Ravi, this is call a "work out". Not in the physical sense, but rather as in "processing". We had a guy do this in a major way about a year back. You may recall it. (-: Of course, come to think of it, that was a winding up, and this is an unwinding. (-:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi" <raviyogi@...> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > curtisdeltablues@ wrote: > > > > > > Not only is RC new here, but he has been besieged from many sides by > people riled up by his provocative posts. With so many people posting > AT you, it is really hard to keep to the limit set for the rest of us > who have had time to settle in. RC is learning who to respond to but I > support Rick's giving the guy a pass this week. > > > MZ, Provocative? You gotta be kidding me, it's more looking like what my > dog used to do - puke and then trying to eat it right back. MZ is worse, > he puked many years back, he's preserved it and is trying to eat it back > - gross !!! > > > > I believe your bias charge is bogus. Imagine if a movement bigwig > signed on and over posted while stimulating discussions. Everyone would > feel the same way. Stimulating discussions here is good. I don't care > which "side" is doing the stimulating. > > > Bigwig as in TM's Prodigal Pimp? > > > If I use the term "stimulating" one more time I am totally gunna pitch > a tent...too late. Sorry gotta run to > www.badbadgirlswhoweartoomuchmakeupbutnottoomanyclothesandareslutty.com > > > Hey I can't get to this website - what am I doing wrong? Please help - > urgent. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall thomas.pall@ wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 7:47 PM, authfriend jstein@ wrote: > > > > > > > > No, Judy, you missed it > > > > No, Tom, I saw it. > > > > > > > > > Alex said the first time, and hist post hasn't > > > > > changed, that he'd be inclined to let RC slide this week > > > > > as he's a newbie, but that Rick is the owner. > > > > > > > > He always says that when he proposes some ruling before > > > > he's checked with Rick. > > > > > > > > > Rick has software running such that any > > > > > mention of the word Rick get's his attention and he zooms in > > > > > on the post. He did not rule against RC. I didn't expect him > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > Neither did I. Why should he have? It's a reasonable > > > > exemption for a newbie. > > > > > > > > If it slams Maharishi, Rick's tacitly all for it. I > > > > > agree with Nabby here. Rick's tacit aggressive when it comes > > > > > to Maharishi. > > > > > > > > That's nonsense. (I think you mean "passive aggressive," no?) > > > > And why should you care anyway? > > > > > > > > > > > > No, I meant tacit aggressive. If you look at the letters to the > owner he > > > chooses to post, you'll notice that if they're a slam on Maharishi > or a slam > > > on the TMO, no matter how far out it might be, Rick will decide to > post it, > > > anonymous to the author, but claim he's being fair and, well, it's > not his > > > writing. Like, for example, that ?psychologist? who launched an > incoherent > > > tirade against Maharishi and the TMO some months ago. People asked > why it > > > is Rick chose to post /that/ but Rick just said something like he > posted it > > > "because it was available for posting" or some such inane excuse. > Why does > > > it bother me? Because I've seen Rick play this very subtle but > after a > > > while very obvious and IMO pretty damn inconsiderate and nasty game > of > > > saying he's not getting involved, that he's at most acting as > facilitator to > > > get all sides of an argument out. But his bias and agenda become > obvious. > > > That rankles me because 1) It's very dishonest and 2) His hidden > agenda > > > becomes first obvious then insulting. Rick does this not only on FFL > but in > > > real life as well. I like to hear both sides. I'd prefer, of > course, two > > > sides to post an approximately equal number of words. If you are > > > enlightened or were and decided you're better than that now, it > appears it's > > > part of your enlightenment to throw in at least a thousand extra > big, florid > > > words which don't move your story along because, well, rambling and > > > confusing people with your meaning appears to be part and parcel of > > > enlightenment. Maharishi spoke for hours at a tim, but > crystallized his > > > main points into pithy epigrams. Rory, Ravi and now RC, OTOH, > figure the > > > more words they throw at you the more you'll lap it up. > > > > > >
