dear Ravi, would you like to share my appt this afternoon with my pastoral counselor? love, BirchyShare
________________________________ From: Ravi Chivukula <chivukula.r...@gmail.com> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:56 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:15 PM, curtisdeltablues <curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >There is a secret under all your bluff and bluster Judy. > >This is why you have to derail all conversations into idiotic word parsing >like this beyond all reason. You can't follow conversations here with any >depth. > >It is why you are eager to engage people about the details of what Robin said >about his enlightenment by cutting and pasting, but you never tried to engage >in a conversation about the problems with his epistemology. > >So here you are once again trying so desperately to get a pat on the head for >your blindly following his misunderstanding into the ground. > >Come on Robin, she is willing to show up as a complete idiot for you. > >And here we come to a problem with no solution. > >He knows your secret too. > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: >> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 <no_reply@> wrote: >> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: >> > > >> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" >> > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 <no_reply@> >> > > > wrote: >> (snip) >> > > > > FWIW Curtis, this was my understanding when I first read >> > > > > your response of "...from the outset" as being the *current* >> > > > > exchange...not going back to the beginning. It surprises me >> > > > > that Robin, in his response, doesn't seem to understand this, >> > > > > but at least he's consistent...or maybe he's being ironic >> > > > > (disingenuous smiley face). >> > > >> > > FWIW, when I read Curtis's response, I also thought he meant >> > > going back to the beginning (this was before I'd read Robin's >> > > reply saying the same thing). >> > >> > on·set >> > noun >> > 1. a beginning or start: the onset of winter. >> > 2. an assault or attack: an onset of the enemy. >> >> Actually the word you used was "outset," not "onset." >> >> "Outset" can't be used in your sense #2 for "onset" >> above. "Outset" just means "beginning" or "start." >> >> But you knew that. >> >> Since you have no substantive comments, let alone any >> refutations, of any of the case I made, there's >> nothing else in this post for me to respond to, >> thankfully. >> >> Stevie and laughinggull and possibly even feste will >> no doubt find your rejoinder brilliant, however, so >> it will have been worth your time. >> >> *plonk* >> >> >> >> > >> > please continue... >> > >> > [snip] >> > >> > > My experience of you, Curtis, has been that you are >> > > consistently dishonest. You're usually quite subtle about >> > > it, such that only the person you're being dishonest *with* >> > > is likely to be able to spot it. >> > > >> > > "From the outset" is a very peculiar way to refer to the >> > > most recent in a long series of exchanges. The most obvious >> > > understanding would be that you meant from the outset of >> > > the series. The idea that "From the outset" meant the most >> > > recent seems to me to be the twisted one. >> > > >> > > I think if you had meant the most recent one you would >> > > have indicated this, e.g., "From the outset of your most >> > > recent exchange with Share..." >> > > >> > > That you claim to be unable to understand how anyone could >> > > have assumed you did not mean the most recent exchange says >> > > to me that you are being disingenuous, at the very least >> > > about how "obvious" it was that you did mean the most recent. >> > > It was not at all obvious, it was ambiguous. And you being a >> > > wordsmith of sorts should have been able to easily recognize >> > > the potential for misunderstanding. >> > > >> > > If that's what it was. I think you are actually trying to >> > > backpedal from a mistake. >> > > >> > > You were not here, after all, when Robin and Share began >> > > their conversations, which were indeed extremely friendly. >> > > >> > > You returned to FFL after a longish absence several weeks >> > > later, just in time to see Share turn on Robin based on >> > > her misunderstanding of something he had said to her. >> > > >> > > You leaped into their conflict without knowing how Share >> > > had misrepresented the situation, having seen an >> > > opportunity to attack Robin by supporting Share. You >> > > claimed he had been deliberately setting her up for a >> > > confrontation, an idea she eagerly picked up on. It made >> > > an appearance later on in her unconscionable claim that >> > > she had been "psychologically raped" by Robin. >> > > >> > > I believe that's what you were remembering, and why you >> > > assumed Robin's "mission" with Share had never been >> > > friendly. >> > > >> > > That conflict, not incidentally, hardly exemplified the >> > > "interactions with the intention to understand" you go >> > > on here to tout, on either Share's part or your own. Your >> > > present insistence on the "obviousness" of your meaning >> > > for "From the outset..." is another example of the lack >> > > of intention to understand on your part. >> > > >> > > And then there's the interesting fact of the rest of that >> > > paragraph: >> > > >> > > "From the outset your mission with Share has been unfriendly >> > > and she has done a pretty good job of handling herself >> > > considering that you are just letting her have it with both >> > > barrels about herself, uninvited. It reminds me of our >> > > conversations which followed the same arc, although I at >> > > lest got some flowers and chocolates at the door before the >> > > assault." >> > > >> > > "Flowers and chocolates at the door" does not refer to your >> > > current exchange with Robin. What you were reminded of by >> > > Robin's exchanges with Share was your early conversations >> > > with him. One more reason to suspect that by "From the >> > > outset" you meant from his early exchanges with her--except >> > > that you weren't aware of the "flowers and chocolates" she >> > > had received from him, hence your phrase "at le[a]st." >> > > >> > > Your walkback here is only marginally plausible. You should, >> > > as Robin says, have just copped to making a mistake. That >> > > would have been no big deal. >> > >> > http://youtu.be/3_I8RCUpe-c (as in 5, 18, and/or 20 below) >> > >> > verb (used with object) >> > 1. to combine, as two or more strands or threads, by winding together; >> > intertwine. >> > 2. to form by or as if by winding strands together: Several fibers were >> > used to twist the rope. >> > 3. to entwine (one thing) with another; interlace (something) with >> > something else; interweave; plait. >> > 4. to wind or coil (something) about something else; encircle; entwine; >> > wreathe. >> > 5. to alter in shape, as by turning the ends in opposite directions, so >> > that parts previously in the same straight line and plane are located in a >> > spiral curve: The sculptor twisted the form into an arabesque. He twisted >> > his body around to look behind him. >> > >> > verb (used without object) >> > 16. to be or become intertwined. >> > 17. to wind or twine about something. >> > 18. to writhe or squirm. >> > 19. to take a spiral form or course; wind, curve, or bend. >> > 20. to turn or rotate, as on an axis; revolve, as about something; spin. >> > >> > please continue... >> > >> > > Finally, in Robin's current exchange with Share, his >> > > remarks about her avoidance of reality were (of course!) >> > > "uninvited"--but they were, as you know, by no means >> > > *unprovoked*. >> > > >> > > Speaking of inadvertent irony: >> > > >> > > > But I am seeing it all as more formulaic than genuine >> > > > interaction. Judy runs the exact same DLL program. It >> > > > is the exact opposite of interactions with the intention >> > > > to understand. >> > > >> > > Robin has your modus operandi nailed, Curtis. When conflict >> > > is involved, your intention--your formula--is to *prevent* >> > > "genuine interaction" and proclaim CurtisTruth by fiat. >> > >> > Brown tears leaving streaks, >> > She uses toilet paper >> > in lieu of tissue. >> > >> > (deep bow to thunderous applause from appreciative audience) >> > >> > >
