--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" <maskedzebra@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" <maskedzebra@> wrote: > > > > > > > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. > > > There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she > > > deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. Ravi was > > > referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to create > > > > I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the > > temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once more--and > > you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will have to send > > you (this time) into a virtual exile. I am trying to do some good around > > here, Ann: please learn to whisper more wisely to these other horses. > > > > > > > M: Let's see here, mmmm,...uh....Oh, I think I get it now. > > > > Robin is the new Buck. And FFL is the new Dune. The snide schtick has > > become the man, and as the Beatles say: > > > > "Let me take you down `Cause I'm going to... Strawberry Fields Nothing is > > real And nothing to get hung about. Strawberry Fields forever" > > > > (Insert guitar riff here.) > > > > The tell: > > > > "a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature". > > > > See, I am catching on to the formula. Share has been dissed, and Ann's > > challenge supported, but it looks like Ann was being chastised. > > > > The overkill, but it makes sure Ann is in on it: > > > > "if she does this once more--and you don't realize how ignominiously > > defeated you are, I will have to send you (this time) into a virtual exile." > > > > Let the cackling commence. > > Dear Curtis, > > I am not sure I follow you here. But I am aware of one thing: You are > interested in my tactics, but not, I see, interested in the issue which has > drawn me into Strawberry Fields forever.
M: That is correct, the whole Share interaction with others doesn't interest me at all. R: You would make a moral stand against my method of expressing my conviction about a matter that I can consider serious enough to warrant being as ironic as I can be? M: I was not making a moral stand, I was sorting it out for myself. I have been having some trouble following your post's intent and wanted to figure it out. Obviously many others have no trouble at all following your method of communication here. But like Buck it makes following the ball a bit difficult sometimes as you slip in and out of what you are calling your "ironic" character. R: > > Do you wish to discuss the issue, Curtis? You would imply that my use of > irony proves something underhanded and insincere about me, whereas your > exposing what is going on here somehow in that revealing is something higher > than my deploying my Buck in the Dome side? M: Higher, lower, those are all your own judgements. It isn't my style so obviously I have my preferences. It is hard to pull off in writing so many levels of communication without any support from voice tone or expressions. R:> > Let's fight out this issue--I won't stoop to irony, and you won't therefore > have some criticism to make of me. Do you know what the issue is, Curtis? You > have already given your judgment of that issue in a post. Do you stand behind > that judgment? M: You lost me here. There is the Share deal and then there is my observation of how you are communicating. Did you read Dune BTW? My reference there is not all all unflattering, it is one of my favorite books precisely for how they depict very complex multilayered communications. Which issue do you mean? I lost interest in your POV on Share after the post I commented on a long time ago where you were trying to get her to experience something about herself. I don't believe this discussion needs to be framed as a fight. R: > > What I would like to see you do, Curtis--and this would surprise me--is > explain why you would in your having (quite effectively) told the FFL readers > what's up here feel you had essentially (if implicitly) somehow looked after > and answered the issue. Like what Emily is saying in her last post. M: I find your style of interaction interesting. I don't find the interactions people are having with Share interesting. People are making their own choices how they want to show up here, and I consider it all very boring. I'm sure inside it all it is fascinating for the participants just as my choices of interactions fascinate me. R:> > Are you willing to address Emily or Ann's point, Curtis? I think your > avoidance of the issue far more significant a 'tell' than your ability to see > what I am up to here. My response is to a sense of what is really going on; > your response would make it (the issue Emily for instance is raising) > something less morally or psychologically significant than your having caught > me in my customary way of handling a dispute when one party is stonewalling. M: We always hit an impasse when you try to get me to direct my attention on other people. I would sooner remove my eye with my unwashed hands after re-potting a plant, than sort through that tangle of interactions. "Avoiding" the issue is either spin or stating the obvious that we are all making our choices for our attention here. I am "avoiding" 99% of what goes on here to pursue my own interests just as I do in my offline life. Any judgement of what I "should" be interested with will be met with the same success my 7th grade math teacher had when she told me to put away my American Indian book. R: > The issue, Curtis: what is it? I understand it--or think I understand it--in > a deep enough way to take the liberty of testing where the grace might be in > this matter. M: You answered my question and I appreciate it Robin. I understand how you are communicating here better. I don't find anything egregious in how you expressed yourself. But like with Buck, where his irony melts into his actual POV, I find you hard to follow sometimes. I have another analysis of your method you used on LG that might be fun to discuss if you are up for it. Oh, and what's up with this reference to "grace". How are you defining it, what is the agent of it and how do we know when we have detected it. Do you mean which POV do we prefer or are you claiming more than that? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight: I don't even THINK the > > > > > word imbecile much less express it. Emily recently asked a question > > > > > about TM and I followed up with a similar question to Steve. Not > > > > > sure how my asking a question of Steve is saying anything at all > > > > > about Emily. And it's true that I ONCE called Emily's sense of > > > > > humor creepy. She is the person who is multiplying it. > > > > > > > > > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me something > > > > > I did not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy here. > > > > > > > > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be friends > > > > too, you know. > > > > > > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. > > > There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she > > > deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. Ravi was > > > referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to create a > > > character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature". I > > > hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the > > > temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once > > > more--and you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will > > > have to send you (this time) into a virtual exile. I am trying to do some > > > good around here, Ann: please learn to whisper more wisely to these other > > > horses. > > > > > > > > BTW how I remember this sequence: lines on stone, lines on sand, > > > > > lines on water, lines on air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@> > > > > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > > > > > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 11:45 PM > > > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or > > > > > "reeely stooopid" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > Steve:  I was being sincere - you really have been laying down some > > > > > funny stuff, IMO.  You are never the butt of my joke.  I almost > > > > > always laugh in the spirit of the moment and never with mean > > > > > intention - and I'm quite serious about that.  I laugh at the human > > > > > condition and our attempts to communicate with each other and I do it > > > > > so that I don't grieve too hard when things are tough.  I should > > > > > really get a volunteer position as I've already filled out the > > > > > application - I just have to make the call.  > > > > > > > > > > I don't always explain the way I interpret FFL and I probably won't. > > > > >  I run it through a lot of different filters some days.  Which > > > > > means that I "misinterpret" at times on purpose for a different > > > > > effect - easy to do with words on paper. And it is well known now, > > > > > thanks to Share, that I have a "creepy" sense of humor.  And I am a > > > > > TM imbecile.  > > > > > > > > > > And I wasn't feeling particularly up today, if truth be told, so I > > > > > really appreciated your posts.  And, I love a good beer.  Had to > > > > > give it up when I was diagnosed as gluten intolerant, but I'm going > > > > > to cheat after what Emptybill posted today.  Emily > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >________________________________ > > > > > > From: seventhray27 <steve.sundur@> > > > > > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > > >Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 6:04 PM > > > > > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or > > > > > >"reeely stooopid" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >whether Emily was being sincere or making fun of me, I really don't > > > > > >care. If I can be the butt of her joke, so be it. > > > > > >(and yes, I need to check out the link) > > > > > > > > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" <maskedzebra@> > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> If you ever figure out why Emily is laughing, Steve, you'll be > > > > > >> where Ted wrote about sex with Sylvia. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Ahh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....ahhhhhh ha ha ha ha ha ha > > > > > >> > ah....ahhhhhhhhh ha ha ha ha ha. Steve, I don't know what is up > > > > > >> > for you, but you are really making me laugh these days. > > > > > >> > àAhhhh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....... > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > >________________________________ > > > > > >> > > From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@ > > > > > >> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > > >> > >Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 2:18 PM > > > > > >> > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" > > > > > >> > >or "reeely stooopid" > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > >à> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" > > > > > >> > ><maskedzebra@> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" > > > > > >> > >> steve.sundur@ wrote: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> You always read me perfectly, Steve, and I am loving it. And > > > > > >> > >> you have been more merciful than most here--I don't like > > > > > >> > >> people criticizing me--but you, you say something nice when > > > > > >> > >> you do this (put me in a better place). And believe me, > > > > > >> > >> Steve: this makes all the difference. > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> I am trying to 'get' your philosophy; I think you are trying > > > > > >> > >> to teach it to me indirectly--through anecdotes like the ones > > > > > >> > >> in this post. I think this an efficacious way to get your > > > > > >> > >> wisdom to go right into me, Steve. > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> I will let you know (through my deeds) the progress I am > > > > > making. Don't ever give up on me. I need your help--AND your love. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > >àMake a daily journal. àWe'll call it "Robin's Daily > > > > > >> > >Journal". àMake a list of the things you hope to accomplish > > > > > >> > >in a given day, and maybe some personality traits to which you > > > > > >> > >want to pay a little closer attention. àAnd then at the end > > > > > >> > >of the day, you can write about how you feel you did. à> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > >For example, "Was I tooàaggressiveàapplying my First > > > > > >> > >Person Ontology test to those I interacted with?" àOr, "Was > > > > > >> > >my ironyàappropriate, or insincere". àThese might be some > > > > > >> > >areas to consider. àI really don't know. àI am just > > > > > >> > >throwing them out for suggestions. à> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > >We're here for you Robin. We can get through this. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> We are good now, I think, > > > > > Steve. > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> Robin > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
