Hey John, You write: > There are some folks on the list that have admirable knowledge and > those folks I respect and read carefully for their ideas are good and > helpful.
Indeed, we agree. > That's not everyone on the list. There are some folks who clamor out > opinions which I think can be dangerous, especially to new-comers. We disagree on how dangerous, one, and for another, how to go about talking to newcomers, and who may do so on my list. I'll address those points more below. > I don't find any of the opinions silly as you've mentioned. Well, given the lack of any feedback from you indicating you've reconsidered any of your assumptions or prior beliefs as a result of the discussion, it's hard to draw any other conclusion. I'm sorry if I've misinterpreted your reaction. > But I've sent and forwarded some e-mails that have creditable info that > have been mocked nastily by some in your group - Yep, I'm sorry about that. Ken, for instance, isn't an easy person to micro-manage. He expressed some strong opinions about Barwick. He's entitled to his opinions and I'm comfortable with people expressing themselves, if they can do so in a civil tone. He may have been less than civil to Barwick, but I don't believe, if you look, you'll find him attacking *you*. Both sides of that discussion were aired, others may make up their own minds. You and he should agree to respectfully disagree and leave it at that. And that's the proper template for all such disagreements here. > I've used CSW in conjunction with other protocols and have helped folks > to beat their cancer, not only once, but many times. And with many > different types of cancer. And I've dealt successfully with many > other diseases with various protocols, for many folks, too. Yes, those are certainly *valuable* insights, and I'm sure many of us would be grateful if you shared them with us over time. A lot of folks would value the opportunity to learn from you. > You must think the list's hammerings are justified for you haven't > addressed much of it before now - except with me. This is crucial... You have not been "hammered" without cause, John. The people in this group are used to being able to express a variety of opinions and *NOT* be insulted, attacked, or ridiculed for them. You have made it a practice from day one of loudly labeling things you disagreed with as wrong, dangerous, foolish, etc., and the people who wrote them irresponsible or incompetent. You routinely direct criticisms at the PERSONS whose opinions and statements you find objectionable, while characterizing those statements as the obvious result of serious mental and moral deficiencies in their authors. In other words, you argue ad-hominem at the drop of a hat, and that pisses people off, and they respond in-kind. And you percieve a hostile environment? Imagine that... The members here are not constrained to only saying things that John Stevens believes are true. And athough I invite you to try to influence us in matters you feel are important, it is not within your power to dictate what may and may not be said, nor reasonable to expect to instantly change long settled opinions and attitudes without a lengthy effort to persuade us to your way of thinking... An effort, by the way, that ought to include thorough and sincere consideration by *YOU* of the notions we bring to the table as well. It'd only be fair, don't you think? > only I can rebel periodically when it gets a little too much "groupie" > for me. I'll see how it goes. If the fire starts, again, with your > "groupies," I may seek out - because there are many folks that know > about the power of CSW outside the list... Let's talk about those people you disparage as "groupies." They are also members and welcome here as my guests. This list is for them as much as it is for you and me. Many of our members are users of the knowledge that we have shared with them. They have learned to make their own CS, they've used it, given it away, and seen results of their own and shared them with us. They are welcome to help new folks, too, John. Why not? It spreads the load and makes the work easier for us all. Of course the old-timers and expert-types are here to listen and chime in when needed to clarify details or correct anything that goes too far off track. To make an analogy... You've come along, stumbling across a different tradition, so to speak, one that's proven quite alien to you in many of its details. And you've reacted badly, loudly declaring things wrong for being different, abusing people for using what they've been taught here because you disagree with the teachers. They don't need to invent this stuff from the ground up, John, in order to be allowed to help others at their own level. If you have questions about the things we teach here, bring them to the teachers and don't abuse our students, my guests. Okay? And be sure that they're questions, John, not attacks, delarations, or dictates. We'll be a lot more friendly if you treat us as esteemed equals, even if you have a hard time believing that we qualify. Humor us. Be well, Mike D. da list owner guy... [Mike Devour, Citizen, Patriot, Libertarian] [[email protected] ] [Speaking only for myself... ] -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: [email protected] Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected] The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down... List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
