--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltabl...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" > > <willytex@> wrote: > > > > > > So, it's all about Jim. > > > > I like Jim. Enlightened Dawn, if you are Jim, > > The biggest tell for me is the use of the term "THE > Maharishi" by a person who is an insider enough to > want to defend attacks on him.
I don't think it's that much of a "tell," nor do I think one has to be an "insider" to defend MMY if one feels he's being unfairly maligned. <snip> > You can disguise writing style but it is more > difficult to mask POV. It's actually very difficult to disguise writing style consistently, especially when you're writing many short contributions one after another quite rapidly. ED's writing style is *very* different from Jim's. This is iffy, but to me ED's seems like a female writing style. I couldn't tell you why, but it's a very strong impression. Men trying to write as if they were women typically aren't very good at it and usually give themselves away at some point by saying something a woman would be unlikely to say, or in a way a woman would be unlikely to put it. And I haven't seen any such giveaways from ED. I'm not quite sure what you mean by POV, but it seems to me the content of ED's posts and the style of her of interactions with others are not like Jim's at all. ED's concerned with different things than Jim was; her posts have a very different set of emphases. Just for one thing, Jim repeatedly insisted he was enlightened, whereas ED has not. ED is also a lot more aggressive; she obviously enjoys being confrontational and frequently provokes it, whereas Jim didn't. He'd do it when he felt he had to, but he didn't revel in it as ED does. And her writing is a whole lot clearer. I couldn't figure out what the hell Jim was talking about much of the time when he was describing his experiences, but I don't have trouble following ED's descriptions. You may recall that ED went after me pretty nastily not long after she arrived for fighting with Barry. Jim, in contrast, LOVED how I dealt with Barry. We had long friendly discussions in private email both before and after he left FFL (he continued to read it for a while and would send me his comments on whatever was going on). He emailed me from his Jim Flanegin address when he was posting here as Jim, and from his Sandiego address when he was posting here as Sandiego--but signed the emails "Jim"--so he wasn't trying to hide from me that he was Sandiego; he took it for granted that I knew. ED has never contacted me by email. Early on, ED revealed one thing about herself that is not consistent with what we know about Jim: she has a 4-year-old son. Jim has a single nearly adult daughter, and I don't believe he ever mentioned having a very young son too. As to "editing" her writing to reveal as little as possible about herself, there could be all kinds of reasons for wanting to maintain her privacy. But I suspect part of it is that she knows it drives Barry batty that she won't respond to his demands to give us specifics about her TM involvement, and she enjoys watching him fulminate. All that said, I wouldn't be astonished to learn that ED *has* been on FFL before under a different name, but I'm just about positive she isn't Jim. I could be wrong, but the contrasts between them are so many that creating and sustaining the ED persona would have to involve a great deal of attention and planning, both in general and in terms of planting red herrings-- and I really doubt Jim would care enough to put so much effort into it, or would even have the discipline and persistence to sustain it.
