<snip> "I'm trying to do you a favor and NOT treat you as being as naive as you're coming across. I'm trying to suggest that you are being baffled by bullshit and being taken in by long-term bullshitters, and that you don't realize it. Many of us who have been wading through that bullshit for years now do realize it. You have much to learn."
I hear you and no, I don't have the history, and yes, I am baffled and yes, I am naive and yes, will watch. But, speaking as an individual, and with only two examples in hand (Ravi and you - ha, in the same sentence), I don't understand why the conversation can't be had without crossing the consensual line for sexual acts described between forum members. This is clearly my gender talking and words are only words after all and I don't believe in censorship and I think the forum weighs in and that works for me, actually. After all, I said my piece and I am not completely blameless either. And, I'm not proposing a "ban"; I was proposing a week off to spur personal thought on whether there might be a way to communicate one's position differently. It just seems that the forum is struggling to some degree with where the line should be, so I put in my two cents on where that line might be, if one chooses to draw one. I don't need a line, actually :) ________________________________ From: turquoiseb <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 9:33 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Rule? Was (Happy new year to everyone !!! (And more love bombing..) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@...> wrote: > > If this forum wants to set a new rule...perhaps that > should be "Using words or pictures to indicate a direct > sexual act between two forum members without their stated > consent is not allowed and will result in dismissal for > a week's time." You realize, do you not, that your proposed "rule" would have banned Jim, Judy, Ravi, Nabby, and many other posters on this forum whose bullshit you are buying into? Literally all of them have suggested that one or more of the people on their Enemies List are gay. Being charitable, you really haven't been here long enough to have figured many things out. For example, that the person you're replying to is a troll whose only intent here is to stir up trouble. Or that there is simply no possibility of Rick ever allowing such a dumbass rule to ever be implemented. My honest advice is to step back from the action for a while and just WATCH. Especially starting Friday evening and this coming weekend, when many of the people who posted out early this week by melting down and going manic will be back. You'll have about a two-day window in which to watch them melt down and go manic again, before they post out again. WATCH to see whether they hit the ground running attacking others here, probably more severely than any others have attacked them. When they do (not if), try to notice whether the people they DO attack happen to coincide with the "Enemies List" that Ravi recently posted. Next, try to figure out what the people on that Enemies List have in common. I'll help you out with the last one. They are either outspoken critics of TM, the TMO, and Maharishi, OR they are other posters who have dared to agree with people they designated as the "troika" (Vaj, Curtis, and myself) on the Enemies List. Or who even admitted to liking their posts. I'm trying to do you a favor and NOT treat you as being as naive as you're coming across. I'm trying to suggest that you are being baffled by bullshit and being taken in by long-term bullshitters, and that you don't realize it. Many of us who have been wading through that bullshit for years now do realize it. You have much to learn. Just wait until YOU side with one of the people on the Enemies List. Watch what happens to you then. Ask a poster by the name of do.rflex about this. He'll tell you what happens to someone whom Judy has come to view as a "traitor" to the vendetta she claims not to be leading. Besides, lighten up. What you've been reading are all attempts at humor, dark though it may occasionally be. No one on this forum -- and quite possibly no one on this planet -- would ever willingly have sex with Judy Stein. So any suggestions to the contrary are fiction, and should be treated as such. > ________________________________ > From: richardatrwilliamsdotus <richard@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 7:36 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Happy new year to everyone !!! (And more love > bombing..) > > > > You're all getting really close to > > > being in big trouble with Judy and > > > Emily and Raunchy. > > > > zarzari: > > I don't mind trouble with Judy. I am > > done with her... > > > She may not be done with you. Where I > come from, silence usually indicates > agreement. > > > She should learn to control her anger > > before she makes spiritual discussions. > > > So, I wonder where are the FFL Moderators? > > FFL Guidelines File - Updated 6/13/09: > > 8) Posting of "adult" material, either > text or photos, or links to such materials, > is prohibited. Violation of this guideline > may result in expulsion from the group. > > > > > Just reintroducing the concept of reality to > > > > all of this fantasizing that's been going on. > > > > In his head the Ravster seems to believe he's > > > > a real rock star, but in reality his biggest > > > > groupie probably has to remove her false teeth > > > > before giving him a blowjob. :-) >
