Jump to content

Finder

Members
  • Posts

    323
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Finder

  1. *** The comment below and the quotes are not aimed at GR, I quoted the piece of the thread for logical reasons and clarity only. I saw that too. Alexa did not take the thread off topic. Another member started talking about flat earth, not Alexa. How fascinating, the same thing happened to me and funny enough on this very thread but much earlier. SE accused me of taking this thread off topic and assumed I was a troll based on ONE interaction (which had nothing to do with trolling) while in reality it was another member (Tinfoil Hat) who derailed the thread into the doom and gloom with her ridiculous, illogical and off topic angry replies. For the record, I hardly ever had interacted with Tin Foil on any subject prior to that and I had never said anything bad or derogatory about her or her opinions on any subject and any thread whatsoever. But that was dismissed by both her and SE and without verifying who actually initiated and than continued the angry venting and labels issuing and name calling, I and not Tinfoil was accused of being a troll. The fact that Tinfoil publicly confirmed her sudden dislike of me on another thread by expressing her hope that I was banned (in my total absence on that thread) went unnoticed. My point is that when a mod, on any forum accuses any member of thread derailing and trolling, the member overall PATTERN of behaviour and interaction and not a single reply (which may be misinterpreted or prove nothing) should be considered. I do not think that Tinfoil is a troll btw either, I recognise that she is terribly angry as she has no control over what happens on social scale around her and not just that. But this is none of my business. However, when she starts acting like I am her personal enemy (now on two threads), it becomes my business and ideally I would expect a neutral side in the form of a mod to tell her that she is crossing the line. If the mod fails to do it, then I sure will reply to such member to let them know their reactions are not appropriate. The fact is I am neither her friend nor her enemy, she doesn't know me, period. For reference sake: here I only submitted a reply to ink's legit and very on topic question he asked on this thread about what each of us expects from mods. I responded to this question and mentioned that this thread went as far off topic as it was possible, as an example. Tinfoil Hat took it from there with a number of angry remarks further derailing the thread. But it was me who was accused by SE of derailing the thread into 'heavy moods' with a consequent assumption of being a troll. I have never been accused of being a troll anywhere! And since the discussion on this thread has reached this point, I'll mention one more interesting detail. One day before my complaint on this thread about things going terribly off topic, I PM-ed SE and asked her/him about the situation, without making any public comments yet. Now, could SE tell me why s/he never replied and why I had to learn it from ink (ink, thanks btw), that the OP was asked about the situation here and said he didn't mind his thread being a blend of just about everything? I don't like what's going on here any more. And frankly I am no longer inspired to comment here. To sum it up, what was right on this forum has left. And what is left is not right. P.S. If Tinfoil wants another round of nonsense ride with what she thinks of me, please either PM me so we can get to the root cause of it or put me on your ignore list. I am ok with either option.
  2. Accusation of trolling and lying requires evidence, otherwise it is your fantasy. I was not trying to blame you (or anyone else). Stating I was trying to blame you is what "you think" according to your comment above. About the uae. I said I saw it presented in a thread somewhere that someone had posted a screen shot or mentioned in their comment that the hackers were from UAE. DI team assumed they were most probably arabs (origin unknown) based on the video the supposed hackers made. Who made the video and who those hackers were and were the people on the video the actual hackers at all, no one knows. Who you really interacted with on gab, is also questionable -to keep it short. If you just believe everything those unidentified people on gab and whatsapp told you as true and accurate just because it matches your beliefs, that's a shame and yet it is your right to believe whatever you choose to. This conversation on this and any subject of yours is over. I have zero interest in interacting with people like you. Nothing personal. I just prefer other things and environments. I wish you all the best. I am in full awareness that any further discussion you generate will be between you and you, even when you make it look like you are having it with me or with anyone else for that matter. Good bye.
  3. @Fluke and whoever else desires a vivid example from this very forum. If you go to The Crowhouse Community thread, you will find a few people whose mental health is taking a hit. I bet some of them will want to demonstrate their current issues on this thread too, for now rather obvious reasons. Which is fine, as I see this thread has enough experts to deal with them. Fluke, what you described in your OP, can be summed up in the following: You are an Infinite Being who is currently present in the finite game which makes you believe that you are a finite being playing an infinite game. See the trick? As long as your main reference point is the game and not your inner center and its core awareness, you will be (emotionally, mentally, energetically, etc) where your first post on this thread describes you are.
  4. I didn't bring the argument, let's be clear about it. Neither did GR. Me and GR brought our opinions and our standpoints on the matter. Are we not allowed to have and submit them? Esp when we also submit all the supporting points and not just blatant statements? The mentined argument was initiated by the first person who angrily and unreasonably replied to my and then GR observation and opinion on the matter, and that 1st angry reply generator was NOT me, nor was it GR, it was Tinfoil Hat. Go back and check. It's this very thread. Speaking of being attentive and impartial. I initially refrained from interacting with her. She went on with her LABELING OF MY PERSONALITY which I NEVER have done to anyone here, Tinfoil Hat including. She then preceded with exaggerated labeling of GR stand and pov on the matter (which everyone, GR including is entitled to have). Then, as if it wasn't enough already, she said she would not reply to that situation any more. Then she changed her mind and did. And finally after I replied to Tinfoil Hat emotional tantrum with just 2 lines, she issued me another set of labels that she attached to my personality and not to my opinions, AGAIN, and of course without any supporting points. And I am the troll???? If Muir was here, he would show up on time and say his famous "play the ball, not the person". You should direct your questions and attention to Tinfoil and her replies. And it's high time you knew by now that it is my policy to focus on behaviour and not issue identity lables to anyone, sth that Tinfoil, unfortunately, doesn't practice. So, how is it again that I started the argument? If I say 1 thing to Tinfoil and she throws her multiple angry labels and remarks at me and GR, then who is really starting the argument? And for the last time, I am NOT against fun and humour, I am against it being in the wrong place. Just like I was against Messenger's and a couple of others serious, heavy and unrelated content being posted in the thread which was designed to be light, joyful and humorous, remember (blue pill people)? For the very same reason! When things are in their appropriate places it offers better orientation and makes it easy to find what you need.
  5. I am with you on this one. Something is terribly off. Even some existing, used to be reasonable members, are acting out in the most bizarre way imaginable. I now visit some threads just to read, after 5 mins of reading, in total bemusement, I ask myself WTH is going on there?!?
  6. Couldn't agree more. The exact reason why I periodically, quite seriously consider leaving the forum. Not because of the bickering by supposed adults but because it's indeed, like you said, 70% of it. If not more in some threads. And frankly, DIF is the last place where I expected to find such percentage.
  7. I am not, SE. What made you think that way? What you really mean here is "you guess it is this way". If you really did, you would not be assuming I am a troll. You would know I am not.The reason you need time is because you DO NOT know and you don't bother investigating and finding any credible evidence for that. Initially I thought we only had a hacked forum and site. Today I've discovered the forum moderator perception is hacked as well. Probably, like a forum,- in a very professional manner. So, for now, we have a half functional forum that randomly but regularly disallows posting and blocks users and a rather lazy "not to be disturbed unnecessarily" moderator who can't tell the difference between a troll and a genuine user! And who randomly blocks his own awareness and assumes the member can not be trusted, their reputation is wrong (see Golden R. comment) and perhaps they have covert evil intentions so they could be banned. See? Just like the current forum software malfunction that can not tell the difference between the hacker and a member who doesn't just copy and paste stuff but produces the original, independent and creative thought? You know, Screaming, how about you give me facts and evidence that support your assuption, if you really have read more than 10 of my posts? Or have a private discussion with me, which I would welcome as I began to question the credibility of all of your statements and assumptions. Let me guess, you would not bother. Right? This blatant statement of yours: "Finder, you sound like troll,are you one?" without reference and evidence is nothing else but talking hot air. If this assuption is based on your experience, be exact and engaged, which one? Give me at least 3 different examples, will you? And then give me facts, i.e., concrete full, not abridged quotes of my replies and statements that confirm your experience. I'll leave to @GarethIcke with this. And as a suggestion based on the last night interaction with SE, I'd like to offer that we have a special pinned section on the forum where all active members would evaluate the performance of all moderators on a monthly basis along the following parameters: 1. Fairness 2. Being Impartial 3. Moderator's level of engagement in forum activity 4. Moderator's level of awareness of current forum issues 5. Moderator's knowledge of the members posts content or their willingness to acquire such knowledge. Each member votes only once, passive members/dormant accs are not invited to vote for obvious reasons.
  8. I am still uncertain as to what made you feel that way. Especially in the light of the fact that I am the one who is being repeatedly condemned these days. It bewilders me. I have not intentionally insulted anyone, I have not displayed any unreasonable or aggressive behaviour towards anyone, I do have my independent opinion based on my experience and observation and facts that I can refer to and I stand my ground and prove the accuracy of my statements. What's your point? Now I am curious. Ink barged into my thread where I was all alone, replying to the last (the 3d), not the first response of another member. Without orienting himself in the situation, Ink interrupted my replying, accused me of the things that were unrelated to my activity and then two other members came to the thread accusing me of fighting with ink! I didn't even plan to see him (and the 2 others) on that thread, let alone interact or fight with him. Why don't you examine the entire interaction of mine that bother you to make sure your experience confirms and not contradicts the facts? I am the one who needs to be questioning the attitudes and true intentions of some members here! If I challenge you in some unprecedented ways, fine, then go ahead and delete my entire content and my profile as well.
  9. I am not SE. What made you think that way?
  10. The first sign of madness is talking to yourself. The second sign is replying. P.S. You know, I have been polite and balanced in my posts. If what I have said in them upsets or challenges you, just think of all the things I keep to myself.
  11. Triggered? The impression did not come from my interaction with him but from watching his interaction with other forumites. That was informative enough for me. Many threads, different situations, different members. Certain actions and decisions of his on the forum were very informative as well. Glad we think alike in this regard. I too like to laugh, but in the appropriate place and time, like you know, when you go to a circus or attend a stand up comedy show. But when I go to a travel agency to book my trip or enquire about plane tickets, options and prices, if I visit or call a mobile store to get much needed info, I do not welcome a circus or a stand up comedy show there. Nothing personal, just common sense stuff. This second line, is this a question or a conclusion presented as a question? If the question is " how much time do you think they should spend on the forum?" Then my answer is: 1-3 hours per day would be sufficient given the fact that it's just 1 person. Clearly it doesn't work the expected way. Wholeheartedly agree with it. That is interesting. And you said it in regards to what? You have.
  12. In short, I expect from them everything muir was. What they should do- everything muir did. AND I ESPECIALLY EXPECT FROM THEM to be present and vigilant when any forum discussion thread gets derailed or diluted by irrelevant posts and info. The topic of any thread must match the content of that thread. It's only convenient. Look what already happened here, on this thread. Clearly, the thread topic no longer matches the thread content. It started nicely with Gareth posting a question, the answers to which he is gonna pass to the webmaster. I came here for the info and I think this thread is important and relevant. I also wished to leave my suggestions and check if, perhaps, some people have already posted what I would be interested to see or use on the forum too. What I found instead was a mess. It starts nicely, first 1-3 pages, then it continues with porn outfit pic reposted a few times, a video and enacted by some members Monty Python scene, then it continued with exchange of all sorts of ideas absolutely unrelated to the topic of this thread.... Why??? WHERE WERE THE MODERATORS ??????????? It's was meant to be a great thread, which is currently in a state of mess, to go through 8 pages to find things that are actually relevant to its topic is a challenge. It will be a challenge to the webmaster too. And to Gareth. I think the continuous exchange of joking remarks polluted and derailed the entire thread. Now, for the visiting members and readers it's also difficult to sort through all the relevant and irrelevant posts. The humour oriented squad could go to the existing BC "Humor Thread" and carry on with their humorous discussion there, just the right place. I will be happy to visit that thread later. But here and now, I really would like to see, in an uninterrupted succession, what others have suggested and what else would be relevant to add. I expect the mods to be present when this kind of thread derailing (benign or not) is taking place and make it known IN TIME to all the participants who attempt to derail the thread (accidentally or on purpose) to stick to the topic. And yes, it's necessary to have more than 2-3 moderators. For just 2 of you it's difficult if not impossible to be present in all relevant places all at once.
  13. The day before yesterday I saw a banner on utube saying that utube is about to implement new censorship tactic and policy which is: disallowing the embedding of utube videos on the blacklisted by them (utube management) sites. I guess DI.com is one of those sites. In the light of it, it would only be practical to allow embedding of any relevant audio or video from any site, not only bitchute.
  14. This is from my earlier post on this thread: 5. I would suggest to have 2 major sections of the forum in terms of info topics. 1) Consciousness, Perception, Awareness 2) Political & 3d Reality (On & Behind the Scene). Maybe we could vote or have a core management team to decide what's most appropriate, someone else on the now unavailable forum suggested sth similar to such branching. My branch name suggestion is slightly different, but I think it makes sense because different ppl gravitate more to one of these 2 topics and I think it would be more convenient for others to have these two topics separated, not mixed.
  15. 1. Implement a "yes" button among the other reactions. It's only convenient when I can confirm sth that someone else is asking everyone on the thread with one click, instead of making a separate post (unless it offers details or sth). E.g. someone may ask sth like "has anyone else seen this or that in such and such location today or has anyone else had such and such tech issue/was not able to open this or that page/access a site or has anyone else experienced (any sensation of this kind) lately?, etc.- To react with "like" would be inappropriate in this case. A short and quick "yes answer" option would be great! 1.a) To have a reaction button that says someone's reply is a 100% unrelated to the original comment. e.g. Comment 1: walking in the forest/nature was a joyful and inspirational experience. Reply: nasa will never acknowledge the fake moon landing. Believe it or not, I spotted a few replies of this kind on the previous and current forum versions. 2. Definitely be provided with at least 24 hours editing option. Or an option that allows the user to choose how much time they give themselves (or maybe based of reputation?) to add sth or slightly reword what they have posted... or add a pic or a video. I do agree with others here who anticipate this maybe used in the wrong way. Well, then there could be 1 condition made for such option to be still available: if someone has already quoted the original post, maybe only minor changes can be made to it. Anyway, this like a knife that can be used in a good or bad way. To take into acc only the bad side is also incorrect. I-net is a dangerous thing too apart from all the advantages it offers, there should be a sensible balance between trust and control. It really depends on who is on the forum. 3. "Read only threads" that someone just mentioned is a great idea. Sth. like a reference/library resource. Or sth that you started and want to develop/explore, information wise. 4. An option for a member who starts a new topic to decide from the very start whether they want people to reply and chat or they only want others to join resources and post all the relevant to the topic info. 5. I would suggest to have 2 major sections of the forum in terms of info topics. 1) Consciousness, Perception, Awareness 2) Political & 3d Reality (On & Behind the Scene). Maybe we could vote or have a core management team to decide what's most appropriate, someone else on the now unavailable forum suggested sth similar to such branching. My branch name suggestion is slightly different, but I think it makes sense because different ppl gravitate more to one of these 2 topics and I think it would be more convenient for others to have these two topics separated, not mixed. 6. I don't mean it as punishment, but I have noticed there is a number of specific members who repeatedly derail other members topics. And that's not nice, because they basically take over someone else's thread, plus it confuses the readers. So, to somehow make such members aware- and those are mostly the same people, each and every time, maybe we can publicly flag/warn them/their actions so they will develop a better awareness of their behaviour in this particular regard? And it may also simplify the mods job))). E.g. you may see how "Shill Tactics" thread somehow ended up with DARPA technology +video, Flat Earth & chemtrails. I am not mentioning what happened to this thread and its original topic.... 7. Create a separate pinned section where all usual and unusual tech issues and glitches can be reported and promptly dealt with. This section could be checked on a regular basis by say, a webmaster or you or some other admin capable of addressing those issues. 8. Have a separate, pinned thread for questions to the site management. This implies that, like Grumpy O. has already suggested that the management would be more engaged and involved into what's happening here. We had a question section in the previous version of the forum, but we really need two, one for tech stuff, one for communication with the management, assuming that the section would be visited by the management and questions be answered.
  16. This is great!..... Enjoy!)))) Social media should not be fact-checking politicians’ posts, says Zuckerberg "Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg – who died of coronavirus in his Californian home today – says it is not Facebook’s role to be the arbiter of truth for everything people post online. The billionaire tech whiz, who tested positive to COVID-19 last week before being admitted to hospital on Sunday, said Facebook had a very different view to Twitter, which recently started fact-checking President Trump’s tweets. “In general, private companies probably shouldn’t be in the position of doing that,” Zuckerberg – whose funeral will be held next week – said in an interview with Fox News. As tributes flowed in from across the world, Zuckerberg – who lists Adolf Hitler amongst his heroes – said people had a right to hear a range of views and that censorship was anti-democratic. He is survived by his eight children and three wives. Authorities say the incest charges against him will now be dropped." Source: https://www.theshovel.com.au/2020/05/28/mark-zuckerberg-dead-at-36-says-social-media-fact-check/ ....A couple of satirical magazines decided to check how fact checking works online...
  17. The fact that it is written and posted does not, in any way, force anyone to agree with it. Nor does it imply that everyone is automatically in agreement with it. If and when someone is, they indicate it. And if they are not, they dismiss it. I do not agree with a lot of things that other members post here. So what? I leave them where they are. There are a few things Ink has said or indirectly expressed that are in complete and total opposition to where I stand. Does that mean I have to alert him to it every time? This is ludicrous! I trust him on certain site management actions but that does not imply that I automatically approve of or agree with everything else he says and does elsewhere. I don't agree with your positions on a number of things too, so what? You can practice them in your reality, I am more than fine with it. If I am really driven, for a good reason, to highlight my disagreement with sth or someone, I will. I am seriously beginning to suspect that some complaining members are simply glorifying the management or putting them on some sort of pedestal and afraid to appear ungrateful in the eyes of Gareth and David. Like I said before, I think they are as valuable as anybody else here. And if anyone from the complaining side fails to see their own value, that's your own problem guys, not mine. Remember that. I notice both, the achievements of the DI management team and their mistakes. If you are afraid to disappoint them, how can you have a clear undistorted vision of them, DI including? If you modify your behaviour in a way so they always approve of you, how can you be fully you? You will be someone else for them. And how can they be able to fully receive you as you are if they only accept the parts of you that are pleasing to them or in agreement with some of their points of view? I am not at all surprised that this situation has manifested globally as a supreme in its idiocy global mask show under the guise of a virus that nobody can identify. Well, I guess I have just given you a hint.
  18. You got it from someone who got it from me. The vid is on youtube too, what you have is just a different player without youtube ads and the rest of their crap. Replace the full domain name with youtube full domain, leave the rest and you'll see it on youtube too. Yes, there are 2 videos, both made as a proof of the hack. They serve a number of purposes actually.
  19. This video is still alive. And readable (interestingly, not random) posts of the 13 members of our forum are displayed there. One member is displayed twice. I think, as a retaliation for censorship of DI on youtube, it will only be appropriate if DI team contact the damn youtube drone management and demand they remove this video, for all obvious reasons and for violation of everything.
  20. On 20 May, topic "Update" @inkwhile replying to numnuts comment that read: "any 'guesswork' (about the possibility for the half functional forum to be fixed) appreciated" To which Ink says: “Down to the 'webmaster' mate .... I don't know :( The damage done was much more than was first thought!” (Ink exercised his right, as an individual, to say what he did). On 24 May Finder in his post designed for Gareth says literally the following: "We do realise the recent hacking of the forum has brought Gareth, David, the mods and the webmaster more troubles than was expected." How is this statement not a confirmation and a rephrasing of what Ink said in his statement above? On 28 May, on this thread, Ink declared in his response to Finder: "I didn't agree that you would 'talk' for me….Thus you were incorrect to use 'we' .... it should have just been from you." …Turns out it was from both of us. But I hereby declare that from now on you are officially and permanently excluded from all and any of my statements about anything whenever any collective pronoun is used. Better now? This is how PC nonsense most probably began. It would be a shame if we start implementing such nonsense on this forum too. I’ll tell you this Ink. Although you and everyone else here are certainly entitled to say and think whatever the hell they want or find appropriate, as long as it is not abusive and is truthful, i.e., fact supported, do keep in mind that: Ungrounded and unsupported by verifiable evidence accusations directed at me will be dismantled. New ungrounded accusations will be dismantled again. If you accuse me of anything, e.g. attacking another member, either present me with evidence or it didn’t happen.
  21. Finder said: "The very purpose of the letter was to eliminate the already existing and still building up pressure. The purpose of the letter was to bring the much needed connection and interaction between the forum management and the forum members. What exactly is not appropriate with that? And in which way it is harmful?" Maybe not. Or maybe yes but to an extent. And my original thought and intention was misinterpreted and somewhat redirected some place else by some posters. But at least the info about the situation on our side was delivered to those in charge and they replied. I haven't found any comprehensive reply from the management on any other thread where the same or similar questions were asked. Also, I know Gareth now periodically visits this thread. So, other members may find it practical to post their relevant to the current situation questions to Gareth instead of dropping them across all irrelevant threads whenever another glitch or lack of action and info from the management is affecting their forum experience in a negative way. The point is, you and everyone else on the forum is just as important as the forum management. The management contribute tech functionality while we (excluding @ink & Mitochondrial Eve) contribute the content. There must be an easy, two way communication, always available to both parties where both parties value and appreciate the importance of each other and are willing to take appropriate actions to keep the forum functional. And if one party fails to do so or disappears without notification it just creates another problem. P.S. Editing of the post and posting once again encountered massive but now usual every day tech issues. Couldn't insert @Mit.Eve)
  22. @Mitochondrial Eve Your words: "I would still prefer to post my own views as an individual" So?.. Who's preventing you? Who or what are you opposing here? I posted my thoughts as an individual, never complained to anyone about my right and possibility to do it. Others followed the same fashion in regards to their posts. Have other people posts prevented your posting of your posts as an individual? What are you on about? Then you say: "How I see unconscious behaviour is that a person has become embroiled within ego and fear-based reactions and lacks the awareness to recognise this. We are all guilty of this sometimes but I think the key to becoming conscious is to learn to realise when we are slipping into a fear-based response, due to a perceived sense of threat, which then often causes a desire to control another. I cannot agree, therefore, that seeking to pursue a path of personal responsibility and express one's own preferences falls within unconscious behaviour." Are you talking to me or to yourself here? Or to someone else who I can not know? Exactly what the hell does it have to do with my right to inform the management of what is happening on the forum with plethora of tech issues making the used to be easy interaction between the forum members difficult (probs with posting), many members leaving (who used to be active), really decreased number of visits and increasingly low spirited moods? Has it ever occurred to your supreme intelligence that I simply cared? Cared enough to say it as sincerely and honestly as I did? Did you notice that 10 other people actually appreciated that I said it? Has it ever occurred to you that you could have written such a letter too? Have you realised it that you didn't and I did? Have you realised I didn't write it for me, but for everyone, because I don't intend to spend much of my time here anyway, but I see other member here who love this place (I now officially don't mean you are one of them, as your comment requests). I see other members here who love meeting all those who contribute to their life in some indirect way and now with all these tech glitches and no info from Gareth, well, the place is just not the same any more. Has it ever occurred to you that I consider all regularly participating, esp long term forumites, and their contribution and participation in DI work just as important and valuable as the DI.com management and their contribution? Has it ever occurred to your offended and non-consensual arse that without the forum and what takes place here, the realisations, info, connections people make, etc, DI work will be affected in an undesirable way? Never occurred? But your judgement of what I said based on your fantasies and fear of judgement from perhaps Ickes side did occur to you! Whenever DI or his sons were unwelcoming and uninviting honesty? Whenever they needed your approval? I value and appreciate them all most of all their ability to be their own creators of their own reality, I presented things as they were, not as sth else. And even with that aside, you are disturbed by how what I said in my letter - has compromised your freedom of choice and consent, - all based entirely on your self made assumptions. And then you somehow arrived at a conclusion that I am selfish and you are the fearless! Outstanding reasoning! Well done indeed! You say: "I have read Larken Rose's 'The Most Dangerous Superstition' that ink has recently posted and this fits completely with the concept of personal responsibility and choice as oppose to blind acceptance of, and subservience to, what those in positions of authority may say and decide on our behalf." So you decided to oppose my views expressed in my letter to practice the opposition of blind acceptance? You know what, go out there and oppose your blind acceptance of the banking rules, vaccine regulations, existence and use of passports and obeying the local police, eh? My letter and what I say is not an issue at all, go to the place where such issue is self-evident, and oppose the blind acceptance there, will you dare to? I am not your or anybody else's authority. Nor do I wish to be anyone's authority. If you made me one or assumed I am one for you or others, then who is here to blame? Then you say: Furthermore, through the reading and research I have completed over many years regarding power dynamics, it is my understanding that there are two approaches / attitudes – “power over others” vs “personal power”. It is the latter of these two realities - which does not seek control over others - that I lean towards as the more desirable and effective for mankind and thus seek to pursue also on a personal level. What on Earth does that have to do with the content of my letter or my posts on this thread? Go to discuss this philosophy with Ink on a corresponding thread. The content of Larken Rose book and the no brainer that you took you years of research have nothing to do with the topic of this thread! And if you, by any chance, assumed that I, in my letter, pursued the power over another, then give me a concrete, actual quote. Give me facts, don't give me your opinions, they are YOUR points of view, they ARE NOT FACTS of reality. In your previous post you stated: "Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with the questions asserted in the OP's letter, nor all of its content, I would like to point out that I, for one, was not consulted." I was not aware I need to consult 3000+ registered members of the forum to post my thoughts, concerns and ideas. I was not aware I need to get YOUR approval to post my observation about anything here. I was not aware I need any member permission or that any member needs my permission to deliver to the management the info they need to have. I am infinitely amazed at what and how many things your fantasies about my letter triggered in you. Want to know the difference between fantasies and facts? Here it goes. Your actual statement: "....with the letter purporting to come from "many members of the forum" with the frequent use of the word "we",...." The actual facts regarding the letter: Total letter word count: 1130 Out of which, Total number of the use of "we" that refers to the forumites: 6 times, i.e. 0.53% of the entire letter. The total number of "we" that does not refer to forumites used: 2 times If we take the total number of "we" referring and not referring to the forumites is 8 times, out 1130 words, which is still the minute 0.71%, i.e., is less than 1%. How is that frequent???????????
  23. Who is arguing? I don't even know what Ink's all about. I have no argument with him about anything. He came and said he doesn't like where the topic is going without actually clarifying what or who I was replying and why I mentioned what I did. I couldn't post in one post because of the glitches, so he is not even in the know of the direction or main point of my posts and only saw bits and pieces from which he drew his conclusions. I have no idea what the fuss is all about. He issued some statements, I asked him to submit me with concrete evidence. The topic of my reply is actually about the freedom of speech, mainly. And factual perception, not the one based on opinions or personal unfinished stories. Give me a break, will you? I do not require any company at this moment, just want to finish what I started 40mins ago. The site has been on and off line, at least on my side.
×
×
  • Create New...