. Did you have a hard weekend? Walk away from the computer, Share, walk away from the computer. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:38 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Emily, join in the fun, why don't you? From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:24 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, you need to learn how to process your own emotions - you are bleeding heavily again. Does meditation help you with this? Did you meditate before you launched your brain on FFL this morning? Did you have a cup of coffee (one of the super foods in the article you posted the other day that I got a good laugh at)? What *are* you trying to achieve here this morning? Ask yourself this. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:19 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Dudy, you told ME not to waste YOUR time! Duh! How can I possibly waste YOUR time?! As Spock would say: your logic is weak. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:12 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share tried a blather instead of a blither: I have no control over which posts of mine you read, Judy, ergo I have no control over how you spend your time on FFL. I don't believe I said you did, Share. What you do have control over is whether you ask stupid questions. Oh, wait... From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:58 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, if you want to know what I'm saying, go back and read the exchange from the beginning, because I've said it all there already. Don't waste my time with stupid questions, please. And I'm not the least bit interested in how things seem to you. As you may have noticed, I don't exactly hold your ability to evaluate what happens on FFL in high esteem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, are you saying that Xeno accused you of lying twice?! Once with *if true* and once about Whole Foods?! Xeno's intention seemed friendly to me even tho he got it wrong about your alleged desire for privacy. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:00 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods BTW, Share, another thing you missed is that there was no desire for privacy on my part in my exchange with Richard; that was purely Xeno's notion. As I explained to Xeno, Richard already knew where I live, because I've mentioned it here before. And because Richard had looked up the locations of Whole Foods stores in New Jersey, he knew there was one quite close to me (he even posted the address). My point was Richard's flagrant dishonesty in (among other things) claiming the nearest one was a long bus ride and two hours distant. It was one of his stupid and petty attempts at trolling. It didn't warrant any discussion other than as a way of highlighting Richard's behavior here. There was no reason for Xeno to intervene; although it became clear later why he did: to suggest that I might be the one who was lying. Ironically, that was also a stupid and dishonest troll on Xeno's part. Share wrote: Judy, right before this argument, Xeno defended you and your desire for privacy to Richard with regards to Whole Foods.
Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Emily, I'm enjoying FFL at this moment. I hope you are too. From: emilymae.r...@yahoo.com emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:39 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, I have written you many straightforward posts. You appear to be incapable of grasping the main point of any straightforward post; you seem to realize there *is* a point, at which time you move always to derail the post in your own mind, through posting on top of it with meaningless frivolity, nonsensical interpretation, or purposeful misinterpretation to avoid whatever reality is coming through to you that you want to reject. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: What did I get? That you called Xeno dishonest in a convoluted way? But you claim to be the most straight forward poster! From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Very good, Share, you got that at least. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:28 AM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com authfriend wrote: Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. I am looking for an explanation of why you think this. But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples. I am not devious, I am as straightforward as it gets, so it's going to be pretty difficult. and extended argumentation, which is an intuitive and subjective evaluation by which I come to this conclusion. You kind of remind me of the tenant portrayed by Michael Keaton the movie 'Pacific Heights'. You begin with the appearance of being on the level, and then Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments I have been known to start an argument. So have you, so have many others here. Since when is this a sign of a pattern of deviousness? or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. Yeah, I don't do any of that. And I'm quite sure you know it. And in fact, I undoubtedly engage in some of the same when I am arguing with you; there does not seem to be much choice if one wants to continue the discussion. I do not like to sow discord, but it inevitably
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
What! No review of the next to last episode of Breaking Bad? Or the finale episode of Dexter? Where are your priorities? Who gives a shit about a bunch of piddling people piddling over who said what about Whole Foods? I tell you what, the next article on TM in the MSM where comments are available I'm going to point to FFL as an example for people to visit and see how TMers behave. :-P On 09/23/2013 06:40 AM, turquoiseb wrote: At 11:53pm yesterday (my time) Judy wrote to Xeno: Why don't you fuck off? I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you've documented your accusations, or withdrawn them. At 5:38am today (my time) Xeno made it clear that he was not going to do either, and thus expected Judy to keep her word and cease all attempts to have discussions with him: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! At 2:28 today (my time), Judy broke her word and wrote to Xeno *directly*, after claiming she wouldn't, addressing him directly and calling him either very dishonest or very stupid. In other words, having realized the bind she'd placed herself in, she backpedalled like crazy and claimed that she'd never said she wouldn't comment on things he posted. She's NOT commenting in this later reply, she's addressing Xeno *directly*, and thus attempting to have a discussion with him, the very thing she said she'd not do unless he did what she wanted. In other words, Judy *LIED*. In Judyworld, addressing a person directly, calling them names, and attempting anything she can possibly think of to lure them back into an argument is NOT discussing things with them. Doing this with someone who had made it clear that he was *happy* that she will no longer be attempting to discuss things with him is -- in her mind -- NOT discussing things with him. It's something else. Insanity, maybe? :-) :-) :-) Xeno wrote: *I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish!* You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is.
Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Ok, Judy, you made a distinction between discussing with Xeno and commenting on what he said. Seems a bit hair splitty to me but there you are: different strokes for different folks. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:23 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods FWIW, there was no change of mind on my part. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: turq, even in Funny Farm Lounge, to change her mind is a woman's perogative. But I don't think of that as lying. I'd have to agree with you here Share, but I'll take it one step further and say it is anyone's prerogative to change their mind without being branded a liar. Something as trivial as saying the equivalent of, I'm not going to eat any chocolate cake because I'm on a diet. and then changes their mind after deciding it looks too good to resist is hardly someone to be reviled for having not predicted their future actions correctly. Now, speaking of cake... From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. All while having a discussion with the person she claimed only yesterday she was never going to discuss *anything* with until he either documented something or retracted it. He did neither. And she thinks HE's dishonest? Chortle.
Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Thank you for the kind thought Share, you are thinking kindly of me, no? - after my observation that you are incapable of grasping the main point of any straightforward post (you have now demonstrated my additional observation in that comment). From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:43 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Emily, I'm enjoying FFL at this moment. I hope you are too. From: emilymae.r...@yahoo.com emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:39 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, I have written you many straightforward posts. You appear to be incapable of grasping the main point of any straightforward post; you seem to realize there *is* a point, at which time you move always to derail the post in your own mind, through posting on top of it with meaningless frivolity, nonsensical interpretation, or purposeful misinterpretation to avoid whatever reality is coming through to you that you want to reject. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: What did I get? That you called Xeno dishonest in a convoluted way? But you claim to be the most straight forward poster! From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Very good, Share, you got that at least. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:28 AM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com authfriend wrote: Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. I am looking for an explanation of why you think this. But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples. I am not devious, I am as straightforward as it gets, so it's going to be pretty difficult. and extended argumentation, which is an intuitive and subjective evaluation by which I come to this conclusion. You kind of remind me of the tenant portrayed by Michael Keaton the movie 'Pacific Heights'. You begin with the appearance of being on the level, and then Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments I have been known to start an argument. So have you, so have many others here. Since when is this a sign of a pattern of deviousness
RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
It's not Share's fault that she doesn't understand the conceptual difference between the two - she has never tried to have a discussion. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:51 AM Subject: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Ok, Judy, you made a distinction between discussing with Xeno and commenting on what he said. Seems a bit hair splitty to me but there you are: different strokes for different folks. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:23 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods FWIW, there was no change of mind on my part. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: turq, even in Funny Farm Lounge, to change her mind is a woman's perogative. But I don't think of that as lying. I'd have to agree with you here Share, but I'll take it one step further and say it is anyone's prerogative to change their mind without being branded a liar. Something as trivial as saying the equivalent of, I'm not going to eat any chocolate cake because I'm on a diet. and then changes their mind after deciding it looks too good to resist is hardly someone to be reviled for having not predicted their future actions correctly. Now, speaking of cake... From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. All while having a discussion with the person she claimed only yesterday she was never going to discuss *anything* with until he either documented something or retracted it. He did neither. And she thinks HE's dishonest? Chortle.
Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Emily, happy to help. Are you enjoying yet? Look, Xeno's quoting Shakespeare, Judy's using fun words like biffle. What's not to enjoy? Just a matter of where you focus your attention. I think that's why you and I see different realities, both of which are valid. From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:53 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Thank you for the kind thought Share, you are thinking kindly of me, no? - after my observation that you are incapable of grasping the main point of any straightforward post (you have now demonstrated my additional observation in that comment). From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:43 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Emily, I'm enjoying FFL at this moment. I hope you are too. From: emilymae.r...@yahoo.com emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:39 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, I have written you many straightforward posts. You appear to be incapable of grasping the main point of any straightforward post; you seem to realize there *is* a point, at which time you move always to derail the post in your own mind, through posting on top of it with meaningless frivolity, nonsensical interpretation, or purposeful misinterpretation to avoid whatever reality is coming through to you that you want to reject. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: What did I get? That you called Xeno dishonest in a convoluted way? But you claim to be the most straight forward poster! From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Very good, Share, you got that at least. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:28 AM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com authfriend wrote: Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written was a lie?' You seem to be looking for a response from me of the form J says x but y is true. I am looking for an explanation of why you think this. But it is not a specific fact that makes me come to my conclusion. It is rather your pattern of deviousness OK, stop right there and document that I have a pattern of deviousness, with examples. I am not devious, I am
[FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: What! No review of the next to last episode of Breaking Bad? Or the finale episode of Dexter? Remember where I am. I downloaded both this morning, but then had to go to work. I'll see them tonight. Where are your priorities? Who gives a shit about a bunch of piddling people piddling over who said what about Whole Foods? Obviously, some of those people seem to give a rather large (and smelly) shit. :-) I tell you what, the next article on TM in the MSM where comments are available I'm going to point to FFL as an example for people to visit and see how TMers behave. :-P Right ON! I'll start doing the same thing, every time I see a reference to TM. If you want to know what the TM program produces in its practitioners, and how they turn out after decades of practice, drop by Fairfield Life. I don't see how anyone here could complain about that, right? They've claimed in the past that they're PROUD of what they say here and how they say it and what that says about both them and the TM technique they feel so strongly about. Let's give them a chance to put those words to the test. Best idea EVER! I've already started doing it, on a TM-related thread I saw the other day. Welcome, lurkers. If you need any help determining which posters on this forum are the conscientious TM practitioners, just ask. On 09/23/2013 06:40 AM, turquoiseb wrote: At 11:53pm yesterday (my time) Judy wrote to Xeno: Why don't you fuck off? I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you've documented your accusations, or withdrawn them. At 5:38am today (my time) Xeno made it clear that he was not going to do either, and thus expected Judy to keep her word and cease all attempts to have discussions with him: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! At 2:28 today (my time), Judy broke her word and wrote to Xeno *directly*, after claiming she wouldn't, addressing him directly and calling him either very dishonest or very stupid. In other words, having realized the bind she'd placed herself in, she backpedalled like crazy and claimed that she'd never said she wouldn't comment on things he posted. She's NOT commenting in this later reply, she's addressing Xeno *directly*, and thus attempting to have a discussion with him, the very thing she said she'd not do unless he did what she wanted. In other words, Judy *LIED*. In Judyworld, addressing a person directly, calling them names, and attempting anything she can possibly think of to lure them back into an argument is NOT discussing things with them. Doing this with someone who had made it clear that he was *happy* that she will no longer be attempting to discuss things with him is -- in her mind -- NOT discussing things with him. It's something else. Insanity, maybe? :-) :-) :-) Xeno wrote: *I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish!* You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is.
RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Ha ha ha. Project everything, take in nothing. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:57 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Emily, happy to help. Are you enjoying yet? Look, Xeno's quoting Shakespeare, Judy's using fun words like biffle. What's not to enjoy? Just a matter of where you focus your attention. I think that's why you and I see different realities, both of which are valid. From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:53 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Thank you for the kind thought Share, you are thinking kindly of me, no? - after my observation that you are incapable of grasping the main point of any straightforward post (you have now demonstrated my additional observation in that comment). From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:43 AM Subject: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Emily, I'm enjoying FFL at this moment. I hope you are too. From: emilymae.r...@yahoo.com emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:39 AM Subject: RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Share, I have written you many straightforward posts. You appear to be incapable of grasping the main point of any straightforward post; you seem to realize there *is* a point, at which time you move always to derail the post in your own mind, through posting on top of it with meaningless frivolity, nonsensical interpretation, or purposeful misinterpretation to avoid whatever reality is coming through to you that you want to reject. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: What did I get? That you called Xeno dishonest in a convoluted way? But you claim to be the most straight forward poster! From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Very good, Share, you got that at least. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 7:28 AM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Xeno wrote: I did notice that you did not document a number of comments you made here. But this response simplifies things immensely because if this is true, anything I write to you here on FFL in the absence of my documentation here with regard to these points or my withdrawing my comments here and earlier in the thread, by your own words must stop you from responding if you do not wish to go back on your word. Very Robinish! You are either very dishonest or very stupid. You made accusations which, if they were true, you would be able to document. I made no such accusations. I don't think you're so stupid as not to have realized this. I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of philosophy or science or music or any other neutral topic. And that's not even a tiny bit Robinish, nor are you so stupid as to think it is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com authfriend wrote: Xeno wrote: Authfriend wrote: 'For, what, the sixth time, what was the basis for your suspicion that what I had written
RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
She looks at him like a brother? Smile. They *are* similar in certain ways. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:59 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Emily observed with her usual sagacity: It's not Share's fault that she doesn't understand the conceptual difference between the two - she has never tried to have a discussion. Good point. One would think, however, that even she would know better by now than to follow Barry's get Judy leads, but it's just hard--for me, at least--to fathom the depths of her cluelessness. From: Share Long sharelong60@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:51 AM Subject: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Ok, Judy, you made a distinction between discussing with Xeno and commenting on what he said. Seems a bit hair splitty to me but there you are: different strokes for different folks. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:23 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods FWIW, there was no change of mind on my part. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: turq, even in Funny Farm Lounge, to change her mind is a woman's perogative. But I don't think of that as lying. I'd have to agree with you here Share, but I'll take it one step further and say it is anyone's prerogative to change their mind without being branded a liar. Something as trivial as saying the equivalent of, I'm not going to eat any chocolate cake because I'm on a diet. and then changes their mind after deciding it looks too good to resist is hardly someone to be reviled for having not predicted their future actions correctly. Now, speaking of cake... From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. All while having a discussion with the person she claimed only yesterday she was never going to discuss *anything* with until he either documented something or retracted it. He did neither. And she thinks HE's dishonest? Chortle.
Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Emily, must you pick on turq so?! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 11:12 AM Subject: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods She looks at him like a brother? Smile. They *are* similar in certain ways. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:59 AM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Emily observed with her usual sagacity: It's not Share's fault that she doesn't understand the conceptual difference between the two - she has never tried to have a discussion. Good point. One would think, however, that even she would know better by now than to follow Barry's get Judy leads, but it's just hard--for me, at least--to fathom the depths of her cluelessness. From: Share Long sharelong60@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:51 AM Subject: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Ok, Judy, you made a distinction between discussing with Xeno and commenting on what he said. Seems a bit hair splitty to me but there you are: different strokes for different folks. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:23 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods FWIW, there was no change of mind on my part. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: turq, even in Funny Farm Lounge, to change her mind is a woman's perogative. But I don't think of that as lying. I'd have to agree with you here Share, but I'll take it one step further and say it is anyone's prerogative to change their mind without being branded a liar. Something as trivial as saying the equivalent of, I'm not going to eat any chocolate cake because I'm on a diet. and then changes their mind after deciding it looks too good to resist is hardly someone to be reviled for having not predicted their future actions correctly. Now, speaking of cake... From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. All while having a discussion with the person she claimed only yesterday she was never going to discuss *anything* with until he either documented something or retracted it. He did neither. And she thinks HE's dishonest? Chortle.
RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Check out Ann, the bottom poster, and her reply to my post about home security! Good example of prejudice: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/358450 On 9/22/2013 8:13 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: Ha, Richard, the guy who says he has to protect himself from gays, transgendered men and women and lesbians (not to mention skinheads). Who's the prejudiced one? But he's right, I think I hate Texas. So, you hate Whole Foods Market because it's a Texas company and I hate neo-Nazi skinhead bikers breaking into my house. Go figure.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
According to the official store list, there are three Whole Foods Markets located in New Jersey - not one of them is anywhere near a Jersey shore, her neck of the woods, according to Google Earth. http://wholefoodsmarket.com/stores/list On 9/20/2013 11:46 AM, anartax...@yahoo.com wrote: Regarding Judy and Whole Foods (Whole Wallet). Based on what she has said, if true, I would say there is a Whole Foods within about a dozen miles (20km approx.) of her location. There's no privacy on the internet - they can find out anything they want to know about you just by nailing down the IP Address that you used to post this message. Maybe she wants to keep a certain amount of privacy in not nailing down her location. I like privacy. Barry likes privacy (you cannot email him through the forum). The home I live in is not in my name; my telephone is unlisted (which unfortunately does not work for telephone scammers using war dialing). If she travels there or not and how and what kind of foods she likes to eat is for her to tell us or not. The distance figure I calculated, if the locations I used are correct, will be within 25% plus or minus about 12% of the correct value.
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
At a certain point on Monday morning, Xeno and Judy both seemed more light hearted about it and that is what I was enjoying. Nothing sadistic about that IMO. And I have noticed that these arguments do come and go on a regular basis. Best to simply ride the wave and let it pass. From: awoelfleba...@yahoo.com awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:08 PM Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It's not Share's fault that she doesn't understand the conceptual difference between the two - she has never tried to have a discussion. I think Share (hi Share) is having a lot of fun with this and to me there is nothing that fun about it. She seems to be acting like it is not only a joke but is taking pleasure in the discord and adding to it in only the way she can. Barry is doing the usual which is to apparently not close his eyes to even sleep while there is a chance to get Judy and keep adding imaginary fuel to the fire. Xeno quoting Shakespeare is a small reprieve however. But I am sensing a tad bit of sadism in our dormouse, which I had not seen before. The fact that our alleged 'victim' of PR is having fun right now is revelatory. From: Share Long sharelong60@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:51 AM Subject: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Ok, Judy, you made a distinction between discussing with Xeno and commenting on what he said. Seems a bit hair splitty to me but there you are: different strokes for different folks. From: authfriend@... authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:23 AM Subject: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods FWIW, there was no change of mind on my part. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: turq, even in Funny Farm Lounge, to change her mind is a woman's perogative. But I don't think of that as lying. I'd have to agree with you here Share, but I'll take it one step further and say it is anyone's prerogative to change their mind without being branded a liar. Something as trivial as saying the equivalent of, I'm not going to eat any chocolate cake because I'm on a diet. and then changes their mind after deciding it looks too good to resist is hardly someone to be reviled for having not predicted their future actions correctly. Now, speaking of cake... From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, here you begin by telling Xeno he's either dishonest or stupid. Then you go on to say TWICE that he's not stupid. Ergo, you are saying in a convoluted way that he's dishonest. All while having a discussion with the person she claimed only yesterday she was never going to discuss *anything* with until he either documented something or retracted it. He did neither. And she thinks HE's dishonest? Chortle.
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods
for Xeno, to Judy, during my argument with you about Buck, I had the thought: Judy could be such a mensch. She's on the brink of being a true mensch. If only she could recognize that MAYBE someone else is making a valid point. If only she could recognize that MAYBE she made a mistake, got something wrong. And here I'm not talking about philosophical discussions. Anyway, I take a psychological perspective on this kind of situation but no longer find it useful to share such perspectives here. From my own experience it is extremely liberating to recognize that I made a mistake, that I got something wrong. And more, will probably do so again. From: anartax...@yahoo.com anartax...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2013 3:06 PM Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Surviving Whole Foods Perhaps both are perspectives are distorted.What do others think of this exchange? We are not always the best judge of our own behaviour.
