Sometimes you hit comedy gold here: Judy: <To everyone else,> he appears to be perfectly reasonable.>
The problem is with EVERYONE ELSE! > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > Carol I believe you have a much better way to asses the kind > > of person I am beyond Judy's filter. > > Right, ignore what Judy says and look through Curtis's > filter instead. > > > I have nothing to do with John Knapp or his perspective, > > I concur that Curtis has nothing to do with Knapp or his > perspective (aside from their mutual antipathy to Maharishi > and the TMO). And Knapp's and Curtis's psychopathologies > are different in many respects; Knapp's does not serve him > nearly as well as Curtis's serves him. > > > and in fact have my own stories which I am really not > > interested in sharing on a public board. > > > > Robin and I really enjoyed communicating on this board for > > a long time and I think we both feel that period was a > > highlight in our posting history here. The complex reasons > > that lead to our falling out are not even clear to either > > of us, and we have both processed some of them openly here > > on this forum. > > > > The risk of doing that is that someone with ill will toward > > one of us can use specific statements for their own goals. > > What Curtis is referring to here is a specific statement > he made a few days ago to Barry about an exchange between > him and Robin from the very beginning of their conversations. > > That statement by Curtis was documentably false; it > misrepresented what had transpired in that early exchange, > and the misrepresentation was clearly in the interest of > Curtis's current goals. > > In this case Curtis's goal was to portray his > conversations with Robin as having fallen apart because > Robin would not tolerate Curtis's skepticism about > Robin's claim to have experienced Unity Consciousness > decades previously. > > That portrayal by Curtis was also knowingly false, > massively and maliciously so. Robin's claim about his > past enlightenment experiences was not what his > disagreements with Curtis were about. > > In more general terms, Curtis's intention with those > false statements--and others--was to make Robin look > like a loon, someone so insistent on his purported > delusions of past grandeur that he'd bust up an > otherwise very rewarding friendship because the other > person wouldn't buy into them. > > That is *so* appallingly untrue and unfair, and it's > purely malicious on Curtis's part. > > > That is the nature of a public forum and the evaluation > > of it's risk reward balance is always a continual > > assessment for me. > > Hopefully Curtis is now assessing whether the risk of > making those knowingly false statements to Barry was > worth the reward. He's having to do damage control, > and that's very difficult because everything is on the > record. > > > Judy's view of what went on between Robin and me is not > > some clear "truth" about it. > > Happens to be very close to Robin's view of what went > on between himself and Curtis, however. And since Robin > was one of the two participants, his view would seem to > carry some significant weight. Plus which, it's > supported by the record of what has been posted here. > > > It is her very unflattering opinion of me which has been > > a consistent theme for a very long time. > > And which is shared by Robin, albeit for a shorter period, > since he only encountered Curtis for the first time back > in June of 2011. > > > The topic changes, but the narrative is the same. > > Which might be because I'm a nasty person who simply > wants to lash out at other people, or because Curtis's > dishonest and unfair behavior has been consistent since > I first ran into him in the late '90s on alt.m.t. > > > Although I don't have a very flattering view of Judy > > either, I am not interested in making a case for my > > opinion by fighting a war of quotes with her here. > > That is not a statement of me conceding that her view > > is accurate. > > Curtis is making a case for his opinion in this post to > Carol by doing what Robin has dubbed "legislating reality"--substituting his > own context for mine and Robin's by fiat, > without ever actually confronting or addressing or even > acknowledging the differences. > > It's his standard M.O. in any contentious discussion. And > he's very, very good at it. As I've pointed out here before, > you can only see what he's doing when it's *your* context > he's erasing and replacing with his own. To everyone else, > he appears to be perfectly reasonable. > > Poor Knapp could only dream of having this kind of subtle > skill. > > The fact remains that no amount of skill in legislating > reality can overcome the actual evidence of the record of > what has been posted to FFL. Besides the false statements > I noted above, there's a host of other misstatements of > fact in Curtis's recent posts. Curtis does not want to > "fight a war of quotes" because he knows what the quotes > will show. > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I owed you that explanation at least. >
