Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
> > > > No Share, that's *not* what I say or have said.  I have said that you > > > "avoid" - I have nothing but multiple concrete examples of this I could > > > show you, if I cared enough to spend the time to do so, and I don't.  > > > > > > Good barb on me "running to the coast" and "walking my dog."  Way to > > > avoid life - it's one of my specialties, didn't you know?  I  have > > > many more tricks up my sleeve I could tell you that you might benefit > > > from more than whoever the next healer is on the circuit through > > > Fairfield catering to those addicted to the "health and wellness" > > > industry.  You bet your sweet little backjack, that's what I'm doing, > > > and I'll be doing that the rest of the day and loving every balmy second > > > of it.  > > > > > > You *are* ranting.  Yeah!  Be angry Share, be very, very angry. > > >  How dare these people say these horrific things about Mr. Newton? > > > And, it isn't just those you have cultized, it was other people too. > > >  Does that mean they are now candidates for the cult you've created to > > > assign people to who disagree with you?  > > > > > > From: Share Long > > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" > > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:21 AM > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized > > > thinking > > > > > > > > >  > > > Jesus, Robin! Can't you answer a question either?! Ok. What > > > scares you a little about John Newton? Or scared past tense just in > > > case it's already gone. And btw if you really want to be scared, > > > check out his teacher, the originator of the forgiveness prayers, kahuna > > > Howard Wills. > > > > > > Over and out, I'm off to writing group. You know, how Emily says I > > > post and then go somewhere else. I guess it's ok that she runs to the > > > coast, walks her dog etc. > > > > > > Great! Now I'm ranting. Yeah, yeah, much love to you too. And > > > what the heck, to the whole screwy gang! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Robin Carlsen > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:03 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > > > Aaaak! Too late! I already replied to > > > > RD. But what the heck stung her about John Newton for God's > > > > sake?! Has she even met the man?! No, I think it's > > > > what I say at the end of my reply to her. She made John Newton > > > > wrong to make me wrong. And we all know why the women want to > > > > make me wrong. So you and them can continue to be right right > > > > RIGHT. Pathetic! What are they so insecure about? > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > And why the heck does he scare you, Robin? Or are you being > > > > ironic?   > > > > > > I SAID: "just a LITTLE, Share. And that fear may go soon anyways. Please > > > don't misquote me: to say "John scares me" is quite different from > > > saying: John scares me JUST A LITTLE. > > > > > > > BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new > > > > for Ravi, right? > > > > > > As far as I am concerned, Ravi is just full of hate--especially for > > > strong and loving women. If he likes you (and you are a woman), that > > > means you're weak and pathetic. Dr Salyavin has provided us with a nifty > > > diagnostic summation anyhow. I agree with him. > > > > > > Jesus. I hope I am not losing it again. Much love and over and out. > > > > > > Robin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Robin Carlsen > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogro
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
Share, did you plan to get back to me on this? Or, are we leaving it and moving on? I would like to know why you think I have sunk to a *NEW* low. Did you reply to this on the other thread, where you pasted what I had said to you after your Juliette response? If so, never mind. I already replied to that. That discussion is moving forward, no? Or not. From: emilymae.reyn To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:24 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for Ravi, right? Dear Share, I missed this earlier. I stopped in for lunch, but let us agree to start right here, with this statement. Us, as in you and me. I have let our entire history go; I apologize for hurting your feelings and I will think fondly of you when I meditate next. Now, deep breathahh. O.K. It's a lovely day here, so I must get back to the ocean, because that is where God resides and I'm only here for another day. I will be back later and hope to hear from you. Please, I really want to work this out with you. I really do. What specifically is a NEW low for me? Specifically. Please quote anything I've written in support of this allegation and explain what it is and why you think it is. I will cop to it all and explain the context and reason why I wrote it, if true. But, I *really* need you to explain what it is. I'm seriously confused and don't understand all of what I am interpreting as purely negative attack rhetoric coming out of you. I could be wrong; I have been wrong before. Let us just figure this one thing out in present time. Sincerely, Emily. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: > > No Share, that's *not* what I say or have said.  I have said that you > "avoid" - I have nothing but multiple concrete examples of this I could show > you, if I cared enough to spend the time to do so, and I don't.  > > Good barb on me "running to the coast" and "walking my dog."  Way to avoid > life - it's one of my specialties, didn't you know?  I  have many more > tricks up my sleeve I could tell you that you might benefit from more than > whoever the next healer is on the circuit through Fairfield catering to those > addicted to the "health and wellness" industry.  You bet your sweet little > backjack, that's what I'm doing, and I'll be doing that the rest of the day > and loving every balmy second of it.  > > You *are* ranting.  Yeah!  Be angry Share, be very, very angry.  How dare > these people say these horrific things about Mr. Newton? And, it isn't just > those you have cultized, it was other people too.  Does that mean they are > now candidates for the cult you've created to assign people to who disagree > with you?  > > From: Share Long > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:21 AM > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > >  > Jesus, Robin! Can't you answer a question either?! Ok. What scares you > a little about John Newton? Or scared past tense just in case it's already > gone. And btw if you really want to be scared, check out his teacher, the > originator of the forgiveness prayers, kahuna Howard Wills. > > Over and out, I'm off to writing group. You know, how Emily says I post and > then go somewhere else. I guess it's ok that she runs to the coast, walks > her dog etc. > > Great! Now I'm ranting. Yeah, yeah, much love to you too. And what the > heck, to the whole screwy gang! > > > > > From: Robin Carlsen > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:03 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Aaaak! Too late! I already replied to RD. But what > > the heck stung her about John Newton for God's sake?! Has she even met > > the man?! No, I think it's what I say at the end of my reply to > > her. She made John Newton wrong to make me wrong. And we all know > > why the women want to make me wrong. So you and them can continue to be > > right right RIGHT. Pathetic! What are they so insecure about?  > > > > > > And why the heck does he scare you, Robin? Or are you being ironic? > >   > > I SAID: "just a LITTLE, Sha
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
Dear Share, because I cannot understand a thing you say, I am forced to rely on my intuition. This is what I decided at the beach today. We don't communicate using the same language. I mean the words are similar, but the language is different. No wonder we don't understand each other. When I used the word "Aww", I used it on a number of posts. I was teasing FFL after Emptybill wrote that post on group hugs, etc. It was nothing personal. Let me tell you Share, everything I write is calculated. Curtis was right about that; damn him. I mean, not really, but I do think as I write. For example, today I sent you an email that said "you bet your sweet little backjack"...first I used the word "ass", but then, I thought, "I should stop swearing." So, I thought well, "ass" reminds me of "baby got back" and that reminds me of the word "backjack." Now, this is a new word for meso I thought, "well, I'll use it in a sentence." The next word I think I'll try and use is "equivocate." Had to look that one up. I like it. That's the level of calculating I do, Share. You and I have very different senses of humor. I understand totally how you could think I am creepy. I think so too. Sal thought so. We are agreed on that point. I have the ability to see it from your perspective. I can't change it, but I understand. Did I say something negative about Mr. Newton? That was tongue in cheek, seriously, Share. I've been to healers, I assure you. I've seen and experienced some amazing shit. I guess that I see no purpose in your standing up for him. Instead, why don't you share a real experience of the real feeling and healing that took place for you. That would be more interesting for me, personally. You have projected an amazing amount of negative since you've been here, IMO. I don't how you can be in denial of this. But, so be it. You don't see it. I'm sorry. I pray for complete healing for you. I really do. ________________ From: Share Long To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 6:23 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking Your post just below that begins Aw is what I meant by your new low. That bit about my judging Raunchy's granddaughter. It's from yesterday, the thread that begins Yikes! OTOH today's post is pretty low too. That bit about how dare these people etc. What I don't like is people saying negative stuff about someone positive that they have had no contact with. Except a website! Furthermore, I've told you what I think are the main criteria for being in wts. It has nothing to do with people agreeing or disagreeing with me. At least once you have made a cleverly snide comment about how I post and then run off to the Dome. Last but not least, I have replied plenty to you. The accusation that I haven't will no longer work with me. So my suggestion is to reply only if you want to. Or whatever values you use to decide about such. BTW, I do like you mostly. But not so much when you do your clever and or pseudo playful thing. Others may find it adorable. I find it kind of creepy. Aw, that's so real. Raunchy, Share is in too much fear me. I am a formidable woman, after all. She will never address any of my questions - she has written me off because it's less scary that way. I don't think she likes me very much. Or, maybe, her latest John Newton healing session will have done her some good and soon we will experience the benefits here on FFL, subtle as they may be. Although, given this comment about your granddaughter - judgment still reigns supreme in her being. From: Emily Reyn To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:45 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking No Share, that's *not* what I say or have said. I have said that you "avoid" - I have nothing but multiple concrete examples of this I could show you, if I cared enough to spend the time to do so, and I don't. Good barb on me "running to the coast" and "walking my dog." Way to avoid life - it's one of my specialties, didn't you know? I have many more tricks up my sleeve I could tell you that you might benefit from more than whoever the next healer is on the circuit through Fairfield catering to those addicted to the "health and wellness" industry. You bet your sweet little backjack, that's what I'm doing, and I'll be doing that the rest of the day and loving every balmy second of it. You *are* ranting
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
Your post just below that begins Aw is what I meant by your new low. That bit about my judging Raunchy's granddaughter. It's from yesterday, the thread that begins Yikes! OTOH today's post is pretty low too. That bit about how dare these people etc. What I don't like is people saying negative stuff about someone positive that they have had no contact with. Except a website! Furthermore, I've told you what I think are the main criteria for being in wts. It has nothing to do with people agreeing or disagreeing with me. At least once you have made a cleverly snide comment about how I post and then run off to the Dome. Last but not least, I have replied plenty to you. The accusation that I haven't will no longer work with me. So my suggestion is to reply only if you want to. Or whatever values you use to decide about such. BTW, I do like you mostly. But not so much when you do your clever and or pseudo playful thing. Others may find it adorable. I find it kind of creepy. Aw, that's so real. Raunchy, Share is in too much fear me. I am a formidable woman, after all. She will never address any of my questions - she has written me off because it's less scary that way. I don't think she likes me very much. Or, maybe, her latest John Newton healing session will have done her some good and soon we will experience the benefits here on FFL, subtle as they may be. Although, given this comment about your granddaughter - judgment still reigns supreme in her being. From: Emily Reyn To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:45 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking No Share, that's *not* what I say or have said. I have said that you "avoid" - I have nothing but multiple concrete examples of this I could show you, if I cared enough to spend the time to do so, and I don't. Good barb on me "running to the coast" and "walking my dog." Way to avoid life - it's one of my specialties, didn't you know? I have many more tricks up my sleeve I could tell you that you might benefit from more than whoever the next healer is on the circuit through Fairfield catering to those addicted to the "health and wellness" industry. You bet your sweet little backjack, that's what I'm doing, and I'll be doing that the rest of the day and loving every balmy second of it. You *are* ranting. Yeah! Be angry Share, be very, very angry. How dare these people say these horrific things about Mr. Newton? And, it isn't just those you have cultized, it was other people too. Does that mean they are now candidates for the cult you've created to assign people to who disagree with you? From: Share Long To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking Jesus, Robin! Can't you answer a question either?! Ok. What scares you a little about John Newton? Or scared past tense just in case it's already gone. And btw if you really want to be scared, check out his teacher, the originator of the forgiveness prayers, kahuna Howard Wills. Over and out, I'm off to writing group. You know, how Emily says I post and then go somewhere else. I guess it's ok that she runs to the coast, walks her dog etc. Great! Now I'm ranting. Yeah, yeah, much love to you too. And what the heck, to the whole screwy gang! From: Robin Carlsen To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Aaaak! Too late! I already replied to RD. But what the heck > stung her about John Newton for God's sake?! Has she even met the man?! > No, I think it's what I say at the end of my reply to her. She made John > Newton wrong to make me wrong. And we all know why the women want to make > me wrong. So you and them can continue to be right right RIGHT. > Pathetic! What are they so insecure about?  > > > And why the heck does he scare you, Robin? Or are you being ironic?   I SAID: "just a LITTLE, Share. And that fear may go soon anyways. Please don't misquote me: to say "John scares me" is quite different from saying: John scares me JUST A LITTLE. > BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for Ravi, > right? As far as I am concerned, Ravi is just full of hate--especially for strong and loving women. If he likes you (and you are a woman), that means you're
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
This is very excellent, feste. From: feste37 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 5:20 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking > > > > > > > > the cult and its leader are almost all positive. AND what > > > > > > > > I've come to think is an even more telling indicator of > > > > > > > > cultishness, thinking that those who don't agree with the > > > > > > > > cult and its leader are almost all negative. So when the > > > > > > > > writing of a FFL person expresses such extremely polarized > > > > > > > > thinking, then I think that person is fundamentally aligned > > > > > > > > with the group I've been calling wts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no such thing as "wts" as you originally defined > > > > > > > it: "CULT DYNAMICS ARE CURRENTLY HAPPENING ON FFL IN wts. > > > > > > > What I see here on FFL around Robin is a mini and cyber > > > > > > > version of WTS, what I think of as wts." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This was and is absolutely the worst kind of bullshit, SICK > > > > > > > bullshit, PERVERTED bullshit. > > > > > > > > > > > > Are you in the same ward as Ravi? > > > > > > > > > > Translation: I can't come up with anything to rebut > > > > > Judy's reasoned deconstruction below of Share's nitwittery, > > > > > so I'll just sling an insult right up at the top and > > > > > pretend I've handled it. > > > > > > > > I'm not trying to handle it, I'm just pointing out that > > > > you appear to have gone mad. "bullshit, SICK bullshit, > > > > PERVERTED bullshit." Doesn't sound all that reasoned to me. > > > > You should calm down, learn to meditate or something. > > > > > > I think you make a very good point here Salyavin. I feel almost as if we > > > can (and maybe should) renew our conversation from the weekend. It was > > > most helpful to me. What you say here of course is apposite, but what is > > > missing is some way to show authfriend she has options--Share is a little > > > much for her, I think. She is finding Share challenging--so she has lost > > > control of her reason--She often does that. Me, I am going to try to get > > > her address and send her a Christmas card--I have a feeling she is going > > > to be very lonely over Christmas--And doesn't that just about sum the > > > whole thing up? It does for me. I like you, Salyavin; especially when you > > > divine the secrets of the human soul. Well, you did in my case--but I > > > think you really may be onto something here with authfriend. I say: Tea > > > and crumpets all around! > > > > Robin you are correct, Judy needs our compassionate help not our brutal > > therapy, especially when she's feeling delicate. Stick > > around old chap, I think her response will be both calm and humorous. > > > > Can I have jam on mine? > > It seems almost as if there already has been a healing, Salyavin. So grateful > for the feeling I now have. Now if we can just warm Judy's heart a little--I > hope we have. Thank you, Salyavin. You don't even have to ask about the jam. > That's a hard thing you've proposed, MZ -- warming the heart of authfriend, even by a little. Who would dare to undertake such a seemingly impossible task? If we were to summon the twelve wisest men in the world and set them to work on it round the clock, how long would it take? Who can say? But here is my contribution: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQh04-STjmU Memories, authfriend, memories. Where would we be without them? (Am I correct?)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
Dear Robin, I am just getting back. I haven't read the other responses. I don't like to base what I write on what other people write. I like to be spontaneous. Now, regarding your last sentence. Don't you think that's just a bit over the top? I am putting myself in Share's shoes right now, just so you know. I have the ability to move between realities, or rather, feel what it is like in someone else's shoes. From: Robin Carlsen To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:38 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking This letter gave me something, Emily. It is truth going everywhere it can go. It almost seems what should take the place of prayer. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn" wrote: > > BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for > Ravi, right? > > Dear Share, I missed this earlier. I stopped in for lunch, but let us agree > to start right here, with this statement. Us, as in you and me. I have let > our entire history go; I apologize for hurting your feelings and I will think > fondly of you when I meditate next. > > Now, deep breathahh. O.K. It's a lovely day here, so I must get > back to the ocean, because that is where God resides and I'm only here for > another day. I will be back later and hope to hear from you. > > Please, I really want to work this out with you. I really do. What > specifically is a NEW low for me? Specifically. Please quote anything I've > written in support of this allegation and explain what it is and why you > think it is. I will cop to it all and explain the context and reason why I > wrote it, if true. But, I *really* need you to explain what it is. I'm > seriously confused and don't understand all of what I am interpreting as > purely negative attack rhetoric coming out of you. I could be wrong; I have > been wrong before. Let us just figure this one thing out in present time. > Sincerely, Emily. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: > > > > No Share, that's *not* what I say or have said.  I have said that you > > "avoid" - I have nothing but multiple concrete examples of this I could > > show you, if I cared enough to spend the time to do so, and I don't.  > > > > Good barb on me "running to the coast" and "walking my dog."  Way to avoid > > life - it's one of my specialties, didn't you know?  I  have many more > > tricks up my sleeve I could tell you that you might benefit from more than > > whoever the next healer is on the circuit through Fairfield catering to > > those addicted to the "health and wellness" industry.  You bet your sweet > > little backjack, that's what I'm doing, and I'll be doing that the rest of > > the day and loving every balmy second of it.  > > > > You *are* ranting.  Yeah!  Be angry Share, be very, very angry.  How > > dare these people say these horrific things about Mr. Newton? And, it isn't > > just those you have cultized, it was other people too.  Does that mean > > they are now candidates for the cult you've created to assign people to who > > disagree with you?  > > > > From: Share Long > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:21 AM > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > > > > >  > > Jesus, Robin! Can't you answer a question either?! Ok. What scares > > you a little about John Newton? Or scared past tense just in case it's > > already gone. And btw if you really want to be scared, check out his > > teacher, the originator of the forgiveness prayers, kahuna Howard Wills. > > > > Over and out, I'm off to writing group. You know, how Emily says I post > > and then go somewhere else. I guess it's ok that she runs to the coast, > > walks her dog etc. > > > > Great! Now I'm ranting. Yeah, yeah, much love to you too. And what > > the heck, to the whole screwy gang! > > > > > > > > > > From: Robin Carlsen > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:03 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > > > > >  > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Lon
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
No Share, that's *not* what I say or have said. I have said that you "avoid" - I have nothing but multiple concrete examples of this I could show you, if I cared enough to spend the time to do so, and I don't. Good barb on me "running to the coast" and "walking my dog." Way to avoid life - it's one of my specialties, didn't you know? I have many more tricks up my sleeve I could tell you that you might benefit from more than whoever the next healer is on the circuit through Fairfield catering to those addicted to the "health and wellness" industry. You bet your sweet little backjack, that's what I'm doing, and I'll be doing that the rest of the day and loving every balmy second of it. You *are* ranting. Yeah! Be angry Share, be very, very angry. How dare these people say these horrific things about Mr. Newton? And, it isn't just those you have cultized, it was other people too. Does that mean they are now candidates for the cult you've created to assign people to who disagree with you? From: Share Long To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking Jesus, Robin! Can't you answer a question either?! Ok. What scares you a little about John Newton? Or scared past tense just in case it's already gone. And btw if you really want to be scared, check out his teacher, the originator of the forgiveness prayers, kahuna Howard Wills. Over and out, I'm off to writing group. You know, how Emily says I post and then go somewhere else. I guess it's ok that she runs to the coast, walks her dog etc. Great! Now I'm ranting. Yeah, yeah, much love to you too. And what the heck, to the whole screwy gang! From: Robin Carlsen To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Aaaak! Too late! I already replied to RD. But what the heck > stung her about John Newton for God's sake?! Has she even met the man?! > No, I think it's what I say at the end of my reply to her. She made John > Newton wrong to make me wrong. And we all know why the women want to make > me wrong. So you and them can continue to be right right RIGHT. > Pathetic! What are they so insecure about?  > > > And why the heck does he scare you, Robin? Or are you being ironic?   I SAID: "just a LITTLE, Share. And that fear may go soon anyways. Please don't misquote me: to say "John scares me" is quite different from saying: John scares me JUST A LITTLE. > BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for Ravi, > right? As far as I am concerned, Ravi is just full of hate--especially for strong and loving women. If he likes you (and you are a woman), that means you're weak and pathetic. Dr Salyavin has provided us with a nifty diagnostic summation anyhow. I agree with him. Jesus. I hope I am not losing it again. Much love and over and out. Robin > > From: Robin Carlsen > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 12:41 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking the cult and its > > > leader are almost all positive. AND what I've come to think is an even > > > more telling indicator of cultishness, thinking that those who don't > > > agree with the cult and its leader are almost all negative. So when the > > > writing of a FFL person expresses such extremely polarized thinking, then > > > I think that person is fundamentally aligned with the group I've been > > > calling wts. > > > > > > > A telling indicator of cluelessness is when a whole lot of people agree > > with each other about your behavior, you think there's something wrong with > > them and not yourself. Then, rather than consider it a gift from the > > universe that an entire group of people have given you exactly the same > > feedback, you dismiss them as a "cult" (an utterly laughable > > rationalization) and then run off to "healers" to validate your > > cluelessness. Healing in right in front of your face. Ref
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Share Long wrote: > ** > > > Aaaak! Too late! I already replied to RD. But what the heck > stung her about John Newton for God's sake?! Has she even met the man?! > No, I think it's what I say at the end of my reply to her. She made John > Newton wrong to make me wrong. And we all know why the women want to make > me wrong. So you and them can continue to be right right RIGHT. > Pathetic! What are they so insecure about? > > And why the heck does he scare you, Robin? Or are you being ironic? > > BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for Ravi, > right? > Oh boy - this is bad. Mummy Auntie Share is talking bad about me again. > > -- > *From:* Robin Carlsen > *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > *Sent:* Monday, December 10, 2012 12:41 PM > > *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking the cult and > its leader are almost all positive. AND what I've come to think is an even > more telling indicator of cultishness, thinking that those who don't agree > with the cult and its leader are almost all negative. So when the writing > of a FFL person expresses such extremely polarized thinking, then I think > that person is fundamentally aligned with the group I've been calling wts. > > > > > > > A telling indicator of cluelessness is when a whole lot of people agree > with each other about your behavior, you think there's something wrong with > them and not yourself. Then, rather than consider it a gift from the > universe that an entire group of people have given you exactly the same > feedback, you dismiss them as a "cult" (an utterly laughable > rationalization) and then run off to "healers" to validate your > cluelessness. Healing in right in front of your face. Refusing to see it is > what needs healing. > > > > > > > > For example, Judy has labeled me the most toxic person AND labeled > Robin's WTS intentions the absolute highest and purest. I think these > phrases indicate extremely polarized thinking as expressed by the use of > verbal superlatives. > > > > > > > > > The problem with such extremely polarized thinking IMO is that it > totally misses an essential truth about us human beings, which is that we > are all a mix of positive and negative and that most of us are mostly > positive with a a glitch or two thrown in to keep us embodied and growing. > And some of us have more and or bigger glitches. > > > > > > Another essential truth is that we humans are going to make mistakes > whether our glitches are big or little, few or many. In regards to this I > have also noticed that a big feature of extremely polarized > > > thinking is that it does not allow for making mistakes, learning from > them and forgiveness. This too I think is very harmful. > > > > > > As far as I'm > > > concerned it's up to you to decide if you're a member of wts. I'm > only weighing in on this because you and others are STILL bringing it up! > BTW this is another indicator of cultishness IMO because it too has an > element of being extreme in its expression. Also BTW I keep saying IMO to > indicate that I realize what I'm saying is only my opinion based on my > observations. Nothing more. > > > > > > > > > Of all the wts people I think you're pretty fluid in your thinking. > But you still are sometimes extreme in the negative direction towards me > and towards other non wts people like Barry. Often I think your negativity > is expressed cleverly and pseudo playfully. Nonetheless the extreme > negativity underneath is discernible. And as I say above, this extremely > polarized thinking in the negative direction has become for me the clearest > indication of someone's being in the group I call wts. > > > > > > > > > PS A very recent example of your extremely negative thinking about > me: I made no judgement about Raunchy's grand daughter. I was expressing > an opinion about the BENEFICIAL effect I thought John Newton's work would > have on Raunchy and the people in her life. IMO both you and Raunchy > reached a new low with those posts. > > > > > > > Who me, new lows? What about Gopi Boy? "Ravi called Newton "fucking > delusional," but he didn't get a gauntlet (or even a guantlet) thrown at > him either." > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328870 > > > > BTW if John Newton, himself hadn't thought the "fainting goat" riff was > humorous, I'd wonder even more than I do about his bona fides. > > Don't bite, Share. She's just trying to get back at you. You stung her. I > kinda like that. With Emily, I'd say just FO. You're good, Share. John > scares me just a little. And that's fine too. > > > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
Jesus, Robin! Can't you answer a question either?! Ok. What scares you a little about John Newton? Or scared past tense just in case it's already gone. And btw if you really want to be scared, check out his teacher, the originator of the forgiveness prayers, kahuna Howard Wills. Over and out, I'm off to writing group. You know, how Emily says I post and then go somewhere else. I guess it's ok that she runs to the coast, walks her dog etc. Great! Now I'm ranting. Yeah, yeah, much love to you too. And what the heck, to the whole screwy gang! From: Robin Carlsen To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Aaaak! Too late! I already replied to RD. But what the heck > stung her about John Newton for God's sake?! Has she even met the man?! > No, I think it's what I say at the end of my reply to her. She made John > Newton wrong to make me wrong. And we all know why the women want to make > me wrong. So you and them can continue to be right right RIGHT. > Pathetic! What are they so insecure about?  > > > And why the heck does he scare you, Robin? Or are you being ironic?   I SAID: "just a LITTLE, Share. And that fear may go soon anyways. Please don't misquote me: to say "John scares me" is quite different from saying: John scares me JUST A LITTLE. > BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for Ravi, > right? As far as I am concerned, Ravi is just full of hate--especially for strong and loving women. If he likes you (and you are a woman), that means you're weak and pathetic. Dr Salyavin has provided us with a nifty diagnostic summation anyhow. I agree with him. Jesus. I hope I am not losing it again. Much love and over and out. Robin > > From: Robin Carlsen > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 12:41 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking the cult and its > > > leader are almost all positive. AND what I've come to think is an even > > > more telling indicator of cultishness, thinking that those who don't > > > agree with the cult and its leader are almost all negative. So when the > > > writing of a FFL person expresses such extremely polarized thinking, then > > > I think that person is fundamentally aligned with the group I've been > > > calling wts. > > > > > > > A telling indicator of cluelessness is when a whole lot of people agree > > with each other about your behavior, you think there's something wrong with > > them and not yourself. Then, rather than consider it a gift from the > > universe that an entire group of people have given you exactly the same > > feedback, you dismiss them as a "cult" (an utterly laughable > > rationalization) and then run off to "healers" to validate your > > cluelessness. Healing in right in front of your face. Refusing to see it is > > what needs healing. > > > > > > > > For example, Judy has labeled me the most toxic person AND labeled > > > Robin's WTS intentions the absolute highest and purest. I think these > > > phrases indicate extremely polarized thinking as expressed by the use of > > > verbal superlatives. > > > > > > > > > The problem with such extremely polarized thinking IMO is that it totally > > > misses an essential truth about us human beings, which is that we are all > > > a mix of positive and negative and that most of us are mostly positive > > > with a a glitch or two thrown in to keep us embodied and growing. And > > > some of us have more and or bigger glitches. > > > > > > Another essential truth is that we humans are going to make mistakes > > > whether our glitches are big or little, few or many. In regards to this > > > I have also noticed that a big feature of extremely polarized > > > thinking is that it does not allow for making mistakes, learning from > > > them and forgiveness. This too I think is very harmful. > > > > > > As far as I'm > > > concerned it's up to you to decide if you're a member of wts. I'm only > > > weighing in on this because you and others are STILL bringing it up! > > > BTW this is another indicator of cultishness IMO because it too has an > > > element of being extreme in its expression. Also BTW I keep saying IMO > > > to indicate that I realize what I'm saying is only my opinion based on my > > > observations. Nothing more. > > > > > > > > > Of all the wts people I think you're pretty fluid in your thinking. But > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:07 AM, salyavin808 wrote: > ** > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:46 AM, salyavin808 ...>wrote: > > > > > ** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking > > > > > the cult and its leader are almost all positive. AND what > > > > > I've come to think is an even more telling indicator of > > > > > cultishness, thinking that those who don't agree with the > > > > > cult and its leader are almost all negative. So when the > > > > > writing of a FFL person expresses such extremely polarized > > > > > thinking, then I think that person is fundamentally aligned > > > > > with the group I've been calling wts. > > > > > > > > There is no such thing as "wts" as you originally defined > > > > it: "CULT DYNAMICS ARE CURRENTLY HAPPENING ON FFL IN wts. > > > > What I see here on FFL around Robin is a mini and cyber > > > > version of WTS, what I think of as wts." > > > > > > > > This was and is absolutely the worst kind of bullshit, SICK > > > > bullshit, PERVERTED bullshit. > > > > > > Are you in the same ward as Ravi? > > > > > > > What can I do to get rid of your chin-envy Salivating Puppy - I have > never > > shied away from petting you. Have you been neutered by any chance? > > Thanks for underlining my joke about people flying off the handle > at the slightest provocation Ravi. > Oh yeah I'm fuming baby - fuming, steaming, huffing, puffing..argh...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
Aaaak! Too late! I already replied to RD. But what the heck stung her about John Newton for God's sake?! Has she even met the man?! No, I think it's what I say at the end of my reply to her. She made John Newton wrong to make me wrong. And we all know why the women want to make me wrong. So you and them can continue to be right right RIGHT. Pathetic! What are they so insecure about? And why the heck does he scare you, Robin? Or are you being ironic? BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for Ravi, right? From: Robin Carlsen To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 12:41 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking the cult and its > > leader are almost all positive. AND what I've come to think is an even > > more telling indicator of cultishness, thinking that those who don't agree > > with the cult and its leader are almost all negative. So when the writing > > of a FFL person expresses such extremely polarized thinking, then I think > > that person is fundamentally aligned with the group I've been calling wts. > > > > A telling indicator of cluelessness is when a whole lot of people agree with > each other about your behavior, you think there's something wrong with them > and not yourself. Then, rather than consider it a gift from the universe that > an entire group of people have given you exactly the same feedback, you > dismiss them as a "cult" (an utterly laughable rationalization) and then run > off to "healers" to validate your cluelessness. Healing in right in front of > your face. Refusing to see it is what needs healing. > > > > > For example, Judy has labeled me the most toxic person AND labeled Robin's > > WTS intentions the absolute highest and purest. I think these phrases > > indicate extremely polarized thinking as expressed by the use of verbal > > superlatives. > > > > > > The problem with such extremely polarized thinking IMO is that it totally > > misses an essential truth about us human beings, which is that we are all a > > mix of positive and negative and that most of us are mostly positive with a > > a glitch or two thrown in to keep us embodied and growing. And some of us > > have more and or bigger glitches. > > > > Another essential truth is that we humans are going to make mistakes > > whether our glitches are big or little, few or many. In regards to this I > > have also noticed that a big feature of extremely polarized > > thinking is that it does not allow for making mistakes, learning from them > > and forgiveness. This too I think is very harmful. > > > > As far as I'm > > concerned it's up to you to decide if you're a member of wts. I'm only > > weighing in on this because you and others are STILL bringing it up! BTW > > this is another indicator of cultishness IMO because it too has an element > > of being extreme in its expression. Also BTW I keep saying IMO to indicate > > that I realize what I'm saying is only my opinion based on my > > observations. Nothing more. > > > > > > Of all the wts people I think you're pretty fluid in your thinking. But > > you still are sometimes extreme in the negative direction towards me and > > towards other non wts people like Barry. Often I think your negativity is > > expressed cleverly and pseudo playfully. Nonetheless the extreme > > negativity underneath is discernible. And as I say above, this extremely > > polarized thinking in the negative direction has become for me the clearest > > indication of someone's being in the group I call wts. > > > > > > PS A very recent example of your extremely negative thinking about me: I > > made no judgement about Raunchy's grand daughter. I was expressing an > > opinion about the BENEFICIAL effect I thought John Newton's work would have > > on Raunchy and the people in her life. IMO both you and Raunchy reached a > > new low with those posts. > > > > Who me, new lows? What about Gopi Boy? "Ravi called Newton "fucking > delusional," but he didn't get a gauntlet (or even a guantlet) thrown at him > either." > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328870 > > BTW if John Newton, himself hadn't thought the "fainting goat" riff was > humorous, I'd wonder even more than I do about his bona fides. Don't bite, Share. She's just trying to get back at you. You stung her. I kinda like that. With Emily, I'd say just FO. You're good, Share. John scares me just a little. And that's fine too. >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:46 AM, salyavin808 wrote: > ** > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking > > > the cult and its leader are almost all positive. AND what > > > I've come to think is an even more telling indicator of > > > cultishness, thinking that those who don't agree with the > > > cult and its leader are almost all negative. So when the > > > writing of a FFL person expresses such extremely polarized > > > thinking, then I think that person is fundamentally aligned > > > with the group I've been calling wts. > > > > There is no such thing as "wts" as you originally defined > > it: "CULT DYNAMICS ARE CURRENTLY HAPPENING ON FFL IN wts. > > What I see here on FFL around Robin is a mini and cyber > > version of WTS, what I think of as wts." > > > > This was and is absolutely the worst kind of bullshit, SICK > > bullshit, PERVERTED bullshit. > > Are you in the same ward as Ravi? > What can I do to get rid of your chin-envy Salivating Puppy - I have never shied away from petting you. Have you been neutered by any chance?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking
Raunchy, your comment "keep my family out of this" wherein you address me as if I'm a serial killer was way out of line IMO. And the sad thing is, you know it too. You just don't have the guts to admit it. As if your shallow and cleverly negative comments about John Newton weren't bad enough. I know that I need healing. I have said that over and over. And I follow through. Look at the very last sentence of this post of yours, Raunchy which is based on a theoretical non event with someone you haven't even deigned to meet in person, tho you could have easily 3 times this year. See how desperate you are to twist and hide the fact that what I'm saying in the first paragraph above is true. That you made a mistake. Basically you want to make John Newton wrong because you want to make me wrong. So you and wts can be right. Thank you for once again proving my point. From: raunchydog To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 12:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking the cult and its > leader are almost all positive. AND what I've come to think is an even more > telling indicator of cultishness, thinking that those who don't agree with > the cult and its leader are almost all negative. So when the writing of a > FFL person expresses such extremely polarized thinking, then I think that > person is fundamentally aligned with the group I've been calling wts. > A telling indicator of cluelessness is when a whole lot of people agree with each other about your behavior, you think there's something wrong with them and not yourself. Then, rather than consider it a gift from the universe that an entire group of people have given you exactly the same feedback, you dismiss them as a "cult" (an utterly laughable rationalization) and then run off to "healers" to validate your cluelessness. Healing in right in front of your face. Refusing to see it is what needs healing. > > For example, Judy has labeled me the most toxic person AND labeled Robin's > WTS intentions the absolute highest and purest. I think these phrases > indicate extremely polarized thinking as expressed by the use of verbal > superlatives. > > > The problem with such extremely polarized thinking IMO is that it totally > misses an essential truth about us human beings, which is that we are all a > mix of positive and negative and that most of us are mostly positive with a a > glitch or two thrown in to keep us embodied and growing. And some of us have > more and or bigger glitches. > > Another essential truth is that we humans are going to make mistakes whether > our glitches are big or little, few or many. In regards to this I have also > noticed that a big feature of extremely polarized > thinking is that it does not allow for making mistakes, learning from them > and forgiveness. This too I think is very harmful. > > As far as I'm > concerned it's up to you to decide if you're a member of wts. I'm only > weighing in on this because you and others are STILL bringing it up! BTW > this is another indicator of cultishness IMO because it too has an element of > being extreme in its expression. Also BTW I keep saying IMO to indicate that > I realize what I'm saying is only my opinion based on my observations. > Nothing more. > > > Of all the wts people I think you're pretty fluid in your thinking. But you > still are sometimes extreme in the negative direction towards me and towards > other non wts people like Barry. Often I think your negativity is expressed > cleverly and pseudo playfully. Nonetheless the extreme negativity underneath > is discernible. And as I say above, this extremely polarized thinking in the > negative direction has become for me the clearest indication of someone's > being in the group I call wts. > > > PS A very recent example of your extremely negative thinking about me: I > made no judgement about Raunchy's grand daughter. I was expressing an > opinion about the BENEFICIAL effect I thought John Newton's work would have > on Raunchy and the people in her life. IMO both you and Raunchy reached a > new low with those posts. > Who me, new lows? What about Gopi Boy? "Ravi called Newton "fucking delusional," but he didn't get a gauntlet (or even a guantlet) thrown at him either." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328870 BTW if John Newton, himself hadn't thought the "fainting goat" riff was humorous, I'd wonder even more than I do about his bona fides.
